The International Organization for the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination

Here's a crowd that I reckon most of you will never have heard of - The International Organization for the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination; EOFORD by way of acronym. If all you heard was the name then you'd think that it was probably an organisation with a broad focus on ending racial discrimination, and maybe somewhat left-leaning. EOFORD is an organisation that makes many submissions to the United Nations with most being to the Human Rights Council.

Here's the text of their latest submission:

Terrorism, Mr Chairman, in the minds of many is manifested by acts of violence. But that is not the only case. Foreign occupation is a major and illegal act of terrorism. And it becomes total terrorism when it creates suffocating situations that make all the rights of the people under occupation at the whim of the occupier, with the intention of killing all means of resisting occupation and regaining freedom.

Resistance to foreign occupation is a natural and legal right, recognized throughout history. This resistance expresses the right of self-defense, and it is not terrorism. It is natural and lawful for the Palestinians and Iraqis to resist foreign occupation of their countries, and the terrorism is the presence of the occupiers. Therefore, there should be no confusion between resistance and terrorism.

Terrorism is an act, which has no moral or legal justification. Its aim is just to cause harm to others who have not caused harm to the perpetrator of terrorism. Some states seem to think that they have a God-given right to occupy the homelands of others, and resistance to that is utterly unacceptable and condemnable. Such states should ask themselves the question: why have they been the targets of acts of terrorism, and why other countries have not been targeted! This in no way is intended to justify or condone the killing of innocent civilians. But it is a question very relevant to the issue of terrorism.

You can call me slow, but what does that have to do with ending racial discrimination? It seems to me that they're saying Israel and the United States are terrorists while those that get on crowded buses and blow themselves up are simply practising legitimate resistance. Methinks that perhaps there is more to EOFORD than meets the eye. And I'd be right. At their website they have a handy list of their submissions to the UN, which I list below in reverse date order from September 2006 back to the start of 2004:

• Comments on Pope’s Speech at the University of Regensburg
• Israeli Attack on Lebanon Violates International Humanitarian Law
• The Only Solution for the Future of Israel is the One Reached by Ending Apartheid in South Africa
• The Need to Activate the General Assembly And International Criminal System, First: The Crime of Aggression on Lebanon
• Standards of a Negotiated Settlement to End the Israeli Occupation; Third: Commitments of Other Countries and the United Nations
• Standards of a Negotiated Settlement to End the Israeli Occupation; Second: Legitimacy of a Negotiated Settlement
• Standards of a Negotiated Settlement to End the Israeli Occupation; First: Exchange of Prisoners
• People will triumph over the racist leaderships that show total ignorance of human history
• Racist Trends have nothing to do with Democracy and Freedom of Speech
• Lessons From Palestinian History
• Contemporary Forms of Slavery
• The Fort of the People -- Now and in the Future -- is the United Nations
• The 1st Anniversary of the Ruling of the International Court of Justice
• Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change
• Is it Apartheid?
• There is a Way to Peace: The International Court of Justice
• The Problem of the American Veto
• Peace Through Justice in Palestine
• The Crucial Condition for Global Justice: The Independence of the International Criminal Court
• "Palestine Reconsidered"
• The Roles of the International Court of Justice and International Criminal Court
• The Influence of the Media
• The Policy of Double-Standards
• Violation of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in Palestine
• The Apartheid Wall in Palestine
• The violation of human rights in the occupied Arab territories, including Palestine

For an international organisation concerned with ending racial discrimination they sure do bang on a lot about Israel and Palestine. I wonder if that would indicate some sort of bias? Seems to be the case; 21 of those 26 submissions are anti-Israel, anti-Zionism, anti-US and/or pro-Palestine. They manage to weave 'racism' into them every so often but it's hardly ever the main theme. I encourage you to read the one on the influence of the media; it is completely deranged. Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change is simply a bash America hit piece and seems to be remarkably disconnected with ending racial discrimination.

So, who are the authors of these racial discrimination ending papers?

Dr. Abdelaziz Nouaydi
Dr. Anis Al-Qasem
Prof. Dr. Turkkaya Ataov

The rat I started smelling earlier is putrefying under my very nose.

Far from being concerned with ending racial discrimination, the grandly titled International Organization for the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination is, in fact, one of the most rabidly racist organisations on the face of the earth. If they called themselves 'Arab Doctors for an end to Israel' and published the drivel that they do then nobody could care less but to use the cloak of racial discrimination is a bit much.

If you take the time to read through some of their submissions then you'll discover what a truly fact-challenged group they are. Their piece Is it Apartheid is typical of the Arab world's inability to separate truth from fiction; a reality that will prevent them from integrating into a globalised economy any time soon. If people want to compare Israel to South Africa then how do they explain the presence of Arabs in Israel's parliament, and an Arab Deputy President, and the complete absence of blacks in the parliament of apartheid South Africa?

Unfortunately, EOFORD is the type of organisation whose submissions align well with that most morally bankrupt piece of the United Nations' - the Human Rights Council - which since changing from its old name a year ago has only condemned one country - Israel. People are being slaughtered in Sudan and Somalia and nary a peep from the HRC; Robert Mugabe sends Zimbabwe down the toilet, kidnapping and murdering his opponents along the way and the HRC says nothing; Hugo Chavez removes people's right to free speech, association and ownership of assets in a Latin American attempt to replay Zimbabwe and the HRC could care less. In fact, he's their new favourite dictator.

Can you imagine how the Human Rights Council would react to a submission from, say, the American Jewish Congress condemning suicide attacks by terrorists? There'd be a resolution condemning Israel quicker than you could blink. In fact, you don't have to just imagine how they'd react to criticism, you can watch for yourself: