PDA

View Full Version : UN Deflects Its Oil-For-Food Scandal To “Stingy” US



thedrifter
12-29-04, 06:58 AM
UN Deflects Its Oil-For-Food Scandal To “Stingy” US

December 28, 2004


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Sher Zieve

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just when I thought the UN couldn’t become any more deceitful, UN Undersecretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Jan Egeland has said that the US’ pledge of a starting point of $15M is “stingy”. Stingy? The United States of America provides more assistance to the world than all other countries combined! Egeland even had the gall to suggest that taxes on US citizens should be raised! It would appear that the recent tragic earthquake and attendant Tsunami has boded well for the UN. Most certainly, it is using this tragedy to divert attention from its own members’ corrupt involvement in the Iraqi oil-for-food scandal. Do you suppose Egeland and his UN colleagues believe that, with this recent horrific calamity, the world will now forget about their own Iraqi-involved corruptions? It would certainly seem so. Could the UN, also, be looking toward this most recent catastrophe as another source of incoming relief funds that they can utilize to covertly “skim their share off the top”? Top UN officials (including Secretary General Kofi Annan and his son) have, already, been implicated as very probably having been involved in taking kickbacks from Dictator Sadam Hussein. Are these soon-to-be-named officials, perhaps, planning to use US taxpayer funded relief dollars, dedicated to this latest tragedy, as “golden parachutes” for their looming departures?

The UN has not only become an exceedingly crooked organization but, through its mouthpiece Egeland, has decided to raise our taxes…on its own. The impudence of these latest UN statements is ludicrous enough. But, considering what is behind them (the UN’s attempt to cover-up its own sleazy behaviors and get some additional “bucks” in the bargain) is unconscionable. Why do all of the relief funds have to go through the UN, anyway? Is there any way we can bypass this fraudulent organization and go directly to the sources? We already know that much of it will “mystifyingly” disappear (into the pockets of UN officials?) before the rest is forwarded to the people and countries who need it. Can’t we cut out the “UN as middle man” scenario? After the uncovering of its Iraq scandal, we already know what the UN will execute; to its own selfish ends. And, the now almost age-old question still remains. Why don’t we send the UN packing from the shores of the USA? Keeping our enemies close is having the opposite effect for which it was intended. Under the ‘protection’ of the US, the UN is robbing us and much of the world blind.
Sher Zieve


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sher Zieve is a conservative political commentator who firmly believes that if Leftists ran the country (left to their own devices), it would be the end of the United States as a sovereign nation. Sher’s articles can be found on Google, MSN Newsbot, US-News.Net, Useless Knowledge and other news sites. Ms. Zieve welcomes you comments and can be reached at: earthseed@iwon.com.

Ellie

yellowwing
12-29-04, 07:15 AM
Wasn't there talk about Bill Clinton being UN Secretary General? He would restore the UN's dignity and reputation!

TRLewis
12-29-04, 07:50 AM
^ HAAHAHA

You know I'm not sure which way it would go, but it would sure be funny. Will Monica be his secretary?

Toby M
12-29-04, 09:49 AM
TRLewis, that would be "under-secretary", would it?

yellowwing
12-29-04, 11:34 AM
But would Hillary be looking over his shoulder this time? (I mean at the UN, not with Monica!)

Ed Palmer
12-29-04, 02:17 PM
THIS IS INTERESTING;


US rebel joins Saddam legal team
Former US attorney general Ramsey Clark has joined the team of Jordan-based lawyers defending Saddam Hussein.
Mr Clark - who held office in the 1960s under President Lyndon Johnson - said his principal concern was protecting the rights of the former Iraqi leader.

Saddam Hussein this month saw a lawyer for the first time since his capture.

Left-wing activist Mr Clark described the special tribunal established to try members of the former regime as a creation of the US military occupation.

He said it had no authority in law as a criminal court.

Mr Clark is joining a panel of about 20 prominent Arab and non-Arab lawyers who have volunteered to defend the former Iraqi leader.

He is an outspoken critic of American foreign policy on Iraq and visited Saddam Hussein in Baghdad in February 2003 just before the US-led invasion.

After leaving office in 1969, he became active in the anti-Vietnam War movement. More recently, he has offered legal advice to numerous figures at odds with the US government including former Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosevic.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/middle_east/4132505.stm

Published: 2004/12/29 13:25:19 GMT