ar
blog*spot
get rid of this ad | advertise here


 

ExpatPundit

"Five axiomatic propositions of Canadian Nationalism vis-a-vis the Americans:

1. Boy, we hate Americans.

2. We really do.

3. Really.

4. I'm not kidding. We really hate them.

5. So how come they never pay us any attention?"

--Will Ferguson, Why I Hate Canadians, Vancouver: Douglas & McIntyre, 1997, p.105.





Archives:


Friday, March 22, 2002

This is a really cool name for a band. If I ever start to play my guitar again, I have a great name for my band. It's inspired by Naela Gabr, the Egyptian representative to the UN Human Rights Commission: "The Durban Conference had highlighted the plight of the Palestinian people under occupation by the Zionist war machine."

Ladies and gentlemen, "Zionist War Machine!" Or maybe it's "Rage Against the Zionist War Machine." Or "I don't need your Zionist War Machines, I don't need your shtetl scenes." (Hah! A quasi-obscure Canadian reference.)

[UPDATE: Now why didn't I think of this! Ken C. from Massachusetts offers the brilliant, Guthrie-esque "This Zionist War Machine Kills Fascists."]
It's Opposite Day! From the UN Human Rights session today:

A Representative of Syria, speaking in right of reply, said that Israel was the one which attacked Arab armies in 1948, as was the case in the other wars. The Israeli delegate tried to mislead the Commission when he said that it was Arab countries which attacked Israel in all the wars since 1948. Israel attacked inhabitants of the Golan in order to force them to flee their homes so as to facilitate the occupation of that territory....

The Syrian representative went on to say that water runs uphill, that the Americans attacked the Japanese at Pearl Harbor, and that the Arab armies actually won the wars that were thrust upon them in 1948, 1956, 1967, and 1973.
The pig-pile tally as of March 22 Here is the current, up-to-date tally of the pig-piling on Israel at the UN's 58th session of the Commission on Human Rights. The fun continues until April 26th! (Sophisticated "Pig-Pile-ometer" (TM) methodology explained here.)

Debate on self-determination:
March 20: 18 paragraphs out of 35 = 52% pig-piling on Israel
March 21 am: 18 paragraphs out of 40 = 45% pig-piling on Israel
March 21 pm: 14 paragraphs out of 36 = 39%
--Debate on Self-Determination, Grand Total: 50 out of 111 = 45% pig-piling on Israel

Debate on racism:
March 21: 0 of 8! (But 4 of 8 on the awful anti-Muslim racism in the West post-9/11.)
March 22: 4 of 48 = 8%

Wow! Compared to self-determination, the debate on racism looks positively pro-Israel. Although most of the statements call for renewing the principles of the Durban conference, with all of the attendant connotations. And more than half the statements are of the following type:

MARICLAIRE ACOSTA (Mexico) said that following 11 September, the Durban Declaration was more important that ever. No one could deny the need to strengthen instruments against racism.

ALGIMANTAS RIMKUNAS (Lithuania) said racism was disgraceful

Not that I disagree, mind you. But if this is the typical statement, the anti-Israel ones really stand out even if few in number.
Gandalf must stop occupying Lothlorien! Apparently the UN cares about Middle Earth too:

COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS CONCLUDES DEBATE ON ELF-DETERMINATION, STARTS TO DISCUSS RACIAL DISCRIMINATION
Bush Blame Game. Writing about the three terrorist attacks in three countries (suicide bomb in Israel; bomb in Peru; assassination in Italy) yesterday Globe and Mail analyst Paul Knox proposes that "two of them suggested that Mr. Bush's [anti-terror] campaign might spawn terrorist attacks as well as repel them." His argument:

[T]he Italian rebels, who call themselves the Red Brigades...said the U.S. commitment of troops and resources to Afghanistan was 'a condition which favours anit-imperialist resistance and counterattack.'

And the Lima bomb was almost certainly linked to Mr. Bush's meeting with the leaders of Peru [et al.] tomorrow.

This would be far more persuasive if the Globe hadn't run Knox's analysis next to a news article on the Italy attack, which notes that the gun used to kill Marco Biagi, an economist working with the government to change Italy's labor laws, was the same weapon used in 1999 to assassinate another Italian official pushing for labor reform in Italy. And that the Red Brigades posted a 26-page manifesto after the assassination that linked it directly to Biagi's engagement in "exploiting" workers.

And the bombing outside the U.S. embassy in Peru? It would be nice if this were the first time that terrorists had set off a bomb just preceding the visit of a U.S. President (or the convening of the G-7 or G-8), but this is just part of a routine that began long before Bush responded to 9/11.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?