The New Republic's blog, The Plank, has a reporter blogging from Durban II which I highly recommend. They're interesting reading. I like how lively Ahmedinejad's speech was:
QuoteDurban II Dispatch: Live-blogging Ahmedinejad
The Durban Review Conference kicked off this morning with some opening statements from the Secretary General and the Commissioner for Human Rights. After selecting a president for the conference and working out some logistical issues, we're on to the main event -- the "high-level segment," where heads of state and other political figures give 7-minute speeches. Up first? Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad.
I'm sitting here in the press box at the conference. Ahmedinejad just walked in.
There seems to be some confusion. He is walking to the seat of the Iranian delegation, not the stage. The chair of the conference seems confused. Ok, now he is finally being escorted to the podium. He begins speaking, thanking Allah.
Some activists are interrupting his speech. They are wearing clown wigs and red noses, and yelling "Racist! Racist" There seem to be three of them, in different parts of the hall. They've been escorted out by security guards. There is a loud applause, though it is unclear whether they are clapping for the activists or the guards.
He continues speaking through the whole fiasco. He is taking a lot of time to thank Allah and his prophets.
Now we're getting a lecture on the history of war, ending with WWII. He transitions into an indictment of the Security Council, questioning the motives of superpowers giving themselves veto powers. Enough of the subtlety -- he condemns their role in the creation of the state of Israel, and starts ripping into Zionism.
The EU is walking out! The entire France, Bulgarian, and Hungarian delegation just walked out. I think others walked out too -- can't see their placards. The press box is going crazy. The entire hall has erupted in applause -- some applauding the delegate who walked out, some applauding Ahemdinejad for continuing his anti-Israel tirade.
Ahmediniejad continues, condemning "the most racist regime," a litany of generic Israel canards. A group of Israeli students start yelling "Racist! Racist!" from the viewing gallery. No one seems to be stopping them. Two Iranian women in hijabs start waving their fists at them. After a few minutes, security finally arrives and escorts out one of the Israel students. Now another one has started yelling "Facist! Facist!"
Ahmediniejad is now ripping into America for invading Iraq. The usual stuff about arrogance and racism.
Now he's blaming the global economic crisis on the US. He's condeming US's selfishness and lack of transparency. He's even condemning the bank bailout plan!
Now he's veered into banal pronouncements about ignorance and history and racism and the creation of the universe and worshipping god.
Oops, he's back to Israel! "A kind of racism that has tarnished the image of humanity ... The word Zionism personifies racism that falsely resorts to religion and abuses religious sentiments to hide their hatred and ugly faces." And Jews control the media! And the major world powers! "Cultural endeavors are not enough. Efforts must be made to put an end to efforts made by Zionists and their supporters. ... Governments must be encouraged in their efforts and their fights to eradicate this barbaric racism."
Another protestor starts shouting from the plenary floor. He is quickly apprehended and silenced.
Now A-jad is talking about a changing of the global order, and the upending of traditional power structures. "Western liberalism and capitalism, like communism, has reached to its end since it has failed to perceive the truth of the world and humanity as it is."
Another protestor starts yelling "Racist!" and is quickly escorted out. Two hijab-clad women start waving and blowing kisses to A-jad.
Now he is back to the Security Council, calling for the elimination of the "discriminatory veto right." Some generic language about love and happiness and cooperation and overhauling the global monetary system. And finally, "Let us all join hands in amity ... in fulfillment of a decent new world." Amen.
UPDATE: The foreign minister of Norway is up next, and he is calling out A-jad, whose speech he says "threatens the very focus of the conference." The declaration of this conference included "the need to protect against incitement to hatred. I heard the messages inside the president's speech. I heard incitement and hatred. This is not a finger-pointing exercise. The president has made Iran the odd man out, and Norway will not accept the odd man out hijacking the efforts of the many. ... We cannot surrender the floor of the United Nations to extremism." Huge applause erupts in the hall.
[NOTE: My transcription is rough. I will update when official transcript is released.]
--Zvika Krieger
This sounds amazing. I hope it gets good coverage on the news tonight.
