STICKY: Join Reject the U.N. Blog Roll

This post will remain on top so new readers can find the directions for joining the 'Reject The U.N.' Blog Roll...

1st things 1st, Get the Code Here and place the CODE in your sidebar, then email me with your information...

I will need the following:

1. The NAME of your Blog
2. The URL of your Blog
3. A brief description of your Blog
4. Yes, we DO check…
5. Please type Reject the U.N. in the subject line of the email


Click the Mail Box to submit
your information to TexasFred
Blog Logo and Roll MUST be displayed ON your blog for inclusion, if you have a 'back page' for Blog Rolls, that's great, I use a back page for most of the blog rolls I am on at the TexasFred's site too, but if you do use a 'back page', please have a prominent LINK displayed TO that page, if I can't find it, I can't list it...

UN sends top envoy to plead with Myanmar over aid

YANGON, Myanmar (AP) - A senior U.N. envoy went to Myanmar Sunday to urge its military junta to accept more international aid for cyclone survivors, as a British minister suggested the isolationist regime may be relenting.

John Holmes, the U.N. undersecretary-general for humanitarian affairs, was greeted by Deputy Foreign Minister Kyaw Thu at the start of a three-day trip that will include a tour of the Irrawaddy delta, the area most severely hit by Cyclone Nargis on May 2-3.

Holmes also will meet with high government leaders, said Daniel Baker, a senior U.N. official.

He did not elaborate but other officials have said Holmes' mission is to assess the needs of survivors and urge the isolationist junta to open its doors to more international aid before people begin dying from starvation and diseases.

Full Story Here:
UN sends top envoy to plead with Myanmar over aid

Burma has many people dying, and I mean right now dying and they already have tens of thousands dead because of the cyclone that hit them, and the U.N. is going to BEG the rulers of Burma to accept aid?? Beg them?? You would think it should be the other way around wouldn't you?? The leaders of Burma being the ones pleading for help for their people??

Sorry folks, my sympathies only extend so far, what's going on in Burma right now is wrong, I know it, you know it, most reasonable and sane people know it, but it's Burma, short of going in and taking over there's not too much we can do to change their lot in life, it's their leaders that are keeping massive aid from reaching the people, and yes, I know they seized leadership, but if the people of Burma can't re-take their nation, then they are going to have to suffer that which fate has in store for them...

Very similar to that which faces us here in the USA right now, a people can make a government do the right thing, they can hold their leaders feet to the fire, but 1st there has to be a willingness to do so, and an acceptance that you may die trying...

I would much prefer to die standing and fighting than lying on my back starving at the hands of a tyrannical dictatorship...

Cross Posted at: TexasFred's

U.N. Human Rights Council Kicks-Up It's Policy of Abuse

Cross-posted by Maggie at Maggie's Notebook

One of the most important issues of our time is America's membership in the United Nations.

If you take comfort in the existence of the U.N.'s Human Rights Council, or any confidence that world human rights are protected by this Council, then you are deaf, dumb and blind, or you hate freedom.

Lorn Gunter at the Calgary Herald has put together a very important piece about the U.N.'s Human Rights Council. Gunter states the central issue:

The fascinating aspect for me is how many of Freedom House's "worst of the worst list" ["worst" human rights record] have also been elected by the UN to be voting members on its human rights council.

The U.N.'s inhumanity to man, woman and child goes on:

On May 21, 15 of the 47 UNHRC seats will come up for election or re-election. Along with UN Watch, an organization that analyzes UN activities, statements and programs, Freedom House has declared that five of the 15 candidate countries -- Bahrain, Gabon, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Zambia -- are entirely unfit for membership because of their rights records. All but one of them (Bahrain) is already a member of the commission. This goes to show how useless the UN is at protecting human rights.

Please read this important piece at The Calgary Herald

Related Reading:
UN Weakens Freedom of Expression to Coddle Islam
United Nations Seals the Condemnation of Israel
UN Watch: Up Against UN Human Rights



Technorati Tags: U.N., U.N. Human Rights Council, Human Rights

U.N. to Investigate Voters Against Obama

Cross-posted by Maggie at Maggie's Notebook

U.N. racism investigator to visit the U.S. May 19-June 6, 2008.

