USA quits UN Human rights council

jacksie66

This post has been deleted.

Creative83

jacksie66 wrote: »

US quits UN human rights council in protest at 'cesspool of political bias'

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/19/us-quits-un-human-rights-council-cesspool-political-bias?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

They're becoming a ridiculous joke at this stage. Unwavering support of the scumbags in Israel while they themselves bomb the crap out of the middle east. Gas shower of hypocrites..

It is a cesspit... here are seven of the members...


Philippines 2018 Qatar 2020 Rwanda 2019 Saudi Arabia 2019 Afghanistan Pakistan Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) ...

It is an absolute joke!

Harry Palmr

Well they way they are carrying on right now, they should leave!

Ulysses Gaze

Creative83 wrote: »

It is a cesspit... here are seven of the members...


Philippines 2018 Qatar 2020 Rwanda 2019 Saudi Arabia 2019 Afghanistan Pakistan Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) ...

It is an absolute joke!

Hahahaha a joke is right!

Having those ****ing degenerate Saudi's anywhere near a Human Rights Council is a sick joke.

Yikes83

They're not wrong

Creative83

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

Hahahaha a joke is right!

Having those ****ing degenerate Saudi's anywhere near a Human Rights Council is a sick joke.

Never mind them... What are Rwanda and Afghanistan doing there!

Mikenesson

I'll deal with it

super_furry

They’re ripping children out of the arms of their parents and putting them in cages inside what’s basically a concentration camp. Nothing surprises me about America now.

Ulysses Gaze

super_furry wrote: »

They’re ripping children out of the arms of their parents and putting them in cages inside what’s basically a concentration camp. Nothing surprises me about America now.

Yes done under Obama too...

Gatling

The whole UN needs to be burnt to the ground ,

And replaced with something meaningful that can and enforce peace when and where needed and help stabilise countries or regions

super_furry

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

Yes done under Obama too...

Equally as evil then as now.

SkepticQuark

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

Yes done under Obama too...

Whataboutism isn't a valid defence, try harder.

Mutant z

The veto power of some of its members defeat the purpose of what democracy is supposed to be they can just veto anything they disagree with whether its right or not.

Taytoland

The UN is a joke. Right decision by the Trump administration.

TheValeyard

Didnt they quit a few years ago when Bush jnr was president?

FionnK86

Its like they picked a list of the worst countries for rights violations ( us included).

Yup UN is a joke, especially when 3 of its secuitry council members ( china, russia, and us) are the countries spreading instability.

Also, WHO just recognised video gaming as an addiction. For god sake, the amount of money researching this couldve been put into rescue boats in the Med.

Is there a criteria to get onto the rights coucil?

Ipso

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

Yes done under Obama too...

To quote todd flanders, "have you a source for this"?

Richard Hillman

Hopefully this is the beginning of the End for the UN. Countries cannot protect their borders or deport people anymore due to its outdated rules. The human rights council is a lolz fest. A major embarrassment to this failing organization. Pull the plug

DickSwiveller

Good. Fair play to them.

Ipso

Let's be honest, this isn't about concern for human rights. If it was they'd stop brown nosing the Saudis. They could do more good and reform by staying and pushing for reform.

riffmongous

Creative83 wrote: »

It is a cesspit... here are seven of the members...


Philippines 2018 Qatar 2020 Rwanda 2019 Saudi Arabia 2019 Afghanistan Pakistan Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) ...

It is an absolute joke!

Quite a few of them are US allies

roddy15

roddy15 wrote: »

Whataboutism isn't a valid defence, try harder.

What about whataboutism? (I thought it was whataboutery:rolleyes:) The poster pointing out that it isn't a new development isn't exactly "a defence" of anything.

Ipso

It is a new development, in the past seperation was a bug. This is a deliberate policy.
When asked, Sessions justified it with a biblical quote and didn’t refer to existing practice.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2018/jun/19/matt-schlapp/no-donald-trumps-separation-immigrant-families-was/
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/was-law-separate-families-passed-1997/

MikeyTaylor

I have zero tolerance for "zero tolerance".

