I’m from the UN and I’m Here to Help
That human action or activity often has unintended consequences is not a new observation.
Among the activities that often have results very different from those envisaged or desired is foreign aid. There is probably not a single case of a very poor country being hauled out of poverty by such aid; there are many instances of dictators being kept in power and of civil wars virtually funded by it.
Peacekeeping forces may likewise do things other than keep the peace (though they rarely do that).
To the roll of unintended consequences must now be added the likely introduction of cholera into Haiti by Bangladeshi troops there who are part of the UN peacekeeping force there.
A paper in the New England Journal of Medicine for December 9 from Harvard Medical School shows that the strain of cholera that has caused an epidemic in Haiti probably originated in South Asia, that is to say Bangladesh. The authors arrived at this conclusion by genetic analysis.
Rather coyly, they state:
Our findings have policy implications for public health officials who are considering the deployment of vaccines or other measures for controlling cholera.
This is indeed the case, and the implications are serious. The strain of cholera, that could easily spread, is more virulent than the strain already resident in Latin America; and while the measures necessary to prevent spread are known in theory, they may be difficult to put into practice. Among other things, there is a world shortage of cholera vaccine.
The Haitians are spot on with suspecting the UN. Now the UN can ask for more $ to clean up the Cholera mess, and appear to care.
The UN puppet also can pad their stats sheet for world population control.
Sad day.
I loath and despise the UN, especially their “peacekeeping” missions, which never maintain peace and usually end up killing a lot of innocent people. Just ask the people in Rwanda or the people who died in the Srebrenica massacre whether or not UN “protection” is a good thing. And see if the UN has stopped the flow of missiles to Hezbollah in Southern Lebanon, which is about to explode into yet another war. It seems wherever UN troops go to “protect” people, usually the opposite happens. And these troops generally don’t lose one or two people. The deaths of the people they’re sent to protect usually ends up in the thousands. The faster we get rid of this pathetic bureaucratic debating society in New York City, the faster more people will be able to stay alive.
Only local troops should be used to protect local people from harm. If there are no local troops available, then a small force of troops from neighboring countries should be used with very loose rules of engagement to protect these same people. That usually works a lot better than sending Bangladeshis to Haiti or Belgians to Rwanda.
You “Loath (sic) and despise the UN?” Ouch! That hurts. Over the years I’ve been involved in UN operations in Ethiopia, Southern Sudan, Somalia, Angola and, yes, Rwanda. Oh yeah, and Afghanistan in 2001-2002 after 9/11 – the only American flying into the places you saw on TV – unarmed.
A couple of years ago, at a pilot’s reunion in Arizona, one of Sudan’s “Lost Boys” came to give a talk on what it meant to him to see those white C-130s overhead. “It gave us hope,” he said, “When we saw the airplanes we knew the world had not forgotten us.”
A year ago a colleague, now flying for FedEx stopped in a convenience store in Memphis to get a cold drink. The clerk behind the counter was Ethiopian and they struck up a conversation. “I’ve been to your country,” my friend said. The clerk was skeptical until my colleague mentioned the town of Mekele, in Tigray Province and the refugee camp there. Tears formed in the cashier’s eyes and he blurted out, “My mother and family were in that camp. God Bless You! They would have died without you. God sent you to us.”
I have a letter in a scrapbook given to me by a mother’s group in the city of Juba in Southern Sudan that reads in part: “…We in Southern Sudan had given up hope of living in this world. But one day we saw a plane in the air…we saw a miracle. A foreign plane flew in. The women of Equatoria would like to take this opportunity to register a vote of thanks…in particular to you, the young and courageous American pilots for risking your lives to fly here after everybody had deserted us…”
So you can despise us if you want. But what have you done? What is your alternative?
Is it not true that before any troops can be deployed by the UN, the financing of such a deployment must be agreed?
Let the Western democracies, led by the USA, decline to fund any such deployments. As most of the UN’s income is derived from the West, that will be that.
If only it were that simple.
Why wouldn’t current and former third world countries, and others like China, etc. step in and take control by means of their contributions? Then you have the Chinese, legally, intervening all over the world.
The toothpaste is out of the tube.
It would be interesting to find out though. Next time someone comes up with the idea of dispatching 20,000 UN troops, the Western alliance should stand back and say – go ahead but we are broke. The southern Sudan comes to mind.
I think the UN should be disbanded but not because of Haiti.
firstly I have sympathy for the poor of Haiti.
…I also do not think Haiti will get on it’s feet either. In Haiti the problems grow faster then the solutions and will for the foreseeable future.
In Haiti there is the strong (with machetes or directing the machetes) and the weak. It is like much of Africa past and present.
It is almost a comedy that they pretend to have free elections (the USA is also proving to be comical in that department).
still blaming the UN for the cholera might be stretching things.
there are water purifiers in customs in Haiti ..the Canadians sent them there months ago and customs will not release them, yet customs bills the Canadians for storage in the customs facilities.
