Deputy Secretary-General Mark Malloch Brown of the U.N. said that FOX News and Rush Limbaugh are keeping us ignorant of the good the U.N. does. This makes me very angry at FOX News and Rush Limbaugh because I can’t even imagine the U.N. ever doing anything useful and am quite curious at what the U.N. could have possibly done. Did, in the midst of their bumbling, the U.N. inadvertently rescue a cat from a tree or something?
The U.N. does do some good. It provides a safe haven for far leftie Socialists and other anti-Americans. Now if we could only arrange to bomb it while they are all in session…
In reality, the U.N. believes it is a world-governing organization despite its own charter. Actually the U.S. itself is a world governing agency-it is called “statehood” and it does not require U.N. interference.
can’t be. I’m pretty sure the UN doesn’t have a fire department.
He probably considers U.N. “peacekeepers” forcing young girls into prostitution and/or raping them to be “sex education.”
The UN are at best ineffectual and at worst they make bad situations worse.
Good things they’ve done? Rwanda? Darfur? C’mon, people…
I dunno. Maybe one peacekeeper, like… poured water on a burning refugee once. I guess that counts.
The UN does provide lots of material for humor.
HOW DARE FOX AND RUSH TELL THE TRUTH! THE NERVE OF THOSE GUYS! I’M GONNA GO TELL RUSH TO STOP TELLING IT LIKE IT IS SO WE CAN ALL BE BRAINWASHED BY THE LIBERALS LIKE WE’RE SUPPOSED TO BE!
FrankJ.
Well, there is the UN study that, for the first time, proved the dangers of female genital mutilation for childbirth.
There is the fact that United Nations agencies are helping victims of the earthquake in Indonesia by feeding 100,000 people for the next two months, and instituting an emergency immunization campaign for 1.3 million others.
There is the fact that the UN preformed the largest humanitarian helicopter operation ever when it successfully transported nearly 30,000 tons of aid supplies, tens of thousands of aid workers and other passengers to Pakistani-administered parts of Kashmir after they were struck by a devastating earthquake.
And of course, there are the millions of children that UNICEF has helped to feed and educate since its founding after WW II.
Of course, maybe you don’t think helping earthquake victims, preventing women and babies from dying in childbirth, and providing food and education to poor hungry children are “good” things.
Do you?
Peace,
Monkey Faced Liberal
dear mfl,
“tsst”
MFL,
I didn’t know the UN had so many helicopters. I think you mistake the UN for the U.S. military and other militaries that participated in “the largest humanitarian helicopter operation ever..” Indonesia, ditto. The tsunami relief?–not the UN that much but rather the Indian, Japanese, Australian and the the American navies. USAID, which I think is part of the State Department, did more in a few hours during the weeks and months following the tsunami than the UN did during the following year. Plus the USAID officials didn’t live in the suite rooms and run up the room service bill. As for UNICEF, fine. As for starving and privation. Arguable, in enabling fascists as it does the UN is in the red here too. Oil for Food anyone? End the UN. Keep UNICEF.
UNICEF is great – except for the children it encourages to be aborted, of course. But then, the more dead babies the better as far as liberals are concerned.
I’ve been thinking…and my brain friggin’ hurts y’all.
Anyhoo – shouldn’t conservatives encourage abortions? After a while, Liberals will “Survival of the Fittest” themselves out of existence.
Maybe that was a little too harsh. Oh well. Send complaints to screwyou@kissmybutt.com.
Bob:
First, note that you did not address my first point (on female genital mutilation) and you agreed with my fourth point (on the good that UNICEF has done).
My second point on the relief effort in Indonesia, which you clearly did not read very carefully, relates not to the well-covered tsunami of more than a year ago, but to the much less publicized earthquake in May. The UN World Food Programme is delivering the food, and the UN World Health Organization is dealing with the immunizations.
As to my third point? Of the 24 helicopters used by the UN in the Pakistan relief effort, 8 came from United States and NATO forces. I believe the rest were leased. (If you can find evidence to the contrary, please let me know)
Of course, the UN also coordinated and paid for the people and food that went to the victims.
