Monday - October 31, 2011

It’s About Time

U.S. Will Withhold Funds For U.N. Agency After Vote to Grant Membership to Palestinians

The United States will not pay $60 million to a U.N. cultural and educational agency after it voted Monday to accept the Palestinian mission as a full member, triggering a U.S. requirement to cut off funds.

“We are not going to be able to continue contributing to the budget,” State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said. “Palestinian membership as a state in UNESCO triggers longstanding legislative restrictions which will compel the United States to refrain from making contributions to UNESCO.”

Washington is required by law to cut off funding to any U.N. agency if the Palestinian Liberation Organization is granted membership in any group at the international body.

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization voted 107-14 with 52 abstentions on Monday granting Palestinians full membership in the organization. The U.S. voted against the nomination. Eighty-one votes of the 173 UNESCO members were needed for full membership to be approved.

“Long Live Palestine!” one delegate reportedly shouted in French at the meeting.

The U.S. funds about 22 percent of UNESCO’s budget, or roughly $80 million annually. Nuland said the $60 million was scheduled to be sent in November.

Unfortunately, this is only UNESCO, not the whole UN package. But there’s a movement under way to de-fund that bunch of socialist puss-weasels as well:

Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., has also introduced legislation that would withhold U.S. contributions from any U.N. agency or program that “upgrades” the status of the Palestinian observer mission at the U.N, whether full membership or not.

Ros-Lehtinen has previously argued efforts at de facto recognition of a Palestinian state is an attempt to evade a negotiated settlement with Israel.

Former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton said the U.N. vote signals weakness in U.S. diplomacy, particularly since some of the United States’ closest allies voted against U.S. wishes.

“So ineffective was Obama administration diplomacy, that France voted in favor of Palestinian membership, and Britain and Japan abstained. U.S. statutes, dating from 1990, now require a full cutoff of U.S. funding, which Congress should insist occur immediately. Should the administration seek changes in the applicable statutory provisions that would eliminate or weaken the funding cutoff, Congress should reject them,” Bolton said.

“UNESCO has made its decision: it prefers Palestinian membership to American participation. Now let the rest of the U.N. specialized agencies make their choice,” he added.

Damn straight skippy. When the ’Stache of Truth speaks, ya’ll better listen up. And gosh, another utter non-surprise: under Obama, our diplomats are effin’ worthless. Strong horse, weak horse, dopey donkey. An ass that needs kicking.

UK out of EU. US out of UN, UN out of US. Let the effers fend for themselves for a decade. Idiots.

Posted by Drew458     on 10/31/2011 at 02:43 PM   
Filed Under: • United-Nations •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Saturday - March 19, 2011

France Over Libya

French fighters jets soared over Libya on Saturday to counter Moammar Gadhafi’s military forces who were intent on destroying the opposition as they pushed into the rebel stronghold of Benghazi.

“Our air force will oppose any aggression by Colonel Gadhafi against the population of Benghazi,” said French President Nicolas Sarkozy, speaking after an international, top-level meeting in Paris over the Libyan crisis.

“As of now, our aircraft are preventing planes from attacking the town,” he said. “As of now, our aircraft are prepared to intervene against tanks.”

The international show of force is much-welcomed by besieged rebel forces who have called for backup to help them stave off a government offensive against their positions in Benghazi and other rebel-held enclaves.

Latest developments:

* French jets have entered Libya’s airspace to prevent Muammar Gaddafi’s forces from attacking Benghazi, President Sarkozy has announced.

* Sarkozy’s statement to the press came after world leaders, including British PM David Cameron, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and various Arab leaders, met in Paris Saturday to hold crunch talks on the crisis in Libya.

* Reports emerged this morning of a fighter plane being shot down over Benghazi. Photos and video show the jet above the city falling through the sky in flames.

* Rebels in Benghazi say the government has been bombing roads and areas around the city. The regime has denied any involvement, saying its air force has remained grounded and the cease-fire is being upheld.

Obama “the leader of the free world”, made a speech yesterday in which he talked tough but essentially told the world “let somebody else do this.”

Asked whether the decision to carry out bombing against Libyan forces could begin immediately after Saturday’s session ends, a senior State Department official said: “In terms of when the bombing starts, I’ll leave that for others to lay out at the appropriate time.”

Such leadership.

Fearless Reader then got on his airplane and began yet another vacation embarked on a vital 5 day trade mission to South America with his family.

Obama departed Washington just hours after endorsing military action against Libya’s Moammar Gadhafi, leaving an array of military might at the ready and raising the prospect that he would have to authorize military action from a foreign land.

For Obama, the visit represents a chance to engage with newly elected [ Brazilian ] President Dilma Rousseff and get a firsthand assessment of what administration officials believe is her practical approach to governance and foreign relations after eight years of the flamboyant Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.
...
Obama arrives bearing no major policy gifts. And he’s not likely to deliver on two of Brazil’s top wishes—an endorsement for Brazil to become a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council and a relaxation of tariffs on Brazilian ethanol. The United States and Brazil are the world’s largest ethanol producers.

