UN HALTED PROBE OF OFFICERS' ALLEGED ROLE IN SEX TRAFFICKING

Follow URL to story as per necessity because of lawsuit.

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28267-2001Dec26.html

The decision to halt the investigation came when the U.N. Mission in Bosnia was reeling
from the disclosure that several of its police officers had been dismissed for sexual misconduct.

No surpise.
I heard an interview with a representative of a Christian Charity (Asian Hope)
on the Hugh Hewitt Show (www.newstalk870.com) here in LA.

The fellow said that it's pretty well acknowledged that the AIDS epidemic ravaging Cambodia
started when the disease was introduced by UN Peacekeepers. (And true, the rampant
prostitution in this broken country simply made sure it spread far and wide).

And for this and other brave and noble deeds, the UN got a Nobel Peace Prize this year, IIRC.

UN_List: for United Nations articles. Other Bump Lists at: Free Republic Bump List Register

This is the guy who was awarded the Nobel "Peace" Prize this year.

UN Chief Condemned For 'Deplorable' Inaction in Rwanda

The Guardian (UK)
17 December 1999
by Chris McGreal

An independent report commissioned by the United Nations secretary general, Kofi Annan, into the organisation's failures during the Rwandan genocide yesterday condemned him for ignoring evidence that a slaughter was planned, and his failure to act once the killing started.

It also criticises the United States and other big powers for their "deplorable" inaction as about 800,000 Tutsis were murdered.

Annan ordered the investigation amid a growing body of evidence that, as head of UN peacekeeping in 1994, his office failed to heed several warnings of the looming genocide. The investigators - a former Swedish prime minister, a former South Korean foreign minister and a Nigerian military officer - say the "fundamental failures" of the peacekeeping operation in Rwanda were a weak mandate, poor funding and a lack of politcal commitment.

But even within those limitations, the report says, UN officials, including Annan and the then secretary general, Boutros Boutros-Ghali, failed to act after numerous signals that a genocide was in the offing.

The UN received at least 10 warnings. The clearest came on January 11 1994, in a detailed and prescient cable from the UN force commander, Lieutenant General Romeo Dallaire, which Annan dismissed as an exaggeration. The investigators also say that once the killing started, Annan and Boutros-Ghali were "unable or unwilling" to use UN forces to intervene.

Criticism also focuses on the UN security council, condemned for abandoning the victims when they most needed the UN's help. Belgium demanded a complete UN withdrawal from Rwanda after 10 of its soldiers were brutally murdered by the Hutu military.

After the pull-out, Washington was the most vocal opponent of renewed intervention: it had just lost 18 solders on a peacekeeping mission in Somalia. The Clinton administration even barred officials from calling the massacres in Rwanda a "genocide" because that would have obliged the US to act under international conventions.

Britain and other permanent members of the security council are criticised for backing the Americans. It was left to the temporary members, principally New Zealand and the Czech Republic, to press for action. But they were not heeded.

After the bulk of the UN force left, many thousands of Tutsis who had sought shelter with the peacekeepers were left without protection. The report is scathing about the manner in which Belgian peacekeepers abandoned about 1,000 Tutsis at a school in Kigali. The soldiers fired into the air as they pulled out while Tutsis begged to be killed rather than fall victim to the Interahamwe, the Hutu militia.

"The manner in which the troops left, including attempts to pretend to the refugees that they were not in fact leaving, was disgraceful," the report says. Most of the 2,000 Tutsis at the school were massacred that same day. The Belgian troops were redeployed to help evacuate white foreigners.

Annan yesterday issued a statement acknowledging the "systematic failure" and expressed his "deep remorse": "Of all my aims as secretary general, there is not (one aim) to which I feel more deeply committed than that of enabling the United Nations never again to fail in protecting a civilian population from genocide or mass slaughter."

just maybe now the u.s women will tell the government to get us out of the the U.N

Survivors Sue UN for "Complicity" in Rwanda Genocide

The Independent (UK)
11 January 2000
Karen MacGregor

The United Nations is being sued, for the first time in its history, for alleged complicity in the crime of genocide. Lawyers are instituting a case on behalf of two Rwandan women whose families died during the 1994 genocide in which 800,000, mostly Tutsi people, were slaughtered by Hutus.

