IN BED WITH THE DREGS

NY Post ^ | April 3, 2009 | Editorial

[Scanian]

The UN Human Rights Council might well be the most vile of all the world body's panels. So why does the Obama administration want in?

UN Ambassador Susan Rice announced this week that the United States will seek a seat on the 47-member body -- which is dominated by such human-rights exemplars as China, Cuba, Egypt, Russia and Saudi Arabia -- when elections are held next month.

"We do not see any inherent benefit, as demonstrated by recent history, in being outside the tent and simply being critical without having significant influence," Rice said.

Well, sure: The Bush administration's disapproval didn't shame the council into abandoning its blatantly anti-Semitic fixation on the "abuses" of Israel.

Or into speaking a word against some of the most repressive regimes on the planet -- several of whom are council members in good standing.

Or into dropping its vaguely totalitarian condemnation of the "defamation of religions" -- that is, criticizing Islamic fanaticism.

But Bush, by refusing to have anything to do with the council, at least managed to avoid lending the prestige and authority of the United States of America to such a cynical circus.

Obama? He presumably wants to change the body from within.

The president, to be sure, campaigned on the promise to "dialogue" more with America's enemies.

And he won.

[Past Your Eyes]

I don’t see any inherent benefit to having this moron for a president either, but we have him anyway.

[samtheman]

Why does Obama want to join an organization comprised by the dregs of humanity?

Doesn’t the question answer itself?

[samtheman]

Why does Obama want to join an organization comprised of the dregs of humanity?

Doesn’t the question answer itself?

[UCFRoadWarrior]

Liberal Globalists do not care about human rights....real human rights lead to soverignty....which no Globalist organization would allow