Posted on 02/26/2006 9:45:48 PM PST by Cornpone
Okay, call me prejudiced...I don't want Wahhabi-influenced Arab "Moslems" associated with anything that can produce a terror attack until I can become convinced that Wahabi-influenced Arabs are civilized. It took to atomic bombs to convert Empero- worshiping Japan to relinquish the "Bushido" side of Shintoism. It might take two more (one on Mecca and the other on Medina) to convert a gutter religious culture to peaceful Islam in the Middle East.
"Public Law 101-246 calls for analysis and discussion of “votes on issues which directly affected United States interests and on which the United States lobbied extensively.” An important basis for identifying important issues is consistency with the State Department’s Strategic Goals. For the 59th UN General Assembly (UNGA) in 2004,2004, 10 votes and 16 consensus resolutions were identified for inclusion in this section.
If you examine the ten votes chosen, I can understand why many Muslim and other countries would be on the other side for various reasons. For example, the votes on (1)the Situation of Human Rights in Sudan, (2) the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, (3)the Division for Palestinian Rights of the Secretariat, (4)Work of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories, (5)Elimination of All Forms of Religious Intolerance and (6) Situation of Human Rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran. IV—GENERAL ASSEMBLY—IMPORTANT VOTES AND CONSENSUS ACTIONS
If you use the ten votes criteria that showed that the UAE voted with us 12.5% of the time (identical votes), then it worth noting that the UK only voted with us 66% of the time, Germany and Poland 57%, Chile 40%, Mexico 44%, Thailand 33%, Bahamas and Russia 28.6%, Afghanistan 25%, Singapore 22%, India 20%, and China 11.1%.
Voting data in the UN is generally skewed in favor of the developing countries against the developed countries. It is the haves against the have nots. Moreover, since most of the countries in the UN are not democracies, they are going to vote against any human rights resolution that can be used against them.
By the way, thanks for that post. It's really nice to see information, instead of conclusory talking points.
It is ALL in our Fathers hands, but we as sovereigns (that means each one of us is as a king) must protect ourselves from stupidity. God may be there for us when we call, but we are not to call on him for things easily avoided, like opening our doors to robbers, or conducting business with a known enemy.
Islam has an image problem. Is that our fault in the USA?
ping
Same "argument" the quislings always resort to when they lose the illegal alien arguments. Which they always do.
Only because they still have theirs!! THAT very action is part of the reason Americans DON'T TRUST MUSLIMS, and anyone, anywhere can say anything they want, and it's NOT going to change how we feel. I don't trust them. They can ALL stay in their OWN countries and that will suit me just fine! ANYONE who has killed or wants to kill Americans is NEVER going to be trusted by Americans!!!
1. U.S. Embargo Against Cuba>--Calls on all states to refrain from promulgating and applying laws and measures such as the “Helms-Burton Act,” whose extra-territorial consequences allegedly affect the sovereignty of other states and the legitimate interests of entities or persons under their jurisdiction and the freedom of trade and navigation; urges states to repeal such laws.
The US voted no along with Israel, the Marshall Islands, and Palau also voted No; Micronesia abstained. We were in the distinct minority.
2. Situation of Human Rights in Sudan
The United States cosponsored this European Union-sponsored resolution and spoke on the floor against the procedural motion. The U.S. Government is deeply disappointed that the Third Committee of the General Assembly passed the no-action motion on this resolution, and on two other resolutions concerning human rights country situations (no-action motions also were passed in November 2004 against resolutions addressing the human rights situations in Belarus and Zimbabwe). The United States is concerned that the UN General Assembly Third Committee dismissed consideration of gross violations of human rights in the Sudan.
We lost this one of 91-74(US)-11; The procedural vote blocked vote on the EU/US sponsored resolution.
3. Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People
Requests the Committee to continue to exert all efforts to promote the realization of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, to support the Middle East peace process, and to mobilize international support for and assistance to the Palestinian people. Authorizes the Committee to make such adjustments in its approved program of work as it may consider appropriate and necessary in the light of developments and to report thereon to the General Assembly at its 60th session and thereafter. The General Assembly established the Committee by Resolution 3376 in 1975 and renews its support of the Committee annually.