To Be Continued…
Monkey Faced Liberal
As for proving female genital mutilation was harmful, as in shoving a knife in a ten-year-old’s cha cha while she’s held down by an aunt is harmful, isn’t that like proving the sky is blue?
What was the budget for that, I wonder?
Bob:
Given all this, and the fact that the UN’s budget is around 4 Billion dollars (which is equal to around 25% of the total direct agriculture payments made by the U.S. in 2006) I think we might be getting a bargin.
Is the UN corrupt and inefficient? Yes. But then, so is the U.S. government, and so are most large bureaucratic organizations.
Could the UN be improved? I am sure it could be. But again, the same could be said for the U.S. government, and most other large bureaucratic organizations.
However, neither of the questions above were the question that FrankJ asked in his post. The post where he flippantly and ignorantly stated, in another vain attempt at humor, that “I can’t even imagine the U.N. ever doing anything useful” and that all the UN has ever done is “inadvertently rescue a cat from a tree or something.”
He asked if the UN had ever done anything “useful” and implied that they had not done anything “good.”
So again, I ask FrankJ.
Do you think helping earthquake victims, preventing women and babies from dying in childbirth, and providing food and education to poor hungry children are “good” things?
Peace,
Monkey Faced Liberal
Kent:
You are either joking about female genital mutilation, an idiot, or both.
I am going with both.
The study found that women who had been mutilated were more like to die in childbirth, and their children were more likely to die in childbirth.
There was no hard statistical evidence of this before. Now there is. And hopefully this evidence will persuade more communities to abandon this horrible practice.
Peace
Monkey Faced Liberal
P.S. I do not believe in putting “limits” on humor. But I do think that if you are going to joke about something horrible, you should try to be funny.
Calling female genitalia a “Cha Cha” stopped being funny in 8th grade. Try again.
MFL…The UN wouldn’t do squat for anyone without the United States paying for it one way or the other, you know it & I know it. I think 99% of the countries in that dog & pony show are only there (present, show up, whatever you want to call it) to see what they can suck out of the U.S. while telling us how worthless we are. Get your head out of the sand and see what leeches they all are.
Every year, the U.N. takes 100’s of criminals off the streets of third world countries and puts them in a more natural habitat, the streets of New York.
MFL stop defending the UN. I’ll agree with you on the point that UNICEF has helped some people but other than that .. no. The UN is a bunch of self important idiots who claim to be trying to help the world by sitting around and complaining about worthless things. Now I’m not saying darfur and rawanda are worthless but on their own the UN cannot be an effective median for anything.. IT BLOWS!!! The UN has a military force, but it isn’t willing to use it. Why be so pacifist? I know the UN’s job is to promote world peace, but they suck at it. Sometimes peace can only be achived by force. I am calling for the dissolvement of the UN. Oh and one more thing .. thank you Ann Coulter for the years of Hilary bashing.
You’re welcome.
So the U.N. did a study of female genital mutilation? After they finished the study did they do anything to stop it or just pass some resolutions against it that they never plan to enforce?
No! I heard about this on CNN! (Fox News tells the truth so i can’t watch them) The United Nations set up the “Clitoris for Food” program to cash in on all the mutilated genitals comming out of the middle east. Because as we all know mutilated genitals burn much cleaner than fossil fuels and are way more efficient.
FROM THE UN CAT SAVING MANUAL: Step 1 – Hire consultant (ie. relative of Kofi) to assess height of tree. Step 2 – Write a press release documenting the plight of oppressed felines in the current post-imperialist world. Step 3 – shoot the cat. Step 4 – blame the death of the cat on American aggression. Step 4 – Avert gaze as the consultant (above) rapes the carcass of the dead cat.
Frank J.
I guess you were right. Now that Satan’s holiday is over, his minions have returned to their usual mischief.
Your UN apologists remind me of the monkey-faces who excuse Hamas for murdering women and children as they drink tea and eat pizza by noting that Hamas also runs schools…schools that promote the murder of women and children as they drink tea…but schools nonetheless.
Hey, idiotboy is back! Which brings me to a question.