And after promising question and answer news conferences with these South American leaders, Obama’s first presser was no questions asked. Yeah, because that’s what Rouseff wanted, right.

Obama’s “press conference” with Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff was abruptly shrunken down to just statements from each leader and no questions from American and Brazilian reporters, though U.S. officials have been quick to point out that they wanted questions from the media but the Brazilian side blocked it.

Wonderful. Brazil abstained from the Un Security Council No-Fly vote, and has in the recent past been willing to engage in talks with Iran.

PRE-POSTING UPDATE: BATTLE IS JOINED In the time it took me to write this post, it looks like war has broken out in the skies over Libya. I was going to do a sidebar piece about the French flying their new Rafale fighter, which is their slightly smaller, less expensive version of the Eurofighter Typhoon, that has not yet been in any real combat ( a few bombing runs in Afghanistan is all ), but this takes precedence:

Allied Powers Declare Military Action Against Libya
PARIS—Top officials from the United States, Europe and the Arab world have launched immediate military action to protect civilians as Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi’s forces attacked the heart of the country’s rebel uprising.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy said after an emergency summit in Paris on Saturday that French warplanes are already targeting Qaddafi’s forces.

The 22 participants in Saturday’s summit “agreed to put in place all the means necessary, in particular military” to make Qaddafi respect a U.N. Security Council resolution Thursday demanding a cease-fire, Sarkozy said.

“Our planes are blocking the air attacks on the city” of Benghazi, he said, without elaborating. French planes have been readying for an attack in recent days.
...
British Prime Minister David Cameron said after the summit: “The time for action has come, it needs to be urgent.”

Obama sambas, while Libya burns.

Posted by Drew458     on 03/19/2011 at 11:00 AM   
Filed Under: • FRANCE • Military • Obama, The One • Tyrants and Dictators • United-Nations •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Friday - March 18, 2011

making the world safe for democracy

If we get ourselves involved in foreign affairs then at least lets not be hypocrites.

Lets simply tell the world up front and out loud ... we’re gonna do this or that and fuck you if you don’t like it. Or, be diplomatic and state our reason(s) for sticking our nose where it isn’t wanted, and then say fuck you. BUT PLEASE! Lets stop the horseshit about democracy where the word means little or nothing except as an expression. What bothers me about this latest thing with Libya is the BS we’ve been getting about all those poor civilians who are also unarmed. Oh really? Unarmed? 
Seems like all folks in turd world places only have to say the word freedom and it automatically puts em on a high moral plain. Like the word “activist” excuses everything.

Well, in the case of Libya, armed people attacked the government. The govt. did what govts do. It hit back. But in this case, we don’t happen to like the shit faced bastard who is head of that govt. and we hear the sirens call. FREEDOM! Democracy! And immediately the Prime Minister of England, whose country has been doing business there for years, gets an itch in his butt and the cure is a no fly zone to protect all those “innocent” civilians.  Who would not have been attacked had they not attacked the govt. The French also are very quick off the mark, they want in on this thing too but there’s a catch. The USA was dragging it’s heels. Mr. O. was having second thoughts. Or more likely, no thoughts at all. But he finally caved in because all those innocent and “unarmed” civilians looked like they were gonna lose to Gadaffi, hereafter to be referred to as simply Daffy.

Now, in fact today, we hear from ppl called rebel commanders, that they do have “weapons capabilities that have been kept hidden.” They also claim to possess some tanks and choppers as well as artillery AND .... they claim to have a few “fighter jets” at their disposal.

Reminds me of Texas Guinan.

HELLO SUCKERS!

I think we all agree on one thing. Daffy is a miserable psychopath and nobody except his family might miss him if died today. However, it’s wrong to assume he has no supporters outside the ppl who make money off him. We should have totally done him in after PanAm.
Well we didn’t. Our govt. made him a deal he couldn’t refuse and he accepted. A few months ago he was being welcomed in European capitols with his tents and medals. The whole fuckin world knew the guy was a freak but put up with him anyway. Now ... all of a sudden he’s Hitler? Come on. He’s always been a close copy of the original.

We don’t have any moral obligation anywhere to violate another country’s sovereignty unless our own national interests are at stake. If they are, say so. But forget the moralizing and the guilt. Stop with damn speeches about all those poor and destitute folk yearning to be free. If people feel strongly about the starving in Africa for example, then throw away your money giving to their various charities or do what many have done. Go over there as a volunteer to help or do what moonbat Madonna does. Adopt black children. But don’t insist that the American taxpayer has any obligation to support anyone but ourselves. Which is not the case now. And going to the expense of sending military help to people who’ll more then likely stab Uncle Sam in the back at the first opportunity doesn’t sit well either.

OK, I’m almost done but I want to ask. For those who think we need to be everywhere … Maybe we should attack this guy too? No? Why not? He was voted out of office last year and refuses to leave.