Ipso

Ipso wrote: »

It is a new development

It's not a new development. The only passable argument I've ever heard for any US president not being steeped to his elbows in blood is Jimmy Carter, and tbh I could still be swayed either way on that one. No one is disputing that Trump is a dislikable individual, but he's responsible for a lot less misery than a lot of other more popular US politicians.

Ipso

Border enforcement is not a new development but deliberate seperation seems to be.

Border enforcement is domestic policy. How each government chooses to interpret and enforce existing laws is nothing to do with the UN human rights council surely?

Ipso

No. This was brought up and someone said deliberate seperation was going on before where it looks like it wasn’t.
They are free to deport people entering the country illegally, but this is just cruel and sh1tty.

It’s also funny they announce to withdraw after brown nosing the North Kireans last week.

Well, I guess we are in agreement about that. It is cruel for sure, no doubt or argument there, and nasty. I just don't think pointing the finger at the current regime does anything or helps anyone.

If the same amount of money and resources spent on blocking migrants was put into perhaps fixing the situation where those people felt the need that they have to leave their homes in the first place then obviously the world would be better off for it.

Realt Dearg Sec

Deleted User wrote: »

Border enforcement is domestic policy. How each government chooses to interpret and enforce existing laws is nothing to do with the UN human rights council surely?

By that logic there's no justification for any intervention anywhere in the world ever, no matter how heinous the human rights violations, as long as the government is enforcing existing laws (no matter how they chose to interpret them, no less!). I have a sneaking suspicion you might have pulled this interpretation of the remit of the unhcr straight out of your posterior.

Edit: ignore that last line, my apologies, unnecessarily sarcastic and unhelpful. Not to mention, the remit of the unhcr always seems to be be pulled straight out of someone's posterior, usually that of the sitting president of the United States.

Realt Dearg Sec

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

By that logic there's no justification for any intervention anywhere in the world ever, no matter how heinous the human rights violations, as long as the government is enforcing existing laws (

What do you mean by justified intervention? Who's policy or "world vision" are we supposed to accept as the norm? Should Vietnam have invaded the USA in the 1960's because they disapproved of their treatment of the Native Americans?

quintana76

super_furry wrote: »

Equally as evil then as now.

But ignored by a partisan mostly Obama favouring media. They are 'shocked I tell you' only now when they can use it as a weapon against Trump.

As the old saying goes, "if voting changed anything they'd make it illegal"

When Trump got elected, I posted on here the next day saying the best thing that would happen because of him would be all of America's shltty practices being brought to the forefront.

I couldn't have been more right. The no drama media during Obama's term has been replaced with coverage of what's really happening and I'm thoroughly enjoying the accelerated downfall of that country.

Realt Dearg Sec

Deleted User wrote: »

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

By that logic there's no justification for any intervention anywhere in the world ever, no matter how heinous the human rights violations, as long as the government is enforcing existing laws (

What do you mean by justified intervention? Who's policy or "world vision" are we supposed to accept as the norm? Should Vietnam have invaded the USA in the 1960's because they disapproved of their treatment of the Native Americans?

We could start with the universal declaration on human rights. I'm not sure I understand the example you are giving, the unhcr doesn't sanction unilateral invasions. So I'm just wondering where your last post is coming from, you seemed to be saying that there's some rule that prohibits the unhcr from intervening as long as a national government is acting according to its own interpretation of its own laws. Whats the basis for that?

testicles

This post has been deleted.

_Brian

Creative83 wrote: »

It is a cesspit... here are seven of the members...


Philippines 2018 Qatar 2020 Rwanda 2019 Saudi Arabia 2019 Afghanistan Pakistan Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) ...

It is an absolute joke!

Given their recent behaviour I’d have thought they would have felt right at home among those delegates. They’re likely supplying arms to most of them anyway.