If we take Moore’s words that “the stupidest European is smarter than the smartest American” at face value, what kind of computer does it take to calculate how smarter I am than Monkey Faced Sucker-Punched Liberal?
As for the UN, I think they dissed a few commies once or twice. By mistake, AFAIK.
MFL,
I can certainly see where you are coming from, but the persistant anti-Americanisms and attempts to undermine our Constitution suggest that the little good it does is only for show while it attempts to rule the U.S.
Unfortunately, the enablers who view the U.N. as something other than a threat to U.S. sovereignty simply make excuses, while the U.N. continues to try to tax the U.S. into submission.
How many U.N. peacekeepers does it take to stop the genocide in Darfur? None. The UN has rendered itself totally irrelevant due to it’s corruption and patronage. While you are at it MFL why don’t ya chack your facts on where most of the aid in natural disasters throughout the world comes from.. I also seem to recall that many copters from Afghan were the first responders to the quake. You are such a douche, have a good midsummer’s eve.
The U.N. is such a corrupt organization that it boggles the mind of any intelligent being. How can we condone and fund (almost 80% is my understanding) an organization whose very existence has proven to be anti-American? We pay for those in the organization to tell the entire world how evil WE are? We pay for these people to commit crimes and laugh in our faces while they do it on our soil? This organization who wants to police the entire world but cannot police its own officers? Who is so corrupt that its own officials take bribes to keep a despot like Sadam Hussein in power (proven fact – therefore makes them responsible for the hundreds of thousands he murdered)? Whose own patrols are the very people the innocent women and children need to fear (rape,robbery,atrocities proven fact)? Whose very existence makes the world more corrupt? I say we withdraw our money from this horrendous organization and see how quickly they become pro-American (how else can they survive?). They fight us at every turn and yet expect us to give more and more…and we do. MFL I have something to say to you…why did it take a council of members to determine that mutilation of women is wrong? why would they need a meeting to determine this? why would they need to vote on it? why are there so many children starving to death if UNICEF was truly using the money it gets to feed them (wonder what kind of kick back they get for staying out of certain places)? when you say 24 helicopters were used and only 8 were American, where do you think the money came from that paid for the other 16? and what about Darfur? Are you telling me that the UN cannot control a place so small so that women and children are not hacked to death? everytime the UN forces go into a place, why does the situation worsen and more innocent people die? The UN is such a corrupt organization because it allows third world countries to have a say on its committees and organizations and they actually are on the Human Rights committee to the point it is a joke. Don’t bother to respond because I can tell you are one of those people who are so determined to defend your beliefs to yourself that you will always be blinded to the truth. Good Luck.
MFL,
I read your first reply. I believe there was a period after “Indonesia.” Thus I clearly separated the current problems in Indonesia resulting from an earthquake with the tsunami that happened well before. But you’re a monkey and a liberal so the fact you can read at all is enough to forgive you. So 24 helicopters used by the UN is the largest helicopter relief force in the history of the world? You clearly don’t know what went on in Pakistan or after the tsunami. Where the helicopters came from. How many there where. Etc… Why? You repeat UN talking points. Dig a little deeper. Do some research. You might learn something. You also clearly have no experience in helping out in the third world. It always amazes me how comfortable and lost a monkey can become living on a diet of the NYT and Carbonated Water. As for all your other points made with such diligence. Nail this one down first. And since I care little, or not at all, about winning a battle against a sycophantic and shallow monkey, I thus have no inclinitation in showing you the way to the facts. And it is always better to believe you have discovered them yourself. For consolation’s sake you don’t even have to go to Rush’s site or watch Fox News to get a good start. A good start would be, perhaps, to begin with links to the USAID and the U.S. military sites. You’d soon discover the UN has a funny way of taking credit for things. To the big question: Nothing the UN does well, and this isn’t a lot, but you did hit on some of them, couldn’t be done better if those parts were made independent and accountable and the UN done away with. Period.
All sorts of spelling errors and the like. Apologies.
