USA and Canada vote against Russian initiative in UN

Iran, Israel, Syria United, For Almost A Decade, in Support of United Nations Anti-Nazi Resolution; United States, For Almost a Decade, Opposed To This Resolution

On November 15, 2013, the United Nations Third Committee adopted Resolution A/c.3/68/L.65/Rev.1, on the Elimination of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance.

The Resolution is entitled:

COMBATING GLORIFICATION OF NAZISM AND OTHER PRACTICES THAT CONTRIBUTE TO FUELLING CONTEMPORARY FORMS OF RACISM, RACIAL DISCRIMINATION, XENOPHOBIA AND RELATED INTOLERANCE.’

This resolution is unique within the United Nations because it has united Iran, Israel and Syria, together with 123 other member States, in support of this resolution, repeatedly, year after year for almost a decade, while this same resolution, combating the resurgence of Nazism, has been consistently opposed by the United States, almost in isolation, during the same years.

full article www.globalresearch.ca...

Interesting why such news doesn't reach Mass Media.
I would be delighted to see world wide discussion of USA position.

You can check votes on this page www.un.org... by searching this resolution and downloading pdf document with results.

Maybe its because the Bush family are known Nazis. Grandpa Bush was nearly indicted for aiding Nazi Germany during WWIi.

Who knows how many other prominent Nazis exist in Amerika today? How many hundreds of dyed in the wool Nazis were imported during Operation Paperclip?

This country is lousy with Nazis and Israel is certainly full of them.

a reply to: kitzik

Ukraine is your answer !

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Well, almost all European countries abstain, including Ukraine yes.
We have 2 No - USA and Canada (I don't count some Pacific Ocean puppet state) and all Europe abstain.

a reply to: kitzik

Those groups have been used to overthrow a government and to attack the Eastern part of the Ukraine by the West.

So what happened in the Ukraine is your answer to why the NO vote.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

I don't agree with such simplistic explanation. Look, I'm not idealistic idiot which will seriously consider that No vote have direct connection with Ukraine. USA signed similar resolution before and ratified it with reservation

RESERVATIONS, UNDERSTANDINGS, DECLARATIONS
WILLIAM J. CLINTON
President of the United States of America
TO ALL TO WHOM THESE PRESENTS SHALL COME, GREETING:
CONSIDERING THAT:
The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination,
was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 21 December 1965, and signed on
behalf of the United States of America on 28 September 1966; and
The Senate of the United States of America by its resolution of 24 June 1994, two-thirds
of the Senators present concurring therein, gave its advice and consent to ratification of the
Convention, provided that:
“I. The Senate’s advice and consent is subject to the following reservations:
(1)
That the Constitution and laws of the United States contain extensive
protections of individual freedom of speech, expression and association. Accordingly,
the United States does not accept any obligation under this Convention, in particular
under Articles 4 and 7, to restrict those rights through the adoption of legislation or any
other measures, to the extent that they are protected by the Constitution and laws of the
United States.”

But this new resolution is Russian initiative, and USA have a long term policy to resist anything from Russia
In my view USA made mistake by voting NO because ... Well, sooner or later people will notice and make simplistic conclusions like you did.

a reply to: kitzik

The United States normally objects to any such resolutions that might violate its sovereignty. I think if you dig further in the resolution itself you would find something evil like giving the UN some power to do something. The U.S. has been against Racism of any type for a long time now. Nazis are extremely disliked here.

a reply to: Patriotsrevenge

you would find something evil like giving the UN some power to do something.

I should put this quote and memorize it
This was said by true American patriot.

You snatched that thought right out of my mind .I was going to ..but you beet me to it ..Thats ok starr for you :>) a reply to: mcChoodles

originally posted by: Patriotsrevenge
a reply to: kitzik

The United States normally objects to any such resolutions that might violate its sovereignty. I think if you dig further in the resolution itself you would find something evil like giving the UN some power to do something. The U.S. has been against Racism of any type for a long time now. Nazis are extremely disliked here.

America is more tolerant towards right-wing extremists as Western Europe.

I have seen lots of in-depth reports about it on Dutch, German, Belgium and English TV, and know what little room they have to wiggle over here, before they get banned.

I don't know it is in Europe but in the US most of the ways neo-Nazis glorify Nazism is through words and propaganda. This is how they fuel contemporary racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance. Last time I checked, as abhorrent as they may be, neo-Nazis are still protected under the First Amendment. So in order to combat their glorification of Nazism we would have to infringe upon their rights. So by voting against this resolution the US is simply choosing to uphold the Constitution.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
I don't know it is in Europe but in the US most of the ways neo-Nazis glorify Nazism is through words and propaganda. This is how they fuel contemporary racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance. Last time I checked, as abhorrent as they may be, neo-Nazis are still protected under the First Amendment. So in order to combat their glorification of Nazism we would have to infringe upon their rights. So by voting against this resolution the US is simply choosing to uphold the Constitution.

