The UN

From a January 3rd story from the “United Kingdom Telegraph:”

(Warning: BRITISH SPELLING AHEAD)

“It wouldn't be the first time. If UN personnel have, as alleged, been molesting children in southern Sudan, they will be following in a long tradition of abuse. Around the world, UN officials have run smuggling and prostitution rings, stolen and sold supplies, and traded food for sex. Sometimes, the racket becomes institutionalised, as when UN contractors collaborated with Ba'athists on the oil-for-food boondoggle. More often, the organisation is greedy and self-serving, but stops short of outright corruption. We learnt this week, for example, that the UN has voted £2.5 million (THAT’S $5 MILLION U.S.!) to refurbish the secretary-general's residence in New York (Ban Ki-moon and his wife are being put up in a suite at the Waldorf Astoria in the meantime).

“The reason that the UN so often behaves badly is, paradoxically, because so many people wish it well. Because the organisation embodies the loftiest of ideals – peace among nations – it tends to receive the automatic benefit of the doubt. We are so fond of the theoretical UN that we rarely drag our gaze down to the actual one. The UN has therefore fallen out of the habit of having to explain itself and, in consequence, become flabby, immobilist and often sleazy.

“If that criticism sounds too harsh, consider its record since the end of the Cold War – the period in which it might have been expected to come into its own. In Bosnia, it was worse than useless. Uselessness would have meant doing nothing. Instead, the UN imposed an arms embargo that favoured one side over the other, herded the losers into notionally protected areas, disarmed them and then handed them over for execution. In Rwanda, when the UN commander on the ground informed his superiors that a mass slaughter was planned, and that he intended to forestall it by seizing the weapons caches, he was told to do no such thing.”

(In my last column I failed to mention perhaps one the most conspicuous and costly screw-ups involving the U.S. and that was the UN run fiasco in Korea. DB)

So sayeth one of the leading media outlets in the UK.

And just before Christmas, we learned that the commission chaired by former Fed head, Paul Volcker (who is also a long-time member of the Rockefeller founded and dominated Council on Foreign Relations and an arch One-Worlder) will turn over all their investigative documentation surrounding the Oil for Food scandal to – drum roll here – the UNITED NATIONS! The fox is not just GUARDING the chicken coop -- he has taken up residence.

(The Rockefellers DONATED the property at Turtle Bay to the UN. It is believed to be very near the site where 21 year-old American patriot Nathan Hale was hanged by the British after declaring “I regret that I have but one life to lose for my country.” In-our-face cabalistic humor? A little “joke” to site the sovereignty destroying UN near where a young patriot gave his life over 200 years ago trying to secure that very sovereignty? Almost certainly! It’s what these elitists do – because they CAN.)

But the UN is now under a new and improved leader, South Korean’s Ban Ki-Moon, who has pledged to “clean up” the organization.

Might I suggest that he begin his “clean up” by scrapping that $5 million remodel of the SG’s digs and move from that suite at the Waldorf Astoria.

Your intrepid reporter CALLED the Waldorf on 1/4/07 and was told that those suites run from $380.00 per night for a 450 square foot “economy” suite all the way up to the Tower suites which, according to the gal to whom I spoke “…guarantee a view of Park Avenue…” for $4,000.00 per night based on a one week stay. My guess is that Ban and the gang are in the Tower. Pity we don’t have an equivalent of the Tower of London for them to use.
Look, don’t get me wrong.

We have no problem with individual nations -- with the full consent of their informed populations -- forming alliances, making trade agreements, treaties, etc. Nations of the world should talk to one another.

We DO have a problem with attempts to force such arrangements by an overarching internationalist organization unaccountable to any population or national government. The end result of such activities is the destruction of national sovereignty, the death of liberty and a leveling of the nations of the world to the plane of the lowest common denominator.
Gee, I think I’ve just explained the real goal of those who took us into the UN – see one of my previous columns for who THEY were -- and their modern soul-mates/counterparts (fellow conspirators?) who insist that we remain involved with what is now and will doubtless remain one of the most corrupt and dangerous institutions on the planet.

I’ve done what I could and am proud to say that there are still a few faded and tattered signs affixed to trees and fence posts across Georgia put there 30 years ago by yours truly and a small group of friends. What do they say?

“GET THE US OUT OF THE UN AND THE UN OUT OF THE US.”
Look for them as you travel.

When was the last time YOU told your congress critter – either in a letter or verbally at a Town Hall Meeting -- that that’s exactly what YOU want?