Membangun Kekuatan Politik Islam Dalam Kancah International

Hezbollah leader calls for international law against insulting Islam 

• Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah gave a televised speech condemning anyone who supports the anti-Islam film 
• Tony Blair: The film may be wrong and offensive but it's laughable in terms of film-making

In a move that could escalate tensions around the Arab world, the leader of the Hezbollah militant group called for protests against the movie and said the U.S. must be held accountable for the film.

In a televised speech, Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah pushed for the creation of an international law that would ban insults of Islam and other religions, citing similar laws that exist to prevent anti-Semitism.

His outrage stems from the anti-Islam film produced by a mysterious convict based in California, that has since sparked protests outside American embassies in the Middle East and across the globe.

Arguing for action: Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah pushed for the creation of an international law that would ban insults of Islam in wake of the offensive film that prompted global protests

'Those who should be held accountable, punished, prosecuted and boycotted are those directly responsible for this film and those who stand behind them and those who support and protect them, primarily the United States of America,' Mr Nasrallah said.

He called for protests on Monday, Wednesday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday, urging protesters to call on their leaders to express their anger too.

'We should not only express our anger at an American embassy here or there. We should tell our rulers in the Arab and Muslim world that it is "your responsibility in the first place" and since you officially represent the governments and states of the Muslim world you should impose on the United States, Europe and the whole world that our prophet, our Quran and our holy places and honor of our Prophet be respected,' he said. 

In Pakistan, police fired tear gas and water cannons at the protesters in Karachi after they broke through the barricade and reached the outer wall of the U.S. Consulate.

The protesters threw stones and bricks, prompting the police to beat back the crowd with their batons. The police and private security guards outside the consulate also fired in the air to disperse the crowd.

One protester was killed during the clash, said Ali Ahmar, spokesman for the Shiite Muslim group that organized the rally.

The protests were set off by a low-budget, crudely produced film called 'Innocence of Muslims', which portrays Muhammad as a fraud, a womanizer and a child molester. 

Tensions flare: Pakistani Shiite Muslim protesters throw stones toward the police as they attempt to reach the US consulate during a rally against an anti-Islam movie in Karachi

Emotions run high: Thousands of protesters shout slogans during a march in Lahore, Pakistan, against an anti-Islam film made in the U.S.

Call for action: Protesters in Lahore are demanding that the Pakistan government immediately end diplomatic relations with all Western countries and recall its envoys to protest the film

A 14-minute excerpt of the film, which is both in English and dubbed into Arabic, has been available on YouTube, although some countries have cut access to the site.

The violence began Tuesday when mainly Islamist protesters climbed the U.S. Embassy walls in the Egyptian capital of Cairo and tore down the American flag from a pole in the courtyard.

Chris Stevens, the U.S. ambassador to Libya, also was killed Tuesday along with three other Americans, as violent protesters stormed the consulate in Benghazi.

President Barack Obama has vowed that the attackers would be brought to justice but also stressed that the U.S. respects religious freedom.

The President's response was echoed by former Prime Minister Tony Blair, who called into BBC's Radio 4 Monday morning to discuss the continued violence.

Mr Blair, now Middle East envoy for the Quartet of powers, said: 'The film, it may be wrong and offensive but it is also laughable as a piece of film-making.

Urging understanding: Former Prime Minister Tony Blair said 'The film, it may be wrong and offensive but it is also laughable as a piece of film-making.'

'What I am afraid is very dangerous and actually is wrong is the reaction to it.'

Mr Blair said such problems were an inevitable consequence of the Arab Spring that has overthrown repressive regimes in Libya and elsewhere.

'I just see a region that is in the process of huge transition. There is essentially a struggle between the forces of modernisation, who want an open society, a properly functioning economy, who recognise the 21st century is the 21st century, and then those of reaction based on a perverted view of religion, that want to pull the whole thing backwards,' he said.

'When you lift the lid off the repression what comes out are a whole lot of religious, ethnic, tribal influences that themselves have to be countered and moulded into something that is compatible with the modern world.'

Going global: The protests spread to Indonesia as American flags were burned outside of the U.S. embassy in Jakarta

Aiming for Americans: By protesting with English posters, these Pakistani students tried to get their point across to an international audience

Mr Blair said he had changed his view since his time in Number 10, when he used to avoid discussions about faith.

'What the politicians often want to do - for totally understandable reasons, I used to feel this myself - is religion is such a tricky subject for us that we want to stay away from it,' he said.

'But one element of resolving this is about a view of religion that is also open-minded and pluralistic.

'And what you actually require for democracy to function properly is a view of democracy in which religion has its place but where you have democracy-friendly religion as well as religion-friendly democracy.'

He added: 'In the end we need both the leadership within those countries and within Islam to stand up and say ‘look, there is a proper modern way of reconciling religious faith, democracy in society’, and we need ourselves from the outside to engage with this process of change in a way that’s constructive.'

copied from: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2204445/Hezbollah-leader-calls-protests-says-people-support-offensive-Mohammed-film-punished.html

They Besieged Us (Daftar Produk yang Mendukung Israel)

Jangan Melupakan Sejarah !

Do You Know???
1. THAT, when the Palestine Problem was created by Britain in 1917, more than 90% of the population of Palestine were Arabs? And that there were at that time no more than 56,000 Jews in Palestine?

