Tuesday, December 12, 2006

A Shameful End to a Shameful Career


Kofi Annan is exactly the Kind of Demagogue that This Blog is Against

A Wasted Human Life


Kofi Annan will go down in my history at least, along with other nefarious characters like Jimmy Carter and Jesse Jackson, as a man who has abused and wasted the abilities and power that God has given him.




Instead of doing great good for the world, as he could have done, he, like Carter and Jackson, have instead chosen to be demagogues. They are purveyors of lies that promote their personal and harmful agendas. Demonstrating the state of our world, both Annan and Carter are Nobel Peace Prize winners, and Jackson was a nominee, and all are beloved at the United Nations.


Annan's Agenda


Annan and Carter are darlings of the vicious left in America, the so-called "progressives." I know some "real progressives" in America, and these are decent, intelligent people who want only good for this country; but there is a strain of progressives who are full of hate, which is mostly aimed at America. This is the strain that loves Annan and Carter.

The common agendas of these two villains and their followers are:


  • The United States is a bad country that bullies the world, abuses its power, and engages in gross human rights violations.

  • Israel is also a bully country that abuses its neighbors, engages in Apartheid, and is the main reason for all the problems in the world today.

  • The United States does not have the right to defend itself. Only the U.N. has the right to decide how to defend the U.S.

  • It is understandable how the world can hate the U.S. In fact, the U.S. bears responsibility for being attacked on 9/11.

  • The Iraq War is illegal, and George Bush is a war criminal.


  • click to show/hide the rest of the post


    The United Nations


    The United Nations began life as a result of a secret meeting on board the warship "Prince of Wales" which was moored off of the coast of Newfoundland in August 1941. The United Nations came from a meeting was between F D Roosevelt and Winston Churchill. At this time America was not in World War Two though she was giving help to the Allies as a result of Lend-Lease. Roosevelt and Churchill met to discuss what shape the world might take once the war ended.

    On June 25th 1945, the representatives of the 50 nations in San Francisco met in the city's opera house. Here they signed the charter and it is this date that the United Nations is considered to have come into existence. The so-called Atlantic Charter outlined the hopes of Roosevelt and Churchill for a better world. The main points to it were:


  • All countries should have a democratic government.

  • All countries would engage in trade freely with one another.

  • All countries would share in world prosperity.

  • All countries would seek to reduce their weaponry.


  • K

    ofi Annan

    is retiring as United Nations Secretary General. The Secretary-General of the United Nations is the head of the Secretariat, one of the principal organs of the United Nations. The secretary general acts as the de facto spokesman and leader of the United Nations.

    On 13 October 2006, the Security Council's choice of Ban Ki-moon of the Republic of Korea (South Korea) to succeed Annan was ratified by acclamation in the General Assembly, consisting of all 192 UN member governments. Ban's five-year term as the next Secretary-General is to run from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2011.

    Kofi Annan is from Ghana. He is the seventh Secretary-General of the United Nations, and was the first to be elected from the ranks of UN staff.

    As Secretary-General, Mr. Annan has given priority to revitalizing the UN through a comprehensive program of reform; strengthening the Organization's traditional work in the areas of development and the maintenance of international peace and security; advocating human rights, the rule of law and the universal values of equality, tolerance and human dignity; restoring public confidence in the Organization by reaching out to new partners and, in his words, by "bringing the United Nations closer to the people." The Secretary-General has also taken a leading role in mobilizing the international community in the battle against HIV/AIDS, and more recently against the global terrorist threat.


    Annan's Final Speech


    In his final speech (see also The Secretary-General's Statements) before leaving office, given on December 11, 2006, at at the Truman Presidential Museum and Library, in Independence, Missouri, Annan called for the United States to return to the multi-lateralist foreign policies of Harry S. Truman and to follow his credo that "the responsibility of the great states is to serve and not dominate the peoples of the world," an apparent rebuke of the alleged unilateralist policies of the George W. Bush administration. He also said that the United States must maintain its commitment to human rights, "including in the struggle against terrorism."

    He echoed earlier speeches, where he also hammered the theme that the United States is a rogue nation, stating, for example, that the Iraq War is illegal (BBC News). In other speeches, he has claimed that the United States is "dominating" the world and is a major human rights violator.


    Hypocrisy


    In December 2004, reports surfaced that the Secretary-General's son Kojo received payments from the Swiss company Cotecna Inspection SA, which won a lucrative contract under the UN Oil-for-Food Program.

    Kofi Annan supported his deputy Secretary-General Mark Malloch Brown who openly criticized the United States media in a speech on June 6, 2006, saying: "The prevailing practice of seeking to use the U.N. almost by stealth as a diplomatic tool while failing to stand up for it against its domestic critics is simply not sustainable...You will lose the U.N. one way or another."

    US ambassador John R. Bolton said to Annan on the phone: "I've known you since 1989 and I'm telling you this is the worst mistake by a senior U.N. official that I have seen in that entire time."

    All the while, Annan has not done anything effective about the holocaust in Darfur. Israel is under attack and he blames the victim. He has been ineffective in handling the Oil-for-Food scandal, with its attendant rationale for why the world will not support the Iraq War.

    Annan, while failing ever to rebuke the real bullies of the world, like the Palestinians who constantly shell Israeli innocents, or terrorists who blow up U.S. citizens, presided over all the U.N. corruption of recent years.

