President Obama hasn’t yet decided if the US will participate in the UN’s so-called “anti-racist” conference of Durban II later this month.  Recall he said there needed to be some changes in the document for America to participate.

Has the document been changed?  Anne Bayefsky shows us what’s going on in the cesspit of of Durban II:

The first issue discussed today was the central one for American participation. Israel was the only nation criticized by name in the 2001 Durban Declaration, which asserts that Palestinians are victims of Israeli racism. Although the Obama administration stated last month that it would not agree to “reaffirm the Durban Declaration in toto,” paragraph number 1 of the working draft of this year’s declaration “reaffirms the 2001 Durban Declaration as it was adopted.”

Guess not.

How about our European allies who Obama just got through charming the socks off of, or so the legacy media says?

Today the European Union indicated that it is satisfied with this language and has no intention of proposing any modification that would bring the Americans onboard.  Suggestions had been floating around to reaffirm only “the core provisions from 2001,” or to insert an explanatory footnote with reservations.  None of this materialized. It turns out that the EU’s “who gives a damn about the U.S.” position is part of a deal struck with Islamic extremists. As long as the EU reaffirms the denunciation of Israeli racism in Durban I, Islamic states will refrain from introducing more racist-Israel language into Durban II. That’s how the EU does business: Forget the principle — just keep the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) happy.

A lesson in negotiating:

Watching the U.N. conduct the business of human rights is revealing. It teaches us how negotiations between fascists and democrats proceed.  Democrats “show restraint,” while fascists don’t care who they offend or what they say. And more often than not, Jews and the Jewish state are the political football. The farthest thing from this playing field is true concern over the protection of human rights.

Much more on the political maneuvering, or betrayal of principle, in the meetings at the link.

What will the President do?  I think there’s a good chance he’ll go along with the travesty, in part to beg for some international love, and to show how sorry we are that we made the jihadists kill 3000 of us on 9/11.  As for the EU’s not-so-stunning lack of cooperation, maybe he should have bowed to Angela Merkel instead.