U.S. Appears Set To Boycott United Nations World Conference Against Racism

[Better Believe It]

U.S. Appears Set To Boycott U.N. Session on Racism
By Michael A. Fletcher
Washington Post
April 14, 2009

The Obama administration appears to be standing by its decision to boycott the World Conference Against Racism next week in Geneva, despite efforts to focus and tone down language in a draft conference document viewed as hostile toward Israel.

The preliminary conference document ran 45 pages and called for reparations for slavery, condemned the "validation of Islamophobia," and asserted that Israel's treatment of the Palestinians is grounded in racism.

In response to objections raised by negotiators from the Obama administration, the document has since been dramatically shortened and many of its sharp statements have been removed. Still, the administration seems uninterested in attending, stoking frustration among activist groups who have said that it is ironic that the nation's first black president would choose that course.

"For his administration not to be present at this global conversation is a disappointment," said Imani Countess, senior director for public affairs at TransAfrica Forum, an advocacy group that focuses on U.S. foreign policy. "For President Bush not to participate, that would have been expected. For Barack Obama's administration not to participate sends a disappointing signal. It says these issues are not important."

TransAfrica sent a letter to Obama late last week urging him to send a delegation to the United Nations-sponsored meeting, saying that to do otherwise would contradict his promise to engage even with nations that hold views that are contrary to those held by the United States. Moreover, the letter said, U.S. participation would send an important message to the rest of the world.

"U.S. participation in the conference is critical for both symbolic and political reasons," said the letter, which was also signed by other leaders, including Jesse L. Jackson and the heads of the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and the National Coalition on Black Civic Participation.

Please read the complete article at:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/13/AR2009041302634.html?sub=AR

[Tarc]

1. The Israeli lobby gets its way again...

:puke:

[Better Believe It]

2. Israel has more political power in Washington than African-American U.S. citizens

That's the only conclusion I can reach from this development.

Seven members of Congress representing Israel object to participation and the Obama Administration folds?

[Deja Q]

4. Non-African-American American US Citizens too, I'd wager.

Let's not segregate.

[Better Believe It]

15. Point well taken

[Uzybone]

5. "Israel has more power in DC than African Americans" ...

...thats a shock.


and how can you say Obama Admin folds when they never said they were going in the first place.?

[tritsofme]

18. The United States doesn't attend sham conferences like this.

The adminstration position is to boycott, the only way he could "fold" is if he actually attended.

[Aloha Spirit]

3. Yikes, Ahmadinejad plans to attend.

http://www.metimes.com/Politics/2009/04/14/irans_president_to_attend_un_racism_meet/afp/

"Several Jewish groups have organised a ceremony outside the United Nations in Geneva to mark Holocaust Remembrance Day on April 20.
Ahmadinejad, who has stirred outrage for repeatedly calling the Holocaust a "myth" and for his anti-Israel comments, was scheduled to attend the opening of the conference on the same day."

[Danger Mouse]

6. Wow. That's weird.

[jberryhill]

7. It is unfortunate that a valid cause has been hi-jacked by a particular conflict /nt

[MadBadger]

8. Why would the conferene have singled out Israel?

I'm not the biggest fan of Israel, but it seems that the conferene would unfairly single out Israel.

[Better Believe It]

9. You didn't read the article. Israel is not even mentioned in the amended conference document.

[MadBadger]

11. Why would they in the first place at all? It seems like the conference is prejudiced against Israel

from the start.

[Better Believe It]

12. Do you think the UN Conference should endorse the right-wingnut regime in Israel?

If they did, two nations would attend the civil rights conference.

Israel and the United States.

Damn, how much do you think we ought to bow down to the right-wing extremists in Israel until they are pleased?

In this country Israeli government leaders would be far to the right of Rush Limbaugh, Hannity and Beck!

[Better Believe It]

16. It seems that Israeli government leaders are prejudiced against Palestinians. Is that too harsh?

They just love Arab people, especially Palestinians. Some of their best friends are Palestinians. Not a bigoted bone in their body.

[Danger Mouse]

10. "Appears"

[Better Believe It]

13. Let's hope the Obama Administration listens to Black leaders and changes its position

[Danger Mouse]

14. I would hope so.

I think supporting Israel is important, but that's excessive.

[vadawg]

19. lets hope the admin listens to common sense and dosent attend

it they do and it goes the way it normally goes, then the admin will score a political loss, i sure as hell dont agree with anything that this so called conference has ever done in the past.

[Freddie Stubbs]

22. The President is a 'Black leader'

I'm sure he knows what he is doing.

[Behind the Aegis]

17. Good.

[dionysus]

20. well, we can't have any criticism of the apartheid against the palestinians, now can we?

[BlooInBloo]

21. (shrug) I see pros and cons in going. Whatever Obama decides on this is fine with me.

[DevonRex]

23. .