Comments on: The UN’s Farcical Human Rights Council

By: Daniel

Daniel — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 17:46:09 +0000

Most and perhaps all human organizations eventually fail, and the UN is a perfect example of how such failure happens.
When they are formed, organizations have well defined goals, and actively pursue them. Those that take part in them tend to be those that share those goals and wish to further them.
As time goes by, these goals recede into the past, and the behavior of a typical organization becomes dominated by the goals and aspirations of its participants. Typically these participants include its managers, its employees, and its owners, or in the case of the United Nations, of its member nations.
Managers and employees of government agencies tend to value their jobs, and their opportunities for “tips” i.e. rewards for corrupt behavior, over all else, including any original goal. Member nations of the UN value their own survival and their own interests over the lofty purposes that were advertised at its creation.
With a human rights panel, most nations have little interest in spending resources on participation. Western nations have little interest in proclaiming their righteousness in this way. The only governments who have such interest are those who see a danger in it, from themselves being named as violators of human rights. These nations have a keen interest in being part of international human rights organizations, and they have a further interest in occupying the time of such organizations with distractions from their own horrible records, such as their campaigns against Israel and the United States.
Thus UN human rights organizations have become defacto committees of Human Rights Violating Nations, and their behavior has become a mockery of language and a disgrace to the United Nations. But this is exactly what should have been expected.
The United Nations has failed miserably in almost everything it has attempted in recent years. How long will it be before it goes the way of the League of Nations?

By: Damien

Damien — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 17:44:24 +0000

The UN had lost all credibility long before the present buffoon took on the job of General Secretary. Time it was replaced with a league of democracies. Who can offer a sensible reason for allowing third world failed states, dictatorships and theocracies a place at the table? Countries like Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Pakistan, Sudan, Lybia, Egypt and Somalia have dismal records of human rights abuses. Have you noticed what else they have in common? Islam! What do they contribute to the world in terms of technology, medical advances, education to name but three? Can’t think of anything offhand. And no, educating people on how to be extremists and suicide bombers doesn’t count because violence isn’t an export there is much demand for in the civilised world.

By: Albert

Albert — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 20:38:41 +0000

Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.

By: Elle

Elle — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 15:28:49 +0000

Let the UN fund itself or perhaps some other four letter word that begins in f and ends in k.

By: gringo

gringo — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 05:25:10 +0000

What many people forget is that the world is royally screwed up. Europe, US, Australia, Japan and Canada (you are free to add a few more free nations) are a small minority in the ocean of fascistic regimes. It should not surprise anyone that the union of all the nations is backwards. What does amaze me is why the West adds its weight to to this corrupt organization – let alone funds it. As you may remember, the lesson of WW2 was that the League of Nations was a waste of time – and that free nations should stay together. Hence we got the NATO.

By: brooklyn red

brooklyn red — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 20:56:39 +0000

UN out of US!

juss sayin…

By: Richard Dell

Richard Dell — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 19:25:23 +0000

I cannot understand why the democracies stand for (and pay for) this charade, so brilliantly highlighted by Hillel Neuer. Why are countries that have absented themselves from the UDHR (viz. ALL the OIC countries that signed the Cairo Declaration), allowed on the UNHRC in the first place? It is not as if this council is merely a waste of time, it is actually doing positive damage by emboldening those who spit on it. Tolerance of bad behaviour never did anyone any good: the brat, his family nor his community.

By: Tony

Tony — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 18:13:38 +0000

I think it’s time that this farce of an institution disbanded.

Too many thugs are being given too large a forum with which to promote their garbage. The civilized world needs to relegate these bozos back into the fringes and let the rest of us get on with advancing humanity.

By: Rubicon

Rubicon — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 18:02:29 +0000

Professional rabble-rouser’s & sinister evil totalitarians convolute context to assert that democratic nations are as bad as themselves.
Easily promoted by a media who know better, nations like Sudan get away with genocide, while the world asserts America is the real villain.
Perhaps it is time we finally stop wasting our time and especially money, and we leave the UN for a multi-national democratic assembly that can effectively use member funds to really help those in need, and really deal with any nation that really violates human rights.
The pretend America & her allies are the bad guys crowd has so polluted the UN that it is no longer repairable.

By: ddc

ddc — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 17:30:05 +0000

It is truly amazing the fear that the UN lives in with regard to Islam. I swear, for the life of me I do not understand it as much as I’ve tried.

The present UN has run so far off its original course it is virtually unrecognizable.

The premise of John McCain’s idea for a “League of Democracies” is the correct one. How that League will come about is another issue.

America needs to start distancing itself from NATO (useless) to the likes of the rhetoric that farts from the UN and throw it out of New York. Why we, as citizens, must pay for these idiots to be here is beyond logically anymore.