Another good'un:
QuoteDurban II Dispatch: Libya on Trial
Geneva, Switzerland
Libya was chosen in 2007 to chair the preparatory committee for the UN Durban Review Conference--notwithstanding the irony of an egregious human-rights violator chairing a human rights conference. For the past three days, the committee has been holding sessions to finalize the conference's draft statement, upon which many countries will base their decision whether to attend the conference this week. On Friday, the last day, NGOs were given 30 minutes to weigh in.
Amidst the anti-Israel rants from all the usual NGOs, Libyan ambassador Najjat Al-Hajjaji (who was chairing the meeting) gave the floor to UN Watch, an organization affiliated with the American Jewish Committee that "monitors the performance of the United Nations by the yardstick of its own Charter." But sitting in their chair was not Hillel Neuer, the group's executive director and usual mouthpiece, but Ashraf El Hagog, the Palestinian doctor who was falsely accused of and sentenced to death for infecting hundreds of Libyan children with HIV (along with five Bulgarian nurses). El Hagog and the nurses were held in Libya on death row for nine years, mistreated and tortured, until their release was negotiated by France last year.
"Madame Chairman," El Hagog began, staring steely eyed at the Libyan ambassador. "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 the five Bulgarian nurses."
Al-Hajjaji immediately started banging her gavel. "Stop... stop.... I ask you to stop," she yelled, first looking miffed, then exasperated. "You are, you are not addressing the agenda item... I will allow you to resume only if you address the agenda item we are discussing." The room immediately fell silent.
El Hagog, being coached by Neuer sitting next to him, tried to introduce some amendments to the statement "based on my own suffering," and was again interrupted by Al-Hajjaji banging her gavel. But he continued recounting the story of his torture, then said, "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?" After listing the amendments, he concluded: "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...?" (Click here for a full transcript of his testimony.)
At this point, Hajjaji recognized a point of order from ... the Libyan delegation, who said that El Hagog was not speaking on the correct agenda item. Hajjaji used the objection as an excuse to move on to the next speaker.
I found Neuer on Saturday night at the UN Watch offices across the street from the UN compound, his hair rumpled and dressed in a t-shirt and sweats, working late into the night preparing for the upcoming Durban II conference. As one of the few NGOs that calls the UN on its human rights hypocrisy--particularly relating to Israel--Neuer does not often have reason to celebrate, so he could hardly contain his excitement over Friday's stunt. "The Libyans have been 'chozer b'teshuva,' they've repented--they're in with everybody these days," he said. "It is important to call them on this, to their face." Neuer had tipped off a Swiss television station, so they were on hand to film El Hagog's testimony; the story, billed on the broadcast as a UN Watch "coup d'eclat," led the news that night. (Click here for an English-language video of the incident.) "It's a small thing in the grand scheme of things," Neuer said. "But it's a rare moment that people are called on their bull crap in the UN."
I caught up with El Hagog at the Geneva Summit for Human Rights, Tolerance and Democracy today, where he read the section of his speech that was cut off by Hajjaji: "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?"
He elaborated on his message to Libya and the UN: "It is disgusting for Libya to be the chair of a human rights conference at the UN. Shame on you, Libya." He said that, while he was in prison, he could handle the hanging, deprivation of food and sleep, and being raped by a police dog; what finally broke him was when they "finally threatened to torture my family in front of me," he said. "I was really scared of that." Upon his release, he was given Bulgarian citizenship, and is now committed to holding Libya accountable for their crimes. "I will remain, until the last moment of my life, as a stone in their throats."
[/B]
[Brain] Nothing like a little dog-rape to start a conference off right. [/Brain]
Gads, what a circus.
Quote from: Malthus on April 20, 2009, 10:49:15 AM
Gads, what a circus.
Better than last time when Jewish groups, and sane governments either boycotted or didn't make a show of their opposition. Far, far better, in fact.
But what the purpose of the thing?
I think it is great we have an international conference to advance hatred of Israel, Jews, and the United States. There is clearly a shortage of that in the world today.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 20, 2009, 11:06:02 AM
But what the purpose of the thing?
This convention is part of a set of failures that will eventually reach a critical mass and kill the UN.
Quote from: Valmy on April 20, 2009, 11:07:44 AM
I think it is great we have an international conference to advance hatred of Israel, Jews, and the United States. There is clearly a shortage of that in the world today.
Why are you here posting?Shouldn't you be out on your honeymoon or something?