Ivory Coast mortar attack may be crime against humanity, say UN

The UN has condemned a mortar attack on a market that killed at least 25 people and said it could be a crime against humanity.
The UN blamed forces loyal to incumbent president Laurent Gbagbo, whose refusal to cede power has sparked a growing political crisis. They said in a statement that Thursday’s attack sent at least six 81mm mortar shells into an Abidjan neighbourhood. The UN said at least 40 people were wounded.

Abidjan, Ivory Coast’s biggest city, has seen daily battles for weeks that have left hundreds dead.

Yeah so?  Why should I care?  But go ahead. Invade the place cos you can not condemn Daffy if you don’t go after this guy too. 

And lets not forget this creep. If we ever got involved in that country, it should be to help what’s left of the legitimate white farmers, who’ve been driven off their lands and been raped and killed by this thug.  I don’t believe the things that happen there get as much attention in the American press as it does here.  And don’t say they should all leave and go home, because that is, for very many, their home.

Below is dated and comes from 2009, at which time Mugabe ranked as the #1 worst dictator.

Robert Mugabe
Zimbabwe

Age: 85
In power since: 1980
Last year’s rank: 6

Inflation in Zimbabwe is so bad that in January the government released a $50 billion note — enough to buy two loaves of bread. The unemployment rate has risen to more than 85%. In 2008, Mugabe agreed to hold an election, but it became clear that he would accept the result only if he won. His supporters launched attacks on the opposition, killing 163 and torturing or beating 5000. He ultimately signed a power-sharing agreement with opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai, but since then Mugabe has broken its terms and installed his own people at the head of every ministry. Meanwhile, health conditions have reached crisis levels. More than 3800 Zimbabweans have died from cholera since August.

Although U.S. leaders have called for Mugabe’s resignation, imports from Zimbabwe (primarily nickel and ferrochromium, both used in stainless steel) rose in 2008.

So how about it folks?  And there are lots of others. The world does not run out of them.  Why, think of the business we could do selling arms and maybe even hiring out to fight never ending little wars everywhere.  Cos as long as there’s bad people running countries all around the globe, there will be excuses to go in and clean their houses for them, even if they don’t ask. All in the name of humanity of course. And as Rich K says, America has a moral right to do anything we want anywhere we want, to subdue bad guy dictators.
Trouble is, in many parts of the world, a dictator might the only stability some folks have.
btw … I’m all for wiping out places like Somalia and Iran. Maybe it’s personal. I still haven’t forgotten Black Hawk Down or our embassy in Iran under that peanut farmer.

Posted by peiper     on 03/18/2011 at 02:51 PM   
Filed Under: • Big Brother • Tyrants and Dictators • United-Nations •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Friday - December 03, 2010

mudscum filthy terrorists should have human rights protected? how many agree with that pov?

Right you are. Your country is attacked by a sub-human species but the law says you must treat em as tho they are real people. Moreover, you must obey international law and follow the suggestion of the idiot UN committee.
Pshaw ... gotta be kidding me.  BS to that and the UN.  Wish we could get out of that thing and kick em all out of our country. Let em move to Brussels.
Terrorists are not impressed by good treatment unless they see it as a weakness.  “Human Rights” For rats. Where’d they get that?

We’ll eventually defeat muzzie terrorists by holding hands and singing we are the world?

Anti-terror fight should be conducted within laws: UN expert

United Nations (ANTARA News/Xinhua-OANA) - The global anti-terrorism fight should be conducted according to the rule of law while taking into account the human rights, a UN expert told reporters here Wednesday.

“We believe that in the long term terrorism will only be defeated if we do so according to the rule of law and with appropriate respect for human rights,” Mike Smith, who is the executive director of the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate (CTED), said at a press conference here.

“If you don`t consider law and human rights, you threaten to alienate the origin of communities, maybe just perpetuate the problem and contribute to the recruitment of terrorists,” Smith said.

The Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC) is tasked with monitoring implementation of Resolution 1373, which requests countries to implement a number of measures intended to enhance their legal and institutional ability to counter terrorist activities at home, in their regions and around the world. The Committee comprises all 15 Security Council members.

The Committee is part of the UN which allows it to easily bring professionals together to brainstorm on a particular subject, Smith said.

source is antara news

Posted by peiper     on 12/03/2010 at 09:53 AM   
Filed Under: • Terrorists • United-Nations •  
• Comments (7) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Friday - November 26, 2010

leave the united nations?  oh if only

H/T SULTAN KNISH Blog site

As usual there’s more at the link.  I’ve gone to the Sultan before. He can be funny at times even when being serious.
You may find this an interesting read.

