My Weblog

December 5, 2006

POOR, POOR KOFI ANNAN will not only collect a life-time pension in excess of $12,000 a month, tax-free, but was also allowed to cash in a second pension valued at more than $1 million — also tax-free — when he became secretary-general in 1996.

Filed under: UN — limewoody @ 3:40 pm

For a start, the U.N.’s Kofi Annan will cash in with two pensions, tax free. He will not only collect a life-time pension in excess of $12,000 a month, tax-free, but was also allowed to cash in a second pension valued at more than $1 million — also tax-free — when he became secretary-general in 1996.

This, of course is in addition to Annan’s tax free salary, his $12,000 per month
UN paid `rent’ on billionaire George Soros’ estate, free medical and UN paid chauffer and limosine.

Annan has also made substantial money from speaking engagements and other “outside” activities. These include his share of a Nobel prize worth $100,000 and a $500,000 cash award for the Sayed Prize, donated by the ruler of Dubai. Just as a coincidence, the judges panel on that personal cash award included two senior members of Annan’s staff and one Achim Steiner – who Annan later appointed to a high paying position as director of the UN Environment Program. After several people – including US ambassador John Bolton – were rude enough to question the propriety of a UN Secretry General accepting a cash prize of this nature, Annan later announced he would turn the money over to U.N. relief in Sudan.



November 13, 2006


Filed under: Eurabia, Global Jihad, Iran, Islam, Israel, Mellemøsten, Militær, Terror, UN — limewoody @ 8:05 am

FOUR months after Israel launched its onslaught against Hezbollah, the Lebanese guerrillas are back in south Lebanon stronger than ever and armed with more rockets than they had before the conflict, according to Israeli intelligence.During the month-long war, which began on July 12, Hezbollah fired 200 to 250 rockets a day into Israel, killing 43 civilians and terrorising much of the north of the country.

“Since the ceasefire, additional rockets, weapons and military equipment have reached Hezbollah,” said an Israeli intelligence officer. “We assume they now have about 20,000 rockets of all ranges — a bit more than they had before July 12.”

Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, has confirmed the Israeli estimate. In a recent interview with al-Manar, the Hezbollah television station, he claimed his organisation had restocked its arsenal and now held at least 30,000 rockets, sufficient for five months of war.

Israeli military intelligence has warned the government that renewed fighting with Hezbollah, which it regards as a terrorist organisation, should be expected as early as next spring.

In response, Israeli forces have taken emergency action. They have postponed a plan to reduce the length of national service — currently 36 months for men and about 24 months for women — and are stepping up production of better armoured tanks.

They are also grouping all special forces into a single new division and are developing laser technology, jointly with the United States, to shoot down Hezbollah’s rockets.

On the border with Lebanon it is easy to understand Israeli concerns. A sniper from the Israeli 50th infantry brigade said last week that Hezbollah was active, although its members wore civilian clothes rather than uniforms.

The sniper, a 24-year-old lawyer from New York on national service, watched through his gun sight as a young man carrying an AK-47 assault rifle climbed from a Jeep. “He was walking quickly and all of a sudden he disappeared into a hidden shelter,” he said. “Then the guy went back to the Jeep and back to the tunnel, checking how quickly he could get there. Then he climbed into the Jeep and drove away.

He added: “We feel that Hezbollah are constantly there, though we rarely see any weapons.”

The Israeli military estimates that at least 5,000 rockets are hidden in secret shelters along the border, which it failed to find before the ceasefire came into effect on August 14.

Iranian-made long-range Zelzal rockets, which could reach Tel Aviv, have been stored in hidden locations. “We’re now in a race to locate the new rockets,” said a Mossad source.

Tracking down the Iranian rockets was one of Israel’s few military successes in the summer. According to sources, the Israeli air force destroyed them on the first night of battle. “We believe Hezbollah have learnt their lesson and it will be much harder to locate them next time,” said the source.

Israel has not yet found a way to tackle the threat from the short and medium-range rockets. It is developing the Nautilus laser-guided cannon in an attempt to intercept them. “It still remains to be seen if the laser gun will work,” said another source. “But it will take up to three years and might be too late for the next war.”

Israel is alarmed at the burgeoning self-confidence of Nasrallah and what it perceives as his intention to undermine Lebanon’s fragile government and take over the country’s politics.

Talks in Beirut to defuse the crisis collapsed yesterday. Nasrallah has set a deadline of tomorrow for his demands to be met or he will stage mass demonstrations.,,2089-2449728,00.html

November 2, 2006

UN Terrors´Little Helper: Terje Roed Larsen – Baby, it´s dark out side…and our soldiers do not like that…and furthermore we do not want to see what is going on….as long as it helps Hizballah Re-arm…………

Filed under: Global Jihad, Islam, Israel, Terror, UN — limewoody @ 10:47 pm
Despite the 20,000 troops deployed in southern Lebanon, the United Nations admits that weapons smuggling from Syria continues unhindered. A German report finds UNIFIL does not patrol after dark.

