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.

 

Kofi Annan

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 07:19 PM
link   
This has been going on for many years. He is useless,corrupt as they come.
He alone,has destroyed the UN. Yet the braying ass will criticize the US and Israel.He is the war criminal.




posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 11:07 PM
link   
Thank goodness he is now gone as leader of the UN. He was a useless man, a supporter of terrorist leaders around the world. Good riddance!



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 02:33 AM
link   
I don't think the new guy will be much better. He's already been busy appointing Annan's cronies to iimportant oversight positions.



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 10:19 AM
link   
I concur. The link below has some pretty shocking evidence against him too, along with many other UN representatives, in regard to their ignoring of the Rwandan Genocide

www.corpwatch.org...



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Subcomandante
I concur. The link below has some pretty shocking evidence against him too, along with many other UN representatives, in regard to their ignoring of the Rwandan Genocide

www.corpwatch.org...


The US as part of the UNSC has constantly vetoed UN involvment in Rwanda since 1993.
A peacekeeping mission was put in but the US wanted it out again and it was in 1993..
The same applies to the Sudan..It has been the US vetoing invasion
There has been been international troops at the borders of Rwanda and Sudan for years and years..France and Belgium in Chad with Sudan at the moment.
France has talked about going in unilaterally and breaking International Law..Should they??
The US has vetoed more UN missions than any other country..Other UN dept are in Rwanda and Sudan feeding and providing humanitarion aid to the people..
Just because oil is more important than human life to the US.



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 12:15 PM
link   
Some very good points, Murphs.

The SG of the UN has very little power, he just heads up the organisation and just generally...oragnises things.. It's the SC that holds the power, so any decisions that have or have not been made rest solely on the SC and it's 5 Permament members.



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
Some very good points, Murphs.

The SG of the UN has very little power, he just heads up the organisation and just generally...oragnises things.. It's the SC that holds the power, so any decisions that have or have not been made rest solely on the SC and it's 5 Permament members.


Awww shucks..Thanks.
Everyone (some more than others) need a scapegoat, though if they stopped playing ostrich and took their heads out of the sand, it would hit up them up the gob and no scapegoat would be needed.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Murphs
The US as part of the UNSC has constantly vetoed UN involvment in Rwanda since 1993.
A peacekeeping mission was put in but the US wanted it out again and it was in 1993..

That is utter bullcrap, and you know it. Prove it up with sources and a chronology or retract it.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky

Originally posted by Murphs
The US as part of the UNSC has constantly vetoed UN involvment in Rwanda since 1993.
A peacekeeping mission was put in but the US wanted it out again and it was in 1993..

That is utter bullcrap, and you know it. Prove it up with sources and a chronology or retract it.


OK..But it is the weekend, so give me time and I will prove it..



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 12:30 PM
link   



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Murphs

Originally posted by jsobecky

Originally posted by Murphs
The US as part of the UNSC has constantly vetoed UN involvment in Rwanda since 1993.
A peacekeeping mission was put in but the US wanted it out again and it was in 1993..

That is utter bullcrap, and you know it. Prove it up with sources and a chronology or retract it.


OK..But it is the weekend, so give me time and I will prove it..

Hand typed from an article I have by William Ferra

On April 6, 1994, Rwandan President Juvenal Habyarimana’s personal plane, a gift from French president Francois Mitterand, was shot down as it returned to Rwanda, killing Habyarimana, Burundian president Cyprien Ntarymira, and members of their entourages. The two presidents were returning from Tanzania, where they’d met with regional leaders concerning events in Burundi. Habyarimana himself was pressed to implement the power-sharing Arusha Accord his government had concluded with the rebel Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) in August 1993, which capped three years of war, cease-fires and negotiations. To do so, however, would mean the effective end of his 20-year, one-party rule over Rwandan politics and society. Extremists in the military and government bitterly opposed the accord; they are the likely culprits in his assassination. Within an hour of the plane crash, the Presidential Guard, elements of the Rwandan armed forces (FAR) and extremist militia (Interahamwe and Impuzamugambi) set up roadblocks and barricades and began the organized slaughter, starting in the capital Kigali, of nearly one million Rwandans in 100 days time. Their first targets were those most likely to resist the plan of genocide: the opposition Prime Minister, the president of the constitutional court, priests, leaders of the Liberal Party and Social Democratic Party, the Information Minister, and tellingly, the negotiator of the Arusha Accord. Those who hesitated to join the campaign, such as the governor of a southern province, were quickly removed from positions of influence or killed. As a US intelligence analyst noted in late April,

“The plan appears to have been to wipe out any RPF ally or potential ally, and thus raise the costs and limit the possibility of an RPF/Tutsi takeover… No end to the unprecedented bloodshed is yet in sight.” (US Department of State, Bureau of Intelligence and Research, Intelligence Assessment, "Roots of the Violence in Rwanda”, April 29, 1994)

