If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Should US follow Brit example?
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
UN to close London base after government refuses to help with soaring costs
Ewen MacAskill
Saturday September 6, 2003
The Guardian
The UN is to close its London office at the end of the year as part of a cost-saving exercise, transferring its activities to Brussels, which is to become its hub for western Europe.
It has had an office in London since 1946 - the year after it was founded - but its London director, Ahmed Fawzi, has failed to persuade the Foreign Office to give it free accommodation, as most other European capitals do.
Mr Fawzi argued that Britain's status as a permanent member of the security council and its commitment to the UN made London an important base, but the rent in Millbank tower had become prohibitive: it has risen from £92,000 a year, including services, in 2001 to £142,700.
Mr Fawzi had hoped that, with the Foreign Office's help, he could have made a case for London becoming the UN's regional hub, because it enjoys the advantage of being one of the most important media centres in Europe and is the location of much diplomatic traffic, especially from the Middle East.
The Foreign Office offered to help find alternative space for the UN in London, but refused to subsidise the rent. The places offered were more expensive than Millbank.
Now the world body has given notice to the owners of the tower that it will leave on December 31. Mr Fawzi has returned to UN headquarters in New York and the remaining seven staff have the option of taking redundancy or moving to Brussels. They will begin winding down operations next month.
Kofi Annan, the UN secretary general, had argued in favour of closing the offices in London and eight other European capitals, saying it would be better to open more in the developing world instead.
Besides Brussels, European bases will be retained in Vienna and Geneva.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1036637,00.html
Perhaps New York should "raise" the rent...
...and take a step toward solving an urban blight affliction.
Perhaps even move the whole of the UN dog and pony show to Tikrit...
And make Saddam Hussein its Supreme Eminence.
Jolly good show, Chaps! Such a simple solution. :cool:
0
Comments
Anyway don't speak too soon, the way Bush seems to be 'reconsidering' things these days, it looks like the U.N may be useful after all.
As the song goes 'well come on all you big strong men, Uncle Sam needs your help a-gain'
green peace will soon be seen as a terrorist organisation and their bank accounts will be frozen and key members marched off to guantanamo bay.
that seems to me to be the plan.
WE aint going to stand for much more of it are WE?
i think george bush is in the process of seriously fucking up america and it's economy ...the respect and trust has been plumeting already for some time now.
you can only fuck informed people about for so long.
people are informed like never before in history ...
WE are going to start fighting back at some point ...it's inevitable and the UN ...will finaly get some real teeth. american is going down fast and unfortunately my country is being dragged down by it.
THE U.N WILL ...come back from these dark days ...i just know it.
No great loss there.
Perhaps you need to look at what the US does contribute to the UN before making such comments? Even under the Bush regime...
There are many things I can find fault with the incumbent President on, but I'm not so blind that I can't see the other aspects too...
Certainly not our UN dues, although that's an issue that spans several presidencies.
I don't put much stock in any credible "contribution" to the UN by this administration however, not after the calculated charade perpetrated against the UN and international community by Bush and co with every intent to discredit it.
Especially that they now come crawling back to try to sucker the SC into covering their butts for the mess theyve made by parcelling out the responsibility and the cost of their beligerent and illegal venture.
Top 10 donors to the U.N. regular budget, 2003
United States * 24.5% $283.1 million
Japan 22% $253.1 million
Germany 11% $126.7 million
France * 7.29% $83.8 million
Italy 5.71% $65.7 million
Britain* 6.24% $71.8 million
Canada 2.8% $33.2 million
Spain 2.6% $32.7 million
Netherlands 1.98% $22.5 million
Russia* 1.56% $12.4 million
* Denotes permanent Security Council member
Let’s face it, without the United States the UN would go the way of the League of Nations, collapsing under the weight of its own corruption. As much distain I have for this Anti-American, Anti-Semitic organization I am afraid we are stuck with this group handed to us by none other than Soviet spy Alger Hiss.
It’s similar to living with a hemorrhoid; it’s itchy, painful and hemorrhages but life goes on.
You and Thanatos must be twins! Both of you discredit yourselves without any help from your opposition!
And what constitues pro-American or Pro-Semitic to your apparently challenged perception of the world? Those who bow and scrape unquestioningly no matter how much wrong and illegality is perpetrated by the afore-referenced governments?
Tell me, if or when you have children, will you adopt a laissez faire attitude toward any mischief they get up to and spare all rebuke, criticism or correction? If not I suppose by your reckoning you would be an enemy of your children.
Noone, American, Israeli or otherwise is above the law nor above rebuke and criticism for fueling world conflict. The sooner you learn that, the more credible your arguments may become.
