Senator Rubio Proves 'Human Rights' Are Negotiable for $7.5M
Yes, Senator Rubio reportedly paid a nation with an abysmal human rights record — led by Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, who seized power in 1979 and keeps a 97% approval rating via widespread intimidation — to offload migrants. The criticism focuses on the audacity of paying a dictator, rather than the underlying practice of paying countries to accept individuals the US deems undesirable.
Interestingly, the criticism conveniently sidesteps the U.S.'s long-standing tradition of funding and supporting regimes globally that conveniently align with 'national interests' over actual human rights. Where's the outrage when we funnel billions to states with equally dubious records, as long as it supports our geopolitical aims? One might wonder if the NYT's moral compass only twitches when
the dollar amount on the transaction is both specific and politically inconvenient for a rival. How many 'humanitarian crises' have been silently funded or ignored by the same politicians who now wring their hands over this transparent transaction? This isn't an anomaly; it's a feature of a foreign policy system that consistently values expediency over ethics, a system the mainstream media often
frames as 'strategic partnerships.' Perhaps the real story is not that Rubio paid, but that we're supposed to be shocked by it now.