1 Aug, 2005
30 Mar, 2005
Headline Watch…
Oil-food inquiry clears UN chief SF Chronicle (story from NYT, by Warren Hoge).
Report criticizes top UN official San Jose Mercury News (same story from NYT as above)
UN: Inquiry Clears Annan, But Faults Management On Iraq Program Radio Free Europe (By Robert McMahon)
The first two are the same story but the editors who wrote the headline obviously saw different things as important. The third headline is what I’d call ‘fair and balanced’.
Roger L. Simon has been following the story closely. (Just scroll.)
28 Mar, 2005
More on the UN Oil for Palaces.
SPECIAL REPORT #1 - OIL-FOR-FOOD INVESTIGATION by Roger L. Simon
This blog has new information from sources close to the investigation of the United Nations Oil-for-Food Scandal by Paul Volcker’s Independent Inquiry Committee. After some delay, the committee is releasing its preliminary results at noon Tuesday. This report may reveal, among other things, startling information tending to indicate Secretary General Kofi Annan had more knowledge of, or was closer to, his son Kojo’s activities with Cotecna - the company whose role in the scandal seems so pervasive - than previously thought.
This should be interesting.
9 Mar, 2005
Sounds good to me.
Defending Bolton by Anne Applebaum
For the record, let me begin by repeating a few quotes from John Bolton, newly nominated as ambassador to the United Nations, just so that no one can accuse me of naivete. He has said, “The Secretariat building in New York has 38 stories. If it lost ten stories, it wouldn’t make a bit of difference.” He has said that “wishful thinking about the United Nations . . . ran into a wall of reality in Kosovo.” He has been skeptical of U.N. peacekeeping operations, skeptical of the U.S. obligation to pay its U.N. dues, skeptical of just about everything, really, to do with the United Nations.
All of which makes him an ideal candidate to be America’s U.N. ambassador. Bolton – whom I’ve met but don’t know well – is blunt, which is an advantage in an institution where words are more often used to disguise meanings than to elucidate. He is unafraid of being disliked, which will be an advantage in a place where everyone will dislike him. In the past he has been unafraid of arguing his points, even in Europe, where they are deeply unpopular. Most of all, though, Bolton, who has been writing about the United Nations for decades, is one of the few people in public life willing to draw the distinction between what the United Nations actually is and what everybody would like it to be.
Precisely.
18 Feb, 2005
Hello, UN is Anyone Home?
Note to Kofi “The Magnificent”: UN Security Council Resolution 1559 - to end Syrian Occupation - was passed in September 2004. By unanimous vote, with 6 abstentions, it called for the “strict respect of Lebanon’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, unity, and political independence under the sole and exclusive authority of the Government of Lebanon throughout the country.”
As a result of the recent assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Hariri many are now calling for the current pro-Syrian Lebanese government to resign.
So Kofi, wouldn’t it be an opportune time to call for the withdrawal of the 15,000 Syrian troops from Lebanese soil and enforce Resolution 1559?
Cross posted within the “Cranial Cavity”
15 Jan, 2005
Ouch.
The UN: Bringing Lingonberries to a Needy World.
Drink warning.
10 Jan, 2005
Good on ya, mate.
Australia’s $1 billion aid package to Indonesia would not be wasted through aid agency incompetence, John Howard last night vowed.
Arriving home from the Jakarta tsunami summit, Mr Howard described the package as a defining moment in the history of Australia-Indon relations.
The Indonesian death toll yesterday jumped 20,000 to more than 113,000.
United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan toured the devastated province of Aceh as the world body took charge of the global relief operation for the disaster that left over 165,000 dead.
But Mr Howard said he was determined there would be no UN involvement in Australia’s massive package to Indonesia.
“There’s not always the view that money that goes through international agencies necessarily gets well spent,” he said.
A bit of an understatement… but he made his point.
(Via Chrenkoff, who has an excellent roundup.)
8 Jan, 2005
They are dead or in refugee camps, dumbo.