SO EVEN IF A UN SOLDIER SH!T IN THE RIVER AND SPREAD A DIFFERENT CHOLERA VIRUS IT IS NOT THE UN’s FAULT FOR THE SPREAD. Cholera is a frequent visitor to natural disasters and more so where the people are poor and uneducated. It is not the UN’s fault that they are poor and uneducated.
the blame is and should be the thugs with the machetes and those that direct them.
agreed..the cholera is not the fault of the soldiers.
It is the fault of the people in charge of Haiti. Haiti is the same old story as most other third word places.
There has to be a way to give help, and have these “leaders” stand down. It should be a part of the process that the aide is given directly to the people. The fact that things are held up in customs is ridiculous.
The UN is a money pit that gives little if any help to solving situations. There has to be a better way of doing things than is offered by the UN.
if the “leaders” were capable or willing to stand down then Haiti wouldn’t be the sh!thole it is and we wouldn’t be talking about it..
that’s why I said there has to be a way
..not that i had a solution, but a solution needs to be found.
the hatian leaders are capable of standing down, they chose not to and the UN allows it. they need to be held accountable, we just keep heaping more money/supplies on them and they keep laughing at our stupidity, just like any other third world country.
We have stars, representatives etc falling all over haiti, they need to quit it until the people are taken care of, If we had taken the leaders out we would not have the problems that we have there
….it is the corrupt Haitian’s holding things up.. they are looking for money.
this thing will not be fixed applying the methods that the western societies have been for decades.
look at the incentives …you see that we create these systems of corruption.
our western governments look more like Haiti’s every day.
Haiti is the mess it is in large part due to the US. US Marines went into Haiti in 1915 to seize the gold reserves because US banks feared Haiti was going to fail on its loans. While there, the US disbanded the Haitian government and the then Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, wrote the Haitian Constitution.
Since then, Haiti and many other so called Banana Republics have been twisting on a string.
please ..what happened in 1914 has nothing to do with the generations of corrupt individuals that followed the exit of the US marines.
give them all the gold in the world and it will stay the mess it is today. this isn’t about money or gold or resources. it is the TRIBAL strong man and lack of law that keeps Haiti a sh!thole and will CONTINUE to keep it a sh!thole.
want to see the future ..look at Zimbabwe/Venezuela/New Orleans during and after Katrina.
this isn’t rocket science. it is right there to see if you look.
“there are water purifiers in customs in Haiti ..the Canadians sent them there months ago and customs will not release them, yet customs bills the Canadians for storage in the customs facilities.”
A link to back that up would be nice. I personally doubt that story very much – canadian water purifiers have been in operation in haiti since february.
http://www.joconl.com/article/id37318
In fact, if you google something like “water purifiers haiti” you’ll see that plenty of water purifiers have been shipped to haiti. Maybe if they had plumbing hooked up to those machines and universal sewage, there wouldn’t be a problem.
Cholera sounds like a pretty horrific way to go. An australian (ex) POW described cholera (in an ABC radio national interview) as “making dysentery look like constipation”. I had a bug last year which came close to that description, and it was the worst week I’ve ever had (from memory).
And yeah, if a soldier with cholera takes a crap in a river, that IS a problem. But we don’t know if that’s what happened.
I know you are incapable of reasoned or critical thought.
yes the canadian purifiers that came with the canadian military were deployed at the outset ..right after the earthquake.
the one I am speaking of were sent after the Haitian’s reestablished control of their money making corruption schemes.
I would link but you don’t like what you see you deny it anyway, anything that isn’t progressive you dismiss or deny. this post is for the benefit other readers …not you.
So … you don’t have a link, then?
I’m astonished by the range of excuses that posters on this site use to explain why they won’t back something up with evidence.
Ah, the road to progress is paved with good intentions. Just look at California’s cap and trade fraud that will raise the costs of energy on the poor while having no statistically significant impact on “average global climate temperature.” The rich countries poor will now get to subsidize the poor countries rich with Al Gore carbon offsets, thanks to the Beverly Hills beautiful people. Think I’ll watch “Down and out in Beverly Hills,” a much under rated movie. Where else can you watch a bum poke the mistress of the house while the man of the house pokes the maid. Life is good, no matter how you got there in Beverly Hills, the trick is keeping it exclusive while touting diversity.
The UN and UN peacekeepers are a joke. Peacekeepers especially. There hasn’t been one successful peacekeeping mission since this misbegotten brainchild of Lester B. Pearson was created. All peacekeepers are, due to strict UN ROE’s, walking targets for any of the sides that wish to open fire. Besides with those nice little blue helmets, blue caps, and patches, the tend to stand out in any environment.
Yes, it seems a lie loved by the powerful of the world is immortal. WHY does UNICEF still exist?
That could be asked of the entire fiasco called the UN, neither united except in its hatred of the West, with membership including groups which only in wildest imagination could be considered nations.
If memory serves UNICEF has been investigated, internally as US Congress does with its miscreants, over and over for mis – and mal-feasance: theft and corruption. But on it goes, and on it goes. Never to be stopped.
