PROOF Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad IS RIGHT on Israel

After the disaster that was Durban II, the conference on Racism, where actual "racism" could not be discussed because the head culprit and leader in racist activity is none other than Israel. A rogue state with Strong arm tactics that seem to reach into most countries, by using threats, intimidation and political money, to keep their vile racist crimes from being under scrutiny. Anyone with the slightest of doubt need only read these tiny passages below to see the evil face of Isareli racism, even against their own who dare to break from the "racist traditions". Notice who made the complaint against him? Nazi Zionist Racist land stealers who would like nothing more than to kill every Palestinian in the Middle East. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is 100% correct in his statement, and until Israel is forced to confront it's nazi Racism, nothing will change.

The Israeli museum Yad Vashem has fired an employee who compared the trauma of Jewish Holocaust survivors to that of Palestinians who were expelled in 1948 from their land in what is now Israel.

Jerusalem resident Itamar Shapira, 29, was relieved of his position as a teacher after a group of Jewish students from the settlement of Efrat made a complaint to the museum.

Yad Vashem’s official position, according to the report, is that “the Holocaust cannot be compared to any other event and that every visitor can draw his own political conclusions.”

Shapira said Yad Vashem “is being hypocritical. I only tried to expose the visitors to the facts, not to political conclusions. If Yad Vashem chooses to ignore the facts, for example the massacre at Dir Yassin, or the Nakba ["The Catastrophe," the Palestinians' term the events of 1948], it means that it's afraid of something and that its historic approach is flawed," Shapira said. source

When the Truth Hurts~Invoke the Holocaust

The truth was told at Durban, no matter if Israel or others wanted to face up to that fact. So, Israel's answer to hearing that Israel is “the most cruel and racist regime”. Israel somehow manages to turn the truth into an excuse to attack Iran and to invoke the sacred "holocaust" (Israel's secret weapon and sympathy booster) What ever would Israel do, without playing the constant victim and invoking the holocaust to push for attacking Iran. So, in bizarro Israeli logic, to call Israel "cruel and racist" means Israel can wage war on your country. Hence, insulting Israel, by telling the truth has now somehow been twisted into an act of war.

Iran trying to do 'what Adolf Hitler did to Jewish people'

The Israeli government used the potent, emotionally-charged platform of Auschwitz concentration camp today to rebut President Ahmadinejad’s latest tirade against the Jewish state.

Standing under the notorious wrought-iron gateway to the camp with its cynical slogan “Arbeit Macht Frei” (Work Makes Free), the Israeli Deputy Prime Minister, Silvan Shalom, said Iran was advocating no less than the Nazi-style elimination of the Jews.

“What Iran is trying to do right now is not far away at all from what Hitler did to the Jewish people just 65 years ago,“ said Mr Shalom.

Mr Ahmadinejad provoked outrage at an anti-racism conference in Geneva yesterday when he called Israel “the most cruel and racist regime”.

Israel will not stop until they attack Iran, if you have not read my post about Israel blackmailing Obama to attack Iran, you can read it here

Reporters Without Borders on Durban II

Reporters without borders have issued a very long press statement on the Durban II conference on racism. Below are some very interesting excerpts that seem to be directed at Israel's attempts to close down any talk of it being racist, LOL Imagine that!!! Reminds me of South Africa years ago, deny, deny, deny, deny and if that does not work, what do you do? Deny and censor whilst crying anti-semitism at the same time.............

Appeal for freedom of expression

Appeal to international bodies and NGOs participating in 2nd World Conference against Racism.
Reporters Without Borders and the Doha Centre for Media Freedom are concerned about the threat to free expression that arises when the media broach religious issues. They therefore urge on the Member States of the United Nations and the international and regional organisations and NGOs attending the 2nd World Conference Against Racism (Durban II) to respect the following principles.

Convinced that an in-depth dialogue between cultures and religions favours the development of a tolerant and multicultural society;

We confirm our support for these principles:

The right to freedom of religion, as enshrined in international law, above all protects the individual and to a certain extent the rights of religious and belief communities, but not the religions themselves. It guarantees respect for believers, not beliefs.

It is neither useful nor necessary to impose more binding and repressive limits on free expression that those envisaged by international law, namely the prohibition of incitement to national, racial or religious hatred and incitement to war. The adoption of additional restrictions would pose a threat to the - very fundamental - freedom of expression and to related freedoms including freedom of religion.

Freedom of expression should only be subject to the restrictions imposed by law, namely the laws on defamation and insult, and the restrictions that are necessary for protecting safety and public order and the fundamental rights and freedoms or others.

Introducing or re-introducing “defamation of religions” and “blasphemy” as crimes in national or international legal documents would represent an unacceptable restriction on the right to free expression.

The dissemination of misconceptions about religions or members of religious communities may shock and elicit disproportionate reactions. But the response to hurtful comments is not to adopt laws restricting free expression but rather measures to foster a climate of tolerance and inclusiveness in which religions can be practiced without risk of stigmatisation or discrimination.

Analysis and evaluation of a religion’s content, including criticism, satire and disparaging comments, are part of the practice of freedom of expression, thought and opinion. source

Iran's President Tells Truth~Zionist Supporters Walk Out

Three cheers for Ahmadinejad for saying what we all know, but what Israel won't allow to be said (Under threat of the Jewish Lobby) Israel is a racist state. FACT! One only need to read the thousands of news reports regarding its vile treatment of Palestinians for many years, take a look at the statements from its Zionist government, or what about the Zionist Settler terrorists, who are allowed to murder and steal homes at will (With total protection by the Israeli Army) And that support by the Israeli army means the government is in support of the actions of those settlers. The list is truly endless. If not for the worldwide organisation of the Jewish Lobby agents at work in every most countries, perhaps we could finally get the truth on record. Instead the world allows these crimes to continue, that makes each country that walked out just as guilty as Israel. because it means they condone Israels actions.

Israel criticism sparks UN walkout

Dozens of delegates have walked out of a United Nations conference in Switzerland on racism after Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran's president, described Israel as a "racist government".

Before he set off for the summit in Geneva, Ahmadinejad had been quoted by Iran's state broadcaster as saying "the Zionist ideology and regime are the flag bearers of racism". link

Durban a "No Go" for USA-big surprise....not!

Rack up another one for the Jewish Lobby in the USA. Wonder how African Americans feel now about Obama, bet many would like their vote back. Its seems Obama is not concerned with slave issues or Palestinian issues at Durban, having both removed to quell the Zionists, and still the US will not be sending anyone to attend.

The United States asserts that it will boycott the upcoming UN-led anti-racism conference citing the event's anti-Israeli draft document.

"The Obama administration will with regret boycott a UN conference on racism next week over objectionable language in the meeting's final document that could single out Israel for criticism and restrict free speech," the State Department said in a statement on Saturday.

Washington and Tel Aviv had also walked out of the previous conference in Durban, South Africa in protest at its draft declaration among other things.

They slammed the 2001 conference held in Durban, South Africa, for being anti-Semitic because it brought into focus Israel's ill-treatment of the Palestinians and attempted to pass a resolution likening Zionism to racism source

Like I said the other day, Durban=The Chees Shop.

Durban II=The Cheese Shop

What do Monty Python's Cheese Shop Sketch and Durban II have in common?

The plight of the Palestinians has been removed from Durban II, just like the references to slaves and reparations for slavery, Sheesh! Not much of a conference on Racism, now is it? All the "racism" has been removed. Why don't they just hold a conference called the "Mutual Admiration Society" instead. Who cares if African Americans were slaves and suffered, who cares if Palestinians are being discriminated against and abused, who cares if Israel is an apartheid rogue state. All of these are removed from the so called "racism" conference. Ok, I just have to say it, can't help myself. I am reminded of one of my favorite "Monty Python" episodes, called "The Cheese Shop" (video below) where every type of cheese asked for, they don't have, in fact, they dont have ANY cheese at all!! The guy ends up saying "Not much of a cheese shop then is it?" Trust me, it's a lot funnier when you watch it, But this Durban II conference IS identical to Monty Python's Cheese Shop, no discussion of racism at the racism conference and no cheese in the cheese shop. To prove my point the latest Durban II article is below along with the "Cheese Shop Video"


see this:
UN protects Israel from Racism Charges

And more below:

Bethlehem - A UN-sponsored racism conference will begin Monday, but the plight of the Palestinians will not be on the agenda, partly because Palestine's own diplomats have buckled to US pressure, civil society organizations have alleged.

The Draft Outcome Document of the Durban Review Conference – to be held in Geneva, Switzerland – contains no reference to the Palestinians, Palestine, or to Israel or its occupation of Palestinian land. All such references were removed by a Preparatory Committee from an earlier draft in March.

According to its official website, the purpose of the conference is to “evaluate progress towards the goals set by the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance in Durban, South Africa, in 2001.”

The 2001 conference ended in controversy when the US and Israel walked out in protest of attempts to identify Israel as a perpetrator of racist policies.

In an open letter signed by some 50 Palestinian, Arab and international human rights organizations, it was alleged that “This step (of deleting any reference to Palestine) was unfortunately approved by official Arab negotiating delegations in Geneva including the Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine at the UN office in Geneva.”

The letter accuses the Palestinian and Arab diplomats of capitulating to a threat to boycott the conference by US, Israel, Canada and European states to remove references to Israel and Palestinians.

Asked why the Palestinian negotiators had accepted the removal of their own people from the agenda, the head of the PLO mission to the UN in Geneva, Ibrahim Khreisha told Ma’an that “the decision was made by all groups” to remove references to all specific countries. “Some from Africa don’t want to mention certain African countries … like Sudan. Europe doesn’t want to mention Israel. … We don’t want to single out any one country.”

Asked why the US, Canada and Italy are still boycotting the conference despite the removal of the references to Israel and the Palestinians, Khreisha said that these countries were actually seeking further concessions, in fact asking for the Durban Review conference not to align itself with the goals set out in Durban.

In a statement issued on Tuesday, the US State Department said it “welcomes the recent progress in … the document, removing all language that singled out any one country or conflict, and removing language that embraced the concept of ‘defamation of religion’ and that demanded reparations for slavery.”

Presented with this description of the US demand, Jaradat, the director of BADIL said that not endorsing the 2001 document would be the equivalent of “not having the conference.”

Khreisha said he did not know exactly what conditions would have to be met to persuade the US to participate in the conference, but he said that the American delegation was “waiting for instructions from Washington” and specifically from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

With Palestinians stricken from the agenda BADIL and its partners are organizing a parallel “Israel Review Conference” for civil society groups to discuss analysis and strategy in the fight against “Apartheid, Colonialism and Occupation.” link

Now, see what I mean? Durban II has no discussion of racism, and the Cheese Shop has no cheese, they are the same:)

DURBAN II~USA to Attend?

Oh this is just brilliant I must say. African Americans have come together in numbers to press the Obama admin to attend Durban II. Looks like this is gaining some ground indeed and America needs to attend this conference. This is literally a war between the wants of the Jewish Lobby acting Agents of Israel, and the African Americans who are loyal to the USA and who voted for Obama 98% worth and they deserve to have their President's administration attend this event. My money is on African Americans to win this one, it's the right thing to do for America!
Why just take a look at this one site of MANY stating:

US Refusal to Participate in Durban Review Conference:
African Americans and People Color Speak for Ourselves!

The election of Barack Obama as US president was an important development in the direction of democracy. It represented an ideological blow against the hold of racism and white supremacy on national political elections. Many Blacks and People of Color worldwide have great hopes that his election among other things, represents a leadership willing to take a strong stand against racist US and global policies, systems and governments. read more here where they also have a petition for people of colour, but there is even a greater petition with clout. More below on this developing story:

HAARETZ: Senior U.S. officials in Washington and New York are leaning in favor of participating in the "Durban 2" UN-sponsored anti-racism conference scheduled to take place on April 20 in Geneva, diplomatic sources said on Sunday.

