Saturday, August 30, 2003
. . .
Ouch babe, ouch.
(username and password are: laexaminer)
"Several days ago I received a phone call from a Brazilian journalist who asked me to respond to the charge being made in her home country that Israel was at least indirectly to blame for the deadly truck bombing of the United Nations headquarters in Baghdad that killed, among others, a prominent Brazilian diplomat, Sergio Vieira de Mello.
I was not surprised at the question, considering its source. Among many South Americans, as among many Eastern Europeans, the knee-jerk response to nearly every evil is "blame it on the Jews." For example, Cardinal Oscar Andres Rodriguez Meridiaga, the archbishop of Tegucigalpa, Honduras, has blamed the "Jewish media" for the scandal involving Catholic priests having sex with young parishioners.
But the question got me to thinking: Who does share the blame with the terrorists themselves for the horrific explosion that killed and injured so many innocent people? Although the primary culprit is clearly the terrorist group that planned and executed the mass murder, the secondary culprit is the U.N. itself.
For more than a quarter of a century, the U.N. has actively encouraged terrorism by rewarding its primary practitioners, legitimating it as a tactic, condemning its victims when they try to defend themselves and describing the murderers of innocent children as "freedom fighters." No organization in the world today has accorded so much legitimacy to terrorism as has the U.N.
Consider the following:
• There are numerous occupied peoples around the world seeking statehood or national liberation, including the Tibetans, Kurds, Turkish Armenians and Palestinians. Only one of these groups has received official recognition by the U.N., including observer status and invitations to speak and participate in committee work. That group is the one that invented and perfected modern international terrorism — namely, the Palestinians.
These rewards were first bestowed in the 1970s when the Palestine Liberation Organization was unabashedly committed to terrorism. In fact, Chairman Yasser Arafat was invited to speak to the U.N. General Assembly in 1974 at a time when his organization was seeking to destroy a member-state of the U.N. by terrorism.
By rewarding Arafat and the PLO for such behavior, the U.N. made it clear that the best way to ensure that your cause is leapfrogged ahead of others is to adopt terrorism as your primary means of protest. The Tibetans, whose land has been occupied more brutally and for a longer period than the Palestinians, but who have never practiced terrorism, cannot even receive a hearing from the U.N.
• The U.N. has for years refused to condemn terrorism unequivocally, while encouraging and upholding "the legitimacy of the struggle for national liberation movements" against "occupation" — in other words, the use of terrorism against innocent civilians to resist occupation.
This has sent the message to aggrieved groups that terrorism is legitimate.
• The U.N. has allowed Palestinian terrorists to use U.N.-sponsored "refugee camps" like Jenin as terrorist bases.
This has sent the message to the world that the U.N. closes its eyes to terrorism.
• The U.N. has repeatedly condemned efforts by Israel to prevent and respond to terrorism. For example, the Security Council condemned Israel for isolating Arafat in the West Bank last year, even after it was proved that Arafat remained complicit in acts of terrorism.
This has sent the message to the victims of terrorism that if they fight back they risk sanctions.
• The U.N. has allowed states such as Syria that sponsor terrorism to sit on the Security Council and to chair important committees, while denying Israel these same rights. This has sent the message that the U.N. applies a double standard when it comes to terrorism.
The bottom line is that the U.N. has served as an international megaphone for the perverse message that any people who feel that they are occupied have the right to resist occupation by randomly murdering innocent civilians anywhere in the world.
Now the chickens have come home to roost. Some Iraqis, who feel that they are now occupied, have taken the U.N.'s message to heart and are engaged in a "national liberation movement" of the kind long praised by the U.N. and are using the tactics rewarded by the U.N. against that very organization.
Now that the victims of "national liberation terrorism" are U.N. employees instead of Jewish babies, maybe the U.N. will finally come to its senses and understand that by legitimating and rewarding terrorism, they have created a Frankenstein monster that can be turned against any nation, organization or group. Unless there is a change, no one will be safe from this U.N.-created, -fed and -rewarded monster that threatens the entire world."
Then one week later you get:
U.N. makes attacks on workers a war crime
Meanwhile they do nothing about this
"Builders are putting the finishing touches to a retirement home for President Robert Mugabe that will rival the most extravagant of African leaders' residences.Or 3 days later this. (username is firstname.lastname@example.org password is fakeout)
The project is the latest sign of how his regime is prospering while vast numbers of Zimbabweans are close to starvation. The World Food Programme estimates that 5.5 million people - almost half the population - will need hunger relief by the year's end.
Several architects who have seen aerial pictures of Mr Mugabe's new mansion, 16 miles north of Harare, say it looks as large as a medium-sized hotel.
Surveyors in Harare estimated the building cost about £3.75 million - a colossal sum in a country where factory workers can earn as little as £6 a month. Final costs, including landscaping, security and interior decoration are expected to push the bill close to £6 million.
David Coltart, the justice spokesman for the opposition Movement for Democratic Change, said: "It had always been assumed that Mugabe himself has not been corrupt. The size of this house would suggest otherwise and will further complicate the negotiation process as Mugabe seeks to secure a peaceful exit. He must explain to Zimbabweans where he got the money from to build such a mansion."
Since coming to power 23 years ago - first as prime minister and then as executive president - Mr Mugabe has officially earned a total of less than US$1 million (about £625,000), including various allowances. Last month, he increased his annual salary by 1,000 per cent to the equivalent of £23,000."
"Zimbabwe's government banned international relief agencies from distributing food aid yesterday and demanded they hand over their stocks immediately.The UN's solution? Cut off food aid. So we know that this man is a thief and a mass murderer who is this very minute starving his own people and the UN response is to cut off food aid?!? I don't like the US to be the world's policeman but the UN is not fit for the job and there isn't anybody else. Root that bastard out of there.
Aid groups were later holding crisis talks. They say more than three million Zimbabweans need food aid, with the number expected to rise above five million - more than half the population - by the end of the year.
President Robert Mugabe's authorities have been accused of handing out relief according to political allegiance. The government denies the charges.
Poor rains have hit crops and grazing in Zimbabwe - once the breadbasket of southern Africa - while Mr Mugabe's chaotic land reforms continue to devastate agricultural production.
Most of the food aid being sent to the country is paid for by Britain, the European Union and America. A large consignment of EU-donated grain is due to arrive in the next few weeks.
The directive demands that all non-government organisations surrender their food stocks to the government and no longer select beneficiaries, as they have been doing in a well-organised emergency relief programme over the past year.
When Zimbabwe had grain stocks of its own and provided a minor work-for-food relief programme last year it was found to be withholding assistance to tens of thousands of opposition supporters."
. . .
. . .
I hate being sick. I hate it so bad.
I think I have West Nile virus. Not really, but there was a dead crow at work and everyone seems to have had this gunge. There was also a dead bird on our front steps a couple days ago. So obviously, I have West Nile. (A coworker called the health department and they aren't even collecting dead birds anymore because they know it's active in this area.)
Benno had it earlier this week and passed it on, the wretch.
I'm in that horrible limbo land of feeling better, (meaning almost normal energy levels until I get up and do something then collapsing back on the couch trembling and sweating.) But I still have a head and chest full of snot, I sound like Sparky the Seal, and the inside of my skull feels bruised. This is day 2 and it better be over tomorrow or I won't be fit for human company. I'm bored and restless and cranky.
. . .
. . .
. . .