Re: [Marxism] U.S. to boycott Durban 2 conference on racism

["Joaquin Bustelo" <jbustelo@xxxxxxxxx>]

Louis sent us an item from the Zionist outlet "Haaretz": 

"The United States will not attend a United Nations conference on racism
that critics say will be a forum to criticize Israel, and will no longer
participate in planning sessions for it, the State Department announced on
Friday."

As it typical of Zionist propaganda, this is a lie. There was no such
announcement. If you look closely at the article you will see there is no
mention of any named person as having made the "announcement," not Hillary,
not her official mouthpiece, not the Foggy Bottom doorman, no one.  

The "news" that the US had pulled out of the conference was based on a late
Friday afternoon leak, which the AP (unlike other outlets) reported as
saying the decision to boycott the conference had been made. Haaretz wasn't
happy with just an anonymous single source leak and escalated it into an
official "announcement."

But as can be seen from reading between the lines of the AP article text, as
well as other reporting, what's going on is that the US is trying to apply
pressure so that criticism of the racist character of the illegitimate
Zionist entity occupying Palestine will be minimized or totally excluded in
the conference text. Washington ALSO wants to strip out a provision
demanding reparations for slavery.

The Zionist bias or agenda of the AP or its scribbler transformed this into
a boycott of the conference, even though correctly attributed to an
anonymous leaker rather than an official announcement, and even though the
direct and indirect quotes attributed to the leaker made clear this was a
threat, diplomatic posturing. 

According to a friend in Washington who has direct knowledge, the AP
exaggerated what was said: the Washington Post story is a better
transcription of what was spoon-fed to journalists.

The leak's timing and purpose left a number of journos befuddled, as there
had been several not fully coherent statements throughout the day. 

A person at the US UN mission had reportedly told Zionist groups on a
conference call Friday morning that the US had already pulled out, as the
Zionists related the content of the phone call. 

However, a state department person, on "deep background" a couple of hours
later, said they could not confirm that, i.e., the scribblers were left with
a story which was being denied but the denial couldn't be reported because
"deep background" ground rules forbid it and because the denial came in the
form of a non-confirmation. ("Deep background" is the kind of material
preceded by "It is believed ...," like "It is believed no final decision on
boycotting the conference has been made, and the U.S. is just trying to
blackmail others for changes in the document." Obviously such a story would
be silly if it started out with the info that a named US diplomat told named
Zionist groups the US would boycott, no ifs, ands or buts.)

Then came the leak which gave birth to the story by the AP, and which
perhaps was just meant to kill the story about the Friday morning conference
call, which in the meantime a couple of web sites had begun reporting. 

The whole thing was such a mess that many outlets just dropped the story,
and the New York Times, which usually has very detailed reporting of
anything governmental in the U.S. which affects Israel, put out just one
paragraph buried in its world briefing: 

"The United States will not attend the second World Conference Against
Racism in Geneva unless the conference's main document improves, according
to a State Department official, though the Obama administration sent a
delegation to preparatory talks in Geneva. The long, unwieldy document seeks
to ban criticism of religion, calls for slave reparations and attacks Israel
as racist. Israel and some American Jewish groups urged a boycott of the
April conference, and several close American allies, including Canada, said
they would not go. The United States walked out of the first Conference
Against Racism, in Durban, South Africa, in 2001, as a protest against an
effort to compare Zionism to racism."

What's clear from this is that the US *REALLY* doesn't want itself or its
middle east client condemned ... like, duh.

And that Hillary, at least, is not running a very tight ship.

Joaquin







________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu