Posted on 06/15/2007 9:12:43 AM PDT by Enchante
UNITED NATIONS — A top executive of the U.N. development arm threatened "retaliation" against a State Department official this week even though America, the top financier of the agency, pays $100 million of its annual budget. In Washington, meanwhile, a new piece of legislation introduced in Congress yesterday set reform benchmarks for the United Nations to achieve — or else risk the withdrawal of American funds. Along with growing disenchantment with the human-rights system, these developments raise the possibility of a new chill in relations between Washington and Turtle Bay. In a strongly worded letter to the administrator of the United Nations Development Program, Kemal Dervis, Mr. Khalilzad expressed "surprise" and "concern" at the threats made by the UNDP second in command, Ad Melkert, toward an American U.N. ambassador, Mark Wallace. A new batch of allegations, including the financing of a Pyongyang's purchase of items that could be used in advanced weapons systems, was reported in several newspapers this week. Spokesmen for the agency told reporters that the allegations were unsupported by documentation.
(Excerpt) Read more at nysun.com ...
This is the same clown that was instrumental in bringing down Wolfowitz at World Bank..... apparently he doesn't like it when it's pointed out that UN pot is black.....
The UN is a criminal, terrorist and undemocratic institution.
The USA have to withdraw and expell them from our country.
I noticed he didn't do it while John Bolton was there.
Time to defund the UN.
Get the UN out of the US.
NYC could use the office space.
Just sit back and wait for your 'strongly worded letter' like the rest of us :)
Congress has the cojones to threaten to stop funding the UN?
Actually, it is so full of crap that it is brown.
Relocate it to Haiti or Kosovo.
Excellent, if only we can goad these worthless POSs @ the UN to retaliate, then we cand wake up from the nightmare thet is the UN....no more $100M checks, let the UN collapse.
Relocate it to Haiti or Kosovo or Gaza or Iran or South Korea or Dafar.
How many other heck holes can everyone think of?
Chernobyl — Plenty of office space available there.
Zimbabwe?
You forgot Venezuela and Zimbabwe. The UN would fit in quite well with the governments of both nations.
Not only withhold funds, we should pull out of the UN and move their headquarters some place else.
ROFL
Bit of history:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1235065/posts?page=28#28
Creation of the United Nations
During August and September 1944, the representatives of Britain, China, Russia and the United States , met at Dumbarton Oaks in Washington DC. At this conference the constitutional foundation for the United Nations was laid. In it Russia was not only made a full partner, but a dominant stockholder. A most significant development was the fact that, while other nations objected, Russia insisted on the right to exercise the veto power even if she were a party to the dispute. This violated the very foundation of international jurisprudence but the democracies consented. They were ready to pay almost any price to get Russia to participate.
(snip)(snip)
On April 25, 1945, 1,400 representative from 46 nations met in San Francisco, and after due deliberation agreed upon a United Nation Charter.
Anyone familiar with the Communist Constitution of Russia will recognize in the United Nations Charter a similar format. It is characterized by a fervent declaration of democratic principles which are sound and desirable; this is then followed by a constitutional restriction or procedural limitation which completely nullifies the principles just announced. For example, the Russian Constitution provides for universal suffrage and voting by secret ballot. Then, in Article 126, it provides for a single political party (the Communist Party) which will furnish the voters with a single roster of candidates. This, of course, renders completely meaningless all the high flown phrases dealing with universal suffrage and secret ballots. (snip)
In precisely this same way the United Nations Charter provides for the “the sovereign equality of all its members” (article 1) and then sets up a Security Council which is dominated by five permanent members (Britain, Russia, China, France, and the United States) anyone of which can nullify the expressed desires of all other member nations by the simple device of exercising the veto power.
(snip)
This makes the Security Council the only legally binding legislative body in the UN. ...any nation which joins the UN must “agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council”.
(snip)(snip)
As some authorities have since pointed out, the UN provided for a world-wide police commission and then made the top international gangster a member of that commission.
(snip)
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.