Getting late, hafta go.  More puter problems.  I think my sound system is failing.  Vol. isn’t very high. ??? Gonna see if I can find the problem.
Cheers All

Want Human Rights? Leave the United Nations
By Daniel Greenfield

Good news everybody. Saudi Arabia now has a seat on the women’s board at the United Nations. That’s right, a regime where it’s illegal for women to drive or leave the house without being accompanied by a male guardian, where girls were pushed into a burning building because they were trying to flee without covering their ‘obscene’ female faces… will be a key player in the international effort to empower women.

I don’t know what contribution the Saudis can make to the project, since in Ridyah, empowering women usually means strapping them into an electric chair. But in the Muslim world, human rights is usually read to mean banning criticism of Islam under the guise of Islamophobia. In Europe, Islamists are calling the Burqa a human right. That’s probably what the Saudis will bring to the table, along with the condemnations of Israel that are De rigueur in every UN group and body.

Obama’s ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, called the Saudi win, “a very good outcome”. I’m not sure what she would consider a bad outcome. Given her role in kneecapping Canada for the Security Council seat, Rice would probably have considered a victory by a country that actually gives women full equal rights to be a defeat. When your only goal is to pander to the Third World, particularly the Muslim parts of it, in order to defy the colonialist and phallocratic Western patriarchy, handing over power to a phallocratic Eastern patriarchy is just a means to an end. At least until it actually becomes the end. The end of everything.

The fallacy of the United Nations is its assumption that every member of the UN is morally equal. The truth is that the majority of the world’s nations are dictatorships with limited human rights. The UN is nothing more than the representatives of dictatorships trying to talk about human rights without breaking up into gales of laughter. If you replaced 75 percent of the UN’s representatives with members of American street gangs, you would still end up with a more civilized body.

But we look the other way. And now Saudi Arabia, along with the likes of Pakistan, Bangladesh and Libya are on the board. Their mission will be to promote global standards for gender equality. Which should in theory disqualify countries who don’t believe in gender equality from membership. Of course since this is the UN, UN Women will have little to do with its stated mission.

Chilean leftist Michelle Bachelet, who heads up UN Women, praised Sudan for its commitment to gender equality in her opening statement. Yes, Sudan, a genocidal state which uses mass rapes as part of its ethnic cleansing campaign. And it’s already clear that the focus of UN Women isn’t to promote gender equality, but to intervene in conflict areas. Which means the odds are excellent that UN Woman will be used to crank out an endless stream of condemnations of countries that fight Muslim terrorists, while cloaking those condemnations in the name of the rights of women in the affected areas. And the Saudis are perfectly positioned to guide UN Women down that road.

MORE FROM SULTAN GREENFIELD

Posted by peiper     on 11/26/2010 at 03:25 PM   
Filed Under: • Blog Stuff • United-Nations •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Sunday - November 07, 2010

sorry I checked my inbox tonight. rcob!  can’t we please drop the damned UN?

Damn it I really thought I was outta here earlier.  Checked inbox before shutdown and found this bloody £”!!&^*%* thing.  Who are these foreign god damn effin jerks to tell my country how to do things in our own back yard.

United States Placed In Human Rights Hot Seat

The United States has been defending its human rights record before the Geneva-based United Nations Human Rights Council.

A 30-strong US delegation was grilled by more than 80 states on issues ranging from the Guantanamo detention centre to racial discrimination. Switzerland called for a moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty.

The US was the 136th UN member state to be scrutinised by allies and adversaries in the UN rights body, as the Obama administration opens itself up to a council that was shunned by his predecessor.

US Assistant Secretary of State Esther Brimmer, head of the high-level delegation, said she was honoured to present the first US Universal Periodic Review (UPR).

“We take our place in the UPR process with pride in our accomplishments, honesty in facing continued challenges, and a commitment to using the international system to elevate and advance the protection of human rights at home and abroad,” she told the packed meeting room in Geneva.

Cuba, Venezuela, Russia and Iran, some of the US’s fiercest critics, were among the first to speak during the three-hour meeting.

The Cuban ambassador, Rodolfo Reyes Rodriguez, called on the Americans to end their embargo against his country.

Iran’s delegation urged the US to “halt serious violations of human rights and humanitarian law including covert external operations by the CIA carried out on pretext of combating terrorism”.

Many countries raised similar issues such as the death penalty, failure to ratify key human rights conventions, the treatment of migrants, racial discrimination, US prison conditions, the closure of the Guantanamo detention centre and related abuses allegedly committed during the war on terror.

Death penalty

Switzerland, like Ireland, France, Britain and a host of others, called on the United States to bring in a moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty.

