United Nations

Understanding the evil of the left wing

Yesterday we saw the public representatives of the left-wing stand in parliament and show their unwillingness to help those in suffering. They should hold their heads in shame, but that is for the next post.

What you need to understand is what those public figures represent, in all its appalling clarity. These comments are from various left wing blogs, I read them so you didn’t have to.

Weka at The Standard:

If the choice is between supporting the US and a cafe terrorism once a decade, I think we should take the cafe.

So innocent victims of terrorism is ok with this person because at least we aren’t supporting the US.

Lynn Prentice, the world’s greatest sysop, now also the world’s greatest solver of Middle East conflict:

As it stands, I’m starting to think that it would be an interesting case for an old imperialistic solution. Let their stable neighbours (ie not Syria) partition it along more rational lines and occupy it under a UN protectorate for a decade or so to stabilize the society. Charge the cost and a large profit to the US and UK taxpayers who were stupid enough to cause the problem.

So which stable neighbours of Syria and Iraq are you suggesting Lynn? I can only think of one…Israel, yeah like that is going to happen.

Tiger Mountain at The Standard thinks it is all a plot manufactured by the US:

this has been a textbook example of “manufacturing consent” at the behest of 5 Eyes and Uncle Sam, from snooping law changes, front page/TV news leading with gruesome IS videos, increased passport sanctions, a visiting Iraqi politician, to even the Westfield mall video that has been around for some time apparently, surfacing in msm on the very day cabinet was firming up a position!

The answer is to not participate in or support imperialist wars. To put diplomatic pressure on via the Security Council and trading partners to not support IS in any shape or form. To run a truly independent foreign and trading policy. To lavish aid on the vulnerable including various stripes of Kurds.

Read more »

The real reason behind the UN’s continued scare campaign over global warming

Here is a clue for you…the UN isn’t interested in saving the planet from a non-existent threat, it is actually interested in controlling the planet, and one of their top officials has proved it.

The alarmists keep telling us their concern about global warming is all about man’s stewardship of the environment. But we know that’s not true. A United Nations official has now confirmed this.

At a news conference last week in Brussels, Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, admitted that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.

This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution,” she said.

Referring to a new international treaty environmentalists hope will be adopted at the Paris climate change conference later this year, she added: “This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history.”

Read more »

McCully insults Israel and cuddles up to terrorists

Sometimes I wonder if years of inveterate rooting haven’t addled Murray McCully’s mind.

[Yesterday], Foreign Affairs Minister Murray McCully appointed Jim McLay, this country’s top diplomat at the United Nations, as the representative to the Palestinian Authority.

The former deputy prime minister and National Party leader will take up the new role in May.

Last September, a diplomatic row broke out with Israel over its refusal to accept New Zealand’s ambassador Jonathan Curr because he was also an envoy to the Palestinian Authority.

The envoy is based in Turkey and had performed both roles since 2008.

Gerard van Bohemen, who is a deputy secretary at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, will succeed Mr McLay at the United Nations.

Read more »

Sour grapes

The Fox and the Grapes

Green Party co-leader Metiria Turei complained that she was overlooked by Angry Andrew for a position on the Intelligence and Security committee because of her sex. She had no proof of this claim apart from the fact that he gave the job to someone else.

He said that he didn’t choose her because he wanted someone with … ‘skills, understanding and experience’  which in her mind implied that she did not have these qualities. Certainly no one would raise an eye brow at his decision to appoint David Shearer given his background in international relations and aid. After all he did spend nearly 20 years working for the UN, managing the provision of aid to countries including Somalia, Rwanda, Liberia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Lebanon and Iraq.No one could say that Andrew Little gave the position to some one less able and experienced than her. In fact the opposite is true as she has no international experience at all. Nothing, nada, nil, zero, nought.

Read more »

Three good reasons from a lefty as to why we should take the fight to ISIS

Paul Buchanan is a lefty…he is an expert on international relations and also on conflicts and military issues.

It is not often I agree with him, we are on opposite sides of the political coin.

However he provides three good reason for New Zealand helping to take the fight to ISIS.

There are three specific reasons why NZ has to join the fight, two practical and one principled.

The practical reasons are simple: First, NZ’s major security allies, the US, UK and Australia, are all involved as are France, Germany and others. After the signing of the Wellington and Washington security agreements, NZ became a first tier security partner of the US, and as is known, it is an integral member of the 5 Eyes signals intelligence network. It therefore cannot renege on its security alliance commitments without a serious loss of credibility and trust from the countries upon which it is most dependent for its own security.

Secondly, most of New Zealand’s primary diplomatic and trading partners, including those in the Middle East, are involved in the anti-IS coalition. Having just secured a UN Security Council temporary seat at a time when the UN has repeatedly issued condemnations of IS, and having campaigned in part on breaking the logjam in the UNSC caused by repeated use of the veto by the 5 permanent members on issues on which they disagree (such as the civil war in Syria), NZ must back up its rhetoric and reinforce its diplomatic and trade relations by committing to the multinational effort to defeat IS. Refusing to do so in the face of requests from these partners jeopardises the non-military relationships with them.

