Why the UN Is the Problem and the US Should Leave It


Any reasonable person can see that the UN is a collection of theocracies, kleptocracies, and racist states. To be sure, there are democracies among its members and in fact one big democracy  — the United States — provides the UN with the lion’s share of its funding. But the UN is dominated — and has been for decades — by a collection of theocratic, racist, and terror-supporting regimes, led by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation and in word and deed has declared itself the enemy of civilized humanity and peace. The UN is now planning a third international hatefest against the United States and Israel (the Great Satan and the Little Satan for those who have not been paying attention). Here is a short video which explains how this latest UN atrocity is the logical result of what the UN has become.

  • Chezwick_mac

    Time to start a much more exclusive club…the 'Global Alliance of Democratic States'. Criteria for membership would include…

    1) multiparty democracy

    2) free press

    3) independent judiciary

    4) independent labor unions

    5) legal protections of private property

    The grotesque farce of the UN 'Human Rights Council'…a body dominated by autocracies…is in-and-of-itself enough to validate David's advocacy for withdrawal.

    • Supreme_Galooty

      Good idea here, EXCEPT any reference to "democracy." Democracy is an exceedingly dangerous concept and is anathema to Liberty. A democracy must have "professionals" to administer the will of the people – which is sacrosanct. The "will of the people" is also a chimera, subject to manipulation and whimsy, and utterly untrustworthy.

      • rdb3

        Right! Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner tonight.

      • http://www.dikaesha.pbwiki.com Foolster41

        I can understand the concern about the representatives of the people being corrupt, but with checks and balances this should at least nulify that (at least in theory, I suppose that hasn't worked 100% in the US)

        I'm curious, If not the will of the people, then what? How should a nation be ruled if not by the will of the people? If it is a "chamira" and "untrustworthy", then do you mean there is something better?

        • Supreme_Galooty

          Somewhere in your schooling you should have been taught the perils of democracy. You weren't. You were probably lied to like so many others, and told that democracy is a GOOD thing. Only members of the ruling class, statist functionaries, school teachers, union leaders, communists, your "betters" and my "betters" are enamoured of democracy. After all, it is the "will of the people."

          The culprit is "the people!" The masses become more and more maleable, more subject to propaganda, more susceptible to demagoguery, and can literally be convinced that war is peace, that up is down, and that Republicans want to starve children to death and kick old people out on the street. People who are that abjectly stupid should never be allowed to vote – ever – but they are in a democracy. And you can kiss your freedom goodbye.

          • Foolster41

            You didn't answer my question.

            From your answer, and your apparent dislike for communists and union leaders, I don't doubt your intentions are good (we have a common target of dislike, perhaps even hatred). I actually had the benefit of home schooling for most of my life (since 1st grade), and so avoided much of the communist indoctrination in public schools (Thank God!).

            Yes, communists too claim the will of the "people" but the truth is,it is not real democracy, but democracy with restrictions on the people. The people have their self-interest and are forced to be generous at the point of a gun. They take the right of production and spread it around, giving to those who "need" instead of those who earn it. It is not the people who rule, but the corrupt communist ruling government.

            You talk about a test for the right to vote, and this seems somewhat troubling to me, and a tad hypocritical. Wouldn't having a test for the right to vote infact be taking away freedom? Who would administer this test? The government ruling party?

            I'm not sure how you equate democracy with a higharchy ("betters" being above), as you seem to imply (why else would, as you claim "betters" be enamored with democracy?). In a democratic system everyone gets one equal vote. There are no betters, so this seems on the face the opposite of what you're saying.

            I feel like I'm missing something, and so I'd like to hear you clarify what you're saying.