The women, the widow of a former Rwandan supreme court judge and the sister of a Tutsi former cabinet minister, accuse UN soldiers who were meant to defend their families of either handing them over to their killers or running away.

They are being represented by the former South Australian crown prosecutor Michael Hourigan, who quit his job as an investigator with the UN's International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda in disgust at UN inaction and barriers to his investigation, and also by the human rights lawyer Geoffrey Robertson, a fellow Australian.

Mr Hourigan, who works for a US law firm, told the Melbourne Age that genocide had been committed against Rwandans in the presence of a UN force, and that the murders in question were "caused by the cowardice, negligence and bungling of UN forces".

This is the first time that a formal claim for reparations for such conduct has been made against the UN. Mr Hourigan would not reveal the damages sought, but said: "It is recognised in domestic and international law that when you commit a tort you compensate for the damage."

Last month the UN released the damning findings of a three-man inquiry, headed by the former Swedish prime minister Ingvar Carlsson, that showed the organisation was guilty of a catalogue of failures during the genocide in which 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus were killed in 100 days. The killings, which wiped out three-quarters of the Tutsi population, began after the Rwandan president Juvenal Habyarimana died when his plane was shot down by unknown attackers.

The UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, has expressed regret, and admitted UN failings in responding to the genocide. The Rwandan government has called on the UN to help reconstruct the country, and genocide survivors have asked the UN to set up a fund to compensate victims.

One of the women suing the UN is Anonciata Kavaruganda, the widow of a Rwandan supreme court judge, Joseph Kavaruganda, who was killed because he sympathised with the Tutsis. She claims UN troops from Ghana, responsible for protecting her family, drank and socialised with Hutus while she and her children were being tortured. The other woman is Louise Mushikiwabo, whose brother, Lando Ndaswinga, was the only Tutsi minister in the Rwandan government. He was shot with his mother, wife and two children. She claims UN troops ran away when the killers arrived.

Mr Hourigan has given the Melbourne Age documents that place a large amount of the blame for the genocide on Mr Annan, who at the time was the head of UN peace-keeping operations. Secure cables sent to his office by the UN commander in Rwanda, General Romeo Dallaire of Canada, and a UN special rappateur show that Mr Annan was given extensive warning that genocide was taking place and was asked for more troops. The cables warned that UN forces would hand over people "for inevitable killing rather than use their weapons to save local people", that ethnic cleansing was accelerating and that government radio was "exhorting the population to destroy all Tutsis".

The documents, headed "most immediate", were never given to the UN Security Council. Mr Hourigan has asked why testimony by the two women, which was given to the Carlsson inquiry team with copies of the Dallaire cables, was not mentioned in its report.

All good armies need good camp followers. What's the problem?

The United Nations as the World's Peacekeeper

"We are not going to achieve a new world order without paying for it in blood as well as in words and money," warned Arthur Schlesinger Jr. in the July/August 1995 issue of Foreign Affairs. Schlesinger had taken to the pages of the flagship journal of the Council on Foreign Relations to vindicate the dubious proposition that the United Nations military represents the thin blue line dividing peaceful civilization from savagery - in short, our planetary police.
But what happens when the planetary police run amok and become the agents of bloodshed? When local police abuse their power, the abused have avenues of redress. From what body can those abused by the planetary police seek justice? The escalating scandal of unpunished atrocities committed by UN "peacekeepers" illustrates that the planetary police are beyond accountability.

UN "peacekeepers" torture a Somali child over fire

Who Polices the UN Police?

By Mary Jo Anderson
February 2, 2000 WorldNetDaily.com

Reports of transgressions perpetrated by the United Nations are routine, from Peru to East Timor to Kosovo. Not a day ticks by that some new story doesn't surface detailing the United Nations' mishandling of operations or outright abuse. Typically these assaults present themselves as peacekeeping interventions, humanitarian aid, education or human rights enforcement. Thus far the United Nations has escaped official sanction. That may soon change.

