Comments on: UNHRC and the Flotilla Hypocrisy

By: anon

anon — Fri, 24 Sep 2010 14:04:22 +0000

I wonder why no major party candidate for US President has ever suggested putting our ‘donation’ to the U.N. into an escrow account. Which can be drawn on ONLY if – not likely – the UN reforms itself. Why on earth should we Americans have to pay for the anti-Democratic screeds by the dictators of the world. Surely Bill Ayers doesn’t have THAT much influence over President Obama.

By: Rabbi Kaufman

Rabbi Kaufman — Fri, 24 Sep 2010 13:10:18 +0000

I would argue that the US needs to establish a new organization, not that it should work through the UN. The UN is marginally good at directing humanitarian relief and dealing with health concerns. It is terrible at dealing with political conflicts because it is on everyone’s side. Problems are still dealt with in reality, outside of the UN anyway, according to how the US, Russia, and China feel that they should be addressed, possibly with only one of the three in favor. Is the UN responsible for the fact that there has been no major war since WWII? I would say that it is not, that instead it is the United States, if not alone then with limited help from the UK and France, who is responsible and that the expansion of the UN to include nations that clearly do not stand for the principles upon which the UN was established has undermined most of the functions of the UN to the point of making it not only ineffective, but rendering it an impediment to achieving those goals.

By: Michael Lonie

Michael Lonie — Fri, 24 Sep 2010 06:22:18 +0000

“one for which participation requires that a nation be a democracy that does not discriminate against women or against religious or ethnic minorities.”

OK, that would exclude four out of five states in the world and all Muslim countries. Somehow I don’t think you’ll find a UN majority to vote to exclude themselves from such a committee. How about just dismantling the UN as a whole? Then we could start over wiht an organization of halfway decent countries, associated by invitation only. Or just forget about it, and use traditonal bilateral and multilateral diplomacy. So far the League of Nations has failed and the UN has failed, both making things worse than they were before.

By: Elisson

Elisson — Thu, 23 Sep 2010 22:17:06 +0000

Amen v’amen.

By: Rabbi Micky Boyden

Rabbi Micky Boyden — Thu, 23 Sep 2010 20:52:53 +0000

The only problem with setting up a new council to replace the UNHRC is that the current one was only established in March 2006 to take the place of the UN Commission on Human Rights, which had been heavily criticized for allowing countries with poor human rights records to be members. Changing the name did not change anything and the UN clearly does not have the moral integrity to call its own members to task – except, of course, if it happens to be Israel!