Quote from: Faeelin on April 20, 2009, 11:13:27 AM
Why are you here posting?
Shouldn't you be out on your honeymoon or something?
We are leaving for our Honeymoon on Thursday. I am at work right now, that is why I am posting :P
Quote from: Faeelin on April 20, 2009, 11:13:27 AM
Why are you here posting?
Shouldn't you be out on your honeymoon or something?
There's nothing wrong with posting on Languish.
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 20, 2009, 10:52:45 AM
Quote from: Malthus on April 20, 2009, 10:49:15 AM
Gads, what a circus.
Better than last time when Jewish groups, and sane governments either boycotted or didn't make a show of their opposition. Far, far better, in fact.
I'm not so sure of that.
I'm with Sheilbh.
Throwing up your hands in exasperation and saying "you guys are beyond the pale, we're not even going to bother with all your bullshit and shenanigans" is conceding control of the terms of the discussion to the demagogues and hatemongers. For the West and allies of actual human rights and freedom to prevail it needs to be engaged in this sort of stuff fully, calling people on their shit and arguing convincingly for what is right. When Ahmedinedjad spews bullshit, it needs to be followed by someone saying "that is bullshit" (as Norway did), not by people saying "ok, you we'll let you and your cronies speak for the UN on human rights because you're so full of shit so we can't be bothered to respond."
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 20, 2009, 10:37:26 AM
Another good'un:
raped by a police dog
Jesus Christ! :bleeding:
Quote from: Jacob on April 20, 2009, 01:17:39 PM
I'm with Sheilbh.
Throwing up your hands in exasperation and saying "you guys are beyond the pale, we're not even going to bother with all your bullshit and shenanigans" is conceding control of the terms of the discussion to the demagogues and hatemongers. For the West and allies of actual human rights and freedom to prevail it needs to be engaged in this sort of stuff fully, calling people on their shit and arguing convincingly for what is right. When Ahmedinedjad spews bullshit, it needs to be followed by someone saying "that is bullshit" (as Norway did), not by people saying "ok, you we'll let you and your cronies speak for the UN on human rights because you're so full of shit so we can't be bothered to respond."
Dunno if I agree or not. The problem is the familiar one: that if the level of discourse is the protest and the invective, or manuverings in committees, the bad guys will always be better at it, since they have no real sense that the other guy might have a legitimate argument - this is just another field of conflict for them, they really do care nothing about "human rights".
So if it comes to shouting and grandstanding at circus-like "conferences", they will always shout the loudest and most whole-heartedly. Why engage them on *their* terms?
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 20, 2009, 01:26:25 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 20, 2009, 10:37:26 AM
Another good'un:
raped by a police dog
Jesus Christ! :bleeding:
I have a hard time feeling bad for that terrorist asshole.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 20, 2009, 01:26:25 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 20, 2009, 10:37:26 AM
Another good'un:
raped by a police dog
Jesus Christ! :bleeding:
That would be a most ironic name for the dog. ;)
Quote from: Jacob on April 20, 2009, 01:17:39 PM
I'm with Sheilbh.
Throwing up your hands in exasperation and saying "you guys are beyond the pale, we're not even going to bother with all your bullshit and shenanigans" is conceding control of the terms of the discussion to the demagogues and hatemongers. For the West and allies of actual human rights and freedom to prevail it needs to be engaged in this sort of stuff fully, calling people on their shit and arguing convincingly for what is right. When Ahmedinedjad spews bullshit, it needs to be followed by someone saying "that is bullshit" (as Norway did), not by people saying "ok, you we'll let you and your cronies speak for the UN on human rights because you're so full of shit so we can't be bothered to respond."
Do you honestly think that progress on human rights is actually possible? I don't think that progress can be made without bringing affluence to the masses. Since the only way to make this possible is to drastically reduce the human population, doesn't this create a problem?
Quote from: Jacob on April 20, 2009, 01:17:39 PM
For the West and allies of actual human rights and freedom to prevail it needs to be engaged in this sort of stuff fully, calling people on their shit and arguing convincingly for what is right.
Do you think the Norwegian convinced anyone?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 20, 2009, 02:11:08 PM
Quote from: Jacob on April 20, 2009, 01:17:39 PM
For the West and allies of actual human rights and freedom to prevail it needs to be engaged in this sort of stuff fully, calling people on their shit and arguing convincingly for what is right.
