US to boycott UN racism meeting

[420inTN]

Source: AP (via Yahoo! News)

WASHINGTON – The Obama administration has decided "with regret" to boycott a U.N. conference on racism next week over objectionable language in the meeting's final document that could single out Israel for criticism and restrict free speech, the State Department said Saturday.

The decision follows weeks of furious internal debate and will likely please Israel and Jewish groups that lobbied against U.S. participation but upset human rights advocates and some in the African-American community who hoped President Barack Obama, as the nation's first black president, would decide to send an official delegation.

The administration had wanted to attend the April 20-25 meeting in Geneva, although it warned in late February that it would not go unless significant changes were made to the draft text.

Some revisions — including the removal of specific critical references to Israel and problematic passages about the defamation of religion — were negotiated.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090418/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_un_racism_conference_4

[BlooInBloo]

1. (shrug) I can see pros and cons on this one. Obama's decision is fine by me.

[ananda]

2. This is a BIG mistake!

Totally wrong.

The USA should be leading the charge, with
the UN, against racism!!!!!!!!

[bemildred]

4. Yeah. Looks bad too, like we are afraid or something. nt

[question everything]

10. These meetings are not against racism, they are against Israel

yeah, I know, fine with DUers. These are the same countries where the president of the Sudan is welcomed with honor - you know, Darfur.

[bemildred]

12. You aren't suggesting Israel is racist are you? nt

[ProgressiveProfessor]

19. Unfortunately the original conference was hijacked and the US and others walked out

This one may be no better. The US is not the only country boycotting

[cali]

23. baloney. this conference is a sham.

although I can see arguments for attending, this is hardly a mistake.

[Better Believe It]

35. Right. Who the hell wants to attend a UN conference against racism?

And why the hell are we in the UN to begin with?

I think the United States, following the example of Israeli right-wing extremists, should oppose anti-racism conferences.

Isn't that right cali?

[Igel]

41. Would you be in favor of the US leading the charge against racism,

even if the UN weren't participating?

That's my take.

[Bluerthanblue]

3. I'm disappointed in this-

but it's not a surprise.

:hi:

We've boycotted many conferences over the last 15-20yrs.

[christx30]

46. I wouldn't say

the UN is the best place to get anything done at all. They kick us off the Human Rights commission in 2001 (before 9/11) and leave countries like Sudan on? Now 8 years (and tens of thousands dead in Darfur and other places we are supposed to take the UN seriously?

[geek tragedy]

5. If he boycotts this and pushes hard for justice

in Palestine, so much the better.

[JI7]

8. there was another article about them being tough with Bibi

even telling him that it doesn't matter to them who is pm of israel when it comes to doing what is right in that area. so i think they will be.

[msongs]

6. You willing to GIVE UP your freedom OF or FROM religion????????????

you willing to let the muslims and other religious cults tell you what you can and cannot say in your own country?

Msongs

[bemildred]

7. What are you babbling about?

We have separation of church and state here. Who do you think is going to make us change it?

[sythe200]

15. Actually...

We have this thing here called the Constitution that is the supreme law of the land and places treaties with foreign nations on the same level as the Constitution itself (Article VI). If we enter into any UN treaties we are bound to follow them as if they had the same weight as the Constitution itself (because they do). If a treaty and the Constitution are in opposition to each other who knows what will actually be followed. On the one hand we ignore the Constitution all the time so it doesn't have much weight, but we ignore treaties too. I am willing to bet that in the end UN treaties will win out over the Constitution on most things.

[bemildred]

17. All this does not change the fact that we have separation of church and state.

And the USSC enforces it with some rigor.
And pigs will fly before the UN agrees on anything much about religion.
And more pigs will have to fly before the US Congress ratifies any such treaties.
But don't let me interfere with your ignorant fantasies.

Edit: and I left out the pigs that have to fly before the USSC upholds any such treaties over articles of the Constitution.

[ohio2007]

25. Thats how you "boil a frog" without it finding out whats on the menu analogy

We can't 'change' how others see us. We can only "change" ourselves.


?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGlmxujJ5y8&feature=related

Supreme Court bans public access to case records
?
http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/supreme+court+bans+public+access+to+case+records-rs

There's a battle outside thats still raging...
For the times they are a changing...

