BTW, it is HR 212, (easily found on Thomas, try 'Lantos' and 'racism') and the operative sentence states:
"Whereas the attempt by some to use the WCAR as a platform to resuscitate the divisive and discredited notion equating Zionism with racism, a notion that was overwhelmingly rejected by United Nations Resolution 3379 (1991), would undermine the goals and objectives of the conference; and .."
The date -1991 - is no coincidence, of course. It certainly is time to restore the old resolution, especially in conjunction with the raising of the issue of apologies and reparations for African slavery, something else the US opposes bringing up (but takes a different diplomatic tack on, given the differing relation of African-American organizations to the US).
The Nays (Dems, unless indicated by an 'R'), : Conyers, McKinney, Paul(R) Not Voting: Baca, Jefferson, Spence(R), Baker(R), Kleczka, Stark, Cubin(R), Lipinski, Stenholm, DeGette, Mollohan, Udall (CO), Goode(R), Rivers, Waters, Hansen(R), Schaffer(R), Hefley(R), Snyder ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Boycott of meeting on racism likely U.S. remains opposed to Arab stance
Thursday, August 16, 2001
URL:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/08/16/MN70197.DTL
Washington -- Just two weeks before the
scheduled start of a United Nations conference on
racism, little progress has been made on the United
States' threatened boycott over an effort by Arab
nations to single out Israel for diplomatic attack.
Rep. Tom Lantos, D-San Mateo, whose resolution
calling for an official U.S. boycott over the issue
passed the House on July 30 by a 408-to-3 vote,
met yesterday with Secretary of State Colin Powell
to discuss the conference.
Lantos, the ranking Democrat on the House
International Relations Committee,
also met with Egyptian diplomats. Asked if
American objections can be met in time, Lantos
said, "I would doubt it."
The eight-day U.N. Conference against Racism,
Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related
Intolerance is due to open in Durban, South Africa,
on Aug. 31.
The differences are particularly sharp over language
dealing with the Israeli-Palestinian dispute.
Language drafted by Arab states originally
resurrected wording equating Zionism with racism.
A U.N. General Assembly resolution making that
link was adopted in 1975, over American
objections, but was repealed in 1991.
At a preparatory conference last week in Geneva,
the wording was softened somewhat. But a draft
circulated at the meeting still referred to Israel's
"racist policies" in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and
Golan Heights and equated the Holocaust with
"ethnic cleansing of the Arab population in historic
Palestine and the Golan."
"Some radical governments and groups are in the
process of hijacking the conference and making it
into a conference against Israel," Lantos said. "To
single out any country is an outrage. No nation
comes to the conference with clean hands."
The congressman, a Holocaust survivor born in
Hungary, is particularly upset over any comparison
between the policies of Nazi Germany and Israel.
The State Department's most recent comment on
the conference came Monday when spokesman
Philip Reeker said, "We are disappointed that the
preparatory conference was unable to reach an
agreement in Geneva."
He said that contacts continue to try to work out an
agreeable wording, and that an announcement on
U.S. participation is expected by next week.
South Africa is especially eager for Powell, the first
African American to serve as secretary of state, to
attend the conference as a symbolic point about
race relations. But the State Department has said
Powell won't go if U.S.
objections aren't met.
Hussein Ibish of the American-Arab
Anti-Discrimination Committee said Washington
has no reason to avoid sending a high-level
delegation.
"We should go there under virtually any
circumstances. There is certainly nothing on the
agenda as it now stands that can serve as a reason
not to go," Ibish said.
He said it is proper for the conference to discuss
Israel's policies toward the Palestinians. "It is racial
discrimination without parallel in the world today.
Every aspect of life there is regulated by who you
are, what group you belong to."
"It cries out for some kind of examination at a U.N.
conference on racism," added Ibish.
Another early conference-related dispute -- over
slavery -- appears closer to resolution. Originally,
African nations pushed for wording calling on the
West to apologize and make reparations for
slavery.
Washington sources say that has been softened to
expressions of regret for slavery, along with efforts
to redress past wrongs, but not promising
reparations.