Do you think the Norwegian convinced anyone?
Well, the report says that the hall erupted in applause, but I'd say that it was because he was preaching to the converted, not because he convinced anyone.
Still, I agree that it's better to call the Iranians and the like on their BS than not doing so.
Of course, it would help to set things up so that countries like Libya don't get the chairmanship of the human rights committee.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 20, 2009, 02:11:08 PM
Quote from: Jacob on April 20, 2009, 01:17:39 PM
For the West and allies of actual human rights and freedom to prevail it needs to be engaged in this sort of stuff fully, calling people on their shit and arguing convincingly for what is right.
Do you think the Norwegian convinced anyone?
I think that exerting moral leadership is an incremental effort and one which is best considered in the long term. As such, I think the Norwegian response contributed positively (though all things said, in human rights and the UN it's more of a rearguard action than any sort of advance).
Quote from: Malthus on April 20, 2009, 01:56:50 PMDunno if I agree or not. The problem is the familiar one: that if the level of discourse is the protest and the invective, or manuverings in committees, the bad guys will always be better at it, since they have no real sense that the other guy might have a legitimate argument - this is just another field of conflict for them, they really do care nothing about "human rights".
So if it comes to shouting and grandstanding at circus-like "conferences", they will always shout the loudest and most whole-heartedly. Why engage them on *their* terms?
If you can engage them on better terms, do so, but if it is a choice engaging on less than ideal terms and not engaging at all I believe it is better to engage vigorously while attempting to change the terms. Throwing up your hands and saying "you guys are crazy, I'm not even going to bother challenging the bullshit you say" is giving up. That strategy is fine for dealing with assholes on the internet, but it is not how a nation should deal with the world.
Quote from: Malthus on April 20, 2009, 01:56:50 PM
Dunno if I agree or not. The problem is the familiar one: that if the level of discourse is the protest and the invective, or manuverings in committees, the bad guys will always be better at it, since they have no real sense that the other guy might have a legitimate argument - this is just another field of conflict for them, they really do care nothing about "human rights".
So if it comes to shouting and grandstanding at circus-like "conferences", they will always shout the loudest and most whole-heartedly. Why engage them on *their* terms?
Agree 100% - moreoever, it is a waste of time at best.
There are other ways for the "good guys" to engage meaningfully on these issues. Promulgating wordy communiques that are only of interest to functionaries is not the way to go.
These Declarations will have as much positive impact on reducing racism in the world as the 1936 Soviet constitution had in bringing human rights and rule of law to the Soviet Empire.
Quote from: Jacob on April 20, 2009, 03:19:13 PM
If you can engage them on better terms, do so, but if it is a choice engaging on less than ideal terms and not engaging at all I believe it is better to engage vigorously while attempting to change the terms. Throwing up your hands and saying "you guys are crazy, I'm not even going to bother challenging the bullshit you say" is giving up. That strategy is fine for dealing with assholes on the internet, but it is not how a nation should deal with the world.
I just don't see any upside to it. *They* are unlikely to be convinced of the need for real human rights. By engaging them on their terms (particularly at these rigged up 'conferences'), all you are doing is providing them with a platform and a certain amount of unearned legitimacy - and providing gainful employment to a certain number of functionaries (does anyone else actually read the stuff these conferences create?)
Personally I think it's more about taking an arena away from them where they can spout their nonsense. I doubt anybody will directly be convinced.
Quote from: frunk on April 20, 2009, 03:42:25 PM
Personally I think it's more about taking an arena away from them where they can spout their nonsense. I doubt anybody will directly be convinced.
Yeah exactly.
I agree with those who say that these hateful views must be challenged, not ignored. The views expressed at the UN conference might seem too ridiculous to be taken seriously by us, but that's the actual worldview of a large portion of the world's population. There are real gains to be made over the minds of the developing world's uneducated masses, and lately the bad guys have been winning.
Quote from: Ancient Demon on April 20, 2009, 09:09:05 PM
There are real gains to be made over the minds of the developing world's uneducated masses, and lately the bad guys have been winning.
:lol:
You think a UN conference is where the battle can be turned?
