Friday, August 26, 2005

NUTS & BOLT(ON) - PART II

The festering boil on the backside of the UN has started leaking pus. I know that sounds revolting but the mustachioed freak (John Bolton) has only been at the UN a few days and he is already causing trouble, (as predicted). Only weeks before the UN reforms summit, the United States wants to renegotiate the draft agreement and get rid of some its most crucial provisions.

Obviously to Bolt-head and the current US administration these provisions seem rather insignificant, I mean all we are talking about is:

- the elimination of pledges of foreign aid to poor, third world nations (because they don't really need it and that money could be better used by the US military) and

- scrapping provisions calling for action to halt climate change (because as we all know, there is no real evidence of climate change, and the only global warming and pollution that has occurred is due to the methane gas caused by John Bolton's flatulence).

In addition, 'The US amendments call for striking any mention of the 2000 Millennium Development Goals, in which UN members set goals over the next 15 years to reduce poverty, preventable diseases and other scourges of the world's poor' and instead wants ' to underscore the importance of the 2002 Monterrey (Mexico) Consensus, that focused on free-market reforms and required governments to improve accountability in exchange for aid and debt relief'. (We are so glad that the US government has got its priorities straight).

The proposals also highlights US efforts to impose greater oversight of UN spending (but not the UN oversight of US spending of Iraq oil revenues) and to eliminate any reference to the International Criminal Court (because any international court that would consider prosecuting Americans, is against God’s will).

There are in total 750 amendments presented by Bolt-head, and the US is expecting each one to be approved by the UN ambassadors or else the US will invade their respective countries.

7 Comments:

Blogger Shahid said...

This right-wing nutter hasn't even been permanently appointed! His appointment has not actually been approved and so he is there temporarily. Who knows how much damage this Nazi will do before he gets kicked out, if ever?

As for the Millennium development goals, what's so preposterous is that the US actually signed up for these!

6:09 PM  
Blogger Kate-A said...

I'm not too concerned about the UN, other than the money we waste in maintaining the illusion of the body being of use to the world.

More here.

7:37 PM  
Blogger Teeth Maestro said...

You have raised a very important issue, Bolton being such a hardliner is the wrong person to be heading the US issues at the UN. There is a big likeihood that it may further alienate the US from the rest of the world. The renegotiation is like a gun on your head better sign up or else.... The new draft is not just a few measly points but far more then protratyed as its been on the table for 6 months

I wonder when he will propose to change the name to United Nations of America, far better then United Nations.

7:53 PM  
Blogger Siddhartha said...

I used to be MangoWala - but have changed my screen name to Siddhartha.

To Kate-A: It would be easy to dismiss the UN if you have never witnessed the good it does in poverty-stricken countries and semi-failed states where had it not been for long term policies put in place by institutions like the UN and its agencies like the UNDP and UNICEF, there would be major social catastrophes and fall-out. I come from a country (Bangladesh) where the UN has formed a fantastic symbiotic relationship with NGO organisations and have delivered fruitful initiatives year in, year out for the last 30 years. I'm not naive enough to think that the UN is without its share of failures and yes there have been astronomic abuses over the years, but all things remaining equal, you would have to hand it to the UN for doing a consistently relevant job.

As for Bolton - it seems he is another NeoCon parachuted into US-represenative role into an institution that the Bush Theocracy feels should be dictated on their terms. Paul Wolfowitz got seconded to the position of USA's man in the World Bank, also on a similar remit to Bolton's. All I can say is that they will fail, or at least have to accept that these institutions cannot be run on a conservative/authoritarian outlook similar whose only analogy is the way the US runs its Health Service (MediCare). Only the rich gets any real health service because they can afford it and the rest of the great unwashed can fuck off. I'm sorry, but it doesn't work like that. If need be, the UN and the World Bank will be re-vamped and if that means without the inclusion of the USA - so be it. They really don't contribute as much as they think they do anyway.

8:13 PM  
Blogger the olive ream said...

I see your point Kate. The UN has not been instrumental in stopping wars and conflicts but in the hands of John Bolton (and the Neocon bunch) they will convert it into an organization that approves wars and conflicts initiated by the US and Israel. Future wars will be fought with UN stamp of approval to shut up respective governments that disagree.

8:26 PM  
Blogger Hypocrisy Thy Name said...

Nut and bolts are good for nothing where buds and flowers are needed. Screw them up. Wait a minute. UNDP and UNICEF, as the person from Bangladesh wrote, once upon a time were doing good job, however it all depends on the NGOs they contact.

8:50 PM  
Blogger Billy said...

Hey, you have a great blog here! I'm definitely going to bookmark you!
I have a card credit debt reduce tip
site/blog. It pretty much covers card credit debt reduce tip
related stuff.

Come and check it out if you get time :-)

7:31 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home