New UN audit reveals massive irregularities at UNFPA

According to its own audit report for 2002, the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) continues to exhibit long-standing management deficiencies. The report, written by UNFPA and released at last week's UNFPA Executive Board meeting in New York City, highlights a large number of serious lapses in both financial matters and program oversight.

The UNFPA audit team investigated 41 UNFPA country offices, and in almost every category of financial management, more than half of the offices were found to be deficient. With regard to general financial controls, 27 out of 41 country offices were either "partially satisfactory" or "deficient." 24 out of 41 country offices did not fully comply with budgeting regulations. In 20 out of 41 country offices, funds for projects had not been spent appropriately.

Of 61 office audits received by the UNFPA audit team, only five were complete. According to the audit document, 58 of 61 country offices did not seek "solutions" to "adverse findings" in their own financial reports.

The audit suggests that there is no reliable way to assess the activities of UNFPA, the national programs that it funds, or the programs of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). In fact, in 19 out of 41 country offices, programs were initiated without prior agreements from governments or NGOs concerning UNFPA regulations. Since UNFPA works with NGOs that perform and advocate for abortion, there thus appears to be no way to ensure that UNFPA is not funding abortions through its programs.

Last year, UNFPA shipped ten million faulty condoms to Tanzania, and it seems that quality control problems remain unresolved. According to the audit document, "Controls over inventory were generally found to be inadequate." In fact, 40 out of 41 country offices did not manage their inventory of goods satisfactorily.

The audit also established that 19 out of 41 country offices did not properly monitor programs, thereby bringing into question UNFPA claims of program effectiveness. The audit concluded, "The availability, accessibility and reliability of data were problematic in all countries to varying degrees, limiting the extent and quality of analysis."

The audit suggests that, where there is reliable data, it does not support UNFPA's assertions of success. For instance, "The condition of the facilities was also an obstacle to providing quality services. In Central Asia, the majority of medical facilities did not have adequate gynaecological equipment, electricity or running water, and required major repairs and refurbishing." The audit also concluded that the ".prevention and management of sexually transmitted infections (STIs), including HIV/AIDS, were the weakest of the three main reproductive health components in many countries, although STIs were rising and fast becoming one of the main public health problems."

When the audit was released to the Executive Board, even the delegate from pro-UNFPA Norway acknowledged that "deficiencies abound" at the population control agency.

My 2 cents regarding the UN?

American Policy Center on-line Declaration of Independence from the U.N.

As I recall, the un has one or more "contingency sites" located in other nations... let's banish them there--

Moreover:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/679476/posts

U.N. Finally Forced to Probe Its Pedophilia Scandal
Newsmax.com ^ | Tuesday, May 7, 2002

"Imagine the screaming headlines and worldwide outrage if the Catholic Church or any other church allowed sexual abuse of children on such a massive scale. Could the media establishment's pro-U.N., anti-religious bias have anything to do with the stunning discrepancy? "

Child sex book given out at U.N. summit

massive sexual abuse of children in Africa

UN cash for accused Nazi (Waldheim got 4,1 million)

'War Crimes' Fear For British Troops. Well, they wanted the World Court Didn't They?

UN COMPLICIT IN BALKANS SEX TRADE

Hmm, this has got me humming a tune: "Accountants only slow things down..."

Madonna
And The Money Kept Rolling In (And Out)

[Che:]
And the money kept rolling in from every side
Eva's pretty hands reached out and they reached wide
Now you may feel it should have been a voluntary cause
But that's not the point my friends
When the money keeps rolling in, you don't ask how
Think of all the people guaranteed a good time now
Eva's called the hungry to her, open up the doors
Never been a fund like the Foundation Eva Peron

[Chorus:]

[Workers:]
Rollin' rollin' rollin', rollin' rollin' rollin'
Rollin' rollin' rollin', rollin' rollin' rollin'
Rollin' rollin' rollin', rollin' rollin' rollin'
Rollin' rollin' rollin', rollin' rollin' rollin'

Rollin' on in, rollin' on in
Rollin' on in, rollin' on in
On in

[Che:]
Would you like to try a college education?
Own your landlord's house, take the family on vacation?
Eva and her blessed fund can make your dreams come true
Here's all you have to do my friends
Write your name and your dream on a card or a pad or a ticket
Throw it high in the air and should our lady pick it
She will change your way of life for a week or even two
Name me anyone who cares as much as Eva Peron

[chorus]

