The Devil's Footprints

[NIGHTWATCH]

This is the in your face deceit we are dealing with. The U.N. talking international gun control and here ending genocide.

Is there an angle?






Call to back UN genocide reform

Oxfam has urged the US, Russia, India and Brazil to support a UN reform that would require the organisation to act quickly to prevent genocide.

The international charity accuses the four countries of blocking UN plans designed to stop atrocities such as the 1994 Rwanda genocide happening again.

Oxfam says the proposal would oblige the international community to take action if governments failed to do so.

Its statement comes ahead of a UN summit next month to discuss reforms.

Oxfam says that while US officials publicly back the planned reform, in principle they are seeking to water it down.

Other countries opposing the move include Syria, Iran, Cuba, Pakistan, Egypt and Algeria, the charity said.

'New standard'

The current draft statement says the UN has a "shared responsibility to take collective action, in a timely and decisive manner" to "help protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity".

The international community must never again allow genocide or mass murder to go unchecked - Nicola Reindorp Oxfam spokeswoman

Oxfam says it is essential the agreement remains this strongly worded, if UN members are to prevent future genocides happening.

Such a reform would establish a new standard, the charity says, and oblige the international community to act when required.

Oxfam's spokeswoman in New York, Nicola Reindorp, said: "We've taken the step of exposing the governments blocking the agreement so people around the world can call on them to change their minds.

"We urge these governments to urgently reconsider their position and agree to protect civilians from mass murder and atrocities.

"The international community must never again allow genocide or mass murder to go unchecked."

Governments supporting the call for strong language in the draft statement include Rwanda, South Africa, Tanzania, Nigeria, Kenya, Chile, Peru, Argentina, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Canada and the EU.

However, opposition from the would-be blockers could still dilute the commitment and so make it meaningless, Oxfam warned.

"Those supporting the responsibility of states to protect civilians must stick to their principles and those opposing it must think again," Ms Reindorp said.

"Brazil, India, Russia and the US must play their part in helping to stop the slaughter of thousands of innocent civilians."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4150002.stm

 

[The Real Hawkeye]

The Rwanda genocide was not only not stopped by the UN, the UN helped the genocide along by first assisting the faction in power in implementing a total ban on civilian gun possession. After that, they did a house to house search for guns, and when they were sure that no members of the Tootsi people (or was it Hootu?) had any guns, the genocide started right on schedule. Genocide has almost always, in history, followed the disarmament of a nation's civilian population.

 

[boofus]

The perpetrators of genocide SIT IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. Some sit in the Security Council. And we're supposed to have any confidence whatsoever in any civilian disarmament plan the UN proposes? Gimme a break.

 

[Pilgrim]

There will never be 'reform' on Genocide because the UN will never agree on how many dead it takes to constitute Genocide.

Pilgrim

 

[Coronach]

The UN will also feel perfectly free to disregard any resolution it passes in reference to this. It is not a higher authority demanding compliance with a standard, it is a resolution made to itself. This is the legislative equivalent of a post-it note on the fridge saying "remember your diet."

Until the constituent members decide to grow a spine in reference to genocide, the body as a whole will contnue to lead a lovely, squishy, skeleton-free existence.

Mike

 

[SMMAssociates]

It never ceases to amaze me how many people feel that the best way to protect me from my enemies is to disarm me....

It never amazes me how many people would happily be my enemies, too, but that's another story. :banghead:

It really cranks me off when I'm paying for it....

****

Crank off an anti. Buy a gun. Better yet, buy two, and send me one....

 

[Flyboy]

"Brazil, India, Russia and the US must play their part in helping to stop the slaughter of thousands of innocent civilians."

Must "play [our] part in helping to stop [it]?" Funny, but phrases like that are usually reserved when there's some sort of moral culpability. For example, automakers that must "do their part" to reduce emissions (emissions being related to the products they've sold), or Worldcom execs "doing their part" to help restore the company pension fund. The phrase "their part" implies a duty owed, typically resulting from actions that led to the situation in the first place.

So, tell me, please, where is our moral culpability for Slobodan Milosevic's bloody little war? Did we fund him? Did we give him weapons? Did we give him any assistance or encouragement whatsoever? Didn't think so. "Our part," strictly speaking, is to stay the hell out of other peoples' business.

Note that this theory can also be used to justify removing Saddam from Iraq, seeing as how we helped put him in power in the first place. Of course, the UN doesn't want us doing any part of that one.