Trump is right to pull the US out of the hypocritical UNHCR - we should follow him

[Blackleaf]

US President Donald Trump has just pulled his country out of this pointless, fatuous, degrading organisation. Well done, Trump. It is about time someone called the bluff of these scumbags.

The US says the UNHRC is “a cesspool of political bias”. Dead right.

ROD LIDDLE Trump is right to pull the US out of the hypocritical United Nations Human Rights Council – we should follow him

A convention that sees Muslim nations with skeletons in their closets bullying the state of Israel is something we should not be a part of

Comment
By Rod Liddle, Sun Columnist
21st June 2018
The Sun

THE United Nations Human Rights Council was set up to preserve human rights, freedom of speech and so on. Across the world. Lovely idea, isn’t it?

Do you know who its members are at the moment? The people telling the rest of the world how to behave?

Trump is absolutely right to pull the US out of the hypocritical UNHRC - we should follow

Well, let’s start with Pakistan and Iraq, two of the most corrupt and least free countries on the planet. Lecturing the rest of us about human rights.

And how about this? Saudi Arabia, where women have no rights whatsoever and gay people are put to death.

A monarchy with no democracy at all. A place where the penalty for changing your faith from Islam is to have your head cut off.

Shall I go on? Rwanda, another Third World country with a dubious record.

Saudi Arabia, where women are treated as second-class citizens with no rights and being gay is punishable by death

There’s an election there soon but last year Amnesty International said it would take place “in an atmosphere of chilling repression”.

More? OK, how about Cuba? A totalitarian dynasty where political opponents are imprisoned.

The Democratic Republic of the Congo, a vast African country.

How’s it doing on human rights? “Serious violations, such as arbitrary executions, rape, torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment are pervasive, committed mostly by the army, police and intelligence services.”

Who said that? Er, the UNHRC. Thank you for asking.

And these are the people charged with telling the rest of the world to put its house in order. The most vile and repressive countries on the planet.

US President Donald Trump has just pulled his country out of this pointless, fatuous, degrading organisation. Well done, Trump. It is about time someone called the bluff of these scumbags.

The US says the UNHRC is “a cesspool of political bias”. Dead right.

And particularly biased against one country — Israel.

The UNHRC is particularly biased against Israel

Every time the UNHRC meets, it sticks the boot into the only democracy in the Middle East. The only country in that neck of the woods where you will not be arrested because of your sexual preference.

Or because of your faith. And which holds free and fair elections, unlike any of those countries I mentioned above.

That’s because of a political agenda driven by Muslim countries which wouldn’t recognise a human right if it slapped them across the burqa with a dead trout. Oh, and their useful idiot allies in the Third World.

It is about time that the UK followed Trump’s typically bold move.

Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson has already said that we will vote against the anti-Israel policies unless change is made. I wouldn’t hold your breath, Boris.

Why not go one step further and tell the UNHRC we’re having nothing more to do with it?

Whining about Israel is a useful way of distracting attention from where the real human rights abuses are being committed. In Pakistan and Rwanda and the DRC, etc, etc.

Plenty of European countries would be poised to follow suit if we pulled out.

Hopefully the time when civilised countries are told how to behave by savages is coming to a close.

That's another fine Jez

HEY, did I see you at the Labour Live Jezfest?

No? Thought not.

Labour had to resort to giving tickets away for free for Labour Live

The tickets were about as sought-after as a dose of thrush. Labour reduced the prices then started giving them away. They are estimated to have lost a million quid on the event.

And those who did turn up? The London middle class – well, a few of them.

That’s who the party now represents. The latest polls suggest Labour has fewer working-class voters than the Conservatives.

How on Earth did Labour allow this to happen?

CAMBRIDGE PROFESSOR'S FEELINGS ARE HURT

A STUPID woman at Cambridge University has gone on strike. Dr Priyamvada Gopal is refusing to teach her English students.

Why? Because the college porters don’t address her as “Doctor”.

She claims this is “racist”. What a jumped-up, chippy madam.

Porters never address staff as “Doctor” – they use Sir or Madam.

