The deepest concern of the UN should be the threats from some Muslims because of the supposedly offensive cartoons. The UN long ago abandoned interest in the rights of free societies. Instead, it has increasingly collaborated with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation in promoting Islamic interests, including the “Islamophobia” canard.
Over a decade ago, after Muhammad cartoons were first published in Denmark’s Jyllands Posten, violence erupted across the Islamic world; in a joint statement, UN head Kofi Annan “along with the head of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and the European Union’s senior representative for foreign and security policy,” stated:
We fully uphold the right of free speech. But we understand the deep hurt and widespread indignation felt in the Muslim World. We believe freedom of the press entails responsibility and discretion, and should respect the beliefs and tenets of all religions.
In 2006, there was UN and OIC disapproval of “offensive” free speech, but the drafters of the statement also felt the need to affirm their respect for the freedom of speech. So what has changed since 2006, such that now the UN and OIC to so blatantly disrespect the freedom of speech, even to the point of blaming the victim for acts of violence by jihadis in response to the exercise of the freedom of expression? The answer is that there was never any actual respect for the freedom of speech in the OIC, but it was not as emboldened as it is now, thanks to the Western Left. The OIC has watched attentively as Western countries — including France, Sweden, Germany and the UK — allowed in multitudes of Muslim migrants without vetting them, and permitted (even collaborated with) Islamic supremacist lobby groups to use “Islamophobia” ploys to destroy the freedom of speech. Western countries have been duped. They accepted the claim that it was “racist” and “Islamophobic” to criticize Islam and to offend Muslims. The stealth jihad succeeded in its goal, and with the passage of time, it was inevitable that Western countries would experience increasing aggression and violence.
Now:the U.N. High Representative is “voicing ‘deep concern’ about escalating tensions over the blasphemous sketches of Prophet Muhammad.” He has not expressed any concern about the erosion of the freedom of speech.
It is time that Western countries stop funding the UN and withdraw from it. It is no longer a body of united nations. It is instead a body that sides with Sharia-supporting countries, and installs the worst violators of human rights into its organs that are supposed to be dedicated to the defense of human rights.
“Top UN official voices ‘deep concern’ about tensions over insulting cartoons,” Daily Pakistan, October 29, 2020:
UNITED NATIONS – Voicing “deep concern” about escalating tensions over the blasphemous sketches of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), the top official for the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations (UNAOC) has called for mutual respect of all religions and beliefs and for fostering a culture of fraternity and peace.
In a statement, the High Representative for the Alliance, Miguel Ángel Moratinos, said that insulting religions and sacred religious symbols provokes hatred and violent extremism, leading to the polarization and fragmentation of society.
He said he is following with deep concern the growing tensions and instances of intolerance triggered by French weekly magazine Charlie Hebdo’s publication of the satirical caricatures.
“The inflammatory caricatures have also provoked acts of violence against innocent civilians, who were attacked for their sheer religion, belief or ethnicity,” Moratinos noted.
Freedom of expression should be exercised in a way that fully respects the religious beliefs and tenets of all religions, he said.
“Acts of violence cannot and should not be associated with any religion, nationality, civilization or ethnic group.”…
In the statement, the High Representative re-affirmed that acts of violence cannot and should not be associated with any religion, nationality, civilization or ethnic group.
“At the same time,” he said, “violence can and should never be justifiable or acceptable response to acts of intolerance on the basis of religion or belief.”
The High-Representative strongly urged interfaith and intercultural dialogue and the debate of ideas at the local, national and international levels which could be a powerful tool against religious intolerance, prejudices and stereotyping.