BILINGUES ? POSTS IN ENGLISH

THE UNITED STATES MUST NOT ATTEND
> > THE UN DURBAN II "ANTI-RACISM" CONFERENCE
> >
> > Secretary-elect Hillary Clinton is poised to announce whether or not
> > the United States will participate in the UN Durban Review Conference - Durban II.
> >
> > Your voice matters.
> >
> > PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION URGING
> > THE UNITED STATES TO STAND WITH
> > ISRAEL AND CANADA AND NOT ATTEND
> >
> > BY CLICKING HERE [eyeontheun.list-manage.com]
> >

Elisabeth,

I haven't been following this issue; what's wrong with the Durban Conference?

before you open the link, this is what it is all about.


The Palais des Nations, Geneva (Site of Durban II)
Dear Secretary Hillary Clinton:

We write to urge you, as President-elect Obama's nominee for Secretary of State, to act as soon as possible following your confirmation to announce formally that the United States will not participate in the forthcoming UN Durban Review Conference (Durban II). This continuation of American policy since September 2001, in defense of the state of Israel and fundamental American values, is crucial both for Israel's welfare and to the successful protection of international rights and freedoms for all.

We were deeply disturbed by the hateful, antisemitic atmosphere that plagued the 2001 UN Racism Conference. Congressman Tom Lantos, a Holocaust survivor, led the United States out of the conference along with the representatives of the state of Israel and every major Jewish non-governmental organization in attendance from around the world. The UN's antiracism movement was hijacked by forces which do not have the best interest of human rights victims at heart and Congressman Lantos spoke for them and our great nation.

The 2001 Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, adopted by governments, claims that Palestinians are victims of Israeli racism. This is the only such country-specific allegation in the entire document. It has already been decided by a series of Durban preparatory sessions - and UN resolutions adopted over the objection of the United States - that the UN Durban Review Conference will be dedicated to the implementation of the 2001 Durban Declaration. Being there, therefore, legitimizes the false and dangerous claim of Israeli racism and is no place for the United States.
Since leaving the Durban Conference, the United States has consistently voted against every resolution on Durban "follow-up" along with the State of Israel, refused to fund Durban II planning and preparatory events, and refused to participate in all planning activities associated with Durban II. It has been a clear, consistent and principled position, based on a refusal to lend any credibility to a mechanism which contains the demonization of the state of Israel as part of its fixed agenda. Maintaining that position cannot be construed as American disinterest in combating racism. On the contrary, it is a strong consistent refusal to build a regime of equality for some on a foundation which sacrifices the equality of others.

Years ago, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan told the United Nations, in the wake of its adoption of the infamous Zionism is racism resolution, that "The United States...does not acknowledge, it will not abide by, it will never acquiesce in this infamous act." Although the resolution was eventually rescinded after 17 years, the Durban process (which includes the first conference, the follow-up and the review conference) has taken up that insidious and antisemitic call. As Martin Luther King said in a 1968 appearance at Harvard: "when people criticize Zionists, they mean Jews." The Obama administration should and must honor King's profound understanding of what remains very much a current threat.

Contrary to appeals for American attendance by some, it is unassailable that the Durban II conference agenda has already been set and it begins with the implementation of Durban I's Declaration. U.S.participation will not and cannot change that fact. Instead, what participation will do is lend credibility and breathe new life into an act which the U.S. has already rejected, forcefully and unequivocally.

Furthermore, every indication of the planning process proves that Durban II will be worse than the original conference - in addition to affirming the Durban I result. The current draft of the so-called outcome document (December 26, 2008) has an entire section called the "Middle East" which includes such defamatory language against Israel as: "Expresses deep concern at the practices of racial discrimination against the Palestinian people as well as other inhabitants of the Arab occupied territories." "... the Palestinian people ... have been subjected to ... torture." "[A]foreign occupation founded on settlements, was based on racial discrimination ... contradicts the purposes and principles of the United Nations."

