RobbieMHertford, Hertfordshire, England UK4,553 posts
Indyfella: Regarding the UN:
Fox News (today)
Beset by scandals surrounding the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has decided to tighten the reins on anti-corruption and ethics investigations across his sprawling organization — even while trying to keep those investigation results from the general public.
The decision by Ban marks a major reversal of course from less than a year ago, when he announced that the U.N. Secretariat “does not enjoy the jurisdiction” over protection of whistle-blowers who expose wrongdoing at UNDP, the U.N.’s development arm, or other agencies in the labyrinthine U.N. system.
At the time, a broad spectrum of U.N. reformers complained that Ban had ceded those powers, as well as the management of anti-corruption probes, to UNDP and its sister agencies, turning a unified anti-corruption system into a jumble of potential conflicts of interest and differing standards.
Since then, UNDP has been hit with a variety of other scandals — including a FOX News investigation last month into UNDP’s procurement of $2.3 million worth of airport scanners for the customs service of the radical Chavez government of Venezuela, which the U.S. manufacturer of the equipment said it never shipped.
Yet another important scandal surfaced last week, when a UNDP whistle-blower demanded an investigation by Ban’s Secretariat into UNDP support for a Somali financial company with ties to terrorist organizations on the U.N.’s own sanctions list. The whistle-blower, Ahmed Ismael, claims that he was fired after bringing the issue to UNDP’s attention. (A UNDP spokesman told news agencies, “Clearly UNDP takes all these allegations extremely seriously and we are in fact investigating them thoroughly.)
In the midst of all the controversy, Ban told a meeting of top-level U.N. officials in Switzerland three weeks ago that he has suddenly seen the wisdom of a single set of standards in those sensitive areas, at least when it comes to the U.N. investigating itself.
A copy of Ban’s talking points for the April 28 meeting was obtained by FOX News.Even while Ban is asking the U.N. to toe the line on investigating itself, he wants fewer outsiders to know the outcome. Among other things, he said, he wanted copies of U.N. system-wide audits to be available to nations that asked for them — but only if governments would keep them confidential. The U.S. mission to the U.N., for one, has in the past put Secretariat audits on its local Web site for public review.
And on the explosive issue of investigating U.N. corruption, Ban let his managers know that “we should be careful to protect individuals whose security and rights may be compromised” — in other words, that investigation results can even be concealed from U.N. member governments.
Nonetheless, the talking points seem to indicate a major turning point for Ban. Only last August, he declared opaquely that his own newly formed Ethics Office “does not fully enjoy the jurisdiction over all the funds and programs of the United Nations.”
Behind that foggy language, it appeared that Ban was signing off on the Balkanization of his sprawling organization, especially over the delicate issue of investigating its own possible wrongdoing.
Theres an easy way of preventing corruption within the UN.It's really simple.
Simply anyone who commits fraud from the public purse should be hung and the execution televised.
If anyone has moral objections i don't mind despatching the criminals.
RobbieM: It's common sense isn't it? But will the politicians do it?
After all what else is the UN for? Hopefully not a discredited toothless talking shop.
We need worldwide support to make this actually work.First 2 subjects that will come up is Palestine and Israel occupying land it took my force.Second subject, Africa.
Solution, get all parties to the UN, make all see sense, pledge material support and deliver it and make Israel behave or withdraw military support.
The sooner we all get along and help the sooner the planet and people will have a better time of it.
Military budgets would shrink and the funds would be available all of a sudden for development of industry and for instance a bi product would be a health system already paid for within the tax system.
Exactly!
thats why United nations was made from the begining.....the reason was solving of the problems so new wars can be prevented and wars to not spread.
If the decision makers of the world to gether wnating that organisation to work, it can work and if the same desicion makers preventing the influence of the United Nations and just critisising the organistaion when there are mistakes then nothing will happen and then the danger of another world war will be real once a gain.
if all this money was not wasted on weapons and only some of it was used giving real Marshal help to troubled areas around the world the same way Germany was helped then most of the problems would be solved by now I am certain.
If major world powers are firmly behind the decisions of the United nations then thnigs will be done and I beeive no porblem what so ever is impossible to solve in this world no matter how huge the problem is...one step at time and then hte problem will be a part of past if the Will is there!
United nations is a gethering where all nations on earht participating in and being a part of this organistaion is not like giving up the souvernity or any thing like that....it just means accepting the fact that we are all living on one tiney planet and we are all sharing the same atmospher and no country is an island!
RobbieMHertford, Hertfordshire, England UK4,553 posts
Hot_Single_Dude: Exactly!
thats why United nations was made from the begining.....the reason was solving of the problems so new wars can be prevented and wars to not spread.
If the decision makers of the world to gether wnating that organisation to work, it can work and if the same desicion makers preventing the influence of the United Nations and just critisising the organistaion when there are mistakes then nothing will happen and then the danger of another world war will be real once a gain.
if all this money was not wasted on weapons and only some of it was used giving real Marshal help to troubled areas around the world the same way Germany was helped then most of the problems would be solved by now I am certain.
If major world powers are firmly behind the decisions of the United nations then thnigs will be done and I beeive no porblem what so ever is impossible to solve in this world no matter how huge the problem is...one step at time and then hte problem will be a part of past if the Will is there!
United nations is a gethering where all nations on earht participating in and being a part of this organistaion is not like giving up the souvernity or any thing like that....it just means accepting the fact that we are all living on one tiney planet and we are all sharing the same atmospher and no country is an island!
thats why United nations was made from the begining.....the reason was solving of the problems so new wars can be prevented and wars to not spread.
If the decision makers of the world to gether wnating that organisation to work, it can work and if the same desicion makers preventing the influence of the United Nations and just critisising the organistaion when there are mistakes then nothing will happen and then the danger of another world war will be real once a gain.
if all this money was not wasted on weapons and only some of it was used giving real Marshal help to troubled areas around the world the same way Germany was helped then most of the problems would be solved by now I am certain.