          • Supreme_Galooty

            Sorry. I intentionally did not answer your question, the answer seeming so obvious. Being home-schooled it is entirely reasonable that there might be holes in what you have learned, or you learned it and forgot it. At least you escaped the significant harm that is done to folks ensnared by the public "educational" establishment. Go here for a discussion of democracy vs republic: http://lexrex.com/enlightened/AmericanIdeal/aspec

            A few requirements for voting might be: Citizen, property owner, age over 25, age over 45, prior military service, not currently working for any governmental agency, currently paying taxes, etc. I'm sure there are others that would not be deemed racist. As for allowing women to vote, THAT is a completely different subject, and one which earns me the most incredible opprobrium if I am so foolish as to express my opinion.

          • Foolster41

            I glanced at the article, and it is indeed interesting. It apears though the definitions of both republic and democracy is "by the people, for the people" but republic has closer controls on the goverment, in the case of controls of the goverment to protect rights I'd agree with completely.

            Some of those restrictions on voting seem not quite so unreasonable. being a citizen and paying taxes are no-brainiers (if any are owed, of course). Though I would disagree with a few, and I do think a few are somewhat unreasonable.
            * 45 seems like quite a bit too old to vote. I can understand wanting to delay so voters gain the knowledge of experience, but this seems much too far. This would mean a person's life is more than half over before they can vote! It would mean they wouldn't be able to vote 10 years after being qualified to be president of the US.
            *militaray service: Serving in the military outside of times of war is not mandatory, so this would be reasonable only if that changed (and I'm not so sure short mandatory time in the military would be a bad thing, though I'm not 100% sure how good it would be either.).
            * I'm not sure why you put not working for goverment on the list. Why would working for a non-partisin post (police officers, administrators, judges) be cause to not vote? Or do you mean people who are in elected offices, or working for them?
            * Owning property is another one I disagree with. Many people rent (i do) and currently cannot afford to own property. Why is it a requirement to vote?
            * Women's right to vote or cases of that you hint at being "racist" (unless you mean what the liberals label as "racist:" meaning against illegal immigrants) I disagree with. What quality does a woman have that she should not have the right to vote (I assume since you say you get in trouble, you are against this?)? A simular question about the "racial" policies, assuming it is actually racist, and you don't mean against illegal immigrants as I said before.

    • Foolster41

      Indeed.

      Not only should we leave the UN, we should insist they move their headquarters off our proprerty. I've been reading Atlas Shrugged recently for the first time, and it's startling the connections I see in our world and the world of the book. the UN, and Islam feeds off of the wealthy natiosn to feed the corrupt and poor. The Islamic nations feed off of the non-muslims, in their own country and when in non-muslim nations of their non-muslim hosts.

      Well then, the solution is the same as the book. We remove ourselves.Not only should we leave the UN, we should insist they move their headquarters off our proprerty. I've been reading Atlas Shrugged recently for the first time, and it's startling the connections I see in our world and the world of the book. the UN, and Islam feeds off of the wealthy natiosn to feed the corrupt and poor. The Islamic nations feed off of the non-muslims, in their own country and when in non-muslim nations of their non-muslim hosts.

      Your suggeston is much like the solution in the book, the victems removing themselves from the power of the canibals.

      • Foolster41

        Oops sorry, my post got horribly mangled, I think I pasted some stuff in the middle somehow.

    • mlcblog

      6) continued rights for women to vote, drive, work at a profession, go out in public, talk to men, and laugh.

      7) people can play, laugh, dance, things like that.

      8) so much more!!

  • Supreme_Galooty

    The Star Wars bar scene…. If it wasn't so disgusting it would be humorous. You can say whatever you want about this collection of jackanapes and pettifoggers, but if they are to continue meeting they should do so elsewhere – and WITHOUT the participation of the United States of America.

  • mrbean

    Walter Chronkite and Hillary Clinton – One World Government http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaS6bLQixkM

  • StephenD

    Chez is right on as usual.
    I would add to his list: "Freedom of Speech" and make it number one.

  • Amused

    Any Organization which allows a maniacal rogue state , like North Korea , that intentionally starves its people , brutally suppresses it's people and behaves in a sociopathic psychotic manner , to be on ANY COMMITTE or hold ANY position of meaning ….HAS GOT TO GO . And the US needs to REMOVE ITSELF from such a cesspool .