B.Dylon

[Igel]

40. I keep hearing that.

But I seldom see it quoted.

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the nited States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be ound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Note there are three things involved.

1. The Constitution ... shall be the supreme law of the land.

2. "The Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof ... shall be the supreme law of the land."

3. "All treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the surpreme law of the land."

Now, we have no problem with (1). People usually ignore (2)--that law raising the income tax on bonuses of TARP-recipient employees making more than $250k? "Supreme law of the land," up there with treaties and the Constitution. Gee, scary, that. Or not.

(3) gets cited primarily, IMO, by two groups of people. Those who want treaties to override federal laws or maybe the Constitution and those who are afraid treaties override federal laws or maybe the Constitution. But just as federal laws can't override the Constitution, it's unlikely treaties can. Treaties override laws at the Congress' (and SCOTUS') whim; the Constitution, to be changed only with the consent of Congress and a supermajority of the states, is hardly able to be changed by what amounts to a simple majority of just the Senate, upon the request of the president. Both groups, in citing, miss the reason for the passage: It says that what happens at the federal level trumps the state level--no state constitution or law can trump the federal constitution, law, or treaty. We are not a confederation; we are a federation. It's not setting treaties against laws or the Constitution.

[Zhade]

43. "the muslims"? Your bigotry finally comes out.

NT!

[ixion]

9. Ah yes... heaven forbid we hold Israel to account

:eyes: very sad, IMO.

[question everything]

11. No, heaven forbids we hold the Arab countries, Hamas, Hezbollah

no to mention the Sudan, to account for their massacres and tortures. Oh, forgot, they do not have a free press that can report on any of their atrocities.

Have you ever noticed that all the reports about "atrocities" in Israel come from reporters based in Israel? And none of them is thrown into jail never to heard from like... Venezuela, the darling of DU?

Why bother. Closed minds on DU when it comes to "the Jews," the "Israeli lobby" etc.

[ohio2007]

14. question everything. you ask to many questions.....

there are certain questions that shouldn't be asked. They will always go unaswered

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2009/04/20094845946844472.html


hmmmm

[ixion]

16. geez, get a grip

I am IN NO WAY suggesting that other countries not be held to account. I said simply that Israel should be.

As for holding Arab countries to account -- are you not satisfied with the body count provided by Israel-lovin' BushCo?

Seems like you should be gleeful, rather than pissy.

[EFerrari]

18. That's funny. I just saw a memorial for a cameraman that was blown up by the IDF.

I guess that qualifies as not being "thrown in jail".

Gazans, Journalists Mark 1-Year Anniversary of Israeli Killing of Cameraman, Youths

In other news from Gaza, journalists from around the world gathered in Gaza City to mark the one-year anniversary of the killing of Reuters camera operator Fadel Shana. The twenty-four-year-old Shana died on April 16, 2008, after an Israeli tank shelled his vehicle that was clearly marked “press.” Shana’s final piece of footage shows the tank firing a shell before his camera goes black. The attack also killed eight Palestinian youths aged between twelve and twenty years old. Reuters bureau chief Alastair Macdonald was among those to speak at Shana’s memorial.

Alastair Macdonald: “The grief and anguish that greeted the killing of Fadel last April the 16th at the age of just twenty-four was a mark not only of the affection in which he was held by his family and friends but of the reputation he enjoyed as an independent journalist determined, through his work with Reuters, to inform the wider world about life and the conflict here in the Gaza Strip.”

No member of the Israeli military has been prosecuted for the attack that killed Shana and the eight Palestinian youths.

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/4/17/headlines

[ShareTheWoods]

50. The Sbarro massacre of children, 2001

Students at An-Najah University, Nablus, West Bank, celebrate the killing of the babies at the Sbarro pizzeria.

Picture credit Associated Press.

It appears Palestinian celebration of killing Jewish children is popular too.

More celebrations of killing Jews at link.
http://markhumphrys.com/israel.conflict.crimes.html

[classysassy]

22. HEAVEN

for bid that Israel accept any of the UN resolutions.

[ohio2007]

13. " the administration..warned ...it would not go unless significant changes were made to the draft te

.
What "change" did Obama want made ?

[iandhr]

20. GOOD

[rpannier]

21. When the conference becomes something othar than bash Israel then we should attend

That the conference neglects the treatment of minorities and mixed-race people in many countries is very telling.

