Quantcast

Pages

Sunday, October 28, 2007

The UN Production of the Flim Flam Man

A scarred reputation from the oil for food program, the failing Millennium Development Goals, another lame example of international intervention featured prominently in Burma as well as the abuses of sex scandals and general corruption now lay the back drop for a budget increase at the United Nations.

By Patrick Worsnip Thu Oct 25 UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon proposed on Thursday a rise in the U.N. budget for the next two years, seeking extra funding to head off conflicts and promote human rights amid new demands on the world body.
By EDITH M. LEDERER, AP Thu Oct 25 UNITED NATIONS - The U.N. Secretary-General proposed a two-year budget of $4.2 billion on Thursday, saying the small increase isn't much in light of the growing demands on the United Nations to address a range of diplomatic and security challenges. What a preposterous notion noted in the two news reports. Ban Ki-Moon apparently cites heading off conflicts, growing demands and addressing diplomatic, security and human rights issues as reasons for a budget increase. In the private sector, bottom line and key performance measures commonly dictate funding parameters for future allocation of resources. Not unlike most governments, public sector organizations in general draw no attention to the fact that no budget decisions reflect the effectiveness of the entity seeking more money. School boards and other local government bodies as well as state and federal governments routinely raise budgets without the corresponding justification of successful past performance. In the UN's case, the Millennium Development Goals alone are sufficient cause to deny budget increases. The little that will prove successful over a minimum of two decades demonstrates clearly that the UN has never possessed the ability to be effective. Certainly there are numerous other examples of the organizations futility but the MDG have special significance. The initiative was to benefit all people of the world who suffer from common deficiencies related to poverty, hunger, disease and similar difficulties not related to the benefit of any particular country or group. So even programs that remove any suggestion of favoritism are beyond the UN's ability to achieve success.
"That is not much, considering the demands upon us," he said, naming conflicts and potential crisis areas as well as longer-term challenges of alleviating poverty, providing humanitarian aid and fighting climate change and HIV/AIDS.
Listening over and over again to the identical sounds of each United Nations pronouncement.... last year .... $3.8 Billion. Price of allowing this scam to continue..... limitless. Let's see Mastercard do an ad on this. There are many voices echoing the call for an end to the United Nations and it is not limited to any one website. Whether campaign rhetoric or not, several US Presidential candidates have made equivalent statements. It may be necessary to engage in the typical demeaning activities characterized by radical public protests. Thoughtful communication focusing attention toward the flaws of the United Nations may already having the needed impact, one post at a time. One last note on the words of Ban Ki Moon. An example of his budget increase justification specified an amount for an extremely vague purpose. $18 Million dollars to 'strengthen the Department of Political Affairs.' How about using at least that much money to do some good for the people you are charged with serving, e.g., helping. And by that it is not meant that the money should be given to those within the United Nations organization. That is the biggest problem. All that money that never gets to a legitimate destination. Stanford Matthews MoreWhat.com

©2007-2012copyrightMaggie M. Thornton