Cross-posted from RenewAmerica.us
by Jim Kouri
Staying true to form, the United Nations is once again condemning the nation of Israel over their refusal to subsidize a terrorist group that frequently attacks and kills Israelis.
Israel’s decision to withhold $50 million of funds destined for the Palestinian National Authority (PNA) in protest of Hamas’ electoral success was sharply criticized by the United Nation’s peace envoy.
The UN’s Alvaro de Soto said the decision made by the Israeli cabinet last Sunday was premature and declared that it ran counter to the agreed policy last month of the United States, European Union, United Nations and Russia. However, the US has not criticized Israel’s decision. In fact, the US demanded the return of $50 million in aid money from the Palestinians as a result of Hamas election victories and their refusal to repudiate their call for the annihilation of Israel.
The UN officials said that international funding should be judged against the willingness of a Hamas government to renounce violence, recognize Israel’s right to exist, and observing past agreements between Israel and the old PA. But Hamas has not renounced violence and they are being encouraged by the madman president of Iran in their hatred of the Israeli people.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by Walt as Terrorism at 11:02 AM EST
No Comments »
Another good reason to get the U.S. out of the U.N.
The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton is know for his adversity against the U.N. Fox News reports that he said Saturday that the world body is hobbled "by bad management, by sex and corruption" and a lack of confidence in its ability to carry out missions.
Mr Bolton also stated that two-thirds of its members pay only 20% of the total dues. The United States pays more than any other country. Yet the U.S. gets the lest benefit of the U.N.
"We find an organization that is deeply troubled by bad management, by sex and corruption and by a growing lack of confidence in its ability to carry out missions that are given to them," Bolton told an audience at a Columbia Law School symposium held by the Federalist Society, a conservative law organization.
Bolton, a longtime critic of the U.N., has been leading U.S. efforts to reform the United Nations after the oil-for-food scandal and sex scandals involving U.N. peacekeepers.
The oil-for-food program, established in 1996 with Iraq’s economy crippled by sanctions, allowed Saddam Hussein to sell oil in exchange for humanitarian goods meant for his people.
An inquiry by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker found that Saddam sold oil to foreign countries in hopes of getting their support for lifting U.N. sanctions, and enriched himself by $1.8 billion through a kickback scheme. Companies and politicians essentially paid him for the right to do business, circumventing the U.N. program.
I agree 110% with John Bolton’s observations but I do not think reform will work within the U.N. No amount of reforms will change the way they do business.
Bolton — who has a reputation for brilliance, obstinacy and speaking his mind — said in 1994 that it wouldn’t make a "bit of difference" if the United Nations lost the top 10 stories from its 39-story headquarters.
If we can get the U.N. out of New York and out of the United States, they would not need any of the 39 floors.
Posted by Walt as Corruption, Finances at 10:55 PM EST
No Comments »
Freedom of religion and speech according to the U.N. is permitted as prescribed by law which is contrary to the freedom as ordained by God in the U.S. Constitution. Fifty-seven Muslim governments are asking to change the law which would suppress freedom of religion and speech.
Fifty-seven Muslim governments are pressing to include a ban on the mocking of religions in a planned new U.N. human rights body, AsiaNews reported.
The 57 governments previously had announced their intention to have the United Nations ban such mocking of religion, the news agency said.
According to the text of the Muslim countries’ proposal, the new U.N. body should strive to "prevent instances of intolerance, discrimination, incitement of hatred and violence arising from any actions against religions, prophets and beliefs, which threaten the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms."
In a clear reference to the Mohammed cartoons controversy, the proposal states that "defamation of religions and prophets is inconsistent with the right to freedom of expression."
To achieve this goal, Egypt, for example, is trying to persuade the European Union to support the ban. After talks with EU foreign affairs chief Javier Solana in Cairo, Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmad Aboul Gheit said the proposal on banning defamation of religions was discussed.
Al-Azhar Sheikh Mohammed Sayed Tantawi, Sunni Islam’s highest religious authority, told Solana that the resolution should include sanctions.
Solana refused to say whether a resolution would be presented to the General Assembly. He did note, however, that a mechanism is under study that would reconcile the principles of a common declaration made by the European Union, the United Nations and the Organization of the Islamic Conference. (Source: ZENIT)
The U.N. is mostly ineffective in promoting most of its agenda but unfortunately it is gaining power and support from incidences such as the ongoing "Cartoon Jihad".
This is another good reason to get the U.S. out of the U.N. before or God ordained rights are taken away by a man-made law.
Posted by Walt as Freedom & Human Rights at 2:41 PM EST
No Comments »
Recently 80 evangelical Christian pastors are endorsing the Evangelical Climate Initiative, a "politically correct" agreement that the United States should abide by the U.N.’s Kyoto Protocol which address the supposedly "green house effect".
Are they blind to the hidden United Nation’s agenda of bringing down, economically the United States to the level of a third world country. All the while third world countries are exempt from the Kyoto Protocol enabling them to gain from the United States loses.
