9.12.04

Neo-cons 'lynching' Annan

I came across this article in the BBC, and it just makes me wonder about who is running the show over there.

To be honest with you, I quite like the BBC. It has some good and some bad, and I thought it's U.S. election coverage was quite good.
But every now and again you stumble across an article like this, showing the BBC's complete lack of perspective and elitist mentality, leaving you with a bitter taste in your mouth.

American critics of the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan have been accused by a former British UN ambassador of leading a "lynch mob."

Ah but the British mobs calling for Tony Blair to be impeached after four independent investigations have cleared him of any wrong-doing, are obviously straight thinking concerned citizens.
Americans however calling for a man who has lead one of the most corrupt organizations in one of the biggest scandals the world has ever seen, are a 'lynch mob'.
Obviously the disgusting behavior of British PMs trying to impeach their leader at a time of war is acceptable.

The former diplomat, Lord David Hannay, said of those who have called for Mr Annan's resignation: "The United States has many traditions, some good and some bad.
"The worst of the bad is the lynch mob. The best of the good is due process. We need more due process and less lynch mob," he said.


This is a laughable statement coming from a man whose own country has probably the worst press in the world when it comes to 'lynching'. British tabloids don't have their reputation for nothing.

The war of words has erupted over an investigation by a US Senate committee into scandals over the UN programme in which Iraq sold oil for food during the years of sanctions.
It has been revealed that Saddam Hussein siphoned money out of the programme for his own uses.
The Republican Senator Norm Coleman, who chairs the committee, complained that the UN was not being forthcoming enough.
"One conclusion has become abundantly clear: Kofi Annan should resign," he said.
"As long as Mr Annan remains in charge, the world will never be able to learn the full extent of the bribes, kickbacks and under-the-table payments that took place under the UN's collective nose."


Notice there is absolutely no mention of the size or sum of this scandal.

A complication for Mr Annan is that it has emerged that his son Kojo received payments from a Swiss company after it was given a contract for monitoring the programme.
Although payments to the son were not connected to Iraq - they involved West Africa - the admission has enabled critics of the father to widen their attack. The UN had previously said the payments had ended before the contract had been granted.


No, MR ANNAN said the payments had ended personally. See here the BBC here completely spinning Mr Annan out of the equation. This is journalism at it's finest folks.

For supporters of Mr Annan like Lord Hannay, an investigation set up by the UN into the oil-for-food scandal should be enough.
The investigation is led by the former Chairman of the Federal Reserve Paul Volcker, helped by Justice Richard Goldstone - the South African judge who prosecuted war crimes in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda - and by Professor Mark Pieth, a Swiss expert on money-laundering.
"We should rely on the Volcker inquiry," said David Hannay.
There is in fact no mechanism to sack a UN Secretary General. Mr Annan is currently in his second term and this ends on 31 December 2006. He has hinted recently that he will not seek an unprecedented third term.

The BBC has failed to mention that Volcker has absolutely no power to investigate matters fully and in a transparent way. Oops, only a small oversight!

But his own immediate future has also become bound up with something wider - a debate about the future of the UN itself.
A recently released report by a panel appointed by Mr Annan called for an expanded Security Council and a more dynamic and interventionist role for the UN. Lord Hannay was on the panel.
The current arguments make for a hostile atmosphere in which this report has to be discussed.
Mr Annan's "neo-conservative" opponents regard the oil-for-food as a symbol of the incompetence and worse of the United Nations.


Ah here we have the kicker. Mr Annan's "neo-conservative" opponents. The BBC obviously has absolutely no understanding of what that means, and is throwing it around like it is some sort of dirty foul word. The BBC is calling the majority of concerned Americas over where their money is going and what it is being used for "neo-conservatives".

The National Review, which describes itself as "America's Premier Site for Conservative News, Analysis, and Opinion" commented: "Never has the UN been more disrespectful or useless."
Mr Annan's own position was further weakened in conservative eyes when he said in a BBC interview just before the US presidential election that the invasion of Iraq was "illegal."
So for one side, talk of reforming the UN is pointless. They see the future more in terms of encouraging what is called the "community of democracies."
For the other, the cries of the neo-cons for Mr Annan's blood sound like a rehearsal for a campaign against the report. By destabilize the Secretary General, this argument goes, they seek to destabilize the UN itself.


No, they want some accountability for Mr Annan's organization, that used American dollars to fund money eventually used in killing American troops.

This article written by the BBC goes to reflect just how hypocritical many Europeans are when it comes to the United States.
One on hand they criticise the United States for it's "illegal" war and the international divide created by side stepping the U.N., but then, on the other hand they seem OK with the wide spread corruption and expect the country that is footing for 20% of the bill to just 'get over it'.
They claim the Americans have 'bad traditions' when they get angry about the money used to kill their own sons and daughters.

What a slap in the face to the American people from Lord Hannay and the BBC.

UPDATE:
This has caught the attention of some others, A Guy in PJ's has more here, and he also links to the Diplomad and Instapundit, check it out.