UN Racism Forum

[Merlin]

Avigdor Lieberman criticizes Ahmedinajad for being a racist. Don't know whether to laugh or cry. Put them both in a room & shoot the one who comes out alive.

Interesting idea.

[Tarek Morgen]

The reason why Ahmadinajad got the first speech was rather simply. He was the only head of state who showed up. And at those events head of states get the first place, followed by head of governments and then others like ministers or ambassadors. If there had been any other head of states he would not have gotten so much spot light, or even time to hold a speech at all...but since he knew that no one (of high enough rank) else would attend he simply used it for another propaganda coup in which each side will see itself as winner.

btw: Could anyone identify what it was the clown guys threw at him? To bad they missed.

[Merlin]

The reason why Ahmadinajad got the first speech was rather simply. He was the only head of state who showed up. And at those events head of states get the first place, followed by head of governments and then others like ministers or ambassadors. If there had been any other head of states he would not have gotten so much spot light, or even time to hold a speech at all...but since he knew that no one (of high enough rank) else would attend he simply used it for another propaganda coup ....

Bull's eye. You may be right.

[Merlin]

After the dust from the damaging Ahmadinejad speech and walkout has settled, the racism conference is back on track.

Racism conference on track

Apr 21, 2009 PARIS - FRANCE'S foreign minister says a UN racism conference is on the right track despite a mass walkout during a speech by Iran's president.

Bernard Kouchner says the meeting is 'not at all a failure but the beginning of a success.'

He said on Europe-1 radio Tuesday that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's speech that was hostile toward Israel was 'predictable.'

France's representative and other European participants walked out during the speech on Monday.

Mr Kouchner said the French participant would rejoin the conference on Tuesday. He expressed hope that a proposed UN declaration on racism would be approved on Tuesday night.

France bucked calls for a boycott of the conference ....

[MIKEMUN]

Hmmm, I think I partially disagree.

If there was a conference against racism worth of that name, it could help bring attention to very serious issues concerning racism that are being almost neglected. It won't solve anything by itself, but it can help.

For example: it could help bring more attention to the largely racially motivated GENOCIDE in Darfur.

I remark "Genocide" because we all have heard about it in the guise of the "humanitarian crisis" in Darfur. This about the murdering of around 400,000 civilians and displacement of another 2.5 million, mainly because of their ethnicity, one of the most abyect euphemisms that I know of.

And this is the second way this conference betrays its purported goals. By deflecting needed attention away from ongoing racist abuses and even a Genocide.

That may be true. But I feel that very few people want to adress the Darfur issue, partly because China and Russia are always trying to be difficult. But the biggest problem with Darfur, like Zimbabwe, is that African leaders want to protect their interests. The rest of the world can't do anything if African leaders do not start being accountable to their people.

[Merlin]

The US should not have boycotted the conference, said France.

France criticizes USA for shunning U.N. racism talks

Apr 21, 2009 PARIS (Reuters) - France's Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner criticized the United States Tuesday for boycotting a United Nations conference where Iran's president launched a verbal attack on Israel.

France, which has strong diplomatic and business ties with the Middle East, had joined a walk-out of delegates in Geneva after President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called Israel cruel and racist in a speech Monday, but then returned to the meeting.

Kouchner said it was wrong of the United States to shun the conference after announcing it was open for negotiations on Iran's nuclear program.
"It's paradoxical -- they don't want to listen to Iran in Geneva but they are ready to talk to them," Kouchner told French radio Europe 1. "More than a paradox, that could really be a mistake."

Kouchner said France would continue to work on the draft text prepared for the Geneva meeting and expected a result later Tuesday, adding that the declaration would condemn anti-Semitism and the Holocaust. ...

[Big K]

...And spell mississippi ))

mishispiispsiisiish..hebele hubelel

[gunnut]

Sorry, but this is an utterly meaningless statement.

1) Rape, murder, cancer, faeces & malaria are all 'natural'. Racism is a social construct, like all prejudices. No one is born hating or fearing people who speak a different language, worship at a different church or have different DNA. They learn.

2) Having said this, the cause is only incidentally relevant. The outcome is not. We try to prevent or minimze the harm from the 'natural' ills I listed. We do the same with racism. Personally I would rather fail doing that than succeed making excuses for racism.



Must be tough not being able to racially abuse people. Personally I gave it up when I reached adulthood, but thats just me. Personally I pity someone who has such a limited worldview & vocabulary that they feel the need to reduce me to some racial stereotype. The moment they utter the word they have already lost the ability to offend me.