    Mr. Annan and his cronies all got rich while blood still flows nonstop because of their policies.

    In his final speech, he outlined "four lessons ". I cannot help adding my own take on them:

  • First, we are all responsible for each other's security.

  • Except, Mr. Annan, if you are the United States, or Israel.

  • Second, we can and must give everyone the chance to benefit from global prosperity.

  • Especially the beneficiaries of Oil-for-Food and other U.N. scandals.

  • Third, both security and prosperity depend on human rights and the rule of law.

  • Unless you are a terrorist or Palestinian.

  • Fourth, states must be accountable to each other, and to a broad range of non-state actors, in their international conduct.

  • This means, you bad U.S. people, that you cannot defend yourselves. Leave that to us, the nations of the world that value brute force, terrorism, corruption and graft.

  • My fifth and final lesson derives inescapably from those other four. We can only do all these things by working together through a multilateral system, and by making the best possible use of the unique instrument bequeathed to us by Harry Truman and his contemporaries, namely the United Nations.

  • So you can promote thuggery, graft and corruption, leaving millions starving, homeless, and dead.

    Annan's Inspiring Words


    IN his paper, IN LARGER FREEDOM: Towards Development, Security and Human Rights for All, Annan calls for:

    I. Freedom from Want

    II. Freedom from fear

    III. Freedom to Live in Dignity, with:


  • Rule of Law

  • Human Rights

  • Democracy

  • IV. Strengthening the United Nations



    What Could Have Been


    Mr. Annan's words, as usual, are noble and inspiring. No one can disagree with the above goals. Yet, Mr. Annan has perverted these into a defense of dictatorships, anti-Americanism, and just plain thuggery. If he could have stood for all these points genuinely, then he would have earned his Nobel Peace Prize. Go in peace my brother.

    click to hide most of this post


    Rock


    (*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)

    Subscribe to my feed
                                              

    Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site! Wanna swap links? It’ll help us both. Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone

    Join Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome. (see left side bar)




    2 comments:

    paz y amor said...

    Calling him a "waste of human life" is a little harsh don't you think? Ouch! Regardless, I love the fact that you wrote about his positive contributions before delving into your criticism of the man. A very noble way to write about someone who obviously respect, yet dislike at the same time. THAT is how fair and balanced is done, my man.

    Now to MY criticisms/disagreements (what else would you expect?)

    You seem to have an issue with three or four things about Mr. Annan: The Oil-for-Food scandal, his position on Israeli targeted killings (which normally kills the terrorist and a large number of innocent civilians), inaction in Darfur, attitude towards the US and a lack of support for the Iraq war. Out of ten years of service, you've found five things to be upset about. I think you've found more things to upset with Bush about and he's been around little more than half as long- but I digress.

    1. Oil-for-food: At no time has evidence arisen that he's become rich and profitted from the Oil-for-food scandal. I'm not saying that his hands are completely clean, because I don't believe they are (which probably accounts for his apathetic response) BUT it's mere speculation lacking sound proof- (a bit like the liberal "demagogues" who paint Bush out to be an oil profiteer as well! There is no difference.)

    2. Darfur/Sudan: THE WORLD has been on active moan-and-do-nothing mode for years now regarding Darfur and conflicts in Africa in general. The US apparently has newfound interests and officials are careful not to criticize too harshly since Sudanese government has provided intel on bin Laden (HE WAS LIVING THERE!). I agree with you and the UN and AU (African Union) troops there are insufficient but it takes a multilateral position to fight genocide on that scale and everyone (the UN included) has been less than eager to do anything but talk the talk.

    3. Israel: You've been a big supporter of Israel and almost everything they do, but I have to side with Annan on certain aspects of this issue. He's not condemned the state of Israel or their right to defend themselves, but condemns the ways in which they do it. Sending a Hellfire missle onto a crowded Gaza City street to kill a Hamas bomb maker is excessive considering the numbers of innocent people who end up dying with the terrorist. You call it "collateral damage", I call it ridiculous to which they deserve condemnation. The IDF is one of the most powerful military wings in the world, yet they can't find a more effective way to do the job.

    4. Iraq: If I recall correctly, it was Bush and his camp who before the invasion said- to paraphrase, "If there is no support for US pre-emptive actions in Iraq, the UN will be rendered insignificant". Is that not a bullying technique? There's tons of examples of rough diplomacy like this in recent American history, and Clinton did it too! What strikes me as odd is that after most nations big and small refused to agree with the US, the Bush camp said, "We'll go it alone" and now we're in the mess we're in- but blame is still layered on the UN?

    I already know we're going to disagree wholeheartedly about Kofi Annan, but it seems to me that his speech was one to encourage the US to do a better job in it's foreign policy making. Had there been overwhelming global support (like in P. Gulf I and Afghanistan) this Iraq thing would be over and done with (hopefully) but Bush and the like have done such a poor job relating their intentions that the open reception we once got from other countries is dried and bare. Rather than accepting his words as anti-American and demogoguery and view it as possibly good advice.

    discoriggall said...

    Why do you think it is villainous to be a critic of the US? The Iranian President would say anyone who criticises him was a villain too.(and he's a nutter)
    There is not a country in the world that can be free of criticism, and with the US attitude to climate change, sovereignty of other countries, human rights and nuclear hypocracy... plus it being the most influencial country in the world: You might expect criticism.