Might we surmise on the premise that the fish stinks from the head, that the same might be said of EVERY one of the UN offices. Exemplified in the recent exposure of the IPPC’s corrupt methods with attendant social and financial advantages.
FDR and other politicians really pulled a fast one on us, ie. those who pay for these monstrosities, establishing and promoting this NEW INTERNATIONAL EMPIRE. Entirely unaccountable to the populations of he various nations EXCEPT via the politicians.But we ought not be surprised at such power grabs advertised as the method to obtain “peace”. Ditto the newest clone the European Union
We learn they have, and are STILL doing so in virtually everything they get their hands on to further their NEW WORLD ORDER since the second World War. The USA and her citizens just the biggest patsy.
you got that right.
regards
As established and presently actualized, in sum, in what way is the UN not intended to be a mere implementation of a vast “welfare program” for the people who work there, . . . and their families and friends and their friends’ families and families’ friends?
The law of UN-intended consequenses strikes again?
Rwanda springs to mind.
A couple of thoughts:
There have been no reported cases of cholera for over 100 years until this outbreak
The source may have been Nepali troops vs. Bangladeshi
Infant and child mortality rates have dropped dramatically in Bangladesh during the period of lots of foreign aid; same for maternal mortality ratios; fertility also has dropped to relatively reasonable levels (above replacement but not very high).
The arsenic problem is real… lack of wells might be a bigger problem.
Correction:
There have been no reported cases of cholera IN HAITI for over 100 years until this outbreak
Blue helmets make great targets. Aim a little low so you can get under the rim.
Youtube video. Horrifying and Evil. Will the UN do ANYTHING to help and rescue these children?
Quran School نحوه تدریس مسلمانان در آفریقا
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Jwii8QihT0&feature=player_embedded
G-D help these innocent, defenseless children.
This is the true face of Islam in all its evil. “GOD” has given you the freedom to think and make your own decisions. So why do inman try and beat this Islamic law into people? The inman are just men, like their prophet mohammad. Do not follow a man but trust and follow GOD and Jesus that did and preached love!
The only thing the UN is going to help in Haiti is the UN to all the money and donations they can steal. Just like the UN does through out the world, when they are claiming to help the people in need. As much money that has been donated to Haitian people, they should all be living in a fine house and driving a new car. The sad thing is the US not only allows this, but is feeding at the feeding trough.
Actually, I though the nepalese team was in the cross-hairs.
But apart from that, I’m not quite sure what this article is trying to say. That sending help is bad? That we shouldn’t do it? That we should only admit aid and peacekeepers from certain countries? What?
The issue with the wells on the subcontinent is just schadenfreude. It’s a serious problem, absolutely. A cock-up, even. Attempts to resolve it have also failed. But the connection with haiti is a bit stretched.
This is how the UN works. It doesn’t actually have any troops of its own. When “the UN” sends aid and peacekeepers, those resources actually come from sovereign states. Sometimes those sovereign states screw up. Incidentally, sometimes those screw-ups are made by the US
But it’s ok, because everyone involved can blame the UN.
And the distinction between bangladesh and nepal is important. Are you really sure you want to exclude the gurkhas from peacekeeping duties?
The point I am making that the UN is about as necessary as tits on a bull and they are really of no help. They standby as citizens are killed right in front of them keeping their weapons at their sides.The soldiers in the field take the best of whatever is donated for themselves. I guess you do not remember how the head of the UN and his son were caught stealing money and selling food. The ambassadors to the UN run around our country with the protection of political asylum, and we let in the idiots, from Iran, Libya and North Korea and other places. Our personal charities do more good than the UN and for a lot less money. The UN is a financial drain and a hot bed of corruption and we leave it in our backyard.
I’m confused … are you the author? Just curious.
This is a big a big argument and I’m not going to have time to do it justice right now (but rest assured – I will be back). I think it’s an argument worth having.
First things first – are you talking about kofi annan? Are you saying he was “caught stealing money and selling food”? His son, sure, he was into some dubious dealings. But I’m fairly sure that annan was personally cleared. If you have some evidence that you think the investigators missed you should really hand it to the state department so they can take a look.
As annoying as the UN is, I think it’s a bit more necessary than tits on a bull. Even as a talk shop, it’s useful. It’s basically a diplomatic venue. It’s a mechanism for inter-state interaction, which has worked out legal agreements to get things done. What that means is that it’s usually under the auspices of the UN that peacekeeping, aid etc take place, but the actual work is ALWAYS done by member states.
“The ambassadors to the UN run around our country with the protection of political asylum, and we let in the idiots, from Iran, Libya and North Korea and other places.”
That’s how diplomacy works. At least, that’s how it’s SUPPOSED to work – the big counterexamples being the US embassy in iran, and zimbabwe’s semi-recent detention of the british ambassador. That’s pretty rare, though – the flip-side to letting the creeps run around safely in the US is that (more often than not) the US can also rely on diplomatic immunity overseas. Just imagine not having that convention in place. It’d be pretty hard to get much done at a inter-country level.
