The United Nations: Public Enemy Number One
Then we have the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), which has still to explain the admission of its former commissioner, Peter Hansen, in a CBC TV interview on October 3, 2004, that “I am sure there are Hamas members on the UNRWA payroll.” On employing members of an avowed terrorist group proscribed in many Western countries, Hansen commented: “I don’t see this as a crime.” UNRWA’s unspoken purpose is to keep the Middle East aflame, perpetuating a crisis from which it derives its warrant for existence. In the process, it has become nothing less than a terrorist consortium by another name.
All this is not to mention the United Nations’ voracity for scandal. To name a well-known few: the Congo sex scandal; the Iraqi oil-for-food scandal; the $5.2 billion UNDP (United Nations Development Program) scandal involving hiring irregularities and violation of financial controls and competitive bidding rules; its allowing the North Korean regime to use its bank account to transfer funds and, according to the Heritage Foundation, “to facilitate payments to a company that has ties to an entity involved in arms dealings”; and the nepotistic Ban’s recent appointing of his own son-in-law Siddarth Chatterjee to the position of regional director for Europe and the Middle East at the UN Office for Project Services. That the secretary-general also sent a letter of congratulation to Iranian tyrant Ahmadinejad on his recent — stolen — election should not surprise us. The UN’s effort and Ban’s pet project to effect a massive subsidy scheme benefiting “the world’s worst-governed states” via the climate change scam, at the cost of the Western taxpayer, is only the latest in an unending series of rebarbative interventions.
There is no question that the UN has become the servant of the world’s most illiberal regimes — Russia, China, Latin American autocracies, and, of course, the Arab bloc. The General Assembly’s passage on December 18, 2008, of a resolution condemning “defamation of religion” is nothing short of a concerted attempt to suppress free speech that is deemed offensive to special interest groups; under such a “gag rule,” the Danish cartoons would never have been printed and criticism of Islam would become indictable. “The efforts to ban criticism of Islam through human rights law at the UN,” argues Jacob Mchangama of the University of Copenhagen, “turns human rights on their head … rather than protecting individuals from oppressive dogmas.” Amen.
The tendency among Western electorates to regard the UN with dewy-eyed respect, believing that it incarnates the dream of world peace and social justice, is a salient instance of the retrograde thinking and lack of realism that has increasingly placed the free world at the mercy of its enemies. For the UN is nothing like the hallucination of its Western advocates, the sweet-minded, the uninformed, the sanctimonious, and the steadfastly ignorant. It is, rather, public enemy number one. It is the command center of a maniple of nations, many of them outright despotisms and one-party kleptocracies, others third-world resenters determined to strip the developed nations of their prerogatives and to ensure the transfer of wealth to their own coffers, and others still, languid appeasers and collaborators — Spain, the UK, the Netherlands, Scandinavia — gradually surrendering their title to credible sovereignty. We continue to support the UN at our peril, unwilling to confront the corruption which vitiates the mandate of this supposedly august body and denying in the face of all the evidence its advancing anti-Western and anti-democratic enterprise.
It is now literally impossible for even the most unconscionable accounting to do justice, so to speak, to the United Nations’ shameful chronicle of injustice. It is equally impossible, unless one is devoted to maintaining a profoundly egregious fiction, to see it as anything but an implacable adversary of a way of life we have long taken for granted. Its largest financial sponsor is the United States, which goes on playing by a set of rules that are rigged against its interests. Yet no American president thus far has had the courage to cut loose from this venal and debased organization whose principal raison d’être, apart from its misprision of Israel, is to embarrass, stymie, and undermine America’s foreign and domestic policies. George W. Bush permitting himself to be insulted at a UN podium by a treacherous clown like Hugo Chavez stands as an emblem of the true relation between the two entities. Were the United States to act with dignity and foresight, it would withdraw the funding on which the UN floats and let it sink into desuetude, where it belongs.
The UN is a snare and a delusion. One wonders how much longer this farce will persist. The UN reminds me of Woody Allen’s definition of eternity: it’s very long, especially toward the end. If Western leaders cannot muster the fortitude to challenge their own beguiled electorates and buck public opinion, or if they decline to confront their own hypocrisy in sustaining this lupine outfit, then the future of the West will grow ever more problematic. The time has come for the UN to go. Indeed, the time came for it to go thirty-five years ago when it was already obvious that the United Nations was “a dangerous place.”
The U.S. should withdraw all financial support to the UN & throw them out of NY, let them establish their HG in Darfour or anywhere else.
The US needs to establish a new world organization composed ONLY of actual democracies. Of course, we’ll have to wait until looney-leftist Obama & his incompetent amateur-hour team have been deservedly dumped in the rubbish bin of history where they belong.
It is beyond shameful that we the voters allow our country to continue support or participation in the cesspool of the UN. Lay down with dogs …
I used to think it was only right-wing nuts who said, “Get the US out of the UN and the UN out of the US.” That seems quite reasonable now. That land on the East River is valuable and could be redeveloped into something useful.
