Posted on 12/09/2006 7:39:06 AM PST by exg
By SALIM MANSUR
United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan is a prime example, I wrote last week, of Peter's Principle -- "an individual in a hierarchical organization rises to the level of his incompetence" -- at work.
Now, just weeks before his departure from the United Nations, Annan revealed how utterly depraved his politics are when he stated in a BBC interview Iraq is now worse than it was under Saddam Hussein.
Annan is of course the ethically void Secretary-General under whose watch the Oil-for-Food program, with Iraq's old regime, turned out to be the worst financial scam in the history of the United Nations.
Annan said, "If I were an average Iraqi obviously I would make the same comparison -- that they had a dictator who was brutal but they had their streets, they could go out, their kids could go to school and come back home without a mother or father worrying, 'Am I going to see my child again?'... And the Iraqi government has not been able to bring the violence under control."
Such a rant coming from a Michael Moore would be predictable.
But when the Secretary-General makes such despicable observations, it is then quite appropriate to assume he is not alone in such thinking inside the United Nations.
In order to appreciate how rotten is the thinking of Annan and his cohort, imagine the Secretary-General transported back in time to the year 1940, and from some corner of Europe under the heels of Hitler's Third Reich he speaks out as the head of an utterly discredited League of Nations.
Britain is under siege, France has fallen, and Hitler's air force, the Luftwaffe, launches the Battle for Britain levelling towns and cities of the island nation standing alone for freedom and democracy against the full tide of German Nazism.
Then read those words of Annan given to the BBC interview, substituting Britain for Iraq, and suggesting how much better England would be were it not for Churchill who has failed to bring violence to an end.
Only the wilfully ignorant will refuse, given the evidence, to comprehend why the UN has been an utter failure when confronted with the evil of our time from Rwanda through Somalia to the Balkans and Darfur.
The United Nations has become the gathering place for the hyenas of our world -- representatives of tyrannies, medieval fiefdoms, dictatorships and Mafia states -- devouring their own people and blackmailing liberal societies by the sheer weight of numbers in a regular mockery of democracy in the General Assembly.
In his magnificent study of the United Nations -- Complicity with Evil: The United Nations in the Age of Modern Genocide -- Adam Lebor exposes the sheer bankruptcy of an organization founded to preserve the noblest aims of mankind.
Lebor quotes Mukesh Kapila, United Nations resident coordinator in Sudan from March 2003 to April 2004, to illuminate the darkness at the UN headquarters in New York and Geneva.
Kapila observed, "Trying to alert the Department of Political Affairs in New York about what was happening in Darfur was like speaking into a dark well, where your words just disappeared into nothingness."
The ranting against the United States and the singling out of Israel to heap abuse piled high with anti-Semitic bigotry reflect the only area of agreement among these wretched violators of human rights, else they would be tearing each other apart as Saddam's Iraq and Khomeini's Iran so amply demonstrated not too long ago.
The United Nations is depraved and beyond reform.
Indeed, democracies such as Canada should resign from the UN and construct a democratic coalition where victims of the hyenas might at least get an impartial hearing, consistent support and even, on occasion, genuine assistance.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get the US out of the foul, stinking corrupt UN, and get the foul, stinking corrupt UN out of the US. We need to scream it right into the scumbag politicians' faces every minute of every day.
Heck no. Thats too close. Pick someplace else further away.
btw, does anyone understand the proper use of "further" vs "farther"? I never did get that one.
And you have identified John Bolton correctly, a man with , " shoot in his eyes!"
The liberal moonbats can't stand that. Tom Delay is another one who is the same. Neither are the foppish gurly men so wanted by the Democratic soft socialist culture, they are true Americans.
Their eyes are part of what made the Dems afraid of both of these men. Our nation needs them both, and instead, they are headed for pasture?
Shame! SHAME!
Teddy Roosevelt and John Bolton can be seen as having similar demeanor:
As Clint Eastwood's Dirty Harry said," MAKE MY DAY!" It will take many years of foolishness before the US again has the right kind of man as Ambassador to the U.N.
bttt
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.