The United Nations has chosen to investigate human rights violations in the United States -- not Darfur or Myanmar or Venezuela or North Korea -- the United States. Part of that is because Western democracies are open and cooperative and they easy to investigate. The U.N. can then say it looks into human rights violations like racism while ignoring the countries that will kill or incarcerate investigators. The U.S. should deduct from its contributions the amount of money spent on this study. Personally, I would go further and cut off money to the U.N. altogether since it has become useless and corrupt. We won't do that, unfortunately, so we should at least deduct for these unnecessary expenses.
I heard about that. Not that it hasn't been for a while, but this makes it official. The United Nations is a farce.
From the story: [rquoter] His three-week visit, at U.S. government invitation, [/rquoter] The idea that the USA should be immune from any sort of probing by the UN because we are clearly the good guys is silly. It's the international equivalent of the drunken celebrity getting pulled over and saying, "Do you know who I am?" The best way for the USA to keep the moral high ground is to be willing to submit to everything that we demand from the rest of the world. Otherwise, claims that the UN is an empty political tool of some government’s agendas is true. Some people seem to think that if the UN doesn't exist exclusively as an extension of US government interests. It is supposed to be a plurality of nations. The prevailing opinion among a certain subset of Americans is that UN is great when it lets us do when we want or when we can site its resolutions and attack Iraq, but stupid when it doesn’t serve as our proxy. You can’t have it both ways. Either submit to the authority that you demand from everybody else, or don't.
I'm not saying we shouldn't cooperate fully. I'm saying we shouldn't contribute to paying for this anti-U.S. propaganda ploy.
I think trying to blackmail them into doing what we want with our funds strikes me as not cooperating or trying to influence outcomes. Like if the mayor getting pulled over for drunk driving, and threatening to cut funding to the police department if they didn't let him go and stop harassing the good citizens of the city. If you want to pull out of the UN completely, I can understand that. I don't really agree, but it is a viewpoint that I understand. I think half measures like threatening to withhold funds to influence the process just look hypocritical, though.
Maybe this is just a handy ploy to keep people from complaining about the United States' lack of participation in the ICC.
3 weeks, and 8 cities. If Mr. Doudou (how appropriate) can find out anything about Human Rights abuses in the US that I couldn't by searching news sources, I'll be shocked. This is a dog-and-pony show, and the perceived legitimacy of the United Nations gives it undeserved credibility.
Check out the guy's website: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/racism/rapporteur/index.htm He has recently been to: Italy Russia Switzerland Brazil Japan Guatemala Ivory Coast Honduras Nicaragua Colombia Canada Trinadad & Tobago etc. It's cool if he goes to Switzerland and Canada, but how dare he come to the good 'ol USA? This isn't some special mission to 'get' the USA. Does that make any difference to anybody?
Um, it seems like you just watched the Fox News bulletin and then started conjuring up your own conclusions. As was pointed out, the investigator is here at the invitation of the US government, plus he's been traveling the world studying Islamophobia. Now, I don't think Islamophobia is as bad here as it is in say England or France, but after watching the West Virginia video and being reminded that there are still people who won't accept that Obama is a christian and think he is secretly a Muslim terrorist trying to takeover the US from the inside, well I guess I won't mind if one guy comes around to ask some questions and gather some statistics.
No, actually you can look at it from another angle. If the United States pays for the U.N. to investigate, then you can say we are influencing the U.N. for brownie points. By not paying, each country remains neutral to the result. No nation should pay for the outside U.N. agents to investigate itself, but every nation should volunteer full cooperation with those agents. However, guess which countries won't do the latter.
I wonder whose son or nephew this is. Most of those are pretty cushy vacation spots. Where's Myanmar (Burma) or Bangladesh or North Korea? Do you see my point?
so what if UN investigate? the US does not belong the ICC which shields any citizen from an international tribunal. plus the US throws more cash at the UN than any other country, dont expect UN to be functional without the US.
Not really. I think you are still making the mistake of viewing any contact as confrontational. It simply isn't that way. Think of him as a management consultant hired to come in and examine the company. HE DOESN'T CHOOSE WHERE HE GOES. He goes where he is invited. [rquoter] Pursuant to the mandate established by the Commission on Human Rights, the Special Rapporteur undertakes missions to countries. Field missions are useful in enabling the Special Rapporteur to familiarize himself with the actual situation in a particular country through access to first-hand information and discussions with the parties concerned, whether the Government or civil society. Such missions are in no case designed to be inquisitorial; rather, they can enable the measures taken by a Government to overcome racism and racial discrimination to be better known. [/rquoter]