What Jews who support the UN are thinking–if they’re thinking at all about it–is beyond me. The entire structure of the UN is dedicated to the proposition that Jewish nationalism is the one illegitimate form of nationalism in the world and that Jews are held to an impossibly high standard while their enemies are not held to any standard at all.
Forget it. You’re pssing into the wind. You’ve lost your own Republic, and you don’t know it yet. What do you think you can accomplish by sassing one of your gangster-ocracy’s surrogates.
All the UN achieves is the empowerment of tyrants by giving them a big stage and thus, perceived legitimacy.
The United Nations is nothing more than a snake-pit, nothing less than an enemy of humanity.
David – Amen.
Anonymous @ #3: Remember, it is the same Jews who support the Obami as support the UN. As someone else has said: They have given up the Torah of Moses for the torah of “liberalism” (the mis-named liberalism which is really quite illiberal except with other people’s money).
the fact that democratic countries haven’t disband or removed themselves from participating in the UN (and their ultimate demise) shows that it will continue as is. …this crap is not new.
it shows that our leaders are part of the mosaic that makes the UN what it is.
until there is an honest leadership don’t expect change for the better. After the present clown and his circus are done it will be difficult to see a difference in the UN or the USA
David ..your points are all correct but that isn’t going to change anything.
I applaud your efforts but I don’t think there is any political will in ANY country to fix things. John Bolton couldn’t even get his nomination passed by the US congress/senate (not sure which one blocked him)
Before there was Israel, there were those who wished to destroy her and her people, and more importantly the message they brought to mankind. We are just witnessing the gathering together of the Nation’s Leaders who have decided where they stand. This story was played out long ago, and now the results are coming to fruition. All people will be given the opportunity to decide where they stand and that is not in the interests of the United Nations which prospers in conflict and the hierarchy of the unworthy. Islam is the religion of choice against Israel so it would be reasonable that the United Nations has chosen this faith to dominate it agenda.
A Nation that brings a message from another Kingdom is not welcome on this earthly kingdom where the flesh dominates and the spirit withers. It is not surprising that the United Nations has chosen the side that calls for Israel and her people to be wiped from our memory and from the earth.
The United Nations can continue to exist but not be in New York City. I am sure that one of the reasons that the U.N. is such a corrupt stinkhole is that everyone connected with it gets to indulge in the sybaritic pleasures of NYC and all on somebody else’s public dime. Not only that but they get to sanctimoniously congratulate each other on the “good work” they are doing but all of this is reflected back on them by the kow-towing New York media. Tis is a formula for the worst excesses of human behavior. Move the U.N. to Ulan Bator, Mongolia or some other such place where they can be cheek-to-jowel with the human misery they are always so concerned about. Who knows? Without four-star restaurants, the best hotels and all the otherperks of the diplomatic life they might actually accomplish something constructive.
“For the UN is nothing like the hallucination of its Western advocates, the sweet-minded, the uninformed, the sanctimonious, and the steadfastly ignorant.”
That, is truly a sad statement; but it’s right on the money! Having spent considerable time in France and Great Britain, there is an alarming ‘groupthink’ regarding the great U.N. I would assume that the same is true elswhere in Europe.
America stands alone as a bastion of freedom and democracy in the world; a fact that does not bode well in Western Europe. What you see is NOT what you get with Europe; in the sense that Europeans in general outwardly feign admiration for things American, while inwardly harboring deep resentment and hatred. All this ‘collectivism’ venom is aimed directly at one place: The Constitution. Does undermining national sovereignty ring a bell? It’s very deliberate, as both the EU and U.N. demonstrate.
The U.N. is anti-American and we are openly funding an enemy of the American people. How stupid is that? The sole stated purpose of the EU, in the mind of its founders (small ‘f’), is to be a superpower capable of competing with the U.S. They do not invite God to be part of their Constituion either; they are their own gods; legends in their own minds, (because, as elites, they know better than everyone else); and it’s revealing itself to be the monster that from the outset; it was designed to be.
Thanks for putting a very timely word out Mr.Solway.
I’ve long believed that the UN was even more corrupt than the the Chicago city government. And, this may example the other problems, i.e., anti-Israeli, pro-terrorist.
Look at EVERY pronouncement of a UN official, at any level, simply as a call for bribes from interested parties. The UN’s accounting and transparency are perfect for crooks. If the UN issues a new report limiting the number of won tons in the soup, a won ton manufacturer can bribe the official to change or mitigate his ruling, with the payoff being quietly deposited in the official’s agency account in a NYC bank.
They are crooks first and fools only second!
There may be more to the corruption at the UN than outsiders realize. I’m an outsider; however, a friend, recently retired from the UN, has told me that he retired at the first opportunity because the inner workings of the committees and bureaus are dominated by a cabal of homosexual apparatchiks who flaunt their homosexuality and make no bones about promoting their agenda. On a blog, my comments are hearsay, but this is worth looking into if anyone has the access and inclination.