Suit has been filed on behalf of two Rwandan women who charge the United Nations with complicity in the 1994 genocidal massacre of 800,000 Tutsi people, approximately 75 percent of Rwanda's population. The suit is the first ever in the history of the United Nations. As countries move toward ratification of the International Criminal Court (ICC) treaty with its sweeping powers to indict individuals and nations, this suit raises a grave question: who will police the United Nations' police?

According to a Jan. 11 story carried by Independent News (UK), the Rwandan women are represented by Michael Hourigan, who has resigned from his position with the U.N.'s International Criminal Tribunal. Hourigan, a former South Australian crown prosecutor working in Kigali, became frustrated by attempts to block his official investigation of the Hutu assault on the Tutsis. He is joined in the suit by Geoffrey Robertson, an Australian human rights attorney. The Independent reports, "The women -- the widow of a former Rwandan Supreme Court judge and the sister of a Tutsi former cabinet minister -- accuse U.N. soldiers who were meant to defend their families of either handing them over to their killers or running away." Hourigan, interviewed by Melbourne Age, noted the murders were "caused by the cowardice, negligence and bungling of U.N. forces."

The suit comes on the heels of an internal investigation of the U.N.'s activity during Rwandan conflict. Chaired by former Swedish Prime Minister, Ingyar Carlsson, the assessment panel concluded that the U.N. peacekeeping forces in Rwanda failed to respond to reports of genocide. One of the plaintiffs, Anonciata Kavaruganda, widow of Rwandan Supreme Court judge, Joseph Kavaruganda, claims her husband was murdered "because he sympathized with the Tutsis." According to the Independent, Kavaruganda reports that "U.N. troops from Ghana, responsible for protecting her family, drank and socialized with Hutus while she and her children were being tortured."

Rony Braunam, former president of Doctors Without Borders, confirmed the failure of the peacekeeping efforts. His group reported: "The humanitarian intervention, far from representing a bulwark against evil, was in fact one of its appendages. ... The social and political role of humanitarian aid was simply to state-manage goodwill, to organize the spectacle of compassion."

U.N. secretary general, Kofi Annan conceded with "deep remorse" that the U.N. had failed to respond appropriately to the genocide. Annan was head of U.N. peacekeeping operations at the time of the Rwandan massacre. According to the Sydney Morning Herald, documents indicate Annan ignored warnings of genocide sent to the U.N.'s New York Headquarters by U.N. commander in Rwanda, General Romeo Dallaire of Canada. The cables Dallaire sent under "most immediate" status just three days before the General Assembly met to discuss the crisis in Rwanda were not made available to the Assembly. Documents given to Melbourne Age include cables that requested additional troops and insisted U.N. troops would stand by as Tutsis were handed over "for inevitable killing rather than use their weapons to save local people," and that government controlled radio was "exhorting the population to destroy all Tutsis." Annan did not forward the cabled information to the U.N. Security Council.

This suit and similar events serve as stark reminders that the U.N. and its agencies are not infallible or even consistently trustworthy. Credible voices have presented evidence of a distinct U.N. agenda at odds with many American legal traditions and cultural values. The International Criminal Court treaty is awaiting ratification by the nations. It places foreign judges, with no particular allegiance to the American Constitution, over American citizens. Recall the 1997 report to the U.N. Human Rights Commission written by the committee's "special rapporteur," that decried the "arbitrary" use of capital punishment in the U.S. Once the ICC is ratified, pressure on the United States to conform to world judicial norms set by the United Nations will increase.

Sober questions must be posed to all nations before they yield sovereignty in exchange for both a United Nations global peacekeeping force and its global tribunal, the International Criminal Court (ICC).

