The Durban II Snow Job: One giant leap backwards for humankind

A version of this article appears in The New York Daily News, Thursday, April 16, 2009. By Anne Bayefski

The UN’s idea of an anti-racism conference entered the final stretch today with the planning committee deciding Iran ought to preside as a Vice-Chair, Libya will serve as the Chair of the “Main Committee” running the conference and Cuba will be the Rapporteur. All three human rights paragons will assume their new duties on the first day of “Durban II” set for Monday, April 20th.

Although the flowers are blooming by Lake Geneva, these Durban II preparations are best described as a massive snow job. The UN had set aside three days this week to hammer out a final document to be adopted formally at the conference itself. But Libyan Chair Najat Al-Hajjaji adjourned the meeting half an hour after it began – despite the fact that half of the 142-paragraph draft manifesto has not yet been agreed.

Al-Hajjaji is serving as the front for the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) . Her not-so-hidden agenda is shared by the Secretary-General of Durban II, UN High Commissioner Navi Pillay. For Pillay, a native of Durban, South Africa, the Durban Declaration’s stature is of biblical proportion. Sitting at the podium side-by-side, Al-Hajjaji and Pillay’s strategy became painfully obvious to the hundreds of assembled diplomats and NGO representatives who thought they had came to talk about combating racism.

Their maneuver had two main elements. First, run out the clock. By adjourning rapidly, and probably for most of the next two days, the conference will be bound to start on Monday with the European Union at the table and the threat of a democratic pull-out gone. All UN diplomats are well aware of the fact that the EU will agree to just about anything when faced with the spectacle of a “failed” UN conference. EU members don’t have the numbers to prevail at the UN if a vote is called and therefore feign consensus instead of appearing to be “losers” to the folks back home. They are also fond of the UN as a means to outweigh the United States 27-1. And EU states wilt at the prospect of being labeled former colonial racists (by racists from the developing world.)

The second Al-Hajjaji-Pillay/OIC-UN move is to keep all disagreements behind closed doors as long as possible. This way, the damage done to combating racism in the backroom negotiations will be in the form of indecipherable ambiguous UN-eze by the time it is a done deal.

When Al-Hajjaji clocked out 30 minutes after showing up for work, she asked delegates to pick up a new draft of the “Durban II Outcome Document” on their way out the door. Little wonder she wanted no opportunity for public discussion. Here is what can be found in the latest draft of the UN’s new “anti-racism” bible:

  • Condemnation of “foreign occupation” – aka Israel-bashing. Foreign occupation is said to be “closely associated with racism, racial discrimination…and contribute to the persistence of racist attitudes and practices…” In other words, labeling the Jewish nation as the world’s racist state is back.
  • “Defamation of religions” returns under a new guise. The document professes “deep concern” about “the negative stereotyping of religions.”
  • More of the Islamic assault on free speech. The draft “reaffirms that all dissemination of ideas based on…incitement to racial discrimination…shall be declared offences punishable by law…”
  • More Iranian-driven references to “cultural diversity” – the diplomatic cover for the murder of homosexuals, judicially-sanctioned amputation of hands and feet, and the stoning of woman for alleged adultery.
  • Renewed emphasis on the “transatlantic slave trade” and total rejection of a proposed mention of the trans-Saharan slave trade perpetrated by Arabs and other Africans.
  • Additional emphasis on the adoption of “complementary standards” on racism and xenophobia – an Islamic idea designed to subvert the universal principles in existing treaties.


And lest anyone be under the impression that Durban II will go away come April 25th, the draft demands that the Durban Declaration be implemented or “mainstreamed” “in the whole UN system” forevermore.