I disagree with Mr. Solway on a couple points. He points the blame only at despots on specific geopolitical issues. What about the present US Administration that supports so many of the social evils emanating from the UN. The attempt by the UN to destroy the family. Their attempt to put SEX at the top of the social agenda and focusing on homosexuality and transgended issues so as to subvert the family. This subversion of the family is one of the biggest problems causing havoc not only in th US(black culture) but throughout the Third World. In this General Assembly just finished it was the African and Arab countries (particularly Egypt) that stood up for conservative values when the liberal countries like the USA, Canada, Sweden, etc tried to subvert the defination of sexuality.
In other words let us call a spade a spade and admit to errors.
Secondly. I have come to think that the presence of the UN , as dangerous as it is – is better than nothing. Part of the UN problem is that the US and First World liberal countries can be so hyprocritical and arrogant on many issues that turns off potential allies. I know for a fact that on many issues if a greater outreach was made by America’s UN staff to some countries they could change the balance on many issues and even remake the UN. I have see it happen. Just as with the despotic regimes of the world , the USA and Canada, etc also push their own sometimes hypocritical social perspective based on their liberal bubble existance. Others therefore do the same and in showing their own self centered ignorance make the UN out to be the big bad guy.
Much can be done if the US adopts a strong, conservative but compassionate stance at the UN and drops the arrogance as projected by this liberal Obama White House. The USA still does not know how to play the game and the foolish , non self sustaining librality of the Canadians and other Western cultures just muddies the waters for an institution that is dysfunctional because all members only look after their narrow self interest.
Good luck with this UN issue. They could terminate every grandma and baby in the world and people would still swoon over them. Somehow I think the UN or some form thereof is part of what will become the one-world government and there is too much money and power at stake not to let that happen. Just a matter of time.
I dread the day when the US transitions the administration of it’s national health care system to the UN (or like agency). That should really give us all comfort.
The people I find amusing are those that favor UN like entities because they somehow believe they will be included in the group that gets to live outside the rules.
Lot’s and lot’s of deception out there.
Heartily agree with the commenter above, who notes that the United States has to clean its own house before we can drain the United Nations cesspool. The “house” in question is the White House.
Last November, deluded by their rotten socialist media, a majority of Americans were foolish enough to elect the Democrats’ wondrous “Chicago gangster,” in the hallowed words of Slick Willie Clinton, to our highest office. Even people who ordinarily can’t bring themselves to face reality are beginning to perceive what the United Nations is, and has been been for years. Maybe it won’t take so long for them to wake up to the lying, criminal, frankly unbalanced fraudster they (not we) were naively dumb enough to entrust with our lives, security, and prosperity.
Normal Americans and everything we stand for are under furious attack by deadly enemies determined to destroy us. They know they won’t get another chance. Surely this is obvious to any thinking person, and so is the only effective response. Big Banana has got to go, followed by Harry the Zoning King and Meatball Pelosi. Talk about cleaning house! It’s time to muck out the entire sickening, subversive D-rat pig sty.
14. Joseph:
“I have come to think that the presence of the UN, as dangerous as it is – is better than nothing.”
You are trying to make this a ‘one or the other’ issue. It is not. You are either simple minded, or a UN apologist and enabler.
Even if it were an either/or issue, ‘nothing’ would still be better than being part of the parasitic UN. But what is to stop the U.S. from implementing a similar organization, which only allows member-states that are democratic, egalitarian, and follow the rule of law?
Who in their right mind would pay the lion’s share of dues to an organization that hates them and steals their citizens’ money? Corrupt UN employees scoff at N.Y. parking tickets, racking up hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in fines that are laughed at and never paid. Any organization that condones such behavior has no ethics, and should be evicted from their posh, rent-free headquarters for abusing and insulting the hospitality of their host country.
Further, the UN is completely opaque regarding how it spends our money; they have never allowed an outside audit, and you can be certain that most all of the $Billions contributed by U.S. taxpayers goes into pockets, which American taxpayers would never voluntarily condone.
U.S. diplomats have access to every country in the world. There is no necessity whatever to meet with the despicable anti-American vermin who infest Turtle Bay.
The reprehensible 0bama repeatedly bows down low groveling to foreign potentates, while constantly traveling around the world apologizing for America, and scolding the the citizens that he was elected to represent. 0bama does everything in his power to destroy the values and institutions that made America the great, ethical, enlightened and generous country that it is His successor will do our citizens an immense favor by withdrawing from the UN, cutting off all financial and other aid to its smarmy thugs, and permanently booting its obnoxious and unwelcome kleptocrats from our shores.
We can provide the same aid to those in need ourselves at much less expense, without allowing the UN to intercept and pocket the major part of every dollar sent through it. We do not need a thieving, corrupt middleman for us to help those truly in need. What we need is to be rid of an organization that, if it were under U.S. jurisdiction, would be criminally indicted and prosecuted many times over for a litany of crimes, from theft to genocide.
put a dagger into the heart of the Left all over the world. The US should pull our funding and the UN will collapse, and with it much of the Left’s structure and support.
The roman court statute
The millenium project
obammy mammy
1+1=2
Go ahead, dig just a teeeeeeeeny bit.
No, no, no.
1. if the UN were abolished there would be no one to eat at the fourstar restaraunts and waiters, somiers and dishwashers woud be laid off.
It has and still amazes me that the USA hasn’t informed this organization it has 90 days to take its dog and pony show elsewhere. I give them a B+ nonetheless.
Well said everyone. I do believe the UN is working diligently to eliminate all national governments. Their annual budget is approximately $2 billion a year and the USA pays $440M for membership. We should withdraw from the UN and pay the money towards our debt to China. Wouldn’t it be a gift from heaven if our “puppet leaders” had the courage to cut the puppetmasters strings? Look how America is treated by the WTO? The world loves us only if we give away the store and become their slaves. As for me, I would prefer they like us less and keep our homes, jobs, etc. Americans are the most generous people on the face of the planet, I guess that’s one reason the UN can’t stand the competition. I would say Obama and his redistribution of wealth is aiding and abetting the UN’s sinister plans.
2. What would new Yorkers do if the streets were not clogged with diplomat tagged limos, immune to parking tickets?
3. Who would be at the scenes of large disasters like the big tsunami, looking to book five star hotels while the US, Brits, new Zeleanders and Asutralians were busy rescuing people?
4. Who would arrive in shiny blue helmets, clean vehicles and good cooks–only to leave at the first sign of trouble?
5. Who would provide a forum where hundreds of seamy dictators, tyrants, religious facists and despots presume to lecture the few real democracies in the world?
The world would never be the same!
PS: One of the best books is still Daniel Moynihan’s UN Diary titled , I think, “A Most Dangerous Place.”
Someone still needs to show me a single example when the UN proved useful in actually SOLVING a problem. Even during the Cuban Missile Crisis, the negotiations between the United States and Russia (via Robert Kennedy) resolved that situation, NOT the UN. And had it not been for the enormous sacrifices made by Americans during the Korean War, the UN never would have been able to enforce its will in Korea. There are also a huge number of examples where the UN’s impotance actually made matters worse, from the slaughter in Rwanda to the massive killings in Bosnia and Kosovo. People actually placed their trust in this warped and twisted institution and ended up paying with their lives. Even now, UN “observers” in Southern Lebanon are doing nothing, absolutely nothing, to stop the flow of arms going to Hezbollah, a situation which will certainly explode in the next year or so. Its failures are legion and its successes are few, which is why the UN must go. And please, save your arguments that the UN is actually keeping people alive because of its humanitarian programs. Tell that to the individuals living in Somalia, Darfur, the Congo, and a hundred other hellholes located around the world. Most, if not all, of these programs could be run much more economically through private organizations, like the Red Cross. The UN is a bloated, overpaid, underachieving bunch of bureaucrats that should be sent home on their own dime. These frauds and bigots should never have been allowed to last as long as they did.
waiting for Darwin to straighten out the mess.
survival of the weakest is not a viable long term strategy.
Whine, whine, whine.
Introduce a bill to divert 50% of our UN dues to care for homeless in California, another 30% to the needy middle school kids and you’ll see somehting get done. Do I have to think of everything?
Blueberry writes, “1. if the UN were abolished there would be no one to eat at the fourstar restaraunts and waiters, somiers and dishwashers woud be laid off.”
Perhaps, but the streets might be more drivable without all those double- and triple-parked diplomatic cars; Housing costs would drop, making it possible for more working stiffs to live in the city again; Security costs would go down; and, last but not least, New York could put that prime real estate to truly productive use. Besides, absent the presence of the UN, the US wouldn’t feel compelled to grant visas to the likes of Chavez, Ahmedinijad and Kadaffi.
The U.N. is a total joke. We never should have been in it. We ought to get out of it.
Ahhhhh…the memories.
I remember as a young lad (too many years ago) travelling through rural southwestern Michigan gliding past farms with huge barns. Some had adverts for tobacco, others for insurance. But a few of those barns and some of the road signs on the sides of the roads had huge signs/banners proclaiming “GET US OUT…OF THE UNITED NATIONS.” We would be on the way to sunday morning church…just taking it all in stride. Every christmas I get sentimental for those days….this kind of thread brings back those memories. Thanks !! and Merry Christmas !!
Totally agree! I have been saying this for the last 20 years. Heck, send the UN over to Africa and let that country pay the cost of their upkeep and security. It is time to show that assembly the door!! I would vote for a Socialist if they vowed to get rid of that corrupt group.
Remember, David, that governments love the UN because it is a good place to get together to deal with whatever they deem is necessary to deal with.
I’m over in Alberta, and the MP I am saddled with, and he knows who he is, is more than willing to perpetuate this cesspool of the worst
attributes of humankind.
So, will change come from the current lot of those in government? The day that happens will be the day a leopard changes its spots.
The UN is a New Age, anti-American, and Global Marxism company. Just check out Lucis Trust inside the UN, and you will understand the agenda. Plus, the symbols and their meaning behind the UN.
Put me in charge, and the UN would be removed to a boat moving away from America. I sure hope a sub does not sink that boat.
Next problem!
UN: Withdraw – Defund – Evict
The last poll I remember seeing on this was in the Spring of ’08. At that time it was about 40% in favor of leaving the UN, about 25% in favor of staying and about 30% that had no idea what the UN was.
So this isn’t an issue that matters a lot in the inner city or the backwoods.
For one thing, those that live closer to real life then an ivy coated tower, understand the UN has no power. Period. It was designed that way.
The UN was created as a forum for international debate. The Ivy tower crowd think that once the debate is finished, the issue is settled. It isn’t. A debate is just a prelude to action. The UN is fundamentally incapable of action. The UN has no means of enforcing it’s rulings. Without enforcement there is no law.
The UN was designed that way. Socialists see the UN as a means to a bloodless take over of the world. That is impossible with the UN as it was created.
Any Nation can tell the UN “NO” and the UN cannot do anything about it.
Look at the long history of nations telling the UN “No” and getting away with it. Only 2 times has anything been done about it. Korea and Kuwait/Iraq. After the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait was reversed, Iraq continued to tell the UN to piss off for over a decade. Iran has been bitch slapping the UN for 2 decades. That list is prolly longer, those examples just being prominent.
If the UN is unwilling to get it’s act together and to get enough nations to work together to invade Iran, does anyone really think that they will be able to build a coalition to invade the USA? Get Real!
So if the UN tells the USA to do something we don’t like, we just tell them to bugger thy self with a flagpole.
Churchill said “Jaw Jaw is better then War War.” By that he meant that talk is cheaper then war. It also has the benefit of not killing as many people. You lose the talks and you go out for lunch, have a couple of drinks and start the talks again tomorrow. The Down side is that Jaw Jaw seldom settles anything. It can put it off in hopes that the issue will resolve itself in the future. That ALWAYS leads to War War. One side wants a ‘final’ solution.
There are no final solutions, so Jaw Jaw is better then War War. War is necessary because some people don’t realize that there are no final solutions, or don’t care. Tyrants and despots don’t care about anything beyond their lifetime. So a temporary solution that leaves them alive and in control is fine by them.
Meanwhile, don’t worry about the UN. Consider it a source of amusement, a skit creator for late night comedy. Politically, the UN is a 4 year old girl playing with her dolls.
I vote to move them to Pakistan because:
- It is one of the most corrupt countries in the world, so they would fit right in
- It is a cesspit of moral decadence, so again, they would fit right in
- On a routine basis someone blows up a bunch of the locals in the name of Allah, so they could enjoy first-hand the results of thier policies
- It’s on the other side of the world!
- It’s within reach of Iranian missiles and Al Queda homicide bombers
- It’s a filthy, backward, decrepit pseudo-democracy a mere half-step from military dictatorship, so they’ll feel right at home
- Did I mention it is on the other side of the world?!
looks like the lefty trolls can’t get up the nerve to defend their beloved UN.
27. It was a joke!
TriGeek, I’ve been waiting and reading and appalled by the comments here.
Two major warriors, FDR and Churchill concieved of the UN to prevent another world war. To enable people of all countries to gther and discuss events in a hospitable forum as opposed to sending tanks over borders at the drop of a hat.
History teaches that the unilateralist tendencies of all nations must be controlled if we are to have peace. And international agencies such as the UN are our only hope for peace and development. The $400 million contributed by the US is but a fraction of what should be contributed to this forum for peace.
The people here, including the aptly named Bubblehead and Leatherneck, are retrograde throwbacks to a darker, meaner and more turbulent time. For almost 60 years the UN has kept the peace. Had the UN not been in existence at the time of the missle crisis, and Adlai Stevenson not been our UN ambassdador, we might have lost the entire world. UN Peacekeepers serve today where others will not.
Let it not be udone by naysayers such as you complaining about parking spaces and mere money.
If or when the USA exits the UN with the UK to follow, it will collapse as an organization & won’t be able to survive. The UN is only a mouthpiece for corrupt tin-pot 3rd world countries.
It’s time to declare the UN a failed experiment.
The United Nations is a monument to counterproductivity. It’s little more than a petty despots club and it’s embarrassing to have it on US soil.
Why does the UN’s Lucis Trust want to teach children New Age false religion crap, or control parks, waterways, and the ocean?
The UN is not what Churchill was looking for. I bet he would faint at all the UN support for murdering children called abortion. But, don’t you hurt that eagle’s egg pal.
