New American 
August 9, 2012
Opponents and liberty-minded activists are up in arms over the fact that the genocidal mass-murderer ruling over Sudan, Islamist Omar al-Bashir, is set to be elected to the United Nations Human Rights Council. Observers said the move will further discredit an institution that has already become a laughing stock around the world for appointing so many communist and Islamic dictatorships as supposed guardians of human rights.
Critics from across the political spectrum are already protesting the latest development. But analysts say that with the broad support of governments in the region and backing from the so-called “African Union,” the Sudanese war criminal’s appointment to the UN so-called “human rights” entity is now virtually assured without a massive wave of opposition.
Ironically, the UN resolution that created the dubious global rights body stated that “members elected to the Council shall uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights.” Even using the UN’s own questionable definitions of “human rights” — completely alien to American notions of individual rights — the council’s membership makes an absolute mockery of the resolution and the idea of protecting human rights.
Other regimes represented on the global council include some of the most repressive and totalitarian dictators on the planet: Cuba’s communists, for example, Saudi Arabia’s autocratic Islamists, the mass-murdering communist dictatorship ruling over mainland China, and many more. Less than a decade ago, the body was actually chaired by the autocratic regime of Libyan strongman Muammar Gadhafi.
Still, Sudan’s genocidal maniac, who seized power in coup more than two decades ago, might represent a new low for the almost-comically discredited UN council, according to commentators. Al-Bashir, who purports to be a “president,” has a warrant out for his arrest by the International Criminal Court (ICC) on charges of war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity.
The brutal Sudanese dictator is actually the first sitting head of state to be the subject of an ICC arrest warrant. And since the international process was initiated over the genocidal plans al-Bashir “masterminded and implemented” in the Darfur region, the mass murderer has continued carrying out barbaric atrocities against Christians, the people of the Nuba mountains, and other groups.
“Just a year after the human rights council sought to exorcise the ghosts of its past by suspending Col. Muammar Qaddafi’s Libya — which infamously chaired the body in 2003, and was reelected a member in 2010 — it is now set to replace him with a tyrant wanted for genocide by the International Criminal Court,” said  UN Watch Executive Director Hillel Neuer, who compared the development to putting Jack the Ripper in charge of a women’s shelter. “For how long must we have the inmates running the asylum?”
UN Watch, a Geneva-based watchdog that monitors the global institution, called on the U.S. government and the European Union to help defeat al-Bashir’s candidacy by promptly announcing their opposition. It also said that the UN and the cause of human rights would be “severely damaged” if the genocidal tyrant was able to secure a seat on the council.
Even the U.S. government, which has been providing taxpayer-funded aid and even “security” assistance to the Sudanese regime as part of its terror war, already decried the preposterous candidacy of the infamous mass-murderer. But while American lawmakers continue to debate a complete withdrawal of the U.S. government from the UN Human Rights Council, the Obama administration offered only a tepid condemnation of al-Bashir’s bid.
“Sudan, a consistent human rights violator, does not meet the Council’s own standards for membership,” explained  Kurtis Cooper, a deputy spokesman for the U.S. Mission to the UN. “It would be inappropriate for Sudan to have a seat on the Council while the Sudanese head of State is under International Criminal Court indictment for war crimes in Darfur and the government of Sudan continues to use violence to inflame tensions along its border with South Sudan.”
The Obama administration re-joined the controversial UN council in 2009 after it underwent changes in 2006 supposedly aimed at making harder for despots to acquire seats. But the battle over U.S. membership is still underway, with numerous lawmakers calling for withdrawal  – and the latest developments will certainly play a role in future debates.
A broad coalition of African and international human rights groups have blasted Sudan’s potential appointment as well. In a letter sent to the continent’s national foreign ministers, the 18 organizations urged political leaders and the African Union to withdraw their support from the candidacies of the rulers of Sudan and Ethiopia.
“The Sudanese army has been responsible for arbitrary detentions, extrajudicial killings, and indiscriminate bombardment,” the open letter stated, citing a long list of crimes and terror perpetrated by al Bashir’s genocidal regime. “Sudanese human rights defenders have even faced reprisals for their participation at the Human Rights Council.”
Other controversial candidates for the council likely to be appointed include the socialist regime of Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez, the U.S.-funded terror-supporting government of Pakistan, the rulers of Ethiopia, and several others with dire human rights records. The brutal Assad regime in Syria is set to run next year, according to news reports.
“Think for a moment about just how outrageous this is: the genocidal Sudanese regime, and the dictatorship in Venezuela which models itself after Fidel Castro, are both poised to join a UN organization responsible for preventing human rights abuse and punishing the abusers,” said U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), the chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee who has long been a critic the absurdly titled UN body. “The Obama administration should stop making excuses for the UN Human Rights Council, which remains as dictator-friendly as ever, despite three years of U.S. membership and funding.”
The UN Council recently came under fire for criticizing the United States in the wake of the Trayvon Martin shooting earlier this year as well. The global entity’s so-called “High Commissioner for Human Rights,” a South African named Navi Pillay whose prominence stems from an appointment by the communist-dominated African National Congress  (ANC), revealed her ignorance for the whole world to see.
“As High Commissioner for Human Rights, I call for an immediate investigation,” she told  the press after the Florida shooting, apparently unaware that local, state, and federal investigations were already well underway to determine the facts in the case. She also questioned U.S. self-defense rights, the “Stand Your Ground” law, and the judicial process, sparking widespread outrage and ridicule among liberty-minded Americans.
The UN itself is also under fire from all sides for a seemingly never-ending parade of scandals. Among the more recent outrages:allowing its “peace keeping” troops to continue engaging in systematic sex crimes worldwide ; handing U.S. technology to the regimes ruling Iran and North Korea ; criticizing the United States  and Canada  for bogus abuses; fabricating climate hysteria to justify its power grabs ; using U.S. taxpayers’ money on forced abortions in China ; and much more.
Critics say it has become increasingly clear that the lawless UN cannot be reformed. According to opponents, the time has come for the U.S. government to permanently defund and withdraw from the “dictators club” before it does any more damage. However, it remains unclear how many more scandals American lawmakers will tolerate before finally putting their foot down once and for all.