[ohio2007]

24. Ahmadinejad off to Geneva to attend Durban 2 ( "burning man" hate fest ready for prime time)

What are the odds the media will keep score on opening statements made by all in attendence?

Ahmadinejad off to Geneva to attend Durban 2

.....

The Review Conference is the follow-up to the 2001 First World Conference on Racism in South Africa which strongly condemned the racist policies of the Zionist regime.
.....

Some 4,500 anti-racist NGO's from round the world are to attend the conference which will be held from April 20 to 24 in Geneva, Switzerland.
....

http://www.irna.ir/En/View/FullStory/?NewsId=443355&idLanguage=3

wonder how many will "clench thier fists",bark against US foreign aid policies yet....open their hands for the US foreign aid given them ?


:popcorn:
It's about who can lay on the biggest guilt trip in order to get "ju$tice" .

BTW

anybody actually read the results of the 2001 conference ?

[mbperrin]

28. Here ya go! The 2001 Meeting:

http://www.un.org/WCAR/

[ohio2007]

31. Click on the video at this link

http://www.france24.com/en/20090417-uncertainty-reigns-eve-%E2%80%98durban-ii%E2%80%99-geneva-racism-israel

the circus is underway and certain countries will not be up for review

[Tim01]

26. That's what I was thinking.

This sounds like it is the equivalent of a meeting in the U.S. on racism that starts with "What are we going to do about this Louis Farrakhan." And the meeting never really addresses anything else.

[mbperrin]

29. Actually, if you'll read all the documents, there are nine meetings in

preparation for this one. In one meeting, the one in Tehran, out of 41 paragraphs, I believe that these two must be the ones that are just "too much" for the US and Israel to bear:

33. Express deep concern at the plight of Palestinian refugees and displaced persons who were forced to leave their homes because of war and racial policies of the occupying power and who are prevented from returning to their homes and properties because of a racially based law of return, and recognize the right of return of the Palestinian refugees as established by the General Assembly in its resolutions, particularly resolution 194 (III) of 11 December 1948, and call for their return to their homeland in accordance with and in implementation of this right;

34. Re-emphasize the responsibility of the international community to provide international protection for the Palestinian people under occupation against aggression, acts of racism, intimidation and denial of fundamental human rights, including the right to life, liberty and self-determination;

So we'll just scuttle the other meetings, which dealt with Africa, South America, Eastern Europe, and Asia, and completely disregard the work of all present, including representatives from the Simon Wiesenthal center, for these two paragraphs in one of out of 9 documents.

Because after all, if we can't have it "our way" then it's the "highway" for the rest.


Hey, can you help me out? I've lost my dictionary and need to look up the meanings of self-centered, arrogant, and petty.

[Better Believe It]

36. Why do you want to coddle and support right-wing extremists in Israel?

The current leadership of the Israeli regime is far to the right of George W. Bush and you want to support them?

The extremist Israeli regime makes George W. Bush look like some sort of left-winger!

[cali]

48. Why do you support the oppression of women and gays and the

racism is Sudan? Just as obnoxious, but you deserve it. And actually, the current leadership in Israel, awful as it is, is not to the right of bushco. It's in an identical place.

[mbperrin]

27. Why, certainly the best way to influence any meeting is to not go!

After all, by not going, your point of view can be heard, you can listen to others, perhaps some middle ground can be found.

Much much better than attending, where you would give up any chance of being heard, listening, negotiating, planning for the future!

That's why I tell all my students to quit coming to school if they want to do better in their school work!

And factory workers would get lots more cars built if they quit going to the factory!

Wait...........

[christx30]

47. Though if you feel

that the meeting is a sham, and therefore not worth your time, you can put forth your view of it by boycotting it. If you are a powerful nation and you feel that your interests or the interests of your allies would not be served by attending something, would you go? TO go would lend legitimacy to something that shouldn't have any.

[ohio2007]

30. UN Watch Turns Tables on Libyan Chair, Exposes Durban 2 Hypocrisy; Qaddafi’s rep panics

remember those nurses Qaddafi accused of injecting the aide virus into children ?