The "investigator," of course, is the representative of a predominantly Muslim country, Senegal (h/t to No Sheeples Here).

This piece by Stephanie Nebehay at Reuters, reports:

"The special rapporteur will...gather first-hand information on issues related to racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance," a U.N. statement said on Friday.

Nebehay appears to offer her own opinion (unless quotation marks have gone astray):

Race has become a central issue in the U.S. election cycle because Sen. Barack Obama, the frontrunner in the battle for the Democratic nomination battle, stands to become the country's first African American president.

The U.N. Special Rapporteur has also "investigated" America's bias against Islam, our courts' application of the death penalty, (which, of course, is also biased, according to the U.N.), and our "hate" crimes (display of hangman's nooses).



Technorati Tags: U.N., U.N. Human Rights Council, Human Rights, U.N., 2008 Elections, Barack Obama

Former UN translator gets year for visa fraud

Former UN translator gets year for visa fraud

Former UN translator gets year for visa fraud

By DAVID B. CARUSO
Associated Press Writer


NEW YORK (AP) -- A United Nations translator was sentenced to a year in prison for using U.N. stationery and fraudulent documents to smuggle people into the United States from Uzbekistan.

Vyacheslav Manokhin, a Russian national who had been living in Greenwich, Conn., pleaded guilty in March to one count of conspiring to obtain visas by means of false statements.

The visas were supposed to be for foreigners attending U.N. conferences in the U.S., but either the gatherings never took place or the visa holders didn't attend them, prosecutors said. Manokhin forged invitations to the conferences from a nonexistent U.N. official.

He apologized at his sentencing Thursday, though he said he didn't initially think what he did was illegal.

"I learned my lesson. I paid a huge price for this," he said.

Snip

Quote: "I learned my lesson. I paid a huge price for
this," he said.

Thus spake the man who got caught. I doubt he's learned anything, but that he must be more careful the next time so he won't get caught.

John Bolton Speaks About The U.N.

I subscribe to Imprimus, a publication of Hillsdale College (an institution that refuses federal funding!), and use the publication to enlighten me on any number of Conservative issues (Imprimus, by the way, is free and can be acquired by an internet subscription).

In the April, 2008 issue, John Bolton, former US Ambassador to the United Nations (and one of the finest appointments made during the Bush Administation -- though later, essentially, abandoned by Bush), writes an article entitled "America's Interests and the U.N." In this article, he makes a rather surprising statement:

The fact is that the U.N., at times, can be an effective instrument of American foreign policy. Of course, to say this is heretical to the real devotees of the U.N., for whom the U.N. shouldn't be an instrument of anyone's foreign policy. But the fact is that everybody who participates in the U.N.—all of the 192 member governments, all of the non-governmental organizations, and all of the civil servants in the U.N. secretariats—try to advance their own interests. The only entity that gets criticized for that, needless to say, is the U.S. government.

(Please see, for reference, the entire Imprimus article here -- adapted from a speech Bolton gave at a seminar in Phoenix, AZ, on 02-11-08.)

Bolton then next makes a remarkably importantly point of which many Conservatives are inherently aware but, naturally, bears constant repetition -- and can be equally applicable, unfortunately, to our United States Supreme Court:

Norming” is the idea that the U.S. should base its decisions on some kind of international consensus, rather than making its decisions as a constitutional democracy. It is a way in which the Europeans and their left-wing friends here and elsewhere try and constrain U.S. sovereignty. You can see how disastrous this would be just by looking at the geography of the floor of the U.N. General Assembly. Look out at the representatives of the 192 governments spread out over the floor and you wonder where the U.S. even is. Well, we’re there somewhere. But the fact is that we’re sitting with a majority of countries that have no traditions or understanding of liberty. The argument of the advocates of “norming” is “one nation, one vote.” That sounds very democratic: Who could object to that? But its result would be very anti-democratic. As an illustration of this, a friend of mine once went to a conference on international law and heard a professor from a major European university say, “The problem with the United States is its devotion to its Constitution over international norms.”

