Tuesday, February 17, 2009

A depressing report from the Durban II planning session 

The Democrats campaigned on a pledge to restore American honor abroad. This is what they meant, apparently:

Yesterday in Geneva, President Obama unveiled the new look of America’s foreign policy — obsequiousness. It was Day One for his emissaries to the U.N. planning committee of the Durban II conference. This is the racist “anti-racism” bash to be held in Geneva in April. The U.S. and Israel walked out of the first go-round in Durban, South Africa in September 2001. Ever since, the U.S. government has refused to lend any credibility to the Declaration adopted after they left. That is, until yesterday.

U.S. representatives were addressing a human-rights negotiating committee with an executive consisting of a Libyan chair, an Iranian vice-chair, and a Cuban rapporteur. Russian Yuri Boychenko was presiding over Monday’s “human rights” get-together. Before them was a draft document which participants plan to adopt in finished form at the conference itself. The draft now contains mountains of offensive references to limits on free speech, anti-Israel and anti-Jewish provisions, and incendiary allegations of the victimization of Muslims at the hands of counter-terrorism racists.

Here is how the American delegates responded to a proposal they understood was incompatible with U.S. interests (“Brackets” denote withholding approval at any given moment in time.): “I hate to be the cause of unhappiness in the room . . . I have to suggest this phrase remains in brackets and I offer my sincere apologies.”

Having watched U.N. meetings for the past 25 years, I can’t remember a U.S. representative in a public session so openly obsequious, particularly in the presence of such specious human rights authorities. And yet the U.S. delegates appear happy to be there and convey the marching orders of their new commander-in-chief.

Read it all.

I predict that Barack Obama will regret this. Ankle-grabbing before despots in the cause of post-modern symbolism will not make it easier for us to achieve our foreign policy objectives, but it will remind everybody that for more than 30 years liberal Democrats have apologized for this country to dictators, as long as they are left-wing, not of European descent, or both. Barack Obama's promise was that he could usher in the first post-Vietnam foreign policy that was both internationalist (if you like that sort of thing) and unapologetic in its defense of American interests. This is not a good start.


By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tue Feb 17, 05:19:00 PM:

When I read the title I thought you were talking about Dick Durban.  

By Blogger Gary Rosen, at Tue Feb 17, 05:23:00 PM:

What a shameful disgrace. This was one of my worst fears about a BO administration and it is coming true.  

By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tue Feb 17, 07:25:00 PM:

One thing about Obama that we know: He kowtows to his party constituencies. This is more of the same.  

By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tue Feb 17, 07:36:00 PM:

I predict a new war during this administration. My goodness does it appear we are in big trouble. A cabinet of actual crooks, a media so enamoured that my Yahoo page keeps telling me how the One went to a gym on his 'long weekend'. Here we are in the midst of a great worldwide crisis, and he's taking a long weekend? didn't Bush get skewered for that kind of stuff?

And how pathetic is it that the rescue we were told had to happen right now or the country would collapse, and here we are being told not to expect much even before he's put his signature to it.

Hope and Change. Indeed.  

By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tue Feb 17, 08:26:00 PM:

So let's summarize: today it's 'ankle grabbing", tomorrow it's "wealth redistribution" and finally it's REPARATIONS for the whole world.

I am not surprised. Anyone else?  

By Blogger Gary Rosen, at Wed Feb 18, 02:46:00 AM:

Imanutjob is already dictating the terms:


This is gonna get real ugly real fast.  

By Blogger JPMcT, at Wed Feb 18, 06:39:00 AM:

Right from the FDR play book:

1. Government mismanages the financial markets until there is a depression.
2. Government mismanagaes the Depression until there is a world crisis.
3. War breaks out and ends the Depression.
4. Repeat.  

By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wed Feb 18, 09:51:00 AM:

One very modest thing we can do is to always mention the name of the individual who disgraces our nation. The media, of course, will nnot do that because they know that he might be the Secretary of whatever when the present incumbent is forced to resign.  

By Blogger John F. Opie, at Wed Feb 18, 10:48:00 AM:

Hi -

The problem isn't that President Obama will come to regret this, but rather that we all will come to regret this when the wars start because people thought we were a paper tiger.

We may be one under President Obama, but letting everyone know? A poor choice at best.  

By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wed Feb 18, 09:20:00 PM:

I think actions (such as 17,000 more troops in Afghanistan) speak louder than any pointless rhetoric engaged in at the U.N.  

By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thu Feb 19, 12:12:00 PM:

What the new troops in Afghanistan says to me is that Barry hopes to sacrifice a lot of US lives in a designed quagmire similar to what befell the Russians there, simply by executing the war the same way that the Vietnam was executed. The rules of engagement will be so limited that the troops will be lucky to even be able to defend themselves. Barry has no intent to win the war, he just wants to have a diversion for the press to focus on while the USA crumbles and falls due to his policies.  

Post a Comment

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