Powell to skip UN racism summit

[Pecos]

Powell Will Boycott U.N. Racism Conference - http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010827/ts/un_racism_dc_1.html

What do you guys think about that?

[Freakapotimus]

That's a pretty dumb thing to do. You would think that if the Powell (and the US) didn't like the way things were going he would attend the conference to speak his mind. What better way to show your discontent than to skip out on the chance to show it!

[KaneOfNod]

At 8/27/01 09:29 PM, UnclePecos wrote: Powell Will Boycott U.N. Racism Conference - http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010827/ts/un_racism_dc_1.html

What do you guys think about that?

I find this to be an excellent development. Now France and the European Union are threatening to walk out, a shattering blow the the whole conference.

[Pecos]

At 9/6/01 12:46 PM, KaneOfNod wrote: I find this to be an excellent development. Now France and the European Union are threatening to walk out, a shattering blow the the whole conference.

Sweet! To hell with these palestinians who think they can single Israel out.. yea fuckers, I'm talkin to you.. send another suicide bomber, pussies!

[anhnonymous]

At 8/27/01 09:29 PM, UnclePecos wrote: Powell Will Boycott U.N. Racism Conference - http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010827/ts/un_racism_dc_1.html

What do you guys think about that?

I don't know, but it seems to me that colin powell is running the show. Ever since he got appointed he's been visiting different foreign countries like china, vietnam, korea and most recently mexico. He talked to vincente fox even before bush went there. I'm wondering if he is doing things on his own or bush planned it out. Now the boycott of this conference is sending out a strong message to other nations. I think it makes us seem a little wishy-washy, where we have a president that we don't really respect, a vice president who is about to croak, and colin powell who thinks he is in charge. I'm curious to see where this will all lead.

[flangazor]

Sweet! To hell with these palestinians who think they can single Israel out.. yea fuckers, I'm talkin to you.. send another suicide bomber, pussies!

You are either a Zionist or someone who hasn't done their research. The paper that says that Israel is "a racist apartheid state" was reached in a democratic fashion.

"The declaration, adopted by a majority of the 3,000 delegates from 44 regions to the World Conference's Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) forum..." (http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/africa/09/02/durban.racism/index.html)

To pull out is to deny the world's views. PResumably the US pulled out because there are more Jewish voters than Arab voters in the US so they need to support that side despite history showing a distinct pattern of Israel acting in poor taste. As Kofi Annan said "Israel can't use the Holocaust as an excuse for not examining their own actions." It seems this was ignored as Israel and the US are calling the democratic document anti-semitic, even though it refers to the nation of Israel's actions and not the fact that it is made up of Zionists.

Powell should have gone to express his opinion if he was so against the idea of Israel being 'badmouthed.'

[Done1done1done]

At 9/7/01 12:07 AM, flangazor wrote:

Sweet! To hell with these palestinians who think they can single Israel out.. yea fuckers, I'm talkin to you.. send another suicide bomber, pussies!

You are either a Zionist or someone who hasn't done their research. The paper that says that Israel is "a racist apartheid state" was reached in a democratic fashion.

"The declaration, adopted by a majority of the 3,000 delegates from 44 regions to the World Conference's Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) forum..." (http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/africa/09/02/durban.racism/index.html)

To pull out is to deny the world's views. PResumably the US pulled out because there are more Jewish voters than Arab voters in the US so they need to support that side despite history showing a distinct pattern of Israel acting in poor taste. As Kofi Annan said "Israel can't use the Holocaust as an excuse for not examining their own actions." It seems this was ignored as Israel and the US are calling the democratic document anti-semitic, even though it refers to the nation of Israel's actions and not the fact that it is made up of Zionists.

Powell should have gone to express his opinion if he was so against the idea of Israel being 'badmouthed.'

It's also the fact that the United States is pulling out of the "peacekeeper" role in the Middle East crisis, meaning they can go off and support the Israelis, even though the Palestinians were there first. And if Bush doesn't support the Israelis, he loses New York and Florida in the next election. Muslim voters don't have power bases like that to cut out the administration from under themselves.

[Freakapotimus]

It's all about the voters and staying in power. How could I have been so naive to think otherwise?

/sarcasm

[Pecos]

At 9/7/01 12:07 AM, flangazor wrote: You are either a Zionist or someone who hasn't done their research. The paper that says that Israel is "a racist apartheid state" was reached in a democratic fashion.

Yes.. they believe in it so strongly that they changed it to exclude all that! Arab nations put that part in, and now it's out.. so ha.

[Pecos]

At 9/7/01 01:13 AM, Wheatonman wrote: And if Bush doesn't support the Israelis, he loses New York and Florida in the next election. Muslim voters don't have power bases like that to cut out the administration from under themselves.

Oh yes, because all the jews in the states live in either new york or florida! dumbass..

[Pecos]

At 9/7/01 12:07 AM, flangazor wrote: You are either a Zionist or someone who hasn't done their research.

Have I done official research on this? No. But I know a bit about this, I'm close with quite a few people in Israel and they keep me up to date.

