New U.N. Report Criticizes Arizonans As "Xenophobes And Racists"

From Floyd Reports:

New UN Report Targets Arizona “Xenophobes and Racists”?




Posted on September 30, 2010 by Ben Johnson by Ben Johnson







A report issued today by a United Nations agency appears to be a thinly veiled critique of Arizona’s immigration law, one that equates its supporters with “xenophobes and racists.” The Global Migration Group adopted its statement on the “Human Rights of Migrants in Irregular Situation” — that is, illegal aliens — earlier today in Geneva. The two-page document criticized unnamed nations for viewing illegal immigrants “through the lens of sovereignty, border security or law enforcement, sometimes driven by hostile domestic constituencies,” and demanded governments instead grant illegals “economic, social, and cultural rights,” including “reproductive healthcare.”



The report seems to be the fruition of Barack Obama’s decision to haul the state of Arizona before the UN Human Rights Council over its differences on domestic policy last month. The GMG is “an inter-agency group” of the United Nations consisting of 14 member agencies, including the World Bank, UNESCO, and the UN Population Fund. It is currently chaired by the Office of High Commissioner for Human Rights, which supports “the work of the United Nations human rights mechanisms, such as the Human Rights Council,” the agency with which the Obama administration filed its complaint.



The GMG’s statement is simultaneously an over-the-top indictment of anyone opposed to the Open Borders Lobby and an endorsement of European-style social welfare programs as “fundamental” human rights. The report states “migrants” are “more likely to be targeted by xenophobes and racists” or “victimized by unscrupulous employers.”



The document uses the the time-honored bad faith argument of cobbling together opposition to socialism with the most outrageous abuses. Illegal aliens, the report warns, “are often denied the most basic labor protections, due process guarantees, personal security, and healthcare.” Female illegals face everything from “sexual exploitation” and “HIV transmission” to “challenges in access to employment, and health services, including reproductive healthcare.” In international human rights speak, access to reproductive healthcare means taxpayer-funded abortion.



The report takes Arizonans — I mean, human rights abusers — to task for their lack of gratitude to the illegal invaders. It states, “[C]hildren can be banned from classrooms or denied their fundamental rights, even as their parents work and contribute to the economies of host countries and thus contribute to raising the standards of living and human development for those societies.” Of course, and their parents’ main contributions to the U.S. “standard of living” have been tuberculosis, whooping cough, hospital closures, gang violence, crime, and expanded welfare use. The National Academy of Sciences found years ago that each “migrant” with less than a high school education costs the United States $90,000, and that immigrants only begin to contribute to the economy if once they have a post-secondary education.



The problem, the report states, is that: “Too often, States [that is, nations -- BJ] have addressed irregular migration solely through the lens of sovereignty, border security or law enforcement, sometimes driven by hostile domestic constituencies.” Although it acknowledges nations have “legitimate interests in securing their borders” these “concerns cannot, and indeed, as a matter of international law do not, trump the obligations of the State to respect the internationally guaranteed rights of all persons.” The GMG states the U.S. has the obligation “to fulfill the rights necessary for them to enjoy a life of dignity and security.” Such “fundamental rights of all persons, regardless of their migration status, include” the “right to be free from discrimination based on race, sex, language…or other status.” Thus, a nation that refused to provide bilingual (or, actually, multilingual) ballots or education in school, to illegal immigrants, would be considered a human rights abuser.



Another obligation is the “right to a fair trial and to legal redress.” However, the Obama administration has denied illegals their day in court, dismissing pending immigration cases against as many as 17,000 illegals already arrested.



America’s debt to its invaders are not yet exhausted. The nation owes illegals the “right to protection of economic, social, and cultural rights, including the right to health, an adequate standard of living, social security, adequate housing, education, and just and favorable conditions of work.”



As a catchall, they are entitled to all rights “guaranteed by the international human rights instruments to which the State is party” — whether this is one of the many UN treaties to which the United States is a signatory or President Obama’s report to the UN Human Rights Council, which branded Arizona’s immigration law a violation of international law.



To this end, the GMG promises to “support [nations] in their efforts to ensure the effective implementation of appropriate legislation.” The GMG will also work for “the expansion of channels for regular migration” — that is, working for Open Borders.



Further, the GMG report calls for an all-out national crackdown on dissent against its program, including those who support the Arizona law. It “calls on States, civil society, the private sector, the media and host communities” to “work actively to combat xenophobia, racism and incitement to discrimination in national politics and in public discourse” and “to actively promote tolerant societies in which every person can enjoy his or her human rights, regardless of migration status.”



The world body’s new report echoes President Obama’s first-ever report to UN Human Rights Council, both in its excoriation of all opponents and in its role as a blueprint for socialism. In addition to listing Arizona’s S.B. 1070 as an example of discrimination — although it merely reiterates standing federal law — the missive expresses our nation’s commitment to such fundamental human rights as card-check union organizing, gays in the military, Affirmative Action, and equality of outcome.



After Arizona Governor Jan Brewer learned about Obama’s actions from this reporter’s work on this website, she expressed her “concern and indignation” in a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, asking the reference to Arizona be struck. The Obama administration has refused. As it stands, the United States will be judged by genuine human rights abuser Cameroon on November 5. The troika will then draw up a plan for the United States to follow. In time, it may “decide on the measures it would need to take in case of persistent non-cooperation by a State with the” World Body.



Today’s report makes clear the United Nations cannot wait even a month to berate the United States, its patriotic citizens, or its most common-sense governor — and that Barack Obama has found a way to attack his fellow citizens by proxy.