Rev. Jerry Falwell has spoken out against their action. Although many are his friends, he does not believe their action is in the best interest of our nation. In his column in World Net Daily, he writes:
Many of the people who signed this document are my friends – some are dear friends. Nevertheless, I have felt compelled to oppose their effort because I believe that global warming is an unproven phenomenon and may actually just be junk science being passed off as fact.
In addition, I believe that so-called solutions to global warming – and particularly the Kyoto Protocol, which is the politically correct international agreement to fight greenhouse gas emissions – would devastate the American economy if adopted by our nation. Further, studies have shown that costly efforts to stem greenhouse gas emissions would just barely reduce global temperatures.
Paul Driessen, senior policy adviser for the Congress of Racial Equality and author of "Eco-Imperialism: Green Power, Black Death," recently stated, "By making energy less affordable and accessible, mandatory controls (on greenhouse-gas emissions) would drive up the costs of consumer products, stifle economic growth, cost jobs and impose especially harmful effects on the earth’s poorest people."
That’s a bottom line our nation cannot endorse.
I agree with Rev. Falwell that this "greenhouse effect" can not be proved scientifically. In fact he points out that the weather does change through cycles. If you look back 20 to 30 years ago, it was believed we were heading into an ice age.
The only thing we are heading in to if we follow the U.N.’s Kyoto Protocol is economic disaster. Instead of signing their Evangelical Climate Initiative, they should be encouraging the United States to get out of the anti-Christian and un-Godly United Nations.
Posted by Walt as Environment Issues at 3:48 PM EST
No Comments »
The UN does not believe in freedom of speech. At the UN in Geneva, at a meeting of an Intergovernmental Working Group on the effective implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, David G. Littman, a representative of the Association for World Education, was prevented by the Chairman, Ambassador Juan Martabit of Chile, from mentioning Sudan and Iran in connection with human rights abuses.
Said Martabit:
"I’m going to be very blunt with you, and with everyone -– if we’re going to get into a country situation debate here at this Working Group, we will not make any progress."
How can the UN effectively discuss human rights abuses without mentioning the names of the countries involved?
The complete transcript of this discussion can be viewed at: International Humanist and Ethical Union.
So why any discussion if names of the countries involved with human rights violations can not be mentioned?
Posted by Walt as Freedom & Human Rights at 4:50 PM EST
No Comments »
WASHINGTON, Feb. 13 /Christian Wire Service/ — The following text is of remarks by President Bush and U.N. Secretary General Annan in a press availability:
The Oval Office
PRESIDENT BUSH: Mr. Secretary General, thank you. As usual, we had a very constructive dialogue. I always enjoy visiting with the Secretary General. It gives us a chance to talk about our common interests and our desire for peace and liberty around the world.
We had a good discussion on Sudan, with a particular emphasis on Darfur. I told the Secretary General that Mrs. Garang was in to see me the other day, and that we had a long discussion — she and I had a long discussion not only about the Darfur region, but about implementing the North-South Accords. And I appreciate the Secretary’s leadership on that issue.
We talked about the broader Middle East. And there’s a lot to talk about. I am very optimistic, however, that democracy and liberty will prevail. And so I want to thank you for your interest and leadership on those particular issues.
We talked about U.N. reform, structural reform, management reform, as well as the reform of the Human Rights Commission. I was most interested in the Secretary General’s thoughts. I appreciate very much his leading on these issues, and we’ll continue to work closely through Secretary Bolton — Ambassador Bolton, with the Security Council and the United Nations.
So Mr. Secretary General, thanks for coming. It’s always a pleasure to welcome you here to the Oval Office. The floor is yours.
SECRETARY GENERAL ANNAN: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I also enjoy our periodic exchanges, and I’m very happy that we have agreed to work together on the Darfur issue, working with other governments from Europe, from Asia, and other regions, to ensure that we do have an effective security presence on the ground to protect the IDPs and ensure that humanitarian workers have access to those in need. And of course this is an issue where all governments have to play their role.
On security — on the U.N. reform and Human Rights Council, I think the President and I agree that we need to reform the Human Rights Council and it should be done as soon as possible. The President of the General Assembly, Jan Eliasson, is working very hard to ensure that we will have that done by this month, and that when the Human Rights Commission meets in Geneva, it will be in the process of transformation, it will not be business as usual. And I also thanked the President for all the support he’s given us on U.N. reform, on the broader U.N. reform. And there are quite a lot of things that we’re going to do.
We also discussed the Middle East and the Hamas elections, and the need of transformation of Hamas into a political party along the lines the Quartet had discussed. And I think there is an opportunity here for Hamas to transform itself into a political party and work with the international community and the Israeli government.
We also touched on the issue of the nuclear issue in — of Iran. And here again, I hope between now and the time the Atomic Agency issues its next report, there will be indications and steps from the Iranian side to indicate that negotiations are not dead, and that both sides can come back to the table and find a way out of this crisis. We need to be able to resolve it, and I hope there will be no steps taken to escalate the situation.
Thank you very much.
