Yet Another Flaw in the UN Climate Report

The UN climate panel is now admitting that they overstated how much of the Netherlands is below sea level.

A background note by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said a 2007 report wrongly stated that 55 percent of the country was below sea level since the figure included areas above sea level, prone to flooding along rivers. . . .

The Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, the original source of the incorrect data, said on February 5 that just 26 percent of the country is below sea level and 29 percent susceptible to river flooding.

While the UN panel claims that this misstatement doesn’t change the “core conclusions” about human induced global warming, those of us with normal reasoning powers know that any study that is filled with as many holes as this one can hardly come to any truly scientific conclusions.

On an unrelated note, Friday’s snowfall in Texas’ Dallas/Ft. Worth area shattered the record for most snow in a 24-hour period that has stood for over 90 years.

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Posted February 13th, 2010 Filed in Global Warming, United Nations

Soros Warns of Double Dip Recession; Recommends Socialism

Liberal financier George Soros thinks that there is every possibility for a double dip recession to occur next year. To stop this from happening, he wants to increase national debt of countries around the world:

“Some countries like Greece do have deficits of 12.5% of GDP [gross domestic product], which is intolerable and has to be reduced. Other countries like the United States and the main European nations have plenty of room to increase their deficits.”

“I think that since the adjustment process to the recession is incomplete, there is a need for additional stimulus. The political resistance to it increases the chances of a double dip in the economy in 2011 and after that.”

Supporting running up an even higher debt to pass on to our children (and great-great-great-grand children) is bad enough. But here’s what he thinks of Obama’s plan to put additional controls on financial institutions:

With the first day of the World Economic Forum dominated by the debate over re-regulation of the banks, Soros said he was supportive of Barack Obama’s plan to limit the size and scope of Wall Street institutions, but said that it “did not go far enough”.

He said that even if the reforms were agreed, the problem of banks considered “too big to fail” would remain. “Institutions have to be controlled so that they don’t fail. They have to be kept under much closer regulatory supervision.”

Soros said the globalisation of finance should be matched by global supervision. Leverage limits and tougher capital regulations would help to reverse the trend of the past few decades. “Deregulation became contagious,” Soros said.

According to socialist Soros, only government can control a bank so as to keep it from failing. Evidently, government programs can’t fail. Which is true, as long as you have taxpayers willing to keep throwing money at a problem that would have long ago died a painful death in the free market.

But worse yet, Soros wants “global supervision”. The American government running our car companies is bad enough. Can you imagine handing our banks over to the U.N.?

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Posted January 27th, 2010 Filed in Economics and the Economy, United Nations

UN Program “Routinely” Violates UN Regulations

I’m shocked! Shocked I tell you!

That paragon of morality in a corrupt world has been exposed in a report that is the result of a two-plus year probe into the operations of the United Nations Development Program for North Korea. The report shows how the agency routinely and systematically disregarded U.N. regulations and considered itself above the law:

The report depicts an organization that for years apparently considered itself immune from its own rules of procedure as well as the laws and regulations of countries that were trying to keep weapons of mass destruction out of Kim’s hands.

It also shows that UNDP apparently considered itself above the decisions of the United Nations Security Council, itself, when that organization tried — as it is still trying — to bar Kim from gaining the means to create more weapons of mass destruction.

The UNDP operation not only transferred millions of dollars to the corrupt Kim Jong-Il regime, it also gave Kim “dual use” technology that can be used for civilian purposes or for terrorist activites or perhaps even creating weapons of mass destruction. Specifically:

  • The UNDP hired North Korean government employees, hand-picked by the Kim regime, to fill sensitive core staff posts, including finance officer, technology officer, and assistant to the head of the UNDP office.
  • The UNDP office in North Korea paid the salaries of these staff directly to the government in hard currency — another forbidden practice.
  • Furthermore, the UNDP gave them hard-currency supplements in cash — yet another violation of its own rules.
  • The regime-appointed finance officer — the person who wrote UNDP’s checks for 10 years — also was responsible for reconciling UNDP’s bank statements with the checkbook. As a result, the study’s authors were denied being able to see roughly $16.6 million worth of canceled checks that were signed by UNDP, nor were they allowed to even interview the finance officer.
  • In 78 percent of a transaction sample of UNDP payment records that they reviewed, the signature on payment receipts could not be verified. For all the rest there was no sign of a receipt at all.
  • Other UN agencies operating in the country also made hard currency transfers to Kim, so the problem is not limited to the UNDP. Perhaps as much as $20 million dollars went to Kim.
  • A staggering $381 million flowed into North Korea from non-UN donors through an arrangement called the Agriculture Recovery and Environmental Protection, or AREP, Cooperation Framework, an initiative supported by the UNDP.
  • Sensitive “dual use” items — which can be used to create weapons of mass destruction — that UNDP handed over to North Korea included computers, software, satellite-receiving equipment, spectrometers and other sensitive measuring devices: 95 items in all.
  • Moreover, some of these items were secured in a “misleading” fashion, with UNDP employees going as far as supplying false information to a Dutch manufacturer that questioned how its product would be used in North Korea.
  • Although annual reports of the UNDP’s safe’s contents list counterfeit US $100 bills (Kim’s famous “Super-Note”) for years, yet no one informed US authorities and UNDP officials claimed no knowledge of the bogus money.

