US 'to quit UN human rights council'The US is set to pull out of the United Nations Human Rights Council, unnamed UN officials say.The US UN envoy Nikki Haley and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo are set make the announcement later on Tuesday.Ms Haley last year accused the council of "chronic anti-Israel bias" and said the US was reviewing its membership.Formed in 2006, the council has been criticised for allowing countries with questionable human rights records to be members.UN officials have not commented on the expected US announcement. "We will wait to hear the details of that decision before commenting further," said UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric.The reported move comes amid intense criticism over the Trump administration's policy of separating child migrants from their parents at the US-Mexico border.UN human rights chief Zeid Ra'ad called the policy "unconscionable".Meanwhile the campaign group Human Rights Watch criticised President Trump's human rights policy as "one-dimensional"."The UN Human Rights Council has played an important role in such countries as North Korea, Syria, Myanmar and South Sudan, but all Trump seems to care about is defending Israel," said HRW executive director Kenneth Roth.QuoteWhat is the UN Human Rights Council?Created in 2006 to replace the UN's Human Rights Commission, which was widely discredited for electing member states with questionable track records on human rightsAll of the 47 members are elected for three-year termsThe council aims to shine a spotlight on rights abuses by adopting resolutions but has faced similar criticism to the commissionIn 2013, human rights groups complained when China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Algeria and Vietnam were elected to the bodyThe US only joined in 2009 under President Barack Obama. It is midway through its current termIn her first address to the council a year ago, Ms Haley said it was "hard to accept" that resolutions had been passed against Israel yet none had been considered for Venezuela, which at the time saw dozens of protesters killed during political turmoil."It is essential that this council address its chronic anti-Israel bias if it is to have any credibility," she said.Israel is the only country that is subject to a permanent standing agenda item, meaning its treatment of the Palestinians is regularly scrutinised.Leaving the council would would be the latest rejection by the US of multilateral efforts, including the Paris climate agreement and the Iran nuclear deal.https://www.bbc.com/news/44537372
What is the UN Human Rights Council?Created in 2006 to replace the UN's Human Rights Commission, which was widely discredited for electing member states with questionable track records on human rightsAll of the 47 members are elected for three-year termsThe council aims to shine a spotlight on rights abuses by adopting resolutions but has faced similar criticism to the commissionIn 2013, human rights groups complained when China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Algeria and Vietnam were elected to the bodyThe US only joined in 2009 under President Barack Obama. It is midway through its current term
This forum is a joke
You lot will miss me when I'm gone
Sessions:- This isn't exactly the same as one of the worst things that happened in the history of our species. "Fundamentally, we are enforcing the law"Weren't the nazi's enforcing the law at the time also?
Ms Haley said it was "hard to accept" that resolutions had been passed against Israel yet none had been considered for Venezuela,
Looks like he going up the trade war with China, they are saying he wants a list of goods he can put a 10% tariff on to cost China $200b.China have said they will do the same to the USA.
And ‘work makes free’, sounds a rather noble sentiment in another context than above the gates of a concentration camp.
Doesn’t China hold most of the US debt?
Just been watching a vid in the Trump video thread.One particular segment from Morning Joe.He really is the spouter of newspeak.Every word that comes from him is a twisting of the truth, a deflection, or an out and out lie.Absolutely nothing he says (outside of his cult) has any credibility, for anyone with half a brain.It's actually quite disturbing, and frightening.
US President Donald Trump has defended his policy of splitting up families entering the US illegally, defying a growing chorus of condemnation.Speaking at a business convention, Mr Trump said children had to be taken away if their parents were jailed for illegally crossing the US border.The president had earlier sparked outrage for tweeting that undocumented immigrants would "infest" the US.Mexico's foreign minister has called the US policy "cruel and inhuman".Mr Trump is meeting Republican lawmakers later to discuss a bill that proposes to curb the policy."I don't want children taken away from parents," Mr Trump said. "When you prosecute the parents for coming in illegally - which should happen - you have to take the children away."
Meanwhile, Mr Trump faced criticism for his choice of language on Tuesday after tweeting that immigrants threatened "to pour into and infest our Country".What are migrants' countries of origin saying?Mexican Foreign Minister Luis Videgaray Caso said on Tuesday that the separation of children from parents at the US border was "cruel and inhuman", and clearly violated human rights.The Salvadoran foreign ministry issued a statement on Monday saying the US policy was "exposing children to extremely adverse conditions".Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez said: "Our position is that families should not be separated."