Or in the case of Gopal “Little Miss Victimhood”. Or they should.

She’s not a proper doctor, of course. She got her PhD in post-colonial literature. So all she’s done is read some really crap books.

Cambridge should kick her out.

Python jibe takes the hiss

MONTY Python is too “white” to be shown on the BBC, apparently.

This is according to the corporation’s head of comedy, a joker called Shane Allen.

Monty Python has now been deemed 'too white' to be shown on the BBC

Instead, BBC shows must have “a diverse range of people who reflect the modern world”, Allen pompously pronounced.

And as an example, he cited a new BBC comedy show, Famalam. Heard of it? Me neither.

But it has an all-black cast. In what possible way is that “diverse”?

And why is it better for a programme to be exclusively black than exclusively white?

And another question, Allen, since you’re here.

Isn’t the most important thing for it to be FUNNY, regardless of who is in it?

Monty Python pulled in an audience of 10million per week. I doubt Famalam got a tenth of that.

Why are these race-obsessed, self-flagellating, middle-class hobgoblins allowed to run everything?

IT'S RICH PICKINGS

IT’S been a good week for Richard Branson.

His Virgin company has just been awarded a £2million payout from the taxpayer, again.

Yep, Branson SUED the NHS because of a row over a contract. I wonder how much money this billionaire has squirrelled away from the ordinary taxpayer. His useless rail franchise has been subsidised to the tune of billions of pounds.

If Branson gave up his businesses and stayed on his stupid bloody Caribbean island, waiting for the next hurricane, we’d probably clear the public debt in a week or two.

Kel's bootiful

SEE Kelly Brook at Royal Ascot? She was wearing a hat with a model of England's 1966 World Cup winning captain Bobby Moore on it.

I’d have preferred Nobby Stiles, but there you go. Now, take a closer look at Bobby.

Kelly Brook wore a Bobby Moore-topped hat to Royal Ascot'

I know it’s hard to focus when he’s standing on Kelly Brook, but just try for a moment.

Look at his boots. They’re HOBNAILED boots. They come half way up his shins.

They didn’t wear boots like that back then. Our World Cup win was in the 1960s, not the 1860s.

Although, granted, that is how it feels sometimes.

CRETIN'S CORNER

THIS week’s lucky inhabitant of Cretin’s Corner is Wilmar Roldan.

He’s the Colombian halfwit who refereed England’s game against Tunisia. First he awarded the Africans a very dodgy penalty.

Then he ignored the repeated attempts to strangle Harry Kane to death in Tunisia’s penalty area.

He has form, too, does Roldan. In the Confederations Cup last year he sent off the wrong player in a game between Cameroon and Germany.

And before that, wrongly disallowed two Mexican goals, again against Cameroon. The man is a liability.

Can’t he be persuaded to change careers, maybe go into cocaine cultivation or something?

And Mr Southgate – time to start a game with either Marcus Rashford or Ruben Loftus-Cheek.

Or preferably both.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/65866...ns-human-rights-council-we-should-follow-him/

 

[OpposingDigit]

US Leaves UNHRC: Big Step to Isolation
By Arkady Savitsky
June 21, 2018
https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/06/21/us-leaves-unhrc-big-step-isolation.html

There are other reasons the US officials prefer not to mention. The International Criminal Court (ICC) is pressing ahead with the investigation of mistreatment of Iraqi detainees by British forces in 2003-2008.
https://www.icc-cpi.int

In 2014, the UN Committee Against Torture released a report that deeply criticized the US for racial discrimination and other human rights abuses, including electronic surveillance, CIA interrogations, immigrant detentions, the failure to shut down the detention facilities at Guantanamo Bay etc.

The U.S. Withdrawal from the UN Human Rights Council
By Peter Falk
June 22, 2018
https://richardfalk.wordpress.com/2018/06

-- in evaluating the UN connection to Palestine it needs to be recalled that the organized international community has a distinctive responsibility for Palestine that can be traced all the way back to the peace diplomacy after World War I when Britain was given the role of Mandatory, which according to the League of Nations Covenant should be carried out as a ‘sacred trust of civilization.’ This special relationship was extended and deepened when Britain gave up this role after World War II, transferring responsibility for the future of Palestine to the UN. This newly established world organization was given the task of finding a sustainable solution in the face of sharply contested claims between the majority Palestinian population and the Jewish, mainly settler population.

