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

By Patrick Goodenough September 13, 2013 - 4:11 AM

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.- See more at:

My Take - There must be really good restaurants in Geneva - why else would this bunch of clowns want to meet there? It certainly can't be about civil rights....can it? Well, maybe I'm being unfair. Let's see who's on the United Nations Civil Rights Commission and what they’re about.

“The Commission was repeatedly criticized for the composition of its membership. In particular, several of its member countries themselves had dubious civil rights records, including states whose representatives had been elected to chair the commission. It rotates but, here is some now and in the past. "People's Republic of China, Zimbabwe,Russia,Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan, and the past memberships of Algeria,Syria,Libya,Uganda and Vietnamon the Commission. These countries had extensive records of human rights violations, and one concern was that by working against resolutions on the commission condemning human rights violations." "The desire of states with problematic human rights records to be elected to the Commission was viewed largely as a way to defend themselves from such attacks."

However this never prevented them from selective "finger pointing" and in "2002 the United States was kicked off the commission for criticizing them for these obvious ethical vilations, "and in 2003 Syria put forward a proposal to discuss US war crimes in Iraq. But journalist Anne Applebaum wrote, "the European Union and the United States aren't exempt from blame, either", citing their hesitance in voting to criticize Russia's actions in Chechnya".

"On May 4, 2004, United States ambassador Sichan Siv walked out of the Commission following the uncontested election of Sudan to the commission, calling it an "absurdity" in light of Sudan's ethnic cleansing in the Darfur region."

However, we can be assured they will overlook they and their friends massive violations in civil rights to condemn the United States.  But this isn't the Commission that is meeting it is the Committee.  Who are they?  I consider these "independent experts" as qualified as their masters.  Clowns who get to meet in New York or Geneva three times a year to sample the food.  Their conclusion are already forgone.....so it must be the restaurants.