The U.N.'s rape and torture of the innocents

Why the UN is fake and worthless!

Quote:

---

Fifty U.N. peacekeepers and U.N. civilian officers face an estimated 150 allegations of sexual exploitation and rape in the Congo alone.

---

Quote:

---

Hundreds of babies, fathered by U.N. personnel, have been born to Congolese girls and women—including the 15-year-old deaf mute daughter of Aimee Tsesi, who told Ross she was turned away at the gates of the U.N. camp when she went for assistance.

---

Quote:

---

entire network of U.N. personnel who had sex with underage girls in Congo and the Central African Republic. Investigators are now digging into claims of U.N. infiltration by organized pedophiles.

---

Quote:

---

Ukrainian and a Canadian — left the Congo after getting local women pregnant.

---

Quote:

---

U.N. report found "widespread" evidence of sexual abuse of West African refugees. Girls and women in East Timor, Cambodia, and Kosovo have reported sex crimes perpetrated by U.N. peacekeepers.

---

Quote:

---

Human rights groups say such monstrosities have been tolerated by U.N. brass for years.

---

Indeed they have, all the way back to the mid 90's!

Quote:

---

Back in 1997, there were reports Belgian U.N. troops roasted a Somali boy. A military court reportedly sentenced two paratroopers to a month in jail and a fine of 200 pounds for the offense.

---

Quote:

---

Another sergeant was accused of murdering a Somali whom he was photographed urinating upon. Another child, accused of stealing food from the paratroopers' base, died after being locked in a storage container for 48 hours. Fifteen other members of the same regiment were investigated in 1995 for "acts of sadism and torture" against Somali civilians.

---

Quote:

---

The pattern of abuse was not confined to Belgian troops. Belgium was actually the third country in the peacekeeping group to charge troops with serious crimes against Somali citizens -- including rape, torture and murder. In 1995, a group of Canadian paratroopers were investigated for torturing a Somali to death and killing three others.

---

War crimes out the ass. Abu Ghraib was a ****ing birthday party compared to this **** these **********s did and still are doing. I'm ashamed my tax money is funding this rapist organization.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=42088
http://jewishworldreview.com/michelle/malkin021605.php3

Hi,

Quote:

---

War crimes out the ass. Abu Ghraib was a ****ing birthday party compared to this **** these **********s did and still are doing.

---

US Solders are also part of UN peace keeping Force . :rolleyes:

They also make no mention of the other side in many of this sexually involved instances. There is such a thing as consentual sex. Every angle should be viewed from.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SwordFish_13

US Solders are also part of UN peace keeping Force

---

Yes, people love to point fingers at the US while simultaneously demanding hand-outs.

Hi,

Quote:

---

Yes, people love to point fingers at the US while simultaneously demanding hand-outs.

---

I am not Pointing Fingers at anybody ......... what i ment was when you say UN Troops ..... it ectually means Troops form member Countries including USA .......... UN dosen't have a army of it's own .

Human beings run the gammut of good to bad ........ and solders are Humans too .........But what Counts is that the Guilty should be Brought to Book ....... But when it comes to Procetuation the Countries are so protective about their Solders .................fearing that It's Solders could be tried in the ICC the US still hasent recognised it................... So what do you expect :rolleyes: .

So who's Bad UN or the Member Countries ? . :)


--Good Luck--

One day people more people will look at the UN and open their eyes. The United Nations does use our troops to enforce resolutions. That is NOT the case in Iraq, but is the case in Eastern Europe.

//EDIT oh and us labeled NeoCons, don't like it one bit. We should offer support under our OWN terms and command as aid and assistance. Not under the command of some UN political jackass.

Quote:

---

Indeed they have, all the way back to the mid 90's!

---

that's funny. the mid 90's wasn't that long ago.

Quote:

---

We should offer support under our OWN terms and command as aid and assistance.

---

offering support under "your OWN terms" is how a country would go about things. the UN is supposed to keep the bigger picture in mind when making decisions, not side with one country, and not to with-hold aid when it can be given because of some piss-ant political demand. the UN is supposed to do what's right for people, all people.

Quote:

---

Not under the command of some UN political jackass.

---

it's likely that the jackass is a US representative, no? though there is a greater chance that the jackass you are on about is not a US representative.

This is what happens when third world idiots, (the UN), are put in charge of third world idiots, (the UN soldiers that are sent in the name of the UN), that are sent to third world idiots, (the corrupt and immoral countries the UN sends people to).

Does anyone see a pattern there.....

There are two....

1. Idiots
2. Third World

I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to see the root of the problems here....

For the dummies:- It's the UN trying to police the third world....

For the Canadians:- Yes, I noticed you were in there quite a lot.... You are being governed by idiots... The sad thing is... You are falling for it..... :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

it's likely that the jackass is a US representative, no? though there is a greater chance that the jackass you are on about is not a US representative.

