-Caveat Lector-

Remember:More people have died in Ted Kennedy's car than have died in
United States Commercial Nuclear Power plant operations

 visit my web site at
http://www.info-quest.org  My ICQ# is 79071904
See the Pledge of alleginace to the flag that the 9th circuit court of
appeals doesn't want you to say.
for a precise list of the powers of the Federal Government linkto:
http://www.info-quest.org/Enumerated.html

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 06:51:55 -0700
From: Paul Blumstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Recipient List Suppressed:  ;
Subject: [JBirch] WSJ: Why the U.N. has no moral standing

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005644

REVIEW & OUTLOOK
Kofi's Law
Why the U.N. has no moral standing.
Monday, September 20, 2004 12:01 a.m.

Last we checked, U.N. chief Kofi Annan was promising to help the U.S.
rebuild Iraq. But pressed by a BBC interviewer last week, the
Secretary-General stated flat out that the liberation of Iraq was
"illegal" and a violation of the U.N. Charter. He had already opined
that "there should have been a second resolution" authorizing the
invasion, and that "I hope we do not see another Iraq-type operation
for a long time."

These thoughts could certainly stand a little parsing. Mr. Annan
seems to be saying that the only way force can be used legitimately
in the modern world is with the unanimous permission of the U.N.
Security Council. So perhaps we should remind him of some recent
history.

For example, there was that splendidly legitimate U.N. operation in
Bosnia, where its blue-helmeted peacekeepers watched with
indifference as Serbian soldiers rounded up for slaughter thousands
of Muslim men in the so-called U.N. "safe haven" of Srebrenica. Or
Rwanda in 1994, where Mr. Annan--then head of the U.N. peacekeeping
office--shrugged off panicked warning calls from the U.N. commander
on the ground, thereby allowing the slaughter of 800,000.

And if liberating Iraq was wrong, Mr. Annan must also believe it was
wrong for NATO to have intervened in Kosovo, where Russia once again
prevented Security Council unanimity. How about the recent French
intervention in the Ivory Coast, which the Security Council got
around to blessing only after it was a fait accompli? And
notwithstanding the latest U.N. promises, what if Gallic and Chinese
oil interests block international action in Sudan, allowing the
continued attacks on Darfurians? It would appear, on this evidence,
that Security Council unanimity isn't exactly the gold standard of
legitimacy, much less of morality.

And what's this business about a "second" Iraq resolution? U.N.
Resolution 1441 was the 17th resolution demanding that Saddam
verifiably disarm, behave with some modicum of respect for the rights
of his own citizens, and otherwise comply with conditions of the
ceasefire following the end of the 1991 Gulf War. From firing at
American planes patrolling the no-fly zones, to widespread sanctions
busting, to a banned long-range missile program, the Iraqi dictator
was in undeniable breach in March 2003 of the terms under which his
regime was spared back in 1991. In other words, there was never any
legal need for even Resolution 1441.

This is the same Kofi Annan, by the way, who said after saving Saddam
from a U.S. armada in 1998 that "You can do a lot with diplomacy, but
with diplomacy backed up by force you can get a lot more done." But
in large part thanks to such diplomatic interventions by Mr. Annan on
Saddam's behalf, by 2003 the dictator apparently believed that this
"force" was always going to be an illusion. He thought he'd slip the
noose one more time.

The Secretary-General's latest posturing is far from harmless. The
U.N. has been given the lead role in organizing the elections in Iraq
scheduled for January. But Mr. Annan's "illegal" comments, which have
been replayed across the Arab world, have given an added feeling of
legitimacy to every jihadist hoping to disrupt the vote.

His comments also suggest that Mr. Annan belongs in the same category
as France and Russia in never intending the "serious consequences"
threatened by Resolution 1441. We wonder: Could the corrupt Oil for
Food program and all the revenues it generated for the U.N. have
anything to do with it?

Copyright © 2004 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/A0NplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->

The opinions expressed on this forum are those of the authors of the articles posted. 
The John Birch Society has no responsibility for anything that is posted on this 
forum. The OFFICIAL John Birch Society web page is a www.jbs.org "Look alike" clone 
pages, run by others, violate JBS policy. Visit The New American at 
www.thenewamerican.com

"The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

Edmund Burke 1729-1797

"Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who still have 
swords."Get FAST unlimited reliable uncensored internet service for $9.95 per month
No Setup Fees.
No Contracts.
No limit on email groups.
5 email accounts at no additional cost.
Fastest Dialup Connection available.

Click here now
http://www.getmysmartisp.net
Fastest Dialup Connection available.

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JBirch/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

www.ctrl.org
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!   These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:

http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to