And FYI, you sound like you think Zionism is a bad thing. So look up what it actually is first - http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Zionism/zionism.html

[Done1done1done]

At 9/7/01 03:18 PM, UnclePecos wrote:

At 9/7/01 01:13 AM, Wheatonman wrote: And if Bush doesn't support the Israelis, he loses New York and Florida in the next election. Muslim voters don't have power bases like that to cut out the administration from under themselves.

Oh yes, because all the jews in the states live in either new york or florida! dumbass..

OK... New York votes Democratic regardless... I get that, and therefore am a dumbass, and a tired dumbass at that. However, you did see how close Florida was in the 200 election? Any group switching sides (ie Republican Jews) could lose the 25 electoral votes for Bush. 2004 is going to be as close as 2000, whether it's Bush against Gore, Edwards, Lieberman, Kerry, or someone else.

[wdfcverfgtghm]

At 9/7/01 04:08 PM, Wheatonman wrote:

At 9/7/01 03:18 PM, UnclePecos wrote:

At 9/7/01 01:13 AM, Wheatonman wrote: And if Bush doesn't support the Israelis, he loses New York and Florida in the next election. Muslim voters don't have power bases like that to cut out the administration from under themselves.

Oh yes, because all the jews in the states live in either new york or florida! dumbass..

OK... New York votes Democratic regardless... I get that, and therefore am a dumbass, and a tired dumbass at that. However, you did see how close Florida was in the 200 election? Any group switching sides (ie Republican Jews) could lose the 25 electoral votes for Bush. 2004 is going to be as close as 2000, whether it's Bush against Gore, Edwards, Lieberman, Kerry, or someone else.

With Reno Running for gov. in florida, the democratic party down here is pretty much in schambles...

[Pecos]

At 9/7/01 04:08 PM, Wheatonman wrote: OK... New York votes Democratic regardless... I get that, and therefore am a dumbass, and a tired dumbass at that. However, you did see how close Florida was in the 200 election? Any group switching sides (ie Republican Jews) could lose the 25 electoral votes for Bush. 2004 is going to be as close as 2000, whether it's Bush against Gore, Edwards, Lieberman, Kerry, or someone else.

ah.. Any is the keyword there.. gotcha. But I think this goes for more than just those 2 states obviously. and I don't know if Bush is thinking that far ahead. the point here is that US and Israel have been on good terms for a while now. And if US disagreed with the anti-simetic content of the document, then they probably did the right thing by leaving (boycotting).

here's an interesting tidbit.. this was the first of three summits that US has attended at all... even if they did drop out later.

[flangazor]

Have I done official research on this? No. But I know a bit about this, I'm close with quite a few people in Israel and they keep me up to date.

That implies to me that you get heavily biased information.

And FYI, you sound like you think Zionism is a bad thing. So look up what it actually is first - http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Zionism/zionism.html

That is a very biased site. Also, to my understanding, the nation of Israel could have been where it is now, or they were going to put it in north-eastern Africa. I am looking this up now. I'll be back when I read up on that.

Any more sites linking to jpost.com and I am not even going to discuss this further.

[Pecos]

At 9/7/01 05:07 PM, flangazor wrote:

Have I done official research on this? No. But I know a bit about this, I'm close with quite a few people in Israel and they keep me up to date.

That implies to me that you get heavily biased information.

And FYI, you sound like you think Zionism is a bad thing. So look up what it actually is first - http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Zionism/zionism.html

That is a very biased site. Also, to my understanding, the nation of Israel could have been where it is now, or they were going to put it in north-eastern Africa. I am looking this up now. I'll be back when I read up on that.

Any more sites linking to jpost.com and I am not even going to discuss this further.

Yeah, everything is so biased! Stop being so stubborn. And what's north-eastern Africa got to do with this? As if they moved there no one would have a problem with that.

Did you know that the Muslim religion promotes hate towards all non-Muslims? It's in the Koran.

[anhnonymous]

At 9/8/01 02:10 AM, UnclePecos wrote:

Did you know that the Muslim religion promotes hate towards all non-Muslims? It's in the Koran.

That's another thing I wanted to point out. They are so totally racist towards other religions. I mean only the jews and klu klux klan have the same hate for other religions. When I say jews I meant the persecution of christianity so don't get me wrong.

[Pecos]

At 9/8/01 01:31 PM, anhnonymous wrote: That's another thing I wanted to point out. They are so totally racist towards other religions. I mean only the jews and klu klux klan have the same hate for other religions. When I say jews I meant the persecution of christianity so don't get me wrong.

Persecution of christianity?? heh? You know.. it weren't the jews who crucified jesus, you do know that right? Jews do not have hate for other religions. There's a difference between hating others and promoting your own.. as most religions do.

And kkk is not a religion.

[anhnonymous]

At 9/10/01 09:11 AM, UnclePecos wrote:

At 9/8/01 01:31 PM, anhnonymous wrote: That's another thing I wanted to point out. They are so totally racist towards other religions. I mean only the jews and klu klux klan have the same hate for other religions. When I say jews I meant the persecution of christianity so don't get me wrong.

Persecution of christianity?? heh? You know.. it weren't the jews who crucified jesus, you do know that right? Jews do not have hate for other religions. There's a difference between hating others and promoting your own.. as most religions do.

And kkk is not a religion.

But they worship the kkk as if it was a religion. I guess you can consider it a cult then.