Joe Anybody says --> Don't Trust The US on Human Rights Law!
Mood:  loud
Now Playing: Human Rights ..... The USA tells the UN - our way or no way!
Topic: HUMANITY
So Bolton has the position in the UN to represent the US......but who is he really representing?

If I was born stupid
I would of thought the US really did care about Human Rights and participating in honorable ways to protect them.

Ha! Not with this UN bozo behind the wheel.
The mere fact that Bolton who didn't even respect or believe in having a UN would then become the ambassador for this
Once A Great Nation The USA!
And by his representingly screwing up our US/UN Policy for the delight I'm sure, of the neocon administration.
It is now been on a terrible downhill slide, in that we were proudly once known as being Noble and Virtuous, it seems the neocon leadership representing us now are pestilential perverse!
...A U.N. diplomat closely involved in the negotiations said that it was not clear to them what Washington ultimately wanted. Mediators and allies offered ideas to help them achieve their goals-- and nothing happened, he said.

Facts be told I am all to aware that we could care less about Human Rights.
Nothing happend? .....Z3 Readers not all to well why the water is murky and its not clear, Government choas
And no offered ideas could help.
Joe Anybody know all to well what them bastards are doing......"not clear" here "not clear" there
torture here.., war there.... unclear year to year.
Ya ....so Boltons not at is UN workplace ...because he is back at home putting the Media PR bull/Spin to everyone who pretends to care.

As pointed out by Swiss Ambassador Peter Maurer who criticized the United States approach as "intransigent and maximalist" and for using its lofty ideals as a cover to undermine the U.N.
He goes on to say "All too often, high ambitions are cover-ups for less noble aims, and oriented not at improving the United Nations, but at belittling and weakening it," ...no that is the America I am learning we have become under the neocons!

In true, bushman form as he did with the "Deny That We Torture Topic,".... critics said that instead of negotiating at these meetings, the U.S. simply kept repeating its position. As well, Bolton did not appear at most of the formal sessions, which other ambassadors who did show up took to mean that Washington was not taking the process seriously, diplomats said. (Great Job Bolton way to represent the USA on Human Rights for all of us citizens of the USA to the United Nations)

In the resoning behind the US stance against a 2/3 vote on Human rights this it has been said that U.S. negotiators privately acknowledged that "The two-thirds standard could even be used to keep the U.S. off the council in a time when the United States is under scrutiny for its treatment of detainees at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and the detention camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba"

Aaaahhhhhh I knew Torture fitted into this hogwash.
The US could be and should be booted from the council just for this point by itself.

So as Bolton held meetings and telephone calls with a number of editorial boards of major newspapers across the country he was able to give influential opinion makers his one sided take on the negotiations, while he ignored or refused to agree to any kind of policy in a stunning losing end of the 170-4 vote on the creation of a U.N. Human Rights Council.

Good Job USA for Human Rights Policies.
Read the LA TIMES ARTICLE about this joke of a man and his representing you at the UN.
**if prompted for an ID and password "sign up" or use...
em>ID = latimes@dodgeit.com
password = password
If Bolton was not making his message clear at the U.N., it was certainly clear in Washington. The ambassador spent every Friday there in Washington, briefing Congress members and meeting with State Department and White House government officials.

His press secretary, Ric Grenell, arranged calls and meetings with about 70 editorial page editors. In one influential editorial, the New York Times wrote, "John Bolton is right; Secretary-General Kofi Annan is wrong."..


Bolton claimed "We would rather have nothing than something that falls short of our standards. That was our view all along," .....DID HE SAY WE WOULD RATHER HAVE NOTHING?????? WOW NO HUMAN RIGHTS POLICY ...THAT WOULD MAKE IT REAL EASY TO TORTURE AND ATTACK COUNTRIES WITH INPUNITY....

In the words of one of the chairs of the preparatory meetings "Their bottom lines were not unreasonable," said. "But their [USA]inflexibility was! If one formula does not work, if you're serious, you should work to come up with another one. For the most part, they [USA]did not do that."

Remember 3 weeks ago on this Bozo Bolton character I mentioned --> This Zebra3 Report here * CLICK for a Re-Cap