Ireland? where they’re throwing bombs again. France? Britain?  Oh that last one is a gas. Britain?  Where most burglars even with a record do not see the inside of a jail?  Britain, where the average man on the street and women too, favor the death penalty. But hey, that’s just the law abiding ppl and who listens to them anymore. Britain? Where more then a thousand VIOLENT criminals are walking the streets free as birds cos the jails are crowded?  Switzerland?
I have a message for all you stupid hand wringing, bunny hugging, bed wetting, butt fuck ass wipes.
GO FUCK YOURSELVES!!!!!!  DROP FUCKIN DEAD SHIT HEADS!  DO IT NOW so we don’t have to listen to your pious bullshit.
Switzerland ... Tell ya what dip shits.  We’ll end the death penalty if all of you holier then tho overpaid fat cat stuffed shirts take ALL the violent prisoners we have waiting on death row, into your country.  With no possibility of return to the USA.  You house the miserable bastards. At your expense.  Or don’t you love mankind quite that much?  You only love em removed by some miles where you won’t have to put up with the problem.  Oh woo-hoo. The Swiss took a few Gitmo prisoners. How thweet you are. Kiss,kiss.  Wait till they turn on ya, and they will.  You gonna send em back?

You guys can flame me if ya want to but I’d be very happy if somehow some way some terrorist found a way to bring down the UN building. I hate the idea of that false money grubbing place on our shores. I’m tired of listening to Russia give us advice on rights.  I’m tired of all the human and civil rights groups messing about and really, really would just love to gun ALL the bastards down.  It’s become an industry we don’t need meddling in state affairs. And, most are foreign based as well, with offshoots operating in the USA.

Oh yeah ... please notice our not so glorious president has allowed this latest UN forum where President Bush (for all his faults) ignored it.

There’s lots more to read and get steamed about. 
I really don’t think I need this damn newsletter. Do I?  Jeesh.

READ ALL THE REST HERE

Posted by peiper     on 11/07/2010 at 01:14 PM   
Filed Under: • Personal • United-Nations • USA •  
• Comments (6) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Sunday - September 26, 2010

United Nations to appoint space ambassador to act as first contact for aliens visiting Earth

I suppose this isn’t news back in the states.  Perhaps those of you in New York and New Jersey have heard it. But I just caught this only a few minutes ago.
Now then, not being a rocket scientist or even close to that rarefied state, I really can not say for certain, can I, that there is no other intelligent life out there.
Personally of course, I very much doubt it and the old question arises.  If there are, why haven’t they been in touch?  Oh I see. Their still looking for the same thing we are. Just a matter of time before we find each other. 

Not to worry however.  Our most favorite institution in ze whole of ze verld is on the job. You betcha.
The UN has it covered.  You aren’t surprised.  The only question now is ......  what budget are they gonna allow for this?  $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
And if they are out there, how can we be sure we want to meet em.  They may not conform to the si-fi image. What if they’re all liberals? 

The downside for real?  The unfunny part?  Read on. 

United Nations to appoint space ambassador to act as first contact for aliens visiting Earth

By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 1:53 PM on 26th September 2010

If aliens ever land on Earth there will no longer be any confusion over who will greet them with the news the United Nations is set to appoint an astrophysicist to be their first human contact.

Mazlan Othman is expected to be tasked with coordinating humanity’s response to an extraterrestrial visit, if ever required.

The 58-year-old Malaysian will tell a conference next week that with the recent discovery of hundreds of planets orbiting around other stars, the detection of alien life is becoming more and more likely.

The continued search for extraterrestrial communication, by several entities, sustains the hope that some day human kind will received signals from extraterrestrials,’ she said.

‘When we do, we should have in place a coordinated response that takes into account all the sensitivities related to the subject.

‘The UN is a ready-made mechanism for such coordination.’

Plans to make Unoose the coordinating body for dealing with alien encounters are set to be debated by UN scientific advisory committees.

If the idea is backed it will then head to General Assembly.

Professor Richard Crowther, head of the UK delegation to the UN committee, admitted recently: ‘[Ms] Othman is absolutely the nearest thing we have to a “take me to your leader” person.’

In April though Professor Stephen Hawking warned that the alien contact, if it ever comes, may not be as friendly as has been hoped.

In a documentary, the 68-year-old scientist said he imagined aliens arriving in ‘massive ships’ and could try to colonise Earth and plunder the planet’s resources.

‘We only have to look at ourselves to see how intelligent life might develop into something we wouldn’t want to meet,’ he said.

‘I imagine they might exist in massive ships, having used up all the resources from their home planet. Such advanced aliens would perhaps become nomads, looking to conquer and colonise whatever planets they can reach.’

He added: ‘It would be ‘too risky’ to attempt to make contact with alien races. If aliens ever visit us, I think the outcome would be much as when Christopher Columbus first landed in America, which didn’t turn out very well for the Native Americans.’

source in the twilight zone

Posted by peiper     on 09/26/2010 at 08:47 AM   
Filed Under: • United-Nations •  
• Comments (11) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - September 16, 2010

China’s UN diplomat in drunken rant against Americans and the UN Secretary General.  funny

I think the following might be well served to file under humor, knowing that some BMEWS readers won’t find anything funny about a Chinese diplomat being critical of the USA.  He also rounded on his UN boss.  He was also quite tipsy at the time.

