Once Again - the UN Misses the Mark on Human RIghts

The whole problem revolves around the UN's Human Rights Council.  The fact that it exists is an issue.  There only needs to be clear-cut definitions of human rights and do countries follow them.  Don't get me wrong, I would probably be the last person to agree with the UN's definition of what are human rights, but there are many many countries that violate human rights in hundreds of ways.


On the Human Rights Council:  We all know Libya was a member.  Now another great state in the news for killing its own for simply protesting is going to become a member.  At least it is very likely they will.  Syria is slated to be on the Council.  How is that for irony?


What the Secretary General is doing about it: Ban Ki-moon has called for for an independent investigation about Syria's murderous crackdown on protesters.  However Moon won’t do much about trying to stop Syria’s joining the Council. According to Martin Nesirky, a spokesman for the secretary-general,"That's not really for the secretary general to suggest to a member state,"

Apparently the secretary-general is more focused on securing his reappointment. He cannot be bother with trivial things like human rights, especially if it could offend potential "supporters among the 56 state members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference."

Remember - Stay Safe!

Interesting Points of Whistleblowers

I noticed that there was settlement in a "whistle-blowing" case against DynCorp for 7.7 million. You can read the article if you like.  I find it interesting that allegedly the Government has all sorts of protections for whistleblowers.  I say allegedly, because I never see articles where people blow the whistle on the government or similar entity and they get protection.  What they get is harassed, fired, or sometimes even worse.

While I guess we have progressed a small bit in this business of whistle-blowing - remember that if you are blowing the whistle on someone inside the government - you are likely to get terrible treatment.  Blow the whistle on a contracting company and you get the same bad treatment, but then a settlement.

It is a good thing to document all that goes on.  I guess the Congressional hearings we all expected on Iraq will never happen now, or will come so late it won't matter.  Doing the right thing does not always pay off.  It only does occasionally when you are on the government's side.

Whatever you do - Stay Safe!

Crucible Awarded Contract for INL

Please Take Note. In case you haven't noticed, Crucible has won the INL contract for a lot of locations. Click the ling here or over there---> for details.

Looking at Human Rights Violations

Many do-gooders in the NGO/UN world are obsessed with the term "human rights."  Even their lawyers do not have a true understanding of "human rights" as they only deal with it in the way the government treats people in an official capacity.  They rarely look at the most basic of all human rights - self defense.  Why?  Because most of these in the community think guns are bad in a blanket way when they are in the population of a country.  What they forget about almost all major human rights violations is - if the citizens were armed to a decent capacity - those violations could not have taken place.

The right of self defense is the most basic human right.  Take that away and the rest really do not matter.    Stop and think about it.  Who violates human rights?  Usually a government - yet the do-gooders only want firearms in the hands of government employees.  What kind of logic is that?  Remember the short-lived post-Katrina policy of the NOPD, which illegally burst into people's homes to seize their firearms?

In some government and NGO offices, there are people who are obsessed with guns. They appear to have no concern about the murder, torture, rape, and ethnic cleansing that result from abusive enforcement of anti-gun laws. The victims are treated like some eggs that must be broken in order to make the omelet of a society where no one except government employees has firearms.

 See what I mean?  I challenge any of you who have worked in an international setting to tell me that this isn't the basic thinking going on in "human rights" offices.

Wearing a uniform representing the government does not somehow make using deadly force any more OK than a person protecting himself or his family.


Possessing a firearm for self defense is a human right.  What possible argument can you have against that?  I look forward to seeing any.