Silencing public commentary on the abomination was not the only thing the OIC-UN nexus accomplished in the space of thirty minutes. Also quickly gaveled without comment was approval of 81 NGOs to participate in Durban II. Included among these illustrious “human rights” partners:

  • The Independent Jewish Voices – a network composed largely of anti-Zionists preoccupied with driving a wedge between Jews and Israel.
  • The Palestine Return Center which objects to the creation of a Jewish state with the tale of “ethnic cleansing of Palestine that began more than sixty years ago”.
  • The Gaddafi International Charity and Development Foundation, headed by the son of Muammar al-Gaddafi. This fellow still insists that the Libyans convicted of the bombing of PanAm flight 103 were innocent.
  • Continue Reading →

Iran complains to UN about Israeli “threats”

Oh, the hypocrisy.

_40806272_president_afp203bodyTue Apr 14, 2009  UNITED NATIONS,  (Reuters) – Iran on Tuesday called on the United Nations to respond firmly to what it described as Israel’s “unlawful and insolent threats” to launch an attack on Tehran’s nuclear installations.

Israeli officials, including President Shimon Peres, recently have suggested that the Jewish state could use military force to prevent Tehran from developing nuclear weapons, as the West suspects it is doing.

Iran insists it is only interested in building reactors that peacefully generate electricity.

Its U.N. ambassador, in a letter to Mexican U.N. Ambassador Claude Heller, said Israel was violating the U.N. charter and urged the international body to respond clearly and resolutely. Mexico holds the rotating presidency of the Security Council.

“These outrageous threats of resorting to criminal and terrorist acts against a sovereign country and a member of the United Nations not only display the aggressive and warmongering nature of the Zionist regime, but also constitute blatant violations of international law,” Iranian Ambassador Mohammad Khazaee wrote.

The letter came two days after Peres told Israel’s Kol Hai radio that Israel would respond with force if Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad refused to soften his position on proceeding with an uranium enrichment program.

“We’ll strike him,” Peres said in the interview.

An aide to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was quoted last month by Atlantic magazine as saying the government was weighing the military option.

Khazaee said the remarks were “unlawful and insolent threats” based on “fabricated pretexts.”

OBAMA WORRIED

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has said that Israel should be “wiped off the map,” has vowed to continue his country’s nuclear program. Continue Reading →

U.N Watch briefing. US returns to HRC

UN Watch Briefing
News and Analysis from UN Watch in Geneva    Vol. 188  |  March 31, 2009

U.S. Return to U.N. Council Justified If Obama Fights Orwellian Agenda

By Hillel Neuer

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced today that Washington will seek membershp in the U.N. Human Rights Council, reversing the Bush Administration’s decision to steer clear of the deeply troubled body, created in 2006 ostensibly to reform its discredited predecessor.

Elections for rotating membership on the 47-nation council will take place at the General Assembly in May, with all 192 U.N. member states casting a ballot. The U.S. under the popular President Obama is virtually assured of election to the one of only 7 seats reserved for Western states. African and Asian states exercise a controlling majority with 26 seats.

Pathologically obsessed with scapegoating Israel — in more than 80 percent of all country resolutions (26 out of 33) — the council’s sessions routinely legitimize perpetrators, while turning a blind eye to millions of human rights victims around the world.
Whether we like it or not, however, the council is a permanent forum whose resolutions, translated into every language, exercise global influence on hearts and minds. As the successor to the Commission on Human Rights, it has noble origins: the commission was founded by Eleanor Roosevelt with the purpose of defending human dignity, but in later years found itself increasingly hijacked by the new U.N. majorities.

Continue Reading →

Hamas wins teachers union elections for UN schools in Gaza

how-to-kill-jews-and-go-to-heaven

The “education” of Gazan children is a priority with Hamas. Proper training with an emphasis on hate.

The Jerusalem Post March 29-2009

Hamas supporters scored a victory in elections for the school teachers’ union of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) that were held in the Gaza Strip on Wednesday.

However, the rival PLO list won a majority of votes for two other UNRWA workers groups: the employees’ and the services’ unions. This means that the PLO list has enough votes to form the next Executive Council of the General Workers’ Union. The results showed that Hamas won all 11 seats of the teachers’ union.

