Saturday, September 18, 2010


President Obama loves a juicy world stage to insult America, undermine it's values and integrity and advance his progressive/socialist agenda for America. An underrated highlight to one of President Obama’s many efforts to sell out America occurred on March 31, 2009, two months into his administration, when his administration decided to seek a seat on the United Nation’s new, so-called, Human Rights Council. This Council is comprised of human rights violators, advances a collectivist worldview and provides special protections to Islamic law.

The Obama administration’s decision to join forces with this Council is a policy reversal of President Bush’s administration when it was named the Commission on Human Rights and was dominated by human rights abusers who used their influence to block scrutiny or criticism. Its 2006 successor, this newly renamed Human Rights Council that the Obama administration decided to join, has policies proven to be as dismal a champion of human rights as its predecessor.

The Obama administration decided to join a Council and take a seat at the table with the likes of human rights violators such as China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia and Russia with the sole purpose to advance it’s progressive/socialist policies through an organization, the United Nations, that supports his collectivist worldview. The Bush administration had very valid, humane reasons for not seeking a seat on this disingenuous Human Rights Council. Brett D. Schaefer, of the Heritage Foundation, outlines in his May 2008 memo entitled “The U.S. Is Right to Shun the U.N. Human Rights Council” the Bush administration’s reasoning for taking the high road on international human rights by not participating on this Council, opposite to the Obama administration's decision.

Among those reasons are:
  • Human Rights Violators on the Council: despite well-known and extensively documented histories of repression and violation of basic human rights, Algeria, Angola, Azerbaijan, Cameroon, China, Cuba, Egypt, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Tunisia were elected to seats on the Council in its first two years of operation.
  • Ignoring Iran and Uzbekistan Human Rights Violations: the Council decided to discontinue consideration of the human rights violations in Iran and Uzbekistan and to eliminate the focus on Belarus and Cuba, despite extensive evidence of ongoing human rights violations in all of those countries.
  • Singling out Israel: like its predecessor the Commission, the U.N.’s Human Rights Council has repeatedly singled out Israel for condemnation. The Council has focused on criticizing Israel, condemning it in 19 separate resolutions and decisions, while ignoring human rights abuses committed by Hamas and Hezbollah. No other country—not even noted human rights violators like Burma, China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, or Sudan—has received a fraction of the criticism or attention that the Council has focused on Israel.
  • Intimidation Rules: the Council adopted new rules and procedures, including a new “Code of Conduct,” to intimidate independent experts.
    Despite the anti-human rights agenda of this Council, one of the most startling and troubling policies of this Obama-embraced United Nations Council is its special protection clauses for Islam. A United Nations resolution was circulated by Islamic states which would define any questioning of Islamic dogma as a human rights violation, intimidate dissenting voices, and encourage the forced imposition of Sharia law. This resolution is entitled "Combating Defamation of Religions” and it mentions ONLY Islam.

    According to UN Watch
    "this resolution constitutes a dangerous threat to free speech everywhere. It would ban any perceived offense to Islamic sensitivities as a "serious affront to human dignity" and a violation of religious freedom, and would pressure U.N. member states, at the "local, national, regional and international levels", to erode free speech guarantees in their "legal and constitutional systems." It's an Orwellian text that distorts the meaning of human rights, free speech, and religious freedom, and marks a giant step backwards for liberty and democracy worldwide."

    But, of course, sharia law gives no quarter to the international legal definition of defamation when it comes to protecting any challenge to the Islamic faith. Unfortunately, on March 25, 2010, this resolution to protect any challenge solely to Islam was passed by the United Nations Human Rights Council.
    Based on this Council’s flagrant anti-human rights members and agenda, one would think American’s would be disheartened enough to have the Obama administration decide to join forces with such a Council that emboldens offenders of human rights and that supports Islamic fundamentalism.

    But there is more. The Obama administration will take advantage of every possible opportunity in it's mission to insult America. The administration has again sold out America by attacking American values and sovereignty. In another sequel to his “Apologize for America” tour President Obama has disgracefully singled out America by issuing a 29 page human rights report of the United States of America on August 20, 2010, delivered to the Council by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ,stating that “America's human rights record is less than perfect”, and by less than perfect the Obama administration means high unemployment rates, hate crime, poverty, poor housing, lack of access to health care and discriminatory hiring practices affecting blacks, Latinos, Muslims, South Asians, Native Americans and gays and lesbians in the United States.

