Reflections From a Murky Pond

Unsurprisingly, it took little more than moments for the filth in the United Nations, now little more than a OIC front-group, to start whining, bleating, and yammering about America’s extermination of Osama bin Laden.

It took less than a full day before they started quasi-demanding that we explain ourselves and justify our actions to them.

Details of their arrogance from Reuters via Yahoo News:

GENEVA (Reuters) – The United Nations’ top human rights official called on the United States Tuesday to give the U.N. details about Osama bin Laden’s killing and said that all counter-terrorism operations must respect international law.

But Navi Pillay, U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, said that the al Qaeda leader, killed in a U.S. operation in Pakistan, had committed crimes against humanity as self-confessed mastermind of “the most appalling acts of terrorism,” including the September 11, 2001 attacks on America.

It was always clear that taking bin Laden alive was likely to be difficult, she said, noting that U.S. authorities had stated that they intended to arrest him if possible.

“This was a complex operation and it would be helpful if we knew the precise facts surrounding his killing. The United Nations has consistently emphasized that all counter-terrorism acts must respect international law,” Pillay said in a statement issued in response to a Reuters request.

In Washington, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder defended as lawful Tuesday the U.S. operation to go into Pakistan that resulted in the death of bin Laden and the taking of his body.

“If he was captured and brought before a court, I have no doubt he would have been charged with the most serious crimes, including the mass murder of civilians that took place on 9/11, which were planned and systematic and in my view amounted to crime against humanity,” said Pillay, a former U.N. war crimes judge.

From what I can see, the details of Operation Geronimo and the reasoning behind it could be easy summed up in a short memo to this jumped-up piece of filth trying to justify her own job by yapping at her betters:

Any Further Questions, Navi?

Her stupid claim that Osama bin Laden would be “charged with the most serious crimes” is one of the laughable statements I’ve heard come out of anyone within the UN in some time. Of course Osama bin Laden would be charged by the International Criminal Court (ICC) and quite that quite readily and speedily.

Convicting it and getting an appropriate sentence enacted upon it under ICC rules is another matter altogether. It would probably die of old age in it’s UN-mandated, carefully comfortable place of incarceration before the ICC ever finished their arguments over jurisdictionality.

Worse, as Richard Goldstone proved to the Civilized World, such a “trial” would swiftly turn into an ongoing attack upon America’s War on Terror.

Navanethem Pillay’s and the UN expected yammering should be met by either America’s silence, the memo shown above, or an eviction notice.

Related Reading:

There is seemingly no sphere of human endeavor that the puling Leftists won’t attempt to invade and subvert into a mockery of itself all in the name of what they try to foist off on mankind as “Human Rights” and “Social Justice.”

It was only a matter of time before these Leftist filth made a push to pervert and control the internet in the same manner.

As always, they seek to wield fictional rights as a sword in their broad ranging jihad against individual liberty, capitalism, and any thought that merit should hold any meaning whatsoever.

The current case in point is the filth from the Internet Rights and Principles Dynamic Coalition and their 10 Internet Rights And Principles with my specific rebuttal in-line:

1. Universality and Equality
   All humans are born free and equal in dignity and rights, which must be respected, protected and fulfilled in the online environment.

One – people may well be born equal in dignity and rights but their later actions will not result in equal worth or outcome.

Two – neither rights nor privileges must be protected on the net anymore than they me protected in any other venue and, in no case, is fulfillment required to be enforced.

2. Rights and Social Justice
   The Internet is a space for the promotion, protection and fulfillment of human rights and the advancement of social justice. Everyone has the duty to respect the human rights of all others in the online environment.

The internet is a method for communication, nothing more. Any other idea is phantasmagoria meant to further a non-normative agenda.

3. Accessibility
   Everyone has an equal right to access and use a secure and open Internet.

Technically true – everyone has the right to purchase whatever level of access they can afford unless their crimes have resulted in their forfeiture of this right.

4. Expression and Association
   Everyone has the right to seek, receive, and impart information freely on the Internet without censorship or other interference. Everyone also has the right to associate freely through and on the Internet, for social, political, cultural or other purposes.

No; everyone has the right to use their purchased access to seek, receive, and impart legal information without government censorship except when that censorship is for reasons of national security.

Technical limitation required by internet providers are to be expected and no individual, group, corporation, or government is required to provide a forum for such expression and can, within their own systems edit or delete information at will.

5. Privacy and Data Protection
   Everyone has the right to privacy online. This includes freedom from surveillance, the right to use encryption, and the right to online anonymity. Everyone also has the right to data protection, including control over personal data collection, retention, processing, disposal and disclosure.

People have no more right to privacy online than when using any other form of communication. Government can surveil people within the limits set forth by their nations’ laws.

