Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Everything That is Wrong With the United Nations, in a Nutshell

  1. #1
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,062

    Everything That is Wrong With the United Nations, in a Nutshell

    U.N. Council Poised to Adopt Report Praising Libya's Human Rights Record

    By Judson Berger

    Published February 28, 2011
    | FoxNews.com

    As the United Nations works feverishly to condemn Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi for cracking down on protesters, the body's Human Rights Council is poised to adopt a report chock-full of praise for Libya's human rights record.

    The review commends Libya for improving educational opportunities, for making human rights a "priority" and for bettering its "constitutional" framework. Several countries, including Iran, Venezuela, North Korea, and Saudi Arabia but also Canada, give Libya positive marks for the legal protections afforded to its citizens -- who are now revolting against the regime and facing bloody reprisal.

    The U.S. mission in Geneva said it would look into the status of the document in response to a question about whether any efforts are being made to cancel or postpone consideration of the report. But an agenda put out by the United Nations in January said the Human Rights Council, of which Libya has been a member since last year, will "consider and adopt" the document at its session underway this month.

    UN Watch, a watchdog group based in Geneva, called on the council Monday to withdraw the report and launch a new review that "would tell the truth about the (Qaddafi) regime's heinous crimes."

    UN Watch Director Hillel Neuer told FoxNews.com the review, formally known as the Universal Periodic Review, is a "complete distortion" of Libya's rights record.

    "The review is supposed to be a serious examination of a country's human rights record to hold it accountable," Neuer said. "All they do is give praise and give cover to Libya's abuses."

    The report -- put together after a November 2010 session, months before protesters challenged Qaddafi's legitimacy and prompted an historic confrontation with his regime -- includes dozens of recommendations for how Libya can improve human rights. But it also includes pages of commentary, mostly positive, from the other 46 delegations to the controversial Human Rights Council.

    The praise comes from some unsurprising places. Sudan's delegation praised Libya for improving education conditions. North Korea noted Libya's progress "in the field of economic and social rights." Saudi Arabia praised Libya for improvements in "constitutional, legislative and institutional frameworks, which showed the importance that the country attached to human rights."

    Praise also streamed in from Cuba, Venezuela and two nations whose leaders were recently ousted in the midst of Middle East unrest -- Egypt and Tunisia.

    Egypt commended Libya for its development of a new criminal code and efforts to combat human trafficking and corruption. Oman, which is facing protests of its own, praised Libya during the review for its "clear commitment" to protecting human rights through a "legal framework."

    Canada noted two very specific developments -- legislation granting women married to foreigners the right to pass on Libyan nationality to their children and an acknowledgement by the government of hundreds of prisoners deaths in 1996.

    The commentary included some criticism, particularly from the United States and several European nations.

    The United States, according to the report, called on Libya to "comply with its human rights treaty obligations." The U.S. also expressed concern about limited freedom of speech, politically motivated arrests and "reports of the torture of prisoners."

    The last half of the report covered recommendations for Libya to improve conditions in the country. Libya backed dozens of generally worded recommendations to improve human rights, advance the status of women and "abolish" the use of torture. At the same time, Libya rejected recommendations to curb "arbitrary detention," among others.

    The Human Rights Council is notorious for showing an anti-Israel bias and being slow to condemn human rights abuses by countries aligned with certain members of the 47-member council. The panel was boycotted by the United States during the Bush administration, but President Obama reversed policy in 2009 and sent a U.S. delegation to Geneva.

    However, with the backing of the United States, the council easily passed a resolution Friday condemning Libya's abuses in response to the latest unrest, calling for an international inquiry and recommending the nation be suspended from the council itself.

    The U.N. General Assembly is expected to vote on that resolution this week. The U.N. Security Council has separately approved a tough set of sanctions against the Libyan regime, imposing an arms embargo among other penalties and referring the case for an international war crimes investigation.

    Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, spoke bluntly about Qaddafi's abuses Monday, saying he is "delusional" and that his regime is "slaughtering his own people." She praised the U.N. for potentially compelling the regime to make a choice between ending the violence and being "held accountable" for continued abuses.

