Blogcritics Comments on Reinventing the United Nations

Comment by Dave Nalle on Reinventing the United Nations

Tue, 8 Jul 2008 04:20:04 EDT

Bliffle, I don't recall Bush/Cheney ever coming up with a suggestion to replace the UN. They seem perfectly happy to let it putter along doing no good for anyone and using it to their advantage whenever they can get away with it, just like everyone else. A UN which has lost its legitimacy ends up serving the interests of anyone who wants to play the bully or abuse their power. Dave

Comment by Franco on Reinventing the United Nations

Tue, 8 Jul 2008 01:23:26 EDT

True enough Dave, but then that lends more to the point.

Comment by Pablo on Reinventing the United Nations

Tue, 8 Jul 2008 01:19:20 EDT

Dave, There is NOTHING I like more than to be disliked by someone such as yourself. I revel in it, and you can rest assured that the feeling is MORE than mutual. Thanks again for showing me what kind of a human being that you are.

Comment by bliffle on Reinventing the United Nations

Tue, 8 Jul 2008 00:47:31 EDT

Reinventing the UN is just the kind of nitwit idea that one expects from Bush/Cheney and their equally weak-minded acolytes: powered entirely by personal pique and totally lacking any thought-out strategic considerations. And, like all the other nitwit Bush/Cheney notions (that they try to pass off as 'ideas') it is doomed to failure. Just look at their records.

Comment by Dave Nalle on Reinventing the United Nations

Tue, 8 Jul 2008 00:28:33 EDT

Freedom House seems to have a very broad definition of "fully free" as the bottom of their fully free list includes Indonesia and Mexico. I'd also take issue with their inclusion of South Africa. Dave

Comment by Franco on Reinventing the United Nations

Mon, 7 Jul 2008 20:24:10 EDT

The "UN", aka the 'Chinese oil exploration authority'

Comment by Franco on Reinventing the United Nations

Mon, 7 Jul 2008 18:32:50 EDT

UN on Terrorism More then six (6) years after 9/11 the UN has established - No Definition - No Names - No Comprehensive Treaty – Martyrdom Glorified. UN member states - democratic? Number of UN member states that are full-fledged democracies or "fully free" according to Freedom House: 89 Number of UN member states: 192 Percentage of UN member states which are full-fledged democracies: 46% Human Rights Actions by the UN Top Five Countries Subject to UN Condemnation for Human Rights Violations 2007 1. Israel 2. Sudan 3. Myanmar 4. Democratic Republic of the Congo 5. United States Syria ranks 21st with Zimbabwe at 22nd. Eye on UN Updated Everyday!

Comment by Ruvy on Reinventing the United Nations

Mon, 7 Jul 2008 17:41:08 EDT

In Israel, there are several governments engaging in human rights abuses. First of all, there is the United States government, which trains terrorist sharpshooters - who them use their training to kill Jews. There is the EU, which funds the PA - which commits terrorist acts against Jews here, and which encourages the commission of terrorist acts against Jews. In addition, the EU funds "Israeli" organizations which work against the settlement of the country by Jews. There is the Hamas regime in Gaza, which commits and encourages the commission of terrorist acts against Jews. Finally, we find the Israeli "government", the bought out tools of the EU and the State Department, committing state terrorism against Jews, and trying to pretend to provide safety to the residents of North Tel Aviv by "fighting" the various other abusers of state sponsored abusers of human rights here. All in all, though, the death toll from all these activities is nothing against the communal violence in India that goes on nearly all the time, the discrimination against Hindu untouchables, and the mistreatment of women in India.