---

2. THAT, more than half of the Jews living in Palestine at that time were recent immigrants, who had come to Palestine in the preceding decades in order to escape persecution in Europe? And that less than 5% of the population of Palestine were native Palestinian Jews?

---

3. THAT, the Arabs of Palestine at that time owned 97.5% of the land, while Jews (native Palestinians and recent immigrants together) owned only 2.5% of the land?

---

4. THAT, during the thirty years of British occupation and rule, the Zionists were able to purchase only 3.5% of the land of Palestine, in spite of the encouragement of the British Government? And that much of this land was transferred to Zionist bodies by the British Government directly, and was not sold by Arab owners?

---

5. THAT, therefore, when British passed the Palestine Problem to the United Nations in 1947, Zionists owned no more than 6% of the total land area of Palestine?

---

6. THAT, notwithstanding these facts, the General Assembly of the United Nations recommended that a "Jewish State" be established in Palestine? And that the Assembly granted that proposed "State" about 54% of the total area of the country?

---

7. THAT, Israel immediately occupied (and still occupies) 80.48% of the total land area of Palestine

---

8. THAT, this territorial expansion took place, for the most part, before 15 May 1948: i.e., before the formal end of the British forces from Palestine, before the entry of Arab armies to protect Palestinian Arabs, and before the Arab-Israeli war?

---

9. THAT, the 1947 recommendation of the General Assembly in favor of the creation of a "Jewish State" was outside the competence of the Assembly under the Charter of the United Nations?

---

10. THAT, all attempts by the Arab States and other Asian countries to have The Assembly submit the question of "constitutionality" of its recommendation to the International Court of Justice for an "advisory opinion" by the Court were rejected or ignored by the Assembly?

---

11. THAT, when the Assembly began to experience "second thoughts" over the matter and convened for its second special session in 1948, it failed to reaffirm the 1947 recommendation for the partition of Palestine-thus destroying whatever dubious legality that recommendation for the establishment of a "Jewish State" had?

---

12. THAT, that original 1947 recommendation to create a "Jewish State" in Palestine was approved, at the first vote, only by European, American and Australian States for every Asian State, and every African State (with the exception of the Union of South Africa) voted against it? And that, when the vote was cast in plenary session on 29 November 1947, urgent American pressures (which a member of the Truman cabinet described as "bordering onto scandal") had succeeded in prevailing only upon one African country (Liberia), both of which had special vulnerability to American pressures, to abandon there declared opposition? And that, in other words, the "Jewish State" was planted at the point-of-intersection of Asia and Africa without the free approval of any Middle Eastern, Asian or African country except that Union of South Africa, itself ruled by an alien minority?

---

13. THAT, Israel remained, ever since its inception, a total stranger in the emerging world of Afro-Asia; and that Israel has been refused admission to any inter-state conference of Asian, African, Afro-Asian, or Non-Aligned States ever held?

---

14. THAT, since the General Armistice Agreements were signed in 1949, Israel has maintained an aggressive policy of waging military attacks across the Armistice Demarcation Lines, repeatedly invading the territories of the neighboring Arab States and that Israel has been duly rebuked, censured, or condemned for these military attacks by the Security Council of the General Assembly of the United Nations on eleven occasions-five times by the Security Council and six times by the General Assembly?

---

15. THAT, no other country in the world, whether member of the United Nations or non-member has been so frequently condemned by the United Nations?

---

16. THAT, no Arab State has ever been condemned by any organ of the United Nations for military attacks upon Israel (or any other State)?

---

17. THAT, besides expelling the bulk of the Arab inhabitants of Palestine, and besides constantly attacking the neighboring Arab States, Israel has also consistently harassed the United Nations observers and other personnel stationed along the Armistice Demarcation Lines: It has assassinated the first United Nations Mediator and his military aide; it has detained some truce Observers; it has military occupied and illegally searched the Headquarters of United Nations personnel; and it has boycotted meetings of the Mixed Armistice Commissions?

---

18. THAT, Israel has additionally imposed a system of apartheid upon the Arabs who stayed in their homeland? More than 90% of these Arabs live in "security zones;" they alone live under martial law, restricting their freedom to travel from village to village or from town to town; their children are denied equal opportunities for education; and they are denied decent opportunities for work, and the right to receive "equal pay for equal work?"

---

19. THAT, notwithstanding the foregoing facts, Israel has always been, and still is, widely portrayed in the Western press as the "bastion of democracy" and the "champion of peace" in the Middle East?

---

20. THAT, the Western Powers have persisted in declaring their determination to ensure a so-called "arms balance" in the area, as between Israel, on the one hand, and the one-hundred million inhabitants of the thirteen Arab States, on the other hand? And this unilateral Western doctrine of so-called "arms balance" is no more reasonable than the suggestion that, in the Cuba-U.S.A conflict, there should be "arms balance" as between Cuba and the United States or that the whole Continent of Africa should not be allowed to acquire more arms than South Africa or that Mainland China should not be permitted to have more arms than Taiwan or that the military allowed to acquire more arms than South Africa and that only thus can peace be safeguarded in the Western Hemisphere, in Africa, in Asia, or in Europe

  copied from: http://www.angelfire.com/al/horizons/20facts.html