Posted on 12/08/2004 2:46:55 PM PST by duckln
Kofi's not the problem, the United Nations is Posted: December 8, 2004 1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2004 Creators Syndicate, Inc.
For our well-mannered and beautifully tailored secretary general, these are not the halcyon days. Kofi Annan is sitting atop the smelliest scandal in U.N. history. Son Kojo appears to be in it up to his eyeballs.
A female employee has charged a senior U.N. officer with sexual harassment, and Kofi pardoned the alleged groper. Peacekeepers in the Congo have allegedly assaulted women and girls. GOP Sen. Norm Coleman, no bomb-thrower, has, after seven months of investigating the U.N. oil-for-food scandal, called for Kofi's resignation.
Coleman claims Saddam defrauded the oil-for-food program of $21 billion that was supposed to go for humanitarian aid.
"We have obtained evidence that Saddam doled out lucrative oil allotments to foreign officials, sympathetic journalists and even one senior U.N. official," Coleman writes in the Wall Street Journal. "We are gathering evidence that Saddam gave hundreds of thousands – maybe even millions – of Oil-for-Food dollars to terrorists and terror organizations ... under the supposedly vigilant eye of the U.N."
The "senior U.N. official" is Benon Sevan, Kofi's picked boss of oil-for-food, who Coleman says, "reportedly received bribes from Saddam."
Virtually charging Kofi with a cover-up, Coleman adds, "As long as Mr. Annan remains in charge, the world will never be able to learn the full extent of the bribes, kickbacks and under-the-table payments that took place under the U.N.'s collective nose."
Coleman's call for Kofi's head has made him a media star at a time when the United Nations has managed to anger so broad a coalition of Americans it could lead to U.S. abandonment of the institution.
To conservatives who have long warned of a U.N. threat to national sovereignty may now be added a Jewish community enraged at the United Nations' hostility toward Israel, Middle America's belief the General Assembly is little more than an anti-American mob – a view uncontradicted by its voting record – and a White House that sees the Security Council as a barrier to Bush wars to disarm rogue regimes and democratize the world.
Not in my lifetime has the United Nations had fewer public champions. U.N.-bashing, once as outre as cock-fighting, is now a popular pastime of the TV talking heads.
To the rescue comes now an Annan-appointed panel to "reform" the United Nations. Among its luminaries, Yevgeny Primakov – ex-KGB master of spies – and former National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft.
Among the panel's recommendations: expansion of the Security Council by six new permanent members: Japan, Germany, India, Brazil and two African states. The six would not be given veto power, which would be retained by today's five permanent members: Russia, China, Britain, France and the United States.
In a bow to the Bush Doctrine, the United Nations would recognize that weapons of mass destruction in the hands of terrorists may justify, as a last resort, pre-emptive strikes and preventive wars. Other suggestions are for "golden parachutes" to retire longtime U.N. employees, for greater U.N. authority to intervene in nations where massacres are occurring and for reforming the Human Rights Commission, which has, with Libya as chair and such stalwart members as Cuba and Sudan, become a joke.
What should be done with the Scowcroft-Primakov reforms?
They should be deposited in the round file and forgotten. For the United Nations is not an institution to be reformed and newly empowered. It is a failed institution that ought to be downgraded or abandoned.
The fly in the ointment of any U.N. recognition of a national right of pre-emptive war is that the Security Council must first sanction it. Whether Bush was right or wrong to go into Iraq, the United States cannot give up its inherent right of self-defense.
As for adding six new members to the council, that is the first step en route to an inevitable demand for veto power for all six. Russia, Japan and India are already insisting upon it. When granted, and gridlock ensues with 11 nations having a veto, there will come a clamor for diluting or abolishing the veto power altogether.
For the hidden agenda of the United Nations, the International Criminal Court, the WTO and the Kyoto Protocol is to curtail America's freedom to act in its own interests and to midwife a world government erected on a one-man, one-nation, one-vote principle.
Under a global democracy, India and China, with 2.5 billion people, would be the dominant powers, and peoples of color, five-sixths of all mankind, would enter a claim for a more equitable distribution of the world's wealth now held by that shrinking one-sixth of all mankind that is of European descent. Global democracy is the death of the West.
With the idea of global governance out of the closet, with the European Union the model – with the United Nations the embryo – the real threat to America comes into view: a loss of sovereignty and eventually the loss of independence.
The enemy is not Kofi, who will become a Third World martyr if forced out in the absence of proof of personal corruption. Let him stay seated atop his compost heap until the aroma grows so great Americans demand it all be bulldozed into the East River as a public nuisance.
UN deserves to be on trash heap of history a.s.a.p.
Were it up to me (which it is probably fortunate it is not) I would give the UN until 31 January to have their shit packed and out of the UN building. I would pull the plug on the US's membership in the UN and do the best I could to see Kofi was tried for embezzlement, taking bribes and racketeering.
Let "global democracy" be the death of Europe. To hell with them. They've made their bed; let them lie in it. As long as America is righteous and steadfast, with true leaders such as Dubya in charge, this great country will be safe.
Caulk it up and fill it with tropical fish. Prettier, more practical and not as smelly.
stm,
December 9th would be a better
date! Why wait so long?
Excellent plan! Love it.
LOL. I would like to see a good outspoken Jew appointed say, Michael Savage. Nah, too harsh. Jackie Mason. Nah, not serious. Ed Koch or Joe Lieberman. Maybe...
Better to keep that Security Council vote to veto any real mischief they might get into. Pull our reps from every other body and committee.
That still leaves the money we have to pay in dues but that might be a small price to pay keep them from doing anything realy adverse to our interests.
I thought Al WAS jewish.
If so, he sure has an interesting way of showing it-- harkening back to Al's history (the deadly fire/semi-riots in a Jewish neighborhood in NY in the 80s I think). BTW, welcome to FreeRepublic....
Jackie Mason as U.S. Ambassador to that collection of nogoodniks in Manhattan? What could be more beautiful? And what could be more serious than a great comic addressing such a comical assembly???
Pray for W and Our Troops
Re#15 Perchance to dream. Still, methinks W will appoint somebody fun, in a serious way...
It's hard to believe that our pope (not to mention some of his immediate predecessors) have referred to the U.N. as humanity's great hope for peace.
God grant us another Pope St Pius X.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.