Please, let me re-emphasize that last sentence and perhaps emblazon it into your Mental Wheelhouse:

THE PROBLEM WITH THE UNITED STATES IS ITS DEVOTION TO ITS CONSTITUTION OVER INTERNATIONAL NORMS.

And trust me when I tell you that this philosophy is the overarching philosophy of the Leftists, Socialists, Anarchists (and, apparently, the California Supreme Court) that make up the commanding portion (the George Soros/MoveOn.org portion) of the current Demorat Party.

Once again, John Bolton cuts to the core of the U.N./Globalist issue.

In summation, Mr. Bolton said:

There is one point of view here in America—a view given expression during the 2004 presidential campaign by Senator Kerry—holding that American foreign policy should meet some kind of “global test.” By this way of thinking, America needs, in effect, to demonstrate the legitimacy of its foreign policy decisions by getting the approval of the U.N. Security Council or some other international body. The same suggestion will no doubt surface again this year, in the run-up to the November election. In the 21st century, then—just as in the 20th—the political decisions we make here in the U.S. will be much more significant than those made at the U.N.

We are diminished by the loss of John Bolton at the UN -- the current rep, Zalmay Khalilzad, is the highest-ranking Afghan American and Muslim in the Administration of U.S. President George W. Bush.[1] Khalilzad's previous assignments in the Administration include U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq.

And, clearly, Khalilzad is an appeasement -- a "showing-our-pasty-white-vulnerable-PC-belly" appointment.

BZ

Sucked in by 'Sustainable development'

Whenever you hear the word "Sustainable", think U.N. and loss of freedom. Like many catch phrases, the "sustainability" word has found its way into pop culture, politics and policy when more often than not, people have no idea what the word means or connotes.

Who could ever be against "sustainability?" The term has caught on just like "going green" has caught on. They are "feel good" concepts that group thinkers don't "feel" the need to investigate.

Henry Lamb has always been one to investigate, especially when indications point to the U.N. as the source of these matters. Who says the U.N. is irrelevant? Here's a portion of his WND piece:

Add the word "sustainable" to almost any project, and immediately the project becomes politically correct and therefore acceptable. The surge of "sustainability" or "sustainable development" in recent years is phenomenal. Americans have been awed by the sales pitch and have bought into the idea of "sustainable development" – without looking under the hood to examine the engine. Nor have Americans realized that "sustainable development" is a self-directing vehicle that is transforming a once-free society into "sustainable communities" where nearly every human activity requires the permission of government.

The principle of private property rights is an early victim. Private property rights cannot exist in a sustainable community. In a sustainable community, a property owner's rights are limited to whatever government decides is appropriate.

Freedom rests upon the principle of private property ownership. Ownership of property is the right to use the property and to exclude others from it. When the right to use one's property is restricted or diminished by government, so then is the owner's freedom diminished.

The concept of private property is incompatible with the concept of sustainable development. Sustainable development is, by definition, a function of government that uses the force of law to balance resource use (the environment) with economic development to achieve social equity.

He lays out the plan, signed by the Clinton administration, in the remainder of his column. Be sure to read it!

Americans Deserve to Consume More Resources

Maybe if Our National Anthem
was "America the Beautiful..."
Photo by: TW Collins

In nature, the entity that supplies most of the benefit to a community gets most of the resources. Let's take the example of the Queen Bee. A queen develops from the same egg or larva as any other bee; the only difference is that she gets vastly greater amounts of royal jelly than the average worker honey bee. Because of this the queen develops into a sexually mature female.

It is the Queen Bee that ensures the survival of the hive and despite the communist misconception that it is the workers that contribute the most to society, nature itself makes the value judgment by allocating the greatest resources to whom she considers the most important. Of course, worker bees never complain that her Highness is only one bee yet consumes a greater proportion of resources than the rest of the hive. They know she deserves it.

Since I was a child I have heard, read, and seen reports about how much of the world's resources we few greedy Americans consume. Here's one:

Solar Energy International, Energy Consumption

• Though accounting for only 5 percent of the world's population, Americans consume 26 percent of the world's energy.


• In 1997, U.S. residents consumed an average of 12,133 kilowatt-hours of electricity each, almost nine times greater than the average for the rest of the world.


• America uses about 15 times more energy per person than does the typical developing country.