The chair of the preparatory committee of Durban II is Libya, who has been exercising an extremely negative role in the planning process and whose influence will continue. On the executive of the preparatory committee, or bureau, sits Iran who has also been influential in sculpting events. Iran and the Libyan Chair were instrumental in scuttling the application to participate in the conference of Canada's primary pro-Israel and Jewish advocacy umbrella group. The Libyan Chair, along with UN members from Egypt, Syria and Algeria among others, has constantly interrupted non-governmental organizations that have attempted to make contributions on the subject of antisemitism in all of the planning sessions. This dynamic is entrenched in the Durban process. The one saving grace has been the absence of the United States, whose absence has denied moral authority to this forum.

While it is true that the negotiating strategy of hardliners to date may be to include sections in the drafting documents which are more extreme than participants will ultimately accept, participation necessitates lending legitimacy to a discussion for and against a Jewish state, for and against drawing analogies between Israel and apartheid South Africa, for and against freedom of expression, for and against protection from antisemitism, for and against even a definition of antisemitism to mean the hatred of Jews (which many participants reject.)

There are some who suggest that a decision to leave the conference can be taken at a later date. This suggestion is disingenuous. Planning and preparation for Durban II are now in their final phases. An American absence has been the rule on Durban I "follow-up" for seven and a half years. Entering the process for the first time less than 3 months before the conference itself would initiate a dynamic that would carry a much higher diplomatic price if subsequently reversed.

In addition, attendance would drag America into a divisive and early confrontation with the 56 UN member states from the Organization of the Islamic Conference, and other developing nations, that can and should be avoided. Religion and religious themes are mentioned in the Durban II draft 62 different times. This extraordinary attention paid to religion in an anti-racism context paves the way for an ugly confrontation at the conference itself. Among other things, the proceedings will constitute an assault on freedom of expression. Draft provisions include an attack on alleged defamation against religious personalities and holy books, as well as a call for a code of conduct for journalists.

Most importantly, the terms, conditions and composition of this conference will not permit America and like-minded democratic allies to prevail on the merits. The organization, planning and outcomes to date make it clear that compromises which jeopardize American values will be necessary to achieve a consensus outcome. This means that enormous pressure will be brought to bear on the United States not to be the "spoiler". Instead, we can and should refuse to sit down to play with a stacked deck. American leadership in the important field of combating racism should be carefully planned to ensure that protection moves forward and not backward.

The United States will not be alone in taking this position of principle.

Israel's Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni has specifically asked the United States and others to stand with Israel and refuse to participate. On November 19, 2008 she issued this call: "Israel will not participate and will not legitimize the Review Conference which will be used as a platform for further anti-Israeli and antisemitic activity. We call upon the international community not to participate in a conference which seeks to legitimize hatred and extremism under the banner of "the "fight against racism"."
Likewise, Canada's Foreign Minister and Secretary of State for Multiculturalism stated on January 23, 2008 that Canada will not participate and added: "Our considered judgment, having participated in the preparatory meetings, was that we were set for a replay of Durban I. And Canada has no intention of lending its good name and resources to such a systematic promotion of hatred and bigotry."

The United States can and should be a world leader in combating racism wherever it is found. But the Durban Review Conference is a forum which has been irrevocably tarnished. Participation would seriously undercut the ability of the United States to play a constructive role in combating racism, now and in the future. We, therefore, call on you to announce that the United States will not participate.

Thank you very much for your consideration.

cc. Susan Rice, UN Ambassador

"iPetition" is a product of RemoteIT.com

Obama vows to listen to Muslims
By Edward Luce in Washington

Published: January 27 2009 04:53 | Last updated: January 27 2009 04:53

Barack Obama on Monday night granted an Arabic-language television channel his first formal interview as president – an unprecedented gesture that appeared aimed at offering the Muslim world a sharp contrast with his predecessor, George W. Bush.


Mr Obama, who in his inaugural address last week promised the Muslim world a “new way forward based on mutual respect and mutual interest”, told the Al Arabiya television channel that his administration wanted listen to the Muslim world and re-examine America’s “preconceptions” towards the region.

Mr Obama also went further than he had at any point during the general election in speaking openly about his own personal ties to the Muslim world.

“Now, my job is to communicate the fact that the United States has a stake in the well-being of the Muslim world, that the language we use has to be a language of respect,” he told the Saudi-owned station. “I have Muslim members of my family. I have lived in Muslim countries.”

