About the only decision that drew loud cheers was the one that killed a paragraph in the draft that supported " the assertion of the right to self determination of the Jewish people and the attempts, through the State of Israel to preserve their cultural and religious identity."

Although that paragraph was expunged, the final document condemned anti Semitism, but strengthened in some language the declaration of "Israel as a racist, apartheid state." The exact wording of the full paragraph was left in the hands of Spanish, English and French volunteer translators. Jewish delegates who were absent during some of the debate because of Sabbath restrictions, returned to launch a counter-attack but left again when it became obvious their cause was lost.

In one of the more heated debates Chinese NGO groups vehemently objected to language singling out Tibetans for special recognition. Ignoring taunts labeling them "Gongos"-- or Government NGOs -- the Chinese representatives struggled to be heard. They were voted down.

Strong arguments also broke out over the procedures to give new caucus groups voting rights. A more liberal interpretation by the chair, was defeated by the membership, in what some delegates said was a sign of exhaustion with the process, and an attempt to get on with the job.

Tempers flared again--over cigarettes-- as the dais' plea that the potentially inflammable tent was strictly a non-smoking area were ignored by people at the back attempting to listen, argue, and smoke.

The deliberation process was delayed also by the tardiness of heads of state arriving at an official closing ceremony, and what steering committee member Vera Egenberger labeled a "middle sized speech" by Cuban President Fidel Castro who spoke somewhat less than his usual five hours back home.

Egenberger said the NGO discussions, which resumed after the Castro speech could be labeled "disrespectful"

"I was shocked," she said, " and very concerned about the way NGOs treated each other. They shouted and screamed and didn't let each other talk." Carl Schiener of the Conference of Nongovernmental Organizations in Consultative Relationship with the United Nations (CONGO) said the failure of a motion to label the document a statement that "reflects" the sentiment of most of the NGOs, meant that the resultant document commits all of them to declarations that some "might have a hard time signing on to."

"Some think it is a document to be proud of, and others think it is outrageous," he said.