  • Angel

    Count me in, I will spread the message to as many people as I can. Israel will not go down, quietly into the night. I remind you of what another Christian said in the 30's

    "Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act."

  • SavetheRepublic

    The UN is the complete manifestation of depraved dictatorships, and corruption coagulated in one central location.

    It's a screaming indictment against any and all liberal democracies of the world that they have not repudiated their membership. The UN needs to be Investigated, condemned, and expelled from our boarders.

  • LindaRivera

    I agree one hundred percent with David Horowitz! Ethics CANNOT allow us to remain in the UN. And it is a crime against the American people that they are forced to finance this racist, anti-America, anti-Israel, anti-human rights, anti free world organization. It is even more shocking that America gives most of the funding.

    Not one more dollar to the UN!

  • UCSPanther

    The UN should go the way of the League of Nations. It is a corrupt, worthless international body that will not last the 21st century.

  • http://www.resonoelusono.com/NaturalBornCitizen.htm Alexander Gofen

    Not only should the US leave UN, but the US ought to never help to establish it – after the utopianism of the League of Nation had become so obvious.

    UN was founded together with USSR!!! And the USSR was the permanent member of the Security Council – for satisfaction and appeasement of Joseph Stalin!

    The UN from its very beginning was an immoral and unproductive attempt to maintain a diplomatic club with membership for both human and cannibals!

    That said, to speak about leaving the UN exactly now is an utmost utopianism by itself, because it is exactly now that the one-world-crowd with their puppet impostor Obama/Soetoro are at the apogee of their power in the US.

    To begin with, the Front Page Magazine must at least fulfill its journalistic duty and do cover the "800 pound gorilla": Forgery of the officially released White House BC copy, fraudulent SS# of its resident, and the total criminality and dishonor of the American presidentship. http://www.wnd.com does it, Canada Free Press does it:

    http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/3852

    Why not Front Page Magazine? What more must happen?

    Abandoning and dismantling of the UN begins with the exposure of the most grotesque pro-UN pResident…

  • Jim_C

    The UN serves a function as a sort of convenient diplomatic channel. But aside from that, the generation of a great amount of hot air, and comical incongruities such as the Human Rights Council's membership, I am really trying to think of what, exactly, the UN has to offer.

    • mlcblog

      Convenient diplomatic channel for who? bullies and thugs who hate America and our way of life. I'd like to see them dry up and blow away instead of blowing hard in that nice big building in New York.

  • Spider

    I would like to add that 160 Democrats including presidential hopeful John Kerry voted to put the United Nations in charge of the United States election process. Just think if they had their way all our future elections would be run by these TYRANICAL THUG governments that don't even hold real elections in their own countries. I will try and locate a list of these (one world Government) Democrats and post their names.

    • mlcblog

      I hope you find and post that list. Or, let's see! we can google everything these days.

  • http://arttelles.com Art Telles

    A question for the UN…

    What is YOUR truth?

    1 –
    There is no god but Allah … and Muhammad is his prophet.

    or

    2-
    There is no god … and Karl Marx is his prophet.

    Art
    I stand with Israel
    I stand with the name of YHWH / Yahowah vs. the name of Allah to
    STOP! Islamization of America

  • WLIL

    The name 'United Nation' is itself misleading because many of the nations most probably have their own selfish and separate agenda, that does not benefit anyone other than themselves. I agree United Nation should be close down and individuals or individual nations should solve their own problems with their neighbours in their own backyard. United Nation is just a big oversized organization that had been most probably misused by some leaders to further their inhumanity and totalitarian agenda.

  • Indioviejo

    The U.N. was corrupt from it's inception when the old Soviet Union held sway among a few free countries. How many member countries in the UN would accept our "Bill of Rights"? We have wasted our time and money on these loosers. Let Norway and Sweden fund the bastards. They deserve one another.

  • Kivi

    US out of the UN. UN out of the US.

  • BS77

    The UN should move to a more appropriate location—perhaps Zimbabwe or Sudan….perhaps North Korea or Iran….somewhere it belongs.

