Saturday, March 5, 2011

Let's Hear It for Great Britain!

That's right, and everyone today should be saying that same thing. So let's hear it for Great Britain!

You see there is no law enforcement agency to call when the same sort of graft and corruption found in a small town like Bell California is found in a place as huge and complex as the United Nations. 
So knowing this, the only real way of getting the U.N. to understand that they better clean themselves up is to cut off their funding.

And yes, that's what the British have done to the U.N.. They've cut their funding and told them to clean up your act or more will be cut.

So OK and let's be honest here, the United States has paid the biggest share of cash to keep the United Nations afloat for years.  We spend a huge amount of money on the U.N., and they can't account for a great deal of that money. 

Now in the last few days, critics of how much money we spend on the United Nations got a huge boost from Great Britain when the British government, one of the U.N.’s staunchest supporters, decided to cut its funds going to many U.N. agencies.

The U.N actually is more like the City of Bell, California, then some might want to admit. Their administration down to their field people have shown themselves to be corrupt throughout. 

So yes, I'm glad to see that in a huge step to reorganization its priorities for its $10.6 Billion foreign aid program that Great Britain, under the leadship of Prime Minister David Cameron, has pulled the financial plug on four major U.N. agencies.

Great Britain's actions were made public just as Conservative members of the Republican majority in the U.S. House of Representatives have started to take a long overdue and very critical look at our U.N. funding as part of its overall budget plan.

And the Americans who I know, all agree that it's about time!  Americans are tired of footing the bill for the U.N. awash in corruption and unashamedly trying to force it's political ideology on us. These are hard times in America with more and more people losing their jobs and most of the States running in the red by Billions upon Billions of dollars.

At a time when our teachers are being fired and many of America's basic social services are being cut off completely, I think the idea of a place as extensively corrupt and as costly as the United Nations which performs no tangible service is not one that we can afford.

The solution that Americans face is to cut essential services, and yes it will affect our infrastructure and social responsibilities at their core. So please tell me why we're spending money on the United Nations?

Corruption at the U.N. is widespread. Corruption is the U.N.'s normal operating procedure. It is systemic at the U.N. by individuals and corporations who reap the benefits of greed.

And to make things worse, the U.N. fails to live up to their most basic mission. If not then is the United Nations a place where the representatives of all nations have gone to settle disputed lands, encourage freedom, end famine and starvation, and support the people of the world? 

Or has it become a corrupt headquarters for a Third World Marxist ideology where dictators and tyrants can hide behind resolution after resolution and condemnation after condemnation? Is the U.N. a shield for radical Muslims who want to bring death and murder to the civilized world?

Let's all do as Great Britain has obviously already done and take a hard look at the importance of the U.N. with a realistic look at what it actually achieves.

Is the sprawling bureaucratic U.N. system ripe with corruption and greed, vice and scandal, and of course intrusions on freedom loving peoples like Americans? You bet they are.

And yes, I'd like to know why do we support the U.N. so blindly? The U.N. sits as a world example of corruption, scandal, and hypocrisy. And it's not just lately, this has been going on for years.

Remember the Iraq Oil for Food scandal where the U.N was taking bribes at the highest levels? Or how about the U.N. Peacekeeper's rape scandals? Or how about the bribes and influence peddling, the falsifying of climate data and the lobbying? How about the graft and the institutional waste? How about its members embezzling funds from programs?

And who is the U.N. to condemn Americans for what we do as a free people? They criticize how we treat people coming into our country illegally. They want to regulate our ownership of guns as stated in our 2nd Amendment of our Constitution. They have actually come out to condemn our voting certain laws into effect like the law against illegal aliens in Arizona voted into law after the murder of an American citizen. And how dare they?

Have they stopped the slaughter in Kenya and the Sudan?  Have they stopped the atrocities committed in the Muslim world on a daily basis?  Have they ruled against Iran and North Korea?  Has anyone heard about the U.N. World Food Program shifting food to Government Armys instead of those starving in Ethiopians where it was supposed to end up? And of course there's the Somali pirates who get a pass from the U.N., after all they can't even come to an agreement on what to do about these killers.  

What are they doing about any of this? Nothing. But they can criticize the U.S. for our actions, and everyone knows how the U.N. feels about Israel who seems to stand more and more alone these days.

It's like my grandfather used to say, "It's easy to correct a friendly dog, but the dogs that need a lesson are never dealt with until someone gets bit."

So what does this British action do for us, the American Taxpayer?  Well, it changes the focus of the debate from just a debate about how the world needs the U.N. to what it actually gets done.

The United States pays 22 percent of the so-called "core" budget of the U.N. Secretariat, and 27 percent of the Peacekeeping expenses, but its so-called voluntary spending on U.N. agencies and programs goes far beyond that, to an estimated $6.3 billion overall.

Even that number is likely a significant under-estimation, since many U.N. agencies operate as so-called "implementing agencies" or program managers for U.S. funds that are channeled through non-U.N. institutions, such as the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (GFATM), where the U.S. has donated $5.1 billion since 2002, and pledged an additional $4.4 billion.

The implementing U.N. agencies typically charge a percentage for their services.

So let me see here, we're already paying the U.N. to do the task but then they are actually charging us again to "implement" what we are paying them to do already?  OK, I get it now, it's called a Shake Down! A Scam! Racketeering! Criminal! Organized Crime!

What other words do you use when you find out that people are stealing from you and trying to legitimize it by calling it "administration cost" for "implementing agencies"?

The British gave the ax to many agencies, but also gave other U.N. agencies a sharp warning to shape up within two years or face deep funding cuts -- or perhaps worse.

I'm sorry, but I can't help but ask where all the money is going?  Billions, not just Millions, but Billions and Billions of dollars. Billions of dollars is a lot of money. So where is it going? Or does that matter to the U.N. because they know that they answer to no one?

And how about the shock waves given off by the British announcement? What might come out of the British government doing this? And it's not only the U.S., but also there are other nations that may want to take a look at where their money is going?

Heck, maybe other nations will want to know who's getting rich at the U.N.?  In fact has anyone ever asked the question as to why it is that the U.N. "needs" more and more money every year while it produces very little to no results.

I read where Norway, for example, has long been one of the most reliable U.N. donors and gives a full 1% of its $380 billion Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to foreign aid, often through U.N. channels. No kidding! A full 1% of its GDP! And friends, that's a lot of money anytime  -- but especially these days.

Norway's direct contributions to U.N. organizations are upwards of $900 million, not counting money it channels through U.N. "affiliated development banks." Whatever that is.

Norway ranks as the U.N.’s sixth-largest donor, but I can't help but wonder what the folks in Norway get for their money?

And I'm sorry, but in today's world wide financial crisis I don't see why the wonderful people in Norway should have to shoulder the such a burden as they do. Especially since they give so much to an organization that has shown itself to be as effective as castrated bull   - and as corrupt as the City of Bell.

But maybe, just maybe, there will be other nations who'll grow a set of cojones like the British have and make some tough choices when it comes to what the U.N. is doing  -- and what its not.

May God Bless Great Britain! 

Story by Tom Correa

1 comment:

  1. Good for them. Now they have something to finally brag about.


Thank you for your comment.