Here are some interesting but meaningless facts:

Mindfully.org, Consumption by the United States

On average, one American consumes as much energy as

• 2 Japanese


• 6 Mexicans


• 13 Chinese


• 31 Indians


• 128 Bangladeshis


• 307 Tanzanians


• 370 Ethiopians

So Average Joe American uses as much energy as 370 Ethiopians, so what? What the hell do Ethiopians contribute to the world? Nothing but more Ethiopians who consume the Earth's oxygen, beg us for money, food, and medicine and then bad mouth us for helping them.

We deserve to use more resources. It is Americans who have contributed the most in medicine, physics, and chemistry (38% of all Nobel Prizes); we are the most generous people on this planet; when there is a disaster somewhere the world expects us to help.

If you read the previous article posted today at Reject The UN, Who is Selfish? by An Ol’ Broad’s Ramblings you would learn:

The overwhelming bulk of the burden in feeding the world’s starving poor remains with the United States and a small group of other predominately Western nations, a situation that the WFP [United Nations World Food Program] has done little so far to change, even as it has asked for another $775 million in donations to ease the crisis.
...
Donor listings on WFP’s website show that this year, as in every year since 1999, the U.S. is far and away the biggest aid provider to WFP. Since 2001, U.S. donations to the food agency have averaged more than $1.16 billion annually — or more than five times as much as the next biggest donor, the European Commission.

OPEC Countries with gazillions of dollars of oil revenues donated diddlysquat. Perhaps that's why Arabs introduced the concept of zero (from the Hindus) to the Western world: so they could give zip in humanitarian aid.

We contribute more to the world than we get back; if the world was fair we'd be consuming 75% of the world's resources and no one dare complain. When the rest of the world bitches about it it's because they are ungrateful wretches - without America the world would still be living in 1910 (although it should be noted that Muslim countries still live in 632 A.D.).

Related:

SFGate, 9 May 2008, UN to resume food aid flights to Myanmar

The United Nations says it will resume food aid flights to Myanmar on Saturday.

It also forecasts heavy rains next week in the country already devastated by a cyclone.

The U.N. food program says it will send two planes with goods to feed hungry survivors. The World Food Program had suspended help after Myanmar's junta seized U.N. aid shipments headed for hungry and homeless survivors.

I wonder if the United Nations Human Rights Council will officially condemn the junta or will it blame Israel for somehow causing the natural disaster?

Planck's Constant: For Gods Sake - Stop Helping Africa

Planck's Constant: Africa better off under Colonial Rule

Cross-Posted at Planck's Constant

Who is Selfish?

A Gulf in Giving: Oil-Rich States Starve the World Food Program

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and his top lieutenants on Monday are convening the first meeting of the U.N.’s Task Force on the Global Food Crisis. Ban says it will “study the root causes of the crisis,” and propose solutions for “coordinated global action” at a summit of world leaders in June.

Root causes? Well, that pesky fuel based on food sources might be a BIG cause. Not the only one, but a big one.

WFP internal documents show that the major oil producing nations of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) gives almost nothing to the food organization, even as skyrocketing oil prices and swollen oil revenues contribute to the very crisis that the U.N. claims could soon add 100 million more people to the world’s starving masses.

Well, considering the biggest oil producing nations are either Muslim or dictatorships, it's not surprising they don't give squat.

The overwhelming bulk of the burden in feeding the world’s starving poor remains with the United States and a small group of other predominately Western nations, a situation that the WFP has done little so far to change, even as it has asked for another $775 million in donations to ease the crisis.

Yep, the EVIL great "Satan" is the one they depend on for survival, yet hate. Well, ya know what? I'm of the mind that we need to pull all support from the UN. Do I want children to starve? Of course not. I don't want mine too either, and at this point in time, I think the US needs to be reminded "charity begins at home".

Donor listings on WFP’s website show that this year, as in every year since 1999, the U.S. is far and away the biggest aid provider to WFP. Since 2001, U.S. donations to the food agency have averaged more than $1.16 billion annually — or more than five times as much as the next biggest donor, the European Commission.

If I ever hear the lefties whining again about how we, as a nation, don't do enough, I'm going to slap the dog fire out of them!