Comment by Dave Nalle on Reinventing the United Nations

Mon, 7 Jul 2008 17:31:38 EDT

A typical reply from this shill. No mention of the documentary that was aired on HBO made by Bev Harris of blackboxvoting.org, or the other numerous accounts of the computerized paperless (unauditable) voting machines in use, many of whom are run by former CIA agents. No mention of how Florida in 2000 was thrown by not only the Supreme Court, but by Choicepoint in conjunction with CFR Katherine Harris to disenfranchise over 40,000 voters mostly of african american descent. Sure Davey. Why should I mention any of that. It's a matter of record, as are the hundreds of thousands of bogus registrations, stuffed ballots and various fraud from the other side. BTW, I had a chance to meet and chat with Bev Harris a few months ago and even she admits that there's no evidence that the potential for tampering with electronic machines has ever been exploited. So I guess Davey would have no problem with this new Global Government admissions policies, if your every move was watched, or you had to submit your blood randomly to prove that it was pure enough for the state. Nice straw man. I never said anything like this. I was defending the right of PRIVATE businesses to test employees. You do believe that private business owners have rights, don't you? I guess the right to privacy is a bit too much for Davey's "libertarian" (cough)view s. As to standards set by the employer davey, would that include her/his race, political ideology, or right to privacy? The fact is an employer is not entitled to trample on a possible employees rights as a human being, particularly without probable cause. You are about as libertarian as Orin Hatch bucko. My god, you ARE a Marxist. Does your anticapitalism know no limits? Business owners ought to have the right to hire who they want and employees have the right to seek employment elsewhere. under YOUR criteria the USA would not be allowed. The US has a representative government. It just doesn't have direct democracy for all offices. You still have a representative who is specifically yours and who you vote for. Picking a president with the electoral college is no more unrepresentative than having a Prime Minister picked by a vote of Parliament as most countries do. I guess you never heard of Yaser Hamdi, uhh Dave there was only a Supreme Court case about him. Right. Hamdi was released and is now free (more or less). He was ultimately not classed as an enemy combatant and not tried on that basis. The FACT is that the US Constitution already delineates what constitutes Treason, and how to proceed in a CRIMINAL case against such a suspect. The fact that the executive now codified under US code, can declare ANYONE ANYWHERE an enemy combatant Clearly he cannot do so. The Hamdi case demonstrates that. I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt, and purposely revealed my loss, to see how you would respond to it, or if you would. Wow, how debased and manipulative. You really are a reprehensible human being. Dave

Comment by Dave Nalle on Reinventing the United Nations

Mon, 7 Jul 2008 17:22:35 EDT

So, do you want to make "cultural allowances" for the habit of Hindus of killing hundreds of Moslems at a shot and of Moslems of doing the same to Hindus, and of treating millions of people as if they are trash (untouchable) from generation to generation? I think I'd be inclined to give Hindus some sort of allowance on the issue of untouchables if they were instituting reforms, which they claim they are. As for the sectarian violence, it is not government sponsored, and as you yourself will admit, in Israel it is the government and not the people who engage in human rights abuses. That's a key distinction. Dave

Comment by Pablo on Reinventing the United Nations

Mon, 7 Jul 2008 17:06:02 EDT

Davey boy: I said: "You mean like here in the good ole usa davey boy? Aside from the fact that our electoral system stinks to high heaven, and the voting machines have obviously been co-opted by fascists," Davey shill replies with this: "Obvious only to paranoid nuts" A typical reply from this shill. No mention of the documentary that was aired on HBO made by Bev Harris of blackboxvoting.org, or the other numerous accounts of the computerized paperless (unauditable) voting machines in use, many of whom are run by former CIA agents. No mention of how Florida in 2000 was thrown by not only the Supreme Court, but by Choicepoint in conjunction with CFR Katherine Harris to disenfranchise over 40,000 voters mostly of african american descent. Sure Davey. --------------- Me: "Oh yeah and I almost forgot the "human rights" clause. Like the right not to have your fucking phone tapped, or the right not to have your piss tested to get a job." Davey: Sorry, these two are NOT basic human rights. There's no right to conversational privacy and certainly no right to keep a job while violating standards set by the employer. The more you write the more clear it becomes that you're nothing like a libertarian. You're just another leftist crank who wants to make up rights out of thin air. ME: So I guess Davey would have no problem with this new Global Government admissions policies, if your every move was watched, or you had to submit your blood randomly to prove that it was pure enough for the state. I guess the right to privacy is a bit too much for Davey's "libertarian" (cough)view s. As to standards set by the employer davey, would that include her/his race, political ideology, or right to privacy? The fact is an employer is not entitled to trample on a possible employees rights as a human being, particularly without probable cause. You are about as libertarian as Orin Hatch bucko. --------------------- I said: " last time I checked the head of our government, even if tallied honestly is not popularly elected, he/she is elected through the electoral college, which is hardly poplularly elected." I thought you were a constitutionalist Pablo. Like Ron Paul you'd be happy to throw out the parts of the Constitution which don't fit with your populist delusions." ME: Uhhh Davey are you so thick-headed that you cannot see the argument that I made? I was not endorsing whether or not a popularly (direct democracy) elected government is good, I was responding to YOUR assertion about membership in said global government bubba, that under YOUR criteria the USA would not be allowed. I know thats a bit much for you to grasp, but any one even of a high school education could grasp it. ------------------ ME: Or the right not to be named an enemy combatant by the executive. I think that would exclude the good ole usa, land of the free and home of the brave bucko. Oh yeah and the right not to be tortured, too, just ask Jose Padilla about that one. Land of the free, my ass. Davey: "Padilla is the only US citizen ever declared an enemy combatant and that was because of the unique conditions of his case which suggest that he revoked his own citizenship, which is debatable but different from any other possible case, so your argument that the executive can do this at will is bogus. As for Padilla's 'torture', it was a fabricated ploy by his defense attorneys which the court didn't take seriously at all." I guess you never heard of Yaser Hamdi, uhh Dave there was only a Supreme Court case about him. Duhhh. The FACT is that the US Constitution already delineates what constitutes Treason, and how to proceed in a CRIMINAL case against such a suspect. The fact that the executive now codified under US code, can declare ANYONE ANYWHERE an enemy combatant is lost on your faux libertarianism, and should cause alarm to ANY freedom lovers. Not surprising however coming from you Davey boy. Oh and one other thing Davey boy, regarding my daughter and your snide comments to me. I intitially revealed on this forum about her tragic death and lying in a fallow field for 12 long years for a reason. I was not looking for sympathy, but only to confirm in my own mind what I thought about you and Clavy as human beings, which both of you confirmed in spades. I have learned over the years to trust my intuitions about other human beings, but I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt, and purposely revealed my loss, to see how you would respond to it, or if you would. Of course you didn't offer any sympathy or condolence, because quite frankly you couldnt give a fuck. Thank you for proving my intuition about you and your sidekick. How is the wifey doing Clavy? just my two sense worth fellas. Have a nice life.

