Posted on 04/16/2002 2:04:11 PM PDT by Clive
UNITED NATIONS - Six European Union countries yesterday endorsed a United Nations document that condones violence as a way to achieve Palestinian statehood.
They were voting as members of the UN Human Rights Commission on a resolution that accuses Israel of a long list of human rights violations, but makes no mention of suicide bombings of Israeli civilians.
Canada and two EU countries -- Britain and Germany -- opposed the measure, which supports the use of "all available means, including armed struggle" to establish a Palestinian state. Guatemala and the Czech Republic joined the opposing voices, but with 40 countries of the 53-member commission voting yes and seven abstaining, the resolution is now part of the international record.
"The text contains formulations that might be interpreted as an endorsement of violence," said Walter Lewalter, the German ambassador to the commission. "There is no condemnation whatsoever of terrorism."
Alfred Moses, a former United States ambassador to the commission and now chairman of UN Watch, a monitoring group, was more blunt.
"A vote in favour of this resolution is a vote for Palestinian terrorism," he said. "An abstention suggests ambivalence toward terror. Any country that condones -- or is indifferent to -- the murder of Israeli civilians in markets, on buses and in cafés has lost any moral standing to criticize Israel's human rights record."
Canada said the resolution did nothing to further peace.
"The failure of the resolution to condemn all acts of terrorism, particularly in the context of recent suicide bombings targeting Israeli civilians, is a serious oversight which renders the resolution fundamentally unacceptable," said Marie Gervais-Vidricaire, Canada's ambassador to the commission.
"There can be no justification whatsoever for terrorist acts."
EU members Austria, Belgium, France, Portugal, Spain and Sweden approved the resolution, and Italy abstained.
Belgium and Spain have been pushing for tough EU measures against the Jewish state, with Belgium calling for sanctions based on a human rights clause in the EU-Israeli Free Association agreement, which grants Israel preferential trading terms.
But Britain, Germany and the Netherlands say such measures would end the EU's chance of playing a greater diplomatic role in the search for peace.
EU foreign ministers meeting in Luxembourg yesterday buried talk of imposing sanctions while Colin Powell, the U.S. Secretary of State, is in the region trying to arrange a ceasefire.
"We cannot decide on a peace plan while Powell is going back and forth between [Israeli Prime Minister Ariel] Sharon and [Palestinian leader Yasser] Arafat," one EU diplomat said.
The 57-member Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) drew up the Human Rights Commission resolution, backed by co-sponsors China, Cuba and Vietnam. Of the 14 OIC members on the commission, one -- Cameroon -- abstained from voting on the resolution, while the rest approved it.
Rulings by the commission and other leading UN bodies such as the Security Council and the General Assembly are significant because they enable causes to claim international legitimacy.
The resolution yesterday reaffirms support for a Palestinian armed struggle by "recalling" a 1982 General Assembly resolution that slammed both Israel and the white-run government of South Africa.
Restating past goals by referring to former documents is common diplomatic practice.
They do it for their love of terrorists, especially their very-kissable Arafat.
2002 Chief Terrorist Arafat and Imperial Wizard Annan
Buy neither stocks nor bonds nor a house. Invest in sanity instead. As this vote demonstrates, sanity is clearly in short supply.
UN_List: for United Nations articles. Other Bump Lists at: Free Republic Bump List Register Don't forget:
|
Yes, but LIBYA and SUDAN do! Now, don't you all feel so much safer at night? Fear not, the U.N. fascist fabians are on the scene...
They're getting bolder.
Once again, the international "human rightser" community, just as it did in the case of the Balkans, has shown itself to be totally corrupt, and to have fallen way, way, WAY down from its once-noble purpose. These international meddlers almost invariably back the muslim cause, especially in cases in which the most bloodthirsty of muslim savages and their ghastly deeds are involved!!!!
Why would a "human rightser" back islam? Surely a TRUE supporter of human rights would realize that islamic nations and movements are responsible for a large percentage of all human rights violations in the world. This is especially true for terrorist quasi-states like the Shiptar muslim entity in Kosovo and the "Palestinian Authority". In the territories controlled by these entities, not only are Christian and Jewish minorities and neighbors mistreated, but even their own muslim people suffer countless atrocities every day from their islamic terrorist rulers!!!
Then any reason why "human rightsers" back islam nearly every single time must have nothing to do with human rights!!!! Some possible REAL reasons: 1. pandering to the ever-growing muslim minorities in their own countries (especially in Europe), and 2. oil!!!
I found the exact right words. See above.
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.