    These intellectually dishonest human rights violations presented to this Council by Mrs. Clinton and raised by the Obama administration attacking America have nothing whatsoever to do with enforcement of international human rights laws. They are another piece of the puzzle for an Obama-led socialist civil society riddled with rights redistribution initiatives. The Obama administration has flagrantly ignored (nor apparently understands) the U.S. Constitution as seen through its policies. Within this dishonest report to the Council by Mrs. Clinton on behalf of the Obama administration where do we find these so-called American human rights “violations” required in the American Bill of Rights?

    This dubiously named Human Rights Council has a collectivist worldview agenda aligned with the Obama administration’s agenda for “changing” America. This Council has little concern for ensuring the enforcement of international laws pertaining to human rights. A closer study of this is outlined by Roger Pilon of the Cato Institute (also see his podcast below on this subject) when he writes,
    "Take the report's contention that "work remains to meet our goal of ensuring equality before the law" — a human right, to be sure. The supposed evidence is that unemployment is higher among blacks and Hispanics; there are racial and ethnic disparities in home ownership rates; and "whites are twice as likely as Native Americans to have a college degree." But those are socio-economic inequalities owing to many factors, not inequalities before the law."

    The Obama administration doesn’t stop with simply insulting America at-large with its remarks to the Council, but singled out one of our country’s states, Arizona, as an example of human rights violators. Mrs. Clinton's report to this Council also included an attack criticizing Arizona’s immigration law (S.B. 1070) as an example of a human rights issue that is “being addressed” by the federal government through court action. This shameful display by the Obama administration to admonish Arizona through an international forum for its efforts to simply enforce American immigration laws that are not being enforced by the Obama administration is even beyond the pale for an administration that has repeatedly shown its disdain for American values and sovereignty.

    Arizona governor Jan Brewer responded to this disgraceful attack on American sovereignty by writing a letter to Mrs. Clinton expressing her concern and indignation at the offensive and hypocritical treatment of Arizona in her report. In her letter to Mrs. Clinton the governor castigated and dressed down the Secretary by writing to her the following,
    “Simply put, it is downright offensive that the U.S. State Department included the State of Arizona and S.B. 1070 in a report to the United Nations Council on Human Rights, whose members include such renowned human rights “champions” as Cuba and Libya. Apparently, the federal government is trying to make an international human rights case out of S.B. 1070 on the heels of already filing a federal court case against the State of Arizona. The idea of our own American government submitting the duly enacted laws of a State of the United States to “review” by the United Nations is internationalism run amok and unconstitutional.”

    By taking a seat with the collectivist United Nations Human Rights Council the Obama administration has joined forces with a socialist group of human rights violators as another means to advance his administration’s progressive/socialist agenda, curry favor with his political base and provide his administration another opportunity to insult and apologize for America. Another selling out moment by the Obama administration. A moment for those who love America for which we would all like to have a “do over”.

    Roger Pilon is the founder and director of the Cato Institute's Center for Constitutional Studies, which has become an important force in the national debate over constitutional interpretation and judicial philosophy. He is the publisher of the Cato Supreme Court Review and is an adjunct professor of government at Georgetown University through The Fund for American Studies. Prior to joining Cato, Pilon held five senior posts in the Reagan administration, including at State and Justice, and was a National Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.


    Matt said...

    That is a great post, Dennis. What strikes me is that the Statist folks have a very different view if human rights. It seems that freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and what we value are absent. At the same time, it seems that they advocate massive government intervention to create an equality of outcome, rather than equality of opportunity.

    Dennis Gallagher said...

    yes Matt. This issue did not get as much play as it should other than the AZ aspect. The immediate pivot in policy Obama took from Bush within 2 months of his presidency speaks volumes of Obama's, as you mention, statist attitude toward America. Aligning with the likes of China, Russia, etc on human rights and agreeing that attacks on Islam only is a violation of human rights? People without housing is a human rights violation? Isn't that the sort of rhetoric that got us into trouble in the first place? Of course it did. Collectivism, as we see in western Europe (Greece) leads to economic decay.