The Hamas victory means that Hamas supporters will continue to control UNRWA-run schools and other academic institutions throughout the Gaza Strip. Hamas has controlled the UNRWA teachers’ union for the past 16 years.

Some 10,100 UNRWA workers participated in the election, with the turnout being estimated at more than 97 percent. The voting was conducted at UNRWA’s main headquarters in the Gaza Strip.

The PLO list that ran in the election consisted of Fatah, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the People’s (Communist) Party. The PLO list won five out of seven seats of the employees’ union and five out of nine in the services’ union.

The services’ union will have three PLO representatives on the Executive Council, while the employees’ union will have only two.

A Hamas official in the Gaza Strip expressed satisfaction with the results, saying they were an indication of the “enormous support” that Hamas continues to enjoy.

Thank Canada for Defending Human Rights Principles

From UN Watch:

Thank Canada for Defending Human Rights Principles

Take Action On This Issue

Feel free to edit the letter or subject line as you like.

“Blame Canada?” No. Thank Canada — for its principled votes at the U.N. to resist the political agenda of bigots and tyrants. The U.N. Human Rights Council is wholly owned and operated by Islamic states that legitimize Hamas and Hezbollah terrorism, supported by an automatic majority from China, Cuba, and other repressive regimes. Canada is the only country that has been willing to stand up and resist Orwellian resolutions that are destroying the true principles of human rights.

Thank Canada for courageously opposing the cynical abuse of the U.N.’s founding principles of universality, equality and fairness.

Please go to the UN WATCH site to send an email to Stephen Harper directly which will be CC’d to the House of Commons in Ottawa by clicking this link.

UN HRC vote to ban defamation of Islam passes

From email received from UN WATCH.ORG

view_from_geneva_image1

UN Watch Leads 188 NGOs in Global Appeal for Free Speech    March 26, 2009

Islamic states win another resolution on ‘defamation of religions’; UN Watch leads 188 NGOs in global protest

The Islamic states scored another win today at the 47-nation U.N. Human Rights Council for their campaign to ban any criticism of religion, with a resolution calling for curbs on free speech to protect Islamic sensitivities. The 23 votes supporting the restrictions showed an increase of two in comparison to last year.

Eleven countries voted No: Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Netherlands, Slovakia, Slovenia, Ukraine, Switzerland, United Kingdom, and Italy, while 13 abstained, including Bosnia, Brazil, and Mexico.

With the alarming rise in resolutions throughout the U.N. against individual rights, UN Watch initiated a global appeal, together with the International Humanist and Ethical Union, The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, and Freedom House — along with 184 other non-governmental organizations from more than 50 countries around the world — calling on U.N. member states to protect basic liberties. Our campaign was covered by the Associated Press, Reuters, Agence France Presse, and numerous other media. (See joint NGO statement below, followed by media coverage.)

The resolution on “defamation of religions” is an attempt to gut the concept of human rights of its original meaning, which is to protect individuals from harm or state control, not to shield a set of beliefs from critical inquiry. Our freedoms of speech and religion are facing a combined assault this week by multiple regressive resolutions at the Council, and proposed provisions for next month’s Durban 2 conference that endorse the Islamic proposal to change a core UN treaty on racism.

For further information:

* Hillel Neuer, “The defamation of human rights, ” Radio Free Europe, December 22, 2008
* “Defamation of religions” postings on the UN Watch blog.

Following is the joint NGO statement and list of 188 signatories:

Joint NGO Statement on Danger of U.N. “Defamation of Religions” Campaign

We, the undersigned non-governmental organizations,

Deeply concerned by the pervasive and mounting campaign by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) to produce U.N. resolutions, declarations, and world conferences that propagate the concept of “defamation of religions,” a concept having no basis in domestic or international law, and which would alter the very meaning of human rights, which protect individuals from harm, but not beliefs from critical inquiry;

