Tapioca Fisted Reponse From UN on N Korea Missle Launch

Rasmussen is reporting that 57% of American voters want a military response to the North Korea missile launch while the Obama administration want the UN to give N Korea a firm talking to. (OK I made that last bit up) Meanwhile the VOA is reporting that the UN Security Council is in fine form:

The U.N. Security Council met in emergency session on Sunday afternoon to discuss concerns over North Korea's launch of a long-range rocket. But the closed-door consultations did not produce a clear and unified response.

Diplomats say the council was unified in its deep concern over the launch, but that it could not immediately agree what form its response should take. (more)

Frankly, I find it a bit surprising that so many want a military response and so few (15%) oppose military action considering how the missile basically failed. Perhaps the headlines had something to do with it.

China and Russia can pretty much put the brakes on any U.N. Security Council action anyway which is pretty much what happened. Good thing too, as we know what sharp teeth those UN resolutions have...

Joint NGO Statement on Danger of U.N. “Defamation of Religions” Campaign

From EuropeNews:

We, the undersigned non-governmental organizations,

Deeply concerned by the pervasive and mounting campaign by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) to produce U.N. resolutions, declarations, and world conferences that propagate the concept of “defamation of religions,” a concept having no basis in domestic or international law, and which would alter the very meaning of human rights, which protect individuals from harm, but not beliefs from critical inquiry;

Deeply concerned by the attempt to misuse the U.N. to legitimize blasphemy laws, thereby restricting freedom of religion, freedom of expression, and freedom of the press;
Deeply concerned that “defamation of religions” resolutions may be used in certain countries to silence and intimidate human rights activists, religious dissenters, and other independent voices;
Alarmed by the resolution on “defamation of religions” recently tabled at the current 10th session of the UN Human Rights Council;

Alarmed by the draft resolution on freedom of expression circulated by Egypt, whose amendments seek to restrict, not promote, protections for free speech;

Alarmed by the recently-announced initiative of the U.N. “Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards” to amend the International Convention for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) by adding a protocol on “defamation of religions”;

Alarmed by provisions in the latest draft outcome document of the Durban Review Conference that, through coded language and veiled references, endorse and encourage these anti-democratic initiatives;

1. Call upon all governments to oppose the “defamation of religions” resolution currently tabled at the UN Human Rights Council, and the objectionable provisions of the freedom of expression resolution;

2. Call upon all governments to resist the efforts of the “Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards” to alter the ICERD;

3. Call upon all governments not to accept or legitimize a Durban Review Conference outcome that directly or indirectly supports the “defamation of religions” campaign at the expense of basic freedoms and individual human rights. (more)

Obama Administration to Endorse Decriminalization of Homosexual Acts

What next? The international court calling states to task? Is that an extreme reading? hmmm...

Lots of folks picking up on this but the first I saw was over at Beetle Blogger:


I thought it wasn’t cool for the U.S. to be bossing other nations. But I guess not because the Obama Administration is going to sign a UN declaration calling for world wide forced acceptance of homosexual acts. No matter the cultural/religious and/or societal traditions of other nations.
The declaration is problematic for many reasons. One, it makes comment on other nations’ laws (based on their citizens’ morality). Two, the declaration conflicts with U.S. state and federal laws:

Gay rights and other groups had criticized the Bush administration when it refused to sign the declaration when it was presented at the United Nations on Dec. 19. U.S. officials said then that the U.S. opposed discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation but that parts of the declaration raised legal questions that needed further review. (more)