The diplomats, who share a close working relationship with the American delegation to the United Nations, informed leading Jewish officials in New York that Washington has increasingly become convinced of the need to dispatch representatives to the conference.

(Excellent!! Would love to see the faces of AIPAC, what a picture that would be!)

Israel plans on boycotting the conference for fear that it will turn into a platform for singling out Jerusalem for criticism over its policies in the Palestinian territories.

(Well perhaps if Israel was not a racist, apartheid theocracy statelet, there would be no need for them to worry about such things)

Leading figures in the organized American Jewish community have been lobbying Western ambassadors and European diplomats in the UN to dissuade their governments from participating in the Geneva summit.

(Jewish Lobby Israeli Agents working against America's best interests as usual)

A senior Jewish activist who took part in some of the discussions with Western diplomats told Haaretz that he would not be the least surprised if the U.S. indeed decides to send an official delegation. The official said that while the U.S. pledged it would not participate, it was not an adamant opposition.

Dozens of human rights groups and activists in the United States have petitioned President Barack Obama to rethink his decision to boycott the conference.

"The Durban Review Conference is one of the most important international platforms for discussing the elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerances," the activists wrote in a letter to the White House.

"Given the brutal history of slavery and Jim Crow in the United States, your Administration has much to contribute to this discussion," the petition read.

(Amen to that one!!)

"A boycott would be inconsistent with your policy of engagement with the international community... How can your Administration engage in any manner with the international community if it has no representation at the discussion table?"

Initial draft resolutions for the United Nations Durban II summit branded Israel as an occupying state that carries out racist policies. It now speaks only of concern about the negative stereotyping of religions and does not single out Israel for criticism, according to the officials.

(Looks like the African Americans are attempting to hold Obama accountable, GOOD for them!! After all they voted for him at a percentage rate of 98%, he owes them bigtime, AND it's the right thing to do!)

PETITION BELOW:

Open Letter to President Barack Obama

Why the United States Should Stop Refusing to Participate in a Global Conference on Racism

Dear President Barack Obama,

We, the undersigned individuals and organizations dedicated to fighting racial injustice and promoting human rights domestically and globally received your recent decision to boycott the Durban Review Conference with profound disappointment.

Recognizing that your stated objections to the conference have been addressed, we are confident that your Administration will be reversing its decision in time to participate in the conference and its remaining preparatory meetings scheduled to take place in April.

Refusing to Discuss Racism on a Global Platform is Inconsistent with a Policy of Engagement with the International Community

As you know, the Durban Review Conference is one of the most important international platforms for discussing the elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerances. Given the brutal history of slavery and Jim Crow in the United States, your Administration has much to contribute to this discussion. A boycott would be inconsistent with your policy of engagement with the international community. A policy of engagement requires discussion with governments and institutions even if one does not agree with them as demonstrated by your statement last week to the people and leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran that your Administration is committed to seeking "engagement that is honest and grounded in mutual respect." How can your Administration engage in any manner with the international community if it has no representation at the discussion table?

The United States Should be Fighting for the Strongest Protections against Racism

The Durban Review process has offered a sophisticated and comprehensive framework for advancing racial equality including concrete guidelines for addressing the link between poverty, racism, sexism, and multiple forms of discrimination; advancing migrant rights; addressing youth violence; providing access to quality education, health care, and adequate housing; and advancing transparent governance in the fight for racial equality. We expect your Administration will not only engage in the process but will also work to ensure that the final outcome offers the strongest and most comprehensive framework for eliminating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerances. This is critical for progress in the domestic and global fight for racial and economic justice.

Specific Objections Raised do not Warrant a Boycott

We are concerned by the reasons put forth by your Administration for its refusal to engage in the conference. Notwithstanding that changes have been made to accommodate your Administration's specific objections, we do not believe that these objections should warrant a decision to boycott the conference. As we mentioned before, you recently demonstrated your Administration's willingness to engage in dialogue with governments with which you do not always agree such as the Islamic Republic of Iran, and we applaud that decision. Why would your Administration pursue a different policy now that it is time to discuss how to fight and eliminate racism for people in the United States and the rest of the world? How can the United States affirm freedom of expression - even for hate speech - if it refuses even to be present to listen to the views of others?

