Wednesday, September 9, 2009

No, Really?

From Reuters, "U.N. rights chief sees possible war crimes in Congo." War crimes, in the Congo? No way! The Congo is an atrocity-ridden hellhole, yet the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights has to hedge her words. As the report shows, it's hard to keep track of all the horrors since they are committed both by government forces and various rebel groups. Here's the U.N. chief:  

judicial response to the abuses had been "wholly insufficient" and called for "concrete and immediate action to hold perpetrators accountable, particularly since sexual violence continues to take place on a daily basis".
I'm sure the same government carrying out rapes and massacres is going to be really worried about prosecuting them.

The Congo situation is a prime example of the impotence of the U.N., as if we needed another one. According to the report, one massacre occurred two miles away from a U.N. peacekeeping mission. Naturally the troops there had excuses for doing nothing: they didn't know about it, and they couldn't have helped if they had. Which leads one to ask, what good are they? Even using the term "peacekeeping" in regard to the Congo is nothing more than a joke.

1 comment:

  1. The Congo is a war crime at this point. Just one big war crime. And the thing that really keeps me from believing in that whole NWO/OWG Antichrist bs is that I'd have to swallow that the UN is capable of ruling the planet. Yeah, right.