PRESIDENT BUSH: I appreciate it. Thank you.
END
Posted by Walt as General Commentary at 8:28 AM EST
1 Comment »
The following article published on the National Ledger website echos my sentiments on the UN, but I would take it one step further and say to the UN: Get Out Of The US!
By Jim Kouri
The United Nations is demanding the immediate closing of America’s Guantanamo Bay detention center. The UN is also calling for the prosecution of officers and politicians "up to the highest level" who are accused of torturing detainees, according to a report in a British newspaper, The Telegraph, that the UN Human Rights Commission will release a biting report against the United States.
However, most of the evidence used by the UN is hearsay — statements by lawyers representing some of the detainees or by American Civil Liberties Union lawyers just creating mischief. Also, the UN investigators and writers of the report slamming the US declined to visit Guantanamo Bay when an invitation was extended to them, according to my own sources.
The UN Human Rights Commission report urges the Bush Administration to put the more than 500 detainees on trial or release them. One must remember that the commission has included representatives from Libya, Iran, Sudan, Cuba and other brutal dictatorships.
The report says that the Bush administration should make certain that all allegations of torture are investigated by US criminal courts, and that "all perpetrators up to the highest level of military and political command are brought to justice." Allegations of torture and abuse at military installations are investigated by the military. Civilian criminal courts lack jurisdiction in these cases.
In spite of the UN insinuations that no investigations are conducted, the US military has indeed investigated and prosecuted officers and enlisted men and women. Recently, the Pentagon turned over more that 80,000 pages of reports and documentation of their investigative and corrective actions to the American Civil Liberties Union.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by Walt as General Commentary, Terrorism at 11:06 PM EST
No Comments »
Apparently, United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan does not really believe in freedom of speech or the press. He is taking sides with the Muslims over the recent up roar over the Muhammad cartoons, even though the Muslim’s recent violence is over cartoons published five months ago.
"Let me say that, honestly, I do not understand why any newspaper will publish the cartoons today," Annan told reporters in New York City on Thursday.
"It is insensitive. It is offensive. It is provocative, and they should see what has happened around the world.
"This does not mean that I am against freedom of speech, or freedom of the press. Yes, I am for that.
"But as I have indicated in the past, freedom of speech is not a license. It does entail exercising responsibility and judgment."
But what about the Muslims who have been producing caricaturist pictures of Muhammad for centuries?
At DiscoverTheNetwork.org, author Amir Taheri presents ample evidence that depicting Mohammed in cartoons calls for jihad is common in the Muslim world:
The Muslim Brotherhood’s position, put by one of its younger militants, Tariq Ramadan–who is, strangely enough, also an adviser to the British home secretary–can be summed up as follows: It is against Islamic principles to represent by imagery not only Muhammad but all the prophets of Islam; and the Muslim world is not used to laughing at religion. Both claims, however, are false.
There is no Quranic injunction against images, whether of Muhammad or anyone else. When it spread into the Levant, Islam came into contact with a version of Christianity that was militantly iconoclastic. As a result some Muslim theologians, at a time when Islam still had an organic theology, issued “fatwas” against any depiction of the Godhead. That position was further buttressed by the fact that Islam acknowledges the Jewish Ten Commandments–which include a ban on depicting God–as part of its heritage. The issue has never been decided one way or another, and the claim that a ban on images is “an absolute principle of Islam” is purely political. Islam has only one absolute principle: the Oneness of God. Trying to invent other absolutes is, from the point of view of Islamic theology, nothing but sherk, i.e., the bestowal on the Many of the attributes of the One.
The claim that the ban on depicting Muhammad and other prophets is an absolute principle of Islam is also refuted by history. Many portraits of Muhammad have been drawn by Muslim artists, often commissioned by Muslim rulers. There is no space here to provide an exhaustive list, but these are some of the most famous:
A miniature by Sultan Muhammad-Nur Bokharai, showing Muhammad riding Buraq, a horse with the face of a beautiful woman, on his way to Jerusalem for his M’eraj or nocturnal journey to Heavens (16th century); a painting showing Archangel Gabriel guiding Muhammad into Medina, the prophet’s capital after he fled from Mecca (16th century); a portrait of Muhammad, his face covered with a mask, on a pulpit in Medina (16th century); an Isfahan miniature depicting the prophet with his favorite kitten, Hurairah (17th century); Kamaleddin Behzad’s miniature showing Muhammad contemplating a rose produced by a drop of sweat that fell from his face (19th century); a painting, “Massacre of the Family of the Prophet,” showing Muhammad watching as his grandson Hussain is put to death by the Umayyads in Karbala (19th century); a painting showing Muhammad and seven of his first followers (18th century); and Kamal ul-Mulk’s portrait of Muhammad showing the prophet holding the Quran in one hand while with the index finger of the other hand he points to the Oneness of God (19th century).
So Annan’s remarks to curb the cartoons is about double standards. What’s good for the Muslims is not allowed by anyone else.
Posted by Walt as Freedom & Human Rights at 1:27 AM EST
No Comments »