Eight years after a UN conference on racism in South Africa, a new conference in Geneva -- to take place from April 20 to 24 -- is having trouble before it begins. The US, certain European nations, and Israel have not confimed their participation.
http://www.france24.com/en/20090417-uncertainty-reigns-eve-%E2%80%98durban-ii%E2%80%99-geneva-racism-israel

UN Watch Turns Tables on Libyan Chair, Exposes Durban 2 Hypocrisy; Qaddafi’s rep panics


Below UN Watch testimony as just delivered. The speaker’s delivery was perfect. Mrs. Najjat Al-Hajjaji, the Libyan chair, made every mistake. She interrupted the witness at 3 different points — and then gave Libya (!) the floor to make an objection, and finally cut him off. But nevertheless he got in the important parts. The room was gripped. It was the top story on Swiss TV news tonight (TSR).

Click for France 24 video (in English)
http://www.france24.com/en/20090417-uncertainty-reigns-eve-%E2%80%98durban-ii%E2%80%99-geneva-racism-israel


Click here for Swiss TV video (in French). Stay tuned for the eventual YouTube video of the full speech.

Also: click here for the legal complaint filed by the Bulgarian nurses against Libya with the UN Human Rights Committee — the highest international tribual for individual human rights complaints — with UN Watch acting as co-counsel with Dr. Liesbeth Zegveld. It is released here now for the first time to the public.

And click here for related complaint filed by Dr. El-Hojouj last year.

Both Dr. Dr. El-Hojouj and Bulagrian nurse Kristiyna Valcheva will testify before the Geneva Summit for Human Rights, Tolerance and Democracy, this Sunday, 19 April 2009.

Watch live webcast at

www.genevasummit.org.

Dr. El-Hojouj will be able to deliver his full speech — without interruptions.

___________________



United Nations Durban Review Conference
Preparatory Committee, Third Substantive Session
17 April 2009, Geneva

Statement by United Nations Watch
Delivered by Ashraf Ahmed El-Hojouj

Thank you, Madame Chair.

I don’t know if you recognize me. I am the Palestinian medical intern who was scapegoated by your country, Libya, in the HIV case in the Benghazi hospital, together with five Bulgarian nurses.

Section 1 of the draft declaration for this conference speaks about victims of racism, discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance. Based on my own suffering, I wish to offer some proposals.

Starting in 1999, as you know, the five nurses and I were falsely arrested, prosecuted, imprisoned, brutally tortured, convicted, and sentenced to death. All of this, which lasted for nearly a decade, was for only one reason: because the Libyan government was looking to scapegoat foreigners.

Madame Chair, if that is not discrimination, then what is?

On the basis of my personal experience, I would like to propose the following amendments regarding remedies, redress and compensatory measures:

One: The United Nations should condemn countries that scapegoat, falsely arrest, and torture vulnerable minorities.

Two: Countries that have committed such crimes must recognize their past, and issue an official, public, and unequivocal apology to the victims.

Three: In accordance with Article 2, paragraph 3 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, such countries must provide victims of discrimination with an appropriate remedy, including adequate compensation for material and immaterial damage.

Madame Chair, Libya told this conference that it practices no inequality or discrimination.

But then how do you account for what was done to me, to my colleagues, and to my family, who gave over thirty years serving your country, only to be kicked out from their home, threatened with death, and subjected to state terrorism?

How can your government chair the planning committee for a world conference on discrimination, when it is on the list of the world’s worst of the worst, when it comes to discrimination and human rights violations?

When will your government recognize their crimes, apologize to me, to my colleagues, and to our families?

This week, at the Geneva Summit for Human Rights, Tolerance and Democracy, the five nurses and I will present our complaint and compensation claim against Libya, filed with the UN Human Rights Committee, the highest international tribunal for individual petitions.

The slogan for this Conference is “Dignity and justice for all.” Does this include your own country’s victims of discrimination?

Thank you, Madame Chair.



http://blog.unwatch.org/?p=314

[bemildred]

32. LOL.

:popcorn::popcorn::thumbsup:

[bossy22]

33. im sort of glad

i find many of these conferences actually do more to increase the problem then fight it. What happens is they end up giving it an audience...which is what they are looking for.