MFL,
You forgot to mention how useful the UN troops were in Srebrenica:
“Women and children gathered at the U.N. base of Potocari, together with about 1,700 men,while most of the “battle-age” males — mostly unarmed non-combatants — took to the hills in a desperate attempt to flee to Muslim-held territory to the west. At Potocari, Dutch troops meekly allowed the Serbs access to the camps and the refugees they held. Then, the following day — July 11 — some 1700 men, disproportionately the elderly and infirm, were separated from women and children. The peacekeepers “stood inches away from the Serb soldiers who were separating the Muslim men, one by one, from their families” (Sudetic, Blood and Vengeance, p. 306). At Serb command, the Dutch drew up a registry of 242 Bosnian men remaining in the camp, again mostly elderly and infirm. Then they handed the men over to the Serbs. Not one of the 242 men is known to have survived.”
From here.
I note that MFL did not come back yet, likely due to the many good points made against his/her arguments, but that critter may still have some whining to do and this generally annoys the hell out of me. Is it possible to stop responding to this nitwit? Or at least hunt him down and give him the beating he needs?
Just an idea…
All:
I must admit, I am shocked at the responses I have seen to my post regarding the UN.
What is most shocking about them is not their number, but how completely ignorant and idiotic they are.
First, lets review.
FrankJ made an ignorant, stupid joke about the fact that the UN is not useful and does not do any good things.
I pointed out to FrankJ that the UN does do a lot of things that I think are good — developing a recent report on the how female genital mutilation kills women and children in childbirth, helping out earthquake victims, feeding poor and hungry children.
FrankJ, was smart enough to realize he said something stupid and not respond. What rational person can argue that helping out earthquake victims or feeding starving children is good and useful?
Others did. Lets examine some of the responses.
Continued.
First, Wily One’s response:
“The UN wouldn’t do squat for anyone without the United States paying for it one way or the other, you know it & I know it.”
FACT: The U.S. pays 22 percent of the U.N. regular budget, as well as 27 percent of the peacekeeping budget. What is the “other way” in which the US paying for the other 78%/73%.
Oh, and by the way — whether the U.S. contributes money to the U.N. isn’t the flippin’ point! The point is that the U.N. does do things that are good and useful.
Trema:
“I’ll agree with you on the point that UNICEF has helped some people”
They haven’t just “helped some people”. Helping some people is stopping on the road to fix someone’s tire.
Feeding and educating millions of children is a good, useful thing.
“The UN is a bunch of self important idiots who claim to be trying to help the world by sitting around and complaining about worthless things.”
Actually, the UN not just the General Assembly. It is also the World Health Organization, the World Bank, the World Food Program… It includes several organizations who are helping people at levels of poverty that we can only imagine.
Of course, why I am talking to someone who thinks Ann “The 9/11 widows are witches and are happy their husbands died” Coulter isn’t a deranged and/or evil?
Leo and others:
Regarding the failure of UN troops in Srebrenica, scandals involving UN peacekeeping forces, corrupt UN officials, etc.
Last time I checked, the U.S. had some politicians who were corrupt, and some soliders who did horrible things to civilians.
I do not think that all soliders in the Army or Marines are evil, or that the the Army/Marines is an evil organization because a few soliders in the Army/ Marines (might) have committed atrocities in Iraq.
According to your logic, though, you do.
Finally shimauma — you say people have made “good points” againest my argument.
To be clear, my argument is that, despite its faults, the U.N. had done and continues to do a great many useful and good things in the world.
What are the good points that have been or that can be made that counter this argument?
Please let me know, because I have yet to read any here.
Peace,
Monkey Faced Liberal
You did not refute my statements concerning the U.N. anti-U.S. work.
MFL, you ignorant slut. The only idiotic post in here is yours. While the U.N. does marginally assist victims of natural disasters, feed some of the poor and state the obvious in female genitalia mutilation reports, only a complete and utter fool would deny that the U.N. is a corrupt, rat-infested hole that is beyond repair. Their original mission is no longer important, the dishonest bureaucrats use it as a bank and cash cow for their own benefit. I would love to see the U.S. boot them out and be done with them.