This UN role was started beneath and deeply influenced by the long shadow of grief and guilt cast by the Holocaust. The UN, borrowing from the British colonial playbook, proposed a division of Palestine between Jewish and Palestinian political communities, which eventuated in the UN partition plan contained in General Assembly Resolution 181. This plan was developed and adopted without the participation of the majority resident population, 70% non-Jewish at the time, and was opposed by the independent countries in the Arab world. Such a plan seemed oblivious to the evolving anti-colonial mood of the time, failing to take any account of the guiding normative principle of self-determination. The Partition War that followed in 1947 did produce a de factor partition of Palestine more favorable to the Zionist Project than what was proposed, and rejected, in 181. One feature of the original plan was to internationalize the governance of the city of Jerusalem with both peoples given an equal status.

This proposed treatment of Jerusalem was never endorsed by Israel, and was formally, if indirectly, repudiated after the 1967 War when Israel declared (in violation of international law) that Jerusalem was the eternal capital of the Jewish people never to be divided or internationalized, and Israel has so administered Jerusalem with this intent operationalized in defiance of the UN. What this sketch of the UN connection with Palestine clearly shows is that from the very beginning of Israeli state-building, the role of the international community was direct and the discharge of its responsibilities was not satisfactory in that it proved incapable of protecting Palestinian moral, legal, and political rights. As a result, the majority of Palestinian people have been effectively excluded from their own country and as a people exist in a fragmented ethnic reality. This series of events constitutes one of the worst geopolitical crimes of the past century. Rather than do too much by way of criticizing the behavior of Israel, the UN has done far too little, not because of a failure of will, but as an expression of the behavioral primacy of geopolitics and naked militarism;

----

What is behind US decision to abandon UN Human Rights Council?
Washington pulls out of the UN Human Rights Council, calling it a 'cesspool of political bias'.
The United States has announced it is leaving the UN Human Rights Council. It calls the 47-member body 'hypocritical' and 'self-serving'.
The decision follows months of threats by President Donald Trump.
The US has long had a conflicted relationship with the UNHRC and says it has to be reformed.
President Trump has recently faced widespread, vociferous condemnation for his "zero tolerance" immigration policy that is separating children from their families at the US-Mexico border.
So, how will this decision impact the global fight to protect human rights?
And will this further isolate the US on the world stage?
Al Jazeera TV - Inside Story
Host Peter Dobbie interviews Guillaume Charron, Rosa Freedman and Mohammed Cherkaoui
June 20, 2018
(Flash Video)
https://www.aljazeera.com/programme...don-human-rights-council-180620165512128.html

 

[Walter]

United Nations is useless.

 

[Danbones]

So you think israel needs human rights defense eh?

hmmm

I wonder how germany would have felt when it was in the same place.

 

[Hoid]

white nationalist climate change deniers do not like the united nations or human rights.

 

[Blackleaf]

white nationalist climate change deniers do not like the united nations or human rights.

That's because they're more intelligent and less gullible than liberals.

The former don't like having their countries dictated to on human rights by countries such as Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Rwanda. The latter do.

 

[Hoid]

of course you are

 

[Blackleaf]

ROD LIDDLE

The political wisdom of people who don’t even know what a circle is

Just because they might wish a shape to be a circle, that does not make it so

Is this a circle?

2 January 2016
The Spectator

Why are liberals morons? I’m sure that this question has rattled around your mind before, perhaps when watching one of those fair and balanced debates between three ill-dressed but very liberal women that Newsnight puts on every evening, hosted by Kirsty Wark. You hear them tiptoeing through the nether regions of some important political issue, carefully sidestepping the nub of the matter, obfuscating, denying the patently obvious even when it is staring them right in their smug faces, jabbering ineffectually about nothing in essence. How can these silly mares be this way, you may have asked yourself. How can they navigate their way through life on such slender mental resources? And you may even have come to a sort of conclusion: they are stupid because they do not see the world as it really is, but only as they would wish it to be. They have no handle on reality. They are in a state of denial. That is why they are morons.