“Our personal charities do more good than the UN and for a lot less money”
Most of the time, charity gets the job done. If all you’re doing is sending bibles or blankets or tinned pears or whatever to a relatively peaceful location, you hardly need an organisation like the UN. If you need to arrange diplomatic agreement to fly a couple of hercules full of medical equipment into liberia, then you probably need an organisation that can arrange that you not be shot at. That’s what the UN is for – coordination and communication. I think it does that pretty well. Get rid of it, and you’ll just need to replace it with something else, and leaving out all the “bad” countries would make it pretty useless for most of what you need it to do. It’s a talk-shop. That’s what it’s SUPPOSED to be. It’s not a defense treaty organisation, it’s not a trading bloc, it’s not a world government.
The problem is that people are dumping a bunch of stupid expectations onto the UN without considering reality. Then everyone blames the UN when it doesn’t do something that everyone wants done but doesn’t want to do themselves – or does something that everyone asked it to do but didn’t want responsibility for.
The UN just reflects the world. There are some creepy member states … but that’s how the world is. Nobody ever said diplomacy was easy, and sure as HECK nobody said the US (or any country) will always get its way.
And if you think the world would be a better place by getting rid of the UN building in new york, go right ahead. They’ll just expand the UN buildings in europe, and you’ll make vienna the center of world diplomacy instead. The US can pull out of the UN if it wants – but it’ll lose its seat (and veto) at the security council. Think it through.
And I agree about the corruption. Don’t get me started about that. The problem, though, isn’t the UN – it’s that member states appear to be quite happy to let corruption take place on their watch. I, personally, am looking forward to seeing some wikileaks about AWB and what a certain government minister knew.
First Matthew, I respect your opinion on the UN and I am not trying to start anything. First I believe “GOD” has given everyman the right to express their opinion. As far as Annan is concerned, he may have been cleared of the charges, he would not be the first politician to get away with stealing. Matthew you say we would lose our veto power if the UN left New York City. Tell me how many other countries are voting with the US. Who is really standing with us against Russia and China. We can not stop Iran or North Korea from nukes with out their support, so much for the UN. Charities from countries all around the world do a better job on their own, helping people than when the UN gets involved.
They would not build a new UN in Europe, their to dam cheap. How do you explain UN troops standing by while people are killed right in front of them and they do nothing. Ask the Africans about this and you can pick your own country to ask.
Do not worry about wikileaks, worry what politicians are doing around the world and using wikileaks as a diversion. Look behind the curtain and not at what the politicians want you to watch. While they steal more of our freedoms!
“First Matthew, I respect your opinion on the UN and I am not trying to start anything.”
Cool.
“First I believe “GOD” has given everyman the right to express their opinion.”
We’re not ever going to agree on that. I think democracy gives us that right.
“As far as Annan is concerned, he may have been cleared of the charges, he would not be the first politician to get away with stealing.”
So … no evidence, but he’s still guilty. Fair enough.
“Matthew you say we would lose our veto power if the UN left New York City. Tell me how many other countries are voting with the US. Who is really standing with us against Russia and China. We can not stop Iran or North Korea from nukes with out their support, so much for the UN.”
And there is your fundamental misunderstanding. You are absolutely right – we CAN’T stop iran from getting nuclear weapons without cooperation from russia and china[1]. But that’s not a problem that the security council has created – that’s problem in the real world. If russia wants iran to get nukes (which it really doesn’t, BTW), then we (the good guys) need to decide what it’s worth to us to prevent that. Ideally, we negotiate a deal with russia (which, I repeat, really doesn’t want iran to be a nuclear power – come on, do you REALLY think putin is that stupid?). If russia really, really wants them to have those nukes, then voting against them isn’t going to make a scrap of difference – somebody is going to have to send troops. No semi-circular table with microphones can change that.
The security council has never stopped the US, russia or china from doing something they really wanted to do. On the other hand, it’s never forced any of them to do anything they didn’t want to. The security council is an approximation of reality. When it DOES work, it means that world’s five major superpowers have agreed on something. Those five aren’t all good guys – I agree, but they’re still superpowers, and they still act in the world. You can’t just wish that out of existence by taking away their veto power or ignoring them. Even the US has to accept the facts of life.
“Charities from countries all around the world do a better job on their own, helping people than when the UN gets involved.”
For the things that private charities can take on without the political and/or military cover of something bigger, then sure. Private charities did some great stuff in indonesia after the boxing day tsunami – but nobody was shooting at them and the indonesian government was grateful, rather than getting in their way.
“They would not build a new UN in Europe, their to dam cheap.”
Hmm. You mean apart from the WFP and FAO headquarters in rome, the WHO, ITU, WMO, UNHCR, WIPO in geneva, the IAEA in vienna. You should check out the photos – they have some very nice buildings over there too.
“How do you explain UN troops standing by while people are killed right in front of them and they do nothing.”