The report reaches two disturbing conclusions, which do little more than support the view of the UN as a corrupt, perhaps even evil, entity:

  1. The whistleblower that kicked off the investigation, Artjon Shkurtaj, was not being retaliated against when a promotion that had already been granted was withdrawn after he made his allegations. The report goes as far as to attack Shkurtaj’s personal integrity.
  2. The report dismisses any notion of holding anyone at UNDP accountable for these spectacular lapses by invoking a concept of blanket immunity. Further, it finds, “There is no evidence that anyone acted in bad faith or in a fraudulent or deceptive manner.” The lapses are blamed on “inadequate communications.”

Fox News’ George Russell wraps up his article nicely:

Rather than bringing “closure on the allegations against UNDP,” as the organization’s boss, Dervis, hopes, the North Korean investigative report ought to raise bigger and more urgent questions about UNDP operations around the world.

If Kim Jong Il’s despotic government was able to twist UNDP’s rules and its adherence to international law with such ease, what is going on in UNDP offices in dictatorships such as Zimbabwe and Syria?

Most urgently of all, as the U.N. wobbles toward further sanctions on the nuclear-ambitious Islamic regime in Iran, what is going on in UNDP offices in Tehran?

What, indeed? Do we need further proof that the UN aids terrorist regimes and is a destabilizing force in the world politic?

And does anyone really think that either a President McCain or (shudder) a President Barack will hold the UN accountable, much less withdraw our ambassador and kick the whole oily mess across the ocean to Europe where it belongs?

Posted June 11th, 2008 Filed in United Nations

Prehistoric Cave Paintings Defaced by UN "Peacekeepers"

Officers attached to UN forces in Western Sahara spray painted graffiti on top of 6,000 year old cave drawings, some going so far as to sign and date their work. The UN is thinking of extreme measures, including reassigning the officers and perhaps even reporting them to their home countries.

More here.

Technorati Tags:
Posted January 30th, 2008 Filed in United Nations

Romney "Pro-UN"?

Posted January 18th, 2008 Filed in Romney, Mitt (R), United Nations

Fear-Mongering at the UN

From IBD, Waving The Flag Of Fear:

One day after the United Nations issued a doomsday report on global warming, it admits it has grossly exaggerated the seriousness of the AIDS problem. The cycle of fear-mongering at the U.N. continues. . . .

Remember the 1980s, when we were told that AIDS was a nondiscriminatory disease destined to wipe out large segments of the population and bring untold ruin to humanity?

When Life magazine declared on its cover in 1985 that "Now No One Is Safe From AIDS"? When the new Black Plague, worse than the first, was upon us? Who could forget Oprah Winfrey’s dire warning that a fifth of heterosexuals would be dead by 1990? . . .

Global warming fear-mongering is likely to fall by the wayside in the next decade or so when it becomes obvious that the charlatans have been wrong. That won’t be the end, however; global warming will be replaced by a wild exaggeration that sounds even more threatening.

Read it all, remembering ZPG from the 70’s because the Earth would be overrun with people if we didn’t stop having babies, the "we’ll be out of oil by the year 2000" from the 60’s, and every other crackpot idea you’ve heard from the alarmists.

Posted November 21st, 2007 Filed in Environment, Global Warming, United Nations

IAEA, Part Deux

The last UN Resolution demanding the Iran stop enriching uranium expired in May, and Iran remains defiant. This is different that Saddam’s behavior before the liberation of Iraq, as he at least pretended to cooperate while leading Hans "Inspector Clouseau" Blix on wild goose chases across the countryside.

This time the member of the axis of evil is out-and-out thumbing his nose at the rest of the world, making just enough concession to draw out the "diplomacy" while continuing to add centrifuges for enriching uranium.

Yet many people put their trust in the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and it’s chief, Mohamed ElBaradei.

Newsweek interviewed IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei about his efforts, and ElBaradei made two very concrete claims.

Newsweek: When the plan was announced, critics said it could undermine the Security Council’s efforts to pressure the Tehran government.
ElBaradei: There was a lot of commotion and misunderstanding about this plan. It’s a litmus test for Iran. In two or three months we’ll know if Iran is serious about coming clean. If they do, that obviously will create better conditions for negotiations. If they [don’t], then of course we will be in a different ball game altogether.

Newsweek: What if in three months Iran hasn’t delivered? If this diplomacy isn’t backed by a credible threat of force, the Iranians can stall and keep enriching and eventually they will have the material that could go into a bomb.
ElBaradei: If Iran were to prove that it was using this period for delaying tactics and it was not really acting in good faith, then, obviously, nobody—nobody—will come to its support when people call for more sanctions or for punitive measures. That is a point that has been made very clear to them by everybody, including myself. If we come [back] with a negative report after three months, I don’t see that anybody will come and say, well, give them another chance.

