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.
Originally posted by zappafan1
REPLY: One only has to look at their record since their change from the League of Nations to the United nations. They're good at delivering food. sometimes. Need I remind you of the Oil for Fraud program??
The world would be a better place if one of the planes had missed and hit their building.
Many talk about the NWO... well, THAT is what the UN wants. Geez.... go read Agenda 21.
You've not heard of UN "Peacekeepers" raping women and children in Africa, and Mr. Coffee says nothing.
Despite the large and growing number of contributors, most “Blue Helmets” continue to be provided by a core group of developing countries. The 10 main troop-contributors to UN peacekeeping operations as of 30 April 2006 were Bangladesh, Pakistan, India, Jordan, Nepal, Ethiopia, Ghana, Nigeria, Uruguay and South Africa, providing together more than 67 per cent of all UN military and police personnel. Less than 5.8 per cent came from the 25-member European Union and 0.5 per cent from the United States.
Source
Until the end of 2005, 2,226 people from over 100 countries have been killed while serving on peacekeeping missions, 1,789 of them being soldiers. Many of those came from India (115), Canada (113) and Ghana (108). Thirty percent of the fatalities in the first 55 years of UN peacekeeping occurred in the years 1993-1995.
Source
Originally posted by imbalanced
I dont know if anyone mentioned this, but the isreal's were trying to get hal's. The hal's use un bunkers/towers as cheap ass cover to fire thier rockets.
Originally posted by Daedalus3
Yes maybe your countries are too busy supplying troops around the world to fulfill your agendas, our countries are committing citizens by the 1000s to maintain peace in lands
"... So the UN is worthless? Hec the US has a clown as a president;
Originally posted by zappafan1
Thanks, Missed Gear, as I was going to mention many of the same things; but go easy, as many do not like being confused by the facts.
I don't know what country he/she lives in, but it must be one which does not mind their soverignty being over-ruled by Agenda 21. It is indeed the NWO most are afraid of, but which is usually blamed on US interests.
REPLY: Thats odd.... some said the same thing about Reagan.
Originally posted by thermopolis
Lets face it, the UN has done nothing to stop terrorist from attacking Isreal. Perhaps Isreal did just kill a terrorist forward observer post.
Who cares the UN is useless...........there guys might have been the ones who raped all those little girls in the Congo. God just punished them. Way to go God!
Originally posted by Daedalus3
Yeah like he quoted a ton there didn't he?
Originally posted by Daedalus3
I'm still waiting on sources for those US troop commissions(25k somewhere?).
(August 15, 1992)
Deteriorating security prevents the UN mission from delivering food and supplies to the starving Somalis. Relief flights are looted upon landing, food convoys are hijacked and aid workers assaulted. The UN appeals to its members to provide military forces to assist the humanitarian operation.
(December 4, 1992)
..On December 5, the UN accepts his offer, and Bush orders 25,000 US troops into Somalia. On December 9th, the first US Marines land on the beach…
Source
By June, only 1,200 US combat soldiers remained in Somalia, with 3,000 support troops.
A- The political theory underlying "Sustainable Development" (one part of Agenda 21) is that man’s actions must be controlled and managed in accordance with the global ‘freedoms and rights’ as arranged in the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights. Article 29 Sec 3 of that document states; "In no event may the freedoms and rights be exercised contrary to the principles and policies of the United Nations.
So, no matter what rights and freedoms your country allows or guarantees, they will eventually be under UN control and not your sovereign laws. I'm not going to be drawn into getting off topic again.
Originally posted by Daedalus3
Yes maybe your countries are too busy supplying troops around the world to fulfill your agendas, our countries are committing citizens by the 1000s to maintain peace in lands
Originally posted by Daedalus3
From your source itself.
25000 aye? For how long; a few months? And since then? its been 14 years and no shortage of incidents.
Originally posted by Daedalus3
There's another issue of hesistance to give operational troop command to the UN since then.
The paper's staff include many well-known political conservatives. Major backers of the paper include Bruce Kovner, a billionaire financier who is also a backer of the conservative Manhattan Institute and American Enterprise Institute, and Roger Hertog, a trustee of the American Enterprise Institute. The newspaper's president and editor-in-chief is Seth Lipsky, formerly editor of The Forward, a Jewish-oriented weekly, and its managing editor is Ira Stoll.
The Sun was created to establish a pro-free market conservative broadsheet in New York City to rival the New York Times. One of the founders of the Sun, in fact, previously established and edited a website devoted to issuing daily critiques of the Times. Like the Washington Times, which was launched as a conservative rival to the Washington Post, the Sun is close to the Republican Party and conservative intellectuals. Especially on foreign policy issues the Sun's editorial opinions resemble those of the neoconservative The Weekly Standard magazine.
Originally posted by hogtie
I think that from an objective point of view, there has been a lot of evidence in this thread that the UN administration has some bias in this issue.
He said that the Secretary-General had condemned Hizbollah’s initial attack, and had called for the captured soldiers’ immediate and unconditional release. He had also called on all parties to exercise maximum restraint, and to respect their obligations under international humanitarian law, Mr. Guéhenno added.
Following those briefings, Lebanon’s representative said the Council was meeting “in the shadow of a widespread barbaric aggression waged by Israel at this very moment against my nation”. He warned that Israel’s destruction of vital bridges, roads and buildings, and the killing and maiming of hundreds of Lebanese civilians “will not resolve the problem, but will further complicate it”.
He said the Israeli Government had held Lebanon responsible for Hizbollah’s acts, even though the Lebanese Government had issued a statement on 12 July, declaring that it was not aware of the incident, that it did not take responsibility for it, and did not endorse what had happened. Israel’s subsequent aggression undermined Lebanon’s sovereignty and attempts to exercise its authority over its entire territory, he said, calling on the Council to take a clear decision to establish a ceasefire and to end the air and sea blockade imposed on Lebanon.
Israel’s’ representative said that Hizbollah terrorists continued to act with impunity in southern Lebanon. They had carried out their heinous acts and then retreated to the Hizbollah stronghold in southern Lebanon. Israel had to respond, as any sovereign Government would, to the assault that had been carried out against it on a scale that had not been seen in recent years. Israel’s actions had been in direct response to Hizbollah’s actions, he declared, stressing that Israel had targeted Hizbollah strongholds and infrastructure, not civilian targets.
Unfortunately, since Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000, the Lebanese Government had chosen to succumb to terror, rather than vanquish it, and to relinquish control of its country, rather than exercise it sovereignty. It had become a country held hostage and tormented by decades of sectarian strife, political assassinations, full-fledged civil war and Syrian control. He said the Council had a duty to help the Lebanese people achieve the goal of a free, prosperous and democratic Lebanon. It was up to the Council and the international community to see that the opportunity was seized, for the sake of generations to come.
Speaking in his national capacity, the representative of France, which holds the Council Presidency for the month, said that Israel had the right to defend its territory and its citizens when attacked –- and it had been attacked -- but he condemned the disproportionate nature of the response. The response threatened to erase Lebanese efforts to restore its economy and State authority throughout the territory, as well as to consolidate democracy.
Condemning the destruction of infrastructures, as well as the blockade, he said: “The Lebanese people must not be taken hostage.” Freedom of movement for Lebanese and foreigners must be restored immediately. There could be no military solution to the crisis, or to any conflict that had affected the Middle East for decades, he continued. Those conflicts fed on each other. He wholeheartedly supported the missions of the United Nations and the European Union to the region. He called upon parties to immediately end hostilities and called for respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all parties.