John Carey, a member of the United Nations Association Westchester Chapter, is now posting on his blog his weekly notes on the TV program he hosts on Rye TV (NY) and Greenwich CT TV. He is former Vice President, American Society of International Law; Board of Editors, American Journal of International Law; Alternate U.S. Member, UN Human Rights Sub-Commission; TV producer, United Nations Week: News and Views. He is also a former Judge and former Mayor of the city of Rye, NY.
His contact information is:
UNITED NATIONS WEEK
News and Views
Rye NY Channels 76 and 33
Greenwich CT Channel 79
John Carey, Editor
J_PCarey@verizon.net
http://unweek.blogspot.com
To give an example, his posting for 3/29/09 starts with an analysis of the upcoming Durban Conference on Race (full title below). He writes:
"Durban Review next month: should we participate?
Next month many nations will gather for a look back to the 2001 Durban Declaration and pronounce themselves again on the subject of racism. Up to now, Washington has not said we will attend. In 2001, we and Israel walked out, and I have been trying to figure out why.
An “outcome document” for next month’s meeting has been under discussion for quite some time. In the latest draft, dated March 17th, there are certain provisions that bear examination, such as #10 referring to “Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, Christianophobia[1] and anti-Arabism.” Paragraph 11 raises free speech issues since it states that certain advocacy shall be prohibited by law. On the other hand, paragraph 64 “Recalls that the Holocaust must never be forgotten, . . .”
The outcome document speaks in favor of the rights of indigenous peoples, for instance in paragraphs 42 and 43.
But the real problem for those who are reluctant to have anything to do with the Review Conference may be found in the very first paragraph of the outcome document. It reads: “Reaffirms the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action (DDPA) as it was adopted at the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance (WCAR) in 2001.” This reaffirmation means one must study the DDPA, as I have done. Is there anything in the DDPA that poisons the outcome document?"
He goes on to analyze the related issues. To read more, visit his blog.
Good going, John!!!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment