Why do our media focus so intensely on alleged abuses by American troops, but not the UN’s peacekeepers? Political bias seems like the obvious answer
Tim Graham has some must read coverage starting with this report from Edith Lederer of the Associated Press:
U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon expressed “deep concern” Tuesday after a leading children’s charity said it uncovered evidence of widespread sexual abuse of children at the hands of U.N. peacekeepers and international aid workers.
The report by Save the Children UK, based on field research in southern Sudan, Ivory Coast and Haiti, describes a litany of sexual crimes against children as young as 6.
It said some children were denied food aid unless they granted sexual favors; others were forced to have sex or to take part in child pornography; many more were subjected to improper touching or kissing.
“The report shows sexual abuse has been widely underreported because children are afraid to come forward,” Jasmine Whitbread, chief executive of Save the Children UK, told Associated Press Television News.
“A tiny proportion of peacekeepers and aid workers are abusing the children they were sent to protect. It ranges from sex for food to coerced sex. It’s despicable.”
At the U.N. headquarters, spokeswoman Michele Montas said Ban “is deeply concerned” by the report.
“We welcome this report. It’s fair, and I think it’s essentially accurate,” Montas said.
The AFP wire service added:
And New York-based Human Rights Watch accused the UN of covering up allegations of embezzlement against Pakistani and Indian UN peacekeepers implicated in alleged arms and gold smuggling while serving in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The UN denied the charge.
The UN — after turning a blind eye for decades to cases of sexual abuse by their troops — recommended in 2005 that erring soldiers be punished, their salaries frozen and a fund established to aid any women or girls made pregnant. But this proposal was not accepted by member nations.
May 31, 2008 - 10:13 AM on May 31st, 2008
Yeah, kind of odd how that is, isn’t it? And where is the Left on this? Where is ChapaTraitor Ted Kennedy? Turban Durbin? In Cold Blood Murtha? Susan Saranwrap?
All those protectors of the weak, the downtrodden, the vulnerable? The ones who were so vocal about every comp0laint, real or imagined, against our troops?
The answer is they only want to undermine the Bush Admin and attack and undermine America. Together with their fellow Boll Weevil travelers in the MSM. They will be totally silent about this one. And most of the sheeple who get their news from the MSM will never even hear about the UN scandal. They’ll glibly vote for America and Whitey-hating Obama.
May 31, 2008 - 02:32 PM on May 31st, 2008
Its only gonna get worse if Hill-a-manure gets elected and tries to place entire US military under UN control. Then of course there’s Osama Ben Obama who would probably as Commander-in-Chief have the military unconditionally surrendered to the wackos we’re supposed to be fighting.
May 31, 2008 - 05:08 PM on May 31st, 2008
The UN helped Saddam rape Iraq. Think the media wants to throw their good buddy under the bus? Where else can they get child bed partners at 3 am?
May 31, 2008 - 07:08 PM on May 31st, 2008
These are the same people that Hillary and Obama expect to keep us safe from terrorists.
May 31, 2008 - 10:33 PM on May 31st, 2008
I hate to say this, but this is old news. That’s been the perianial problem with UN Peacekeepers in Africa for years. The UN takes no responsibility as they say they get the soldiers from the African Union and its their problem. The AU says its the UN’s fault and it continues. BBC ran something on it about two years ago.
Frankly, I don’t see much negative stuff about the troops in MSM, except for the Ft. Bragg barracks issues (maybe it will now get fixed) and the soldier that got electrocuded back at camp (the contractor should be shot, dug up and then shot again).
You all kill me with your rants about how Hillary or Obama could never be commander in chief. Both have the same credentials as Bush when he took office.
D
June 1, 2008 - 06:06 PM on June 1st, 2008
Bush doesn’t hate the military, but the bag and the omassiah do.
June 1, 2008 - 07:14 PM on June 1st, 2008
5 – Again, another load of BS…
June 1, 2008 - 07:41 PM on June 1st, 2008
“You all kill me with your rants about how Hillary or Obama could never be commander in chief. Both have the same credentials as Bush when he took office.”
Surely you jest…
June 2, 2008 - 12:36 AM on June 2nd, 2008
Hmmm, let’s see compare them shall we?
Bush, Air National Guard fighter pilot and as governor of Texas Commander in chief of the Texas National Guard. Father is a former President and wartime Commander in Chief, former head of CIA, and decorated combat fighter pilot.
Hillary, No military background at all. Has shown total disdain for high ranking military officers. Only government credentials being married to a governor and president whose actions she was so oblivious of that he was getting BJs in the oval office from an intern while she was elsewhere in the building.
Obama, No military background at all. Father Muslim foreigner. Spent years living in a predominantly Muslim country. Spent teen years with a devout communist as a family friend and Mentor. Referred to Communist as “Uncle Frank.” Yes, that certainly qualifies him to be Commander in Chief… of the Cuban or Indonesian Armies.
You’re right no discernible difference whatsoever.
June 2, 2008 - 08:46 AM on June 2nd, 2008
The UN peace keepers have commited rape and sex with children they even withheld food to some in favor of sexuial favors and in the former BELGIM CONGO in 1961 the UN commited war crimes and especialy in KANTANGA where they commited further war crimes GET US OUT OF THE UN
June 2, 2008 - 08:55 AM on June 2nd, 2008
Actually, I’ll add to GHW Bush’s credentials that fact that he speaks three languages (one being Chinese). He was also former abassador to China.
That said, GW’s military service has been documented by lack of performace of duties and barely showing up. While you correctly point out that as governor of Texas, he was CIC of the National Guard, but only for items of State concern (usually for disaster response). Sorry, not the same. Other then more aggressive use of the death penalty, if you could name other stellar accomplishments, I’ll listen.
Hillary Clinton has been a Senator from NY State for over seven years. I challenge you to find anywhere where she’s stated disdain for the military, its officers or otherwise. She’s pushed for several different bills in support of military benefits for the NY’s vets, including a recent one for broader education benefits. She constantly visits the troops, including the 10th Mountain Division up in Fr Drum to let them know how important they are.
As for Obama, you may be right and I’m not going to spend the time to research what you think are “communist” or not or what the guy did while growing up. Its not worth it.
Getting back to topic, I generaly agree with Pam. I think Scott sold out. I’ll wait to comment further until I read the book. The book I’d really like to read would be “Sold up the River” by Scooter Libby but I don’t believe its been written yet.
NY-David
June 2, 2008 - 09:00 AM on June 2nd, 2008
My getting back to topic reference would have been better actually refering to the correct topic
.
June 2, 2008 - 09:05 AM on June 2nd, 2008
I have a post up about Carbon credits and updated Roberts post on Scott McCellen..very interesting info for all of you. Thanks for bringing up the carbon credits David..
I really am not so sure Scooter was sold up the river. I think his beef is with Fitzgerald. He got a pardon but nothing else. Fitzgerald knew about Armitage prior to even speaking to Libby. In other words, there was no need to speak to anyone because he already had the answer. We have discussed that at lenghth when the story was unfolding. IMO, Fitz wasted a bunch of our money trying to get people in any way he could. He had the answer from Armitage, therefore there was no need to even speak to Libby. Why didn’t Armitage get charged again? Oh that’s right, she wasn’t covert, and there was no chargeable offense committed!