The United States Must Not Attempt to Ignore our History of Slavery

We are troubled that your Administration pushed for the withdrawal of language related to reparations, reference to the transatlantic slave trade as a crime against humanity, and the overall weakening of the efforts related to people of African Descent. We recall your own speech on March 18, 2008 that we need to "remind ourselves that so many of the disparities that exist in the African-American community today can be directly traced to inequalities passed on from an earlier generation that suffered under the brutal legacy of slavery and Jim Crow." We also urge you to consider the bill H.R. 40 reintroduced by Representative Conyers in January calling for the establishment of a commission to examine the institution of slavery and current forms of racial discrimination, as well as to make recommendations to the Congress on appropriate remedies. We believe it will help illuminate the importance of discussing these issues both in the United States and globally.

The United States Must Engage the Global Fight for Racial Justice in Good Faith

It is regrettable that your Administration made its current decision on whether to participate in the Durban Review Conference based on one meeting. One meeting is inadequate for meaningful engagement in the process especially since the process has been ongoing since 2006 not including the time and preparation put into the 2001 World Conference Against Racism (WCAR). The actions of your Administration leave the impression that you are willing to ignore an important opportunity to advance racial equality if it is politically expedient.

The Current Position of Non-Participation is worse than that of the Bush Administration

A boycott by your Administration would be the first time in recent history that the United States has refused to participate in a United Nations conference. This position is even more radical than that of the Bush Administration's as the former Administration at least attended the preceding conference on race before withdrawing. We hope that your Administration will not squander this important opportunity to push for racial equality on the global stage and will instead send a diverse and high-level delegation including representatives from the non-governmental community.

A United States Refusal to Discuss Racism Encourages Other Countries to do the same

The current decision by your Administration not only affects the United States, but also provides cover for other countries that are reluctant to engage in a meaningful discussion on advancing racial equality to boycott the discussion as well. A United States boycott would have a long-term damaging effect on the global fight against racism.

In closing, we are reminded again of a speech you made a year ago insisting that race is an issue that this nation cannot afford to ignore right now. We applauded your thought-provoking speech then as it echoed basic American values of equality and fairness and reminded us of the importance of engaging in mature and constructive dialogue on race. We urge you not to ignore this global discussion on race. This is an issue that is extremely important for making genuine progress in the United States and advancing peace worldwide. It is also a priority for many of us who supported your campaign for change. Again, we look forward to your timely and substantive engagement in the Durban Review Conference.

Organizational Signatures

1. Advocates for Environmental Human Rights
2. Alianza Latinoamericana por los Derechos de los Inmigrantes, ALDI
3. Black Alliance for Just Immigration
4. Black Workers for Justice - Europe (BWJ-e)
5. BLACK Advisors
6. Center for Constitutional Rights
7. Cidadao Global
8. Coalition of African, Arab, Asian, European, and Latino Immigrants of Illinois
9. Coalition to Save Harlem
10. Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism
11. Croydon African Caribbean Family
12. Equal Justice Society
13. Equality Now
14. Four Freedoms Forum
15. Global Afrikan Congressuk
16. Hawai'i Institute for Human Rights
17. Highlander Research and Education Center
18. International Action Center
19. Justice Now
20. Labor/Community Strategy Center
21. Malcolm X Grassroots Movement
22. Maria Iñamagua Campaign for Justice
23. Matahari: Eye of the Day
24. The Meiklejohn Civil Liberties Institute
25. Minnesota Tenants Union
26. Movement for Immigrant Rights Alliance (MIRA)
27. National Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression, Chicago Branch
28. National Conference of Black Lawyers
29. National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty
30. National Lawyers Guild
31. National Lawyers Guild - Minnesota Chapter
32. National Network for Immigrant & Refugee Rights
33. National Rail Maritime and Transport Union 0543 Local Finsbury Park Branch
34. Norbertines of the Priory of St. Moses the Black
35. NY Solidarity Coalition with Katrina & Rita Survivors and the Survivors Assembly
36. United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America (UE)
37. Urban Justice Center
38. Willets Point Defense Committee
39. Women's International League for Peace and Freedom
40. Women of Color United
(please see individual signatures on next page)

