Posted on 03/08/2003 8:35:37 AM PST by EveningStar
As I write this, the full orchestra of the Philharmonic Symphony gives Handel’s Messiah full volume in my head. After seventeen resolutions and twelve plus years, Iraq is not deviating one bit from its past behaviour and the United Nations just can’t help but go down the toilet with Saddam. A fitting end to a United Nations that has done nothing but steal money and sovereignty from the free people of the united States and suppress liberty around the world.
After 9/11, NYC has already a big expensive hole downtown. Do they really need another on the East side of the island? Moreover, NYC already has the Mafia, so they are up to their limit in the corruption department, too. So who needs a United Nations? Not us and not the USA.
(Excerpt) Read more at bluestarbase.org ...
While we are at it, let us say Ba Bye to Phil Donahue also.
For years, ever since its inception with the odious FDR and his buddy Alger Hiss, noted communist at the helm, the United Nations has never been about anything but socialism and Marxism. Here’s a brief who’s who for you:
Right from the get-go, the United Nations showed its true colours. The UN has always chosen socialists of the Marxist variety, one-worlders as the leaders. The Secretary-General at the UN founding conference was the aforementioned Soviet spy Alger Hiss. He was followed as Secretary-General by Norwegian socialist Trygve Lie, Swedish socialist Dag Hammarskjold, Burmese Marxist U Thant, Austrian former Nazi Kurt Waldheim, Peruvian socialist Javier Perez deCuellar, and Egyptian socialist Boutros Boutros-Ghali.
(Notice the consistency, hmm? Gee, Socialist, Marxist, Socialist, Marxist and nary an America-lover in the bunch. But wait! There’s more!)
Each has consistently used the full resources of the UN to promote Communist and socialist causes around the world. The Socialist International (which proudly traces its origins to the First International headed by Karl Marx, no surprise) today claims tens of millions of members in 54 countries. At its 1962 Congress, it declared: "The ultimate objective of the parties of the Socialist International is nothing less than world government ... Membership of the United Nations must be made universal ..." Almost all of the UN's "independent" commissions for the last thirty years have been headed by members of the Socialist International.
Right now, as we try to buy the support for the latest United Nations faux sanction vote, of little Cameroon (Cameroon?) and its one vote (which is equal to our American one vote), the United Nations is doing what it does best: chat and drink espresso at the Café du Conseil Securité (exclusive membership only). Of course, not only do we, the hard working American taxpayer, pick up the tab for the java, but for the whole billion-dollar money-hole shebang.
But, “wait a minute”, you say, “why should be pay for a vote when we are footing the lion’s share of the bill to keep the weapons of mass destruction from the global terror network?” Yeah, that’s what I say, too. And I am totally fed up with the land-grabbing third worlders who are currently squatting in that building that is still standing in Manhattan.
It’s not enough that the Man And Biosphere program of the United Nations (read here land-grab) already owns way too much of this country; it’s not enough that the American Heritage Rivers Act (and the five mile buffer zone slipped into that obscene bit of the devil’s handiwork) is stealing more of American property and it’s not enough that we, humans, are considered “alien species” in our own pristine lands; now the United Nations wants to not only run the show in Iraq, but manage the aftermath of rebuilding that country. Can anyone say Somalia?
Has everyone forgotten that an American with his side arm was the only thing to, finally after American soldiers were bleeding to death on those impoverished streets on the other side of the world, make the United Nations’ coalition of tanks move in for rescue? And has everyone forgotten those American soldiers who were mutilated by the savages? I know the mother who saw her son’s naked body dragged through the streets, his head on a pole, on CNN that night, hasn’t forgotten.
Do we really want a return to the early days of Marxism in the Soviet Union when, in the early part of the last century, the Soviets figured if they starve the kids and arrest the parents, their government-induced famine would successfully bring private property into the State’s ownership? Have we learned nothing at all from the past to allow the future to be prologue?
After the most recent presentation by Hans Blix to the United Nations, The Times/UK , in an article entitled, 'Iraqi drone 'could drop chemicals on troops' reported:
A REPORT declassified by the United Nations yesterday contained a hidden bombshell with the revelation that inspectors have recently discovered an undeclared Iraqi drone with a wingspan of 7.45m, suggesting an illegal range that could threaten Iraq’s neighbours with chemical and biological weapons.
US officials were outraged that Hans Blix, the chief UN weapons inspector, did not inform the Security Council about the drone, or remotely piloted vehicle, in his oral presentation to Foreign Ministers and tried to bury it in a 173-page single-spaced report distributed later in the day. The omission raised serious questions about Dr Blix’s objectivity.
“Recent inspections have also revealed the existence of a drone with a wingspan of 7.45m that has not been declared by Iraq,” the report said. “Officials at the inspection site stated that the drone had been test-flown. Further investigation is required to establish the actual specifications and capabilities of these RPV drones . . . (they) are restricted by the same UN rules as missiles, which limit their range to 150km (92.6 miles).” (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-603370,00.html)
Moreover, during his remarks on Friday, 07 March in New York’s 9/11-scarred Manhattan, Mr. Blix also mentioned that the Russians have donated a surveillance drone for the Inspection Team. Now, I ask, what does Hans need a drone for, when, if Saddam were actually to comply with UN Res.1441, his WMD could be laid out in a parking lot and publicly destroyed, metaphorically speaking, which would require no aerial monitoring. The current diabolical misinterpretation of UN Res.1441, constantly repeated by the liberal media that the inspectors are really searchers, notwithstanding. Now that it is clear that no drones are needed to observe the destruction of WMD, could those surveillance planes be used to monitor American and British troop deployments? The anti-American United Nations has left itself out in the open with its pants down.
Recently, many of us saw footage of an Iraqi dissident, notebook under his arm, trying to defect to the UN. The UN promptly turned him over to the Iraqi police. He has since disappeared (most likely after he and his family were tortured to death for the pleasure of Saddam and his boys). When Hans was informed of this, he said, (I kid you not) "Well, he could have found a more delicate way to approach the UN." This is the kind of man Hans is. I can only wonder what was in that notebook under the guy’s arm, but thanks to Mr. Blix, we will never know. Pardon my language, but, other than fostering socialism, communism, dictatorships and oppression of the innocent around the globe, the only thing the UN does well is the goatscrew.
One of the most positive things I have come across lately was found at the telegraph.com.uk and I almost couldn’t contain my joy. In part, the article stated: “Well-connected advisers tell me that if, as now seems likely, the UN refuses to back action against terror, Mr. Bush will announce a "temporary" suspension of America's membership, to be accompanied by an offer: if the UN gets its act together and carries out long-overdue reforms, America (and its money) will return. But if there is no reform, the temporary withdrawal will, de facto, become permanent.”
Dare I hope?
*************************************************** One of the best articles I've ever read. Bookmarking.
If this is even remotely true, knock me over with a feather.
Just get the UN out of the US and the US out of the UN. The rest of the World can just go someplace else to endlessly talk, spend tons of money and play with themselves!
Dictatorships that wanted to join could, but they would not be voting members. The only thing the UN is good for now is to allow France to throw it's itty bitty little weight around. Let's get out while the getting is good. ( After we win in Iraq)
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.