Germans to walk out of UN meet if Ahmadinejad denies Holocaust

[oberliner]

German representatives will walk out in protest if Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad denies the Holocaust during his upcoming speech before the United Nations General Assembly, officials in Berlin confirmed on Tuesday.

A Foreign Ministry spokesman confirmed a report by the German newspaper Handelsblatt that Germany would respond harshly to any anti-Semitic rhetoric during the speech.

"We are seeking a common response from the European Union (EU) nations," said the spokesman.

http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1116121.html

[helderheid]

1. Error: You can't recommend threads from this forum

[emilyg]

2. Ditto - I tried.

[sabbat hunter]

3. I hope that

many other countries follow Germany's lead.

[Vegasaurus]

5. It would make a good statement if they did, nt

[Vinnie From Indy]

4. Good!

I hope more will do the same. It is important that these things be recognized with peaceful protest.

[Jack Rabbit]

6. I'd like to see the US walk out right behind them

By what right does the former President of Iran address the General Assembly, anyway?

[oberliner]

7. He's not the former president - he is the current one

Unless you are making a point about his recent "re-election" not being valid.

[Violet_Crumble]

8. I hope other countries follow Germany if he does it...

He's making a mockery of the UN by doing the Holocaust denial crap. And I think Germany's approach, where they'll only walk out if he denies the Holocaust is a good approach....

[oberliner]

9. Will the Focus at the UN Be on Ahmadinejad's Human Rights Abuses?

End of piece:

So if delegates at the UN General Assembly walk out on Ahmadinejad on Wednesday, the decisive issue will be on what grounds they did so. Will it be over his Holocaust denial or over his stealing of an election and torture of his own people?

Ahmadinejad's preference is clear. He has used the tragedy of the Holocaust for political gain before. The question is if the world will walk into his trap again.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/trita-parsi/will-the-focus-at-the-un_b_295312.html

An interesting perspective that I hadn't thought of.

[Violet_Crumble]

10. It is an interesting perspective, but one I disagree with...

Can you imagine the uproar if delegates at the UN walked out because of the election fraud and human rights abuses, and not the Holocaust denial? While I totally support walking out if he starts the Holocaust denial stuff, I'm opposed to walkouts for political reasons....

[Kurska]

11. Murdering people in the streets is not a political issue.

This wasn't a act of war, this wasn't done under duress, this wasn't accidental it was government thugs being told to fire on kids and them doing it.

[Violet_Crumble]

12. But it is when Israel does it in Gaza?

Sorry, they're both as bad as each other when it comes to abusing human rights, and if you support a walk-out based on human rights abuses when it comes to Iran, you've also got to support it if an Israeli leader is subject to a walk-out because of Israel's human rights abuses.

[Kurska]

13. No, Israel was acting during a time of war and was under extreme pressure from it's own population

do something about gaza. Not only that, but the IDF rarely if ever intentionally targeted civilians.

You can't compare a military action to try and stop acts of war against your civilian population to the violent and authoritarian crack downs on civilian populations for the sole reason of keeping power.

Nearly everyone killed in the Iranian crack down were unarmed civilians who posed no military threat to the country of Iran, while nearly everyone killed in Gaza was atleast killed in the pursuit of real and existent military threats. The difference is the same reason we don't tend to charge soldiers with murder after killing on the battlefield.

Please don't try to equate artillery missing and hitting a house (or for that matter firing upon a house after getting bad information) to militia lowering their guns and firing into crowds.

[Violet_Crumble]

14. There was no war declared and I'm sure supporters of Iran can make a million excuses as well...

I've got no time for either, and I don't give a shit if yr upset that I see both as grave violations of human rights that should get the same treatment.

The difference is the same reason we don't tend to charge soldiers with murder after killing on the battlefield.

Killing unarmed civilians is a war-crime. I really don't care what the US military calls it...

[Kurska]

15. I'm sure plenty of middle eastern nations WOULDN'T sit there for a speech by Bibi

and they would cite the exact same human rights reason that you would. Ultimately whether you would walk out on Israel or Iran for human rights abuses depends on if you think either of them committed ones worthy of walking out on.

"Killing unarmed civilians is a war-crime. I really don't care what the US military calls it..."

Can you name a single major conflict where unarmed civilians haven't died?

[Violet_Crumble]

16. And I'd have a problem with them doing that...

I'd also have a problem with people walking out on a speech by Ahmanutjob if it's because of human rights violations and not Holocaust denial (I totally agree with a walk-out for that)....

I'm not sure what yr point is at all with yr question. You were making out that the deaths of all those civilians in Gaza were justified. I have a massive problem with that sort of thinking...

[Kurska]

17. The point is according to your definition ever major conflict ever is in violation of human rights.

So saying that Israel violated Human rights in its latest conflict is pointless, because the very fact it had a conflict implies that.

I don't see why nations are expected to sit there and respect each other in the UN, that would violate its long proud history of being the world's most expensive lunatic asylum.

[Violet_Crumble]

18. And how does that absolve Israel?

btw, US soldiers have been charged with murder in past conflicts, unless I'm getting what I've learnt wrong...

Ah, but unlike you, I have respect for the UN and the work it does. All I was doing was pointing out that anyone who supported a walk-out on one leader because of human rights violations shouldn't then turn around and complain if it's done to a leader of another country for human rights violations....

[Kurska]

19. Yeah and yet, unarmed civilians die in every war and the vast majority of cases are never tried.

Obviously what the world considers a war crime is a malicious and intentional killing of civilians (not all killings of civilians and even that is only a definition that has come to be very recently and is seldom enforced.

[Violet_Crumble]

20. It needs to be enforced more often...

And there are killings of civilians in Gaza that look very much like they were war crimes...

[azurnoir]

21. Good and the EU should follow along with the US n/t