European Union, OIC, United States pledge to "combat intolerance"

In what can rightly be described as a seminal step in relations between the Muslim world and the Western world, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation and the leading nations of the Western world led by the United States and the European Union agreed Saturday to take concrete steps to combat intolerance, negative stereotyping and discrimination, incitement to violence, and violence against persons based on religion or belief.


...The U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had announced the intention of the U.S. State Department to organize a coordination meeting during her participation in the meeting which she co-chaired with the OIC Secretary General, Professor Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu in Istanbul on 15 July 2011. The meeting issued a joint statement emphasizing the dire need for the implementation of resolution 16/18.


The resolution 16/18 is precisely the resolution that condemns blasphemy, that is, criticism on Islam.


Will Obama support the blasphemy resolution? It looks like that the correct answer is yes.

Mohammed Cartoons: "We condemn the publication of The Tyranny of Silence", OICSG Ihsanoglu says

This is the OIC Press Release about the publication of Flemming Rose's book, the Tyranny of Silence:

The Secretary General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference Professor Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu today strongly condemned the publication of the book entitled “Tyranny of Silence” in Denmark. The book contains a compilation of denigrating caricatures and cartoons of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) published by the Jyllands Posten in 2005 which aroused worldwide condemnation and denunciation, and caused hurt and insult to the sentiments of Muslims around the world.

The OIC Secretary General expressed his dismay and disappointment at the release of the book despite the fact that he and some other leaders of the Muslim countries had personally addressed letters to the Foreign Minister of Denmark urging the intervention of the Danish government against the publication due to the highly provocative and inciting contents of the book. He reiterated his position when the Foreign Minister of Denmark called on him to discuss the issue at the sidelines of the 65th session of the UN General Assembly.

Emphasizing the moral responsibility of the political leadership of Denmark in this regard, the Secretary General said that the publication of the book was a deliberate attempt to incite prejudices and animosity which would undermine the ongoing efforts of the international community for promoting understanding and peaceful coexistence among peoples of diverse religious and cultural backgrounds.

They insist then on their position: no one can criticize, mock or just laugh about their positions. Government can't at all interfere in the publication of a book that is paid privately, with no public money. But we have to read this statement taking into account what Mr. Ihsanoglu said when the Mohammed cartoons were published the first time.

He said that "Violence weakens us" (link above), a striking statement that leads to think he is not worried about people actually harmed by enraged Muslims, but rather about how the public opinion perceives those Muslims. There is no prejudice or animosity in publishing those cartoons, and there would never have been any problem with them, if they wouldn't have ended in violence. The alleged prejudices wouldn't have even existed if (an important part of) Muslims wouldn't have got enraged or have justified that because of the alleged "insults" to Mohammed.

But who is responsible for the violence? The cartoons? Or the violent people?

Cross-posted from T&P.