Individual Signatures (with organizational affiliation for identification purposes only)

1. Ajamu Baraka, Executive Director, US Human Rights Network
2. Alexandra Oprea, Senior Editor, UCLA Law Review, Vol. 57
3. Aleyamma Mathew, Transnational Institute for Grassroots Research and Action
4. Alice J. Palmer, Chicago, Co-Chair of the People Programme
5. Amelia Parker, Program Coordinator, Center for Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, American University Washington College of Law
6. Amy Agigian, Center for Women's Health and Human Rights, Suffolk University
7. André Degbeon, Founder, AFRO TV BERLIN
8. Andrés Castro, Founder/Managing Ed., The Teacher's Voice
9. Ann Fagan Ginger, The Meiklejohn Civil Liberties Institute
10. Anthony Gifford, Barrister (UK) and Attorney-at-law (Jamaica)
11. Asantewaa Gail Harris, Community Vision Council
12. Bill Fletcher, Jr., Executive Editor, BlackCommentator.com
13. Brenda Stokely, New York Solidarity Coalition with Katrina & Rita survivors
14. Charles Amjad-Ali, Ph.D., Th.D., The Martin Luther King, Jr., Professor of Justice and Christian Community, Director Islamic Studies Program, Luther Seminary
15. Council Member Charles Barron, New York City Council
16. Chris Crass, Catalyst Project
17. Clarence C. Gravlee, Assistant Professor, Department of Anthropology, University of Florida
18. Colin Rajah, International Migrant Rights & Global Justice Program Director, National Network for Immigrant & Refugee Rights (NNIRR)
19. Professor Connie de la Vega, University of San Francisco, School of Law
20. Dr. Corann Okorodudu, Professor of Psychology & Coordinator, Africana Studies
21. Daniel Hazen, Board Member, US Human Rights Network
22. David Gespass, President-Elect of the National Lawyers Guild
23. David Kreindler, Vermont Workers' Center
24. David Wildman, Executive Secretary, Human Rights & Racial Justice Mission, Contexts & Relationships, General Board of Global Ministries United Methodist Church
25. Dawn Stanger, Vermont Workers' Center
26. Denise Williams, Ph.D., Negotiation, Conflict Resolution & Peacebuilding, California State University Dominguez Hills
27. Ms. Diane King, Director, Seeking Joint Solution
28. Dianne Burnham, Ohio Valley PEACE, Outreach
29. Donald H. Smith, Ph.D., Past President, the National Alliance of Black School Educators; Former chair, the Board for the Education of People of African Ancestry, the John Henrik Clarke House, New York City
30. Dowoti Désir, Founder of the DDPA Watch Group
31. Ms. Dra Barryl A. Biekman, President of the African European Women's Movement "Sophiedela"; Chair of the National Platform Dutch Slavery; Past President of the Pan African Strategic and Policy Group (Panafstrag Europe EU/NL; Board member of Tiye International
32. Edith M. Jackson, Howard University
33. Edward L. Palmer, Chicago, Co-Chair of the People Programme
34. Ellen Raider, Independent Commission on Public Education
35. Emira Woods, Foreign Policy In Focus/Institute for Policy Studies
36. Eric Mann, Author, Dispatches from Durban: The World Conference Against Racism and Post-September 11 Movement Strategies.
37. Erika Simard, Vermont Workers' Center
38. Eva Paterson, President, Equal Justice Society
39. Francisco Ramos, Executive Director, Coalition of African, Arab, Asian, European, and Latino Immigrants of Illinois. (CAAAELII)
40. Gary Orfield, Professor of Education, Law, Political Science and Urban Planning. Co-Director, Civil Rights Project/Proyecto Derechos Civiles, University of California, Los Angeles, UCLA
41. Gerardo Renique, Associate Professor, Department of History, City College of the City University of New York
42. Dr. Gloria A. Caballero-Roca, Hispanic Studies, Earlham College
43. Gwendolyn Anderson, Member, NEA, WEAC and Milwaukee Teachers Association
