NSP
LE

I was listening to Maajid Nawaz's show on LBC this afternoon and he was discussing the plight of the Uyghars again and had this UN lawyer on who claimed that the UN was helping the Chinese identify dissidents prepared to speak out about the Uyghar genocide so that the Chinese could imprison their families to put pressure on them to shut up. Some of the dissidents are exciles and now have British citizenship and, according to Maajid, should thus be able to enjoy the protection and support of HMG - which is conspicuously silent.
Using the terms "human rights" and "United Nations" in the same sentence is a bit of an oxymoron, it seems.
www.wionews.com
www.foxnews.com
www.express.co.uk
The actual LBC interview is available here:-
I gave it a run through the Jarrod filter and nothing came up. This is a repost of a something I put on the EU thread in reference to a comment made about the UN charter but I think it's worth an expanded discussion.
Is the UN fit for purpose? Is it complicit in what is perhaps the biggest atrocity since The Holocaust? Indeed, is China's abuse of the Uyghars a new holocaust...?
If this lady does indeed have the evidence she claims and it does indeed show what she says it does then I'd have to say, "Yes," to all the above. I'd also have to say that the UN is guilty of involvement in criminality and of trying to cover it up.
Is it actually fit for purpose? Should it be binned and rebuilt from the ground up? It should certainly be subjected to deep scrutiny and far-reaching reform, in my opinion.
Note to the howlers: this is in CA for a reason. I would hope that the mods invoke the spirit of Viro Bono and stomp on any idiocy. This is a serious matter for serious discussion. Start a parallel thread in the NAAFI if you want to clown about. That said, a little levity is always good in the midst of a serious, heavy discussion.
Using the terms "human rights" and "United Nations" in the same sentence is a bit of an oxymoron, it seems.

Whistleblower accuses UN human rights office of helping China keep an eye on dissidents
A United Nations whistleblower in an exclusive conversation with WION accused the UN Human Rights office of secretly providing the Chinese government names of activists critical of the Communist Party of China and their atrocities. Emma Reilly, a UN employee who first found about the practice...

UN Human Rights Office accused of helping China keep an eye on dissidents
A United Nations whistleblower is accusing the organization's human rights office in Switzerland of continuing to provide the Chinese government with the names of activists critical of Beijing.

UN informed China of human rights activists plan to attend meeting, claims whistleblower
CHINA'S alleged infiltration of the UN has led to the institution handing over a list of names of human rights activists to Beijing which endangered the lives of their family members, and this activity is "ongoing" a human rights lawyer and whistleblower has claimed.
The actual LBC interview is available here:-
I gave it a run through the Jarrod filter and nothing came up. This is a repost of a something I put on the EU thread in reference to a comment made about the UN charter but I think it's worth an expanded discussion.
Is the UN fit for purpose? Is it complicit in what is perhaps the biggest atrocity since The Holocaust? Indeed, is China's abuse of the Uyghars a new holocaust...?
If this lady does indeed have the evidence she claims and it does indeed show what she says it does then I'd have to say, "Yes," to all the above. I'd also have to say that the UN is guilty of involvement in criminality and of trying to cover it up.
Is it actually fit for purpose? Should it be binned and rebuilt from the ground up? It should certainly be subjected to deep scrutiny and far-reaching reform, in my opinion.
Note to the howlers: this is in CA for a reason. I would hope that the mods invoke the spirit of Viro Bono and stomp on any idiocy. This is a serious matter for serious discussion. Start a parallel thread in the NAAFI if you want to clown about. That said, a little levity is always good in the midst of a serious, heavy discussion.