Warm Up The Bulldozers.

The sonsofbitches  from the U-frigging-N. are at it AGAIN.

ANY candidate running for POTUS in 2016 will AUTOMATICALLY have my full support IF they  have as a plank in the platform, language to disembowel us of this NUISANCE once and for all.  From CNSNews.com.  Prepare the pisstivity meters.

U. N. Human Rights Panel Prepares to Challenge U.S. Domestic Policies

  September 13, 2013 – 4:11 AM
By Patrick Goodenough
UBNThe Palais Wilson in Geneva, once the headquarters of the League of Nations, another worthless waste of time and monies way back when, will be the venue for the U.N. Human Rights Committee’s review of the U.S. next month. We can send the ‘dozers THERE, once we’re done HERE……………….

Keep them ‘dozers FUELED, and READY. We’re going to NEED them.


They look READY to me.


(CNSNews.com) – From “stand your ground” laws to voter-ID, from drone  strikes to NSA surveillance, from profiling of Muslims to continued  detentions at Guantanamo Bay, the U.S. government’s positions on a wide  range of issues will be placed under a United Nations’ spotlight next  month.

At a session in Geneva running from October 14 to November 1, the  U.N. Human Rights Committee will hold a periodic review of the U.S.  compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights  (ICCPR), which was signed by the U.S. in 1977 and ratified in 1992.

The Human Rights Committee, which comprises 18 independent legal  experts who serve for four years, is a separate entity to the Human  Rights Council (HRC), also based in Geneva, which the Obama  administration joined in 2009.

The U.S. ICCPR review is the fourth undertaken, and the first since  the Obama administration came to office pledging that its engagement  with the U.N. human rights apparatus would set a new standard.

“We’re committed to advancing a strong human rights agenda, working  with multiple partners from all regions of the world,” then-Assistant  Secretary of State Michael Posner said in September 2009, the day the  U.S. took up its seat on the HRC for the first time.

“The second thing that’s going to guide our participation here is a  commitment to a universal application of human rights standards – to  everyone, including ourselves,” he said.

Citing the upcoming ICCPR review, Posner added, “We’ll engage our  government, we’ll engage civil society. Our intention is to be able to  lead by example.”

When the U.S. Senate ratified the ICCPR in 1992, it stipulated several “reservations, declarations and understandings,”  including one stating, “Nothing in this Covenant requires or authorizes  legislation, or other action, by the United States of America  prohibited by the Constitution of the United States as interpreted by  the United States.”

The review in October is the culmination of a lengthy process that  began with the federal government in December 2011 submitting a 188-page  report on its compliance with the ICCPR and its 27 articles, which  range from “self-determination” to “the rights of minorities to culture,  religion and language.”

The committee also received submissions from non-governmental  organizations, covering numerous, often-controversial issues such as the  “disproportionate minority impact of felon disfranchisement” (Florida  ACLU); “abusive counterterrorism policies” (Human Rights Watch);  “restrictive abortion laws” and “the impact of religious refusal laws on  women’s reproductive healthcare” (Center for Reproductive Rights); and  “discrimination” against immigrants, people of color, Muslims, sex  workers and LGBT persons (Human Rights Watch).

Amnesty International contributed several documents, including a hefty report entitled “Human Rights Betrayed.”

Armed with these submissions and its own questions, the committee  last April sent a “list of issues” – basically a questionnaire asking  the government for clarification. The U.S. in return provided a “reply  to the list of issues” in July.

These documents, on which the October review will be based, reveal  some of the areas the U.N. experts consider to be problematic. Among  them:

Stand your ground” laws: The committee wanted to know  whether these laws “provide blanket immunity to persons using force as  defined and permitted by such laws.”

The government replied that more than half the U.S. states have some  form of these laws, and that some provide civil and criminal immunity.  It noted that from 2007 to 2011, victims used firearms to threaten or  attack an offender in one percent (235,700) of all “violent criminal  victimization situations.”

In a related question, the committee asked about victims of gun  violence and on “steps taken to better protect people against the risks  associated with proliferation of firearms.”

The Human Rights Committee has already criticized Florida’s “stand  your ground” law in particular. In a report on gun violence late last  year it cited the Travyon Martin shooting and charged that Florida’s law  was not compliant with “international human rights principles of  necessity and proportionality.”

Profiling:  The committee wanted to know what was being done  to eliminate racial and religious profiling of Arabs, Muslims and South  Asians.

The government’s response stressed that it considers profiling to be  “premised on the erroneous assumption that any particular individual  possessing one or more irrelevant personal characteristics is more  likely to engage in misconduct than another individual who does not  possess those characteristics.”

It said new FBI agents are trained to conduct investigations and  interviews in accordance with U.S. laws, regulations and the  Constitution, “which prohibit invidious racial, ethnic, and religious  profiling,” and that the Departments of Justice (DOJ) and Homeland  Security (DHS) carry out training in this area.

