Cernig at Newshoggers has posted a critique of McCain’s proposal for a “league of democracies” to supplement the diminishing returns of the bloated United Nations. In his critique, however, Cernig embraces a classic strawman technique, ascribing a belief to McCain supporters that none of them actually embrace: (more…)
United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon described Fitna as "offensively anti-Islamic" and issued the press release that follows (via memeorandum):
I condemn, in the strongest terms, the airing of Geert Wilders’ offensively anti-Islamic film. There is no justification for hate speech or incitement to violence. The right of free expression is not at stake here. I acknowledge the efforts of the Government of the Netherlands to stop the broadcast of this film, and appeal for calm to those understandably offended by it. Freedom must always be accompanied by social responsibility.
The new National Intelligence Estimate has taken out the ground from beneath the various liberals, progressives, and leftists who, with varying degrees of conviction, have been predicting that the United States would initiate military action against Iran before the end of the Bush Administration. There will be no war. Senator Biden’s call for Bush’s impeachment in the event of war with Iran is now off the table. Seymour Hersh will have to find something other than the Pentagon’s plans for attacking Iran to expose. (more…)
While Ahmadinejad claims that the just-released IAEA report vindicates Iran, these quotes from the report suggest otherwise:
. . . since early 2006, the Agency has not received the type of information that Iran had previously been providing, pursuant to the Additional Protocol and as a transparency measure. As a result, the Agency’s knowledge about Iran’s current nuclear programme is diminishing.
[ . . . ]
Although the Agency has no concrete information, other than that addressed through the work plan, about possible current undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran, the Agency is not in a position to provide credible assurances about the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran without full implementation of the Additional Protocol. This is especially important in the light of Iran’s undeclared activities for almost two decades and the need to restore confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of its nuclear programme.
The emphases are mine.
This year’s exercise in hypocrisy by the UNHRC is over. Anne Bayefsky has provided an excellent summary of its decisions and indecisions.
Thankfully, the UNHRC’s actions and inactions haven’t gone without notice in the halls of Congress:
Alongside what passes at the U.N. for “human rights” protection, stands the eminently reasonable legislation that has come from both the House and the Senate calling for an end to American funding for the Human Rights Council. The House passed their version of the Department of State Foreign Operations and Related Programs Appropriations Act on June 22 and included by unanimous agreement an amendment introduced by Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen to refuse any funding for the Council. In the Senate version, proposed by Senator Norm Coleman and adopted unanimously on September 6, an exemption law was inserted by Senators Richard Lugar and Joe Biden. It would refuse funding for the fiscal year 2008 unless the President certifies either that providing the funds to the Council is in the national interest of the United States, or the U.S. is a member of the Council. Conference negotiations are underway, but some form of the restriction is expected to survive.
“As well it should” says Bayefsky. Ditto for me.
|
|