Because those were the rules of engagement they were given. The troops themselves had no say in the matter. Keep in mind – those rules aren’t imposed by the nasty UN, they’re the rules cooked up by the security council and the countries that send troops. It’s not all one way, though – the US went on adventures in somalia and pretty much trashed the peacekeeping efforts there. It’s a tough problem, absolutely, and the dutch government resigned over the screw-up at srebrenica.
“Do not worry about wikileaks, worry what politicians are doing around the world and using wikileaks as a diversion.”
I’m actually pretty sure they’re not.
“Look behind the curtain and not at what the politicians want you to watch. While they steal more of our freedoms!”
I’d rather just seek out information and make my own decisions
[1] I’m not convinced that iran actually intends to “go nuclear”, but I’m also glad it’s not my job to determine that with certainty.
WOW!!!! Matthew, with all due respect, are you a high school student? The premise of your comments could not be more categorically wrong on every point you raise! Maybe, the best approach to a substantive diolog would be for you to highlight any of their “real” successes over the past 60 plus years. Maybe some lasting brokered “agreement resolutions” and boots on the ground security resolutions….just to start.
With regards to your premise that private sector “organized charity” does not have equal or better logistics and equal or better implementation of aid in many area’s of social needs, than the UN. May I encourage you to do a great deal more homework.
T.T. Thomas
“WOW!!!! Matthew, with all due respect, are you a high school student?”
Er, no.
“The premise of your comments could not be more categorically wrong on every point you raise!”
Way to go with explaining yourself.
“Maybe, the best approach to a substantive diolog would be for you to highlight any of their “real” successes over the past 60 plus years. Maybe some lasting brokered “agreement resolutions” and boots on the ground security resolutions….just to start.”
Sure. East Timor, Kosovo, Cyprus, Ethiopia/Eritrea, things were going reasonably well (if a bit bumpy) on the ivory coast until … a few hours ago. As Dave points out below, the WHO was involved in the eradication of smallpox, and it also coordinates response to outbreaks of diseases. The world food programme doesn’t get a lot of attention, but if you really want a head-spin, read their page on their activities in iraq:
http://www.wfp.org/countries/iraq
Now, here’s an important point: The UN didn’t actually do any of that. The actual boots on the ground were nationals from member states. The people running around in africa with radios, listening for word of smallpox cases weren’t UN employees. The troops in east timor were (mostly) australian. The troops who’re probably about to leave the ivory coast are from all over the world. The UN just a talk-shop to work out the details, and a participant in the treaties that let it coordinate activities.
“With regards to your premise that private sector “organized charity” does not have equal or better logistics and equal or better implementation of aid in many area’s of social needs, than the UN. May I encourage you to do a great deal more homework.”
If you say so. Tell me how much food and medicine private charities have shipped to afghanistan and iraq.
““First I believe “GOD” has given everyman the right to express their opinion.”
We’re not ever going to agree on that. I think democracy gives us that right.”
Based on your choice of words, I would guess you are English. Skip’s premise is actually based on an American understanding of rights as God-given, as stated in our Declaration of Independence (written by a few Englishmen, as I recall). An evolution, if you will. Our free speech rights seem to be standing on more solid ground these days on this side of the pond.
“Based on your choice of words, I would guess you are English.”
Australian.
“Skip’s premise is actually based on an American understanding of rights as God-given, as stated in our Declaration of Independence (written by a few Englishmen, as I recall).”
Actually, your right to free speech comes from the bill of rights. Take that away, and you have no right to free speech (try it and see). I’ve checked, but I can’t see where the constitution says it’s inspire by god.
Let us never forget Amundsen’s axiom: Never attribute to malice that which is more easily attributed to stupidity.
The UN is a cancer! Its a global ideological machine whose membership is exclusively, Communist, Socialist, and Theocratic rogue nations, EXCEPT for the U.S. Now, think of it as a “sporting match” playing against Team USA!
The UN Security Forces are a joke, a rouse, a ________________ fill in the blank!
The UN Humanitarian arm is a machine of corruption! After 60 some years, much like the Peace Corps, much of the same parts of the world they taken residence in, are still be hand fed and corrupted.
Then consider their initial grand scheme that France, UK and America (yes I intentially left the other nation out), were to “police” and broker peace among the frictions and threats of the world….then, consider the state of affairs around the world for decades and today.
The ONLY thing, they have been efficient at, is pick-pocketing the wallets of American taxpayers!
The greatest shame of 9/11 is, that the terrorists were not a little more stupid and flown all their planes into the UN.
“The UN Security Forces are a joke”
What UN security forces? How many divisions does the UN have?
Matthew, I know George Washington was born in America as with Jefferson and as most of the leaders who freed us from England. If Washington did not have the understanding, honor and integrity needed at that time. We would be a totally different country with a different government. George Washington said many times that without “GODS” superior spiritual guidance we could not win our Independence. George Washington prayed every day and went to all churches of any denomination.
As far as are rights our forefathers knew they came from the Supreme Creator, not any government!
Washington also kept slaves, as did jefferson. Was that inspired by god too?
Actually think about the question before responding. I find that apologists like to pick and choose as to what is inspired by religion and what isn’t.
