Analyst's note:  This upcoming United Nations Human Rights Council event will likely turn into a significant "anti-American circus."   American sovereignty will be challenged at every opportunity by this body.  It is all part of the progressive, one-world gov't crowd. 

We will soon be provided even more reason NOT to continue funding the U.N. and get them off our soil.  If I'm right, this may will prove to be yet another opportunity for those newly elected to Congress to excel.  The United States is founded on the concept of limited government.  The U.N., on the other hand, is founded on the concept of unlimited government power with virtually no meaningful restraints to protect individual liberty.  On top of this, the U.N. has become a professional politician's paradise where they work every day to set prices, production quotas, inventories, stockpiles of raw materials, labor standards, wages and monetary policies -- all planned to come under the ultimate control and direction of the United Nations.

"When the United Nations Human Rights Council, a conclave of 47 nations that includes such notorious human rights violators as China, Cuba, Libya and Saudi Arabia, meets in Geneva on Friday, its attentions will be focused on the human rights failings of a country called the United States.

It will hear, among other things, that the U.S. discriminates against Muslims, that its police are barbaric and that it has been holding political prisoners behind bars for years.

Those allegations, and many more, will come from Americans themselves — especially from a stridently critical network of U.S. organizations whose input dominates the U.N. digest of submissions from “civil society” that are part of the council’s background reading.

[....] The Obama administration  has gone to elaborate lengths to consult with such groups in advance of the Geneva meeting. The State Department, has led delegations from a variety of government departments (including Labor, Homeland Security, Education and Justice) to consult with such groups in Chicago, Detroit, San Francisco, Harlem, and Albuquerque, according to an official at State.

Those NGOs will also get a chance to “engage” with the U.S. delegation in Geneva at what the State Department calls a “first ever town hall meeting,” after the Human Rights Council, composed of national governments, makes its views known. “Many countries stack the room with NGOs that are government controlled,” the State Department official told Fox News, adding that the U.S. obviously doesn’t.

[....] CLICK HERE FOR THE U.N. SUMMARY OF SUBMISSIONS

Yet despite their apparent diversity, many of the submissions, as summarized briefly in the U.N. document, point to a number of common themes:

--The U.S. needs to sign, ratify and implement a wide number of United Nations-sponsored human rights conventions, whatever reservations various U.S. governments or courts have had to them;

-- All these treaties and conventions should be “self-executing,” meaning that no subsequent U.S. government action should be required for them to go into effect—regardless of the U.S. constitutional separation of powers, and the separation of powers between federal and state governments;

--the U.S. should have national human rights institutions to coordinate and enforce human rights compliance;

--racial, economic and social disparities are still endemic in the U.S. despite its own civil rights laws, and need to be eliminated to meet “international standards” embodied in U.N. treaties. Amnesty International, for example, charges that “racial disparities continue to exist at every stage [U.S.] in the criminal justice system,” and calls for laws to bar “racial profiling in law enforcement.”

The Center for Human Rights and Global Justice, an offshoot of New York University’s law school, goes further, and argues that since 9/11, “the U.S. has institutionalized discriminatory profiling against members of Muslim, Arab, South Asian and Middle-Eastern communities.” The organization calls for federal laws against profiling “on all grounds, with no exceptions for national security and an in-depth audit of government databases/watchlists.”

--barbaric treatment of citizens by U.S. police is allegedly rife. Again according to Amnesty, U.S. police and custody officials “are rarely prosecuted for abuses,” prison conditions “remain harsh in many states,” and “electroshock weapons are widely used against individuals who do not pose a serious threat, including children, the elderly and people under the influence of drink or drugs.”

--U.S. social conditions are dismal. One submission claims, according to the U.N. summary, that 30% of the U.S. population “lacks an adequate income to meet basic needs,” while another notes that “there is an unequal access in the U.S. to basic amenities such as adequate food, shelter, work, healthcare and education. There is also a lack of affordable housing, job shortages and income insecurity, particularly among minorities and women.”

-- native peoples on American soil are badly neglected and need the protection of international treaties, and the U.S. treats immigrants and asylum-seekers badly. At least one organization recommends a ban on deporting indigenous peoples from anywhere in the Americas. [....]"

As we watch all this unfold, it is good for all American citizens to remember that there is one and only one legitimate goal of our United States foreign policy.  It is a narrow, nationalistic goal that is the preservation of our national independence.  There is nothing in our Constitution granting our President with the privilege of offering himself as a world leader.  He is on our payroll and is our executive.  Neither our President or our Congress is granted by our Constitution the power to influence the political life of other countries, to "uplift" their cultures, to bolster their economies, to feed their peoples or even to defend them against their enemies.  The father of our country, George Washington,  made these points on the matter:

"I have always given it as my decided opinion that no nation has a right to intermeddle in the internal concerns of another; that every one had a right to form and adopt whatever government they liked best to live under themselves; and that, if this country could, consistently with it engagements, maintain a strict neutrality and thereby preserve peace, it was bound to do so by motives of policy, interest, and every other consideration (August 25, 1796; Writings 13:263)

The preservation of America's political, economic, and military independence -- the three cornerstones of sovereignty -- is the sum and total prerogative of our government in dealing with the affairs of the world.  Beyond that point, any humanitarian or charitable activities are the responsibility of individual citizens voluntarily without coercion of others to participate.

We would be committing national suicide to surrender any of our independence, and chain ourselves to other nations in this sick and turbulent world represented by the U.N.