Hizbullah terrorists are free to roam at night without fear of being identified by the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), according to a report by the German paper Der Spiegel.

Spanish UNIFIL official Richard Ortax admitted to the paper that no patrols are carried out at night “because of the danger involved.” UNIFIL commanders said their function is to “observe changes in the behavior of the local population.”

One junior officer told Der Spiegel he was glad that his battalion had only left its camp once. “It’s absurd,” he said. “We landed here and set up our tent city, but since then we’ve only left the camp to drive around and to make sure that we’re seen.”

The report cites a long tradition of UNIFIL inaction, which it says allowed time for a Finnish contingent to construct a giant sauna and an Indian contingent to decorate its base with traditional Indian artwork.

The UNIFIL troops and the 14,000 Lebanese soldiers stationed in the region add up to a total of around 20,000 troops in the 18-by 31-mile region of southern Lebanon. Another 6,000 troops are still expected to arrive.

The United Nations itself has admitted that Syria was still successfully smuggling arms to the Hizbullah, which neither UNIFIL nor the Lebanese army plan to stop.

Israel has maintained overflights in the region in order to monitor and discourage the smuggling, yet UNIFIL officials condemn the continued Israeli maneuvers. The Lebanese army even attempted to shoot down Israeli fighter jets on Tuesday. France and the European Union have been accusing Israel of violating Resolution 1701 with its flights over Lebanon.

The current state of affairs has led Israeli officials to speak about “rethinking the implementation of Israel’s commitments” made in the context of the UN-brokered cease-fire.

The UN Security Council “noted with regret [that] non-Lebanese militias” in the country had not been disbanded or disarmed, an allusion to the Iranian and Syrian-backed Hizbullah. The statement on Tuesday was termed a “presidential statement,” which is the weakest of all available Security Council actions.

Following the meeting, UN envoy to the region Terje Roed-Larsen explicitly admitted that Syria was actively smuggling weapons into Lebanon. He said that Lebanese government officials “have stated publicly and also in conversations with us that there have been arms coming across the border into Lebanon.”

Roed-Larsen added that Syria itself does not deny the flow of weapons, claiming only that the arms are not being dispatched by the Syrian government. “The consistent position of the government of Syria has been that, ‘Yes, there might be arms smuggling over the border, but this is arms smuggling and the border is porous and very difficult to control,'” Roed-Larsen told reporters.

Roed-Larsen ducked UN responsibility for the smuggling, saying UN troops had not been asked by the Lebanese army to monitor the border.

Filed under: UN — limewoody @ 8:33 am

Mohamed ElBaradei, director-general of the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency, makes it very plain why the U.N. has become the Trojan horse of nuclear proliferation. In an interview with Newsweek magazine on Oct. 20, Mr. ElBaradei laid bare his plan — guaranteed to lead the international community into nuclear war.

His overall outlook toward nuclear proliferation, he explained, has two prongs. No. 1, the problem with Iran and North Korea is “not really leader-specific. It is country-specific: a country feeling insecure. And if it sees that the people in the major leagues are relying on nuclear weapons, it will at the very least be tempted to do the same.”


October 20, 2006

Filed under: Satire, UN — limewoody @ 2:32 pm


If You can not get your lust for GLOIRE at home in La Frawnce: Then go for the JEWS: UNIFL chief: We may open fire on IAF planes

Filed under: Eurabia, Global Jihad, Islam, Terror, UN — limewoody @ 7:08 am

The UNIFIL international peacekeeping force may open fire on Israeli planes in Lebanon, UNIFIL chief Maj.-Gen. Alain Pellegrini said on Thursday.

Pellegrini said that there is a possibility that the UN will make changes to the rules of engagement for the UNIFIL force, this in an attempt to cope with the various sorties conducted by the IAF force on a daily basis.

October 16, 2006

UNbeliveblablablabla: PukeTime

Filed under: UN — limewoody @ 8:52 pm

Via Little Green Footballs: 

The United Nations is hosting a series of seminars titled “Unlearning Intolerance,” and the next one focuses on the dreaded cartoons of blasphemy. (Hat tip: Dan.)

Are they going to discuss the violently intolerant reaction of the Islamic world to the relatively mild Danish cartoons?

Of course not, silly! This seminar will emphasize “The Responsibility of Political Cartoonists:” UN Chronicle | Cartooning for Peace (UN Chronicle E-Alert).

And that responsibility is, of course, the responsibility to avoid offending the Religion of Tolerance™.

