The Evil Of Patriotism When Opposed To Humanism


Perceptions From Abroad

Each of the following links leads to further reports on the related issue.

For additional information see also the section
__________________

Patriotism: Boon or Bane?

__________________

Perceptions of Combat

__________________

Remember Your Humanity!

_______________
Perceptions From Abroad

Appeal To Americans: To my American friends...your last hurrah!

The Horrors Really Are Your America, Mr Bush

The Voice of Hypocrisy

The United States of Torture

The UNITED STATES of MONSTERS: DEPLETED URANIUM

Now they see us as we are

Is This The Death Of America?

IRAQ: The Nemesis Of Imperialism

John S. Hatch: Revolution

The 2005 World Summit & UN General Assembly 60th Session: HYPOCRISY vs. INTEGRITY

U.S. Image Up Slightly, But Still Negative American Character Gets Mixed Reviews

__________________
read also
 
The Hidden Costs of Patriotism:

A THOUSAND NINE ELEVENS

Final Declaration of Brussel's Peace Conference: It is Time to Unite and to Ensure Peace


Related Links

Human Rights Watch

Human Rights Research and Education Centre

Not In Our Name

Very Pissed Off Combat Veterans -- And Blueprints For Change By John McCarthy

Patriotism vs. Humanity

- Perceptions From Abroad -

Home | John McCarthy | CIA | Treason in Wartime | 1941-2001 | Science vs Religion | Reality Or Hoax? | Israel & ME | 9/11 - 3/11 - 7/7 -- Cui Bono? | New World Order | Lies vs Facts | War on Terror - Terrorism of War | Patriotism vs Humanity | War Crimes - Committed 'In All Our Names' | Enviroment & Lobbyism | FOIA & Whistleblowers vs Cover-Ups | Recruiting Lies vs Military Reality | From Democracy to Dictatorship | Empire Agenda | Media Coverage | International (War)Crimes Tribunals | Take Action! - Take Back America! | Summaries & Previews | Index Part 1 | Index Part 2 | Multimedia Index

The 2005 World Summit &
UN General Assembly 60th Session
 
 
HYPOCRISY vs. INTEGRITY
 
President Bush Addresses United Nations High-Level Plenary Meeting 

Click Play to watch the event (Running Time: 27:11)

 

Listen also to Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State 

  Video - English

Text - English

For all other statements use the following links:

The 2005 World Summit - Statements

UN General Assembly 60th Session

 


 

Summit failure blamed on US

Mark Townsend in New York
Sunday September 18, 2005

The Observer

The failure of last week's United Nations summit to deliver an agreement designed to prevent terrorists acquiring 'weapons of mass destruction' was sabotaged by the US, senior diplomats have told The Observer.

Officials involved in the negotiations have confirmed that the Bush administration's refusal to countenance any form of disarmament blocked attempts to push measures that would prevent regimes seeking to develop a nuclear capability.

It contradicts reports last week that the US had in fact been furious that plans to crack down on nuclear proliferation were stripped out of the final UN document.

However, diplomats speaking on condition of anonymity have revealed it was in fact President Bush who scuppered what the UN believed was a crucial move in helping make the world safer from the risk of terrorists obtaining a nuclear threat.

Sources reveal that the move has heightened further tensions between the Americans and furious UN officials who believe the issue remains the greatest threat to world peace. Kofi Annan, secretary-general of the UN, told world leaders that the decision to drop all references in the final UN text to disarmament was 'inexcusable', saying that 'weapons of mass destruction pose a grave danger to us all'.

Later, President Bush urged leaders to tackle regimes that 'pursue weapons of mass murder'.

The row comes as the US and Britain attempt to have Iran referred to the UN security council if it does not stop uranium enrichment.

One diplomat said the US refused to accept the 'logical premise' that it must engage in disarmament if it does not to want to encourage a 'new nuclear arms race'.

Mark Malloch Brown, Annan's chief of staff, said that that while progress on terror was positive, the fact no agreement had been made on nuclear weapons meant it was 'a hollow achievement'. Brown told The Observer: 'There is always going to be a terrorist who is going to try and use it [a nuclear weapon]'.

He added: 'More countries are bumping against the nuclear weapons ceiling. And at the same time we have a world energy crisis where countries are turning to nuclear energy as an alternative.'

Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005

Source:

Observer.Guardian.UK

 


Nonproliferation, Disarmament Matters Dropped From U.N. Summit Document

By Jim Wurst
Global Security Newswire

UNITED NATIONS — U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan yesterday said it was “a real disgrace” that disarmament and nonproliferation are not addressed in the document produced by the General Assembly for the summit that began this morning (see GSN, Sept. 13).

Speaking minutes after the General Assembly adopted the 35-page “outcome document,” Annan yesterday told journalists, “The big item missing is nonproliferation and disarmament. This is a real disgrace.  We have failed twice this year: we failed at the [Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty] Conference, and we failed now.” 

At least 170 heads of state are scheduled to attend the summit that began this morning. The summit, making the 60th anniversary of the United Nations and the fifth anniversary of the Millennium Summit, was supposed to be the launch of the most ambitious U.N. overhaul since its creation. 