Actually, drunk or sober I enjoy any diplomat saying out loud what he really thinks as opposed to all the nonsense they usually spout.  Like in congress or the senate or the Brit parliament.  Politicians refer to “my honorable friend” or “colleague” when in fact they aren’t referring to either of those states of being.
They’re more likely thinking ... that miserable rat fink on my left or something like that.  I’m not certain I wouldn’t enjoy dueling in fact.  Once that stage is reached well, there’s no question of how anyone “really feels.” Is there? 

China’s top-ranking UN diplomat embarked on a drunken rant against the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, telling his boss he’d “never liked” him, and adding for good measure that he didn’t like Americans either.

Peter Foster in Beijing

The outburst by Sha Zukang at a retreat for top UN officials in the Austrian ski resort of Alpbach left senior UN officials cringing in embarrassment as others tried to convince him to put down the microphone, according to Washington-based Foreign Policy magazine.

“I know you never liked me Mr. Secretary-General – well, I never liked you, either,” said Mr Sha as Mr Ban looked on, smiling and nodding awkwardly during the 15-minute toast attended by the UN’s top brass.

Mr Sha, who was appointed the UN undersecretary general for Economic and Social Affairs in 2007, also made no secret of his fractious relationship with Mr Ban, although did say he’d grown to respect the South Korean.

“You’ve been trying to get rid of me,” said 62-year-old Mr Sha according to the senior UN official present, “You can fire me anytime, you can fire me today.”
Later in his impromptu speech Mr Sha turned to an American colleague, singling out Bob Orr, from the executive office of the secretary-general.
“I really don’t like him: he’s an American and I really don’t like Americans,” he said.

A second senior UN official who was at the dinner said: “It went on for about ten or fifteen minutes but it felt like an hour.”
Officials present at the dinner suggested that Mr Sha might have been the victim of a misguided attempt at humour.

. In a BBC interview in 2006 he was goaded into a furious, shrieking attack on American criticisms of China’s rapidly growing defence budget.

“It is much better for [America] to shut up, keep quiet. Are you the number one? Is it true that the US has almost 50 per cent of the world’s military budget?”
The Chinese population is five or six times bigger.
“Why blame China? Forget it. It’s high time to shut up. It’s America’s sovereign right to do whatever is good for them. But don’t tell us what is good for China.”

TELL US WHAT YA REALLY THINK

And then there was this from the editorial page of the Telegraph.  Gotta love it.

By historic standards this was mild stuff.  These days, former British Prime Ministers regard half a bottle of wine at dinner as shocking.  Churchill managed to conceal his thirst from the public; not so poor George Brown, who as Harold Wilson’s foreign secretary made it a point of honor never to draw a sober breath.  At a reception for a South American republic, Brown is said to have staggered up to a glamorous figure in red silk and asked for a dance.  “I must refuse for three reasons” came the reply.

“First, this is not a dance but the national anthem.”
“Second, you are clearly drunk.”
“And third, I am the Cardinal Archbishop of Lima.”

Posted by peiper     on 09/16/2010 at 05:56 AM   
Filed Under: • Humor • United-Nations •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - April 21, 2010

That Ain’t Right

The United Nations has quietly upped this year’s peacekeeping budget for earthquake-shattered Haiti to $732.4 million, with two-thirds of that amount going for the salary, perks and upkeep of its own personnel, not residents of the devastated island.

The world organization plans to spend the money on an expanded force of some 12,675 soldiers and police, plus some 479 international staffers, 669 international contract personnel, and 1,300 local workers, just for the 12 months ending June 30, 2010.

Some $495.8 million goes for salaries, benefits, hazard pay, mandatory R&R allowances and upkeep for the peacekeepers and their international staff support. Only about $33.9 million, or 4.6 percent, of that salary total is going to what the U.N. calls “national staff” attached to the peacekeeping effort.

Presumably, the budget also includes at least part of some $10 million that the U.N. has spent on renting two passenger vessels, the Sea Voyager (known to some U.N. staffers as the “Love Boat") and the Ola Esmeralda, for a minimum of 90 days each, as highly subsidized housing for some of its peacekeepers and humanitarian staff. The tab for the two vessels, which offer catered food, linen service and comfortable staterooms and lounges, is about $112,500 per day.

Under a cost-sharing formula, the U.S. pays a 27 percent share of the entire $732.4 million peacekeeping tab for Haiti during this 12 month period, or about $197.7 million.

That adds up to more than 15,000 “peacekeepers”. That’s an army. I think that’s more troops than we had in Afghanistan a year ago, and we’re fighting a war there.

I think we should all be referring to the place as “occupied Haiti”. Not that anyone in or out of their right mind would want to invade the place. Not a chance. So these “peacekeepers” are doing what then? Protecting the Haitians from themselves? In their own country?? Or perhaps they are protecting all the pushy aid workers from the Haitians that might not like the way that these tens of thousands of foreigners are doing whatever they want to, in rebuilding and changing their country? Somebody explain to me why Haiti needs any peacekeepers at all.