Rollin' on out, rollin' on out
Rollin' on out, rollin' on out
On out

[Che:]
And the money kept rolling out in all directions
To the poor, to the weak, to the destitute of all complexions
Now cynics claim a little of the cash has gone astray
But that's not the point my friends
When the money keeps rolling out you don't keep books
You can tell you've done well by the happy grateful looks
Accountants only slow things down, figures get in the way
Never been a lady loved as much as Eva Peron

[chorus]

Rollin' on out, rollin' on out
Rollin' on out, rollin' on out
On out

[Che:]
Eva!!!
When the money keeps rolling out you don't keep books
You can tell you've done well by the happy grateful looks
Accountants only slow things down, figures get in the way
Never been a lady loved as much as Eva Peron

[chorus]

Rollin' on out, rollin' on out
Rollin' on out, rollin' on out
Rollin' on out, rollin' on out
On out

Trilateral Commission Clear in Directing World Government

Joey Dauben June 23 2003

World banker David Rockefeller is very clear: The states, the peoples, the governments and the economies of all nations must serve the needs of multinational banks and
corporations.

In Rockefeller's book, "The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management," (written by Holly Sklar, but at the discretion of Rockefeller), Rockefeller does not hide the fact that his network of organizations, banks, corporations or governments works at the whim of his financial influence.

The owners and managers of the Trilateralist global corporations, the book states, "view the entire world as their factory, farm, and playground." History, Rockefeller says, "shows that every effective international system requires a custodian."

And Rockefeller even goes on to state that there are other organizations helping in the cause for world government, organizations he's funded: the Bilderberg Group and the Council on Foreign Relations are just two notable examples of the Rockefeller-directed One Worlders.

Even the thoughts of any "secret society" working to direct foreign policy, or shape public opinion, are met with a stern Rockefeller put-down: he calls the cabal-calling conspiracy theorists "extremists."

It's all laid out on the table, he says. Nothing to hide.

Anyway, it is also good to note some of the Trilateral Commission's guidelines, as presented by Sklar, but according to Rockefeller himself.

- Trilateralists propose strategies for the management of dependence.

This in itself is obvious; took a gander inside one of the U.S. History books our children are studying. There's much to be said about the Standard Oil Company and many of the giant corporations that have directed Rockefeller's policies (i.e., Ford, IBM).

- Marketing, Trilateralists say, is like militarism - it is a means of managing social change.

Look at the mainstream media (ABC, NBC, CBS, Time, etc.) - they're all owned and operated by members of the Big Three (TC, Bilderbergs, CFR). Has our country gotten better since the 1960s? I'm afraid not, but then again, that's the plan.

- Global corporations, writes TC-co-founder and former Carter Administration official Zbigniew Brzezinski - depend on the political, economic, and repressive power commanded by the ruling class of the nation-state to maintain a "favorable investment climate."

And when those nation-states, countries, or governments fail to adhere to the gloabalists' claims, they are, in simple terms, "dealt with."

For example, the Vietnam War, according to the TC, "undermined severely the U.S. role as global police for international capitalism."

The globalists had things going perfectly until John F. Kennedy's abrupt change in policy - JFK, if you will remember, helped "fight communism [TC: war for capitalism]" but found out things were not what they seemed; he later told a group of college students shortly before his execution of a "grave threat to the American people." This threat, JFK later found out, was within his own government. His executive order to start the withdrawal of American servicemen in Vietnam was a globalist "no-no." And the rest is history.

Or what about Richard Nixon? Nixon and Treasury Secretary John Connally "unilaterally demolished the Bretton Woods System" on Aug. 15, 1971. Now, observers of the global government being put in place and free-market capitalists will know that free trade is the unobstructed flow of money, goods and services between countries. The Bretton Woods, New Hampshire pact in 1944 established the "pro-world capitalist" International Monetary Fund, World Bank, and the International Federation for World Development - basically the financial institutions funding our crusade for world government.

Well, Nixon came up with a plan of his own, called the "New Economic Policy." It strongly favored, according to the TC, our domestic economy, which were losing out in international trade competition (plans similar to Nixon's are still in place - hence South American protests of free trade agreemetnts).

And not too long after Nixon's economic venture, the Washington Post, affiliated with Rockefeller's Bilderberger Group and the CFR, broke Watergate - and, yes, the rest is history.

When governments or political leaders turn unfriendly, according to Brzezinski, the Trilateral co-founder, the globalists "attempt to discipline them" through economic and political maneuvers." Or, "through military and covert action."

This is all spelled out, in the Elite Planning for World Management - you can pick up a copy at your local bookstore or library.

