Canada Leads Boycott of U.N. Racism Farce

[jbg]

I am most proud of our northern neighbor that Canada was the first country to announce its boycott of this farce. For Iran to be in a "starring" role defies all credibility. The Western countries are really the only countries in the world to make serious efforts to disband racial discrimination and create genuinely multi-racial, multi-ethnic societies. Could you image a Jewish President in Iran? Or a Christian senior advisor to the throne in Saudi Arabia?

The U.S. and Canada have fully integrated citizen s of all races into its society. I am everlastingly grateful to both countries that they cared, as to my peole, the Jews, only what they brought, not what their beliefs were. Is this true even of such normally praiseworthy countries such as Japan and South Korea? Not bloody likely.

Why the West allows itself to be badgered about "racism" or allows Zionism to be declared a form of "racism and racial discrimination" is beyond me.

Link to article, excerpts below:

US boycotting, Iran starring, at UN racism meeting

GENEVA – The United Nations opens its first global racism conference in eight years on Monday with the U.S. and at least six other countries boycotting the event out of concern that Islamic countries will demand that it denounce Israel and ban criticism of Islam.

The administration of President Barack Obama, America's first black head of state, announced Saturday that it would boycott "with regret" the weeklong meeting in Geneva, which already is experiencing much of the bickering and political infighting that marred the 2001 conference in Durban, South Africa.

The Netherlands and Germany announced their boycotts Sunday, while Australia, Canada, Israel and Italy already had said they would not attend.

[Machjo]

We need to distinguish between Judaism and Zionism. Though Zionism is often criticized by the Un through criticisms of Izraeli actions, the UN has made it clear that it will not tolerate anti-semitism (prejudice against the Jewish Faith). Granted it said nothing about Zionism, but bear in mind that Zionism is not a religion but a political ideology which has been criticized even by Jews themselves.

The UN itself admits that anti-semitism got out of hand last time owing to confusions between Zionism and anti-semitism, but it has lernt its leson and will not tolerate anti-semitism again. Essentially, by boycotting the conference, Harper is showing suppport not for Jews, but for Zionism.

[jbg]

We need to distinguish between Judaism and Zionism.....Essentially, by boycotting the conference, Harper is showing suppport not for Jews, but for Zionism.

No. You're the one confused. Anti-Zionists are those who cannot fathom the idea, for some reason, of Jews not being subservient victims, but rather a peacefully powerful, educated, proud people in control of their own destiny. They are every bit as "distinct" a people as any so-called "indigenous" group. Edited April 20, 2009 by jbg

[bush_cheney2004]

No. You're the one confused. Anti-Zionists are those who cannot fathom the idea, for some reason, of Jews not being subservient victims, but rather a peacefully powerful, educated, prowd people in control of their own destiny. They are every bit as "distinct" a people as any so-called "indigenous" group.

Indeed...you would think this distinction to be obvious in light of adventures in Quebec.

[Visionseeker]

I agree with the boycott w/o reservation. But I also believe that if left unchecked, Zionism will be the undoing of the world's only Jewish state.

Times have changed greatly since Herzog, it's time for Zionism to do the same.

[jbg]

I agree with the boycott w/o reservation. But I also believe that if left unchecked, Zionism will be the undoing of the world's only Jewish state.

Times have changed greatly since Herzog, it's time for Zionism to do the same.

Supporting the Jewish state is what Zionism is about. Maybe you're looking for some other term?

[tango]

I think it's supporting a Jewish state that I am questioning, the concept of rule by one religion.

I don't see how that can work.

I also wonder whether removing our voices and our votes from the conference might be the worst thing to do, in these circumstances.

the U.S. and at least six other countries boycotting the event out of concern that Islamic countries will demand that it denounce Israel and ban criticism of Islam.

I do agree with the concerns about what's facing the countries at the conference. Freedom of and from religion ... fine. Banning criticism of a religion or any religion? No. That goes too far. And I think we should be there to say that, and to vote that way.

Edited April 20, 2009 by tango

[Borg]

Seems to me that the countries not attending are proving this conference is a farce

Israel has lost the media war.

It is the only country in the middle east that allows full citizenship rights to a person of any religion.

Try frinding that in any Arab country

Borg

[Wild Bill]

I think it's supporting a Jewish state that I am questioning, the concept of rule by one religion.

As opposed to supporting an Islamist state? Can't find better examples of "rule by one religion" than that!

I care little for the various religions involved. To me it's quite simple. Some Arab states launched first strikes on Israel. Israel retaliated and won. Afterwards Israel found that if they returned the lands around their country their enemies would simply move in and use them as bases for guerrilla attacks and rocket launches.

To expect Israel to unilaterally return the lands and ignore rockets landing on their bedrooms while not retaliating I find totally absurd! Some Arab states and the Palestinian leaders have for the most part demonstrated time and time again that they have no interest in stopping attacks on Israel.