Mr Obama spent four years of his childhood in Indonesia, which is widely tipped to be the first majority-Muslim country he will visit within his first 100 days in office.

He pledged his strong backing for the peace brokering efforts of George Mitchell, the former Senator, whom he appointed last week as his special envoy for the Israel and Palestine. Mr Mitchell is expected to visit the region within the next few days.

Mr Obama implicitly conceded in the interview that terms such as “war on terror” had proved counter-productive over the last seven years. “The language we use matters,” he said. “We cannot paint with a broad brush a faith as a consequence of the violence that is done in that faith’s name. I cannot respect terrorist organizations that would kill innocent civilians and we will hunt them down. But to the broader Muslim world what we are going to be offering is a hand of friendship.”

Just five days into office, Mr Obama has issued several executive orders declaring an end to torture and closure of Guantanamo Bay among steps including permitting US aid agencies to promote family planning after an eight-year hiatus.

The new president has also appointed envoys to the Middle East and Afghanistan-Pakistan.

In the midst of intense negotiations with Congress to push through an $825bn stimulus package, Mr Obama also on Monday offered a big boost to the environmental lobby by unblocking a Bush-era waiver that allows California and other states to impose higher carbon emission standards on industry.

The interview with Al Arabiya is likely to further antagonise conservative Republican critics of Mr Obama, who have already attacked his move to close Guantanamo within a year.

Source and video here : [www.ft.com]

Thanks for the info, Elisabeth!

I always wonder what the best course of action would be in such a situation: boycott the thing or go there and make your voice heard?

As far as I'm concerned, the UN is a joke and it's time to disband it.

Thank you Surfeuse.

Elisabeth

Nine Saudi Islamic militants, including former Guantanamo inmates, have been rearrested in the Kingdom despite completing a controversial rehabilitation programme.

The arrests follow the embarrassing revelation last week that another Saudi Guantanamo Bay detainee who was released to the authorities in 2007 has emerged as the deputy leader of al-Qaeda’s Yemeni branch of the terrorist organisation.

Both incidents are a serious setback for the experimental regime in which Saudi terror suspects are "weaned off" Islamic militancy at the so-called "Betty Ford clinic" for jihadists.

The rearrest of nine Saudi militants has also underlined the dilemma now facing governments with nationals still being detained in Guantanamo Bay, following President Obama’s decision to close the camp. He has called on other countries to take detainees to help clear out the controversial prison...

At the Saudi rehabilitation centre, inmates selected for reform have access to a swimming pool, table tennis and PlayStations. They even play football with their guards.

From Haaretz :


Moroccan organizations in Holland agree to attend Auschwitz memorial


By DPA ?Tags: Israel News, Jewish World ?


Representatives of Moroccan organizations in the Netherlands were due to attend the annual Auschwitz memorial scheduled for late Sunday morning after receiving requests from the government. Their decision to attend - a first for the groups - comes amid heightened tensions between Jewish and Arab groups. Advertisement During several pro-Palestinian rallies earlier in January, protesters against Israel's military action in the Gaza Strip shouted a well-known anti-Semitic slogan "Hamas, Hamas, put the Jews to the gas". The Moroccan groups decided to attend the ceremony after a direct invitation from Dutch Integration Minister Eberhard van der Laan called on Thursday. Van der Laan emphasized the need for Jews and Muslims to "come together by understanding each other's pain and suffering." "Muslims should understand what al-Nakba is for Muslims, the Shoah is to Jews, and vice versa." van der Laan said. Also, Dutch MP Harry van Bommel of the leftist Socialist Party will not be present at the Auschwitz commemoration. He was filmed calling for an "intifada" - uprising - against Israel during a pro-Palestinian rally where protestors also shouted explicit anti-Semitic slogans. His announcement in the next days that he would be present at the Auschwitz commemoration caused fury among Dutch Jews. Van Bommel ultimately decided not to attend. The Dutch Auschwitz commemoration is a public, non-denominational ceremony, usually attended by a maximum of two hundred people, Jews and non-Jews. The annual Jewish commemoration of the Holocaust, which attracts a much larger number of participants, takes place on Yom Hashoah in the spring, on a different site. During World War II, the Nazis murdered 6 million Jews, more than 1.5 million Jews in the gas chambers of Auschwitz-Birkenau, located in Poland.