The rather cheering news is that this thesis of yours, if indeed it is your thesis, now seems to have been proven by science. The Journal of Personality and Social Psychology recently carried out a test in which they asked people to identify a shape. The shape was what I would call an irregular ellipse, a sort of vaguely oval outline, except quite inconsistent in its circumference. The researchers discovered that people who said the shape was ‘a circle’ were more likely to be liberals. People who correctly identified the shape as definitely not a circle, but something else altogether, were more likely to be possessed of conservative political views. Still more pertinently, those who looked at this sort of splodge and said yep, it’s a circle, were more likely to be welcoming to immigrants and more inclined to be tolerant of filthy and aberrant and sinful and sociopathic lifestyles. (The Journal didn’t quite report it like that, but you get my drift.) Interestingly, the scientists did not draw the obvious conclusion from their fine research. They did not stoop to judge. So given their professional restraint, I will judge instead.

The first and most obvious point to make is that objectively, the shape was not a circle, nor anything very much like a circle — so the liberals were factually wrong. I think this makes them stupid. The second point is that these findings fit in precisely with the stuff I was talking about before — Kirsty Wark and the three liberal women who agree with each other about everything on Newsnight. Much like the Newsnight debate I mentioned previously in this column, immediately after the Paris atrocities, in which one woman announced that the cause was the racist nature of Paris and another talked about a theory that it had been carried out by rival drug gangs. This particular debate still makes me convulse with grim laughter when I think about it, the debate in which the words Muslim and Islam were not used at all, at any point — long after we’d all seen film footage of the murderers screaming ‘Allahu akbar!’ and so on. It is more of that liberal wishful thinking, the refusal to see the world as it is; a severe mental impairment, I would call it. You can imagine trying to put them right on this point, perhaps shaking them by the shoulders, your frustrated spittle glistening in their hair. No, ladies. The shape is not a circle. No matter how much you might wish it was a circle, it is still not actually a circle. It is a different shape entirely.

It is not generosity of spirit or -lateral thinking which leads liberals to say that something which isn’t a circle actually is a circle. It’s stupidity or self-delusion (and they are one and the same thing in the end).

This is the first time I have seen scientific research that proves that liberals are morons. Non-scientific evidence is all around us, of course. But it is nice to have the whole matter nailed down. There have been tendentious reports before which have attempted to prove the converse — that conservatives are stupid and liberals really clever. At the London School of Economics a researcher called Satoshi Kanazawa, suggested that liberals were smarter because they were ‘willing to espouse evolutionarily novel values’, i.e. those values that did not exist in our ancestral environment. But this is only Satoshi’s opinion and it proves nothing. It may well be that for mankind to progress we need useful idiots to espouse ‘evolutionarily novel values’ every now and then, even if 99 out of 100 of them lead us into a cul de sac of either evolutionary stasis or indeed grotesque depravity. One of them may take us forward: that’s not clever, that’s just the consequence of statistical chance. Not everything in the Guardian is wrong. Only almost all of it. Once every ten years or so they print something that might be useful to mankind, possibly by accident.

And then, in the USA, there was the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, which reported that the average IQ of people who described themselves as ‘very liberal’ was 106. Whereas the average IQ of those who described themselves as ‘very conservative’ was just 95, which isn’t much more than a reasonably well-trained Doberman Pinscher. I’m prepared to believe this of people who describe themselves as ‘very conservative’. Being ‘very conservative’ is in itself a sort of paradox. But even here there is a problem, because the researchers discovered that while those smarties described themselves as ‘very liberal’, when push came to shove they actually were not. They did not trust the state to decide things for them, for a start.

So there we have it: a nice way to begin the year. Liberals think things that aren’t circles are circles. They are stupid. That is all ye need know on earth, and all ye need to know.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/01...f-people-who-dont-even-know-what-a-circle-is/

 

[Hoid]

A generalized attack on "liberals" is always welcomed by white nationalist climate change deniers.