To those who think differently I say put your own kids in an Israeli neighbourhood that's being targeted by rockets!

[cybercoma]

I am everlastingly grateful to both countries that they cared, as to my peole, the Jews, only what they brought, not what their beliefs were.

Do you have any idea how horribly the Jews were treated by Canada during WWII? There's a reason more Jews live in the US than in Canada. Edited April 20, 2009 by cybercoma

[KeyStone]

I am most proud of our northern neighbor that Canada was the first country to announce its boycott of this farce. For Iran to be in a "starring" role defies all credibility. The Western countries are really the only countries in the world to make serious efforts to disband racial discrimination and create genuinely multi-racial, multi-ethnic societies. Could you image a Jewish President in Iran? Or a Christian senior advisor to the throne in Saudi Arabia?

The U.S. and Canada have fully integrated citizen s of all races into its society. I am everlastingly grateful to both countries that they cared, as to my peole, the Jews, only what they brought, not what their beliefs were. Is this true even of such normally praiseworthy countries such as Japan and South Korea? Not bloody likely.

Why the West allows itself to be badgered about "racism" or allows Zionism to be declared a form of "racism and racial discrimination" is beyond me.

Link to article, excerpts below:

US boycotting, Iran starring, at UN racism meeting

GENEVA – The United Nations opens its first global racism conference in eight years on Monday with the U.S. and at least six other countries boycotting the event out of concern that Islamic countries will demand that it denounce Israel and ban criticism of Islam.

The administration of President Barack Obama, America's first black head of state, announced Saturday that it would boycott "with regret" the weeklong meeting in Geneva, which already is experiencing much of the bickering and political infighting that marred the 2001 conference in Durban, South Africa.

The Netherlands and Germany announced their boycotts Sunday, while Australia, Canada, Israel and Italy already had said they would not attend.

I seem to recall that the US wasn't a big fan of trying to force South Africa to end apartheid either.

But regardless of Ahmadinejad's agenda, it seems foolish for everyone to boycott the entire conference based on the fact that some countries are going to say some negative things about Israel. It's a big conference, with a lot to achieve, but it seems that some countries are so desperate to silence any criticism of Israel (legitimate or otherwise), that they'll go to any lengths to deny critics of Israel a voice.

[g_bambino]

Why the West... allows Zionism to be declared a form of "racism and racial discrimination" is beyond me.

I'm not 100% sure, but I suspect that you're referring to the final declaration that came out of this meeting's predecessor eight or so years ago. Interestingly enough, I was just this morning listening to the BBC on which was a spokesperson for the Israeli foreign ministry who said that the previous conference produced a declaration singling out Israel as a systematically racist state. A strong defence for not attending this year, save for the point that the BBC interviewer said he had the declaration in front of him, and nowhere in it could he find what the spokesperson was referring to. The latter was, to say the least, somewhat baffled.

While listening to this, running through my mind was the question of, while the presence of Iranian representatives at such a meeting might seem odious, is refusing to attend and debate their probably ridiculous claims really the correct response?

Could you image a Jewish President in Iran? Or a Christian senior advisor to the throne in Saudi Arabia?

I can imagine it as much as I can a muslim or sikh president of Israel. Or a catholic monarch of Canada.

[cybercoma]

Or a muslim/sikh President of the US...

Hell, we're so progressive up here in Canada, that we had a woman Prime Minister for 30 seconds one time. Imagine a native PM?

Edited April 20, 2009 by cybercoma

[Smallc]

France and The United Kingdom walked out of the conference during the Iranian leader's speech.

[tango]

As opposed to supporting an Islamist state? Can't find better examples of "rule by one religion" than that!

Exactly. Is that the kind of state Israel wants to be?

Do Muslims have full rights in Israel?

Can a Muslim be head of state in Israel?

I don't see why I should support Israel without questioning, especially with their actions in blockading and causing children to starve in Gaza, and then bombing the civilians they trapped there.

I do not support their right to do that in 'defence' of a Jewish state.

And I believe our leaders should be at the conference to vote against any racist measures, or any that place one religion over another.

Edited April 20, 2009 by tango

[myata]

Who cares? Would it make any difference? As long as that one, far 'greater' country stands staunchly behind whatever Israel's rulers come up with, one can safely predict decades of turmoil and violence. In that time, many a government will change and buckets of wise, truthful words will be spoken.

[tango]

France and The United Kingdom walked out of the conference during the Iranian leader's speech.

A U.N. racism conference on the eve of Israel's Holocaust Remembrance Day disintegrated into chaos moments after Ahmadinejad became the first government official to take the floor.

Two protesters in wigs tossed the noses at Ahmadinejad as he recited a Muslim prayer to begin his speech.