Quote from: garbon on April 20, 2009, 09:48:58 PM
Quote from: Ancient Demon on April 20, 2009, 09:09:05 PM
There are real gains to be made over the minds of the developing world's uneducated masses, and lately the bad guys have been winning.
:lol:
You think a UN conference is where the battle can be turned?
Every little bit helps.
Ancient Demon, what was your name on the old forum?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 20, 2009, 02:11:08 PM
Quote from: Jacob on April 20, 2009, 01:17:39 PM
For the West and allies of actual human rights and freedom to prevail it needs to be engaged in this sort of stuff fully, calling people on their shit and arguing convincingly for what is right.
Do you think the Norwegian convinced anyone?
Maybe, maybe not, but he convinced me he found his balls at long last... he might make a good PM, and more frightenenly a solid leader of the Labour Party...
Get the UN out of the US and the US out of the UN. It's time to deepsix that utterly despicable organization.
Heard the milquetoast (Korean) SecGen criticizing A-bad's speech on the radio. Kinda surprised me.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 20, 2009, 09:56:49 PM
Ancient Demon, what was your name on the old forum?
It says in my signature (Zagys). ;)
Quote from: Hansmeister on April 20, 2009, 10:50:17 PM
Get the UN out of the US and the US out of the UN. It's time to deepsix that utterly despicable organization.
Or perhaps the US just needs to learn how to manipulate the UN better.
Quote from: frunk on April 20, 2009, 03:42:25 PM
Personally I think it's more about taking an arena away from them where they can spout their nonsense. I doubt anybody will directly be convinced.
Indeed.
Ahmedinejad's day got worse at the press conference:
QuoteDurban II Dispatch: Following Ahmedinejad
After Ahemedinejad finished his speech, he immediately went downstairs to give a press conference. But waiting for him in front of the press conference room, blocking the doors, were hundreds of protesters chanting "Shame! Shame! Shame!" and holding signs like "Respect Bahais and Minorities" and "Iran Funds Hamas and Hezbollah." Standing amidst the protesters were Holocaust survivor Elie Weisel and Iranian dissident (famously pictured on the cover of TIME) Ahmad Batebi.
By the time I pushed my way through the crowd, I had missed most of the press conference. Most of the questions I heard came from what we call "single-issue journalists," like reporters from Albania and Ecuador, who asked questions specifically relating to their home countries. (I'll spare you the transcript.) I did get to hear two interesting questions. One reporter asked why Ahmedinejad was so quick to condemn Israeli violence, but never condemns violence perpetrated on Muslims by Muslims. (The reporter referenced some recent attack that I did not catch.) Predictably, he said that "all the problems and conflicts in the Muslim world are a result of Western interference."
Another journalist asked if the row over Durban would affect the negotiations over Iran's nuclear program. He repeated his usual response about Iran's rights to operate a peaceful nuclear program, the US not treating Iran with respect as a sovereign country, and the West wanting a monopoly on nuclear power. Then he went on a surprising rift about the environmental benefits of nuclear power, and that if we want to combat global warming, Iran must be allowed to have a nuclear program. He must be getting desperate.
--Zvika Krieger
This is a good thing.
Quote from: Ancient Demon on April 20, 2009, 11:25:41 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on April 20, 2009, 10:50:17 PM
Get the UN out of the US and the US out of the UN. It's time to deepsix that utterly despicable organization.
Or perhaps the US just needs to learn how to manipulate the UN better.
It's Hans...
The conference puzzles me.
But it's at least refreshing to see a Norwegian do what we do best - point out the flaws in other people.
Sheilbh, this new story made both covers of our more serious/respected daily journals, so at least here you can say that it made some impact.
The titles were along the lines of "Alm-j crashes UN racism conference".
Checking their online pages, Diário de Notícias says that he has "poisoned" the conference, whilePúblico says that its speach has made the conference sink.
@Jacob: I think we may have done the right thing by distancing ourselves from the Durban conference. The feeling seems to be not that Iran's case has been helped, but that in "showcasing their support for human rights" by allowing an egregious human rights violator to rant in a venue hosted by an egregious human rights violator, the UN has hurt their case. Public relations fail.
Quote from: Hansmeister on April 20, 2009, 10:50:17 PM
Get the UN out of the US and the US out of the UN. It's time to deepsix that utterly despicable organization.
Word.