Continue Reading →

A speech by Hillel Neuer of U.N. Watch given in Ottawa March 17 09

view_from_geneva_image

I had the opportunity to go to a lecture by Hillel Neuer of U.N Watch. An organization which all of us certainly should know about if anyone already doesn’t. In fact I brought my Macbook and videotaped the whole thing as I was hoping to post all of, or segments at least of this speech as I was pretty sure it would be a good one. Hillel did not disappoint. Photobooth did. hillel-neuer-and-kofi-annan Memo to all interested, do not use photo booth as a video camera unless you are prepared for crushing disappointment. I got exactly four seconds of it. I did however take some notes. My pen typically works or if it doesn’t I know right away. UN watch is an NGO who occasionally get to speak to the UN on matters which pertain to its various bodies and committees, in this case, the UN Human Rights Council. The lecture was at Carleton University in Ottawa and was attended by about 10 people two of whom where there to protest the speech. Please see videos below of some of the excellent work UN Watch does. Firstly, a word about the United Nations. This is a body of 192 member states. The Human Rights Council has 53 voting members made up from some of the general assembly of the 192 member states. The HRC was created by Eleanor Roosevelt who wrote its charter and mission statement and was in fact, a very good idea. Or at least seemed like it at the time given that it was created shortly after the horrors of Nazi Germany became widely known. The purpose of the HRC was to observe and report on human rights abuses around the world by governments typically against their own citizens. The HRC does not have the power of the sword as the security council does, nor does it have the power of the purse as the general assembly and other UN bodies do, who can fund or stop funding for various groups based on policy. But the HRC has the power of shame. When the UN passes a resolution against human rights abuses, it makes news and brings focus and attention to issues that might otherwise go unnoticed. As a consequence, strange alliances are made at the UN-HRC. There is a body within the UN called the OIC or, ‘Organization of Islamic Councils’ or alternatively, ‘Organization of Islamic Countries’ who of course represent a couple of things. One, the interests of Islam and protection of Islamic goals agendas sensitivities and so on and perhaps more importantly, protect states which are totalitarian, have no basic rights for their own citizens or any similarities to free democracies as we in the west and the Anglosphere would know them. As a consequence, nations rather famous for being atheist and working against religion and religious ideologies tend to vote with the OIC such as Cuba, Venezuela, Russia, China or any other communist or socialist totalitarian state. It turns out, the anti religious sentiments of communist nations is a distant second to protecting their dictatorships and making sure that the notion of real individual human rights or individualism at all in fact, never manages to sneak into the human rights council of the United nations. In other words, the UNHRC works actively against any form of human rights whatsoever. Darfur springs lightly to mind. Roosevelt would be hemmoraging from the spleen if she was at a typical UNHRC meeting today. In theory, the Human Rights Commission was created to have the opportunity to speak truth to power. This goes back to the idea of shame as it’s only real tool as referred to above. But then we have the case of John Ziegler. From Reason.com:

As media coverage of Falk’s nomination has metastasized, it has unfortunately obscured news of UN-HRC’s nomination of the Swiss socialist Jean Ziegler to the UN Human Rights Council Advisory Committee. A brief recapitulation of Ziegler’s qualifications: In 1996, he defended Holocaust denier Roger Garaudy not only on free speech grounds—an admirable position, after all—but further celebrated his supposed scholarship. “All your work as a writer and philosopher,” Ziegler wrote, “attests to the rigor of your analysis and the unwavering honesty of your intentions. It makes you one of the leading thinkers of our time.” He lauded the Zimbabwean tyrant Robert Mugabe, a leader who “has history and morality with him.” He offered his “total support for the Cuban revolution.” He recently told a Lebanese newspaper the he “refuse[d] to describe Hezbollah as a terrorist organization. It is a national movement of resistance.” Then there’s Ziegler’s friendship with Libyan dictator Moammar Kaddafi. In 1989, according to a report in Neue Zurcher Zeitung (one that confirms research done by UN Watch), Ziegler helped establish the Kaddafi Prize for Human Rights. In 2002, Ziegler himself received the prize, which he shared with, among others, Roger Garaudy. Previous recipients include Fidel Castro, Louis Farrakhan, and Hugo Chavez.