There's no secret about it, folks. Like Communism, World Capitalism attempts (and is doing a good job at it, I might add) to only benefit the few.

Trilateralism, Rockefeller says, is the "current attempt by ruling elites to manage both dependence and democracy - at home and abroad."

And by the looks of it, his plan is working.
Joey Dauben is a reporter for The Ellis County Press, an independent weekly newspaper based 20 miles south of Dallas, Texas. He can be reached at http://www.joeydauben.com.

Exclusive commentary by Helen and Peters Evans

Jun 19, 2003

When the dictator, Josef Stalin, first appeared at the brand-new United Nations accompanied by representatives of Soviet "labor unions," other delegates cried foul, asking, "How can there be labor unions in a government-run society?" Stalin explained, "Ah, but these are Non-Governmental Organizations," and the term "NGO" first came into the world's vocabulary.

Nowadays, most of us are likely to think of NGOs as large-scale charitable organizations who work all over the world providing medical care in disaster situations, food to famine sufferers or advocacy for political prisoners. One of the main reasons we even recognize the names of the well-known groups is that they often canvass door to door for donations to support their good works.

However, there is a growing number of less well-known NGOs who don't want to help the hungry feed themselves, rather, their aim is to "eradicate hunger." They don't want to help the poor become wealthy, rather, their goal is to "eliminate poverty." Do these distinctions sound picky? Well, they're not. Helping people means getting down to cases with the real people who are asking for help, finding out what they really need and helping them in ways that enable them to actually provide it for themselves. The much more abstract aims of "eliminating" hunger or poverty typically involve utopian plans that are to be imposed upon people "for their own good."

Consider the "elimination of poverty." This abstract notion breeds anotherthe "re-distribution of wealth." We see this in the United States when our own Congress takes more and more wealth (in the form of taxes) from those who create it and "re-distributes" it, in the form of entitlements, to those who don't create, or earn, it. This is bad enough when a democratic nation, essentially, "does it to itself" through government policy. The citizens have the option of changing policies through democratic means. But what happens when non-governmental organizations try the same thing?

Consider a recent, international casethe "Kyoto Protocol To The United Nations Framework Convention On Climate Change." If you think it's about controlling climate change, read it again. If it were implemented, its real function would be the "re-distribution of wealth" from the industrialized, developed nations to the less-industrialized, less-developed nations who, under Kyoto, will basically be paid not to develop. The important thing to notice though, is the composition of the United Nations. Although seats in the U.N. General Assembly are ostensibly held by 185 "sovereign nations" from around the world, they are outnumbered more than two-to-one by about 500 seat-holding NGO's who can submit papers, call for votes, exercise influence by lobbying 'real' members, etc. The only thing they can't do is vote. An additional 3,000 NGOs hold, not seats, but "consultant" status at the U.N.

Who the heck are all those NGOs and what are they doing at the UN? Well, they are self-appointed groups vying for government-sized budgets and global power, claiming a pseudo-governmental legitimacy while side-stepping the accountability that is the essential requirement of legitimate government. In short, these burgeoning elements of the global New-Left are "hijacking democracy."

This is the title of an analytical synthesis of studies conducted over the last decade by Marguerite Peeters, subtitled "the power shift to the un-elected." Ms Peeters gave a brief overview of the trends indicated by her research at a recent conference at the American Enterprise Institute. She also told those assembled of a tentative meeting scheduled this fall for representatives of major NGO's, the European Union and the Democratic Party of the U.S. Do you know why Bill Clinton has hinted that he'd like to be Secretary-General of the UN? He would be the leader of the largest socialist organization in the world, while his wife... well, you know where her sights are aimed. We should "be afraid; be very afraid" of where this trend is taking us, but only if the fear mobilizes us to change its direction.

We should begin by learning more about the pervasive influence NGO's already have and would like to have on our lives. The American Enterprise Institute and the Federalist Society have collaborated on a new website, NGO Watch Check it out. It's time for us to use our own influence.

"Recent years have seen an unprecedented growth in the power and influence of non-governmental organizations (NGOs). While it is true that many NGOs remain true to grassroots authenticity conjured up in images of protest and sacrifice, it is also true that non-governmental organizations are now serious business. NGO officials and their activities are widely cited in the media and relied upon in congressional testimony; corporations regularly consult with NGOs prior to major investments. Many groups have strayed beyond their original mandates and assumed quasi-governmental roles. Increasingly, non-governmental organizations are not just accredited observers at international organizations, they are full-fledged decision-makers." ~ NGO Watch.org

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.