Morocco Bans Unislamic Names in the Netherlands (Christians names included)
NIS News ^ | January 28 2008


THE HAGUE, 29/01/09 - Moroccans in the Netherlands are not allowed to give their children any Berber names any more. In this way, Islamic identity is being stressed, Trouw newspaper reported yesterday.

By far the biggest group of Moroccans in the Netherlands are of Berber origin, a region in the mountainous north of Morocco. "They will now be forced to give their children a Moroccan-Islamic name," according to Trouw. "Morocco wants to secure the Moroccan identity of its nationals in this way, including the Moroccan Dutch."

The Moroccan government in Rabat sent all embassies and consulates abroad a list of banned name this week. Christian names were already forbidden. "We forbid Berber names because they conflict with the identity and because they open the door to the spread of meaningless names," said Idris Bajdi, a top official in Morocco, in the newspaper.

Labour (PvdA) MP Samira Bouchibti, a Moroccan national (by royal Moroccan decree) like all other Moroccans who moved to or were born in the Netherlands, is angry. "We must get rid of these lists of names and this interference. I want to be able to decide myself how I name my children. This is discriminatory."

Bouchibti also criticised her party leader Wouter Bos, who said at a PvdA party meeting earlier this week that dual passports "belong in the Netherlands." Bouchibti: "Bos has no enforced dual nationality and therefore does not know what it means in practice." Bos considers dual nationality



Modifié 1 fois. Dernière modification le 01/02/2009 19:28 par anidavid.

à lire : c'est long...