I’ll be the first to speak the obvious: Haiti is a mess. A world of hurt. A rolling, never ending disaster, largely self-inflicted. But I didn’t think they needed saving from themselves by an army of occupation. This rather looks like the Imperial UN to me.

Free Haiti!

Posted by Drew458     on 04/21/2010 at 10:32 AM   
Filed Under: • International • United-Nations •  
• Comments (10) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - November 24, 2009

Yeah, that’ll show ‘em

You’re a Mexican city on the Mexico-US border.
You’re suffering massive violence from drug lords
Your own army can’t restore order.
Who you gonna call?

U.N. Peacekeepers!

Mexico’s business leaders are pleading for the United Nations to send peacekeepers to prevent the border city of Ciudad Juarez from falling into complete chaos. Locked in a deadly war with organized crime, the Mexican Army is unable to protect the safety of its citizens. Will El Paso’s sister city be the first domino to fall in a long line of Mexican cities that are teetering on the edge of lawlessness?

Talk about desperation. Where is Gen. Pershing when you need him?

Posted by Christopher     on 11/24/2009 at 02:41 AM   
Filed Under: • Border Security • Latin-America • United-Nations •  
• Comments (5) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - November 18, 2009

Moonbats on Parade at the UN

The battle against global warming could be helped if the world slowed population growth by making free condoms and family planning advice more widely available, the U.N. Population Fund said Wednesday.

The agency did not recommend countries set limits on how many children people should have, but said: “Women with access to reproductive health services ... have lower fertility rates that contribute to slower growth in greenhouse gas emissions.”

“As the growth of population, economies and consumption outpaces the Earth’s capacity to adjust, climate change could become much more extreme and conceivably catastrophic,” the report said.

The world’s population will likely rise from the current 6.7 billion to 9.2 billion in 2050, with most of the growth in less developed regions, according to a 2006 report by the United Nations.

The U.N. Population Fund acknowledged it had no proof of the effect that population control would have on climate change. “The linkages between population and climate change are in most cases complex and indirect,” the report said.

It also said that while there is no doubt that “people cause climate change,” the developing world has been responsible for a much smaller share of world’s greenhouse gas emissions than developed countries.

Here it is folks, in black and white. In no uncertain terms whatsoever. The solution to climate change is to depopulate the planet. Eugenics by any other name. Because the Global Warming crowd is the exact same bunch of self-haters and racists as the Zero Population Growth crowd. Always has been. But now, with the ascendancy of the radical far left to power, they aren’t even bothering to hide their core message any more. We Won, so it’s time to crow.

And they will append lie upon lie to their story, but the message remains the same: people must go. Especially the lesser ones. Who all just so happen to be darker than average. Is this where I insert the recent quote from Ruth Bader Ginsburg, about how abortions had to be funded by Medicaid because of her concerns about certain types of babies “we don’t want to have too many of” ?

It’s all part and parcel. This is the core belief of the left. And here it is, in black and white. All people are bad (white males especially) so let’s get rid of them. Either all of them, or until there’s just enough slave population left to support us elites in the style we deserve.

The Democrats were pro-slavery 150 years ago. Then they were all in favor of the Jim Crow laws that they themselves passed. Then they were in favor of Margaret Sanger, eugenics, Stalin, Hitler, and every other tyrant who enacted mass murder. Then they were in favor of “separate but equal” apartheid and against integration. Then they were against the Civil Rights Act. Then they came out in favor of Johnson’s “Great Society” welfare scheme, that has done more to harm minorities than anything in history. Then they were in favor of Zero Population Growth and abortion. But really they only wanted to push abortion on those undesirable types, so let’s get the government to fund it for them. Now it’s Global Warming. Which can be fought by handing out rubbers in the Third World. Where all the darkies live! Because white folks in developed countries bought into this nonsense ages ago and are already depopulating themselves (see Mark Steyn et al).

The name of the vector changes over time, but their core belief remains the same.

Posted by Drew458     on 11/18/2009 at 10:35 AM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • United-Nations •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - November 05, 2009

Run Away, Run Away

The United Nations said Thursday that it will send more than half its international staff either out of Afghanistan or into more secure compounds following last week’s deadly Taliban attack against U.N. workers — the most direct targeting of its employees during decades of work in the country.

About 600 nonessential staffers will be affected by the move, the U.N. said.

The U.N. is still reeling from the pre-dawn assault on a guesthouse in the capital that left five of its staffers dead.

The world body insists it remains committed to Afghanistan, but its actions show how much security has degraded in the country and raise questions about the future of its work if attacks continue.

The relocations follow a U.N. decision on Monday to suspend much of its work in the volatile northwest of neighboring Pakistan because of increasingly targeted attacks.

The 600 U.N. employees will be moved for three to four weeks to more secure locations both within and outside of Afghanistan while the world body works to find safer permanent housing, spokesman Aleem Siddique said. He said they did not know how many would actually be leaving the country.

