Okay, so let’s get this straight — the United Nations votes to put human rights monitors in Palestine and the United States, acting alone as one of the charter members, vetoes!? Exactly what positive spin can possibly paint this disgusting act as somehow justified? We’re always blowing smoke about being the human rights leader, but now we don’t want to see human rights monitors in the middle of a warzone?
I’d like to hear anybody explain to me how the United States can claim the moral high ground in anything while voting against human rights monitors in the middle east, especially when the rest of the civilized and uncivilized world votes in favor of such action. Oh yes, I can hear the white Christians now explaining how the United Nations are all just a bunch of terrorists — after all, they’re not all white and they’re not all Christian.
It’s a joke. I’m shaking my head. We vetoed a human rights monitoring program. Obviously, we are afraid that if we allow human rights monitors into Palestine, lives might be saved — and we can’t possibly have that now, can we? No, we’re hoping for a mass die-off in the middle east. After all, they’re all terrorists, those damn bearded darkies!