The UN just trolled the world

[Duchess]

WHY IS SAUDI ARABIA HEADING THE UN HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL?

In a normal world, Saudi Arabia would be arraigned for its appalling human rights record, not appointed to head an international human rights monitor. And yet, it was revealed Monday that over the summer Saudi Arabia was appointed to a panel at the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) that would interview and short-list experts, from among whom successful candidates would then be nominated to examine specific human rights challenges. These challenges may include the human rights record of a particular country or a specific theme, and those themes can include violence against women, the rights of migrants, religious freedom, or sexual orientation.

The hypocrisy behind this decision need hardly be stated. The Saudi government is unelected and run by one large family, or clan. Not only does it have the death penalty on its statute, it executes prisoners with particular relish, turning their executions into a public spectacle. Torture is routine in its prisons and offenders of certain crimes are flogged in public. The denial of the right to drive is among the least of the abuses women suffer in the country. Foreigners who live in Saudi Arabia—be they well-paid expatriates or construction workers living in slavery-like conditions—have to be on the guard constantly so that they don’t fall foul of its laws that violate the norms of free and fair trials. Its vast wealth is used to acquire weapons at home and finance fundamentalist movements abroad which cause havoc in distant societies, transforming native forms of Islam into Wahhabism which bears little relation to the universal declaration of human rights.

Hillel Neuer, executive director at UN Watch, which tracks some of the grander absurdities of the UNHRC,called Saudi Arabia’s appointment “scandalous” because it “has beheaded more people this year than ISIS.” Ensaf Haidar, whose husband Raif Badawi has been sentenced to 1,000 lashes for blogging about free speech in Saudi Arabia, said the appointment would in effect give “a green light to start flogging [Badawi] again.” Others have blamed the power of oil wealth—“oil continues to trump basic human rights principles,” Neuer added, according to reports.

The rest: www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/22/why-is-saudi-arabia-heading-the-u-n-human-rights-council.html

The U.S. has welcomed the news that Saudi Arabia will head the panel.

QUESTION: Well, how about a reaction to them heading the council?

MR TONER: Again, I don’t have any comment, don’t have any reaction to it. I mean, frankly, it’s – we would welcome it. We’re close allies. If we —

QUESTION: Do you think that they’re an appropriate choice given – I mean, how many pages is – does Saudi Arabia get in the Human Rights Report annually?

MR TONER: I can’t give that off the top of my head, Matt.

QUESTION: I can’t either, but let’s just say that there’s a lot to write about Saudi Arabia and human rights in that report. I’m just wondering if you that it’s appropriate for them to have a leadership position.

MR TONER: We have a strong dialogue, obviously a partnership with Saudi Arabia that spans, obviously, many issues. We talk about human rights concerns with them. As to this leadership role, we hope that it’s an occasion for them to look at human rights around the world but also within their own borders.

QUESTION: But you said that you welcome them in this position. Is it based on improved record? I mean, can you show or point to anything where there is a sort of stark improvement in their human rights record?

MR TONER: I mean, we have an ongoing discussion with them about all these human rights issues, like we do with every country. We make our concerns clear when we do have concerns, but that dialogue continues. But I don’t have anything to point to in terms of progress.

https://theintercept.com/2015/09/23...a-chosen-head-u-n-human-rights-council-panel/

 

[Reddington]

I saw this on Twitter earlier. Reza Aslan kept retweeting them.

 

[Duchess]

I find this all very funny. The rest of the world is questioning how this could happen, but the US 'welcomes' the decision.

 

[Bielsa]

Fox News will rant and rave about Iran day and night but you won't hear a peep from them contesting this.

 

[Duchess]

Fox News will rant and rave about Iran day and night but you won't hear a peep from them contesting this.

Isn't Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal a major shareholder in Fox News? I wonder how much say he has in what the network says about Saudi Arabia.

 

[SomaliSpotter]

Petrol $$ > "human rights". Who gives a damn about human rights?

And by the way, the US is the biggest violator of the so-called human rights AND and many of the UN conventions, as well as resolutions. Most of these human rights/amnesty international organizations, together with the "international court" and most of the UN resolutions seem to have been crafted & made by the West solely for the brown nations. Call me a conspiracy theorist if you want but (apart from those Eastern European leaders, regarding those 90's wars in that part of the world, and the Nazis after the end of second war), who else do those UN resolutions & the international court laws apply to? Clearly they don't apply to Bush, Blair, Rumsfeld, Cheney, the US, Israel or to any Western leader or country so what are they there for?

 

[Geeljire]

Whaaaat? How? Why? When?

Sheeeeeeeetttt saudi literally has the west by the balls
That oil money!!

 

[Geeljire]

Isn't Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal a major shareholder in Fox News? I wonder how much say he has in what the network says about Saudi Arabia.

Yes! he is and that is why it is funny. He owns large portion of fox news.

