United Nations hits new low, keeps digging

April 26, 2011

If anything shows what a farce and travesty the UN has become, it’s Syria’s forthcoming membership on the UN Human Rights Council:

The brutal crackdown by Syrian President Bashar Assad may finally be getting the attention of world leaders — but apparently not enough to stop Syria from becoming the newest member of the U.N. Human Rights Council.

And despite calling for an independent investigation into the crackdown, which has left hundreds dead, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon apparently won’t do much about blocking Syria’s path to the human rights group.

Nah, Ban’s too busy with the important stuff: attending meaningless conferences, issuing vapid statements, and generally trying desperately to pretend he’s anything other than the UN’s head waiter. I wonder how much Assad tipped him for the seat at the UNHRC table, no questions asked?

As Michael Totten writes:

Correct me if I’m wrong here, but I’m pretty sure the absurdness of this situation is self-evident and that no comment is necessary.

It speaks for itself.

RELATED: Human rights, a la Assad. This is the man Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently called “a reformer,” thus removing all doubt about her qualifications to be president.

Advertisements

Venezuela: the fruits of Obama’s energy policy

April 26, 2011

Thanks to the Obama administration’s refusal to explore and develop the vast oil resources we have in the United States, Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez will likely wind up with an extra $11 billion slush fund heading into his next presidential campaign.

Hey, if you can’t help your friends…

Obama with Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez


Sarah Palin: We deserve an explanation about Libya

April 26, 2011

I’m having cognitive dissonance here. On  the one hand, I’m assured by the Left and the major media (but I repeat myself), and by many on the Establishment Right, that Sarah Palin is a chillbilly airhead who has no idea what she is talking about and would be a disaster as president.

But then, after expressing puzzlement over the administration’s conflicting reasons for going to war (kinda-sorta) in Libya,  she goes and writes something like this:

At this point, to avoid further mission creep and involvement in a third war – one we certainly can’t afford – you need to step up and justify our Libyan involvement, or Americans are going to demand you pull out. Simply put, what are we doing there? You’ve put us in a strategic no man’s land. If Gaddafi’s got to go, then tell NATO our continued participation hinges on this: We strike hard and Gaddafi will be gone. If, as you and your spokesmen suggest, we’re not to tell Libya what to do when it comes to that country’s leadership, and if you can’t explain to Americans why we’re willing to protect Libyan resources and civilians but not Syria’s, Yemen’s, Bahrain’s, Egypt’s, Israel’s, etc., then there is no justification for U.S. human and fiscal resources to be spent.

I would also ask you to better explain your thinking on Libya. We can’t afford any actions that don’t take care of crucial U.S. needs and meet our own interests at this point. You are the Commander in Chief, so please explain what you believe is our “interest” there and not elsewhere.

Mr. President, your hesitation and vacillation in the Middle East breed uncertainty. It’s symptomatic of the puzzling way you govern. See, uncertainty is one of the factors over which you have control, and I would think you’d want to eliminate that additional element that helps breed problems like higher oil prices. Higher oil means exorbitant gas prices weighing down our economy.  Consistency and strength – and greater domestic energy production – will help fix higher gas prices and help heal the economy. But only with leadership. These sorts of problems don’t fix themselves.

Uncertainty breeds higher prices because those who thought themselves our allies suddenly find that may not be true(1), they may not be as secure as they thought and their oil supplies may not be as safe, all of which leads more risk being associated with Mideast oil, and contributes to higher costs passed on to us at the pump. Basic economics and common sense, both of which are alien to our president.

It seems to me the woman dismissed as a “Caribou Barbie” and a quitter(2) has a better grip on our national interests than the Smartest President in History ever will.

Darn her for confusing me by being right when our Cultural Elites (all bow) insist she’s wrong.

Go, ‘Cuda!

TANGENTS:

(1) Hey, if we unceremoniously dumped Mubarak, who, while a bloated dictator, at least often served our interests and wasn’t as bad as a lot of them, then who’s next? You can bet a lot are worried.

(2) An argument I no longer treat as serious, unless it can be made in the context of the Alaskan ethics law as it existed at the time of her resignation.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Justice delayed is justice denied, but not for murder victims, it seems

April 26, 2011

I made my feelings about convicted cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal clear a couple of weeks ago. Thus, I’m sure you’ll share the joy I feel knowing the man who shot a cop in the back and then finished him off with a bullet to the brain has been granted a new sentencing hearing because, 30 years later, an appeals court found the trial court’s sentencing instructions were vague:

A federal appeals court on Tuesday ordered a new sentencing hearing for convicted police killer and death-row activist Mumia Abu-Jamal, finding for a second time that the death-penalty instructions given to the jury at his 1982 trial were potentially misleading.

The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered prosecutors to conduct the new sentencing hearing within six months or agree to a life sentence. Abu-Jamal’s first-degree murder conviction nonetheless stands in the fatal shooting of Officer Daniel Faulkner.

And while this “death-row activist” cheats Death again, the family of Daniel Faulkner still waits for justice.

LINKS: More from Michelle Malkin

via PJM

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)