Kofi Annan Gives Farewell Speech

So did Slick KKKlintler. In fact SlicKKK launched a cruise missle raid on Iraq the day before he was impeached and had Dickless Gephardt try to keep his face straight while trying to make the case in congress that it was unpatriotic to start an impeachment with a "war" in progresss. That's the new definition of "chutzvah" in Yiddish dictionaries.

NOT having Iraq targeted at any time prior to 2001 would have been total incompetence on the part of any US government guilty of it.

How about: A history of voting for nothing but criminals and gangsters is at the bottom of being unheard.

Yeah, gungasnake - you and MLK are practically equals, as far as quotability. Thanks so much for the moving suggestion for a sig line.

Believe it or not, I was out there at the reflecting pond when Martin Luther King gave his famous speech. King, unlike Kofi Annan and unlikethe kinds of guys most black people vote for these days, was definitely not an Amos/Andy character. Very little resemblence between him and the Jesse Jacksons, Al Sharptons, William Jeffersons, Marion Barrys, Ray Nagins, and Slick KKKlintons of the world.

Yeah, hinge, why can't you just be reasonable for once!

I hope you understand now.

As a matter of fact, gungasnake is equal to MLK, as am I, as is anybody that enjoys equal rights. Course I realize that some believe that there are those that are more equal. I don't agree with that, I believe that there are those that believe that they should be more equal

So, you believe that having equal rights makes everyone equal in terms of value and achievements?


Thus, you would consider both yourself and, say, Jack the Ripper, the equal of Martin Luther King in terms of their value to the march of civilization?

You know, the more I think about it....

I never really understood why they took Amos'n Andy off the air and you assume the race-baiters amongst the dems did it, but my guess at this point would be that the de-moKKKer-rat party feared it as direct competition. In other words, if you can watch Amos n Andy on television for free, what do you need the dem party for? Amos Jones, Andy Brown and George Stevens were just as funny to watch as the democrats, and without all the hate and division and pathalogical consequences.

Lol! I rest my case.

Do you really think your question deserves an answer?

Kofi's stain

UN chief wronged U.S., coddled
dictators and ignored corruption





BY NILE GARDINER

Some people go out in style. On Monday, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan bade farewell by biting the American hand that has fed him for the last decade. Kofi's American swan song, delivered at the Truman Library in Missouri, was a condescending piece of finger-wagging from a discredited diplomat who can barely disguise his contempt for American foreign policy.
One low-light: his declaration that Washington's position in the "vanguard of the global human-rights movement...can only be maintained if America remains true to its principles, including in the struggle against terrorism. When it appears to abandon its own ideals and objectives, its friends are naturally troubled and confused."

This from a man who blithely allowed the biggest financial scandal of modern times, the multibillion-dollar Oil-for-Food debacle, and blinded himself to human-rights violators throughout Asia, Africa and the Middle East.

Amazingly, some U.S. political leaders still defend Annan's leadership. Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) praised him as a man who served with "grace, humor, determination, always doing what he felt was in the best interest of mankind." And Annan has long been a darling of the American left. In 2002, media mogul Ted Turner famously remarked that Annan "has the toughest job in the world and everybody loves him. He doesn't make anybody mad at him, not even Saddam Hussein."

But Annan has been no friend of the American people, or of the Iraqi people. At every opportunity, he has undermined U.S. global leadership, most recently making a habit of deriding America's decision to remove Saddam from power as "illegal." People of good will can debate whether that decision was right or wrong - but it was Saddam, not Bush, who thumbed his nose at a dozen UN resolutions and systematically oppressed the Iraqi people.

Annan has a long track record of cozying up to dictators. He has consistently failed to condemn African tyrants such as Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe or Omar Al-Bashir of Sudan. And aside from a few perfunctory criticisms, he has been noticeably quiet about the threats against Israel posed by Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Annan gave only a low-key response to Iran's state-sponsored Holocaust denial conference, which sparked international outrage this week. To his credit, incoming Secretary General Ban Ki Moon has already strongly denounced it.

As a result of this and more, the UN's standing as a moral authority on the world stage - not exactly stellar at the start of Annan's tenure - has plummeted during his 10-year reign. He was forced to disband the UN Commission on Human Rights after Western complaints over human-rights abusers (Cuba, Libya, et al.) running the show. Yet his "reform" solution, the much-vaunted Human Rights Council, is just as bad. It has been unwilling even to condemn the regime in Khartoum over the crisis in Darfur.

Even worse, amid a culture of weak and permissive leadership, UN peacekeepers entrusted with protecting some of the world's most vulnerable people have raped and abused hundreds of refugees in the Congo, Sierra Leone, Haiti and other war zones. Before he became secretary general, Annan was in charge of UN peacekeeping operations during the Rwanda slaughter and the mass killing at Srebrenica, in Bosnia. Suffice to say, in that capacity, he did not earn the top job.

The free world should not shed a tear at Annan's departure. Rather, let New York bid good riddance to the most weak-kneed secretary general in the history of the United Nations, a shameless appeaser of despotism and tyranny. He may well be remembered as the Neville Chamberlain of our time.

Gardiner is the director of the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom at the Heritage Foundation.

Originally published on December 17, 2006

Margret Thatcher was one of the greatest Pms that England has ever seen, next to Churchill, she is the greatest. I was fortunate to have been living in England when she was elected, I saw what James Callaghan did to that country & what Thatcher did for that country. She knows what she's talking about.

I never expected a different answer from you, you cardboard cutout.

You don't have to confirm where your coming from politically any more, I understand. Thank bejeebus I'll never go there.

Actually, she wasn't ALL bad.


I just read the other day that Thatcher's intelligence services blew the whistle on Reagan's illegal activities with Iran and the arms deal.

She was apparently incensed that the old cretin was selling arms to Iran, while his lackeys were strong arming and shrilly denouncing any other government that did not obey the US embargoes.



It's an ill wind....


:wink:

I was gonna say that a public service does well in spite of the government of the day not because of it - but I have to concede she let the world know rather than squash it. Damn.

Thatcher concentrated on the macro at the expense of the micro and many many people suffered under her rule while members of her own party profited on that suffering.

I think a good pollie balances the macro and micro. She was too full of her own opinion to give a rats about the powerless.

Thatcher was probably the worst PM England has ever had. The wedge between the haves and have nots expanded mightily under her. But then, I suppose it's understandable that you'd support a worthless right wing bitch.

You don't appeciate individuality? I should be a real cardboard cutout & toe your line? then you'd think better of me? Guess what....I am a conservative & so far can't see where I'd ever agree with you, but I can do that without calling you names....

I have yet to see evidence to support that statement.

Since you're either ignorant of the facts or are being dishonest in your portaryal of the wedge between the haves & havenots, I'll fill in the missing why.
In 1978, Englands winter of discontent, (& the year I arrived in England) England was almost on her knees with almost everything in the country on strike. Lorrie drivers, , coal miners, trash collectors, grave diggers, you name it, they were striking, the inept James Callaghan couldn't do anytjing, or wouldn't do anything, trash was literally piling up, bodies were not being buried, the country was almost stopped, & why not, these people still got paid, at the taxpayers expense while on strike. Thatcher came along & promised that these people would no longer be able to get their wages at taxpayers expense, that the strikers would not get paid, not like they had been. the country liked what she said & voted her in for 10 years they kept her in office, she did what she said she'd do & England was better for it. then along came a disaster known as John majors....
If you're going to tell a story, tell the whole story, & BTW, I got the bitchreference, sweet, you tell a half truth/half lie then have the gall to call somebody a vile name, typical left wing trick. Bugger off.