I suspect that you have a very good idea why some words have more power than others & are just being obtuse.

You might think this way, but there are those who believe white people are more racist than others. Is that racism?

I don't think Obama is anything special. I disagree with his policies. Yet there are those who think he's "historic" simply because of his skin color. Is that racism?

There's a movie called "White Man Can't Jump." Make a movie with a title "Black Man Can't xxx" and see what kind of outcry there will be. Is that racism?

Racism goes both ways, and may other ways too. It's the nature of how we group things together. We make sense of this world by grouping things together. People don't like to be criticized either. Sometimes racism shows up as criticism. Sometimes criticism is interpreted as racism.

[Oscar]

You might think this way, but there are those who believe white people are more racist than others. Is that racism?
I don't think Obama is anything special. I disagree with his policies. Yet there are those who think he's "historic" simply because of his skin color. Is that racism?

You certainly remember the days when anyone who dared criticise Bush were labelled "terrorist sympathiser liberals" do you?

Now the new label for people criticising Obama is "racist".

Both are exaggerated.

Racism goes both ways, and may other ways too. It's the nature of how we group things together. We make sense of this world by grouping things together. People don't like to be criticized either. Sometimes racism shows up as criticism. Sometimes criticism is interpreted as racism.

Whatever be the roots of racism, it must be fought since its against everything the Enlightment stood for. Apartheid is not a natural thing. People who think that the color of your skin, your sexual orientation, etc... allow them to put you in a category must GTFO and just leave us alone.

Article I - Men are born and remain free and equal in rights. Social distinctions can be founded only on the common utility

[gunnut]

You certainly remember the days when anyone who dared criticise Bush were labelled "terrorist sympathiser liberals" do you?

Now the new label for people criticising Obama is "racist".

Both are exaggerated.

Which one would you rather be called? A terrorist sympathizer liberal or a racist?

Whatever be the roots of racism, it must be fought since its against everything the Enlightment stood for. Apartheid is not a natural thing. People who think that the color of your skin, your sexual orientation, etc... allow them to put you in a category must GTFO and just leave us alone.

So you would agree that calling white people "crackers" or any other form of derogatory terms is a form of racism?

I'm not looking for any type of preferential treatment. I just want consistency. Double-standards is bad. Racist policies are double-standards in practice.

As far as racism, I don't think we can get rid of it (the thought) from humans. We don't have to act on it though. I will always look at one group more favorably than another. However, I will not deprive one group's rights based on my personal preferences.

Remember, tolerance doesn't mean "to like."

[Oscar]

So you would agree that calling white people "crackers" or any other form of derogatory terms is a form of racism?

I'm not looking for any type of preferential treatment. I just want consistency. Double-standards is bad. Racist policies are double-standards in practice.

You're right, white people are so discriminated nowadays. And Germans are called the krauts, the French the frogs, and....Honestly who cares?

As far as racism, I don't think we can get rid of it (the thought) from humans. We don't have to act on it though. I will always look at one group more favorably than another.

Thats called prejudices, white settlers had prejudices against Asians too in the early days of the colonization of California and even afterwards.

Remember, tolerance doesn't mean "to like."

I agree. There's no right to be liked, thats something you should deserve. But tolerance means that no one has a right to assault you because of the color of your skin, your religion, your political opinions, etc...

[gunnut]

You're right, white people are so discriminated nowadays. And Germans are called the krauts, the French the frogs, and....Honestly who cares?

And they're all white...)

Thats called prejudices, white settlers had prejudices against Asians too in the early days of the colonization of California and even afterwards.

We put a bunch of yellow skinned Americans in concentration camps in WW2. That was by a Democrat, no less. A highly regarded (not by me) democrat.

I agree. There's no right to be liked, thats something you should deserve. But tolerance means that no one has a right to assault you because of the color of your skin, your religion, your political opinions, etc...

Absolutely.

What Chris was saying was that we can only joke about white people these days. Joke about white people, for what ever the reason, is just that, a joke. Joke about anyone else and charges of racism fly all over the place...unless the one making the joke is not white. He just felt that was not fair.

[Parihaka]

Avigdor Lieberman criticizes Ahmedinajad for being a racist. Don't know whether to laugh or cry. Put them both in a room & shoot the one who comes out alive.

[Parihaka]

btw: Could anyone identify what it was the clown guys threw at him? To bad they missed.

Red clowns noses

[gunnut]

Red clowns noses

Isn't that racist? Persians have larger than average noses.