“As far as are rights our forefathers knew they came from the Supreme Creator, not any government!”
Whatever they might have thought then, that isn’t what gives you that right now. The legal basis for your freedom of speech (which is the only basis that counts) is the first amendment, and that does not mention god.
Matthew your poor sense of history is really showing. I know Jefferson slept with a slave girl and even bore him children. You have nothing to back you up on George Washington sleeping with slaves. Matthew did you know the first person in this country that owned a black slave was a black man. His name was Anthony Johnson, sold to merchant then to the Virgina Company. This was done in 1621, I was just a young lad then. Anthony was sold as an indentured servant as where whites at that time. When he worked off his bill he was free, at which time he bought his own black man as an indentured servant and took this man to court and was granted permission to own this black man. Slavery is still very popular in Africa if you would like to sleep with a slave.
Matthew you say it does not matter what our forefathers thought about where our rights came from. You say that is what they thought way back then and it does not count because of the way we think today. I guess we do not need any laws or rights except, who is the strongest kid on the block or the fastest gun! I get my rights from our Creator not some man that does not know the truth even looking at the truth!
Matthew, GOD is talked about and honored in everything our forefathers did, in all writings and public buildings. Religion was even taught in schools until after the First World War. The White House use to have as many as 2,ooo people go to church there every Sunday. Look on your money and tell me what it says!
“Matthew your poor sense of history is really showing. I know Jefferson slept with a slave girl and even bore him children.”
I think you misread my post. I didn’t write about anyone sleeping with anyone. I said that they kept slaves. As in – they owned them.
“Matthew did you know the first person in this country that owned a black slave was a black man.”
Oh, well I guess it was all ok then.
“Slavery is still very popular in Africa if you would like to sleep with a slave.”
I’m sure it’s popular in lots of places. But I repeat – was jefferson and washington’s belief in their right to own slaves inspired by religion? Consider your other statements before responding.
“Matthew you say it does not matter what our forefathers thought about where our rights came from.”
Rubbish. I say no such thing. I’m just saying that what you can’t pick and choose which bits you think were inspired (in your opinion) by religion and which weren’t. Europe was christian for hundreds years before anyone decided on a fundamental right to free speech (or anything else, for that matter). If those rights are handed down by a creator, he sure took his time mentioning it.
“I guess we do not need any laws or rights except, who is the strongest kid on the block or the fastest gun!”
Er, wrong.
“I get my rights from our Creator not some man that does not know the truth even looking at the truth!”
But it’s the bill or rights you’ll be referring to if you’re dragged into court. It doesn’t matter what YOU think gives you those rights, it matters what the law says. And the law (as supplied by the founding fathers) says nothing about god.
“Matthew, GOD is talked about and honored in everything our forefathers did, in all writings and public buildings.”
Yet they somehow neglected to mention it in the document that lays down the legal system of the united states. Bit of an oversight, don’t you think? Or could it be … that it was deliberate?
I’ll stick up for the U.N. for once. When it comes to humanitarian work, the U.N. is a valuable tool.
One of humanity’s worst enemies ever was the smallpox virus, responsible for perhaps 500,000,000 deaths in the 20th century alone. Thanks, in part, to the WHO, the smallpox virus no longer exists. It’s been completely, utterly and totally destroyed. There is no such thing as smallpox anymore. In 1960, when the worldwide smallpox eradication program began, about 2,000,000 died from smallpox every year. In 2010 not one person died from smallpox.
This is one of my mankind’s greatest accomplishments. One of the best things we’ve ever done. And the U.N. helped do it.
The political bodies of the U.N. are crap. Worthless and worst than worthless. Bodies like the WHO are worth keeping around, despite the tragic accident in Haiti.
May I remind that the smallpox virus, is not totally gone. A few nations still posse the smallpox virus under their control. Just think of the devastation smallpox would cause if ever released. Do not think that this virus will not be used someday even by America. Are you vaccinated against smallpox? I was vaccinated as a child and now they have stopped vaccinating people. If the UN has or had any real power this virus could be wiped out forever. The countries that do posse the virus say they keep it so they can make an anti-virus to fight smallpox if we have an out break. How can you have a out break of a virus that no longer exist? Again you really think this virus will never be used? If you believe that than you do not know the evils of mankind! It is a great way to control population growth.
The UN has been an evil and malignant force in the world its entire history. The rape of Katanga occurred soon after the UN’s creation and it has been a tool of oppression ever since.
The UN’s successes are decades-old. The UN as it exists is a trade association for the executives of the governments of the nations of the world, and since there are many more unsavory governments than open, transparent, accountable ones and since the UN’s structure does not concentrate power in the responsible nations, corruption is the only possible long-term outcome.
As to the arsenic-producing wells: they were tested when they were started. The arsenic content didn’t show up until they were operating for a while. There is some hope in reduced-irrigation cultivation of rice (and cultivars which work well with it); it greatly reduces the amount of arsenic concentrated by the rice (and rice is exceptionally good at concentrating it).