Taytoland

quintana76 wrote: »

super_furry wrote: »

Equally as evil then as now.

But ignored by a partisan mostly Obama favouring media. They are 'shocked I tell you' only now when they can use it as a weapon against Trump.

Mainly because they embarrassed themselves before the election said he had no chance, it was impossible. He humiliated them and that is why they can't take it that he is President.

Malayalam

Many years ago I studied Law in college and even as a very naive and impressionable country oaf I realised almost immediately from study and research that the United Nations and associated global institutions such as the International Court of Justice were lame, ineffectual, back-slapping, opinion-churning, junket-loving, soap boxes for well-padded elites and elitist aspirants, its halls stuffed with complacent, superior diplomats in custom-made suits, who liked to imagine their self-important shufflings on the world stage effected great change in the world, when in fact their existence and work achieved extraordinarily little, if anything at all, because the institutions usually caved to the western hegemony, which could also be known as the race to control the last of the finite global resources, and stood by mouthing platitudes while millions of innocents were slaughtered in many parts of the world. But at least they get to feel industrious by generating acres and acres of resolutions, decisions, recommendations, case notes, meeting minutes, advisory opinions, etc., while essentially being utterly useless. Who cares if the US leaves such a pointless talking shop? And who cared about the brutality of previous US administrations immigration policies, now being continued by Trump? Trump could not act as he does without the patterns having been establsihed before he came to office. Hardly anyone gave a single flying fcuk before and now they are hyperventilating, because they are told to do so. What about the Middle Eastern kids slaughtered in their hundreds of thousands - maybe even millions - over the past almost 30 years - where is the public shaming of the 'civilised' coalition countries that reduced whole countries to rubble and starved babies? It's all shameless spin. All of it. Bilge. Claptrap. Bull****. Evil machinations. It would make you sick the way it all goes on in this world. I hardly believe a single thing I hear any more.

old_aussie

Creative83 wrote: »

It is a cesspit... here are seven of the members...

Philippines 2018 Qatar 2020 Rwanda 2019 Saudi Arabia 2019 Afghanistan Pakistan Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) ...

It is an absolute joke!

Yeah, why would any country want to be associated with that group!

old_aussie

Malayalam wrote: »

Many years ago I studied Law in college and even as a very naive and impressionable country oaf I realised almost immediately from study and research that the United Nations and associated global institutions such as the International Court of Justice were lame, ineffectual, back-slapping, opinion-churning, junket-loving, soap boxes for well-padded elites and elitist aspirants, its halls stuffed with complacent, superior diplomats in custom-made suits, who liked to imagine their self-important shufflings on the world stage effected great change in the world, when in fact their existence and work achieved extraordinarily little, if anything at all, because the institutions usually caved to the western hegemony, which could also be known as the race to control the last of the finite global resources, and stood by mouthing platitudes while millions of innocents were slaughtered in many parts of the world. But at least they get to feel industrious by generating acres and acres of resolutions, decisions, recommendations, case notes, meeting minutes, advisory opinions, etc., while essentially being utterly useless. Who cares if the US leaves such a pointless talking shop? And who cared about the brutality of previous US administrations immigration policies, now being continued by Trump? Trump could not act as he does without the patterns having been establsihed before he came to office. Hardly anyone gave a single flying fcuk before and now they are hyperventilating, because they are told to do so. What about the Middle Eastern kids slaughtered in their hundreds of thousands - maybe even millions - over the past almost 30 years - where is the public shaming of the 'civilised' coalition countries that reduced whole countries to rubble and starved babies? It's all shameless spin. All of it. Bilge. Claptrap. Bull****. Evil machinations. It would make you sick the way it all goes on in this world. I hardly believe a single thing I hear any more.

TLDR, is there a short version in sentence and paragraph form making it readable.

Malayalam

old_aussie wrote: »

TLDR, is there a short version in sentence and paragraph form making it readable.