There is no restraining mechanism to check abuse of these proposed planetary powers. While cautious voices debate the merits of the U.N. as the world's peacekeeping body, and the proper jurisdiction of the ICC, pro-globalist forces such as the World Civil Society Conference push tirelessly to establish "conditions for global governance," including a world police force. The balance tips in their favor: Kofi Annan, now U.N. General Secretary, in his keynote address to WOCSOC in December, referred to the organization as representative of "global people power" and implored them to agitate governments when they "are unwilling to act."

Annan's remarks are the prelude to the Millennium Forum at the United Nations in May. Forces within the inner circle of U.N. and Non-Governmental Organizations are poised to present a "People's Assembly" to join the United Nations. (NGO's are non elected, non accountable lobbying groups -- many funded by corporate foundations.) This People's Assembly was also referred to as a "Parliament of Humankind" during the State of the World Forum in San Francisco in October. The State of the World Forum, a creation of Mikhail Gorbachev, drew the world's liberal glitterati to a posh six-day confab where world governance, as an expansion of the U.N. and a "global means of enforcement," was touted at a session led by the World Federalist Association.

Each year the State of the World Forum gathers marquee names from the ranks of Nobel laureates, ambassadors, politicians, actors, and even a psychic or two. Past speakers have included Ted Turner, Desmond Tutu, Earth Council president, Maurice Strong, David Rockefeller, Queen Noor of Jordan, John Naisbitt, Jane Goodall, Carl Sagan, the witch "Starhawk and a covey of U.S. congressmen. Yet, despite the prophecy of Infoseek CEO, Steve Kirsch, the nude parade of Patch Adams and Helen Caldecott, the cosmic healing advice of Deepak Chopra or the posturing of Jesse Jackson, not a whisper of this year's Forum was heard from the major networks.

The media blackout left unreported such roundtable sessions as, "The United Nations in Ten years; The United Nations in One Hundred Years," which conceded that the U.N. was only a foundation for the world federation which would require a voluntary army to "deter human rights abuses." The moderator, Tad Daly, director of Global Security Programs for the State of the World Forum, was joined by retired senator Alan Cranston and Tom Spencer, chairman of the Foreign Affairs Security and Defense Policy Committee of the European Parliament. Participants advocated abolishing the veto power of the U.N. Security Council -- a dated mechanism favoring the winners of World War II -- adopting instead a "Parliament of Humankind." World peace was possible if a "planetary patriotism" for the "Federal Republic of Earth" supplanted nationalism. Far removed from open public debate, these planetary patriots proposed a restructured U.N.: The General Assembly should abandon the one country one vote system in favor of a weighted voting process. This proposal would provide an "equitable sharing of power" among the more populous nations such as China and India.

Do Americans believe it wise to permit a greater share of U.N. deliberative power to accrue to Communist China than to the United States? Does anyone believe such a provision would increase world peace?

Two days after the State of the World Forum closed at the glitzy Fairmont of San Francisco, president Clinton stood before the Forum of Federations inaugural conference at Chateau Mont-Tremblant, in Canada. He said, "... I see the whole concept of federalism emerging internationally. ..." Clinton claimed the U.S. was working to "redefine federalism for the 21st century." Careful to make a limited concession to sovereignty, Clinton admitted there were no easy answers for arranging powers to protect the responsibilities of member states. In other words, there are no guarantees that nations will be allowed to meet their responsibilities to defend and protect their citizens. He noted, "... We become more of a federalist world when the United Nations takes a more active role in stopping genocide."

The genocide complicity suit filed against the U.N. on behalf of the two Rwandan women bears close scrutiny. Since the "federalist world" the global elites envision for us is about as likely to protect certain ethnic populations or political groups as Kofi Annan's troops were in protecting the Tutsis from genocide, the question remains: If we forfeit sovereignty with the advent of global governance, who polices the "peacekeepers"?

So, are these brothels run by the east European heroin gangs? You know - the KLA, the good, peaceful, ethnic Alabanian Muslims.

The feminazi's will NEVER admit this...they lose power if they did. It and other things the un does makes my stomach churn. They turn a blind eye to the things they chose to like slavery, sex trades etc., and push for the wrong things like rights of the child garbage. Their meddling has gotten many a US soldier killed.

socialistic