Comment by Ruvy on Reinventing the United Nations

Mon, 7 Jul 2008 17:04:52 EDT

So, do you want to make "cultural allowances" for the habit of Hindus of killing hundreds of Moslems at a shot and of Moslems of doing the same to Hindus, and of treating millions of people as if they are trash (untouchable) from generation to generation? If those are the kinds of "cultural allowances" you would make - and then accuse us of treating Arabs as though they are a prison population, shove your plan - and your proposed organization - up your butt. We don't need more anti-Jewish discrimination coming from anybody.

Comment by Dave Nalle on Reinventing the United Nations

Mon, 7 Jul 2008 14:11:39 EDT

Ruvy, we do have to make some cultural allowances, and Indian women are still way better off than Arab women are as a whole. We might even want to take into consideration the degree of human rights violation. Killing people, imprisoning them without trial and treating a whole ethnicity as if they're in prison is a lot worse than what's done to women in India. Dave

Comment by Ruvy on Reinventing the United Nations

Mon, 7 Jul 2008 13:49:45 EDT

So you could put India and France and Denmark and Italy and maybe even Israel.... From what little I read in Desicritics, this imperfect kleptocracy is far ahead of India in protecting human rights. What would stop this country from being part of any such organization is that it is a war zone - the 'human rights' of the Arabs are far more highly respected that those of any woman in India. Ask them there how many times they've been groped. Look up "eve teasing" for further enlightenment or "A Parting Wish for India" on Desicritics by a writer whose screen name is Smallsquirrel.

Comment by Clavos, aka Mr. Rogers on Reinventing the United Nations

Mon, 7 Jul 2008 13:30:54 EDT

"Bush seems in a particular hurry to give it all away and he may have committed so many longterm follies that several future administrations may find their options co-opted." That's because he's a Bonesman, a Bilderberger, a member of the CFR, and a lackey of the Rothschilds. Oh, and he cavorts at Bohemian Grove. At least, I think that's how it goes. Pablo?

Comment by Andy Marsh on Reinventing the United Nations

Mon, 7 Jul 2008 13:14:03 EDT

I like your ideas Dave, but what are the chances of it ever happening?

Comment by Andy Marsh on Reinventing the United Nations

Mon, 7 Jul 2008 13:12:41 EDT

Padilla spent all his time in the states anyway...he wasn't even part of the Gitmo BS, he was held in Charleston, SC!

Comment by Dave Nalle on Reinventing the United Nations

Mon, 7 Jul 2008 13:02:37 EDT

You mean like here in the good ole usa davey boy? Aside from the fact that our electoral system stinks to high heaven, and the voting machines have obviously been co-opted by fascists, Obvious only to paranoid nuts last time I checked the head of our government, even if tallied honestly is not popularly elected, he/she is elected through the electoral college, which is hardly poplularly elected. I thought you were a constitutionalist Pablo. Like Ron Paul you'd be happy to throw out the parts of the Constitution which don't fit with your populist delusions. Oh yeah and I almost forgot the "human rights" clause. Like the right not to have your fucking phone tapped, or the right not to have your piss tested to get a job. Sorry, these two are NOT basic human rights. There's no right to conversational privacy and certainly no right to keep a job while violating standards set by the employer. The more you write the more clear it becomes that you're nothing like a libertarian. You're just another leftist crank who wants to make up rights out of thin air. Or the right not to be named an enemy combatant by the executive. I think that would exclude the good ole usa, land of the free and home of the brave bucko. Oh yeah and the right not to be tortured, too, just ask Jose Padilla about that one. Land of the free, my ass. Padilla is the only US citizen ever declared an enemy combatant and that was because of the unique conditions of his case which suggest that he revoked his own citizenship, which is debatable but different from any other possible case, so your argument that the executive can do this at will is bogus. As for Padilla's 'torture', it was a fabricated ploy by his defense attorneys which the court didn't take seriously at all. Dave