Now that's disgusting! No one should be rude when someone is saying a prayer.

A Jewish student group from France later took credit for causing the disturbance, saying members were trying to convey "the masquerade that this conference represents."

Imagine how upset they would be if a Muslim threw something at a Jew reciting a prayer.

I think western media is biased, so I'm checking AlJazeera

Ahmadinejad told delegates at the summit in Switzerland on Monday, that after the Second World War the United States and other nations had established a "cruel, oppressive and racist regime in occupied Palestine".

"The UN security council has stabilised this occupation regime and supported it in the last 60 years giving them a free hand to continue their crimes," he told delegates at the Durban Review Conference hall in Geneva.

Ah I see ... he is referring to Israel's actions against Palestine.

You know, I can't disagree with what was said either. Israel is racist toward Palestinians, does oppress them in their own state and especially in Gaza, killed children without conscience there.

However, saying that at the conference is guaranteed to create a backlash against Muslims, so it was a lousy strategy and not sophisticated enough for their concerns to be taken seriously.

"They resorted to military aggression to make an entire nation homeless under the pretext of Jewish suffering," he said.

yes, I see ... He did make racist statements. Jewish suffering was not a "pretext".

What a mess!

But I still think we should be there to be heard, and most importantly to vote against any racist language.

[lictor616]

I am most proud of our northern neighbor that Canada was the first country to announce its boycott of this farce. For Iran to be in a "starring" role defies all credibility. The Western countries are really the only countries in the world to make serious efforts to disband racial discrimination and create genuinely multi-racial, multi-ethnic societies. Could you image a Jewish President in Iran? Or a Christian senior advisor to the throne in Saudi Arabia?

The U.S. and Canada have fully integrated citizen s of all races into its society. I am everlastingly grateful to both countries that they cared, as to my peole, the Jews, only what they brought, not what their beliefs were. Is this true even of such normally praiseworthy countries such as Japan and South Korea? Not bloody likely.

Why the West allows itself to be badgered about "racism" or allows Zionism to be declared a form of "racism and racial discrimination" is beyond me.

Link to article, excerpts below:

US boycotting, Iran starring, at UN racism meeting

GENEVA – The United Nations opens its first global racism conference in eight years on Monday with the U.S. and at least six other countries boycotting the event out of concern that Islamic countries will demand that it denounce Israel and ban criticism of Islam.

The administration of President Barack Obama, America's first black head of state, announced Saturday that it would boycott "with regret" the weeklong meeting in Geneva, which already is experiencing much of the bickering and political infighting that marred the 2001 conference in Durban, South Africa.

The Netherlands and Germany announced their boycotts Sunday, while Australia, Canada, Israel and Italy already had said they would not attend.

The problem is that "diversity" of the kind that we forced to celebrate in Canada (racial, religious, cultural etc), seems quite illogical, fatuous and even suicidal to other nations.

Other nations (Japan, China for instance) know and understand that "diversity" is not a source of strength but of bottomless weakness. They regard the new western liberal societal mores as idiocy and degeneracy incarnate. They correctly see it as a log rolling and problem CAUSING institution and quite rationally aim to avoid it.

As far as a conference against so-called "racism" is concerned, such an inane conference could not impose on the more rational and objective nations in the world today (of which sadly, Canada and the US cannot claim membership). "Racism" has no fixed definition, or rather is has hundreds of subjective and silly definitions and approximations- "racism" is itself an abstract notion.

What is racism? the belief that genes and heredity play a role in people's abilities, physical aptitudes, mental faculties, susceptibility to specific diseases?

Nearly every biological anthropologist believes in races or at the very least (given the stigma and ultra taboo status that racial differences has in our crumbling culture) in a "cline type" of racial taxonomy. (see: the consensus laid out here http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/001951.html)

"Race" or human "CLINES" as they are increasingly referenced to as (given the quasi illegality of the concept of race in the western world today), is a real, immediate and immutable biological fact.

We should regard any effort to make "racism" disappear as inherently foolish and childishly naive. Akin to believing that santa claus exists.

And mentioning obama as some sort of proof that America or Canada have gone beyond or moved away from racism: consider that 96% of black voters voted for Obama. Consider secondly that nearly every honest analyst understands that Obama was NOT elected REGARDLESS of race: but rather precisely BECAUSE of it. Consider also how Obama's favorite ideologue: James Cone- who believes in a doctrine of black supremacy in which he believes honestly: that "whites" were created in labs as slaves near the earth's core by Ethiopian scientists 6000 years ago "but something went wrong with the experiment"... consider this as proof that America has not at all gone "beyond race".... far from it.

[Argus]

We need to distinguish between Judaism and Zionism. Though Zionism is often criticized by the Un through criticisms of Izraeli actions, the UN has made it clear that it will not tolerate anti-semitism (prejudice against the Jewish Faith).