Accompanied by this Orwellian graphic by anti-Israel, anti-American French cartoonist Jean Plantu, available as an attractive commemorative plate:

October 12, 2006

Reform Run Amok

Filed under: UN — limewoody @ 8:19 pm

The U.N.’s new Human Rights Council makes the old one look good.

Thursday, October 12, 2006; Page A26

A MAJOR piece of the United Nations reform promised by Secretary General Kofi Annan was a new Human Rights Council. The idea was to replace the Commission on Human Rights, which had been hijacked by rogue states such as Libya and Sudan, with a body that could refocus attention on serious human rights violations around the world — and in so doing remove what Mr. Annan said was “the shadow” cast by the old organization on “the United Nations system as a whole.”

When the Human Rights Council was approved by the General Assembly in March, we were among the skeptics who doubted that it would be much of a change, mainly because the membership rules still allowed for the election of human rights violators. As it turned out, we were wrong: The council, which completed its second formal session last week in Geneva, has turned out to be far worse than its predecessor — not just a “shadow” but a travesty that the United Nations can ill afford.

For all its faults, the previous U.N. commission occasionally discussed and condemned the regimes most responsible for human rights crimes, such as those in Belarus and Burma. China used to feel compelled to burnish its record before the annual meeting. The new council, in contrast, has so far taken action on only one country, which has dominated the debate at both of its regular meetings and been the sole subject of two extraordinary sessions: Israel.

Western human rights groups sought to focus the council’s attention on Darfur, where genocide is occurring, and on Uzbekistan, where a dictator refuses to allow the investigation of a massacre by his security forces. Their efforts have been in vain. Instead, the council has treated itself to report after report on the alleged crimes of the Jewish state; in all, there were six official “rapporteurs” on that subject in the latest session alone. One, Jean Ziegler, is supposed to report on “the right to food.” But he, too, delivered a diatribe on Israeli “crimes” in Lebanon.

This ludicrous diplomatic lynch mob has been directed by the Organization of the Islamic Conference, which accounts for 17 governments on the 47-member council and counts on the support of like-minded dictatorships such as Cuba and China. Council rules allow an extraordinary session to be called at the behest of just one-third of the membership, making it easy for the Islamic association to orchestrate anti-Israel spectacles. Several Muslim governments that boast of a new commitment to democracy and human rights — including Jordan and Morocco — have readily joined in this willful sabotage of those values.

Human rights groups that supported the creation of the council, such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, admit to being appalled by the outcome; they nevertheless argue that the panel should be given time to right itself. That could happen, they say, if the democratic members of the council organize and work with the same cohesion as the “unfree” states. They also suggest that the United States, which refused to join the council, reconsider.

Perhaps that strategy would work — though once again, we’re skeptical. If there is no turnaround, the council’s performance ought to invite consideration of the measure that was applied to the U.N. cultural organization, UNESCO, when it ran amok in the 1980s: a cutoff of U.S. funding. If this ill-formed body is to become an exclusive forum for anti-Zionist rants, the principal victim will be not Israel but the United Nations.

October 4, 2006

UNIFIL says could resort to ‘use of force beyond self-defense’

Filed under: Mellemøsten, UN — limewoody @ 3:53 pm
By Shlomo Shamir, Haaretz Correspondent, DPA and Haaretz Service

The United Nations explained Tuesday the “rules of engagement” that will be used by its peacekeepers who are supervising a cease-fire in south Lebanon between Hezbollah and Israel since August 14.

The UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) said it could resort to the “use of force beyond self-defense,” but did not give details on the means which will be used.

“UNIFIL commanders have sufficient authority to act forcefully when confronted with hostile activity of any kind,” a UN statement said.


“All UNIFIL personnel may exercise the inherent right of self-defense. In addition, the use of force beyond self-defense may be applied to ensure that UNIFIL’s area of operations,” it said.

According to the statement the UN mandate is aimed at protecting “UN personnel, facilities, installations and equipment; ensuring the security and freedom of movement of UN personnel and humanitarian workers; and protecting civilians under imminent threat of physical violence.”

?Should the situation present any risk of resumption of hostile activities, UNIFIL rules of engagement allow UN forces to respond as required,? UNIFIL stated in a press release issued Tuesday, in regard to the mandate given to UN forces under the UN security council?s resolution 1701.

According to UNIFIL, “in cases where specific information is available regarding movement of unauthorized weapons or equipment, the LAF [Lebanese Armed Forces] will take required action. However, in situations where the LAF are not in a position to do so, UNIFIL will do everything necessary to fulfill its mandate in accordance with Security Council Resolution 1701.”

Issues dealt with in the UNIFIL statement were discussed this past week by Israeli representatives, the Lebanese Army, and UNIFIL officers in southern Lebanon. Israeli representatives said that under Resolution 1701, UNIFIL forces must work to locate and identify Hezbollah weapons and ammunition stores, and that in instances where UNIFIL encounters Hezbollah members, to remove their weapons from them. This issue was later removed from the agreement.