Additionally any entity may require any level or type of personal data as a prerequisite for providing to an individual an online service of any sort.

As for control over the later use of one’s information – that is a good thing and a privilege that should be maintained wherever possible but it’s not a right.

6. Life, Liberty and Security
   The rights to life, liberty, and security must be respected, protected and fulfilled online. These rights must not be infringed upon, or used to infringe other rights, in the online environment.

This one beggars the imagination of any and all rational humans. I can’t even begin to address the gross stupidity of this point in their manifesto.

7. Diversity
   Cultural and linguistic diversity on the Internet must be promoted, and technical and policy innovation should be encouraged to facilitate plurality of expression.

If there’s a market for such things they will happen organically, without significant intervention by any governing body. Nor should such ghettoization be actively encouraged.

This idea is counterproductive to the free flow of information, ideas, and knowledge and is nothing but another example of Leftists’ hatred for normative / majority behaviors, ideals, morality, and cultures.

8. Network Equality
   Everyone shall have universal and open access to the Internet’s content, free from discriminatory prioritization, filtering or traffic control on commercial, political or other grounds.

Translation – The productive members of society must pay for the internet access of the worthless eaters and looters; this is ever the generalized goal of “Social Justice.”

9. Standards and Regulation
   The Internet’s architecture, communication systems, and document and data formats shall be based on open standards that ensure complete interoperability, inclusion and equal opportunity for all.

If there’s a market for this it will happen organically, without significant intervention by any governing body. In point of fact, it already has to a large extent.

These puling Leftists real point is the “inclusion and equal opportunity for all;” by which they really mean equal results for all. It is nothing but an attempt to suborn the standards to bring everyone down to the level of the lowest common denominators.

10. Governance
    Human rights and social justice must form the legal and normative foundations upon which the Internet operates and is governed. This shall happen in a transparent and multilateral manner, based on principles of openness, inclusive participation and accountability.

The Internet’s normative foundation is as a communication medium, nothing more and nothing less. It has nothing intrinsically to do with human rights or “Social Justice.”

Most of the above are nothing but but Leftist “dog-whistles” for nationalizing – actually “extra-nationalizing” as in the UN – the internet backbone and providing broadband access to everyone and anyone without direct charge – unless, of course, they’re a productive member of society, in which case they would not only have to directly pay for internet access but also indirectly pay for the internet access that would be provided for the useless eaters of the world.

I freely admit that the moment anything starts jabbering about “Social Justice” my first thought is to put few hollow-point rounds in their guts and that I rarely get past that thought.

That is simply because I believe in defending my real rights from their supposedly benevolent tyranny and their goal to steal from me and mine in order to give to those without measurable worth or merit.

And, as is always the case with these vermin, they want some form of monitoring / governing body to police the internet to ensure that nobody except the productive and normative members of society are ever offended by what is said on the internet.

When dealing with these sorts it’s absolutely necessary to remember that their goals never change and their attack vectors rarely do so. It’s always the same thing, incessant attacks upon individual liberties, capitalism, and national sovereignty with the goal being to subjugate humanity to a tyrannical nanny state world quasi-government devoted to enslaving the productive to feed the needs and desires of the worthless dregs at the bottom of society.

~*~

Keep your eyes open. Travel light but load heavy, and always put another round in the enemy after they’re down.

Related Reading:

Last week the “august” body of the United Nations elected Iran to hold a seat on the U.N.’s Commission on the Status of Women (CSW), a body supposedly dedicated exclusively to “promote gender equality and advancement of women.” This came suspiciously close on the heels of Iran abandoning it’s bid for a seat on the U.N. Human Rights Council. In all likelihood, women and girls were a sacrificial offering to Iran as a appeasement and propitiation for the even U.N. not being willing to allow Iran to have a hand in shaping global Human Rights policies.

Here is a very small sampling of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s more “lovely” activities which obviously qualify them as a exemplary choice to help shape gender equality policies across the globe:

• Institutional rape of condemned female prisoners
• Raided and closed the Defenders of Human Rights Center
• Stones women to death if convicted of adultery
• Considers women’s testimony to be worth half that of men’s

Of course, to be completely fair, Iran is not really any worse than any other Muslim country. In fact, as repressive and misogynist as they are, Iran’s laws and culture are not nearly so bad for women and girls as some other parts of the Muslim World.

Just disband the United Nations. It is nothing but a corrupt, pathetic, and degenerate gathering of fools and miscreants that has been hopelessly infected and suborned by the despicable forces of Islam and the vermin of the Muslim World. The UN’s rot goes too deep for it to be saved, if it was ever worth saving in the first place.

This travesty must be brought to an end.

Related Reading: