Great Article from Washington Times

U.N. a haven for despots

TODAY'S COLUMNIST
By Fred Gedrich
April 16, 2007

A February 2007 Gallup poll indicated that 66 percent of surveyed Americans believe the United Nations is doing a poor job. It's the worst global body rating in Gallup polling history. And it may worsen once the American public reads the recently published State Department report on U.S. voting practices for 2006.
The State Department issued the 24th annual installment of this congressionally-mandated report in March 2007. It shows that, among other things, 191 U.N. General Assembly members collectively voted against U.S.-supported positions 76 percent of the time, out of 94 non-consensus votes cast, on important issues such as threats to international peace and security, terrorism, disarmament, economic and social development, humanitarian relief and human rights.
To fully comprehend this one must first look at the type of governments voting. The General Assembly is currently split into two main factions: free nations and those that are not. According to Freedom House -- a democracy-focused group co-founded by Eleanor Roosevelt -- only 89 of 192 U.N. members have truly free governments.
In other words, the U.N. majority is composed of 103 nations whose governments and leaders do not provide their 3.5 billion subjects the full panoply of political rights and civil liberties like those enjoyed by citizens of free states. Worse, a substantial number of people residing in these countries suffer the dual indignity of severe oppression and extreme poverty.
Unfortunately for their citizens, most rulers of U.N. majority nations instinctively look to despots and human-rights abusers like Cuba's Castro, Iran's Ahmadinejad, Libya's Gadhafi, Venezuela's Chavez and Zimbabwe's Mugabe for leadership. Any doubters should attend a typical U.N.-sponsored global gathering and witness this cast of characters spewing their anti-American, anti-Israel, and anti-free-world diatribes while receiving loud accolades and encouragement from their many enablers.
They, along with putative U.S. European allies like France and Germany (who often place their national business interests with despotic governments over free world security interests), generally detest the United States standing as free-world leader and President Bush's stated national security strategy of defeating terrorism by promoting and expanding global freedom.
The General Assembly majority shrewdly uses democratic theory -- under the "one nation, one vote" concept enunciated in the U.N. Charter -- to protect their interests and oppose U.S.-supported positions -- while denying their own citizens the constitutional right to freely elect and replace government leaders.
To buttress and advance their national, regional and global agendas they have formed strong, intertwined U.N. alliances. And since the United States poses the greatest threat to their existence by advocating the expansion of freedom, they typically vote in blocs against this country. For example, the 114-nation Non-Aligned Movement voted against the United States 85 percent of the time, the 56-nation Islamic Conference voted against 87 percent of the time and the 53-nation African Union voted against 86 percent of the time.
The State Department report also provides some other important facts. The United States authorized $13 billion in direct bilateral financial aid to 148 nations. Seven countries: Israel, Afghanistan, Columbia, Egypt, Jordan, Pakistan and Sudan received 57 percent of it. Israel voted with the U.S. 84 percent of the time. The six others collectively voted against the U.S. 88 percent of the time.
And what about the three Muslim countries U.S.-led coalitions liberated from invaders and oppressors at a cost of several thousand American lives and hundreds of billions of dollars in taxpayer expenditures? Afghanistan, Iraq and Kuwait expressed their independence, and ingratitude, by collectively voting against the United States 86 percent of the time.
America's European Union allies (25 nations) did somewhat better by voting against the United States only 57 percent of the time.
The majority of U.N. General Assembly members, over strong U.S. objections, have effectively blocked substantive and much-needed institutional reforms; refused to define deliberate attacks on civilians as terrorism; made Iran's terrorist state vice chair of the Disarmament Commission even though it actively pursues nuclear weaponry technology over Security Council objections; and placed human-rights abusers like China, Cuba and Saudi Arabia on the new Human Rights Council.
The United States was the primary impetus for the U.N.'s creation and has served as its chief benefactor and host since 1945. And generous Americans contribute about $3 billion annually to the U.N.'s various missions and causes. However, the global body has not lived up to its basic founding principles of keeping the peace, protecting human rights and promoting and expanding global freedom. Based on current member voting habits and the majority's actions, it probably never will.

Fred Gedrich is a foreign policy and national security analyst and former U.S. State Department official.

I-ran

Iran has stolen the show recently, probably doing the best job in the world at showing the uselessness of the UN in it's current form. Sanction after sanction and repeated infractions have left Iran no worse for the wear. Last week some abductions, this week violating UN Security Council resolutions (AGAIN), and not cooperating with the UN Atomic Energy Agency, yet they are still a member of the UN. Even drunken fraternities have stricter rules for staying a member. To continue with this analogy, Iran needs a good paddling or to get blackballed, neither of which the UN will do.

Ahmadinejad (im guessing here and he doesn't deserve my time to look it up) has repeatedly claimed that Iran's nuclear pursuits have been for peaceful purposes only and has nothing against Jews. Well, I'm not an expert on international policy and politics, but when the President of a country that is already on the shit list with the UN, calls for the destruction of another member country, while saying that they are pursuing nuclear technology, having a "Holocaust didn't happen" conference, and not complying with the UN or it's agencies, the World shouldn't trust you nor should it have any reason to. A UN that was worth anything would actually have a means of putting an end to this nonsense.

CNN's article on Iran's recent announcement


Check This out. So ridiculous thats its actually kind of funny. You have to use Internet Explorer. Enjoy.
Portrait of Jews on Iranian TV

Just a Quick Example

Hey all....just wanted to post a quick clip (7:30) showing what the UN Human Rights Council deems admissible speech in its chambers followed by a clip of the President of a group called UN Watch ( UNwatch.org ) whose main focus is to literally watch the UN and call them out on not making fair and balanced decissions. He makes some pretty good points and tears them a new one. Enjoy.

UN Watch Speech


P.S. Sorry but I'm first learning this shit...in the future I want to have videos embedded in the page

Darfur

As you probably already know.....
In the Darfur region of Sudan, there is currently another GENOCIDE taking place. Indigenous Black Africans are being slaughtered and displaced by the hundreds of thousands to its current level by a racist Arab supremacist regime along with the Janjaweed Militia. The only thing thus far that the UN has attempted has been to send inspectors into the region; a move which this POS regime has denied. What has the UN done about this rejection of world authority one might ask? Not a God Damn thing! That is besides accuse Israel or more bullshit of course. I guess thats what they get for complying with UN inspectors and resolutions. Sorry to get off topic, but in Darfur it's just another example of Islamofacists committing atrocities and getting nothing but weak rhetoric in return.

Wouldn't it be great if there were an organization that could be called upon to protect these people? Well there currently is not one available to call. If the UN was worth anything at all, there would have been a UN peacekeeping force installed in this area years ago....against the Sudanese regime's wishes. Why is Sudan still allowed in the UN? Shouldn't there be some sort of rules that countries have to follow in order to have respect on a world stage? Maybe its just me but I would like to see the UN grow some balls and give a nice FU to the Sudanese government and deploy troops BECAUSE ITS THE RIGHT THING TO DO! Not to just sit back and allow a member country to kill its citizens.

What the US could accomplish in this situation with a creation of a New United Nations is to actually have the ability to punish countries for non-compliance and to take action against regimes that commit criminal acts. We can actually look out for the fate of the worlds people and to restore the values of Freedom, Justice, and Human Rights back into the UN and instill these same values into countries in which they are lacking. The time has come to be the true freedom fighters of the world and squash injustice everywhere.

P.S. I know I used some strong words like "Islamofacist" and "Racist Arab Supremacist" so I just wanted to say that I only wrote these words to solely and directly describe the Sudanese Government. Not all Muslims are terrorists of course and not all Muslim countries behave in such terrible ways.


UPDATE:
Chad: At least 65 killed in Sudan militia raid

Well it seems that killing Black Villagers in Sudan just gets boring after a while and so the Janjaweed militia have apparently set their sights on Chad. The UNHCR was on the scene inteviewing survivors but since they're part of a worthless organization there will most likely be complete inaction. Part of the report states that the militia was mounted on camel and horseback, with some in vehicles. Chad's military forces only managed to drive back these whackos? You are a country with a military....The only excuse you could possible have for not destroying these people is that you are mounted on horse and camel as well.