As far as the cholera: if the right treatment is available, the death rate can be cut to about one in twenty. It’s not expensive: a little starch, a little sugar, a little salt, in the proper proportions, cooked just enough, mixed with the right amount of CLEAN water, will stop the diarrhea and allow a reasonably healthy person to fight off the infection and recover. By stopping the diarrhea it will also reduce the spread of the infection.
Various aid agencies have treatment packets stacked up, ready to go, and in a pinch it can be made by anyone with some rice, salt, and sugar, the means to cook, and the recipe.
Which means that if deaths continue, it’s due either to the incompetence of the aid agencies (which should have had a few doses of the stuff nearby) or to the difficulties presented by Haiti.
Were it not for the deaths, I’d say that anything that reduces the esteem in which the UN is held is a good thing. I look forward to the day when the US is hated BECAUSE the UN is based in New York.
Sadly the Arsenic laden groundwater wells in Bangladesh were the result of trying to address the problem of Bangladesh’s lack of safe drinking water. The wells were intended to reduce the spread of water spread diseases such as Cholera. What no one really realized at the time was that the water table in a good portion of the Indian subcontinent is very high in Arsenic. They could have avoided this by testing the ground water however the availability of tools for testing groundwater was and remains an issue.
I do agree with Dave Surls as to the public health efforts of the U.N. are concerned they did succeed in eradicating Smallpox and the almost successful attempt at eradicating Polio. Polio would have been eradicated if it had not been for a bunch of Imams in Northern Nigeria claiming that the vaccines where a plot by the west to render Nigerian Muslims sterile. (In my opinion said Imams should have been rounded up and tried for mass murder and crippling of children)
Another area in which the U.N. has done a lot of good is through the support of institutes such as CIMMYT and IRRI which have done more to reduce starvation by improving the worlds great grain crops (Wheat,Corn and Rice) than any other thing in history.
Where I will criticize the U.N. is in the area of human rights and peacekeeping where more often than not it has been more of hindrance than a help.
To those defending the UN, why would the UN send “peacekeeping” troops from a third world country to another third world country in distress knowing the prevalence of cholera in countries with substandard sanitary conditions? There is no excuse for this level of incompetency from an international group with access to the top world scientists. One must then ask if this was indeed a result of incompetency versus a blatant act of malfeasance meant to decrease the burden of too few resources for too many people in a disaster zone.
Probably because the countries in question are willing to contribute troops to U.N. peacekeeping and humanitarian missions. And were probably among the few troops available for that sort of work. Also outside the U.S not many countries are all that willing to send troops abroad. Particularly if one bears in mind that quite a few of those countries have the belief that the U.S. will bail them out of a crisis. Also for some countries militaries U.N. work is a valuable source of funding and let’s not forget graft for senior officers and politicians. As well as great propaganda ever heard of Cuban medical brigades? They are active through a great swath of Latin America.
“There is no such thing as smallpox anymore”
Outside of labs. Let’s not forget that. Despite its eradication in the wild, a few people decided it was the sort of thing they wanted to keep. Only to produce immunisation doses, of course.
Matthew this is were you show your brilliant knowledge about smallpox.For starters if all the smallpox virus was irradiated, then why would we need to keep the virus around? Secondly if their was ever another out break of smallpox we know how to make the meds. from the virus to stop smallpox. By using the smallpox virus, from infected people. Which is suppose to be irradiated so they say!
My comment “only to make immunization doses, of course” was meant to be sarcasm, or at least whimsical. I agree that any REAL response would probably be based on samples of the infections – which might or might not actually be something that somebody already has in a freezer. But, as you have probably realised, I’m no expert.
That said, though. The WHO does actually have a policy on this (and it’s evolving):
http://www.bmj.com/content/334/7597/774.full
If it’s the WHO that’s deciding to keep this stuff around, then it’s probably not just nasty military types (again – sarcasm) wanting to make secret weapons from it. There might just be legitimate reasons to be able to experiment with it. If it really is finally disposed of, then we won’t have it for that purpose any more. Dunno – I’m inclined to leave it to the doctors to decide.
Though I’m at odds with you on the UN, I’m going to have to agree there were more reasons then evil to hold on to the virus.
The threat of it’s misuse is real, none the less. Evil exists and it does walk amongst us (IMHO).
That said, it is only one of many examples of danger in our modern age.
My fear?
That the UN will only be finished after they cause the next world conflagration. Only after that fire will the world finally see the UN clearly and be done with the “One Worlder’s” movement.
Well, those still hear will be done with them.
And on that “downer” note:
Merry Christmas to everyone!
“May I remind that the smallpox virus, is not totally gone.”
The disease is dead. There hasn’t been a recorded case of smallpox in about 30 years. This is an illness that killed hundreds of millions of people and that was still killing millions per year fifty years ago.
And the U.N. helped destroy it.
And, according to what I’m reading, the polio virus may be on the edge of extinction next, thanks to the efforts of the WHO, UNICEF and also private groups, like the Rotary International that, while we’ve been busy jagging off on the internet and watching football games, have been carrying out international vaccination programs in order to save the people of the world from the effects of these horrible diseases.