So we have a fellow, influential in the UNHRC, who created a human rights prize, named after a well known brutal dictator, who then accepted his own prize shortly after. Not a very illustrious record for a prize I would say. Even the most amateur performer knows not to clap for himself.

Then we have the GONGO’s. “What’s a gongo” you may ask? “I don’t even fully understand what an NGO is yet”.  Welcome to the club. A GONGO is a governmental organization designed to appear to be a non governmental one. A GONGO is a shill, dressed up like an NGO but representing actual fascist dictators. They are apparently, all the rage at the UNHRC. Everyone has one from Cuba to China and of course, the Sudan. The idea is, they celebrate all the worst actions of each nation who hires them. “Genocide? I don’t see no genocide everyone in Darfur is happy and fulfilled”.  They manage to add noise to proceedings so that any attempt to actually bring notice shame or attention to the outrages perpetrated by the worst human rights abusers on earth are drowned out in celebration. The one thing the GONGO’s, the John Ziegler people and the dictators all agree on? The US is evil for one, and Israel is the only place they can all safely pass condemnatory resolutions on.

Another word on Ziegler, he was appointed the UN HRC expert on hunger. Oh, before I forget, he was also a good friend and admirer of Robert Mugabe. Who is Mugabe? well of course he is the president for life of Zimbabwe formerly Rhodesia and the cause of most of the worlds hunger. Rhodesia was in fact the bread basket of Africa. A major net exporter of food. Mugabe drove out all the farmers so he could give the land and material wealth to his friends. The excuse was, the farmers where white and hence colonists although most of them if not all had been multi generational for decades to centuries. His friends of course mostly grew a crop of marijuana if they grew anything at all, sold off the equipment and buggered off to Europe.

I suppose this would make Ziegler an expert on hunger. One would hope though that his expertise was based on alieviating it rather than causing it as Mugabe indisputably did.

As the time of NGO’s to speak to the UNHRC is limited, the job of the GONGO’s is to use it up so that real NGO’s really can’t get  much of a word in. They are effective at this we are told by UN Watch.

The last point is the activities of the chair of the UNHRC. The chair of course is acutely aware of who will cause embarrassment to the totalitarian states. And the chair picks who can and cannot speak, and can stop any speaker on points of order which, as you can easily see from the videos, is to make sure no embarrassment falls on exactly who the UN and the UNHRC was intended by design, to if not stop, at least embarras.

Eeyore for Vladtepesblog.com

Some UNHRC videos from UN watch below the more fold:

Continue Reading →

The actual UN resolution on ‘defamation of religion’

Below is a PDF of the actual UN resolution up for voting at the general assembly. Most of the language is innocuous and seemingly harmless. Much of it however states what the real goal is. I think when reading this, it’s important to realize that the Organization of Islamic councils, the 57 odd Islamic states that sponsored this resolution, have no intention, nor will they ever have any intention, of obeying it in the manner we would expect by its wording. That any attempt to remove incitement to genocide against the Jews for example in Saudi and other Islamic nation’s school text books would be seen as defamation of Islam as this is central dogma to Koran and the hadiths etc. In other words, while the west would have to be sure to criminalize any criticism of Islam, it’s followers or any action by Muslims in the name of Islam we may view as anti social or anti progressive, Muslim nations would be safe from these laws as they would in fact, be practicing Islam by breaking these same rules.

Classic Al Taqiyya. Nearly identical strategy to the peace deal signed by the Marines under Jefferson at Tripoli where the English one said one thing and the Arabic one said quite another.

human_rights_council_resolution <—- Here is the actual document as a .pdf

To be clear, this document if passed, would put pressure on all world governments to pass laws making any criticism of Islam, its actions and teachings as criminal, while it would make no difference in the Islamic world at all when it comes to tolerance of secularism, homosexuality apostasy or conversion from Islam to other faiths or tolerance of non Muslims within Muslim and ultimately any nation.

