Replies

When Bush alluded to the nonsensical founding purpose of the UN, and said that their nonexistant leadership is needed, that was about what you could have expected from Al Gore, had Gore managed to pull off his theft of the election. The dissembling he did was for his amen corner, who he knows he needs to toss a rhetorical bone from time to time.

This is a dire state of emergency we're in and failure to speak strongly and to act even more strongly is not encouraging. If you folks would prefer to pretend that the President put the UN on notice about anything, then go ahead. I prefer to face obvious facts when they are staring me in the face.

If you folks would prefer to pretend that the President put the UN on notice about anything, then go ahead.

Looked to me like he praised them right off the top, and throughout most of his speech.

Here's the one place where the President called the U.N. to task:

It undermines the credibility of this great institution, for example, when the Commission on Human Rights offers seats to the world's most persistent violators of human rights. The United Nations depends above all on its moral authority and that authority must be preserved.

But earlier he said this:

These commitments — hope and order, law and life — unite people across cultures and continents. Upon these commitments depend all peace and progress. For these commitments we are determined to fight.

The United Nations has risen to this responsibility. On the 12th of September, these buildings opened for emergency meetings of the General Assembly and the Security Council. Before the sun had set, these attacks on the world stood condemned by the world.

And I want to thank you for this strong and principled stand.

He's giving the United Nations credit for the international condemnation of the assault on America.

Are the other nations of the world so hostile to us and so without character whatsoever that they were actually waiting on the United Nations to force a condemnation out of them?