Hehe sorry, when I am cranky I talk fast.

nice_guy80

So much for setting an example for the rest of the world

Cupatae

jacksie66 wrote: »

US quits UN human rights council in protest at 'cesspool of political bias'

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/19/us-quits-un-human-rights-council-cesspool-political-bias?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

They're becoming a ridiculous joke at this stage. Unwavering support of the scumbags in Israel while they themselves bomb the crap out of the middle east. Gas shower of hypocrites..

And they get away with it cause aint no one gonna stop or say **** to em, the US does what it wants when it wants and doesnt care what any one else says.

RIGOLO

Malayalam wrote: »

Many years ago I studied Law in college and even as a very naive and  impressionable country oaf I realised almost immediately from study and research that the United Nations and associated global institutions such as the International Court of Justice were lame, ineffectual, back-slapping, opinion-churning, junket-loving, soap boxes for well-padded elites and elitist aspirants, its halls stuffed with complacent, superior diplomats in custom-made suits, who liked to imagine their self-important shufflings on the world stage effected great change in the world, when in fact their existence and work achieved extraordinarily little, if anything at all, because the institutions usually caved to the western hegemony, which could also be known as the race to control the last of the finite global resources, and stood by mouthing platitudes while millions of innocents were slaughtered in many parts of the world. But at least they get to feel industrious by generating acres and acres of resolutions, decisions, recommendations, case notes, meeting minutes, advisory opinions, etc., while essentially being utterly useless. Who cares if the US leaves such a pointless talking shop? And who cared about the brutality of previous US administrations immigration policies, now being continued by Trump? Trump could not act as he does without the patterns having been establsihed before he came to office.  Hardly anyone gave a single flying fcuk before and now they are hyperventilating, because they are told to do so. What about the Middle Eastern kids slaughtered in their hundreds of thousands - maybe even millions - over the past almost 30 years - where is the public shaming of the 'civilised' coalition countries that reduced whole countries to rubble and starved babies? It's all shameless spin. All of it. Bilge. Claptrap. Bull****. Evil machinations. It would make you sick the way it all goes on in this world. I hardly believe a single thing I hear any more.

One of the better posts I have seen recently.

Hande hoche!

Hardly surprising, was widely speculated. Sure it was UNESCO last year.

Zebra3

Racist country that regularly commits war crimes while supporting nations that behead people quits human rights council.


This is somehow news?

RIGOLO

Zebra3 wrote: »

Racist country that regularly commits war crimes while supporting nations that behead people quits human rights council.


This is somehow news?

I think you should review the list of members of the UN Human Rights Council and rethink your post..  
Its membership is choc full of countrys that are up to their eye-balls in human rights abuses.

The US gave 12 months notice on this decision, and had been seeking reforms, but with none coming the US choose to depart. 

You seem to be happier the US has pulled out of this council. 
Im sure you can relax now as Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, UAE and the Philipinnes (all members) can get down to talks on human rights without the destraction of the 'racist ' US prescence.

Gbear

If the only people allowed onto the human rights council were countries who never did anything wrong, it wouldn't serve any purpose.

As flawed a system as the UN is, it was never about policing behaviour or imposing one absolute vision.
It was about trying to get countries that act badly to come to the table so that they could be steered towards improvement without outright conflict.

On Isreal, developed countries are held to a higher set of standards. Those standards are their own standards. We want them to adhere to them. If Isreal wants to stop having resolutions passed against them, they should stop committing war crimes and human rights abuses.
If you want to act superiour to Muslim countries, you better actually be as well.

There are many avenues Western countries could go down to put far more pressure on these countries with poor human rights records. Not selling Saudi the weapons they use to commit war crimes in Yemen might be one example.

Foxhound38

Gatling wrote: »

The whole UN needs to be burnt to the ground ,

And replaced with something meaningful that can and enforce peace when and where needed and help stabilise countries or regions

How is that going to work when there's so many vested interests and fiefdom-owning at the top table (America shielding Israel from criticism for example, or Russia protecting Syria)?

Your Face

Quasimodo predicted all of this.