mindgames
Member
- Awards
- 0
Well, after Gitmo and Abu Grahib, kidnapping and torturing innocents in foreign nations, voting to supress evidence of torture and homicide - is it any wonder.
Even if you somehow deny all of the above, can you provide ONE reasson why the US would take such a stance if it had nothing to hide??
All the legislation is for is "to expose human rights abusers......." hmmmmmm, funny they voted against it.
Why did ALL the US allies vote FOR this if it was a bad piece of legislation??
###############################################
UN establishes new rights despite US objections
The United Nations General Assembly has created a new UN human rights body by an overwhelming majority, ignoring objections from the United States.
Ambassadors broke out in sustained applause when the vote was announced: 170-4 with three abstentions.
Joining the United States in a "no" vote were Israel, Marshall Islands, and Palau - but not American allies in Europe or Canada.
Belarus, Iran and Venezuela abstained.
As the pre-eminent international rights watchdog, the 47-seat UN Human Rights Council is to expose human rights abusers and help nations draw up rights legislation.
It would replace the 53-country Geneva-based UN Human Rights Commission, which in recent years has included some of the world's most notorious rights violators.
US Ambassador John Bolton told the assembly the rules for the new council were not strong enough to prevent rights violators from getting a seat.
But he said the United States would cooperate with the body.
"We did not have sufficient confidence in this text to be able to say that the Human Rights Council will be better than its predecessor," Mr Bolton said.
"That said, the United States will work cooperatively with other member states to make the council as strong and effective as it can be."
Cuba, which had distributed four amendments, voted in favour, although it stated many objections and called the council a creation of the West, which would be used to "unjustly condemn Third World countries".
Its ambassador, Rodrigo Malierca, said, "We were never deceived by the loudmouthed objections of the Washington representatives.
"The text, he said, was "conceived and negotiated behind the scenes to accommodate its demands, sacrificing vital interests of the countries of the south."
UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan first proposed the new council last year as part of sweeping reforms of the world body.
But his blueprint was watered down in the resolution.
The seats would be distributed among regional groups: 13 for Africa, 13 for Asia, six for Eastern Europe, eight for Latin America and the Caribbean and seven for a block of mainly Western countries, including the United States and Canada.
-Reuters
Even if you somehow deny all of the above, can you provide ONE reasson why the US would take such a stance if it had nothing to hide??
All the legislation is for is "to expose human rights abusers......." hmmmmmm, funny they voted against it.
Why did ALL the US allies vote FOR this if it was a bad piece of legislation??
###############################################
UN establishes new rights despite US objections
The United Nations General Assembly has created a new UN human rights body by an overwhelming majority, ignoring objections from the United States.
Ambassadors broke out in sustained applause when the vote was announced: 170-4 with three abstentions.
Joining the United States in a "no" vote were Israel, Marshall Islands, and Palau - but not American allies in Europe or Canada.
Belarus, Iran and Venezuela abstained.
As the pre-eminent international rights watchdog, the 47-seat UN Human Rights Council is to expose human rights abusers and help nations draw up rights legislation.
It would replace the 53-country Geneva-based UN Human Rights Commission, which in recent years has included some of the world's most notorious rights violators.
US Ambassador John Bolton told the assembly the rules for the new council were not strong enough to prevent rights violators from getting a seat.
But he said the United States would cooperate with the body.
"We did not have sufficient confidence in this text to be able to say that the Human Rights Council will be better than its predecessor," Mr Bolton said.
"That said, the United States will work cooperatively with other member states to make the council as strong and effective as it can be."
Cuba, which had distributed four amendments, voted in favour, although it stated many objections and called the council a creation of the West, which would be used to "unjustly condemn Third World countries".
Its ambassador, Rodrigo Malierca, said, "We were never deceived by the loudmouthed objections of the Washington representatives.
"The text, he said, was "conceived and negotiated behind the scenes to accommodate its demands, sacrificing vital interests of the countries of the south."
UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan first proposed the new council last year as part of sweeping reforms of the world body.
But his blueprint was watered down in the resolution.
The seats would be distributed among regional groups: 13 for Africa, 13 for Asia, six for Eastern Europe, eight for Latin America and the Caribbean and seven for a block of mainly Western countries, including the United States and Canada.
-Reuters