It is also no accident that this is in front of the UN general assembly as it warms up for the Superbowl of antisemitism, Durban II in April.

Please see the excellent Christopher Hitchens video on this matter as he appeared on US national TV as well as any of the dozen or so posts videos and articles on all points I refer to.

To quote the most excellent movie ‘Life of Brian’…

“Something is actually happening Reg”

Perhaps it might be worth noting that the enlightenment and all rights freedoms and even technology we have came about by the hard won right to question the authority of the irrational Catholic church. To see it all end by the newly minted authority of the umma through the UN and other institutions presumably designed to preserve and increase world wide freedom, would be a tragedy of unimaginable proportions.

Perhaps this is why so few seem to fight it. It is so huge, we resist seeing it for what it is.

Somehow this French speaker managed to get a word in at the UN

Somehow I don’t think it will matter. Even if the OIC does make some conciliatory noise about it the UN thanks to the OIC is setting up for Durban II in a matter of weeks. At this point I don’t really give a damn what the UN has to say. The organization is rotten to the core and nations such as Canada the US and GB should abandon it as a farce to it’s own stated principles. The video is worth seeing anyway.

Some links for Sunday March 15 2009

Shades of Buffalo, a moderate Muslim in the UK who was an advisor to the government on Islam was arrested for stabbing someone in his home.

A Muslim who advised the Government following the July 7 London bombings has been arrested after an alleged stabbing.

Inayat Bunglawala, 39, was held on suspicion of attacking another man at his £300,000 home.

Mr Bunglawala, who also briefed former Security Minister Tony McNulty on the threat posed by Islamic radicals in the UK, was arrested two weeks before Christmas last year.

Anjem Choudary said he wanted every woman to be covered by a full-length cloak in his vision of Britain under Sharia law. Remember Britain? It’s the place that arrested and sent home an elected member of the Dutch Parliament Geert Wilders as they felt his message that Islam posed a threat to liberal values was one unfit for British ears. Apparently Choudary’s is not.

The lawyer, who praised the Mumbai terror attacks, also said he wanted to see the “flag of Allah” flying over Downing Street, adulterers stoned to death and drunks whipped.

Choudary, 41, sparked fury this week when he branded British soldiers “cowards” and was behind a sickening anti-war protest against troops who were arriving home from Iraq to a heroic welcome.

Last night politicians and fellow Muslims condemned his comments while some called for him to leave the country.

Choudary, the leader of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah, a group set up following the banning of extremist sect al-Muhajiroun, led by now-exiled preacher Omar Bakri Mohammed, said he offered “a pure Islamic state with Sharia law in Britain”.

choudary

More on the UN and its anti UN agenda:

From Home

International Humanist and Ethical Union

The UN Human Rights Council is not allowed to judge religions, according to president Doru Romulus Costea of Romania. Criticism of Sharia law or fatwas is now forbidden.

This ruling follows attempts by the Egyptian and Pakistani delegates at the Council to silence criticism of human rights abuse in the Islamic world.

The representative of the Association for World Education, in a joint statement with the International Humanist and Ethical Union, had denounced the stoning to death of women accused of adultery and of girls being married at the age of nine years old in countries where Sharia law applies.

The speaker, David Littman, was interrupted by no fewer than 16 points of order and the proceedings of the Council were suspended for forty minutes when the Egyptian delegate said that “Islam will not be crucified in this Council” and attempted to force a vote on whether the speaker should be allowed to continue.

On giving his ruling after the break Council President Costea said that the Council “is not prepared to discuss religious questions and we don’t have to do so”. “Declarations must avoid judgments or evaluation about religion. … I promise that next time a speaker judges a religion or a religious law or document, I will interrupt him and pass on to the next speaker”.

Continue Reading →

Video from UN, Canada stops David Litman mid speech


The above raw footage of the silencing of Litman at the UN was removed by the user. However, I have found a number of other videos on topic. I will not rest until I can find the same video that was removed above and make sure it stays on this blog.

Here it is. If it comes down again, Ill repost as I saved it locally