---

Often US soldiers are put under direct command of UN officers, who have axes to grind. That is what I meant. It should be joint efforts under each armies own officers and it should not be forced under political threat. They were also forced to give up their sense of dignity as US soldiers and "forceed" to wear United Nations blue berets instead of their own head covers. Those who did not obey were court marshaled. That is what I was on about.

//EDIT "own terms" also meaning command under our own field officers. :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by SwordFish_13
US Solders are also part of UN peace keeping Force .

---

We have a maven in the house people. Ok, as I wade my way through some spin.

First of all we shouldn't have to lecture these liberals on why the UN is one of the most corrupt, wasteful, fake, law-breaking, covered-up, bull-**** etc... organizations known to mankind. And we needn't have anymore simpleton UN/ liberal belecture on what is "morally right".

Quote:

---

They also make no mention of the other side in many of this sexually involved instances. There is such a thing as consentual sex. Every angle should be viewed from.

---

Code:

---

U.N.'s sexual code of conduct is prominently displayed on U.N. facilities Congo – forbidding sex with prostitutes or women under 18 –

---

Look, who gives a **** about the "other side"! Bottom line they're not over there to get their dicks wet. They're over there to ????? , what are they supposed to be doing again??? Oh, yeah something about "peace keeping".

"victims say they were raped, but later given food or money to make the incident appear to have been consensual – rape disguised as prostitution."

I'll post more of my thoughts later... I'm reading reports of 7 to 9 year olds being raped vaginally and anally by Euro UN troops.

Quote:

---

"victims say they were raped, but later given food or money to make the incident appear to have been consensual – rape disguised as prostitution."

---

Or prostitution alleging rape ........ The media is not always user friendly.




Judging the entirety of the UN by the acts of a few in dubious circumstances is not alot different than terrorists with a political agenda indiscriminately killing the people of that nation (people being defined as the total of the population minus the beaucracy), though judgement is not murder - it is in effect a form of 'passive terrorism'.

I use to work for the UN when I was a soldier in Europe, yes the peacekeepers, and I can indisputably attest to the fact that their are some warm hearted, philanthropists involved in its workings. I was part of a company stationed in the Pyrenees west of Andorra (a very small nation that most people aren't aware exists) and I was shot in my stomach by a child of about 14 involved with ETA - But not all the Basque people are ETA and not all ETA are of the 'terrorist persuasion'.

Another example of what I have termed 'passive terrorism' comes from when I lived in S. Korea.
I was absolutely head over heels in love with a Korean bird and she with me. But her family would not condone us being together based solely on the fact that I was a weaguk (foreigner to Korea) and threatened to completely disavow her if we saw each other any longer. Koreans are very family oriented (in a twisted sense) and we ended our trysts - 'familial terrorism'.

Another form of terrorism is 'intellectual terrorism' - I shall explain - I have a very high IQ and I have always been regarded highly because of it by people who know me. But I don't consider my intelligence to be based on that fact, I regard my intelligence based on the fact that I put no weight in the IQ system, that it is only a medium developed by man to categorize and cliche their fellow man. If I were to be honest I would say (and am saying) that I have met many people who are better, nicer more decent people than me who have considerably lower IQs than I who would not be seen as who they really are because of their lower IQ - 'intellectual terrorism'.

Terrorism comes in many forms and every time an entire group of people is put into a niche based on the actions of a minority inside their same group is a form of terrorism to some extent.

Maybe Im babbling a bit (but its 7:00am and Iv been up a long time) but we also have to keep in mind that for every person who sees people like Bin laden and the other violent factions as terrorist there are just as many people somewhere in the world that considers them freedom fighters. Where is the line of demarkation between terrorists/freedom fighters and the people that make them feel that they have to fight for something that is a natural right to all anyways?

Sorry I got off subject a bit - this should probably be a thread of its own.

see here is the thing...

#1- soldiers are people who are not much different then any one else... they have a sex drive and so on... but one major difference is that they have a lot more power... not to say that all people with power and a sex drive will abuse said power, but it does leave for a bad combination. esp when you factor in that the persons mate is usually thousands of miles away...

#2- in situations were soldiers take things too far and abuse people and such... again, this is because these are people. i do not condone any of the actions but since they are not machines, i can also see where they may get carried away... the only way to stop it would be replacing them with machines OR brain washing them even more...

#3- the UN is niether terribly useless nor terribly useful. in many cases it can be useful to help in situations.; it also gives a forum were member nations can discuss things and put out opinions and so on. it fosters collaboration among much of the world, a collaboration that may not exist otherwise. it has its problems and it doesn't always do the right thing, but nothing is perfect... until we can come up with a better way to unify the nations of the worlds, this one is definitely better then nothing. and it is definitely better then a one world government....

My issue with the UN is a typical stereotype. Politics: it does provide a forum for countries to wag about, they pass all kinds of resolutions that last decades. But they rarely enforce anything and they lack internal controls to prevent corruption.