MFL:
To answer your question about the good that the UN purportedly does:
As a monkey, you’ll be familiar with the concept that enough monkeys hammering on typewriters will ultimately produce Shakespeare, given sufficient time. (Or at last, a series of liberal rants.)
The situation with the UN is analogous. If we give the UN monkeys the torrent of funding provided by ignorant Middle Americans, some good works are likely to result. Remember: accidents happen!
Writer:
First, your statements on the UN’s so-called “Anti-Americanism” do not address my argument — that the UN has done many, many good and useful things around the world.
Second: As far as the UN’s so-called “Anti-Americanism”, there is difference between the U.N. as an instituion and the diplomates and other officials who are there representing their countries interests.
Because a diplomat to the UN says something bad about the U.S., it does not mean that the U.N. is Anti-American. (Anymore than the silliness that came out of Congresspeople’s mouths who were supporting the “Defense of Marriage” Act means that Congress is an Anti-Gay institition.)
To offer just ONE example, do you seriously think that the WFP’s distribution of 4.2 Million tons of food, and assistance to 73 million internally displaced people, refugees, AIDS orphans, and victims of natural disasters does “little good.” Give me a break.
Now, if you will excuse me, I have to make some herbal tea. Kofi is coming by, and there is a lot of work to be done on our plan to overthrow the Constitution and U.S. government.
Also, a friendly “heads-up” — some of the UN’s black helicopters will be landing in your neighborhood next Tuesday to confiscate your guns and enslave your women. You might not want to schedule anything for that night.
Peace,
Monkey Faced Liberal
Captamerica:
“While the U.N. does marginally assist victims of natural disasters”
How is delivering more than 200 metric tons of food to some 182,000 Indonisian earthquake a “marginal” effort?
“Feed some of the poor”
Well, there is a lot of poor.
It is hard to feed all of them, especially when the UN and its agencies are receiving 1/4 of the funding that U.S. government spends each year in direct payments to U.S. farmers.
However, I am sure the 16.6 million children in 72 countries who are receiving free school meals through the WFP still appreciate the help.
Would you classify this as a “marginal” effort as well, by the way?
“state the obvious in female genitalia mutilation reports”
While you might think it was obvious, until this study there was NO real statistical evidence (you remember statistics, those things you ignore when they don’t support your current view) that female genital mutilation results in higher rates of death in childbirth for mothers and babies.
Persuading communities where female genital mutilation is a traditional rite of passage to give up this practice is very difficult.
However, with this recent study, efforts to persuade these communities to give up this practice now have an important resource to aid them in educating leaders in these communities about the dangers of this practice.
Hopefully they will now see that the practice is not just cruel, but that it threatens the lives of their children and potential grandchildren as well.
Now, do Captamerica, do you have any other counters to my argument that, despite its faults, the U.N. does an impressive amount of good, useful things?
Do you still want to casually dismiss the help the U.N. and its agencies have provided to earthquake victims, hungry children, and young girls?
Are you really that heartless?
Peace,
Monkey Faced Liberal
P.S. Loved the reference to SNK circa 1979.
Do you have some bon-mots from Laugh-In or Not Necessarily The News you would like to humor us with?
Monkey Eater:
MFL:
“If we give the UN monkeys the torrent of funding provided by ignorant Middle Americans, some good works are likely to result. Remember: accidents happen!”
The FACTS:
Total U.S. expeditures: Approximattely $2 Trillion Dollars. (Rounding Down)
Total U.S. contribution to the UN. $5 Billion Dollars (Rounding up) (I believe it is closer to 4, but what is a billion dollars between friends?)
Proportion of U.S. government budget that goes to the U.N. = .25%.
QUESTION:
How exactly is .25% percent of the total U.S. budget a “torrent of funding”? Because it seems more like a trickle to me.
In addition, you didn’t counter my argument that the U.N. does a lot of good and useful things.
You just gave a very poorly reasoned and thought out explanation for it.
Finally, Monkey Eater, I agree with you that accidents happen.
After all, you were born.
Peace,
Monkey Faced Liberal
MFL, Actually, I do not object to the 25% funding the U.S. makes to the U.N. as long as Congress is honest enough to take it out of the Diplomatic and Foreign Welfare budget where it belongs.
