Now it's insult America.

The Obama administration has, once again, complained to the United Nations about alleged American human rights violations–and boasted about liberal policies like Obamacare as the solution.

The State Department report, released Monday as part of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) at the UN Human Rights Council, reads less like an accounting of human rights issues and more like the platform of the Democratic Party–and invites the world to judge America harshly.

The so-called "human rights" problems cited in the report include:

Police brutality, including the Michael Brown case in Ferguson, Missouri
Discrimination against Muslims who want to build or expand mosques
Voter identification laws in Texas and elsewhere
Predatory lending in home mortgages
Suspension of black children in schools
Women earning "78 cents on the dollar" (a false statistic)
In addition, the report boasts of progress in the following areas:

Promoting same-sex marriage
Fighting discrimination against transgender children in school
Executive action on illegal immigration
Helping illegal alien children who cross the border
Protecting privacy rights against government surveillance
Trying to close the Guantánamo Bay prison for terror detainees
Revoking "torture" memos for interrogating terrorists
Passing Obamacare
Expanding food stamps
Regulating "carbon pollution" to fight climate change
The apologetic, left-liberal report echoes one filed by the Obama administration five years ago, during which the State Department proudly told the Human Rights Council that the administration opposed Arizona's new immigration law, among other alleged American misdeeds.

http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/05/11/obama-complains-to-un-about-us-human-rights-violations/

No comment necessary....Membership speaks for itself!




Current Membership of the Human Rights Council, 1 January - 31 December 2015
by regional groups
by year
COUNTRY
TERM EXPIRES ON
Albania   2017
Algeria   2016
Argentina   2015
Bangladesh   2017
Bolivia (Plurinational State of)   2017
Botswana   2017
Brazil   2015
China   2016
Congo   2017
Côte d'Ivoire   2015
Cuba   2016
El Salvador   2017
Estonia   2015
Ethiopia   2015
France   2016
Gabon   2015
Germany   2015
Ghana   2017
India   2017
Indonesia   2017
Ireland   2015
Japan   2015
Kazakhstan   2015
Kenya   2015
Latvia   2017
Maldives   2016
Mexico   2016
Montenegro   2015
Morocco   2016
Namibia   2016
Netherlands   2017
Nigeria   2017
Pakistan   2015
Paraguay   2017
Portugal   2017
Qatar   2017
Republic of Korea   2015
Russian Federation   2016
Saudi Arabia   2016
Sierra Leone   2015
South Africa   2016
The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia   2016
United Arab Emirates   2015
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland   2016
United States of America   2015
Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)   2015
Viet Nam   2016

Quote from: Solar on May 13, 2015, 07:26:25 AM
Now it's insult America.

The Obama administration has, once again, complained to the United Nations about alleged American human rights violations–and boasted about liberal policies like Obamacare as the solution.

The State Department report, released Monday as part of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) at the UN Human Rights Council, reads less like an accounting of human rights issues and more like the platform of the Democratic Party–and invites the world to judge America harshly.

The so-called "human rights" problems cited in the report include:

Police brutality, including the Michael Brown case in Ferguson, Missouri
Discrimination against Muslims who want to build or expand mosques
Voter identification laws in Texas and elsewhere
Predatory lending in home mortgages
Suspension of black children in schools
Women earning "78 cents on the dollar" (a false statistic)
In addition, the report boasts of progress in the following areas:

Promoting same-sex marriage
Fighting discrimination against transgender children in school
Executive action on illegal immigration
Helping illegal alien children who cross the border
Protecting privacy rights against government surveillance
Trying to close the Guantánamo Bay prison for terror detainees
Revoking "torture" memos for interrogating terrorists
Passing Obamacare
Expanding food stamps
Regulating "carbon pollution" to fight climate change
The apologetic, left-liberal report echoes one filed by the Obama administration five years ago, during which the State Department proudly told the Human Rights Council that the administration opposed Arizona's new immigration law, among other alleged American misdeeds.

http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/05/11/obama-complains-to-un-about-us-human-rights-violations/

He wants the UN to do his bidding..... taking care of things he has been unable to do.

To an extent it is an admission of his own failures!  The anointed one has been less than "anointed".

Right up until the collapse of the Soviet Union, the COMINTERN showed their strength every May Day with COmmies on Parade both in COmmunist countries and in all other counties where they promoted INTERNATIONAL COMMUNISM.  It was so easy then to connect the dots with the nations of the UN and why they voted the way they did.  Simply watch the size of their May Day Parade(s) and one would know how they would vote (and why)

Now...they've done gone to hole! 

I don't really understand the point you guys are trying to make here.

Ill be honest I am trying to learn about the tea party and that's why I am here.  I wont to learn as much as I can before I side with any type.

It seems to be while some of the issues there are partisan some are pretty basic human rights issues.

But aside from that, I have seen criticisms from the UN on far more expansive topics.  One for example, is the use of uranium tipped tank shells in Iraq by US forces.  These shells have caused birth defects in Iraq higher then that of Hiroshima.  They have also hurt US forces as well. 

I also don't understand the point about listing who sits on the council.  Of course some of those regimes aren't great, like Saudi Arabia.  But does that mean they also cant be correct in pointing out human rights abuses?

I guess what I am asking, is what human rights abuses, if any, do you think America commits?

Quote from: steve folkster on May 13, 2015, 12:11:37 PM
I don't really understand the point you guys are trying to make here.

Ill be honest I am trying to learn about the tea party and that's why I am here.  I wont to learn as much as I can before I side with any type.

It seems to be while some of the issues there are partisan some are pretty basic human rights issues.

But aside from that, I have seen criticisms from the UN on far more expansive topics.  One for example, is the use of uranium tipped tank shells in Iraq by US forces.  These shells have caused birth defects in Iraq higher then that of Hiroshima.  They have also hurt US forces as well. 

I also don't understand the point about listing who sits on the council.  Of course some of those regimes aren't great, like Saudi Arabia.  But does that mean they also cant be correct in pointing out human rights abuses?

I guess what I am asking, is what human rights abuses, if any, do you think America commits?

That's fine.  You don't have to be conservative to post here, and we encourage you to discuss.  Just understand, we come from a perspective of pro-Constitution and pro-free market capitalism.  When you formulate your posts, just keep that in mind, and don't assume propaganda you may have been indoctrinated with is reality, or that we would agree with you about.  We are a fact-based forum, where reality trumps all.

Quote from: taxed on May 13, 2015, 12:16:06 PM
That's fine.  You don't have to be conservative to post here, and we encourage you to discuss.  Just understand, we come from a perspective of pro-Constitution and pro-free market capitalism.  When you formulate your posts, just keep that in mind, and don't assume propaganda you may have been indoctrinated with is reality, or that we would agree with you about.  We are a fact-based forum, where reality trumps all.

I'd like to think that too.  But I am not here to push my views I want to learn from you guys about why you think what you think.

So to ask, are there human rights abuses you think America commits around the world?  If so, what?

If not, then I assume you think the commission is biased against the US for alleging so?

Quote from: steve folkster on May 13, 2015, 12:19:53 PM
I'd like to think that too.  But I am not here to push my views I want to learn from you guys about why you think what you think.

Then I'm glad you're here, and I want you to feel welcome.

Quote from: steve folkster on May 13, 2015, 12:11:37 PM
I don't really understand the point you guys are trying to make here.

Ill be honest I am trying to learn about the tea party and that's why I am here.  I wont to learn as much as I can before I side with any type.

It seems to be while some of the issues there are partisan some are pretty basic human rights issues.

But aside from that, I have seen criticisms from the UN on far more expansive topics.  One for example, is the use of uranium tipped tank shells in Iraq by US forces.  These shells have caused birth defects in Iraq higher then that of Hiroshima.  They have also hurt US forces as well. 

I also don't understand the point about listing who sits on the council.  Of course some of those regimes aren't great, like Saudi Arabia.  But does that mean they also cant be correct in pointing out human rights abuses?

I guess what I am asking, is what human rights abuses, if any, do you think America commits?

You have to take anything the UN says about the US, with an overdose of skepticism.
They hate us, there is no other way to put it.

As to TEA, we are, just that Taxed Enough Already. TEA is about returning govt to the people, shrinking the Hell out of it and returning it to the States, where it belongs.

I agree about being skeptical about the UN.

Just curious though.  Do you think we commit any abuses or you think its all rubbish?

Quote from: steve folkster on May 13, 2015, 12:24:32 PM
I agree about being skeptical about the UN.

Just curious though.  Do you think we commit any abuses or you think its all rubbish?

Like what?  Give us some concrete examples to work from.

Quote from: steve folkster on May 13, 2015, 12:24:32 PM
I agree about being skeptical about the UN.

Just curious though.  Do you think we commit any abuses or you think its all rubbish?

You do know the literal definition of war, is to blow things up and kill people, right?
Using depleted uranium to destroy armor is a small price to pay in keeping our soldiers alive.

If they don't want us attacking the enemy, they still have the option of killing the radicals for themselves.
The M/E is the breeding ground of the worlds enemy.

Well the uranium was used to destroy Sadaams forces.

The Uranium also harmed US soldiers of course since they were in the same area.  Its now having the effect of dementing unborn babies, who of course aren't radicals. 

It seems to me that following that logic any army could justify the use of chemical weapons.  For example, when Sadaam was using chemical weapons against the Kurds, he was clearly using them to defeat forces while minimizing his own casualties.  Putting aside that he was a US ally at the time and that we gave him those weapons, was he justified in using them?

Im not trying to be argumentative just trying to follow the logic.

I guess what I am asking is then do all countries have the right to use uranium tipped shells?

Quote from: steve folkster on May 13, 2015, 12:44:56 PM
Well the uranium was used to destroy Sadaams forces.

The Uranium also harmed US soldiers of course since they were in the same area.  Its now having the effect of dementing unborn babies, who of course aren't radicals. 

It seems to me that following that logic any army could justify the use of chemical weapons.  For example, when Sadaam was using chemical weapons against the Kurds, he was clearly using them to defeat forces while minimizing his own casualties.  Putting aside that he was a US ally at the time and that we gave him those weapons, was he justified in using them?

Im not trying to be argumentative just trying to follow the logic.

I guess what I am asking is then do all countries have the right to use uranium tipped shells?

You'd first need to provide solid evidence of your claim that our soldiers received any lasting harm.
And how are we in anyway to blame for what others do with their weaponry?

Quote from: Solar on May 13, 2015, 12:50:06 PM
You'd first need to provide solid evidence of your claim that our soldiers received any lasting harm.
And how are we in anyway to blame for what others do with their weaponry?

We are not to blame for how other countries use their weaponry.

But if we sold Sadaam chemical weapons before, during and after he used them on Kurdish Civilians we would no doubt share some complicity. 

If I gave a terrorist a bomb knowing he would blow up a school, as the scumbags sometimes do, I'd be responsible no?

Would it be ok for other armies to use uranium is my real question?  If we can use then everybody can no?