Do you trust Annan ?

[Cinema Face]

d, You’re freaking hilarious. Your blind adoration of the UN is even more ridiculous than your blind hatred of the US. Please keep up the delusion, it’s entertaining.

 

[*d*]

....still full of sh.. I see. You know all you do on this board is spout anti-american bs. If it isn't that it's some bigoted comments about Jews, Israel, and Zionism. You really are getting very boring and predictable - why not go to one of those facists boards, like that kid in Minnisota. You may find more friends there.


bbk

And I don't listen to those who only spout fallacious insults to boost their egos. When you present some useful facts with some truth to them ...then I'll listen. Until then...

 

[*d*]

d, You’re freaking hilarious. Your blind adoration of the UN is even more ridiculous than your blind hatred of the US. Please keep up the delusion, it’s entertaining.

...be careful where you wave that white cane of yours.

 

[Don]

bbking - don't waste your time getting all worked up over *d*. I used to but now I just dismiss him. It's to the point where I almost get amused by him. I read his posts (on those rare moments I feel like reading them) with a smile and sadly shake my head.

 

[Peeping Tom]

You overlook the US SC veto - which can, and has, been used to no yuo whatever the US doesn't like.

The only reason the US will walk away from the terrorism convention is because the US is losing grip of UN control.

 

[Peeping Tom]

But bbk, they really do believe it is social justice. This is not an act.

What I'm telling you *d* is that I'm sick and tired of you wrapping your anti-American, anti-Israel crap as a social justice issue. It's not and it's time to grow up and look for real solutions.

 

[*d*]

No insults here - I'm very serious when I say this about you. You want people to think your all about social justice but you fail to address the social justice issues as they affect Israel and the US people.

You can't have social justice when you ignore or express hate for these people and you have proven over and over again to pick only one point of view.

That's why I say you really should go to those neo-nazi sites, they both express hatred for the US government (and most of it's people) and we won't mention how they feel about the Jews. At least you would have an audience that might appreciate what your saying.

What I'm telling you *d* is that I'm sick and tired of you wrapping your anti-American, anti-Israel crap as a social justice issue. It's not and it's time to grow up and look for real solutions.

BTW is it your idea that .79 GDP of the US economy should be turned over to Anan so it can be as well managed by his son as the Oil for Food program was. If so it's a really stupid idea and no wonder the US is reluctant to get involved with it.


bbk

I could hold you in contempt for saying such things about me. Put some facts where your mouth is. Where have I ever said anything to suggest that I hate the American people -or Jews?? Go on, there's a search function on this site! Look it up and prove to everyone and your ego, that all you are is a bunch of lies. My beef is with government policies that create social injustice --changing those policies is where the real solutions lie and unfortunately most of these troubling policies, that problematically impact the world the most, exist in the US. When those policies change, then I'll shut-up. Happily, I might add.
Oh and BTW, the .7% GNI to foreign assistance is not my idea. I wasn't there at the UN Millennium Summit when it was voted in, in 2000. And the UNDG will most likely not manage the donor funds. A collective joint effort of UN org.'s and national partners will be set in place to monitor and implement the funds.

 

[*d*]

In everthing you have said involves the misdeeds of the Americans and the Jews - you cover this crap with "I don't have a problem with the people but I have a problem with the governments". Newsflash *d* there is the pesky problem that these two governments are democracies voted in by the will of the people - but I can understand the misunderstanding, the governments you support generally avoid the people all together so that a more just society can exist.

As for the .70 being your idea - I find this funny that your ego has to disclaim this - I said it in jest you twit. Look it's a nice idea but if you can't figure out why the US has reservations on this, then you will never understand anything.

Look you cloke your ideas in social justice - your motives are not that pure. You claim to hate the elective reps but like the dumb ass people who put them in those positions.

Face it *d* your a phoney, plain and simple. You are no better than those fools on the neo nazi sites. I still maintain that you would be happier there.

BTW contempt you fool is only something I would be worried about if you were a judge and I was in court but if you're talking about libel, hey go for it I will give you a world of misery.


bbk

As I thought, no links to any derogatory remarks about Americans or Jews that you claim I made. You sir are simply an insulting liar, 'plain and simple'.

Sad too that when someone voices their opinion about a government activity, it must also mean they blame and hate everyone in that country. And here I thought voicing my opinion on government policies would help inform those in that country. Silly me. LOL
You're a real piece of work, bb.

 

[*d*]

As you are *d* I suppose that pea brain of yours claiming the americans are not for human rights is not a derogatory slam. You can't justify that kind bull with calling it a "simple point of view" because it's an over statement that is simply not true - and you know it. Your post in this thread is very consistant with normal anti-american, anti-Israel bull that you say in all your posts.

While you do have right to your opinion, you have right to say it but I have the right to call you out for what you really are. Because your in denial, or your hatred is so profound that it even offends you, you find neat little ways to justify your bigotry - such as voicing opinions as government policy. I have never seen a post where you slam China's human rights issues, or Iran's, or Russia's - I only hear crap about the Americans or the Jews. In fact, I'm waiting for the day you blame Iran's lack of human rights on Israel's policies that force the mullahs to maintain rigid control.

The issue *d* is not your single opinion, but a collective body of work that shows a tendency to unfairly attack two countries.

