"Qaddafi = BAD"?
or..
"Qaddafi = GOOD"?
Check this out . . .
The United Nations is really trying to cover themselves on the "Qaddafi Issue".
On the one hand, they are really working hard to condemn Mummar Qaddafi for attacking his own citizens for protesting against him and his regime's long running oppression and severe violations against human rights issues.
On the other hand, the same U.N. is ready to adopt a report offering praise in favor of Libya's human "rights' record. (or should it be "human wrongs" record?)
One review prepared by the U.N. is praising Libya, commended the government for "improving educational opportunities" and for "making human rights a 'priority'" and even "bettering constitutional framework".
What kind of 'two-face', 'double-speak' is this?
Either you are against this man and his actions, or you are with him on what he's doing to these people. How can any responsible organization play such a nonsense role in our world today?
There are countries like Iran, Venezuela, North Korea and even Saudi Arabia, along with Canada offering high marks for Libya's "legal protections" for its citizens -- by the way, these are the same citizens who are being massacred in bloody military attacks right now, just for protesting against the oppression treatment.
At least the United States said, in the mission in Geneva, that it was looking into whether or not efforts should be made to cancel or at least postpone considering the report of the U.N.
The U.N. issued an agenda back in January, saying the Human Rights Council, which Libya just joined last year, will "consider and adopt" the document (praising Libya's record) at its session, going on now until the end of March.
None of this nonsense has escaped the attention of the UN Watch, a group based in Geneva, spoke out clearly on the matter, clearly calling for the council to withdraw their report and launch a new review, a real review of the "truth about (him) and his regime's heinous crimes".
In a report found on FoxNews.com, they reported that Hillel Neuer, director for the UN Watch, said - the review, formally known as Universal Periodic Review is a complete distortion of Libya's rights record.
It went on to say, "The review is supposed to be a serious examination of a country's human rights record to hold it accountable," the director said, and "All they do is give praise and give cover to Libya's abuses."
The report -- put together after a November 2010 session, months before protesters challenged Qaddafi's legitimacy and prompted an historic confrontation with his regime -- includes dozens of recommendations for how Libya can improve human rights. But it also includes pages of commentary, mostly positive, from the other 46 delegations to the controversial Human Rights Council.
The praise comes from some unsurprising places. Sudan's delegation praised Libya for improving education conditions. North Korea noted Libya's progress "in the field of economic and social rights." Saudi Arabia praised Libya for improvements in "constitutional, legislative and institutional frameworks, which showed the importance that the country attached to human rights."
Praise also streamed in from Cuba, Venezuela and two nations whose leaders were recently ousted in the midst of Middle East unrest -- Egypt and Tunisia.
Egypt commended Libya for its development of a new criminal code and efforts to combat human trafficking and corruption. Oman, which is facing protests of its own, praised Libya during the review for its "clear commitment" to protecting human rights through a "legal framework."
Canada noted two very specific developments -- legislation granting women married to foreigners the right to pass on Libyan nationality to their children and an acknowledgement by the government of hundreds of prisoners deaths in 1996.
The commentary included some criticism, particularly from the United States and several European nations.
The United States, according to the report, called on Libya to "comply with its human rights treaty obligations." The U.S. also expressed concern about limited freedom of speech, politically motivated arrests and "reports of the torture of prisoners."
The last half of the report covered recommendations for Libya to improve conditions in the country. Libya backed dozens of generally worded recommendations to improve human rights, advance the status of women and "abolish" the use of torture. At the same time, Libya rejected recommendations to curb "arbitrary detention," among others.
The Human Rights Council is notorious for showing an anti-Israel bias and being slow to condemn human rights abuses by countries aligned with certain members of the 47-member council. The panel was boycotted by the United States during the Bush administration, but President Obama reversed policy in 2009 and sent a U.S. delegation to Geneva.
However, with the backing of the United States, the council easily passed a resolution Friday condemning Libya's abuses in response to the latest unrest, calling for an international inquiry and recommending the nation be suspended from the council itself.
The U.N. General Assembly is expected to vote on that resolution this week. The U.N. Security Council has separately approved a tough set of sanctions against the Libyan regime, imposing an arms embargo among other penalties and referring the case for an international war crimes investigation.
Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, spoke bluntly about Qaddafi's abuses Monday, saying he is "delusional" and that his regime is "slaughtering his own people." She praised the U.N. for potentially compelling the regime to make a choice between ending the violence and being "held accountable" for continued abuses.
"In Libya, the United Nations is demonstrating the indispensable role that it can play in advancing our interests and defending our values," Rice said.
But Neuer questioned how the United Nations could move so vigorously toward approving sanctions without sidelining the human rights review from last year.
"Given that Libya's diplomats themselves have admitted their regime is a gross violator of human rights ... how can the Human Rights Council adopt this report?" he said. "How can they with a straight face adopt the recommendations and the assessments?"
Good question - "How can anyone keep a straight face around these guys - And we thought McDonald's had a clown…."
