Durban III: Time for the U.S. to Defund the UN?

by Roger L Simon, PAJAMAS MEDIA

When I was a kid, I thought the United Nations was the most righteous and positively idealistic organization in the world. It was the hope of humanity and I worshipped it. (My father — a doctor — volunteered for WHO and I would accompany him to the New York headquarters about once a month, gawking at the colorful Third World costumes and wishing I could speak French, la langue diplomatique.)

Man, times have changed. I now regard the UN as a kind of global racket with three principal, often related, areas of, in Mafia style, special interest: propaganda for totalitarian countries, massive corruption (e.g. Oil-for-Food) and spying.

The latter rose to the fore recently when Wikileaks revealed an email from Hillary Clinton, urging her minions at Turtle Bay to snoop on their fellow diplomats. Quelle surprise, as we would say in the old langue diplomatique. Anyone with the slightest interest in the UN has known for years it was a cesspool of spies, and they also knew, if they had paid even the slightest attention to the invaluable reporting of Claudia Rosett and/or the equally invaluable activism of Anne Bayefksy, that the United Nations is the very model of the proverbial fish that rots from the top.

Also of note in recent years is the UN’s continuing meretricious and power hungry approach to global warming – excuse me, “global climate disruption” – spearheaded by the IPCC. This off-shoot of the international organization has earned a special place in the history of the abuse of science for its manipulation and misrepresentation of data for ideological, bureaucratic and larcenous purposes.

But of all of the despicable malfeasances of the United Nations, nothing surpasses the international body’s mega-Orwellian approach to human rights known as the “World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance,” later shortened to the “World Conference Against Racism” (WCAR), aka Durbans I, II and, now, incredible as it may seem, III.

To return to the langue diplomatique, these events are la vie a l’envers — life upside down. They are the reverse of what they pretend to be and should be labeled the “World Conference for the Promotion of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance.” I attended Durban II in Geneva – you can see some reports here and here — and I can say personally that I have never seen anything as quite literally insane. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was the keynote speaker of a human rights conference.

The whole thing virtually broke down when several European delegates walked out on the Iranian despot in the midst of one of his predictable anti-Semitic screeds (the US, despite some equivocation, had ultimately declined to go in the first place). UN officials ran and hid from the media after this debacle and you would think they wouldn’t want to repeat such a disgrace but… here they go again with Durban III this September… and in New York, of all places.

These events (I, II and, most probably, III) are basically Festivals of Anti-Semitism, and the UN membership — a substantial portion anyway — just can’t stop themselves from doing it again. It’s pathological, really. They pay lip service to the idea the anti-Zionism is not anti-Semitism, but this notion has become increasingly risible. UN attention to tiny Israel (still with under eight million population — less than L.A. county) is nearly as big as all other states combined. Why is that? By 1992 alone there were 65 resolutions concerning Israel. By January 2009, this number rose to 225. All these resolutions are largely led by Islamic states that are basically judenrein, although many of them had substantial Jewish populations in the past.

It’s a black comic moral travesty and our money is paying for it.

Yes, yes, I know the U.S. is continually in arrears to the UN, but we are by far its biggest donor. We are paying for these Festivals of Anti-Semitism (why not go the whole nine yards and throw in some KKK cross-burnings while we’re at it?)

Meanwhile, we are in the midst of a financial crisis. Earmarks are bad enough, but money for conferences featuring the likes of Ahmadinejad, spewing hate? At least a “bridge to nowhere” is a bridge.

Enough already. When the new Congress comes in in January, they should move to defund the UN if they persist in promoting these proto-fascistic conferences that have more to do with Wansee than they do with human rights. We elected them to cut the budget. They should start with the UN.

December 28, 2010 | 1 Comment »

Subscribe to Israpundit Daily Digest

Leave a Reply

1 Comment / 1 Comment

  1. Bill is quite right – this is like buying a weapon and asking someone to use it against you.

    AS TO HILLIARY’s memo – well, that is their job. Does this mean that they were not doing their job, or not doing it to her satisfaction. Does it mean that Bill had been there and no one had reported on his behaviour there? Or at least provided her with the names and photos of a few women she might want to go after (why does she still need him – this woman is really sick).

    Of course they are spying at the United Nations, but then look who got us into it – a bunch of progressives who never fail to turn against America and do everything they can for the forces of evil in this world.