The UN being corrupt
The UN being anti-American
The UN being anti-semitic :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
By the way, I seriously think that if the US were to pull out the other 190 states would be able to pay the $1.5m per head to compensate for America's contribution.
http://www.globalpolicy.org/finance/unitedstates/2002/06status.htm
Seems regardless of what is claimed above as our yearly contribution, we are still paying off over 20 years of arrears and have over 600 million left to actually pay. That of course is in large part the fault of successive administrations and Congresses, but speaks volumes about the prevailing attitudes inside the beltway.
Hearkening back to a 2001 article, these words ring truer today than ever before...
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml%3Fi=20010528&s=editors
UN Corruption in the Iraqi Food For Oil Program:
UN Officials Do Nothing To Prevent Skimming
I don't have hard evidence of this, but the UNHCR is Turkey and Azerbaijan has very questionable practices in regard to its treatment of refugees who are religious minorities.
http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0723-02.htm
Deflecting the issue again?
The subject was UN corruption, not Bush involvement in the Southwest Plan.
But on a side note, I know if I was to quote Fox News or one of its analysis you be giving me grief, so I will only say that the Boston Globe as a source leans further left than Fox does right.
Give me a break!
Doesn't sound like UN corruption from the article, Bandidi. Which UN officials took bribes?
No actually, simply showing that the source of our nation's antipathy toward the UN and its vital role in helping prevent unmitigated global warfare for more than a half century stems from an administration mired in so much corruption, criminality, and deceit (pick any key member of the administration and youve hit a goldmine of corruption).
Its time fellow Americans like yourself stopped ignoring the abuse this admin has made of its power (as you obviously would not have done had it been a Democratic govt (the endless right wing attempts to smear the Clinton years a prime example)) and start putting your criticism where it belongs first and foremost.
If not for multilateral institutions like the UN and the pressures of internationalism, our nation and its power mad elitests would have arrogantly lead us into political isolationism faster than this administration is systematically doing.
Would you care to oblige Bandito?
but..
Multiple Choice answer:
a) Since I live in America, and we are the most productive people on the planet I have been working in excess of 60 hours a week.
or choice
b) Since I live in America, and the economy is in such shables I have been standing in an unemployment line for the last week.
Aladdin:
Let’s start with anti-Semitism at the UN. Let's not dig far because my time is limited since Telestar 4 (Satellite at 89 degrees West Longitude) has failed and I will be needed to recover many sites without computer access.
The UN sides with Arafat over the State of Israel:
The UN sides with a known terrorist
We could go back further in to history but why bother. This pretty much sums up the attitude of the UN when dealing with the Israelis.
Arafat is the President of the Palestinian Authority. He might be "a known terrorist", but Ariel Sharon himself is a known war criminal wanted in several countries and directly responsible for the deaths of more than 1,000 people in one sitting in 1982, as well responsible for the deaths of at least 1,500 innocents since he took power.
For every possible death that Arafat might have in his hands, my bet is that Sharon has 5.
And yet I could see you and every other zionist fundamentalist screaming 'Nazis!' and 'anti-semites!' if anyone attempted to have Sharon removed from power in any way.
But then, how dare anyone, be the UN or individual nations, dare to tell the Kingdom of Israel that they cannot violate human rights like that and that they must comply with the countless UN resolutions they have ignored? They’re not dark-skinned Arabs!
The UN and the Europeans must clearly be anti-semite for demanding the IDF stop shooting 10-year old children or subjecting a whole people to decades of occupation and abuses. :rolleyes:
Change the fucking record Bandito.
http://www.counterpunch.org/sharon.html
Having said that they could simply move to a cheap part of Loondon or greater London that's still onthe Tube, there's plenty of offices for rent near where I live and that got loads of links to London.
I'll never understand how mportant projects and departments never get funding but the dumbest project MP's can think of have no trouble getting money by stealing it from Tax payers.
News Alert:
Israel is a parliamentary democracy. They elect their Prime Minister by popular vote. So eventually Sharon will be removed from power by the will of the people of Israel, in a free election.
Can you say the same for Arafat? He will be gone from power once he is dead, and only then.
And until that time he is the biggest impediment to peace in that region.
Check your copy of the UN Charter.
These "resolutions" against Israel were non-binding,
unlike the resolutions passed against Iraq which required mandatory compliance.
But then in your mind this is all about race, correct?:rolleyes:
No sir, I call you hypocritical for demanding that of Israel but you don't bat an eye when homicide bombers target Israeli woman and children on buses, in pizza parlors, at school etc...