Writer:
I am sorry, but I do not understand your post.
You do not object to the .25% (1/4 of 1%) of the total US budget that is provided to the UN as long as Congress puts it where exactly?
And why do you care so much about bureaucratic budgetary classifications?
This might be a rather un-liberal thought, but if Congress is actually spending money on something worthwhile, I could care less where in the budget they put it.
Peace,
MFL, you say the UN does all these wonderful things. Then, you complain they only have .25% of the budget… How is it then they’ve done SO much?
Just a thought… females (in those countries) are persecuted throughout their lives, obviously from birth on… why would the idea that wives and babies can possibly die during/at childbirth (due to mutilation)change the fact that the men are still taught that women are basically good for nothing…? Unless, they give them (the men) sons? Hence, why would they (the men) give a rip?
RightWingWhacko:
When did I “complain” that they only have .25% of the budget?
The reason I brought up the budget is because people like Monkey Eater give the impression that it is a major part of the U.S. budget. This is not true.
As far as how they have been able to do so much, they also get money from other countries. The individual agencies also raise private money as well.
Yet, despite limited funding, they are able to do a great amount of good.
Regarding female gential mutilation,(and I am not expert on the issue), I think it is simplistic to think that the reason for this practice is just male dominance in the society.
That said, if, as you say, women are viewed as only being valuable because they can provide male babies, wouldn’t the men in charge be less likely to support a practice if that practice results in the death of thier male babies, or the mothers who would raise these male babies?
More importantly, I think that despite vast cultural difference, mothers and fathers in communities that practice female genital mutiliation DO love their daughters. Persuading them to give up what is an important (to them) coming of age tradition because it is “cruel” or “unhealthy” is difficult, just as many cruel traditions have peristed and continue to persit in many societies.
However, they might be more likely to do this if you can show them that, since this practice increased death in childbirth, they are more likely to have healthy grandchildren if they give up this practice.
Peace
Monkey Faced Liberal
MFL
why do you think “cruel” practices continue? And why is it these “cruel” practices are always against women? I’m no “expert” either, but from what I can see, it has everything to do with dominance. If they love their daughters so much, why put them through such trauma, especially just for some “tradition,” religious or not. Not allowed to go to school, not allowed to have a mind of their own, not allowed to have any pleasure in sex. Not sure what that sounds like to you, but to me it’s male dominance.
Sorry, if I misunderstood the complaining. You monkeys have a way with words that you always sound whiny (no offense intended).
RRW:
I think these “cruel” traditions continue because traditions are often hard to get rid of, (foot binding, widow burning, etc) especially when they are bound up with gender and cultural identities, as well as power and religious issues (as you can read about here.
Also, keep in mind that it is not just men who defend the practice — women in these societies do as well.
And before throwing rocks at the glass walls of other communities, I think we should keep in mind how hard it was for the U.S. to give up its own cruel traditions.
While the analogy is clearly not perfect, we had to have a Civil War and the civil rights movement in order to get rid of the cruel tradition of black slavery and discrimination in this country.
While this discrimination was certainly tied to the economic explotation of blacks, I doubt one could argue that it wasn’t also tied to the ways our society created cultural and racial identification.
And frankly, we are still dealing with the legacy of this tradition today.
You don’t have to apologize for misunderstanding me. You should however, read more carefully. And you should open your mind to other ideas, even if they might sound “whiny” at first.
Maybe you will learn something, and soon find yourself sounding less like a “wacko.”
Peace,
Monkey Faced Liberal
MRL
It’s RWW, not RRW, unless you think one R stands for racial…
Anyway, I do listen… sometimes ppl tell me things I already know, sometimes they tell me things I absolutely do NOT believe, and on rare occasion, I read something feasible… something I can believe. I did read carefully. As for all you’ve said, whiny or not, I will agree to disagree.
I don’t believe I’m a “whacko…” That’s the term liberals use for someone like me. Unlike them, I don’t get offended at names like that. The more whacko I appear to be, the more likely you are to steer clear.