The only piece of work around here is you *d* Your act is getting very tired and I suspect your some snot-nosed punk who thinks they have experience or a brain. Laugh that off.

bbk

Human rights issues in other countries are well documented. There is no need for more from me. Nor does any foreign policy of any country on earth have more impact on the globe then the ones from the USA. I voice them as much as I can on this board because these issues with the US are seldom heard or believed even after my rant. On that note, my posts are indeed opinions based on facts. These facts are followed up with proofs. Therefore, without guilt, I can point out that you are simply an insulting liar. And unlike your empty accusations, I have proof in this thread. I would hope that the mods. of this forum will soon curb your many groundless bigoted insults.

 

[onthebottom]

bbking - don't waste your time getting all worked up over *d*. I used to but now I just dismiss him. It's to the point where I almost get amused by him. I read his posts (on those rare moments I feel like reading them) with a smile and sadly shake my head.

Yeah, I have the same view of Pecker.... even he can't take him seriously.

OTB

 

[onthebottom]

The only reason the US will walk away from the terrorism convention is because the US is losing grip of UN control.

How is that exactly, I think the US has the UN on the run, scandal ridden and now Bush has sent Bolton over to kick some *ss. Should make for some interesting news from the UN, not a phrase used very often.

Annan wants a more common world view on how to handle terrorism. The US wants only their own self-centred view and their own destructive way of handling it. Annan sees a 5 point strategy to fight terrorism which includes defending human rights and dissuading people from resorting to terrorism. That may sound like something the US would support, but the most effective way to persuade people not to resort to terrorism is take away the source of their grievances to begin with. That's something the US will never do, nor even recognize.

That's a pretty gross oversimplification. The US should retain it's right to defend itself against terrorism. I'd say the US has a strategy as well, people who are electing their own governments are less concerned about bombing ours......

As far as defending human rights; the US wants to use the word terrorism to abuse human rights, not defend it.

How so? If you are talking about combatants found on a battlefield without uniforms, those people are lucky to be alive.

Another issue is the UN funding of foreign assistance. Annan wants 0.7% of each state member's gross national income for foreign development assistance. The US is fighting this as they stand now at only 0.18%. Their idea of foreign funding is through their false use of military action; all in the name of terrorism.

Why would the US hand over to the corrupt and inefficient UN that much money? see signature line

I say we match the generous giving of the "next superpower" China, oh wait, they're a net receiver[/i] of aid. It's just so impressive when poor countries vote to receive more money from rich countries.

OTB

 

[onthebottom]

.....
Seldom heard? You honestly believe that the US government has that much control over the media - damn your paranoid.

....


bbk

Hey, he's got a point, CNN hushed the whole Abu Ghraib prison thing right up....

OTB

 

[*d*]

How is that exactly, I think the US has the UN on the run, scandal ridden and now Bush has sent Bolton over to kick some *ss. Should make for some interesting news from the UN, not a phrase used very often.

Bolton kicking ass?? Many of your former US diplomats believe he is unfit to represent the US at the UN.
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/US/03/29/bolton.ap/
And maybe you haven't read today that Annan has been cleared by the investigation committee of the US Federal reserve on the oil-for-food scandal.
http://sympaticomsn.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1112114521411_107523721?hub=topstories

That's a pretty gross oversimplification. The US should retain it's right to defend itself against terrorism. I'd say the US has a strategy as well, people who are electing their own governments are less concerned about bombing ours......

What kind of government did the people of Iraq elect? I don't see one. It seems there's a problem developing its form and its charter.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/30/international/middleeast/30iraq.html
Do you really think people that elect their own governments are less likely to bomb the US? I suppose the violence in countries with newly elected phantom governments like Iraq, is all over something silly -like the price of gas or something. Surely they love the US now.
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/ECB11484-325B-45F0-9301-0733EFC7A08E.htm

How so? If you are talking about combatants found on a battlefield without uniforms, those people are lucky to be alive.

General Ricardo Sanchez should have a good idea of the human rights issues that I'm talking about.
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/58D32161-96EC-4E11-AA6A-304596C05BA8.htm
So should the US commanding officers in Falluja.
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/6890A8DA-AF79-45AD-BB4F-42C060978A07.htm

Oh and don't forget a certain US run prison in Cuba.

I say we match the generous giving of the "next superpower" China, oh wait, they're a net receiver[/i] of aid. It's just so impressive when poor countries vote to receive more money from rich countries.

OTB

China has the 0.7% obligation as well.

 

[james_Mudenka]

i trust annan

 

[*d*]

i trust annan

Annan is under some tough scrutiny right now. Old audits of the UN oil-for-food program are being dragged out and looked at. The UN is being watched more closely. That's a good thing. But what of the missing $9 billion while the Iraqi oil revenues were under the watch of the US run 'Development Fund for Iraq'? From May '03 to June '04 the US lead Coalition Provisional Authority collected $20 billion in Iraqi oil revenues. Audits show many questionable spending habits towards humanitarian aid and Iraqi reconstruction, but of the $20 b collected, the DFI only spent $11 b in aid. $9 billion is unaccounted for. Auditors find no record of where it went. In Jan. '05 the Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, Stuart Bowen wrote a report to the US wanting to know exactly where the $9 billion went. He's never been given a decent answer, nor does it appear that he ever will. So I don't blame you for trusting Annan over some of the hypocritical alternatives. At least Annan's actions will be watched more closely.

 

[Don]

I don't really have too much of a beef with Annan. Most people in power are corrupt to some degree. Annan may not be a saint but few people are.

My main beef is with the people who are telling other to back off Annan, that stuff like this happens in any big organization and that Annan has been unfairly criticized by the US, they are trying to make him look bad, cut him some slack, he should not step down, etc... And these are the same people who slam Cheaney for his Haliburton ties, GOP playing favorites with reconstuction projects in Iraq, this is unexcusable, etc...

Those people bug me big time. Not Annan.