As the killing intensified, the international community deserted Rwanda. Western nations landed troops in Rwanda or Burundi in the first week to evacuate their citizens, did so, and left. The UN mission (UNAMIR), created in October 1993 to keep the peace and assist the governmental transition in Rwanda, sought to intervene between the killers and civilians. It also tried to mediate between the RPF and the Rwandan army after the RPF struck from Rwanda to protect Tutsi and rescue their battalion encamped in Kigali as part of the Accord. On April 21, 1994, the United Nations Security Council, at the behest of the United States—which had no troops in Rwanda—Belgium, and others, voted to withdraw all but a remnant of UNAMIR. The Security Council took this vote and others concerning Rwanda even as the representative of the genocidal regime sat amongst them as a non-permanent member. After human rights, media, and diplomatic reports of the carnage mounted, the UN met and debated and finally arrived at a compromise response on May 16. UNAMIR II, as it was to be known, would be a more robust force of 5,500 troops. Again, however, the world failed to deliver, as the full complement of troops and materiel would not arrive in Rwanda until months after the genocide ended. Faced with the UN’s delay, but also concerned about its image as a former patron and arms supplier of the Habyarimana regime, France announced on June 15 that it would intervene to stop the killing. In a June 22 vote, the UN Security Council gave its blessing to this intervention; that same day, French troops entered Rwanda from Zaire. While intending a wider intervention, confronted with the RPF’s rapid advance across Rwanda, the French set up a “humanitarian zone” in the southwest corner of Rwanda. Their intervention succeeded in saving tens of thousands of Tutsi lives; it also facilitated the safe exit of many of the genocide’s plotters, who were allies of the French.


On July 4, the RPF took the capital, Kigali; two weeks later, it announced a new government comprised of RPF leaders and ministers previously selected for the transition government called for in the Arusha Accord. With the RPF’s takeover, and with the encouragement of extremist radio, Rwandans implicated in the slaughter, their relatives and those who feared the arrival of the RPF, fled to neighboring countries. In the end, the extremists killed nearly one million Rwandans, approximately one-tenth of the population. Were it not for the RPF’s military prowess, the genocide would have continued.

Despite overwhelming evidence of genocide and knowledge as to its perpetrators, United States officials decided against taking a leading role in confronting the slaughter in Rwanda. Rather, US officials confined themselves to public statements, diplomatic demarches, initiatives for a ceasefire, and attempts to contact both the interim government perpetrating the killing and the RPF. [red]The US did use its influence, however, at the United Nations, but did so to discourage a robust UN response (Document 4 and Document 13).[/red] In late July, however, with the evidence of genocide littering the ground in Rwanda, the US did launch substantial operations—again, in a supporting role—to assist humanitarian relief efforts for those displaced by the genocide.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 01:00 PM
link   
Made an arse of posting the above::

It was by William Ferraggiaro and is from the National security Archive..

Advice..Don't post with a child hanging from you..
Will post more over the weekend..



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 01:11 PM
link   
The Un was dead in the pan in the late 90's and begining of 2000

But it was the USA invading IRAQ that totally destroyed it.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
This do anything for you JSO?

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org...

www.informationclearinghouse.info...

www.zmag.org...

Nice links, but no, they have no relevance to the topic at hand.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 01:34 PM
link   
Here is the real catalyst for the genocide in Rwanda. It is a fairly thorough chronology of the events:



8. After 10 Belgian UN soldiers were killed by Rwandan government troops the day after the Rwandan President's plane was shot down, Belgium withdrew all its troops from the UN mission. So that Belgium would not alone be blamed for scuttling UNAMIR, its government then strenuously lobbied the UN to disband the mission in its entirety.

www.africafocus.org...



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 02:00 PM
link   
Might I just add that the UN is completely worthless. Therefore, in consequence of this, by technical default, all members and persons and businesses associated with the UN are in fact not worth a dime. The countries who may choose to participate are merely lending an about face gesture. Put it this way, Switzerland found the UN so important that it become a member of said organization in 50 years after its foundation in 2004.

Annan is not American. He is a rich man from some piss poor backwards former French African colony. His interest simply lie outside of the realm of the US's interest. You cannot blame him, but surely you can hate him...for not wanting to make the big bucks and follow the US's interest.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
Here is the real catalyst for the genocide in Rwanda. It is a fairly thorough chronology of the events:



8. After 10 Belgian UN soldiers were killed by Rwandan government troops the day after the Rwandan President's plane was shot down, Belgium withdrew all its troops from the UN mission. So that Belgium would not alone be blamed for scuttling UNAMIR, its government then strenuously lobbied the UN to disband the mission in its entirety.

www.africafocus.org...


Ahh, using that logic then, one could argue (successfully) that the US is responsible for the collapse of the UN in Somalia and the subsequent decade of death and destruction?

But, i am sure you will somehow come up with a reason why that example doesn't count.....



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason

Originally posted by jsobecky
Here is the real catalyst for the genocide in Rwanda. It is a fairly thorough chronology of the events:



8. After 10 Belgian UN soldiers were killed by Rwandan government troops the day after the Rwandan President's plane was shot down, Belgium withdrew all its troops from the UN mission. So that Belgium would not alone be blamed for scuttling UNAMIR, its government then strenuously lobbied the UN to disband the mission in its entirety.

www.africafocus.org...


Ahh, using that logic then, one could argue (successfully) that the US is responsible for the collapse of the UN in Somalia and the subsequent decade of death and destruction?

But, i am sure you will somehow come up with a reason why that example doesn't count.....

LOL...Stu. Some on this forum might think we agree..Agreeing on something is an awful crime!!!



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
The Un was dead in the pan in the late 90's and begining of 2000

But it was the USA invading IRAQ that totally destroyed it.


*all cuddley*#

Just love you..You are so cute. These ideas of no UN and NO, NATO or UN involvement is bizarre..
But the US did invade Iraq!?!?!



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 06:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Murphs
LOL...Stu. Some on this forum might think we agree..Agreeing on something is an awful crime!!!


Stranger things have happened.... I did once reach agreement with Seekerof, who can be notoriously right-wing and very argumentative...




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join