Comment by Dave Nalle on Reinventing the United Nations

Mon, 7 Jul 2008 12:53:04 EDT

Ruvy, if we used your standards then the only countries let in would be Ireland, Australia and New Zealand, and while I'd be fine with them running the world as a triumvirate, that would hardly be a representative organization. Maybe there ought to be three levels of membership, with a relatively reasonable standard to be a voting member and then a higher standard for nations which would be allowed to head committees and fill leadership positions. So you could put India and France and Denmark and Italy and maybe even Israel if they cleaned up some of their human rights issues in that second tier with full representation but no leadership slots. Dave

Comment by Christian on Reinventing the United Nations

Mon, 7 Jul 2008 12:36:04 EDT

I was very impressed with the quality of the discussion on this blog. So I thought it would be the perfect platform to get feedback on an idea that has been bothering me for awhile now. The other day, while daydreaming, I stumbled upon the concept of "Vampire State or Nation". A state or nation who has/has had its fangs sunk in the jugular of another, usually "less developed", state or nation and is/were sucking the life out of its economy thus contributing to a myriads of issues for its population. Issues ranging from repressive governance to extreme poverty. Since I am not politically savvy or even knowledgeable, I would love to see this topic disserted, published and debated. It is, in my opinion, one of the root cause of the ongoing failure in unifying the world into one nation.

Comment by Dan Miller on Reinventing the United Nations

Mon, 7 Jul 2008 12:26:59 EDT

Ruvy, Have you figured out why in Israel we call the scum "useless nothings"? Why no, I didn't even realize that you thought of them that way. How could you possibly have such views? Sounds twisted to me. Actually, they aren't totally useless. Nothings, perhaps, but far from useless. Just think of the comfort and happiness they bring to the oppressed peoples of the world, and to those who oppress them. Without oppressors, there wouldn't be any oppressed people, and then what could be done about them? Why, even Nancy Pelosi is not completely useless, and has done quite a lot to further the noble cause of human rights, in far-away places like Colombia. Useful idiots are lots of fun. Dan

Comment by bliffle on Reinventing the United Nations

Mon, 7 Jul 2008 12:16:35 EDT

IMO we're better off with the UN the way it is. If the UN were controlled by a more representative sample of world political theories and various power centers we might be worse off. I doubt that we can control the formation of a UN these days the way we could 60 years ago. We seem to be devoted to diminishing our influence in the world and ceding more of it to Europe, the Middle East and China (as well as other Asian centers). Bush seems in a particular hurry to give it all away and he may have committed so many longterm follies that several future administrations may find their options co-opted. The bottom line is that the USA will be so much weaker in the future that when the neo-UN sends blue-helmeted troops into New Orleans to quell housing riots the US government won't have moral, financial or military means to stop them. We'll be longing for the veto power we had in the old UN.

Comment by Dr Dreadful on Reinventing the United Nations

Mon, 7 Jul 2008 11:35:12 EDT

@ #14: It appears that Pablo went back, actually read the whole thing, and decided that he didn't agree with Dave's proposal after all... My reaction to the piece as a whole is that if you had certain arbitrarily-chosen nations dropping out of the UN and starting their own organization - based inevitably on their own assessment of themselves as beacons of freedom and justice - you would put a multitude of noses out of joint, and probably end up with China, Russia and a few others starting up their own rival body on the grounds - also determined by themselves - that they are the paragons of virtue in this world. Presto! A new Cold War. Congrats, Dave.

Comment by Ruvy on Reinventing the United Nations

Mon, 7 Jul 2008 11:34:49 EDT

"A 25-member delegation from South Africa arrived in Israel on Sunday with the self-proclaimed goal of examining Israeli human rights violations against the Palestinians." One might have thought that a much shorter trip to Zimbabwe could have been more carbon-efficient and interesting, but it's comforting to learn that they are taking all the trouble to go to Israel instead. So Dan, Have you figured out why in Israel we call the scum "useless nothings"?

Comment by Dan Miller on Reinventing the United Nations

Mon, 7 Jul 2008 11:16:32 EDT

Actually, the UN may be completely unnecessary, with freedom loving folks like these willing to go to far off places in look into human rights abuses.

A 25-member delegation from South Africa arrived in Israel on Sunday with the self-proclaimed goal of examining Israeli human rights violations against the Palestinians.

One might have thought that a much shorter trip to Zimbabwe could have been more carbon-efficient and interesting, but it's comforting to learn that they are taking all the trouble to go to Israel instead. Dan