A lawyer defending the detained immigrants tells the Boston Globe that several of her clients had been told by Border Patrol agents that their children were being taken to be bathed - a tactic that has drawn further comparisons to the Holocaust.As the hours passed the mothers began to realise their children were not going to be immediately returned, according to lawyer Azalea Aleman-Bendiks.
In her first address to the council a year ago, Ms Haley said it was "hard to accept" that resolutions had been passed against Israel yet none had been considered for Venezuela, which at the time saw dozens of protesters killed during political turmoil."It is essential that this council address its chronic anti-Israel bias if it is to have any credibility," she said.Israel is the only country that is subject to a permanent standing agenda item, meaning its treatment of the Palestinians is regularly scrutinised.Leaving the council would would be the latest rejection by the US of multilateral efforts, including the Paris climate agreement and the Iran nuclear deal.https://www.bbc.com/news/44537372This is getting beyond a joke. Seriously someone just send them all into space. Let the aliens decide what they want to do with this vile ignorant garbage piece of a shithole government.
There is nothing to understand or sympathise with if its reasons like abortion though. You cannot reason with people like that.
This is not funny anymore.
The argument that abortion is wrong is simple to understand and so should be easy to argue against.
I almost started arguing with him, but it would have turned into WW3 and wrecked our working relationship.
In truth, this is the sort of thing I imagine (and hope) would turn them off Trump, her mum definitely, knowing her. And, as I said, it wasn't Trump they are in favour of, they are fully cognizant of the fact he's a shitty human being and were never remotely part of the MAGA crowd, it was the fact he said he'd let individual states determine their own abortion laws that swung it, apparently.
Definitely. He has done and said some stupid things but the decision with migrants is without doubt the worst.
I'd say we should maybe reach out because, currently, it's the right that is in power on both sides of the Atlantic, and it's worth doing whatever we can to ensure they get voted out at the earliest opportunity. Or we could just snipe mindless vitriol in their general direction. I do that myself most days if I'm honest and yeah, it's weirdly satisfying and cathartic, but sometimes I stop and think "what the fuck am I actually achieving here?" although it normally doesn't last long and then I go right back to laughing at/being appalled by the wannabe fascists whining about the MSM and how we need to Free Tommy. It's not very productive though.
would rather have a wank wearing a barb wire glove
If you're chasing thrills, try a bit of auto-asphyxiation with a poppers-soaked orange in your gob.
Hopefully this leads to renewed pressure on Theresa May to cancel his UK visit.
I watched the first five minutes of this. It was too scary to watch anymore.<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/YyPaWMYA6CQ" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/YyPaWMYA6CQ</a>
Its all about winning shiny things.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Trump can not and is not going to initiate any kind of nationwide anti abortion legislation? So really if people are voting for him based solely on him being supposedly anti abortion (yeah, right) then they're pretty much pissing in the wind because voting for Trump wont change anything?To the people it matters to, abortion might be a dumpster truck worth of shit. But with Trump you're facing that off against a mountain of shit. People who vote for Trump are not complicit in traumatising the lives of thousands of people.There are people on these very boards who have gone through trauma and abuse. Look at those kids. You think something like this isn't going to leave its mark on those children? They'll carry this forever. As will the parents.What happens when somebody dies in custody? It will happen eventually. For that matter, how many of those kids have had vaccines? What if measles gets loose in there? What kind of medical facilities do these camps have?
I've got a feeling that Origi is the real deal, from a couple of games I watched but mainly his interviews there seems to be something about him.
Are people here aware UK home office has been separating children from parents for years? https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2006/aug/18/immigration.immigrationandpublicserviceshttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34191606https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/apr/27/children-parents-asylum-seekers-cedars-centre-barnardos*this is not saying I agree with the policy I actually agree with Arny on this 100%
The first link talks of two isolated incidents where the parents were reunited with their kids.The second one bears no relation as it’s about legal immigration based on income rules, where one parent comes over leaving their spouse and children behind as they are not earning the threshold. The third link talks about parents being kept from their children for 72 hours before their flights. Barnardos even explain that there are legitimate reasons, such as a parent being a danger to their kid. Every case, kids are reunited after a short time and often for legitimate reasons or an isolated case of incompetence. What’s happening in the US is a planned policy where thousands of children are being taken, and with the former head of ICE saying that a large number of those will never be reunited with their parents.