It has? I must have missed that.

For all intents and purposes, Anti-Zionism is largely practiced by people who think a perfect ending to the dispute would be putting all Jews from all nations into large ovens.

[Argus]

Ah I see ... he is referring to Israel's actions against Palestine.

You know, I can't disagree with what was said either. Israel is racist toward Palestinians, does oppress them in their own state and especially in Gaza, killed children without conscience there. any racist language.

All Arab states oppress Jews, too, but you won't find anything in the conference about that. Israel is racist? There are muslim MPs and Muslims have rights there. How many chuches are there in Saudi Arabia, where being caught with a cross showing will get you beaten and imprisoned? How much freedom to Palestinians have compared to say, Iranians or Saudis or Sudanese? Where is the condemnation of Sudan for its attempt to purge itself of Blacks? Nobody cares about that, right?

[g_bambino]

All Arab states oppress Jews, too, but you won't find anything in the conference about that. How many chuches are there in Saudi Arabia, where being caught with a cross showing will get you beaten and imprisoned? How much freedom to Palestinians have compared to say, Iranians or Saudis or Sudanese? Where is the condemnation of Sudan for its attempt to purge itself of Blacks? Nobody cares about that, right?

Are you trying to justify one example of discrimination by pointing to others?

[Borg]

Exactly. Is that the kind of state Israel wants to be?

Do Muslims have full rights in Israel?

If they are citizens of the country - YES - and they CAN become citizens should they so decide. Unlike the arab countries and Jewish people living there.

Can a Muslim be head of state in Israel?

If they get the votes to win - Yes

I don't see why I should support Israel without questioning, especially with their actions in blockading and causing children to starve in Gaza, and then bombing the civilians they trapped there.

You question through stupidity and bias. If you were serious you would have looked up the answers to the questions first - but you are prepared to make Israel the villian with your weak words. Aide flows - Hamas uses it to trade for weapons - do you know how much aide flowed last week - it is published - it is significant and the UN will be happy to tell you - look it up. LOTS!!! It does not get to the people - Hamas controls Gaza and Fatah is close behind. Commodities are often more valuable than money.

Gaza also borders Egypt - an Arab country and they do not want anything to do with the Gaza residents either - why do you not question them?

As does west bank border Jordan - same situation and Jordan wants nothing to do with them either.

Funny how the media never mentions that - and now that you know perhaps you might also ask why - but you will not - you will carry on as before

I do not support their right to do that in 'defence' of a Jewish state.

It is a Jewish Democracy - not a Jewish State - once again you show your ignorance - better look it up. All people - of all religions - residing have citizenship rights - but the media will never mention that - and now that you know you will not change - you will simply carry on with your thoughts.

Muslims actually hold elected seats in the Israel government - try the reverse in an arab country.

You are one who speaks and does not know what s/he says = if Hamas tried peace instead of crimes against humanity - deliberately targeting civilians for years before Israel finally acted - things would be different - those people preach death to Israel - even after Israel left Gaza and even removed all Israelis - then Egypt decided they not worth letting into their own country - too much trouble.

You have not learned anything from the media - but then again you are likely as racist as they come - and hide it through your carefully measured and politically correct words.

And I believe our leaders should be at the conference to vote against any racist measures, or any that place one religion over another.

Unless of course it means supporting Israel - then you would be back to where you are now. As an expat Canadian I now know why Canada has started to lose her reputation - it used to be the ugly American - it is now - more and more becoming the ugly Canadian - smug, self centred and oh so correct in their arrogance and ignorance

Borg

Edited April 20, 2009 by Borg

[Alexandra]

Unless of course it means supporting Israel - then you would be back to where you are now. As an expat Canadian I now know why Canada has started to lose her reputation - it used to be the ugly American - it is now - more and more becoming the ugly Canadian - smug, self centred and oh so correct in their arrogance and ignorance

Borg

Bravo Borg. Being ex-pats and living/working in the center of the storm is a humbling experience with no room whatsoever for the smug, self-righteous and overbearing false patriotism Canadians are now becoming known for. Such as that on display by the poster you have replied to.

`

[tango]

And I believe our leaders should be at the conference to vote against any racist measures, or any that place one religion over another.

Unless of course it means supporting Israel - then you would be back to where you are now.

Your words, not mine, nor my thoughts.

I have no problem supporting Israel ... always have done so.

I do have a problem with their recent behaviour towards Gaza, yes.

It's important to make the distinction, rather than try to put words in people's mouths and create discrimination where none exists.

[jbg]

While listening to this, running through my mind was the question of, while the presence of Iranian representatives at such a meeting might seem odious, is refusing to attend and debate their probably ridiculous claims really the correct response?

It's Iran having a starring role that I have a problem with. Do you really expect Ahmejenejad (sp) to debate?