And, Now! The World's Champion Hypocrite!

The competition for the title of Master Hypocrite of the Globe is tough. Leaders of more than a few countries have been in the running. That includes George W. Bush. Even with the welter of worthy claimants, it isn't hard for the Geek to make a choice.

And the winner is?

The winner, the Master Hypocrite of the Globe, is King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. Actually, to rate the latest occupant of the Wahabbist throne as a mere hypocrite is to do him a disservice. The king is really a flat-out, pedal-to-the-metal liar. His carefully orchestrated charm offensive of religious tolerance, which extends from its beginning at a highly touted international conference on religious tolerance in Spain last summer to its current main event in a special session of the UN General Assembly, is an exercise in duplicity unrivaled in recent decades.

Backed by the Muslim World League and the fifty-six members of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the Master Hypocrite is pursuing the goal of achieving an international convention criminalizing "blasphemy" throughout the world. The OIC (whose members constitute over twenty-five percent of the General Assembly) has been pushing long, hard and relentlessly for an international regime prohibiting all attacks or questions of whatsoever nature directed at Islam.

The fellow-travelling Muslim World League sought the same end along with King Abdullah in Spain. The widely reported conference issued a final statement which seems harmless, even high-minded, calling, as it did, for the promotion of respect for the religions of the world and "preventing the derision of what people consider sacred."

This statement, when taken with the assorted proposals emerging from the OIC and the threats delivered by Pakistani delegations and diplomats to the European Union and various of its members, points clearly in one direction. The direction is that of exporting the same climate of religious intolerance and repression endemic to Saudi Arabia, Iran and other Muslim dominated states to all the nations of the Earth.

King Abdullah is lying when he speaks of or seemingly supports religious diversity, mutual respect and acceptance. He is, after all, the King of the Land of the Two Mosques. As such, he must live according to the dictates and requirements, strictures and exhortations of the Quran. As anyone who has read that book can readily attest, the words passed through the Prophet in no way encourage either diversity of belief or the acceptance of those who believe other than the Message and the Messenger require.

In short, the present campaign of the OIC, the Muslim World League and King Abdullah to isolate Islam from any questions or perceived "attacks" while preserving the sacred obligation of the same entities to disparage, marginalise, prohibit and even kill not only adherents of religions other than Islam but also Muslims that someone, somehow, accuses of apostasy, is the latest high-profile example of the uniquely Islamic approach to negotiation.

That was a long sentence, Geek. You better unpack it.

Look at it this way, partner. The negotiation process as normally understood in the West is one of bargaining, of give-and-take, of compromise until finally an agreement acceptable to all parties emerges.

Right, Geek, that's, as they say, self-evident.

OK. In the days of the Cold War some wag or another characterised the Communist style of negotiation as, "What's mine is mine; what's your's is negotiable." A close examination of the processes by which any number of agreements were achieved between the US and assorted Communist states shows the aphorism to be too true to be funny.

Come on, Geek, cut to the chase. The Islamic approach.

Simple. It's an approach mandated by the Prophet and the Message. Here it is. Get a grip on it. "What's mine is mine. What's yours now will be mine later."

But, wait one, Geek! There are a bunch of international agreements like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Any infringement on free speech no matter what the reason or goal would violate at least some of them. And, the OIC countries including Saudi Arabia are signatories to these. Right?

Right. It's necessary to look at the small print. There is an old diplomatic convention observed by all countries including the US which allows for a state to adhere to an international convention but to state "reservations" regarding the degree and nature of its compliance. It is rather like the use of "signing statements" by American presidents.

Each of the Muslim dominated states have entered reservations regarding each and every convention to which it has adhered. To make the story short and simple but not over-simplified, Muslim states limit compliance to the requirements of sharia. In most cases this reservation has the effect of cancelling any and all obligations under the convention or treaty.

A convention on the rights of women? Sure. As long as we do it according to the overarching requirements of religious law, of sharia.

A convention outlawing slavery? Sure. As long as we do it according to the overarching requirements of religious law, of sharia.

An agreement on prohibiting "derision" of religion? Sure. As long as we do it according to the overarching requirements of religious law, of sharia.

You in the West with your emphasis on respecting the dignity of beliefs and believers wouldn't want us to compromise our basic religious principles, would you? After all, if you insisted on us attenuating the power of our beliefs, you would be insisting that your principles and world views and your understanding of life are superior. You wouldn't want to do that, would you?

King Abdullah, the Muslim World League, the OIC are betting they can trap the West. They are betting that the flood of lofty words regarding religious beliefs and the necessity of respecting those despite any slight erosion of something as abstract as "freedom of speech" will slip through the UN supported by non-Muslim regimes which are authoritarian.

Beyond that, these agenda driven masters of hypocrisy and tergiversation are betting that the governments and political elites of the West, of the US in particular, have so lost sight of their undergirding principles that the new restrictions will be accepted in silence. They are wagering that the West's chattering classes are so fuzzy of mental focus and short of historical consciousness that they will sell out their heritage for something far more worthless than the biblical "mess of pottage."

The King, the Muslim World League, the OIC might be right. The Geek can hear the Deep Thinkers and Profound Feelers of the US saying, "It's only a small thing. Respect is so important. And, religion is not worth fighting over."

Tell that to a Muslim.