It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Americans and Fox News, are ANTI U.N.?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 7 2006 @ 02:18 PM
link   
Well, congratulations.

Finally good news coming from the Elitists.

According to our Global Subcommander, The United Nations Deputy Secretary-General Mark Malloch Brown, you Yanks are failing in support for this Suspisious Collective of Malcontent Nations.

www.un.org...

UN need u.s., u.s. needs un to face challenges -- HIV/AIDS, Sudan -- that defy national solutions, says Deputy Secretary-General in new york address

Following is the address by United Nations Deputy Secretary-General Mark Malloch Brown on “Power and Super-Power: Global Leadership in the Twenty-First Century” at the Century Foundation and Center for American Progress -- Security and Peace Initiative, in New York, 6 June:

Thank you for allowing me to speak to you today on Power and Global Leadership. I often get asked to talk about leadership, but rarely about power. I wonder why.

Maybe he been too busy dealing with Corrupution within the U.N.


Some of the themes -- that the United Nations is misunderstood and does much more than its critics allow -- are probably not surprising. But my underlying message, which is a warning about the serious consequences of a decades-long tendency by US Administrations of both parties to engage only fitfully with the UN, is not one a sitting United Nations official would normally make to an audience like this.

Sure, the Poor Disfunctional and Scandal ridden Offices of the U.N. are misunderstood. That is likely why we in Canada, understand the U.N.. 30 Years of Liberal Government and Scandals and Corruption afforded us the hindsight to endorse the U.N. to the point where we have our collective noses so far up the U.N.'s arse, that we can't smell the B.S. as we are buried in it. But you Americans do not get it. You must accept this incompetence and embrace it.

He goes on spinning the Glorious last 10 years, lead behind the scenes, by Canada's Maurice Strong, and our Commander, Kofi.
(Look at this Bio for Maurice. It's an interesting read) iresist.com...

But then he seems to be drawing that line in the Sand scenario.

However, inevitably a moment of truth is coming. Because even as the world’s challenges are growing, the UN’s ability to respond is being weakened without US leadership.

This of course is due to you (AMERICA) not working with these people more
constructivly.

And here is a ringing endorsement of the U.N. by the U.N. itself.

Americans complain about the UN’s bureaucracy, weak decision-making, the lack of accountable modern management structures and the political divisions of the General Assembly here in New York. And my response is, “guilty on all counts”.

Well, what can he say. They are inept and bungle everything at every turn.

Here's the most impressive comments. IT IS ALL YOUR FAULT AMERICA.

But why?

In significant part because the US has not stuck with its project -- its professed wish to have a strong, effective United Nations -- in a systematic way. Secretary Albright and others here today have played extraordinary leadership roles in US-UN relations, for which I salute them. But in the eyes of the rest of the world, US commitment tends to ebb much more than it flows. And in recent years, the enormously divisive issue of Iraq and the big stick of financial withholding have come to define an unhappy marriage.

As someone who deals with Washington almost daily, I know this is unfair to the very real effort all three Secretaries of State I have worked with –- Secretary Albright, Secretary Powell and Secretary Rice -– put into UN issues. And today, on a very wide number of areas, from Lebanon and Afghanistan to Syria, Iran and the Palestinian issue, the US is constructively engaged with the UN. But that is not well known or understood, in part because much of the public discourse that reaches the US heartland has been largely abandoned to its loudest detractors such as Rush Limbaugh and Fox News. That is what I mean by “stealth” diplomacy: the UN’s role is in effect a secret in Middle America even as it is highlighted in the Middle East and other parts of the world.

Exacerbating matters is the widely held perception, even among many US allies, that the US tends to hold on to maximalist positions when it could be finding middle ground.

We can see this even on apparently non-controversial issues such as renovating the dilapidated UN Headquarters in New York. While an architectural landmark, the building falls dangerously short of city codes, lacks sprinklers, is filled with asbestos and is in most respects the most hazardous workplace in town. But the only Government not fully supporting the project is the US. Too much unchecked UN-bashing and stereotyping over too many years -- manifest in a fear by politicians to be seen to be supporting better premises for overpaid, corrupt UN bureaucrats -- makes even refurbishing a building a political hot potato.

Oh, you difficult Amercians. Listening to Rush and watching Fox, to get your info.