If major world powers are firmly behind the decisions of the United nations then thnigs will be done and I beeive no porblem what so ever is impossible to solve in this world no matter how huge the problem is...one step at time and then hte problem will be a part of past if the Will is there!
United nations is a gethering where all nations on earht participating in and being a part of this organistaion is not like giving up the souvernity or any thing like that....it just means accepting the fact that we are all living on one tiney planet and we are all sharing the same atmospher and no country is an island!
Let the people of Iceland know they can just walk to Great Britain then.....and not get wet
RobbieM: Tom i agree with you 100 per cent.But blindly supporting Israel is a recipe for a disaster.It's high time they honored the agreement with the old Saudi king and sorted out the mess in the middle east.
Tom you may not be aware but we have discovered more cells in this country than are going to be operational in the states.
Saddam apparently had one man in every street working for the secret police, and also offered a bounty worldwide for any mercs to come and fight in Iraq.The rates were quite generous and plenty of people from of the Balkans, Russians and even FFL guys took the money to go there to basically shoot at Americans.
As you probably already worked out i was once more than familiar with joint operations, but still retain friends in the community.
Thanks for info on Sadam's foreign mercs. And the cells in Suadi is noted. We knew that his secret police and special units planned a guerilla war. We have thought that most of the outside fighters were either AlQeada or militants with cleric groups. Checkens have been in this big. But their connection there is via Iran.....at least we see a close connection there.
Our support of Isreal....blind to you....near sighted to many others...is not unconditional. There are things, that we have not given them. And things we are considering giving them. Things that are not even on the table for consideration. The trick is to give things that they need for thier defense, but don't upset the existing treaties with middle east Moslem countries.
It is a real tricky and tough balancing act to walk here.
Not only that, the Isreali are pretty innovative themselves. Give them F-16s, a few years later they have conformal fuel tanks on it that extends the range. We are often not talking about straight weapon transfers with them but technology transfers that their military industrial complex can use and develop. This is not to say that we have not done straight weapon deals, we have.
I think that our role has changed. Most have seen us as the peace maker in the region. Being active in Iraq, means it is hard (maybe even impossible) for the US to be the peace maker. But I also think that the recent Isreali and Syrian talks in Turkey were backchaneled by C. Rice and GWB. This might give Iran some thought, to have it major ally in the middle east, signing a peace agreement with Isreal. We still want peace in the region even ahomeland for the Palestines....just hard to get peace in the region when we are also pulling triggers there.
You watch...President A is going to be meeting soon with President S. and some serious talking is going to occur.
With Fatah seemingly to be ready to go the same route. That leaves...Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran as threats to Isreal. Locking then into peace agreement is not going to be easy. With out the stick, I just don't see it happening. Trick is to find the right stick. And make the carrots much more attractive than the stick.jmo
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
Fox News (today)
Beset by scandals surrounding the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has decided to tighten the reins on anti-corruption and ethics investigations across his sprawling organization — even while trying to keep those investigation results from the general public.
The decision by Ban marks a major reversal of course from less than a year ago, when he announced that the U.N. Secretariat “does not enjoy the jurisdiction” over protection of whistle-blowers who expose wrongdoing at UNDP, the U.N.’s development arm, or other agencies in the labyrinthine U.N. system.
At the time, a broad spectrum of U.N. reformers complained that Ban had ceded those powers, as well as the management of anti-corruption probes, to UNDP and its sister agencies, turning a unified anti-corruption system into a jumble of potential conflicts of interest and differing standards.
Since then, UNDP has been hit with a variety of other scandals — including a FOX News investigation last month into UNDP’s procurement of $2.3 million worth of airport scanners for the customs service of the radical Chavez government of Venezuela, which the U.S. manufacturer of the equipment said it never shipped.
Yet another important scandal surfaced last week, when a UNDP whistle-blower demanded an investigation by Ban’s Secretariat into UNDP support for a Somali financial company with ties to terrorist organizations on the U.N.’s own sanctions list. The whistle-blower, Ahmed Ismael, claims that he was fired after bringing the issue to UNDP’s attention. (A UNDP spokesman told news agencies, “Clearly UNDP takes all these allegations extremely seriously and we are in fact investigating them thoroughly.)
In the midst of all the controversy, Ban told a meeting of top-level U.N. officials in Switzerland three weeks ago that he has suddenly seen the wisdom of a single set of standards in those sensitive areas, at least when it comes to the U.N. investigating itself.
A copy of Ban’s talking points for the April 28 meeting was obtained by FOX News.Even while Ban is asking the U.N. to toe the line on investigating itself, he wants fewer outsiders to know the outcome. Among other things, he said, he wanted copies of U.N. system-wide audits to be available to nations that asked for them — but only if governments would keep them confidential. The U.S. mission to the U.N., for one, has in the past put Secretariat audits on its local Web site for public review.
And on the explosive issue of investigating U.N. corruption, Ban let his managers know that “we should be careful to protect individuals whose security and rights may be compromised” — in other words, that investigation results can even be concealed from U.N. member governments.
Nonetheless, the talking points seem to indicate a major turning point for Ban. Only last August, he declared opaquely that his own newly formed Ethics Office “does not fully enjoy the jurisdiction over all the funds and programs of the United Nations.”
Behind that foggy language, it appeared that Ban was signing off on the Balkanization of his sprawling organization, especially over the delicate issue of investigating its own possible wrongdoing.
Theres an easy way of preventing corruption within the UN.It's really simple.
Simply anyone who commits fraud from the public purse should be hung and the execution televised.
If anyone has moral objections i don't mind despatching the criminals.