Irish Independent.ie
Why the Israeli people have finally had enough
By Ian O'Doherty
Junuary 5 2009
So, it's genocide now, is it? Or is it actually another holocaust, something which one typically restrained Palestinian analyst described as "worse than Hitler's war against the Jews"? Are we watching the ethnic cleansing of an entire people? Are we witnessing the deliberate e radication of a race?
Well, no actually, we're not..
Yet the conventional dinner party wisdom which we've had to put up with in the media, both here in Ireland and generally across Britain, is that somehow Israel is the aggressor in the rapidly worsening situation in Gaza.
Footage of air strikes with the ensuing photogenic explosions and dramatic plumes of smoke, quickly followed by clips of collapsed buildings and enraged mourners, makes far better copy than actually looking at the reasons why Israel has done what it's done.
Anyone who devotes o nly a cursory glance at the news, both print and television, would be forgiven for thinking that, out of spite, might and malice, Israel has decided to destroy the Palestinian people.
The problem with that conclusion -- and it's not something you're going to learn from the BBC and most other outlets -- is that, contrary to the currently popular belief, Israel is actually acting with a ridiculous degree of restraint.
Over the last couple of years, thousands of rockets have been landing on Israeli soil and, finally, they have had enough.
But behind that statistic there is a human dimension which tends to be rather ignored.
I know many people in the southern Israeli town of Sderot and what is remarkable about their stories is not the number or make of rockets which have fallen on them on a daily basis for years, but the psychological carnage this wreaked upon them.
One woman freely admitted to me that she hasn't had a proper night's sleep in more than two years as she and her family now basically live in their bomb shelter and it's hard to tell who she hates more -- the Muslim terrorists of Hamas or the Israeli government which she thinks has abandoned them.
It's a common feeling amongst residents of southern Israeli towns who have been the silent victims of a long campaign of violence, intimidation and murder carried out by Hamas. And now, finally, that the Israelis have said that enough is enough, they are somehow meant to be the aggressors?
There are people of good conscience on both sides of this argument, but one of the main problems in this debate lies in the cowardly tendency of the Western media to apply equivalence to both sides.
Thus, Hamas is seen to be as legitimate a government as the Israelis, and its rocket attacks across the border from Gaza are seen as being part of a yet another, intractable, interminable Middle Eastern dispute.
There's just one problem with that approach -- it's completely wrong.
Hamas is a fundamentalist Islamic organisation intent on the eradication of the state of Israel and all its citizens; a violent fascist regime that allows honour killings and the execution of homosexuals to continue in its sphere of influence. Bankrolled by Iran, it manages to make even Hezbollah look like a moderate organisation.
But Hamas is clever.
As a friend of mine from Sderot pointed out, one of its favourite tactics is to launch Qassams from Palestinian schoolyards -- while the schools are still in session.
Hamas does this, you see, knowing that the IDF can't immediately strike back (they can vector a rocket launch site within 90 seconds) because the last thing the Israelis need is footage of a devastated Palestinian school with dead kids.
And, over the last week, we have seen carefully manipulated footage of dead civilians, with the fact that they were effectively used as human shields conveniently ignored. When Israel pulled out of Gaza -- ironically, the last battalion of IDF troops to leave Gaza contained some people from Sderot -- they were acceding to international and internal pressure. The doves on the Left said it was to prove to Palestinians that they wanted to give Palestinians independence, the hawks on the Right -- and there are some truly scary right-wingers in Israel, even as ardent a supporter of the country as I am will freely admit that -- prophesied that it would lead to carnage.
And, lo and behold, virtually as soon as the last jeep left Gaza the rockets started. And then the blockade began, and the whole damn mess started all over again.
But there's a bigger picture here, something which Israelis have been trying to broadcast to the world, but which, thanks to their spectacular inability to accur ately and sympathetically portray their point of view, has not been properly transmitted. It's this -- Israel is the front line of the war between democracy and Islamic fascism.
Would you rather live in a society with a free press, equal rights for women -- and anyone who knows an Israeli woman will know that they're not easily suppressed, anyway -- equal rights for gay people and a proud and stubborn belief in the right of the individual to lead their life in the way that they see fit or would you rather exist in a society where women who dare to speak their mind are executed, where gay people are not just shunned but murdered and where having a dissenting thought marks you out for death?
The civilian deaths in Gaza are to be mourned, and anyone who says otherwise is reprehensible. But in a sick and twisted irony, they are mourned more by Israelis than by Hamas, who know that every dead Palestinian kid is worth another piece of propaganda.
Here in the West, where we share the same values as Israel, we need to start standing shoulder with this tiny oasis of democracy in a vast desert of savagery.
To do otherwise is moral cowardice of the most repugnant kind.
IAN CAN BE CONTACTED AT iodoherty@independent.ie. NO DOUBT HE WILL RECEIVE SCORES OF HATRED FILLED EMAILS SO PLEASE SEND HIM A MESSAGE OF GRATITUDE FOR HIS STRAIGHT THINKING
---------------------------------------------------------

Wow! This analysis is spot on! Way to go, Ian!

that's interresting, but a bit too late !!


Israeli Arab view of Lieberman: We got what we deserved
We got what we deserve


Ali Zahalka slams Israeli-Arab leadership for radicalism that boosted Avigdor Lieberman
Ali Zahalka

Published: 02.09.09, 12:14 / Israel Opinion

The Arab-Israeli leadership is increasing pushing us into anti-Israel radicalism. This extremism climaxed with the "Death to the Jews" chants during Operation Cast Lead. Here is what I have to say to those leaders: Look at what you've done.

We did not cry out in the face of rocket attacks on southern residents that went on for years. We did not cry out in the face of the suffering of our brethren, Gaza residents, who have been brutally repressed by Hamas. Yet we cried out, of all things, in the face of an onslaught against the most radical element in the Arab world.

The Arab-Israeli leadership won't connect, heaven forbid, to the moderate Arab elements such as Egypt, Mahmoud Abbas' Palestinian Authority, or Jordan. These are of no interest to it. We saw Azmi Bishara, who left, and we saw where he went to.

I don't need to explain what Hamas is all about. The Egyptians and Palestinian Authority officials are doing it better than me. They ask Hamas how it can talk about victory when the war against Israel – which it sought and advanced – was managed on the backs and blood of thousands of Palestinians that were killed, wounded, or lost their property, while Hamas' leadership stayed at fortified bunkers or in Damascus.