44. Henrietta Faulconer, Northside Neighbors for Justice
45. Ignatious Muhammad, Member, Nation of Islam
46. Dr. Irma Loemban Tobing-Klein, President MDG Global Watch
47. Iwan Leeuwin, Chairperson, AAD Network in the Netherlands
48. James Haslam, Vermont Workers' Center
49. James Rowan, Northeastern University School of Law
50. Dr. Jason M. Ferreira, Department of Race and Resistance Studies College of Ethnic Studies, San Francisco State University
51. Jeanne Mirer, Secretary General of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers
52. Rev. Jeremy Tobin, Board Member, US Human Rights Network and Executive Board, Movement for Immigrant Rights Alliance (MIRA)
53. Jerrika Rivera, President, Asociacion Latina DBA Latina Association
54. Jewel L. Crawford, MD, National Medical Association; Participant, UN World Conference Against Racism, 2001
55. Joanna Cuevas Ingram, Student Member, National Lawyers Guild - San Francisco
56. Joceline A. Clemencia, Director Cultural Institute Independence, Curaçao, Netherlands Antilles
57. John A. Powell, Executive Director, the Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity
58. Jonathan Kissam, Vermont Workers' Center
59. Jose R. Matus, Alianza Indigena Sin Fronteras
60. Joshua Cooper, Director, Hawaii Institute for Human Rights
61. Kalin Williams, Malcom X Grassroots Movement
62. Katie Seitz, Teaching for Change
63. K-C Nat Turner, Assistant Professor, School of Education, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
64. Keith Jennings, President, African American Human Rights Foundation
65. Kristine Suozzi, Ph.D., New Mexico Health Equity Working Group Coordinator
66. Dr. Lady Dhyana Ziegler, Professor of Journalism, Florida A&M University, Tallahassee, Florida
67. Laura Roskos, Ph.D., Co-President of U.S. Section, Women's International League for Peace and Freedom
68. Lisa A. Crooms, Howard University School of Law
69. Loretta J. Ross, National Coordinator, SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Health Collective
70. Lucy Murphy, Convenor, Gray Panthers of Metropolitan Washington
71. Lynn Roberts, PhD, Assistant Professor & Coordinator, Community Health Education Track, Urban Public Health Program, Hunter College
72. M. Thandabantu Iverson, Ph.D., Indiana University Labor Studies Program, School of Social Work
73. Madeline Labriola, Hudson Valley PaxChristi
74. Marc Pilisuk, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus, The University of California. Professor, Saybrook Graduate School and Research Center
75. Marilyn Fischer, Franciscans International
76. Martin Y. Iguchi, Ph.D., UCLA School of Public Health
77. Dr. Martin C. Okeke, (PhD) Former President of the Organisation NIDOE-France, Vice President PanAFSTRAG-France
78. Matt McGrath, Vermont Workers' Center
79. Mavis G. Biekman, Board Member, African European Women's Movement Sophiedela, The Hague, The Netherlands
80. Monami Maulik, DRUM-Desis Rising Up & Moving
81. Monique Ndigo Washington, The Healing Drum Collective
82. Nancy J. Bothne, Instructor, DePaul University
83. Nancy Munger, Co-President of U.S. Section, Women's International League for Peace and Freedom
84. Nina T. Harawa, MPH, PhD, Department of Research, Charles Drew University
85. Nkem Dike, Northwestern University, IL
86. Nzingha Assata, Founding Member, The Alliance of Afrikan Women in England
87. Peg Franzen, Vermont Workers Center
88. Mr. Philip M. J. Baptiste, III, Kappa Alpha Psi Fraternity, Inc
89. Queen Quet, Founder, Gullah/Geechee Sea Island Coalition
90. Radhika Balakrishnan, Professor of Economics and International Studies , Marymount Manhattan College
91. Raj Patel, Affiliation. UC Berkeley Center for African Studies
92. Ramona Ortega, Executive Director, Cidadao Glo