Also, i believe there were some constitutional issues...i heard part of the conference was to draft a resolution that would have prohibited "hate speech" and forced participating states to prohibit race based protest (such as a neo-nazi rally)...if this is the case, then im all for boycotting it. I think racism is disgusting and the people who participate and fuel it even more disgusting...but in the US you still have the right to freedom of speech...and that includes speech that is not well liked or even sometimes hurtful. You have a right to hate in this country (as long as you dont act on it) and show your hate in a non violent way...and i'd like to keep it like that

[Better Believe It]

34. Obama wanted language that was acceptable to the extremist right-wing Israeli regime.

He didn't get it.

Good!

[cali]

37. not even close

this is about the obsessive focus on Israel, but it's also about quite a bit more, including the refusal of nations in the lead at the Geneva conference, such as Zimbabwe and Sudan to deal with issues of racism, sexism and homophobia, as well as the aattempt to equate criticism of religion with human rights abuse. And the Netherlands, Canada, Italy and Australia are also not going. Why do you think that is, genius? Ooh, don't tell me, they're controlled by the Israel lobby.

Your ingorance is lame.

[Better Believe It]

38. So four, count them, four nations are following the lead of Israel/USA governments and boycotting!

Wow.

That's impressive. Almost a world consensus!

[ohio2007]

39. Better call for a recount

Germany joined the United States, Netherlands, Australia, Canada, Israel and Italy in boycotting but thats only a partial list as New Zealand is considering boycotting the conference . UK is facing heat for going to the hate fest
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/5182662/Britain-isolated-amid-UN-racism-summit-boycott.html

Boycott the United Nations Durban Review Conference
The United Nations Durban Review Conference – so called because it monitors progress made since the UN anti-racism jamboree in South Africa in 2001 – convenes in Geneva today. Durban II, as it is known, will be boycotted by the United States, Israel, Italy, Australia and Canada. At first glance, this might seem puzzling. Why should a US administration run by the first mixed-race president boycott an anti-racism conference, of all things?

In fact, the decision reflects credit on Mr Obama. The Durban conference was an exercise in anti-Semitic racism directed at Israel; America stormed out half way through. This event promises more of the same:


snip


The steering committee is chaired by that well-known champion of human rights, Libya; Islamists and despots will play key supporting roles. If proof were needed of the conference's hypocrisy, one need only read its programme of action. This includes a list of worrying trends, beginning, predictably, with Islamophobia. There is no reference to the racist atrocities perpetrated by Islamic Arab militias in east Africa; instead, the focus is on "neo-Nazi" ideologies.

Durban II will be little more than a celebration of the alliance between anti-Western leftists and Islamists. Countries that take civil rights seriously are right to stay away. Why is Britain not among them? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/5183425/Boycott-the-United-Nations-Durban-Review-Conference.html

and the list of countries not invited is also a telling tale of two worlds.
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/membership.htm
btw
Is Switzerland able to boycott ?

[MrBig]

44. Your numbers are wrong...

but even if they were right...should we be basing decisions on whether there is a "world consensus"? Even if it were just four countries, it would be the right thing to do given the anti-free speech aspects.

Just because it is called a Conference on Racism doesn't mean it isn't a Racist Conference (hint...it is). Sort of like that whole Patriot Act thing. I'm sure you were all for that one...I mean, who could be against a Patriot Act???

[cali]

45. you have trouble counting evidently

and you seem wholly ignorant of the issues involved. Durban was an Orwellian obscenity. Geneva looks to be shaping up the same way.

[Zhade]

42. "change"

NT!

[MellowDem]

49. Good

It's not a conference about racism so much as a chance for countries with lots of ethnic, racial, homophobic, and gender issues themselves to get to rail against their most hated enemies and rivals. It's a sham and a joke. The word 'racism' has about as much meaning now as 'nazi' 'fascist' 'communist' 'socialist'. It has become another overused and incorrectly used word to demonize those your country disagrees with.

[ohio2007]

51. the mullahs are not amused at their boy

first some gay french clown throws a shoe at him while he chants to his god

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTQAB9w22qI&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ewhnt%2Ecom%2Fnews%2Fnationworld%2Fsns%2Dap%2Dun%2Dun%2Dracism%2Dconference%2C0%2C125788%2Estory&feature=player_embedded
then western countries walk out en mass.

He is such a *co

http://www.whnt.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-un-un-racism-conference,0,125788.story