I submit that your hypocrisy is rooted in prejudice.
Israel has tried it's citizens, who target Palestinian civilians, but can you say the same of Arafat and his Palestinian Authority?
For starters, Arafat isn't directing terrorism. This is something that even the Israelis acknowledge. Whether he wanted to curb militants or not is irrelevant. He can't. Every single Palestinian police station and governmental office has been destroyed by the IDF. The Palestinian police are under-equipped and have no support. But most importantly, Hamas is the closest the Palestinians get to an army. And you really expect that anyone would stand idly while a foreign army invaded your land, took it away and subjected your people to a catalogue of abuses and oppression spanning 4 decades that would make the most brutal of dictators blush???
Arafat can do little to convince militants, be peacefully or by force, that negotiation and a ceasefire are the only solution when Israel hasn't made a single gesture in 40 years towards peace. Even Hamas have suggested in many occasions that they are prepared to be pragmatic and that their alleged goal of 'destroying the Jewish state' is just mumbo jumbo, and would be 'officially' dropped the second the Israelis start fulfilling their obligations. Being a return to 1967 borders, the return of all stolen land and the full and permanent withdrawal of the occupying army, the dismantlement of all illegal settlements, the destruction of the Apartheid Wall of Evil currently being built and the right to return for refugees. As per international law and UN resolutions.
But do you think that anyone would want to settle for a broken, ever-shrinking land with illegal settlements flourishing all around it like the fetid tumour they are? These people have the right to their land!
If another people arrived in the States, took most of your land and subjected the Americans to decades of oppression and abuses, leaving you a miniscule and broken amount of land to live in and surrounded by Nazi-style containment walls you would be the first one fighting the invaders by any mean necessary. And then you would be outraged if anyone called you a terrorist. Because you would be a freedom fighter wouldn't you?
Open your eyes. The only way of achieving lasting peace is giving the Palestinians what is theirs and reaching a fair settlement. The second the Israelis agree to do what is right and go back to 1967 borders and dismantle the illegal settlements you would see and immediate end to all militant activity.
But that's clearly not what the Israeli government wants...
Ok, so now West Bank is controlled by Jordan and the Gaza strip controlled by Egypt and still the Palestinians have no nation of their own.
The term “occupied territory” is just another falsehood, perpetuated by those who have no desire to see the state of Israel exist.
As I said before, change the record. You will find that nobody at the UN, in Europe or elsewhere who demand that the Israelis stop shooting unarmed children dead and that the tanks withdraw from Palestinian towns is suggesting Israel does not have a right to exist.
As far as I'm concerned, there is only certain people who are against an Israeli and Palestinian state co-exisiting next to each other. Take a wild guess who they might be...
Really??? How about the Palestinians themselves?
Breeding Grounds For Hate
From the Article:
For instance, among the songs children learn at these camps are such classics as, "We’ll Throw Them into the Sea,"
Moreover, the maps contained therein do not even acknowledge Israel’s existence, instead depicting "Palestine" as an Arab land stretching from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. The Palestinian "problem," students learn, is not Israel’ s control over the West Bank and Gaza, but Israel’s very existence.
Kind of blows your theory that no one questions the Israel's right to exist, now doesn't it?
You truly miss the mark, as does our myopic administration and its hatemongering sycophants, on the totality of issues including occupation, indiscriminate rocket attacks, sniper sprees, house demolitions, ever encroaching illegal settlements, etc..
Now we're to believe that the Israeli government policy is not even an issue.
Another case of putting the cart before the horse in order to justify a thoroughly partial intermediation in favour of the zionist expansionist agenda which IS, in and of itself, the continued cuase of successive peace process failures.
Just the latest attempt to cloud the issue
a fuller examination of this anti-Palestinian campaign
US study uncovers misleading and politically inspired claims of CMIP
a disturbing revelation reveals what is being ignored by the mainstream media
I never claimed all the ills in the Middle East were due to Palestinian text books.
That link was only posted to refute the claim made by Aladdin that no one anywhere denied the right of Israel to exist as a nation.
I think most reasonable people can agree that is just not the case.
BTW, is sycophant your favorite insult? Or could we get through one post with out the use of that word. Just a suggestion.:D
So if you don't like the well earned label - and heaven knows those with your attitude on world matters wasted no time villifying (i.e. Un-American, Traitor, etc...) those of us who recognised where Bush was leading the country from the start - I suggest you abandon your support for an agenda is now all but universally revealed to be one of personal vendetta, greed, and arrogance.
Keep acting as an apologist for it all and I, for one, will continue to paint it with the brush it deserves.