U.N. antithetical to U.S.
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Friday, Nov. 16, 2012, 8:56 p.m.
Regarding the editorial “The Human Rights Council: Wrong again” (Nov. 8 and TribLIVE.com): The recent report submitted by the U.N. Human Rights Council to the U.N. General Assembly calling for an international boycott of all companies that do business in Israel, including U.S. businesses, is truly astounding.
This incredibly malevolent, blatantly biased policy recommendation once again demonstrates the harsh fact that the U.N. is heavily influenced and administratively manipulated by a consortium of countries whose political philosophy and economic policies are strongly antithetical to the best interests and sociopolitical posture of the United States.
These same groups at the U.N. either ignore or even applaud the terroristic killings, violence against women and other horrible acts committed by people in their own countries on an ongoing basis. Many U.S. citizens have been murdered, American businesses have suffered substantial financial losses and our country's foreign-policy mandates have been boldly ignored or rejected by the very same countries that control the Human Rights Council and, quite frequently, the General Assembly.
The time is long overdue for the U.S. to assert itself and aggressively undertake whatever actions are necessary to protect our citizens, pursue international policies that provide the best possible outcome for the world and defend our corporations and businesses from foreign groups that have diametrically opposed economic interests.
Democrats and Republicans need to work together to achieve these goals in a unified, firm fashion.
Cyril H. Wecht
The writer is a former Allegheny County coroner.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Knives vs. guns II
- Knives vs. guns I
- Bloomberg & coal
- Resurrection? Yes, really
- Tragedy sensationalized
- Consequences in space
- Tragedy’s ramifications II
- Tragedy’s ramifications I
- Tragedy’s ramifications III