  • John_Kelly

    The United Nations is the “United Nothing” and if the facts are examined it is easily identified as the greatest fraud in all history with an underlying purpose to destroy the United States.

    This festering snake pit and den of hypocrisy costs the American tax payer almost one trillion dollars per year.

    To highlight the absolute incompetence, let’s just look at one simple case of the U.N.’s involvement in mishandling global affairs, the Middle East crisis.

    On May 16th 1967 – Cairo Radio (Egypt) announced "The existence of Israel has continued too long. The battle has come in which we shall destroy Israel."

    On May 19th 1967 Cairo Radio said "This is our chance Arabs to deal Israel a mortal blow of annihilation."

    On May 27th 1967 Egypt's President Gamel Abdul Nasser said "Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel."

    On June 1st 1967 Iraq's leader said "We are resolved, determined and united to achieve our clear aim of wiping Israel off the map."

    On June 3rd 1967 Cairo Radio hailed the impending Muslim Holy War.

    On June 5th 1967, Israel with just 3 million people went to war against 80 million Arabs.

    The battle lasted just 6 days and was a resounding victory for Israel.
    TIME MAGAZINE called it ISRAELS MIRACLE WAR

    In the six day war Israel took back:
    • JERUSALEM,
    • The WEST BANK (or Judea & Samaria)
    • The GOLAN HEIGHTS a strategic mountain range that separates Israel & Syria.
    • The GAZA STRIP.
    • And THE SINAI PENINSULAR.

    Then the United Nations got involved and said “give the land back”, as per U N Security Council Resolution 242.

    If America applied the same logic we would have given Alaska to Japan in a “land for peace” deal when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor.

    The United Nations the great 39 story tower of wisdom located In New York, better described by former UN Ambassador Dore Gold as the tower of babble.

    The United Nations is the same lame duck organization which turned a blind eye and did nothing in 1994 while 800,000 innocent civilians were massacred in the tiny African nation of Rwanda.

    The United Nations who stood back and did nothing from 1974 to 1979 while 2 million Cambodians were slaughtered by an insane leader named Pol Pot.

    The United Nations stood back and did nothing from 1975 to 1999 while tens of thousands were slaughtered by radical Muslims in East Timor, just off the North Coast of Australia.

    The United Nations who want to replace the American Constitution with the United Nations Charter. In case you have never read the U.N. Charter it starts with the words “We the People of the United Nations”…….hmmmm sounds familiar!

    The United Nations who have an agenda to bring World peace through a one world government but is giving us a world in pieces, they told Israel, Give the land back.

    If America applied the same logic as United Nations Security Council Resolution 242, we would have given Alaska to Japan in a “land for peace” deal when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor.

    If America applied the same logic as United Nations Security Council Resolution 242, we would have given Manhattan Island to Osama Bin Laden in a “land for peace” deal after the attacks of 911.

    President Obama is now expecting Israel to go back to the 1967 lines.

    THE UNITED NATIONS IS THE UNITED NOTHING.

    America needs to get out of the United Nations and get the United Nations out of America.

    • Gita Lev

      John Kelly…..agreed! UN IS A GREAT FRAUD REPRESENTING THE EVIL INCARNATES desire to seem JUST in the world(nothing more than BARBARIANS in WESTERN STYLE clothing). Long live the GREAT DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC…America, G-d Bless her and may she remove herself from the United Nothings…(would that mean BO too????? <goal of this administration is to make the UN the world's governing body of law>. The Constitution rules and is the greatest document for mankind, since the BIBLE. Good for the people(not the politicos). The US and Israel are connected for all the right reasons…….

      • John_Kelly

        Gita Lev I agree wholeheartedly with your comments and especially "The Constitution rules and is the greatest document for mankind, since the BIBLE."

        I found a fascinating documentary series on YouTube which really nails the need for America to support Israel. Hope you find it as interesting.

        It's in 6 parts and titled "America Under Judgment". Here's the link for part 1.
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncZan8r6BNs

        Keep up the good work Gita Lev.