I am not a throwback to a darker time, I am much worse to the New Age. I am a Nationalist white Christian male with morality.
To follow G-d’s laws, repent in Christ’s name is hate speech to the UN. The UN is the enemy of the United States, and as such should be destroyed along with CAIR, the Muslim brotherhood, Humas, Hizboallah, and San Fran Nan’s sicko values!
If you do not like anything I wrote, blame the Founding Fathers of the United States of America.
White Line wrote: “Had the UN not been in existence at the time of the missle crisis, and Adlai Stevenson not been our UN ambassdador, we might have lost the entire world.”
==================================================
Do ya think socialists ever get a good night’s rest?
To 38. White Line:
What so many U.N. admirers consistently fail to acknowlegde is just how much of an utter failure the UN has been at preventing conflict, death, destruction, and devastation. How much evidence does it take to prove this? Consider just these well known failures going back to the 1950′s:
- Cambodia
- Tibet
- Sudan
- Somalia
- Hungary
- Congo
- Czechoslavakia
- The entire mideast
- Uganda
- Angola
- The Balkans
I’m sure I’ve missed a bunch but for all the noise and pronouncements that emanate from the UN, none of it has had any impact on averting war and conflict. I’d go as far to say that the UN actually makes it worse by prolonging the pain via politicized talkfests.
Terry:
“The US needs to establish a new world organization composed ONLY of actual democracies.”
If that’s the case then the United States of America would not be among them! You see, beyond what is being taught in our public schools today, even among some charter, private schools, and unfortunately in universities, is the notion that our Nation is supposedly a democracy. In fact, this is not true as our Nation is a Constitutional Republic. It will hopefully will remain that way, too. Democracy is by definition “mob rule” which in reality is what the U.N. is today – so why trade one bad system for another? All of us who read PJM need to work together to mend this erroneous idea about U.S. democracy as it’ll eventually destroy our freedom if we let the falsehoods persist.
Our Republic is precious and we had better start fighting for it! Let’s work together to do it and make the U.N. irrelevant through proper education and proper adherence to law.
Citizen Authority
White Line
Uh…. do you know the individuals who were the architects of the U.N. charters? You had better read up on this info before passing of history so easily my friend. Do the research and learn how and who formed the foundation of this ridiculous and highly communistic organization. If you knew the truth in this matter the truth would set you free -
Citizen Authority
Congratulations White Line- you completely ignored the total failures of the UN, and just blindly defended the concept. Liberals “feel” that if they produce something with good intentions, they should be congratulated forever, no matter that the organization they created has been an absolute an total failure. I think I am going to go out an plant a “peace pole”. No doubt the despots of the world will see my good faith, and scrap all of there bad intentions.
White Line: “…international agencies such as the UN are our only hope for peace and development.”
First off, forget the ‘international development’ scam. Translation: “Give us your money.”
The second claim, that corrupt organizations that are out to steal our taxpayers’ money, are our ‘only hope’ for peace, is completely ridiculous. Peace is assured by preparing for war. This has been a universal maxim since the beginning of civilization.
Useful fools are everywhere, and Mr White Line is a perfect example.
The UN at work…
http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2009/12/un-backed-goons.html
White line: “For almost 60 years the UN has kept the peace.”
WTF? The last 60 years have seen wars, and wars, and more wars, with a couple of genocides tossed in. The only “peace” that was kept was the non-invasion of Western Europe by the USSR- and it certainly wasn’t the UN that prevented that!
Th cat’s out of the bag now and they’re getting more brazen and panicky; the head honcho Spanki Banki broke his own U.N. rules by actively lobbying Congress to get the “cap and trade” bill passed. Now; if the U.N. is lobbying for it; it has to be rotten to the core.
Every clear-thinking American ought to push for de-funding this bunch of elitist malcontents. Nice intentions are one thing; but motives are another. This is a body with an agenda that doesn’t bode well for the U.S. These are out-of-control stateists that know exactly what they’re doing and it has nothing to do with anything that Churchill envisioned. I want Churchill’s bust sent back to the WH; he was a man of his time; I believe it will return before too long.
HOW CAN ? the Augean Stables of the political establishment of Washington, New York, California and the “Blue States” be cleansed
without a Hercules, and where on earth can he be found? Have you had other comments about the following paradox? Of the two major political parties in the USA, the “Democratic” Party is reputed and
advertises itself to be the ANTI – WAR Party, the PEACE Party, and the champions of the workers and the disadvantaged. The “Republican”
as the champion of big business and immoral profit seekers, and the
oppressors of the workers and the disadvantaged. BUT a scan of the
“entanglement in foreign affairs” of America in the 20th Century shows that of the 5 major conflicts, WARS, ALL, save the last, the First Irag War, were started, developed and executed by Democratic Presidents in Democratic Administrations, with the cooperation of the Republicans in Congress. And that post – war
policies to administer the “Peace”,i.e. the League of Nations AND the United Nations were started by and developed by Democrat Presidents. The League of Nations was, FORTUNATELY,for the US, had
a relatively short – term tenure. BUT the United Nations has become a NEW INTERNATIONAL EMPIRE WITH ALL THE PERQUISITES OF A
NEW INTERNATIONAL ROYAL COURT.