This is correct the UN intiative says

that “any commemorative celebration of the Nazi Waffen SS organization and its crimes
against humanity, whether official or non-official, should be prohibited by States”

That would be in direct violation of the 1st amendment. I do not see how any nation that truly has freedom speech could vote for this. I hate neo nazis but, they have the right to as the please so long as they are not harming others.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

It`s not allowed in Europe to raise your right hand (Nazi-style) or to wear Nazi-symbols. You will get fined and/or arrested for it. Mein Kampf and Holocaust denying is also forbidden.

a reply to: MrSpad

But why are there words forbidden in the US ?

Real freedom of speech doesn`t forbid words.

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
a reply to: MrSpad

But why are there words forbidden in the US ?

Real freedom of speech doesn`t forbid words.

What words are forbidden?

originally posted by: MrSpad

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
a reply to: MrSpad

But why are there words forbidden in the US ?

Real freedom of speech doesn`t forbid words.

What words are forbidden?

You`re bleeping your asses off over the ocean (we have lots of American programs over here), even this site doesn`t allow a word as "faq" to be shown as it should be.

Of course this resolution united Syria, Iran, and Israel- The first two have Russian leanings, and Israel cant risk seeming 'pro-Nazi'. I bet Russia phrased this very deliberately, so that Israel wouldn't be able to vote with their allies in Europe. Obviously the United States and Canada don't support xenophobia, they just don't support Russia.

Russia is playing on their anti-Nazi history to Make the West look bad. Its about Ukraine, but it is also about something bigger. The Ukrainian rebels have accused Kiev of being 'fascists' and 'Nazi's' since the beginning. Power spheres are settling, and The line between the "West and the Rest" is getting darker.

With this resolution, Russia also demonizes the increased nationalism and anti-immigration sentiment growing in Europe. They want to 'protect ethnic Russians' in Ukraine, and to seem like the 'good guys' by championing liberal immigration laws, something that would destabilize Europe.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
I don't know it is in Europe but in the US most of the ways neo-Nazis glorify Nazism is through words and propaganda. This is how they fuel contemporary racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance. Last time I checked, as abhorrent as they may be, neo-Nazis are still protected under the First Amendment. So in order to combat their glorification of Nazism we would have to infringe upon their rights. So by voting against this resolution the US is simply choosing to uphold the Constitution.

I was thinking along the same lines, that the 1st amendment had something to do with it. Star for your comment.

a reply to: tAcAnAvAn

With this resolution, Russia also demonizes the increased nationalism and anti-immigration sentiment growing in Europe. They want to 'protect ethnic Russians' in Ukraine, and to seem like the 'good guys' by championing liberal immigration laws, something that would destabilize Europe.

All of this have some merit, but it is curious to note that this resolution is dragging for 10 Years. Just found another article from same author Carla Stea from 2009. rockcreekfreepress.tumblr.com...

Highly placed diplomatic sources accredited to the United Nations, in a personal interview with this reporter, confirmed that during informal consultations on the resolution they pointed out to the United States delegation that to condone opposing the resolution, the United States was condoning violation of Article 34 of the Geneva Convention. The United States stated that the matter of violation of Article 34 of the Geneva Convention was “irrelevant.” While the Bush Administration Justice Department discarded the Geneva Conventions as “quaint,” many hoped that the Obama Administration would show greater respect for international law. The United States reference to international law as “irrelevant” begets fearsome possibilities, and evokes fearful memories. Those highly placed diplomatic sources regarded the United States’ vote flaunting international law as motivated by political interests. The governments of the Baltics and Ukraine are tacitly sanctioning resurgent Nazi ideology, and the inclusion of the Baltics in NATO, and support of pro-Nazi regimes in Ukraine and Georgia, are central to a hostile encirclement of Russia, an Orwellian rewriting of history, undermining Russia’s morale and prestige as the decisive victor defeating Nazism in World War II. Of course, this perversion of history also desecrates the honor and memory of the many American soldiers who also died fighting Nazism. The rewriting and desecration of historic truth are an essential component of political and psychological warfare

And already in 2009 she pointed out existence of pro-Nazi regimes in Ukraine and Georgia.

a reply to: kitzik

It`s not that curious.

About 7-10 years ago I already saw a few video reports on TV about neo-nazi groups doing serious military training in the Ukraine and getting first class equipment/funding.

Russia was already seeing the threat of those groups going to be used in overthrowing governments.

So it`s no surprise US who needed these groups (and probably have been funding them) didn`t want them to be banned.

You actually confirmed my first statement about Ukraine with your last post it.