They made a frenzy about the ground zero mosque but never mentioned that one of their owners Al Waleed was funding it. in order to villify him. But i think they only did that because they were stupid and did not know. They have blamed him for 9/11 before.

dont bet on it they will cover it and go mad. They are a network full of retards.


Look at this retard is telling his own boss to take his money and go away, yet he is still taking Al Waleeds money

 

[rcv]

Is the international community just going to continue to turn a blind eye to Saudi Arabia's terrible track record on Human Rights? Just look at some of these:

https://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/research/ratification-saudikingdom.html

Some good ones from that list:

• Refused to sign Slavery Convention
• Refused to sign Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others
  
• Refused to sign European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
  
• Refused to sign Convention relating to the Status of Refugees
  
• Refused to sign International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombing

What's funnier is the other countries on the Human Rights council (China, UAE, Qatar, Russia, and Cuba).

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/Pages/CurrentMembers.aspx

 

[nambarA]

I see nothing wrong with the appointment. Saudi Arabia isn't different from Western countries. Which Western countries doesn't do what Saudi Arabia is accused of? Saudi Arabia at least didn't invade/occupy other countries causing the death/displacement of millions, engage in torturing the locals like in Abu Ghraib, send drones that kill thousands of innocents, barbecue to death innocent kids like Shidane Arone, etc.

 

[Bielsa]

I see nothing wrong with the appointment. Saudi Arabia isn't different from Western countries. Which Western countries doesn't do what Saudi Arabia is accused of? Saudi Arabia at least didn't invade/occupy other countries causing the death/displacement of millions, engage in torturing the locals like in Abu Ghraib, send drones that kill thousands of innocents, barbecue to death innocent kids like Shidane Arone, etc.

I'd just appoint an inoffensive country like Norway to lead the panel. Not Saudi Arabia and not the US either.

 

[Inactive]

The UN is a joke. They have stood by and watched many massacres and genocides take place under their nose. Western countries should stop funding this organization and leave it entirely.

 

[nambarA]

I'd just appoint an inoffensive country like Norway to lead the panel. Not Saudi Arabia and not the US either.

Norway took part in the occupation of Iraq.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-National_Force_–_Iraq

Also in the occupation of Afghanistan:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_Army#War_in_Afghanistan

It's accused of rendition, shipping a Pakistani citizen to Pakistan for torture:

http://www.refworld.org/country,,CAT,,NOR,,47975afcc,0.html

These are just a few, among many horrible things which Norway did/does.

 

[Duchess]

Somalia should be the head of panel.

 

[rcv]

Saudi Arabia at least didn't invade/occupy other countries causing the death/displacement of millions, engage in torturing the locals like in Abu Ghraib, send drones that kill thousands of innocents, barbecue to death innocent kids like Shidane Arone, etc.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/23/us-syria-crisis-saudi-idUSBRE85M07820120623

http://www.theguardian.com/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/220186

They might not be involved in any wars directly, but those deep Saudi wallets open up for a lot of rebels/militants in the Middle East. I would argue that they've done worse than just kill people. They've successfully propagated their extremist ideologies across so many Muslim countries. An ideology that will be instilled into many generations to come. If we want to get rid of terrorism/muslim extremism, killing off the leaders or members of certain groups won't do much. The entire outlook/philosophy they've planted into the minds of these niggas has to be erased from future generations.

 

[SomaliSpotter]

Somalia should be the head of panel.

If countries like SA & USA became the heads of the panel then why can't we? We could be barbarous against one another but at least our global record isn't worse than those of the said countries, is it?

 

[Duchess]

If countries like SA & USA became the heads of the panel then why can't we? We could be barbarous against one another but at least our global record isn't worse than those of the said countries, is it?

That's true. It says a lot about the world that we live in.

 

[SomaliSpotter]

That's true. It says a lot about the world that we live in.

One day, Duchess; one day we will be pioneers in some crucial field and will be balling so hard like people who were always poor (which we are). Until then, we will have to persevere and endure all the crap thrown at us just for being poor at the moment.

 

[nambarA]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/23/us-syria-crisis-saudi-idUSBRE85M07820120623

http://www.theguardian.com/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/220186

They might not be involved in any wars directly, but those deep Saudi wallets open up for a lot of rebels/militants in the Middle East. I would argue that they've done worse than just kill people. They've successfully propagated their extremist ideologies across so many Muslim countries. An ideology that will be instilled into many generations to come. If we want to get rid of terrorism/muslim extremism, killing off the leaders or members of certain groups won't do much. The entire outlook/philosophy they've planted into the minds of these niggas has to be erased from future generations.

Even if what you claim is right tenfold, it doesn't come close to the damage Western countries have done to humanity, and especially Muslims.

 

[Thegoodshepherd]

Saudi Arabia and the gulf states always make sure a couple of them are on the human rights council. They do this so they can block any motions against their slave-economy. And they have the OIC in their back pocket if they need votes for anything.