If the Un rarely enforce any thing important it is normally because one of the permanent members votes against it. What that means is that the UN has been hamstrung from its very conception. To be totally honest I get the impression that most of the opposition to the UN coming from the US today is extremely recent in its origin. Once the UN stopped acting more or less like an extension of US forgine policy the slander campaign started.
As has been pointed out the UN has no army of its own and as such it depends on the different countries to supply the troops and administrative personnel it deploies around the world. There will always be a few bad apples when you are talking about tens of thousands of people. That doesnt mean the organisation should be condemned. To finish just too little qoutes most americains should recongise but probably they mean nothing today.

Quote:

---

To those new States whom we welcome to the ranks of the free, we pledge our word that one form of colonial control shall not have passed away merely to be replaced by a far more iron tyranny. We shall not always expect to find them supporting our view. But we shall always hope to find them strongly supporting their own freedom —

---

Quote:

---

"To that world assembly of sovereign states, the United Nations, our last best hope in an age where the instruments of war have far outpaced the instruments of peace, we renew our pledge of support—to prevent it from becoming merely a forum for invective—to strengthen its shield of the new and the weak—and to enlarge the area in which its writ may run."

---

John F. Kennedy
Inaugural Address
Friday, January 20, 1961

Maracu, even when they PASS a resolution they do nothing. Let's take current world affairs. THe UN has voted to go into the Sudan and bring those people resonsible for mass genocide to justice. No one has vetoed the action.

It's one thing to support one's view, its another to be repeatedly stabbed in the back. And then use the mechanism of the United Nations to stand against someone on principle, and then find out it was not based on principle at all, but of greed. Especially with history behind their faux stance on politics.

Thanks for reminding us of the wisdom of Kennedy. For the record he had his own battles within the United Nations. It didn't just start, however learning of continuous corruption within the body does fuel it today. Kennedy made good decisions during a crisis both at home and with the soviet union. You may remember the crisis that could have brought world war upon the west? Our agressive action against Cuba and ALL foreign ships in the vicinity had some reprecussions within the UN Security Council.

But like I said, it's one thing to speak out... it's another to be corrupt.

I've avoided this debate simply because I don't know enough about the UN or how it operates to have an opinion either way...I'll let you guys debate the practical usefulness of the UN in today's world.

But I will say that Canada has served on and has deployed more peacekeeping troops than any other nation through the UN including the US...125,000 up to 2003 stats...out of a total of 750,000...1,457 have died, 107 of then Canadians...and Lester B. Person, who would go on to become prime minister actually was responsible for the calling them peace-keeping missions in 1956....before then they weren't known as such.

Criminals can be found in every walk of life...and should be punished accordingly! But, for the record, even though Canada has deployed the most troops in the most diverse circumstances through the UN, it has had the least amount of criminal activity...in fact, statistically, total criminal activity as mentioned has been substantialy less than the number of Canadians that have died...I'd say that's a pretty good record and something to be proud of.

A toast to the Canadians. elkgrin

You HAVE to [try] to read this linked post.

Some more sh1te that the UN gets up to
I was trolling looking for details on UN payments [countries are suppose to PAY to belong .........] specifically the head tosser kofi / koffee anan, and his country Ghana.

Fell into this page, spent two HOURS reading it, totally APPALLED at the state and size of incompetance throughout the entire heap..........

one in particular - Great Rant from the USS Abraham Lincoln - roughly a third of the way down, REALLY got to me. TOTAL WANK3R5

Maybe the NEXT war we'll be allowed to hose these filth ?

[edit]

Quote:

---

Let me insist again on one point. Who profits from the existence of the UN? Let's take the five member of its Security Council.

The US? Hardly. It pays the bills while the UN has become an mechanism to try and contain its power.

Russia? It doesn't care much for it, nor does China.

The Brits? They, probably, least of all. The UK being a honest country, follows the rules, doesn't use nor abuse of its position which is frequently used by its internal and external enemies to actually reduce its legitimate influence.

Thus we're back to the usual suspect: France. The UN is an institution the function of which nowadays is to potentialize France's declining influence in the world. They know how to deal with bureaucrats in general and with Third World bureaucrats in particular, the French. They also know how to set up and how to manipulate already established NGOs. They know how to make rules that are advantageous to themselves and how to bend them when needed. The UN is basically France's megaphone nowadays.

---

The bloody FRENCH, I KNEW they would be in there somehow :)
This : from October 2004

Quote:

---

This month, the United Nations Security Council voted to condemn terrorism. The resolution was introduced by Russia, still grieving over the terrorist attack on a school in Beslan, and perhaps the unanimous vote will give it a measure of solace. But the convoluted text and the dealings behind the scenes that were necessary to secure agreement on it offer cold comfort to anyone who cares about winning the war against terrorism. For what they reveal is that even after Beslan and after Madrid and after 9/11, the UN still cannot bring itself to oppose terrorism unequivocally.

The reason for this failure is that the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), which comprises fifty-six of the UN's 191 members, defends terrorism as a right

---