a short – term
HOW can the Augean Stables which is the political Establishment in
Washington, New York, California and the “Blue States” be cleansed
without a Hercules, and where on earth can such a creature be found? Have you had other comments about the following paradox ? Of the 2 major political parties in the USA, the “Democratic” Party is reputed, and advertises itself as the champion of the workers and the disadvantaged, and the ANTI- WAR,the PEACE Party. the “moral” Party. The “Republicans” as the PRO-WAR Party, the “stupid” Party in pursuit of immoral profits, the oppressor of the workers and the disadvantaged.A scan of the “entanglements in foreign affairs” in which America was embroiled in the 20th century shows that of the 5 (five) major conflicts, all – ALL save the last, the first Irag War were STARTED, DEVELOPED, AND
EXECUTED BY DEMOCRAT PRESIDENTS, in Democratic Administration, with the cooperation of the Republicans in Congress. And that the two agencies established as post-war models to administer the Peace were also the inventions of Democratic Presidents, again with Republican cooperation : The League of Nations, which fortunately for the US had short tenure, and the United Nations which has become a NEW INTERNATIONAL EMPIRE WITH THE PRIVILEGES OF A ROYAL COURT, entirely UNACCOUNTABLE TO THE TAXPAYERS OF THE MEMBER NATIONS, EXCEPT THROUGH THE COURTIERS, i.e the politicians. An organisation model illegal, unconstitutional, in the USA, which disallows any representation as royalty within the government machinery and representations. BUT THIS ORGANISATION HAS RECEIVED FOR 60 PLUS YEARS,MASSIVE SUMS, ALWAYS ESCALATING AS
ITS POWER AND BUREAUCRACY EXPANDS,FROM THE AMERICAN TREASURY, the expropriated taxes from the worker Americans, FOR THE PAYMENT OF
THE “BUSINESS” COSTS AND ROYAL PRIVILEGES OF THE ORGANISATION AND ITS MEMBERS. Did I notice reference to Orwell? All animals are
equal, some animals are more equal? and the “dictatorship of the
Proletariate”
Just in case you haven’t seen this…
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2009/12/global-warming-economic-war.html
46 citizen authority: Oh come one!
Not the tired old “Alger Hiss was at FDR’s shoulder” claim. Even if he was, the principle of collective opposition to unilateralist force was espoused in the League Of Nations, before that against Napoleon and before that too. No Alger Hiss at any of those. FDR endorsed the UN; so did Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon…..
All the people opposing the UN presumably think that high level diplomacy can be conducted by email, or carrier pigeon, or maybe over the top of a pickle barrel. It can’t. They need a secure base, staff, and prompt payment of dues by member nations. The one thing it does not need is the carping by underinformed pople who rise in knee jerk unison to oppose the UN. Grow up!
As someone who has worked closely with multiple UN agencies in Africa, the UN is primarily a very generous welfare program for non-American PhDs supported by US (and European) billions. At least the Europeans get jobs at the UN – very few Americans do. THe pay is astronomical and the benefits unheard of anywhere else but the World Bank and IMF. They pay for private schooling of employees’ children through college!
THe strongest justification for the UN is that it is the one place where all countries can get together to address issues. The though is never finished, however. It’s where all countries get together to gang up on the US.
Should we get a Libertarian president in 2012, a winning foreign policy initiative would be to cut back funding to the UN and to require member states to pay for the salaries, benefits, and lodging of their citizens employed bu the UN.
pelut, we’re sick of your negativity. The Republic is not dead yet, and we’re not going to give up. We have no tolerance for fatalists like you.
What has kept the world safe from another world war was not the UN, but the American and Russian nuclear arsenals. The certainty of total devastation of one’s own country causes even the most hawkish of politicians to sheath their sabres.
The UN enables corrupt, greedy incompetent governments out here in Africa.
They loot , steal, murder and rape while the UN puts on bandages and provides clean water to the victims without ever putting these insane regimes on the spot.
In my opinion these African governments should be left alone, outside the system, and let nature take it’s course. Unfortunately that would mean the gravy train would have far fewer seats for the incompetent idiots that make up the bloated head count at the UN.
White Line;
Me thinks you should study a little history on the subject. FDR did his thesis on the 5 nations treaty. FYI, that was the treaty that organized 5 Indian nations in a loose republic to fend off the advance of European settlers. Unfortunately for them, it was to little to late.
The UN Charter is derived from the 5 nations treaty. Get past the verbage and you have a security Council, a general council and permanent member(s).
http://www.constitution.org/cons/iroquois.htm
The term United Nations was first used by Churchill to describe the Nations allied against Nazi Germany. The UN Charter is an expansion of the Atlantic Charter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_Charter
Since the Atlantic Charter was never made into a treaty, it isn’t considered part of International Law. Although the various treaties it spawned are.
