Thursday, February 03, 2005
At Least They're Consistent at the U.N.
So Kofi has decided to use Bill Clinton to head the U.N. tsunami relief programs. Bill Clinton pardoned Marc Rich. Marc Rich figures prominently in the Oil-for-Food scandal. I'm certainly not suggesting Clinton had anything to do with the U.N.'s handling of oil-for-food, the program that allowed Saddam to siphon off billions for bunkers, palaces, and weapons while 5,000 children starved to death every month (that's a U.N. figure, by the way). But the career U.N. "diplomats" are so deeply immersed in the U.N. culture that they have no vision of the world at large. Like some third-world countries, corruption has become so commonplace in U.N. administered programs that its just considered part of the program. They don't see anything wrong with the Clinton-Rich connection (even if it is nothing more than an unsavory appearance), just as they see nothing wrong with Kofi's son using the U.N. paid apartment for parties and brokering oil-for-food deals.
Meanwhile, the genocide in Darfur continues and the U.N., blocked by France, does nothing. What a shock. France, putting its own financial interests first, has obstructed efforts to bring the Darfur issue before the security council and all but declared that it will veto any effort to impose sanctions (or take any other meaningful action).
And the slaughter and rape of the children of Uganda goes on, all but unnoticed, with USAid providing 1/2 of the total food the world is supplying to the refugee camps of northern Uganda.
Can anybody think of a good reason we continue to pour billions into the U.N. and its various agencies and programs, instead of dealing directly with the countries receiving aid?
Meanwhile, the genocide in Darfur continues and the U.N., blocked by France, does nothing. What a shock. France, putting its own financial interests first, has obstructed efforts to bring the Darfur issue before the security council and all but declared that it will veto any effort to impose sanctions (or take any other meaningful action).
And the slaughter and rape of the children of Uganda goes on, all but unnoticed, with USAid providing 1/2 of the total food the world is supplying to the refugee camps of northern Uganda.
Can anybody think of a good reason we continue to pour billions into the U.N. and its various agencies and programs, instead of dealing directly with the countries receiving aid?
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]