Negotiators and Secretary General continue to ignore scientists and public opinion
OTTAWA, Dec. 13, 2014 /CNW/ – “Climate change negotiators in Lima, Peru seemed oblivious to the findings of the UN’s ongoing My World survey about what the people of the world really want the agency to focus on,” said Tom Harris, executive director of the Ottawa, Canada-based International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC). “The seven million people polled so far indicate that, in comparison with issues such as education, health care, jobs, and energy, they care very little about climate change.”
“Perhaps most out of touch with reality is the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon himself who on Wednesday asserted that climate change remains his ‘top priority’,” continued Harris.
ICSC chief science advisor, Professor Bob Carter, former Head of the Department of Earth Sciences at James Cook University in Australia explained, “That ‘action taken on climate change’ rates dead last among the 16 priorities the public wants to see action on is not surprising. They understand that the remote possibility of human activity contributing to climate problems decades from now is unimportant in comparison with the very real problems faced by the world’s poor today.
“During the UN Climate Change Conferences in 2007, 2009, and 2012, hundreds of climate experts endorsed open letters (see here) to Mr. Ban explaining his mistakes on the science,” said Carter. “Among the scientific luminaries signing the letters were Dr. Antonio Zichichi, President of the World Federation of Scientists; Freeman J. Dyson of Princeton Institute for Advanced Studies; Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski, professor of natural sciences, Warsaw; and Dr. Richard S. Lindzen, Professor of Meteorology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
“The Secretary General did not even acknowledge receipt of our open letters, let alone address any of our points,” concluded Carter.
New Zealand-based Terry Dunleavy, ICSC founding chairman and strategic advisor asked, “How can anyone take Mr. Ban seriously after he asserted on Tuesday that ‘Science has not only spoken – it is shouting from the rooftops. Our planet has a fever – and it is getting hotter every day.’
“Not only is climate science highly uncertain but there has been no statistically significant global warming for 18 years despite a 9% rise in carbon dioxide to a still miniscule 0.04% of our atmosphere,” said Dunleavy. “As the scientists explained in their 2012 open letter to Mr. Ban, ‘Global warming that has not occurred cannot have caused the extreme weather of the past few years.'”
In his 2014 book “The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science“, ICSC science advisory board member and former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg, Dr. Tim Ball summed up the situation well: “Climate change has happened, is happening and will always happen. Contrary to the message of the last thirty years, current rate of climate change is well within the bounds of natural variability. Thus, a perfectly natural phenomenon became the biggest deception in history.”
“The UN must get out of the climate field entirely,” said Ball. “In particular, their Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the Framework Convention on Climate Change have always been biased political instruments and should be immediately disbanded. Then the agency should focus only on issues the people of the world deem important.”
To arrange interviews with ICSC participants (listed here), contact:
Tom Harris, Executive Director, ICSC
Ottawa, Canada
Email: tom.harris@climatescienceinternational.net
Phone: 613-728-9200
http://www.climatescienceinternational.org/
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
That they’re ignoring public opinion is especially unsurprising, given that the reaction to shifts in public opinion is “the ignorant sheeple don’t know what’s good for them, so we have to decide for them.”
The public policy extortion vector is simple – what can we demand the most money for and have to show the least output from?
“Climate Change” will always be top on that list. There is no other policy issue that can top its extortion ratio (funds demanded / results delivered). I can’t imagine an issue that could top it. Even arming the planet against asteroids – you’d have to actually produce a weapon and test it.
Climate Change output? That is like hanging out at the Craps Table with a rabbit’s foot. Good roll? Rabbit’s foot. Bad roll? Just wait and see. Every alarmist paper/press release is just another Rabbit’s foot.
That’s a nice turn of phrase.
michael hart
December 13, 2014 at 8:32 pm
I concur. Lovely. Must use it myself.
It would be good if our elected representative were required to write out (in actual handwriting, – not type once, copy & paste) –
extortion vector – a short definition of Climate Disruption [or whatever might be the watermelons’ preferred meme that hour . . . .]
Auto.
No sarc. No apologies.
There’s no money to be had from addressing the “other issues” that people deemed to be more important.
They still view climate-change funding as a “slam-dunk”, and people like our current U.S. pres continue to add credibility to that belief…
The Plan is to get a Climate Treaty that means World Government/International Socialism claiming it’s needed to stop climate change(sic)
Far too much money involved for the UN to drop this particular cash cow.
Money is out playing the Science. Climate Change is used as a bargaining market, a nail in the science of climate.
Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy
I know that English is your second language. Forgive me for rephrasing your comment and please correct me if I have it wrong.
You said, “Money is out playing the Science. Climate Change is used as a bargaining market, a nail in the science of climate.”
I think what you meant is more like, “Money has overpowered the Science. “Climate Change” is used as a way to make money, a stake in the heart of the Science of climate.”
Again, please correct me if I have the intent of your comment wrong. I’ve no intent to twist your meaning.
Instead of “out, playing the science”, out-playing the science. 😉
Actually, it is not money keeping the UN pushing the global warming hoax now. Originally they had hoped to levy extra-sovereign climate taxes on the developed nations and “re-distribute it under a framework of UN global governance”. What they were after was a guaranteed income for their kleptocracy just as they tried with their failed “law of the sea”. It is now clear that they are not going to get a guaranteed income from the global warming hoax. The reason the UN continues to push the propaganda is because they are now in a fight for their very survival.
The UN should have dropped the issue over a decade ago, but they pressed on chasing the dangling carrot of “climate debt”, with no regard to the consequences of pushing a lie this big in the age of the Internet. Now they are stuck with no exit strategy. It’s too late to swap to “Bio-crisis” or “Sustainability”. Manufacturing a “Fresh water crisis” won’t help. They have gone way, way too far to get away with just throwing the WMO and IPCC under the wheels. There is no net radiative GHE on this planet, therefore there can be no “less than we thought” soft landing for the hoax. This gravy train is not going to run out of steam, it’s going to crash.
One hopes you are correct. And, the sooner the better
I don’t think you quite understand the forces behind this scam. Look at what happened in Aus recently when they decided not to pay the UN climate extortion. They paid in the end.
This is extortion by a gang of terrorists called Greenpîss, FoE and WWF lead by the plonker prince and all funded by governments around the world.
They are behaving just the same as the EU. They are desperate to get their own direct income stream so that they don’t have to keep going cap in hand to the subjugated nations for more money. The auditors have refused to sign off their annual accounts for accuracy for so long that I think the last time they did there was some global warming.
Good point but lets take it a step further: are nation states in this with the UN for the same reason? Take Germany for example: how much money have they taken out of the system and out of their citizens pockets. Does anyone believe for one minute those in power are going to say “Oops, sorry made a mistake”? It will take another mini ice-age and even then the powers that be will try to blame that on AGW.
Greenpiss and World War on Freedom
Hmm. Just need even more arsenic for that cash cow.
(FMiskolczi2014 from Geodetic and Geophysical Institute):
http://www.seipub.org/DES/Download.aspx?ID=21810
Some say that is the right potion. I tend to agree.
Thanks for pointing at this beautiful Christmas present. In the prelude to the conclusions of FM’s new paper (p. 49):
“Considering the temporal and areal variability in the local water vapor content of an air column, one has to admit that the Earth’s atmosphere possesses enormous stability against fluctuations in its global average flux optical thickness. In our understanding, the source of this stability is related to two natural causes. One is the favourable orbital parameters of the Earth, and the other is the permanent presence of the three phases of the H2O in the boundary layer.”
In the conclusions:
“The only solution to the Earth’s ground surface temperature is […] = 288.6 +/– 0.1 K.”
15.45 +/– 0.1 degrees Celsius independent of CO2; and that’s it.
“Far too much money …”
Nope. Its party time on somebodies else’s dime.
Yeah, the Earth sure is running a fever
http://suyts.wordpress.com/2013/02/22/how-the-earths-temperature-looks-on-a-mercury-thermometer/
LOL
+1
Can’t play hockey with that stick!
You miss the point. Now they are playing ring hockey
Not quite. Climate change policies ARE a very real problem for the world’s poor because they are bearing the brunt of the h*ll caused by lack of affordable power preventing from moving themselves into even the 20th century much less the 21st. They are also starved by lack of fuel for agriculture and the absolute crime of industrialized nations forcing their population to burn food in their vehicle fuel tanks thereby driving the price of food even higher.
+1
Thank you for the reminder ! [Biofuels – they are a joke for the poor]
Next time you read or hear
remind them that MILLIONS more around the world demand action on good education, better healthcare, better job opportunities, good governance, affordable and nutritious food, crime…..
http://data.myworld2015.org/
The climate clamour among ordinary folk in the west is largely a comfortable, Western style luxury some can afford. The world has spoken and it’s time to act on many issues before considering climate. Imagine you are poor and cannot afford to send you 8 year old to school. Imagine you go to bed most evenings hungry. I could go on and on but maybe try not having lunch and dinner and let us know how you feel the next day.
The science doesn’t matter with the UN. Climate change is only a pretext for carrying out its redistributionist schemes after taking a generous cut of the proceeds.
““…one has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. Instead, climate change policy is about how we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth…”- IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer (2010)
“No matter if the science of global warming is all phony … climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.” – Christine Stewart, former Canadian Minister of the Environment
“We have got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.” — Timothy Wirth, former U.S. Undersecretary of State for Global Issues and U.S. Senate Chamber temperature adjuster
I’m missing something pretty big here.
I get the fundamental science and I realize that we don’t understand “climate science” or rather, we who accept it, appreciate that there are multitudes of chaotic systems driven by the sun and the oceans . . . and
I realize that CO2 = bad so coal, oil, natural gas = bad (not true of course, but that’s the agenda) and I realize that those assumptions are not being driven by science but by plastic, idiotic, and ridiculous models that are taken to produce some fictional results that drive policy.
How does this redistribute wealth? (Obviously I don’t do political or social “science”.)
Are we going to take the oil money and give solar to Nigeria (they already have that, but other issues), with UN taking ransom along the way?
Or is it all of our money paying for expensive renewables that is to be taken where??? Just shuffled into the next global derivates gamble?
sorry – derivatives – don’t do spelling well. Originally an English major, ya know?
The money will be shuffled off into Swiss bank accounts as the UN and its many branches are literally accountable to no one, just like the EUSSR.
It’s pretty simple: Carbon taxes for CO2.emissions. Fuel taxes on any carbon based fuel. there there are the oddball approaches like the Pacific Island which tried to get compensation for ‘rising sea levels’, and the carbon-credit market. For example, did you know that the only reason Tesla is profitable is because they sell California emission credits to other car makers?
http://www.marketplace.org/topics/sustainability/teslas-secret-success-selling-emissions-credits
Impoverish and destroy western capitalism, free enterprise by shutting down cheap energy. Quote from Maurice Strong, the guy who created the UN framework on environment, the Rio conference, Kyoto, and the CO2 bogeyman itself (well he didn’t invent this but he latched on to it as he saw that this was the perfect vehicle to serve his new world order purpose).
“Isn’t it the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
This Canadian guy, who wants elites through the UN as a world government, is very bright and dangerous even though all he got was a high school education. He lives in China, a country he has admired for decades. Google his biography – he was a big player in the mining and oil industries.
It has always been about the money. The UN will never let a good ‘crisis’ go to waste.
You’d first have to figure out where all of the “Money for food” program dollars went in the MidEast, that the U.N. was in charge of.
Good luck with that.
Bubba. I suggest you try some online research before they censure the web….
AS a CANADIAN I am ashamed by Strong who has been hiding in China after the UN oil for food rip off in
Iraq
Thanks to all who have provided the economic background. Really.
I’ve been pretty busy catching up with the real science and the dangerous modelling.
Dear Bubba:
The UN wants $200 Billion Per YEAR from the ‘developed’ world as climate reparations. That money (some of which has already be promised by Obama) will be ‘redistributed’ (minus some grease to sticky fingers at the UN) to ‘needy people’… i.e. the friends, relatives, and cronies of the UN members… That’s how.
sorry that I asked a serious question. uncalled for.
still asking for a real anwer
The UN will supposedly redistribute all that tithe from individual carbon taxes to those countries disadvantaged by AGW. Sinking islands, not enough rain, too much rain.
Of course there will be administrative costs along the way that will have to be factored in. Corrupt governments to pay, before any gets to the affected populace etc.
The scam works like this. It’s a direct transfer of wealth. Right now, the UN’s Conference of the Parties being held in Lima, Peru is at the point of collapse because the poorer nations are angry that the richer nations aren’t meeting the $15 billion goal set by the UN for this year that was to go to its Climate Fund. China and India are especially upset. Climate Fund money is supposedly earmarked for projects in third world countries to help them reduce their CO2 emissions. However, only $10 billion has been committed. And I don’t think that will be met as Obama’s contribution was to be $3.3 billion, but he now has to deal with a Republican Congress. In 2009, the rich nations promised to provide $100 billion a year in funding. Doubt that will happen.
Bubba — A significant part of the scam is the UN’s urging the formation of a $100-billion-per-year fund (by the “Rich” countries) to be turned over the “developing” countries, since they don’t have fully-developed energy infrastuctures. It’s presumably to help with the costs of developing green systems. If that ever got off the ground, of course any funds left over would be pretty minor after the UN picks off its ‘administrative levies’, and the kleptocrats running about a hundred third-world countries squirrel away the big chunks.
Bubba: You ask where are the funds to be allocated?
A review of the UN FCC Background Paper entitled “INVESTMENT AND FINANCIAL FLOWS TO ADDRESS CLIMATE CHANGE” provides the answers.
This paper describes (as but one of many “funds”) the establishment of a funding transfer vehicle entitled:
“RESOURCE ALLOCATION FRAMEWORK (RAF)
China, India and the Russian Federation are likely to receive the most under the RAF formula, followed by Brazil, Mexico and South Africa, followed by a group of countries that includes Argentina, Egypt, Indonesia, Islamic Republic of Iran, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Pakistan, Romania, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine and Venezuela (GEF, 2005b).”
http://unfccc.int/files/cooperation_and_support/financial_mechanism/application/pdf/background_paper.pdf
$100 Billion and that is just the start of the Wealth Transfer plan.
“IPCC Official Climate Policy Is Redistributing the World’s Wealth
Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental protection, says the German economist and IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer. The next world climate summit in Cancun is actually an economy summit during which the distribution of the world’s resources will be negotiated.”
http://thegwpf.org/ipcc-news/1877-ipcc-official-climate-policy-is-redistributing-the-worlds-wealth.html
Bubba, WUWT covered the interview too.
They’ve got jack-all else to do.
UN Church of Global Warming – leader Ban Ki-moon – the new “Moonies”.
Instead of “Would you like to buy a flower?”
“Thank-you for the bouquet” (stolen at gun-point).
Nah…They would never say Thank-you
Cue up the bouquet scene from Sherlock Holmes:
http://youtu.be/DQO3aIpmIDg
Irene’s exit strategy.
I could not disagree with this article more. The UN has no business in our domestic “education, health care, jobs, and energy” policy. Quite the contrary.
Because of the “Supremacy Clause” in the Constitution, treaties with the UN trump state law and have resulted in a Federal invasion into domestic policies and decisions made by voters, where the feds have no jurisdiction. This gives a dastardly crew of member countries of the UN, which are not economically, politically, or religiously free, the ability to change domestic policy set by the states. Even treaties which are not ratified are routinely used by activist judges to decide cases. I think a proper exit strategy for the US to leave the UN is what is needed. (And we should take the bouquet.)
Dr. Ball is clearly over the target. He should be seen as academic hero for his stance. Flax only comes from guarded positions. He has been tacking it and with honor will likely continue to do so.
Ball (wrong post) & flax (wrong word); (2 of 3)
Try again, please.
I think you meant “flak” (German acronym for Anti-Aircraft Artillery). The “flax” would be the poor moral fiber of those who are *linen* their pockets with our green stuff…
I missed the boat on that one. Sorry 😉
The boat, the barn, the planet 🙂
Fortunately, we have impaled on you to fix it.
[Please do not impale on the very people you have imposed a pale into while fixing a pail upon their pale. 8<) .mod]
Follow the … http://news.gcfund.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/release_GCF_2014_12_10_austria_pledge.pdf
One thing to remember is that the ultimate purpose of the UN is to rule the world. Not today or tomorrow perhaps, but someday. Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (aka “Climate Change”) is just the sort of global battle to “save humanity” that the UN needs to expand its power over the various nations and thereby over the 7 billion people on this planet. The USA started as a weak, decentralized republic and grew year by year into the world spanning empire that it is today. The US Empire was not built in a day.
Recall:
The answer is to dismantle the beast.
Maybe some UN fanatics have this idea, hardly anyone else. The UN to rule China and USA?
I think they would get their funding cut before any sort of empire was built.
Nearly the same thing was once said about the central government of the USA and look where we are now. Nowadays very few even know that at one time the USA was a union of independent states who all felt they could leave the union at any time and also felt that they could overrule any federal law or mandate. Nullification anyone?
The process for the UN is a very gradual one. Step one is to find a way to impose taxes on the various states. Taxation is always key to the process. Carbon taxes anyone?
Dictatorship 101:
First you take their money.
Then you take their guns.
Then you can easily take their freedoms.