While governments and nongovernmental experts complained that much of the substance in the document was weakened in the name of consensus, the section on “disarmament and nonproliferation” was the only key topic to be entirely dropped from the paper.

“I hope the leaders will see this as a real signal for them to pick up the ashes and really show leadership on this important issue when we are all concerned about weapons of mass destruction and the possibility that they may even get into the wrong hands,” Annan said. “So I will appeal to the leaders who are coming here in the next few days to really step up to the plate and accept the challenge and show leadership on this issue.”

U.N. delegates never solidly agreed to the disarmament and nonproliferation language during negotiations on the summit document. The first version in early June called on states to “pursue and intensify negotiations with a view to advancing general and complete disarmament and strengthening the international nonproliferation regime.” 

It encouraged them to strengthen the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and the biological and chemical weapons conventions.  The section listed a number of specific steps that nations could take, including the entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and negotiations over a fissile materials cutoff treaty. The text also “appeal[ed] to the nuclear weapons states to make concrete steps toward nuclear disarmament in accordance with Article VI of the NPT with the objective of eliminating all such weapons.”

Seven nations, led by Norway, submitted alternative language in August to this section that would have sharpened nations’ commitments to disarmament and nonproliferation. The proposal never was substantively discussed because newly arrived U.S. Ambassador John Bolton submitted to the negotiators an annotated version of the draft with hundreds of amendments. 

Many of those changes struck at the heart of the document, including his proposals for disarmament and nonproliferation, by deleting the word “disarmament” from the section and proposing language that dealt exclusively with the dangers posed by the proliferation of nuclear weapons. 

For example, the sentence saying, “We emphasize that progress in disarmament and nonproliferation is essential to strengthening international peace and security” would have been replaced by “The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and the possibility that terrorists might acquire such weapons remain the greatest threats to international peace and security.”

The Bolton text also deleted references to the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, a proposal that the Additional Protocol to International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards agreements be called “the standard for compliance,” and suggestions for a program of work for the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva.

“The U.S. approach was very provocative. This is best illustrated by the deletion of reference to the NPT’s ‘three pillars: disarmament, nonproliferation, and the peaceful use of nuclear energy’ and the substitution of a reference to the NPT’s ‘role in preventing the further spread of nuclear weapons,’” said John Burroughs of the Lawyers’ Committee on Nuclear Policy. “This proposal went in the face of a broad and deep international consensus that a viable nonproliferation regime requires progress on arms control/disarmament and a recognition of the right to non-weapons uses of nuclear power.”

Once the U.S. proposals were tabled, according to delegates, other nations that had held back their objections now felt free to introduce amendments that were unacceptable to other states.

“The U.S. led the way [in proposing amendments] and by leading the way they opened the door for the other bullies to come in and take their swings at the text,” said Jennifer Nordstrom of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom.

When the United States tried to make the section solely about nonproliferation, other nations, such as India and Pakistan — which are not NPT parties — introduced language stressing disarmament and deleting references to the treaty. After the proposals and counterproposals were tabled, “We could not get back the balance between nonproliferation and disarmament” from earlier drafts, a European diplomat said yesterday.

Speaking about the negotiations in general, Bolton said yesterday the “line-by-line amendments” were necessary because it was important to be “very frank with the other delegations on the amendments we wanted to see. Indeed, I think other governments were waiting for the opportunity, and should have that opportunity, because this is not a text dictated by nameless, faceless text writers.”

The last version of the disarmament section was circulated Friday. It said states affirmed that “progress is urgently needed in the area of disarmament and nonproliferation,” that governments “support efforts for the global elimination of all weapons of mass destruction and prevention of the proliferation of all such weapons in all their aspects,” and affirmed “support for the multilateral treaties whose aim is to eliminate or prevent the proliferation of nuclear, chemical or biological weapons.”  However, by this time all references to specific treaties had been deleted and there were no commitments on eliminating weapons of mass destruction.

The penultimate draft of the summit document on Monday simply had the heading “disarmament and nonproliferation” without any text. By yesterday, even the heading was gone.

The only reference to nuclear weapons comes in the section on terrorism, in which the document calls for the early entry into force of the International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism. That treaty, completed this spring, was opened for signatures this morning. Russian President Vladimir Putin and U.S. President George W. Bush were the first heads of state to sign.

Source:

Global Security Newswire

Check for latest Site-Updates

Index of Posted Articles

or copy and paste the URL into Google Translate

Important note:

We neither promote nor condone hate speech in any way, shape or form. We have created this website to search for truthful facts that can shape unconventional conclusions and restore historical integrity. The work is therefore protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution as well as by Article 19 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights: “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the articles posted on this website are distributed for their included information without profit for research and/or educational purposes only. This website has no affiliation whatsoever with the original sources of the articles nor are we sponsored or endorsed by any of the original sources.

 
Copyright John McCarthy 2005 if not indicated otherwise

 
Ages ago, I taught my children "never to point with a naked finger towards dressed people" and I usually keep that for myself as well but for this website I have to quote:
"The Emporer Has NO Clothes On!"
Traude
 

 
Want to get in touch? You can send email at:
 

or

Disclaimer And Fair Use