“We are not talking about pulling out,” the head of the mission, Norwegian diplomat Kai Eide, told reporters. “We are not talking about evacuation.”

He said a number of options were being considered for those who have to leave the country, including Dubai — a typical destination for international workers in Afghanistan on rest breaks.

Just because they aren’t talking about it doesn’t mean that’s exactly what they’re going to do. UN staff runs at the first bullet. We’ve seen that before. And given the choice of a) staying on in the violent wasteland that is Afghanistan, or b) relocating to the party city of Dubai, which would you do? The staff gets paid either way; doing the job on site isn’t really a factor. They still believe in the task at hand; they’ll just be doing it from a safer location. Like Paris.

Well, maybe not. It turns out that they run on polling data, just like Bill Clinton:

“There is a belief among some that the international commitment to Afghanistan will continue whatever happens because of the strategic importance of Afghanistan,” Eide said during a news conference in Kabul. “I would like to emphasize that that is not correct. It is the public opinion in donor countries and in troop-contributing countries that decides on the strength of that commitment.”

Posted by Drew458     on 11/05/2009 at 10:37 AM   
Filed Under: • United-Nations • War On Terror •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - September 23, 2009

OBAMA TELLS UN AMERICA IS READY TO WORK WITH IT AGAIN …. I THINK I MISS BUSH

I think the regulars here know exactly how I feel about the United Nations, so I can only see this as a bad omen. I don’t want us to work closer with those gas bags.  I want us OUT of that damned body.  Not in my lifetime but I can hope.

Anyway, that’s how the headline read today.  I wonder if working closer to those $£!!:(**&^% will cost us any of our sovereignty as the EU has cost the UK.  I know it isn’t exactly the same but ... but it’s about in the same league.

US President Barack Obama is preparing to address the world at the UN General Assembly in New York on his ambitious foreign policy plans.

By Our Foreign Staff
Published: 10:48AM BST 23 Sep 2009

“Around the world, even as we pursue a new era of engagement with other nations, we are raising a broader engagement, new partnerships between societies and citizens, community organisations and businesses,” he said.

“We have been speaking directly to people around the world, including our friends across the Muslim world, with whom we launch new beginnings based on mutual interests and mutual respect.”

“This spirit of partnership is a defining feature of our foreign policy.”

Yes, this is a very short post and you can read more at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/world

I really hate the thought of “working closely” with any of those mentioned. Set the blood to boil.

Posted by peiper     on 09/23/2009 at 09:35 AM   
Filed Under: • Commies • United-Nations •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - September 10, 2009

You’ve seen this before, but not quite this way or quite this much.

Hi Mommy and Daddy ... guess what I learned in school today? 

Jeesh ...

Headline in the Mail quotes the UN saying:

TEACH PUPILS AGE FIVE ABOUT THE SEX ACT.  Now that was the headline in the hard copy. Teach the actual sex act to a five year old?
What the hell is the point of that? Five?  Are they freeken mad?  Have those loony tunes finally and totally lost it?
In the past they called for sex ed. which I thought (and so did you) was outrageous. But this is the first time they’ve spelled it out in exactly this way.

How’s a baby supposed to take that in and understand that sort of thing? 

Here’s the on line version.

Children as young as five to learn about masturbation and abortion under new UN guidelines

By Kirsty Walker
Last updated at 7:55 AM on 10th September 2009

Children as young as five should be taught about explicit sex acts, according to guidelines from the United Nations.

The advice also calls for youngsters to learn about abortion, same-sex relationships and sexually transmitted diseases.

The draft report on sex education has been compiled by UNESCO, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation.
Children in school

Too young? Children as young as five could be taught about masturbation if UNESCO guidelines are followed.

The guidance is due to be issued to governments, local authorities and education bodies around the world by the end of next month.

But it has provoked an international outcry. Critics claim that addressing the issue of masturbation, which is contained in the plan, is too explicit for young children and removes the responsibility of parents to teach their own children about sex.

The guidelines break down suitable topics for discussion into four age groups. Among the most controversial recommendations are for teachers to begin discussing subjects such as masturbation with children from the age of five.

They recommend teachers should discuss the idea that ‘girls and boys have private body parts that can feel pleasurable when touched by oneself’.

The guidelines also recommend young people should learn about the ‘right to and access to safe abortion’. The report is intended to help countries improve sex education and sexual health, especially in the developing world.

SOURCE FOR THE REST OF THE ARTICLE HERE

“ESPECIALLY THE DEVELOPING WORLD” Got it. This would be the same world that has been developing for ALL OF MY LIFE. And it still hasn’t developed. It just produces more babies that the west then feels obligated to feed. Though I’ve no idea why. Really. Never thought I was obligated to em. Still don’t.  If the UN wants to really help, they should find a way way to quietly sterilize the populations of , The Developing World , so they don’t develop any further.

Posted by peiper     on 09/10/2009 at 10:36 AM   
Filed Under: • Africa • Animals • Sex • United-Nations •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2008 Domain Owner