Surveillance:  The committee asked about “steps taken to  ensure judicial oversight over National Security Agency surveillance of  phone, email and fax communications” both inside the U.S. and abroad,  and also for a justification of “roving” wiretaps (whereby agents are  allowed to follow a target and lawfully intercept communication with a  single court order even if the suspect tries to evade surveillance by  changing communications devices.)

The government said in response that legislation allowing “roving”  wiretaps under certain circumstances has been reauthorized until  mid-2015. It said the provision corresponds to roving authority used in  law-enforcement surveillance since 1986, and repeatedly upheld in U.S.  courts.

“The United States welcomes a discussion of the balance between  security and civil liberties,” the government told the U.N. committee.

Voting rights:  In reply to questions about eligibility  requirements for voting, the government pointed out that the  Constitution “generally provides that governments of the individual  states, not the U.S. Congress, determine who is eligible to vote in  their state.”

However, “Congress has the power to regulate elections for federal  offices and has constitutional authority to eradicate discrimination in  voting through the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments.”

It said varying restrictions of voting for felons are in place in 48  states, with some providing for later restoration of voting rights while  a few prohibit felons from voting for life.

The government also outlined DOJ objections to voter-ID laws in South   Carolina and Texas, and said the department would “continue to  carefully monitor jurisdictions around the country for voting changes  that may hamper voting rights.”

Last year the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People on two occasions approached the U.N. in Geneva to complain about what it called “racially-discriminatory election laws.”

Other issues the U.N. committee wants to probe in the upcoming review  include drone strikes, torture, “racial disparities in the criminal  justice system,” the ending of detention of terror suspects at  Guantanamo Bay, and “police brutality and excessive use of force”  against “undocumented migrants crossing the United States-Mexico  border.”


Folks, I know it’s Saturday, so as to speed you on to more “fun” activities, I can sum up the U-frigging-N’s request with one SHORT sentence. Herewith:

GO.        F#&K.       YOURSELVES.

Enjoy your weekend.




Tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to Warm Up The Bulldozers.

  1. Buck says:

    Funny, ain’t it. Ha ha. How slavemasters, race pimps and religious nuts can presume to dictate “Human Rights” policies to the most tolerant country in the world.

  2. Hardnox says:

    I echo your last line. The absurdity of the UNHRC to focus on us is telling. There are 192+/- countries in the world. The only reason the UN asshats focus on the USA is because the Left in this country actually takes them seriously. The UN asshats should be focusing on those countries that actually violate the aforementioned abuses, etc. but that would be more difficult since the middle finger is a permanent fixture coming from those countries. Take Russian and China as examples. We should take their lead.

    If we stopped funding this nitwit den of thieves the organization would crumble by itself.

    Good post.

  3. Mrs AL says:

    Do the ‘dozers come in automatic or are they strictly manual transmission?

    Oh and Hardnox, thanx for echoing Clyde’s last line. I will have a great little weekend.

    • Clyde says:

      Mrs. Al, most of the newer ones have hydrostatic drive. And, ALL sorts of electronic controls. Be pretty much like driving your car, but with joysticks instead of a steering wheel. So easy, even a liberal can do it!!

  4. Kathy says:

    I saw this yesterday and pretty much thought the same thing Hardnox just said, so ditto. We’ll never defund them as long we have the same old career congress critters sitting in DC. We need a bunch of new guys with backbone.

  5. BrianR says:

    Well, of course, the Useless Nations will just use this as a rationale to continue their endless SOP backbiting aimed at us, so…

    ((((((((((((((((((( yawn ))))))))))))))))))))

    What’s new?

    Nothing they can do or say has any force of law in this country. Even if they tried, how could they “enforce” it? Can you even imagine a UN “force” of any kind that didn’t have US as its military backbone?

    They’re so irrelevant that even the LEFTIES rarely pay any attention to them.

    • Clyde says:

      I disagree on one point, Brian. The lefties pay attention when the U-frigging-N’s dictates would benefit THEIR agenda, ie: gun control, global warming, etc etc. Good comment, and thanks for dropping in, pard.

      • BrianR says:

        Well, they “pay attention” when they want to use some UN drivel as a talking point, and that’s it. Like the examples you cited: gun control, “climate” bullpuckey, like that.

        Did Obozo go to the UN for a sanction on his “red line” bombardment plans for Syria? Nope. Because he knew it would go exactly nowhere.

        I always enjoy reading your stuff, my friend. And do so daily (as I do with the site as a whole, Nox. Good job, guys)

        • Clyde says:

          True enough. I think Obozo is about as well-liked by the U-frigging-N as he is by us. Glad you come by, and enjoy our little enterprise here, pard. It is appreciated.

  6. bullright says:

    Great article, Clyde. 16 days of ‘hate fest’, what a waste of time and resources.

  7. pepperhawk says:

    Like you clyde, I say screw these jerks. Our Constitution trumps this and if applied illegally with UN forces you know what’s going to happen to the blue helmets. I don’t need to spell it out.