Sorry, if it displeases some people, but the world isn’t a comic book, everything isn’t all black and all white, and there are parts of the U.N. that are worth keeping.
Getting rid of the Security Council, and the General Assembly makes all kinds of sense, and keeping agencies like the WHO also makes all kinds of sense.
Go ahead and slag off the U.N. 24/7 if that amuses you, but when they do something right, I’m going to back them up 100%.
If I had an employee who saved a customer from choking, but also broke a thousand dollars’ worth of equipment due to reckless disregard for proper equipment operation and was caught stealing from the cash register – that person would be fired, and quickly. Sure, they did something wonderful, but that deserves praise, not tolerance of their misdeeds.
THE UN, not again!
The U.S. has been more than generous to Arab and Muslim nations in direct foreign aid, military assistance and other ways. Egypt receives about $2 billion of American taxpayer dollars every year, yet it still votes against American interests at the U.N. 79 percent of the time. Jordan, a “moderate” Muslim nation, receives nearly $200 million annually in U.S. foreign aid, but votes against America at the U.N. 71 percent of the time. Pakistan votes 75 percent of the time against the U.S. at the U.N. while pocketing nearly $7 million annually in foreign aid (in addition to the money it gets to supposedly fight al-Qaida).
An even better example of the disconnect between American assistance and changed Muslim attitudes toward the U.S. is the Palestinian Authority. As former Israeli diplomat Yoram Ettinger writes for ynetnews.com, just since 2007, “U.S. foreign aid to the Palestinian Authority and to PA-controlled (nongovernmental organizations) reached nearly $2 billion, in addition to $3.7 billion contributed by the U.S. to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East since 1950.”
If the news has the word “United Nations” in it, it’s guaranteed, definite, surefire, cast iron, in the bag, clear cut, assured, straightforward, a sure thing, that it’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing.
“Actually, your right to free speech comes from the bill of rights”
Way off topic, but, no, there is no mention of a RIGHT to free speech in the Bill of Rights.
And, the source of our rights is God, per the founding document of this country, the Declaration of Independence.
Take it from an American.
“Way off topic, but, no, there is no mention of a RIGHT to free speech in the Bill of Rights.”
Yeah, well, these threads do ramble. But seriously – no right to free speech in the bill of rights? Have you read it? Here’s the first amendment:
“And, the source of our rights is God, per the founding document of this country, the Declaration of Independence.”
Yet god never gets a mention in the constitution. Interesting, that.
Matthew , why do you keep bringing up religion with the issue of slavery? Slaves were bought and sold just like in today`s time for the purpose of cheap labor not religion. All empires own slaves at one time or another through out the history of man.
Mathew the only rights you lose are the ones you relinquish to the government or some other man. I am sure you follow every law to the tee! All I can say that for them to take my rights and guns away, I will no longer be in need of them. I will be dead but I will die Free! Yes I will fight to preserve our freedoms, even against illegal American forces!
“Matthew , why do you keep bringing up religion with the issue of slavery?”
Because you keep claiming that, because the founders believed in god, the foundation of american democracy and laws was therefore inspired by god. Ok, so if THAT bit of their life’s work was necessarily inspired by god, why not other things they did? If you say their ownership of slaves was ok with the maker, then that’s fine. But if you say it wasn’t, then you’re picking and choosing. If jefferson and washington owning slaves wasn’t in keeping with god’s plan, how do you know that it informed anything else they did?
You can’t just filter out the good thing that somebody does and say “see – THAT bit was christian” but ignore the rest simply because it’s inconvenient.
Musings on De-nationalizing, Toilets, and Fighting Obama
Random thoughts on totally unrelated news items also unrelated to Tucson:
HAITI: Some nations just shouldn’t be nations and Haiti is at the top of that list. . .
TOILETS: I had always thought toilets, potties, loos, water closets were just places to do your business and begone. Not anymore, at least not in Brazil where they have become a cause of great contention . . .
FIGHTING OBAMA: Ultimate Fighting Champion Jacob Volkmann wasn’t serious when he said after a New Year’s Day victory that he would like to fight Obama next. ”He’s not too bright,” Volkmann opined . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3378
A detail with regard to U.N. peacekeeping missions: American Rangers and Special Forces in Somalia, were engaged in a fierce fire-fight in Mogadishu. They had to fight their way out, encumbered by their wounded, fired upon from every direction by Somalis. American tanks, desperately needed in this operation, had already been withdrawn from Somalia by the American Secretary of Defense, for whatever stupid reasons I do not know. The Americans fighting for their lives, were supposed to be backed up by Pakistani tanks. The Pakistanis reluctantly and super-cautiously, entered into the battle area, too late to do much good, then were supposed to provide some cover for the retreating Americans. In their anxiety to get out of the battle area the Pakistani tanks speeded up and provided little cover for the Americans who could hardly keep up to the fleeing tanks. So much for U.N. “peace keeping” forces.