Moral Authority

I agree it's a disgrace. You neglected to point out that the US and China were also elected; also a disgrace.

I think that the appointment of China is a disgrace.

Mick, do you seriously make a case for equivalence with the US?

Regards
Steve M

This is unbelievable

Steve
Both governments have lamentable human right records and have made strenuous efforts to cover their tracks and justify their actions whilst happy to stand in judgement over others. The question of equivalence isn't pertinent. Suffice to say that IMO it is perverse and a disgrace that either administration should be sitting on this commission.

quote:

Originally posted by bigmick:
The question of equivalence isn't pertinent.

Of course the question of equivalence is pertinent.

Otherwise, as NO country has a perfect human rights record, no one could sit on the commission.

Yes but America is, apparently, "Land of the Free" --------------> Guantanamo - need I say more?

The question of equivalence is IMO not pertinent here as there is nothing to be gained from you and I ploughing through a litany of human rights abuses trying to score meaningless points. This is the kind of unconstructive nonsense that feeds conflicts the world over where each side claims the other side is worse by playing trump cards with each other's losses or atrocities. I'm happy to engage in constructive debate or offer an opinion but I am loath to waste my time pursuing circular and pointless point scoring. I repeat, IMO none of these three countries is currently fit to consider and stand in judgement over the human rights abuses of others. That's my response to your thread starter.

Three emoticons Steve? What age are you?

quote:

Originally posted by JonR:
Yes but America is, apparently, "Land of the Free" --------------> Guantanamo - need I say more?

quote:

Originally posted by bigmick:
...I repeat, IMO none of these three countries is currently fit to consider and stand in judgement over the human rights abuses of others. That's my response to your thread starter.

Three emoticons Steve? What age are you?

There's no denying that abuses have taken place in the US. Moreover, I'm certainly ashamed that in the UK our police force suffers from institutional racism and it's not the only institution that does. Racism is clearly a violation of human rights.

Why therefore should the UK (or the US) be allowed to 'stand in judgement' over the human rights abuses of others while Zimbabwe should not? To answer this we naturally have to go into issues of equivalence, legal systems, freedom of expression - including the freedom for citizens to object to one's own country's abuses, and so on.

If forum members had to live in a country other than their own and could choose between the US, China or Zimbabwe, which would they choose? Would their choices bear any relation to the levels of human rights in those countries?

Regards
Steve M

I'm 53 years old, Mick, nearly 54. Your point?

One smiley for each country under discussion?

But is it art?

Nime

Over recent years these three countries have been guilty of well-publicised and universally condemned human rights abuses. Thousands of innocents have been killed, tortured, unlawfully imprisoned and abused, disenfranchised and a sovereign state has been attacked. You might want to delve into the niceties of the individual abuses, but starting this thread I guess that you wanted to garner opinion and you have mine. If I were aware of three criminal judges standing for appointment and knew that one was killer, one was a sex offender and the other a vicious wife beater I'm sorry but I wouldn't be sitting down figuring out how they compared in terms of suitability for the post. They'd all be unacceptable and I'd be moving on to my other choices. The choice doesn't need to be perfect but there is quite an obvious public gulf between the record of these countries and many of their compatriots in the UN.

My point is that in what I had assumed, rightly or wrongly, was a mature and deadly serious discussion, I was surprised that resorted to an unnecessary string of emoticons to express yourself. Seems childish, inappropriate and somewhat lacking in gravitas considering the discussion, but each to their own.

quote:

Originally posted by bigmick:
...Seems childish, inappropriate and somewhat lacking in gravitas

Ah well. There goes my moral authority.

I'm just glad that Israel didn't want to join the club too, that really would have been a hard cookie to swallow, innit.



Fritz Von Hyperspace

Not at all Steve. Your moral authority is as strong and valid as ever. If the US and China were only guilty of inappropriate emoticon use then this thread could have begun and ended rightly with our condemnation of the election of Zimbabwe.

Fritzy I wouldn't dare to comment.

Happy holidays chaps.

Well, I'm pleased we've got that out of the way.

quote:

Thousands of innocents have been killed, tortured, unlawfully imprisoned and abused, disenfranchised.........If I were aware of three criminal judges standing for appointment and knew that one was killer, one was a sex offender and the other a vicious wife beater I'm sorry but I wouldn't be sitting down figuring out how they compared in terms of suitability for the post. They'd

To lump all three countries into the first part of this statement is misleading. I have deliberately omitted the "invation of a foriegn country" bit because we've all been there before.

But taking each of the other headings and applying actual numbers to each of the three counties in question, I'd be surprised to find the USA in the same league as the other two, never mind the same division.

The analogy of three judges in the second part is interesting. I would liken the criminal judges to a serial killer who uses an axe, a serial killer who uses a cut throat knife and a person who had been of unblemished character until last year when they were repremanded for having smoked hash as a school boy.

but, as has already been implied, we each are entitled to our own point of view.

Cheers

Don

quote:

Originally posted by Don Atkinson:
...I would liken the criminal judges to a serial killer who uses an axe, a serial killer who uses a cut throat knife and a person who had been of unblemished character until last year when they were repremanded for having smoked hash as a school boy.

And, with the US, would you go as far as to accuse them of inhaling?

Regards
Steve M

Steve,

There are only two tpyes of schoolboy. Those who have been caught being naughty....and those who haven't. The world of international politics is undoubtably the same.

Now to answer your earlier question, I for one wouldn't voluntarily emigrate to either Zimbabwe or China. My analogy with the Judges was to show how wicked both China and Zimbabwe are (and you could include a few others) compared to the rest of humanity, including the USA, which is not without its faults.

I had to actually read the opening post to this thread twice. At first I thought we had let let Zimbabwe JOIN the UN. And I felt that even that was a step too far!

Cheers

Don