Steve Forbes: Expel 'Murderous' U.N. From New York

NewsMax ^ | 12/27/04 | Carl Limbacher

[wagglebee]

New York City is too good for the "privileged, pampered" bureaucrats of United Nations, notes Steve Forbes, editor-in-chief of Forbes magazine.

Ship the corrupt globalists to the corrupt Third World, he urges in his column in the Jan. 10, 2005 issue.

"The poverty and backwardness of Port-au-Prince, Haiti or Lagos, Nigeria or Dar es Salaam, Tanzania or Addis Ababa, Ethiopia would serve as daily reminders" of the taxpayer-supported U.N. parasites' "years-long record of murderous failure and moral turpitude," he observes.

Forbes is, however, a realist. "It won't happen," he admits.

After all, where would the internationalist fat cats dine and park their limos?

[wagglebee]

Forbes is, however, a realist. "It won't happen," he admits.

I think someone with Forbes' name recognition and publishing empire may possibly be able to make some headway on this.

[wagglebee]

IMHO the jihadists are very unlikely to "bite the hand that feeds them."

It is also a building that is prime for demolition. The land could then be sold to developers who could build housing, offices and shopping centers -- this would produce revenue for NYC and get America out of this 60 year old leftist farce we have been supporting.

[rickmichaels]

After all, where would the internationalist fat cats dine and park their limos?

Kofi Annan's place in hell?

[marmar]

Death to the parasites......just get them out of the US.

[mewzilla]

Bravo! But don't just sit there and spout, Mr. Forbes. Do something.

[processing please hold]

Ditto

[WarPaint]

Amen. Do Somthing! Excellent article. I was thinking today that it will take an extraordinary insult (and it will come) from the U.N. to "America" for Americans to storm the place and empty it out.

[wagglebee]

I think he should run a cover story in Forbes outlining how corrupt and irrelevant the UN is, this would surely get a lot of attention.

[The Teen Conservative]

Ditto. He has headway in the social circles.

[bill1952]

I've been hearing these sentiments since I was a kid in Lansdale, Pa.

It was a popular idea with many in the area.

So, how do we get there from here?
And why?

I want my enemies very close, indeed.
But we don't have to keep them in comfort.

Or do we?

In the UN, how exactly is it decided where the UN shall reside?

[wagglebee]

The United States GAVE the UN the land and paid for the building after WW II, since then we have provided BILLIONS in upkeep. I agree that "keeping our enemies close" is a good idea. However, I believe that if we were to quit the UN, a lot of other countries would soon follow suit (Great Britain, Ireland, Israel, Australia, Japan and others), within a few years the UN would be effectively extinct. I do feel that there is a need for an international body where nations can go to resolve differences; however, I think this body should be made up of "like-minded" nations (non-totalitarian democracies that observe human rights and follow the rule of law). And most importantly no nation's sovereignty should ever be subordinate to this body.

[ken21]

gosh, we've come a

l--o--n--g

way when someone like forbes makes his doubts public.

[Txsleuth]

It won't happen because there a too many UN apologists among the MSM and Capitol Hill---

The Oil-for-Food scandal is a blip on the MSM's radar, and as long as you have people like Joe Biden, Carl Levin playing footsies with the diplomats, nothing will change.

Forbes would make a terrific addition to the Bush administration because he is outspoken about a lot of things, and he favored a flat tax when he ran for Pres.---he might be able to help the income tax changes.

[southernnorthcarolina]

OK, maybe someone can help me here with my hazy memory... but I seem to recall that some UN officials threatened to remove the UN HQ from New York during the Reagan administration, and that one of Jeanne Kirkpatrick's Deputy UN Ambassadors said something to the effect that the United States UN Delegation would be pleased to go down to the Hudson River wharfs and wave the UN a fond farewell as they sailed off into the setting sun.

It was deemed by some to be a fitting comment (if astronomically wrong, as the setting sun would be in the wrong direction for such a goodbye). I think Ambassador Kirkpatrick entered a retraction/apology of sorts, while chuckling up her sleeve. Does anyone have similar memories, or the ability to document my recollection?

[bill1952]

However, I believe that if we were to quit the UN, a lot of other countries would soon follow suit (Great Britain, Ireland, Israel, Australia, Japan and others), within a few years the UN would be effectively extinct.

I wish I could agree, but I believe that it would become an unrestrained anti US international forum with the color of international law and conventions.

As of now, we have the Veto.

We should pursue the international body that you mention, while still keeping our veto power.

And since we gave it, we can find a way to "ungive" it.
Just hire any middle of his class Seton Hall graduate, and it would be done.. :^)

[livius]

Wow! I hope he's got enough clout to at least call a bit of attention to this. I will admit that, for years, I was not in favor of expelling them from the US (and getting the US out of the UN), but after seeing their response to the Iraq situation, I am fully in favor of all of the above. And I doubt that I'm the only person who's had a change of heart.

[wagglebee]

Your memory seems fairly accurate (as long as mine hasn't failed that is!).

[bill1952]

Fifty more Ambassador Kirkpatricks in the State Department and our problems would be solved. 8^)

[wagglebee]

We should revoke the diplomatic credentials of Kofi Annan and his band of thieves and throw them in prison while we're at it!