Yes! Read Agenda 21. Read UNEP and UNCED UN-WIDER, UNFCCC ‘global warming’ history.
http://appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/GW_History.htm
what do handguns have to do with climate? – the UN
Police need armored military vehicles for defense against constitutionalists with firearms.
http://www.teaparty.org/police-armored-military-vehicles-needed-constitutionalists-firearms-72371/
Try reading about UN Agenda 21 and then come back.
We have to kill the people to save the people , I for one say CANADA dump the UN that we helped to start it’s out of control ISIS will be the next member , Wait 6 months and see ;>(
U.N Climate Change Summit Goes Crazy After China Refuses To Curb Its Own Pollution
http://weaselzippers.us/208006-u-n-climate-change-summit-goes-crazy-after-china-refuses-to-curb-its-own-pollution/
Latitude, ah, did you notice the ad to the left of the article? Asking to donate “ahem” BAIL MONEY. with a big button labaled “Donate” prehaps it’s just me.
The UN is not a democracy, and they don’t care what “the people” want. Not even in the slightest.
In the eyes of the UN, you are nothing but a potential money source, to be told where you can go and what you can do, and eventually to die, hopefully without leaving any footprints or offspring.
If ever there was a force of pure evil set upon this planet, worse than Communism or National Socialism, it is the horror of the United Nations.
Lima Peru, Paris, Copenhagen, CanCun, these are all FUNDRAISERS for UN slush funds that have no accountability! By the way, if humans solidly control world temperatures, did they “Pause”?
The United Nations is Communism and National Socialism
It wants to be Plato’s Republic
Didn’t Plato see a perfect society as consisting of a large, unarmed proletariat of farmers and commoners, controlled by a professional military, and all ruled by a small aristocracy?
The UN would like to step in as the aristocrisy. They certainly act like it, wanting an unarmed populace.
““all these women shall be wives in common to all the men, and not one of them shall live privately with any man; the children too should be held in common so that no parent shall know which is his own offspring, and no child shall know his parent”” (Plato)
(He didn’t invent it BTW)
Also interesting
“Our rulers will find a considerable dose of falsehood and deceit necessary for the good of their subjects” (Plato)
And to think that Plato* is the source of what is known about Socrates. In reality, Karl Popper has done conclusive work in showing that Plato shamelessly used the dead philosopher as a sock puppet.
Socrates believed in the ability of all to become educated and wise, and favored democracy, while Plato wrote his most venomous invective about democracy. He favored a caste system. There are only two choices: either there is complete equality before the law, and laws apply equally to all people, or a caste will apply laws to some and not to themselves.
*besides Xenophon’s writings
Agreed. This happens anytime you set up a system with no accountability. It is corrupt beyond belief, and is far out of reach of anyone who contributes to this lunacy via taxation, i.e. without choice. Couple that with the “Golden Egg” syndrome. The poor countries far outnumber the rich in the U.N., so it’s pretty easy to attempt to continue the “WE NEED MORE!!!” mantra.
Much like our own government (a special thanks to lawyers here), it’s become so convoluted that it’s beyond the attention span/intelligence of the citizens to comprehend.
It’s a communist kleptocracy founded by communist spy Alger Hiss; only one non-Communist Secretary General in its history. An evil organization that’s made loans to corrupt 3rd world dictators, not countries, for decades, used UN NGOs to exploit resources and seized natural resources used as collateral on loans. Karen Hudes, former World Bank Whistleblower, has good information on World Bank fraud based on over 20 years experience as IBS senior legal council, and workd with other World Bank whistleblowers.
It is not just the UN that should get out of blindly supporting the AGW propaganda for political ends. So should the US National Park Service which is being used by the Feds to further double down on their Agenda 21 plans.
http://epaabuse.com/17131/news/revealed-obamas-biggest-taxpayer-funded-classrooms-used-teaching-global-warming-doctrine/
the UN was founded with the objective of preserving/promoting peace in the world. Unfortunately they diverted their energy (and our money) to other purposes while the world is still suffering from cruelty and atrocities galore. but of course, it is easier to cry wolf about a non-existing threat than to do the real job. Ban Ki Moon should go
“Ban Ki Moon should go”
The U.N. should go.
Fixed it for ya…
Never mind getting the UN out of climate change, get us out of the UN.
Oh my, they (the U.N.) seen to be having a problem.
http://news.yahoo.com/overtime-u-n-climate-talks-head-watered-down-090452563.html
Guess china did not like what the U.S. House did on funding. Oh dear! very LOUD LAUGHTER!
michael
Thanks for the good efforts. There will succeed, soon, I hope.