The release further stated that UNIFIL has deployed 5,200 soldiers, out of a maximum 15,000 allowed under Security Council resolution 1701.

It said UNIFIL, whose task is to support the Lebanese army in the area, “has set up temporary checkpoints at key locations within its area of operations.”

It added that Lebanese troops have established “permanent checkpoints… to stop and search passing vehicles and would act if they find unauthorized weapons.”

UN Security Council Resolution 1701 which ended the war on August 14 calls for peacekeepers to monitor the southern Lebanese border region along the border with Israel and make sure it is “free of any armed personnel other than those of the Lebanese armed forces and UNIFIL.”

Since the cease-fire, Hezbollah guerrillas have kept out of sight in southern Lebanon, but their chief Hassan Nasrallah has rejected in several speeches the laying down his movement’s arms as required by the UN resolution.

Hezbollah official in southern Lebanon Sheikh Nabil Kawook said Tuesday that “Hezbollah guerrillas are still in the border areas with Israel with their weapons.”

“I tell [Prime Minister Ehud] Olmert, our guerrillas are still there, but not visible, so nothing has changed since July 12,” the Hezbollah official said.

Israel launched a offensive against Lebanon on July 12 in response to the cross-border kidnapping of two of its soldiers by Hezbollah.

October 3, 2006

Keep the United Nations’s Hands Off the Internet

Filed under: Diverse, UN — limewoody @ 3:07 pm

Last week, the Commerce Department and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (Icann) signed a memorandum of understanding that would continue for at least three years our federal government’s oversight of Icann. Ironically, but not coincidentally, later this month the United Nations will convene for the first time the Internet Governance Forum (IGF), in Athens. That forum will look at a wide range of Internet governance issues that may not closely align with the views of either the American government or Icann.

Founded in 1998, Icann is a private company and the global coordinator for the system of international Internet identifiers including both domain names and addresses for Internet protocols.These are important responsibilities for the efficient and secure operation of the Internet.

Although it has federal government oversight, Icann is hardly an instrument of the federal government — no doubt to the consternation of many members of Congress and the administration. For that matter, it is hardly the choice of any government or the U.N. either.The U.N. is ultimately a body whose members are governments; Icann, for much the better, has no governmental members.

Although our federal government oversees Icann, it hardly controls it. Our government has, of course, attempted to influence Icann, but it refuses to be influenced. Icann suffers not from benign neglect but from benign independence.

Icann’s board consists of more than 20 directors, mostly technocrats from around the globe with relatively little representation from the United States. The individuals tend to be known among the Internet literati, but unknown among the politically or financially powerful in Washington, New York, Brussels, or Geneva.They are not the politically connected individuals who populate the directorships of most U.N. agencies.

There is much that is wrong with Icann. It is a private organization without shareholders and with a board that is ultimately responsible to no one but itself. Its board meets in secret and its procedures are unpredictable and opaque at best.Icann’s budget is increasing from $25 million to $34 million next year.The total sum is still minuscule on the scale of budgets of U.N. agencies, but Icann has and could operate on much less.Part of the budget goes to finance meetings in expensive venues around the world. The London School of Economics Public Policy Group recently released a detailed critique of Icann.

Yet for all of its shortcomings, Icann is a precious treasure compared with the next most likely outcome: the emergence of a U.N. agency to govern the Internet.Curiously, the same day the memorandum of understanding was signed with the Commerce Department, Icann issued a press release emphasizing that Icann could be more independent with fewer reporting requirements to the American government. The press release appears intended not for American review but for international consumption. For years, international resentment builds as the Internet has any vestigial connection to the American government, which merely designed and developed the Internet at great expense and then magnanimously gave it to the world gratis.

The very pretext for U.N. interest in the Internet governance and its initiation of the IGF is dissatisfaction with current Internet governance, or lack thereof, under Icann. KofiAnnan has established an advisory group for the IGF and has taken a visible role in the IGF. The IGF has 12 mandates, most of which are thinly veiled foundations for a U.N.role in Internet governance. One example is: “Strengthen and enhance the engagement of stakeholders in existing and/or future Internet governance mechanisms, particularly those from developing countries.” The approximate translation of this phrasing into standard English would mean the establishment of a new international Internet governance body.

America and every country around the world have much at risk if the Internet weregoverned by an incompetent or a politically motivated organization. While many in America would prefer that our government had retained more control over the Internet, many more individuals around the world would prefer to sever all remnants of a relationship between the Internet and America. Icann is far from a perfect administrator of the Internet, but it is far better than the alternative being conceived at the United Nations.

A former FCC commissioner, Mr. Furchtgott-Roth is president of Furchtgott-Roth Economic Enterprises. He can be reached at

Older Posts »

Create a free website or blog at