 

[OpposingDigit]

This report must of really offended America ...

Speaking of cesspools, my report draws attention to those that I witnessed in Alabama as raw sewage poured into the gardens of people who could never afford to pay $30,000 for their own septic systems in an area remarkably close to the State capital.

Report of the Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights on his mission to the United States of America
Undermining of democracy, Shortcomings in basic social protection, Reliance on criminalization to conceal the underlying poverty problem,
Persistent discrimination and poverty, Confused and counterproductive drug policies, and Environmental pollution. It sets forth concrete conclusions, underscoring “Punishing and imprisoning the poor is the distinctively American response to poverty in the twenty-first century. Workers who cannot pay their debts, those who cannot afford private probation services, minorities targeted for traffic infractions, the homeless, the mentally ill, fathers who cannot pay child support and many others are all locked up. Mass incarceration is used to make social problems temporarily invisible and to create the mirage of something having been done.”
May 04, 2018
A/HRC/38/33/ADD.1 - E

US: Criminal Justice System Fuels Poverty Cycle
UN Official Speaks Out for Reform
June 21, 2018
https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/06/21/us-criminal-justice-system-fuels-poverty-cycle

 

[Blackleaf]

A generalized attack on "liberals" is always welcomed by white nationalist climate change deniers.

Is this a circle?

Is having Canada being dictated to on human rights by Pakistan and Rwanda a good thing?

 

[10larry]

Hilarious... the UN dictates diddly, the un as an arbiter of human rites approached hypocritical full circle with saudi arabia granted a seat and closed the perfect sphere when haley declared netanyahu a misunderstood humanitarian. What of trudoughs' strength in diversity mandate, constructing a list of undesireables pretty much defeats that ideal.

 

[Serryah]

Is this a circle?

Is having Canada being dictated to on human rights by Pakistan and Rwanda a good thing?

A circle is a simple closed shape. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circle


So yes, that's a circle.

Not a good one, but still a circle.

I don't know, is having Pakistan and Rwanda being dictated to on human rights by Britain a good thing?

If a country is conducting human rights abuse, it shouldn't matter WHO calls it out, only that it is called out (although admittedly places like Saudi, Pakistan, Iran, the US, etc are hypocritical for doing so when they commit violations themselves. And yes, even Canada falls under that)

 

[Hoid]

Because the UN is being dictated to by Rwanda and Pakistan.

 

[Twin_Moose]

Mostly financed by whom?

 

[DaSleeper]

A generalized attack on "liberals" is always welcomed by white nationalist climate change deniers.

there you have it .....
words of wisdom from a “white socialist global warming chicken little “

 

[pgs]

there you have it .....
words of wisdom from a “white socialist global warming chicken little “

You forget he also must be racist , supporting Trudeau removing minority children from their parents .

 

[OpposingDigit]

This may well be one of the reasons that a huge majority of United Nation member countries are critical of Israel ..... This guy is still preaching while the Jewish Folks rant and rave against Muslim preachers and hate speech.

The Gaza War and the Killing of Non-Combatants in Warfare - Why are the Rabbis Silent?
It is clearly forbidden by Torah Law to endanger Israeli soldiers to protect "innocent " Gazans. This lecture by HaRav David Bar-Hayim deals with the reason why Rabbis are not speaking out on this life and death issue.
-- 09:20 The Torah teaches that the life of a Jew is more precious than the life of a non-Jew.
-- 10:00 God (HaShem) prefers Jews to non-Jews and gives them a special status.
-- 11:00 The notion that Jews and non-Jews are equally precious to God contradicts the spirit of the Torah from beginning to end.
-- 16:40 According to Shimon bar Yochia (aka Rashbi) “the best of non-Jews should be killed in warfare” because just as Jews cannot know if a snake approaching you is venomous or not, Jews cannot know which non-Jew is a danger to then.
-- 26:15 since you cannot bring a perishing non-Jew to court to establish his guilt, you take a neutral position by neither helping him nor killing him.
-- 25:16 Jews must assume that it is likely that any non-Jew they meet does not live by the Noahide Laws.
-- 25:33 Those who do not keep the Seven Noahide Laws are all therefore guilty of a capital offense
-- 25:49 “Avoda Zara”, i.e. idolary meaning Christianity was the most common offense.
-- 1:22:00 if not saving a non-Jew makes Jews look bad, then the Jew ought to lie about his motives
-- 1:00:30 there is no requirement to return a lost object to a non-Jew
-- 1:17:40 Jews can brake the sabbath to save a Jew but not a non-Jew because Jews do not consider all lives to be equal
Machon Shilo - The Shilo Institute
By David Bar-Hayim
December 04, 2012
http://www.machonshilo.org
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bar-Hayim
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Laws_of_Noah
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avodah_Zarah
A Crash Course on the True Causes of
(YouTube Video)