Without this U.N. Work in the Middle East, to support and feed the terror groups, that spawn the homicide bombers, and enflame Anti Israeli sediment, we wouldn't have a clue about U.N. involvement. All we can, historically praise them for, is Originating the term 'Palestinians Refugees' and apply this solely to the Arabs from all over the Mid East. A job well done!

He goes on and on, and it's still all your fault America.

So in closing I wish to express my thanks. The Monster, has plans for our future, and any monkey wrenches you can throw into the mix is welcomed.

I suggest, rather than rebuilding the U.N., maybe you should kick it out of North America altogether, and let the French house them, or maybe better, Hugo Chavez, can get them somewhere in Jerusalem to reside. That would shut the Palestinians up.

Ciao

Shane

[edit on 7-6-2006 by Shane]




posted on Jun, 7 2006 @ 04:12 PM
link   
I honestly think the U.N should go the way of the League of Nations. I hope we dont need another World War to get to that point though.

I hope the best minds in the world could come up with a more effective org. with better oversites to combat corruption to replace the UN. I also think the power structure needs to be updated. Im mean France isnt really more deserving of a Permanent security seat then I dont know India which could very well become a Superpower in the next couple of decades.



posted on Jun, 8 2006 @ 02:12 AM
link   
The United States has never really had a popular majority support for the UN. Most people see it as a waste of time and money and should be destroyed, or as a waste of time and money but a neccesary negoiation tool.



posted on Jun, 8 2006 @ 04:53 AM
link   
heck the UN sucks, wherever they appear in force, brothels flourish and abduction rate of minors goes through the roof, along with other kinds of slave trade. aside from being outright barbaric criminals, they blatantly fail every time, need i say 'safehavens' in Bosnia? round them up then have them killed (strange how people still fall for that, though)


Accontability? no way, they're special, right? the entire UN with its 'veto powers' is just a tool to perpetuate yesterday's 'new' world order, i can't see ANYONE outside the elitist's circles favoring them.

If they get canned, good riddance i say. too bad people all over the world have their taxes channeled to these criminals, wether they like it or not. Kind of like the EU, outright critizism is heresy and nearly as bad as denying the holocaust



posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 11:46 PM
link   
I am an American and I have a mixed opinion of the UN. Simply put it kept the Cold War room temperature but given todays international security environment it is incapable of being an effective Non-Governmental Organization, much less one that all member states are supposed to subjugate a certain degree of sovereignty to. I don't push for a League of Nations type of failure but simply a back to basics strategy for reforming the UN along modern standards. The Bretton Woods institutions set up during their time made perfect sense, they don't any longer.



posted on Jun, 10 2006 @ 03:21 AM
link   
I have to say, when i read in the herald Sun in Melbourne Australia that the UN has told it's troops in East timor not to help in an investigation or divulge any information regarding some UN troops and i believe it was 7 executed East timorese to the Australian criminal investigation board (i'm not sure what the name of the actual investigation is called but it's aroudn those lines).

Anyways it makes you suprised and unhappy to see how the un are handling the situation.



posted on Jun, 10 2006 @ 03:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Baphomet79
I am an American and I have a mixed opinion of the UN. Simply put it kept the Cold War room temperature but given todays international security environment it is incapable of being an effective Non-Governmental Organization, much less one that all member states are supposed to subjugate a certain degree of sovereignty to. I don't push for a League of Nations type of failure but simply a back to basics strategy for reforming the UN along modern standards. The Bretton Woods institutions set up during their time made perfect sense, they don't any longer.


Exactly....the UN was mainly a forum where the USA and USSR could talk and fight out issues with words and ploys intstead of with thermal nuclear weapons.

I remember seeing the thing in the 60's during the cuban missile crisis with krushchev bangin his shoe on the desk at the UN.

since the cold war has ended, and there are maybe 1 or 2 countries on earth that pose any significant threat to the United States. the need for a UN seems less important, when neither of them can afford or are not willing to be drawn into a direct confrontation.

hell, the US doesnt even care about UN recomendations or mandates anymore...

and yes it is more or less a waste of money.....now it seems to serve 1 of 2 purposes...

1. organized crime

or

2. global welfare on the american dollar

It wouldnt be so bad if we saw progress in parts of the world where money is poured into.....like africa....

it seems the money we spend there will never yield any results so why bother....




top topics



 
0

log in

join