So now we can accurately measure the result of this conduct: 18. Why 18? Because this is the number of Knesset seats that the polls predict for Avigdor Lieberman's party, Yisrael Beiteinu.

Apparently, we got what we deserve. If we, citizens of the State of Israel, which has a Jewish majority, connect to the worst enemies of the State, why are we surprised that this is what we get?

Lieberman and his party are not a marginal political element such as Meir Kahane's party, Kach. We are dealing with immense political power that constitutes tangible danger to Israeli Arabs. He hates us and incites against us, and we can see that it's going very well for him: The more he incites against us, the stronger he gets.

Moment of truth
That is, we managed to make the Jewish public hate us so much that many are willing to support a racist party. If a party was similarly inciting against Jews overseas, those same Lieberman supporters would probably cry out "anti-Semitism."


Our leadership, which for years had been leading us in a way that portrays us as the enemies of the State of Israel, while failing to take care of any of the real needs of Israel's Arab residents, is now asking for our votes again. Yet we interest our leadership just about as much as the Gaza population interests Hamas. For this leadership, we are merely a political means that allows it to make its damaging voice heard again and again.

I turn to Arab residents of Israel: This is a moment of truth for us. We are facing grave danger, and don't say that you weren't warned. Eighteen Knesset seats for Lieberman is no longer a political game. For us, it's genuine trouble. We cannot stand by and watch on, as if this does not pertain to us. We must enlist and massively support the moderate parties that will weaken Lieberman.



We constitute 20% of the population in Israel and we have the ability to exert significant influence. We do not have the privilege to stay at home at this time and avoid the political game. If we fail to play it, others shall play it on our backs.

Therefore, do not abstain from voting, and do not vote for the radical Arab parties. Rather, vote in a way that reduces the great danger we are facing today – Lieberman and his colleagues. In other words: Support parties that are still willing to give us the opportunity to integrate as citizens with equal rights.

The writer is the principal of an elementary school at Kfar Kara

Where was Obama really born ?
His grand'mother says he was born in Kenya and that she was present in the room where he was born.
And Obama would not provide a birth certificate.

You decide.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="

&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="

&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

cette vidéo est passée bien avant l'election, cet avocat a menacé de dénoncer "ses vérités" pour qu'Obama ne puisse être élu. Si c'était vrai, tout ce qu'il dit, ça aurait été un vrai scandale, donc.... I sincerely do not believe this man.

Lison

Actually, a Republican (a sore loser I guess) challenged his being born in the US and Obama produced a birth certificate in early December, 2008 that proves he was born in Hawaii.

Of course, if they can prove he wasn't born in the US and the birth certificate is a forgery, his election will be voided as you have to born in the US to be eligible to run for president.

Personally, I think they're full of it because there is no proof that Obama and his family ever lived in Kenya. His birth father even deserted him when he was 3.
Pièces jointes:

Surfeuse, You are a wonder !!! amazing...
Elisabeth

pour lison !!!!


Video

Stricly for Information.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="

&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="

&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

I wonder how they are going to go over this one. I am not sure that "both parents have to be american citizen"
looks like a smear campaign..

my G-d !!!!!

Lison

Today, 15th February 2009, the Palestinian Forum in Britain is holding a conference to "celebrate the victory of the resistance in Gaza." There is no doubt that is their right, even if they are lying to themselves, provided that they gather peacefully and do not preach hatred. I doubt that the latter will be the case, however.
Among those attending, are avowed antisemites such as Wagdi Ghuneim, who addressed a New York audience in Arabic about the dishonesty of the Jews and told them that the Palestinians' conflict with Israel was not about land but about belief.
Ghuneim then led the 500 strong audience in a song of which the following is a transcript translated from Arabic:

No to the Jews
Descendants of the Apes
We vow to return
Despite the obstacles


The collaborators have sold
The Land of Ascension
Without Shame
They bowed to the Jews

“Oh Ben Gurion”
Zion is ours
A mean Jew


Generations have past
Refusing humiliation
he heroes attacked
The heroes of steadfastness


O Children of Salah[Al Din]
And Children of [Ibn al] Jerah
Jerusalem is allowed to everybody [is vulnerable to rape]
And the Arabs are bowing down.