The toothless, symbolic British monarchy violates the human rights of the British and should be abolished? This would be some sort of joke were it not a something that the UN Human Rights Council has recommended.

The UN Human Rights Council said the UK must "consider holding a referendum on the desirability or otherwise of a written constitution, preferably republican".

The council has 29 members including Saudi Arabia, Cuba and Sri Lanka.

It was the Sri Lankan envoy who raised concerns over the British monarchy.

The resulting report said Britain should have a referendum on the monarchy and the need for a written constitution with a bill of rights.

Now let's consider some of the hypocritical complaints put forward.

The UN report was also critical of the UK's treatment of immigrants from Sudan.

Syrian representatives accused the UK of discriminating against Muslims and Iran complained about the UK's record on tackling sexual discrimination.

Hold on -- Iran is complaining about sex discrimination? That complaint from Burqa-ville should have been laughed out of the hearing room.

But then again, consider the human rights records of the participating nations. What the heck is Saudi Arabia doing recommending a constitution and the abolition of a monarchy? And what is Cuba doing on any body that is tasked with judging human rights?

US out of UN -- UN out of US

Posted by: Greg at 10:25 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 241 words, total size 2 kb.

And if that means imprisoning his opponent and banning all election activity by the opposition party, that is how it has to be. Oh, and he is requiring all food distribution to go through government programs -- where he can have government employees sing his praises to the poor and deny assistance to opposition supporters.

With only three weeks to go before ZimbabweÂ’s presidential runoff, the police briefly detained the oppositionÂ’s standard-bearer, Morgan Tsvangirai, on Friday for the second time this week and directed his party to cancel political rallies, effectively preventing him from addressing voters.

At the same time, the Zimbabwean governmentÂ’s requirement that all nongovernmental organizations suspend their aid operations, which grew out of the authoritiesÂ’ allegations that some were supporting the opposition, was condemned Friday by officials in the United States and Europe, as well as the United Nations.

Relief agencies said the order, issued this week, would deprive millions of desperately poor Zimbabweans of food aid and other basic assistance. Unicef, for example, depends on 25 nongovernmental organizations to provide education, health care and food to 185,000 orphans in Zimbabwe.

“It’s a horrible situation,” said James Elder, Unicef’s spokesman in Zimbabwe. “The children and their families continue to find stoic means of surviving, but this is a profoundly disturbing blow to them. We can’t reach these children today.”

I don't know which disturbs me more -- this attempt to starve those who might vote for the opposition, or the campaign of outright murder that has gone on since the first round of the election that Mugabe's thugs tampered with to give him a second shot at winning.

Posted by: Greg at 12:34 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 287 words, total size 2 kb.