There you have it. If Iran has not revealed all by the first day of the new year, it is time for action.

After watching "diplomacy" and international politics for a few years, however, there is no doubt that by the first of the year Mr. ElBaradei will be singing a very different tune. One that acknowledges a lack of success but praises imaginary progress and calls for more time and further inspections. We’ve seen this play out before and I have no doubt that ElBaradei and Blix are cut from the same cloth.

Wait. You’ll see.

Posted September 27th, 2007 Filed in Iran, Middle East Freedom, United Nations, War on Islamofascism

Bush to Nominate Muslim to be UN Ambassador

Word has it that President Bush will nominate Zalmay Khalilzad to be Bolton’s replacement as the new U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, perhaps as soon as tomorrow.

Khalilzad is a Sunni Muslim, currently serving as ambassador to Iraq:

A consummate dealmaker, Khalilzad played an active role trying to push the Iraqi government toward political reconciliation. Khalilzad’s efforts [alienated] some in the Shia-dominated Iraqi government who complained that Khalilzad was biased in favor of Iraq’s Sunnis.

Wizbang thinks that Khalilzad will be “a great advocate for America’s interests at the UN.”

Matt at Blogs for Bush says that the president “should leave the post vacant after the Democrats shamefully obstructed John Bolton.”

I disagree, believing that if we are going to pay for the UN, we should at least be there to try and control things.

But both miss the elephant in the room. Does anyone believe that Khalilzad will be the tiger we need to protect Israel from the billion surrounding Muslims that threaten its very existence, at the international body that has repeatedly shown itself to be anti-Semitic?

This would never have gone through a Republican Congress. The Democrats will not want to be seen obstructing a Muslim’s appointment to this role so I predict he will be confirmed.

Israel is screwed.

Posted January 4th, 2007 Filed in United Nations

WHO to Blame

In spite of launching (and sustaining) a concerted effort to control the population explosion in 1952, India hasn’t exactly been successful. India’s population crossed the 1 billion mark in 1999 and is expected to surpass China by 2040.

One reason is that for some reason condoms don’t work well in India, with men in that country experiencing an incredible 15 to 20 per cent failure rate. And men who experience repeated failures don’t continue using them.

There is only one size of condom sold throughout most of India, which follows the World Health Organization’s recommendation.

Working on the theory that the WHO recommendation wasn’t “optimized” for India’s population, and on the concept that perhaps all men are not created equal, a study was launched in 2001 to determine if variations in penis size is the reason that so many condoms fail. (Condoms too small are more likely to rupture, those too large will spill.)

This was a high tech study, using digital photographs and sophisticated software (no pun intended). And now, five years later, the early results are in.

The WHO recommended condom size of 150 to 180 mm in length (6 to 7 inches) is too large for the general Indian population. Preliminary data shows that 60% of men in Mumbai (the financial capital) measure 5  to 6.1 inches and another 30% are 4 to 5 inches in length.

While the news organizations and blog posts have concentrated on the obvious (but somewhat humorous) cheap shots (e.g., Times of India: Indian men don’t measure up), they are missing the real story.

India has almost six million people with HIV/AIDS, the world’s highest caseload. WHO made an ill-conceived, poorly researched recommendation for solving the problem with condoms and the people of India are paying for it.

The really sad point of this story is that the UN has yet another spectacular failure to add to their pathetic record, and the media failing to point it out.

On the other hand, I rather enjoyed this phrase from last night’s Saturday Night Live:

Which explains why they’re always cranky when I call tech support.

Side Note: The Four Seasons Condoms company in Australia completed a similar study in 1999. They just included a little ruler and a survey in their product and promised two free condoms for participating. When they saw the results, they started offering condoms in three sizes. Low-tech is often the best way to go.

Update: India is closing in on China in another grim statistic: female feticide. With the economic boom in India, wealthy families have access to diagnostic technology and are killing girls either shortly before or, in too many cases, after birth.

Posted December 10th, 2006 Filed in India, United Nations

UN Report Denies “Right” of Self Defense

A United Nations report states clearly and unequivocally: you have no right to defend yourself. Particularly with a gun. Period.

From the summary:

The principle of self-defense has an important place in international human rights law, but does not provide an independent, supervening right to small arms possession, nor does it ameliorate the duty of States to use due diligence in regulating civilian possession.

Just in case you were one of those doubting the “hidden” agenda of the UN to remove small arms possession from anyone except tyrants and thugs.

Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations applies to States acting in self-defense against armed attacks against their State sovereignty. It does not apply to situations of self-defense for individual persons.

Mao Tse-tung: 14 to 20 million dead. Joseph Stalin: 20 million dead. Pol Pot: 1 to 3 million dead. Kim Il Sung: 4 million dead. Adolf Hitler: 60 million dead.

The UN would never think to take weapons away from these monsters. But you and I — we are to be feared. Can’t trust us with guns!

Continue Reading »

Posted August 30th, 2006 Filed in Gun Stuff, Second Amendment, United Nations