  • http://rogueoperator.wordpress.com/ rogue operator

    The graphic is really interesting. I can't shake idea that the UN is an international fascist organization (Fascism does not equal racism, by the way).

    • Gita Lev

      Rouge…so right! Fascism is just plain EVIL!

  • geoffputerbaugh

    Gee, I was for getting out thirty years ago, and haven't changed my mind.
    An alliance of democratic states might be worth looking into, as well as that vague concept called The Anglosphere.

    Just stop paying money to support thugs and their "ambassadors." Move the thing to the Central African Republic; they probably need the income.

    • hrayspitz

      Move the UN to Haiti – they need some sort of industry.

  • Sonny

    The UN is and for al purposes the tool for international Progressives i.e. Leftists and the majority of Arab states during the cold war were soviet client states supported and armed by Moscow. The PLO was a leftist organization supported by the old USSR. The majority of Muslims went to universities in Russia and now those very Arab countries run the UNGA. Now we ask if the UN is viable and whether we should belong and fund an organization that is basically a stacked deck against everything the US and Israel stand for. Many fear the end of the UN, but history tells us that organizations that bite the hand that feeds them are the ones doomed to extinction. Ask this question of yourself; name one war the UN has stopped? I rest my case.

  • kafirman

    Horowitz subtly conflates "theocracies" with Islam. But theocracies can be wonderful. Further, Horowitz makes an implied broad appeal to religious neutrality. But like world peace, and however reaffirmed by the SCOTUS, religious neutrality is a fictional construct. There is only atheism, agnosticism, theism, pantheism, finite godism, panentheism and one more (which escapes me). The American system of government has recognition of "Nature and Nature's God" as the fount of rights. The problem is that Islam does not recognize human rights. Horowitz subtly besmirches theism and the important theisistic notions–like natural law–when he disparages "theocracies." Mr. Horowitz, Islam and not theocracies are the problem.

  • Ben

    I agree with the swastika`s place on the picture.But what about the alternative? The tendency of using international forces in conflict is irreversible so there must not be two of international organizations.I see the only way to modernize UN may be by American dictate using their going out.

  • Ben

    I`m astonished by the lack of common sence of the conservative commentators! America have veto in UN security consil, and what`ll do China,Russia,Muslims after America departure? They`l persecute remaining disageeable countries under the UN flag, and America will have to defend them in the coalition with whom?
    Conservatives demonstrate the qualities of liberals.

    • Foolster41

      Yes, but being in the system continues to grant a pretend legitimacy. All the UN does is feeds off the generosity of free producing nations and gives to the non-productive ones, money AND power. Who is heading the security council? Despots, communists and Islaofascists who don't grant the rights the west does. You say, the'll persecute other free nations. Then they should join us. This is a STRIKE, not working men for better wages, but a strike against bureaucratic thieves in suits who steal OUR rights by bending us international PC law (such as laws against blasphemy), who steal our security and our right tell us we have no right to exist (such as Isreal) or fight back.

      If we remove ourselves, the parasitic UN can no longer feed off the US or the west. They loose legitimacy and fuel and will crash all the sooner. If others join us, the crash's velocity will increase.

      To the UN, we, as American and free westerns and capitalists should say, as did John Galt did, "Get the hell out our way"

      • Foolster41

        Errata: (Corrections in bold)

        "bending us to international law"

  • Steven Folino

    Just curious, but how can something dated May 25th have happened yet?

  • Snorbak

    & what post WW2 agenda would that be?

  • Supreme_Galooty

    It was a brainchild of Woodrow Wilson and his brain-dead step-child Franklin. It was supported by fascist leftists galore in both the US and the rest of the world. It is still revered by those fascist leftists and THEIR brain-dead progeny, today's "progressives." It resides in Flushing Meadows and is composed primarily of POND SCUM.

  • Larry

    The final destruction of the British and French empires, and the absolute entrenchment of the USA in its newly acquired positon of No.1 Power.