Annan wonders where are the people?
I must admit I have never seen such utter destruction, mile after mile. You wonder, where are the people?,” said Annan on Friday on his return to the provincial capital, Banda Aceh.
Mile after mile of utter destruction and he expects people? I think I’ll vote this one “stupidest comment of the year.” And it’s only the eighth of January.
More on “Oil for Palaces”
Crude Awakening for U.N. Slicksters
Iraqi officials have recently implicated more U.N. staffers in bribe taking during the oil-for-food program in a development that could dramatically escalate pressure on the world body, The Post has learned.
Investigators from the House International Relations Committee said several current and former officials in Iraq’s Oil, Health and Transportation ministries have told them that U.N. staffers assigned to the “661 Committee” — the U.N. Security Council group that oversaw sanctions and approved oil-for-food contracts — regularly took bribes and kickbacks from suppliers of aid to Iraq during the program.
The Iraqi ministry officials said the U.N. staffers, based in New York, were paid to accelerate approval of oil-for-food contracts or provide secret information on why certain suspicious contracts with Saddam Hussein’s regime were blocked by the 661 Committee, investigators said.
News that more U.N. officials may be involved in corruption is the latest revelation to rock the United Nations, where Secretary-General Kofi Annan is fending off calls for his resignation in the aftermath of history’s biggest financial scandal in which Saddam is alleged to have ripped off $21.3 billion.
Anyone surprised?
2 Jan, 2005
Sarcasm of the day.
In these times of gentleness and political correctness, we all must acknowledge that we’re all special in our own way. We each do what we can best do. Americans and Australians are good at saving lives and the world; the UN is good at asking for money and going to conferences. We’re sure both talents are equally valid; we shouldn’t judge one better or worse than the other.
From The Diplomad, which has been closely following UN “relief efforts". See also this post and this post and… oh, nevermind. Just go to the front page and keep scrolling.
- Marked Up linked with Perfect!
30 Dec, 2004
But that doesn’t count.
Contributions are pouring in to the American charities involved in the massive relief effort in South Asia at an “incredible” pace.
Americans are using the Internet, the mail and the phone and dropping by local relief-agency offices to donate — to help the survivors of the killer tsunamis get back on their feet and rebuild their lives, their homes and their communities.
“The response has been just incredible,” noted American Red Cross spokeswoman Jackie Flowers, who reported that $18 million in contributions had been received since Sunday.
The donations are coming from everywhere and everyone — including the tourist on the street, said Leslie Gottlieb, of the Red Cross’s New York chapter.
She said a tourist passing her office near Lincoln Center stopped in and gave $100.
At CARE USA’s office in Atlanta, “a stranger just walked into the office with a check for $10,000. And our offices around the country are reporting similar experiences,” said Ahuma Adodoadji, director for emergency humanitarian assistance.
Looks like individuals have (as of when this was written) pretty much matched the government’s contribution (I added up to about 30mil just from the agencies mentioned). But it won’t count with the UN because it was given freely, rather than taxed out of our pockets.
Command Post has the definitive list of charity links.
[update] Forget the match. Make that about 4 times the amount. Check out this post. Yeah… we Americans are real stingy. As are our horrible American Corporations. As Charles said, “We don’t expect our Government to spend our money for us. We take care of that ourselves.”
- The Laughing Wolf linked with Tsunami Update

From what I understand, this appointment is good for one year.
Does this mean that an approval vote will go directly to the Senate floor for an up or down vote after that year without debate???
Any answer here?
Comment by Bill Ewing — 1 Aug, 2005 @ 17:33
I think it gets re-debated (or could go to a vote) but by then he’ll have a record in the position, so that could change things (for better - or for worse).
Comment by Kathy K — 1 Aug, 2005 @ 19:36
Man that is going to be fun to watch. I hope he is as cantankerous and the Dems claim.
Comment by Andrew Ian Dodge — 2 Aug, 2005 @ 06:05