The United States believes that the continuation of this Committee that embodies institutional discrimination against Israel is inconsistent with UN support for the efforts of the Quartet to achieve a just and durable solution. (The Quartet is a group comprised of the United States, the United Nations, the European Union, and Russia.) The United States believes this Committee should be abolished and actively lobbies other countries to withdraw their support for the annual resolution renewing the Committee's mandate. The US has not been successful.
4. Division for Palestinian Rights of the Secretariat
Requests the Secretary-General to continue to provide the Division with the necessary resources and to ensure that it continues to carry out its program of work as detailed in relevant earlier resolutions, in consultation with the committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People and under its guidance. Requests the Secretary-General to ensure the continued cooperation of the Department of Public Information and other units of the Secretariat in enabling the Division to perform its tasks. Also requests the Committee on Palestinian Rights and the Division to continue to organize an annual exhibit on Palestinian rights or a cultural event, in observance of the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People.
The United States believes that the continuation of the division, which embodies institutional discrimination against Israel, is inconsistent with UN support for the efforts of the Quartet to achieve a just and durable solution. The United States believes this division should be abolished and actively lobbies other countries to withdraw their support for the annual resolution renewing the division’s mandate. The division still exists. US unable to muster support against it's abolishment.
7. Elimination of All Forms of Religious Intolerance
Reaffirms that freedom of thought, conscience, religion, or belief is a human right derived from the inherent dignity of the human person and guaranteed to all without discrimination. Urges states to ensure that no one within their jurisdiction is, because of their religion or belief, deprived of the right to life, liberty, and security of person; the right to freedom of expression; the right not to be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, and the right not to be arbitrarily arrested or detained; and to protect their physical integrity and bring to justice all perpetrators of violations of these rights.
The General Assembly adopted the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief in 1981, which spelled out the UN Charter provision to promote and encourage universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to religion. The General Assembly has been adopting this resolution every year since 1981; for the first time, it has references to Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, and Christianophobia.
One of the U.S. goals at this year’s General Assembly was for the Assembly to adopt a resolution which addressed the problem of anti-Semitism. The United States was one of more than 50 cosponsors of this resolution. A win for the US.
9. Situation of Human Rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran
Expresses its serious concern at the continuing violations of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran; the worsening situation with regard to freedom of opinion and expression and freedom of the media, including arbitrary arrest and detention without charge or trial; the disqualifications of prospective candidates in the Majlis elections and the intimidation of opposition activists before the February 2004 elections;
The United States cosponsored this Canadian-sponsored resolution and lobbied other delegations to vote in favor of the text. The United States believes that this resolution demonstrated the international community’s concern over the human rights situation in Iran and the desire to hold the government accountable for its human rights abuses. It didn't pass.
The bottom line is that the UAE voted with the majority in the UN in most cases. In the case of the Cuba resolution, we couldn't get support from almost anyone to vote against it. The UN votes are not a very good metric in terms of gauging countries' support of the US.
who owns most of COSCO?
China. So what?
Singapore and Taiwan also have state-owned companied that manage terminals in the US.
You're welcome atlaw.
I have a problem with government owned company regardless of where they are from, whether is it European or Korean. I personally don't approve of state capitalism. And no, I don't have any problems with Arab owned businesses. I have friends who are Arabs, in fact one of my good friend is Iraqi. What I don't get it is why this was even leaked????????? Anyways, I don't really give a damn. I like to look at both sides of the issue.
No kidding. And so what? General foreign ownership of port facilities isn't the problem here. It's UAE ownership. The concern is rather self-evident, if you have paid any attention at all over the last decade to Middle Eastern politics, Islamic terrorism, and the funding and facilitated transit of terrorists and the logistics of terrorism.
Your concerted misrepresentations about the views of fellow FReepers with concerns about this speaks volumes about both your motivations and your maturity.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.