This year, the U.S. had contributed $362.7 million to WFP just through May 4, according to the website. That figure does not include another $250 million above the planned yearly contribution that was promised by President George W. Bush in the wake of WFP’s April warning that a “silent tsunami” of rising food costs would add dramatically to the world population living in hunger. Nor does it include another $770 million in food aid that President Bush has asked Congress to provide as soon as possible.

No, NO, and HELL NO! Not another dime!

On the other hand, Saudi Arabia, with oil revenues last year of $164 billion, does not even appear on the website donor list for 2008.

Ok, putting anger aside, do the Saudis give directly to those in need? Isn't there a 'tenet of Islam' that says something about giving? Well, I don't take their "tenets" too seriously, since they've been proven false day after day.

And while Canada, Australia, Western Europe and Japan have hastened to pony up an additional $260 million in aid since WFP’s latest appeal, the world organization told FOX News, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), the international oil cartel, tossed in a grand total of $1.5 million in addition to the $50,000 it had previously donated.

The OPEC total amounts to roughly one minute and 10 seconds worth of the organization’s estimated $674 billion in annual oil revenues in 2007 — revenues that will be vastly exceeded in 2008 with the continuing spiral in world oil prices.

Well, I'd say that breaks it down pretty well. In other words, about the time it takes to blow your nose real good!

Cross posted at An Ol' Broad's Ramblings

UN halts aid to Myanmar after junta seizes supplies

YANGON, Myanmar (AP) - Myanmar's junta seized U.N. aid shipments headed for hungry and homeless survivors of last week's devastating cyclone, prompting the world body to suspend further help on Friday.

The U.N. said the aid included 38 tons of high-energy biscuits and arrived in Myanmar on Friday on two flights from Bangladesh and the United Arab Emirates.

"All of the food aid and equipment that we managed to get in has been confiscated," U.N. World Food Program spokesman Paul Risley said. "For the time being, we have no choice but to end further efforts to bring critical needed food aid into Myanmar at this time."

Myanmar's government acknowledged taking control of the shipments and said it plans to distribute the aid "without delay by its own labor to the affected areas."

It is a rare occasion that I find myself defending the U.N. in any way, this is one of them...

Disasters such as the cyclone that hit Burma are the types of relief efforts the U.N. needs to be engaged in, it is right up their alley of expertise and they got supplies started down the chain and to Burma in record time, even if they knew what the reaction of the Burmese authorities would be, and I am sure they had at least some idea going in given the corrupt nature of the military junta that rules Burma now...

In a statement said in a statement e-mailed to The Associated Press, government spokesman Ye Htut said the junta had "clearly stated" what it would do and denied the action amounted to a seizure.

"I would like to know which person or organization (made these) these baseless accusations," he said.

Well now, aren't you the dumbass?? It was the United Nations, did you miss that part?? Are you so paranoid that you can't allow the U.N. to actually come into your piss-hole of a nation and make an effort to keep even more of your people from dying or are you just too afraid that someone might discover a few ugly truths??

"Please, this food is going to people who need it very much. You and I, we have the same interests," Banbury said. Those victims - those 1 million or more people - who need this assistance are not part of a political dialogue. They need this humanitarian assistance. Please release it."

When Katrina ripped hell out of New Orleans it was 'The Chocolate People' that were shooting at the police and helicopters, keeping aid from getting through, and in some cases causing even more death and pain to befall their own people, this time it's an oppressive government...

I have no pity for those that won't help themselves, and I have even less sympathy for those that will live under a government such as the one in Burma, freedom isn't free and until these people cast off their chains, this is all they can expect from the government of Burma...

The junta said in a statement Friday it was grateful to the international community for its assistance - which has included 11 chartered planes loaded with aid supplies - but the best way to help was just to send in material rather than personnel.

And that my friends is all the citation my above remarks need, the military junta does NOT want the world to know it's dark and dirty secrets...

Our government cries over human rights in oppressed nations?? We went to war in Iraq basically over human rights?? What kind of violations do you suppose this junta is hiding?? And many do NOT want to know...

Full Story Here:
UN halts aid to Myanmar after junta seizes supplies

Cross Posted @ TexasFred's