““The Secretary General did not even acknowledge receipt of our open letters, let alone address any of our points,” concluded Carter.”
Says it all; but no debate = no science.
Australia lead the way and got it right, refusing to pay into the UN Slushfund at the Lima Peru Fundraiser. Now, Canada has come around to declare the IPCC Global Warming Emperor has no clothes. Come on, REALLY, if humans have not cintrolled the weather so far “Did they “Pause”
After I read what Mr Moon had to say about both Australia. and Canada in recent days , I am stunned by his (purposely I presume) total ignorance of both countries. Both with small population and very large territories to fill the needs of those people. The fact that Canada has one of the biggest carbon sink forested area’s on the Planet per person seems to have escaped him and the CBC(tv) that let him speak.
A climate gate email from an agent of the World Bank to Phil Jones at the CRU East Anglia ‘ the agenda will continue regardless of the science’. Once we the survivors are securely locked in the Big Green Climate Corral, they might consider dropping the BS as it will have served its purpose. Until then, the attack will continue.
The UN allows nation states to jaw jaw instead of war war.
Diplomacy instead of military interactions.
Negotiating distribution of powers allows a more efficient distribution of resources (trade is efficient for everything – even sovereignty). The UN is a good thing.
But I do agree that the UN is wasting its time with AGW.
And Ban Ki Moon is a failure as UN Secretary General.
I could be wrong but doesn’t the UN have a history of jaw jawing while war wars were actually killing people?
+ 10
And sometimes the UN has actively participated in war, e.g. Korea
O Olson and Dan B. You have answered each other.
Mike the Morlock, immediately below, points out the alternative to trading sovereignty (stealing sovereignty).
The problem with the UN is practical – it does not work.
The problem with the UN is not conceptual – it can work.
MCourtney I tend to agree. We have not had a repeat of what happened To Haile Salssie in June 1936 at the League of Nations.
michael
The UN has one element that is useful. The Security council.
That should cost nothing to run. No buildings necessary, no admin, no leader. Shut it down NOW
And no effective action either, so why bother?
Careful what you wish for:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-12/one-plus-one-helen-clark/5963656
Real scientists would support the proposal but we live in an age of excess government and most “science” and obviously climate science has descended into a leftist, pro-statist enclave. Much of academia suffers the same malady.
This though is the proper tone of debate. The UN should be minimized or better yet eliminated, it’s a force of socialist deterioration in the world as is much of the climate change agenda.
There’s a lot to like with both socialism and capitalism. I think self-serving incompetence and corruption is the main issue regardless of government structure.
It’s all about the opportunity for graft.
There are a lot of sticky fingers out there.
And the money flowing around is big.
So much would disappear in the “rounding error” alone.
This would put a huge smile on the face of many a Swiss banker.
Far past time to remove US funding from the UN, force the HQ to move to Sweden or Switzerland.
The WHO and ICAO are about the only UN bodies with an executable missions. Fund those.
Disagree…Deadhorse Alaska works for me. Hey, just think about it. No unpaid parking tickets to worry about.
I think you need to [research] the WHO at least, I too was a young guy once that hoped that good was being done but the corruption in those departments ONCE the aid gets to where it is needed is mostly in the hands of the dictators that become millionaires on the black market.
Sorry about the spelling errors (I wish there was a “preview” setting)
I realize a lot of the WHO fnds gets siphoned off. But they do a worthy mission. Polio, Dengue fever, Malaria, HIV, Influenza, Ebola,…. those pathogens do not follow man’s geopolitical boundaries. We need the WHO. We need the ICAO. Pretty much everything else could go away.
We’ve all got burdens 🙂 , some greater than the dances of the UN.
Well the objective of the UN was to encourage politicians talking rather than exchanging bombs.
We have Utube now, they are not needed.
So they evolved into a grasping self absorbed bureaucracy in no time flat.
What would you expect from a bureaucracy without oversight or function?
The UN or Useless Nutjobs has lasted long past any relevancy or function.
Nevermind getting the UN out of climate change, how about getting them out of my pocket?
For any ethical society to contribute, even one taxpayers dollar, to this cesspool of corruption amounts to treason.
I am neither represented by or able to hold these bandits accountable, why shall I be robbed to support their parasitic existence?
My understanding is that our ‘betters’ are doing it for our own good because we’re too stupid to enthusiastically participate in our own suicide.
“Our ‘betters’ are doing it for THEIR own good…”
Fixed it.