Rabbi Shlomo Mlma, chairman of the Council of Rabbis in the West Bank settlements, has issued an advisory opinion in which he allowed Jewish settlers to poison water in Palestinian villages and cities in the West Bank.
According to Israeli anti-occupation organisation “Breaking the Silence”, the call for poisoning Palestinian water aim to push the Palestinians to leave their villages and pave the way for settlers to take over their lands.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20160619-palestinians-decry-rabbi-call-to-poison-west-bank-water

“In any situation in which a non-Jew’s presence endangers Jewish lives, the non-Jew may be killed even if he is a righteous Gentile and not at all guilty for the situation that has been created…When a non-Jew assists a murderer of Jews and causes the death of one, he may be killed, and in any case where a non-Jew’s presence causes danger to Jews, the non-Jew may be killed…The [Din Rodef] dispensation applies even when the pursuer is not threatening to kill directly, but only indirectly…Even a civilian who assists combat fighters is considered a pursuer and may be killed. Anyone who assists the army of the wicked in any way is strengthening murderers and is considered a pursuer. A civilian who encourages the war gives the king and his soldiers the strength to continue. Therefore, any citizen of the state that opposes us who encourages the combat soldiers or expresses satisfaction over their actions is considered a pursuer and may be killed. Also, anyone who weakens our own state by word or similar action is considered a pursuer…Hindrances—babies are found many times in this situation. They block the way to rescue by their presence and do so completely by force. Nevertheless, they may be killed because their presence aids murder. There is justification for killing babies if it is clear that they will grow up to harm us, and in such a situation they may be harmed deliberately, and not only during combat with adults.”…In a chapter entitled “Deliberate harm to innocents,” the book explains that war is directled mainly against the pursuers, but those who belong to the enemy nation are also considered the enemy because they are assisting murderers.
http://didiremez.wordpress.com/2009...lishes-the-complete-guide-to-killing-non-jews

Religious Jews are asked about the Talmud
Want to know what Israelis and Palestinians in the Middle East really think about the conflict?
Ask a question and I will get answers.
As the video begins, several interviewees are in denial (even though you can see in their eyes they are hiding something).
Beginning at 14:40 the real Jewish Rabbis come out and tell exactly what the Talmud says about non-Jews.
The Rabbi Says:
.... ''the billions of people around the earth are here to serve the Jews''
.... ''only Jews are humans, whereas non-Jews are animals"
.... ''when the messiah comes, the Jews will live 1000 years with non-Jews as our slaves, each Jew will have 2800 non-Jew slaves''
.... ''Non-Jews are building our Cars, houses, buildings, everything ... they serve us already''
The reporter asked .... "Aren't the Jews working as well and building?'' and the Rabbi replies ... ''Hardly any Jew is working''
The Ask Project
By Corey Gil-Shuster
November 21, 2015
https://www.gofundme.com/Ask-Project
(YouTube Video)

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

I agree with Blackshirt. No country with as storied a record of brutality as Britain's should be on the UNHCR.

 

[pgs]

I agree with Blackshirt. No country with as storied a record of brutality as Britain's should be on the UNHCR.

I agree , and you can add every country in the world to that list including Canada . The British however were the first country to actively try to curtail slavery from the African continent.