Posted on 05/30/2005 8:47:54 PM PDT by CHARLITE
Right on target again, Fred. The islumic nations hold the largest block vote in the UN general assembly... enough to pimp the UN and use it to do their bidding:
Terrorism's Silent Partner at the United Nations....With the Organization of the Islamic Conference defending any act committed on behalf of "national liberation," the United Nations cannot even issue an unequivocal condemnation of terrorism, let alone join the struggle to eliminate it.
This month, the United Nations Security Council voted to condemn terrorism. The resolution was introduced by Russia, still grieving over the terrorist attack on a school in Beslan, and perhaps the unanimous vote will give it a measure of solace. But the convoluted text and the dealings behind the scenes that were necessary to secure agreement on it offer cold comfort to anyone who cares about winning the war against terrorism. For what they reveal is that even after Beslan and after Madrid and after 9/11, the UN still cannot bring itself to oppose terrorism unequivocally.
Terrorism As a Right
The reason for this failure is that the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), which comprises fifty-six of the UN's 191 members, defends terrorism as a right...
"The reason for this failure is that the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), which comprises fifty-six of the UN's 191 members, defends terrorism as a right..."
THUS ISLAM HAS GIVEN UNTO ITSELF THE STAMP OF APPROVAL TO COMMIT GENOCIDE!
And Kofi Anus sits there in the dust of a 'refuge camp' in Dafur telling us we must give more KNOWING ALL THE WHILE WHO IT IS THAT IS KILLING THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLE OF THE SUDAN!
ISLAM!
"For eight years now, a UN committee has labored to draft a "comprehensive convention on international terrorism." It has been stalled since day one on the issue of "defining" terrorism. But what is the mystery? At bottom everyone understands what terrorism is: the deliberate targeting of civilians. The Islamic Conference, however, has insisted that terrorism must be defined not by the nature of the act but by its purpose. In this view, any act done in the cause of "national liberation," no matter how bestial or how random or defenseless the victims, cannot be considered terrorism.
This boils down to saying that terrorism on behalf of bad causes is bad, but terrorism on behalf of good causes is good. Obviously, anyone who takes such a position is not against terrorism at all-but only against bad causes."
According to their philosophy may I venture that acts of terrorism against the UN itself might be in a good cause?
I agree... and as I have personally studied Islam, and have chanted the shahadah "Ash-hadu anla ilaha illAllahu Wahdahu la Sharika Lahu wa-ash-hadu anna Muhammadan abduhu wa rasuluhu" in front of Muslim witnesses, and have given what I consider as "sermons," to Muslims, I hearby declare myself not only a Muslim, but a mufti, and declare a fatwah calling for all my brothers and sisters in the ummah to resist the oppressors and humiliators at the UN and wage a jihad against it.
There. Done. ;o)
[/Mullah USF mode]
"Ash-hadu anla ilaha illAllahu Wahdahu la Sharika Lahu wa-ash-hadu anna Muhammadan abduhu wa rasuluhu"
And I, Fred Nerks, having also muttered the above utter nonsense before a witness (my cat) and declared my pathetic and total submission to the Will of a Black Rock (meteor) I also hereby declare myself not only a Muslim, but a mufti, and declare a fatwah calling for all my brothers and sisters in the ummah to resist the oppressors and humiliators at the UN and wage a jihad against it, not a little jihad, nothing to do with spiritual betterment, but a big, proper jihad with weapons and things that go BANG and long sharp knives for chop chop off heads, get it?
For allah is wise, merciful, knows best in all things.
Ethnic cleansing of Black Muslims by Arab Janjaweed militias
iranian.com ^ | August 5, 2004 | Iqbal Latif
Posted on 09/06/2004 7:06:28 AM PDT by Dr. Malcolm Bass
Sudan, the latest tragedy that the world has just woken up too, has from long-standing tensions between nomadic Arab tribes and their African neighbours over water and farmland. It is a conflict between Muslims but the manner of its conduct has brought ignominy to the Islamic world. Dotted alongside the charred Sudanese locations are unharmed, populated and functioning Arab settlements.
In some locations, the distance between a destroyed Fur (black Muslims) village and an Arab village is less than 500 meters. The Arab killers and rapists in Darfur are Muslims, and so are the victims -- Black African farmers.The Arab street has displayed a striking indecisiveness when ever it has come to the fate of non Arab Muslims and considered the fate of non-Arab Muslims as peripheral to the integral cause of Arab nationalism.
(Excerpt) Read more at iranian.com ...
Three words: Pot, Kettle, Black
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.