Go Figure!
Meanwhile, there IS a need for some sort of international forum, and yes, the UN is far from Ideal.
Not that I’m a liberal or even a “progressive”, but I would like to point out that the UN doesn’t do a very good job of halting or even slowing down war. The UN is a toothless weasel.
So why do you fear it? You can’t have it both ways. Either the UN is ineffective or it needs to be feared. Logically, it can’t be both.
Is the UN expensive? ‘ell YES. The USA pays 22% of the UN budget. Is that good or bad?
http://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/224/27247.html
The USA operates on a different FY then the UN. The UN sends the USA a bill the first of every year. Congress CANNOT apportion money to pay that bill until Spring, at the soonest. That money isn’t available to disburse until October when the USA’s FY begins.
The UN kmnows this and refuses to adjust their billing cycle. So that way they can always claim the USA is in arrears. As you see from the URL, ANY Senator can hold up the payment to the UN and they often do.
The UN cannot do anything without money, which is why they are desperate to get their hands on a source of income that the USA can’t shut off. Hence OIL for Fraud, LOST, Global Warming and any other scam that looks to fill the UN’s coffers.
No, the USA needs to stay in the UN. That makes it easier to keep our foot on their neck. What we need to do is veto EVERYTHING and cut our percentage of the UN budget back to about 10%. Let the UN diplos travel coach for a while.
Last but not least, the UN should move to Jerusalem. That would accomplish several things at once. Most of them positive.
None of the people that are believers in “negotiation” will ever support the U.S. leaving the U.N. I think a better plan is to couch it in the language of building up Africa, a continents that sorely needs development. U.N. headquarters are moving to the first African nation that endorses our First and Second Amendments to the Constitution, as well as Article I, section 2 providing for the biyearly election of the tax man. At the first missed election or repeal of either amendment (through vote or other)… we leave. They show themselves to be unable to support the freedom that we DEMAND here.
SenatorMark,
The requirements for the USA voiding a treaty are that
A.) POTUS signs a finding that the Treaty is no longer of benefit to the USA.
b.) The Senate passes a bill ( I think by 2/3, but I not real sure about that) wihdrawing the USA from that treaty.
IIRC, ‘B’ has only happened once, during WW2 with the Kellogg-Briand Pact. I’m no expert on this subject, so it could have happened more often. ‘A’ has happened before. Bush ’43 did it with the ABM treaty. ‘Peanut’ Carter did it with the USA-Taiwan mutual defense treaty.
Here is a link to a liberal lawyer arguing in support of Goldwater that the President doesn’t have the authority to withdraw the USA from a treaty. The USSC wiffed on the case;
http://cndyorks.gn.apc.org/yspace/articles/abmt/stopwithdrawal.htm
Since as a point of fact, Presidents HAVE withdrawn the USA from treaties, I would say that the Lawyer is blowing smoke.
In the fair and balanced mode, here is a link to a Law School Professor that claims Bush was legal when he canceled the ABM treaty. He looks at it from the POV of “international Law”, not US law. Since the USSC has ruled that international law supersedes US Law, which the first attorney acknowledges, then I would think he is correct.
http://www.asil.org/insigh70.cfm
Look at the 5 tests for rescinding a treaty and see how many of them the UN charter passes.
Then there is the practical side, which is that there is no such thing as international law, since there is no international enforcement body.
According to Blackstone, “The Law does not go where enforcement cannot reach.”
If POTUS withdraws from the UN charter, who can force him/her to change his/her mind?
Once the American voters realize that the UN intends to use the global warming scare (AGW) to steal a few thousand dollars a month from them, they will go ballistic. Any politician involved is toast. Senators know that, which is why they voted 98-0 AGAINST Kyoto. I suspect the Margin will be similar this time.
Moynihan also called the UN a theater of the absurd, a decomposing corpse and an insane asylum. I think he was too generous.
For almost 60 years the UN has kept the peace. Oh, you poor, deluded schmo.
#1, Terry,
If we removed all the tyrants and only had so called western democracies, what would we have, a bunch of whiny libs who would continue to do as they have done during my entire 64 years of life. They are pretty much a bunch of leftist tyrants, they swap around as to who is the tyrant in charge for now, but this is the same bunch that created the stupidity that we call the UN, we of course are included in that collection of idiot tyrants. And of course we now have the ultimate moron in charge of the US. Do you honestly believe we have the common sense in the US to get much of anything right?
#13, Dan,
We have much bigger problems then whether the UN is queer. It is hand in glove with every two bit tyrant around the world as well as the so called democratic west, which isn’t really very democratic, we now have the Won and he is a perfect fit for those at the UN. Life in the world is about to get interesting beyond the wildest dreams of every two bit tyrant and muslim out there.