    "In Libya, the United Nations is demonstrating the indispensable role that it can play in advancing our interests and defending our values," Rice said.

    But Neuer questioned how the United Nations could move so vigorously toward approving sanctions without sidelining the human rights review from last year.

    "Given that Libya's diplomats themselves have admitted their regime is a gross violator of human rights ... how can the Human Rights Council adopt this report?" he said. "How can they with a straight face adopt the recommendations and the assessments?"
    Could the UN be any more of an Epic Fail than it is? Does it actually DO anything of worth?

    Is the idea of the UN more of a Utopians Dream, than a true workable real-world reality?

    Cause really, if it wasn't so fail and sad from top to bottom, this article would be totally lolworthy.


  2. #2
    All League
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    3,028
    the UN is such a joke..and the U.S pretty much foots the bill

  3. #3
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    20,857
    In order: no, no, a dream.

    The UN is a microcosm of the bad behavior of at least 50% of the people in the world, so there you have it.

    Explain how Charlie Rangel got re-elected after getting censured: self-interest.
    Explain how countries like Iran, Cuba, Valenzuela get on these committees: self-interest (of someone, somewhere)

    "The Day the Earth Stood Still" is really going to happen some day.

  4. #4
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Staten Island
    Posts
    9,033
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Could the UN be any more of an Epic Fail than it is? Does it actually DO anything of worth?

    Is the idea of the UN more of a Utopians Dream, than a true workable real-world reality?

    Cause really, if it wasn't so fail and sad from top to bottom, this article would be totally lolworthy.

    I printed out the above article, crumpled it up and found that it DOES NOT fit into a nutshell. Even a walnut shell. Just an FYI.

    BTW, could we please get a referendum that definitively lets everyone know precisely how to spell/say these Arab names? Qaddafi, Ghaddafy, Khaddafy, al-Qaeda, Quaida, Ore-ida? WTF?!?

    The UN is a joke, full of pandering criminals and sycophants. As you have said before, they should just ship the entire building off to some part of Europe and build something more worthwhile there, like a small landfill.

  5. #5
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,062
    Quote Originally Posted by Jetworks View Post
    BTW, could we please get a referendum that definitively lets everyone know precisely how to spell/say these Arab names? Qaddafi, Ghaddafy, Khaddafy, al-Qaeda, Quaida, Ore-ida? WTF?!?
    Kunt-doofy?

    I find funny names more entertaining. I do it to local town names (Fairfax VA, becomes Fair****s, for example), so why not insane World Leaders?

    Worked for So-Damn-insane too.

    Ah, I make myself lol every so much...

  6. #6
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    23,165
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Kunt-doofy?

    I find funny names more entertaining. I do it to local town names (Fairfax VA, becomes Fair****s, for example), so why not insane World Leaders?

    Worked for So-Damn-insane too.

    Ah, I make myself lol every so much...
    The Daily Show the other night was discussing Libya and Stewart did about 10 - 15 "celebrity look-a-likes" for Kaddafi. Finished it off by saying that if African mercenaries and Al Queada are fighting each other there, we should quietly slip out of the room because "that's some Alien Vs. Predator sh*t right there"....

  7. #7
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,062
    Quote Originally Posted by PlumberKhan View Post
    The Daily Show the other night was discussing Libya and Stewart did about 10 - 15 "celebrity look-a-likes" for Kaddafi. Finished it off by saying that if African mercenaries and Al Queada are fighting each other there, we should quietly slip out of the room because "that's some Alien Vs. Predator sh*t right there"....
    He's absolutely right. There is zero U.S. National Interests in Libya, including their little droplet of Oil (so tiny, the Suadi's made up for it with noraml daily surpluses since the Libyan Uprising).

    If the U.S. intervenes, I wonder if the same foks who screamed "No Blood For Oil" will scream it again at Obama, or if suddenly they'll have a stirring change of heart regarding humanitarianism when a Dictator is killing his own people.

    Check that, I know exactly what the hypocrites will say.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us