The third reason is a matter of principle and it is surprising that the government has not made more of it as a justification for involvement. After the Rwandan genocide an international doctrine known as the “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P) was agreed by UN convention to prevent future horrors of that sort. It basically states that if a defenceless population is being subject to the depredations of its own government, or if the home government cannot defend the population from the depredations of others, then the international community is compelled to use whatever means, including armed force, to prevent ongoing atrocities from occurring. There can be no doubt that is the situation in parts of Iraq and Syria at the moment. Neither the Assad regime or the Iraqi government can defend minority communities such as Kurds or Yazidis, or even non-compliant Sunnis, from the wrath of IS.

That, more than any other reason, is why NZ must join the fight. As an international good citizen that has signed up to the R2P, NZ is committed in principle to the defense of vulnerable others.

Read more »

ISIS wants girls married at nine years old

The depravity of ISIS and their Islamic inspired dogma reaches even further depths.

If you are gay they chuck you off buildings. If you are a woman and commit adultery then they stone you to death. Journalists and aid workers get their heads hacked off. Men and children are slaughtered, crucified and shot for not being Muslim, or the wrong type of Muslim…their women enslaved or used as unpaid prostitutes.

Now ISIS has declared that girls can be married off at nine years old and that women should certainly be married before 17.

Girls living under Isis (Islamic State) rule may legitimately be married from as young as nine, and should have a husband before they are 17, according to a semi-official manifesto aimed at winning new recruits.

Their education should continue no later than the age of 15 and “most pure girls will be married by 16 or 17″, according to the document published by the all-female al-Khanssaa Brigade’s media wing. Most women should lead a sedentary lifestyle within the confines of their homes, it adds.   Read more »

Guest Post – Phil Hayward on Auckland and the RMA reforms

by Phil Hayward

The Auckland Unitary Plan Submission process is underway and we should soon know whether it is a charade with outcomes pre-determined and impervious to evidence. The usual suspects are also claiming once again to be able to “debunk” the latest Demographia Report on housing affordability, and even the government is embarrassed over the dismal ineffectiveness of its trumpeted “Housing Accords”.

My previous essays on this forum could usefully be read or re-read now by anyone interested in this subject.

The prevalent mythology is that Auckland already sprawls too much at low density, already has built too many roads (and that is why it is congested), is letting the floodgates re-open too much towards more new sprawl and not enough new intensification (60% of growth to be via intensification is the plan), the ramp-up in building now is major, and intensification will provide for affordability.

In fact, Auckland is around 3 times as dense as Boston, Atlanta, Indianapolis, Nashville and dozens of other US cities; is the second densest city in the Anglo New World after Toronto (pop. 6 million); is one of the densest first world urban areas of only 1 million people; is close to Amsterdam’s density and is denser than Lyon, Marseille, the Ruhr Valley and many urban areas in France and Germany, especially those with around 1 million people or less.

We have never actually had US style low density sprawl; very little of our suburban development was ever even ¼ acre sections. That always was a “dream” for most, and now nearly every such section has already had townhouses built on what was the backyard. In the USA, suburbs are common with minimum lot size mandates of 1 acre to 4 acres.  

Michael Bassett and Luke Malpass (NZ Initiative) “Priced Out: How NZ Lost its Housing Affordability” (2012) show that NZ and Auckland were during the period from the 1960’s to the 1980’s, building as many as twice as many new dwellings as now. Most of that was greenfields suburban development, albeit at considerably higher density than US-style sprawl. We now have congestion problems because there was inadequate planning of road capacity, not because we did the roads we did.

I have estimated from TomTom Traffic index data and Google Earth imagery, that Auckland has 1/3 the highway lane miles and 1/5 the arterial lane miles of Indianapolis, which has a similar population. Indianapolis in the TomTom Traffic Index, scores a congestion delay of 15 minutes per 1 hour of driving at peak (other comparable US cities are similar) versus Auckland’s 45 minutes. Of course its house price median multiple happens to be stable at around 3 as well, in spite of being truly low density, unlike Auckland.   Read more »

Green Aussie idiot is going to kayak from Canberra to Paris…uhmm…by plane

1421197396191

The Green taliban fools really don;t realise just how foolish they look when they pull their lame stunts.

One Aussie Green idiot reckons he is going to paddle his kayak from Canberra (which is landlocked) to Paris…but of course he is a Green so his carbon footprint is going to be enormous.

He will risk confronting alligators, polar bears and container ships but in the end he will be able to say to his grandchildren, “I did my best”.

Engineer, grandfather and ecowarrior Steve Posselt begins an 8000-kilometre kayak journey from Canberra to Paris on Thursday.

He intends to drag and paddle his wheeled kayak halfway around the world to deliver a message on behalf of all Australians who want action on climate change. The message: we are in this fight against global warming.

Read more »

Op-ed “Unity through Diversity Equals Cultural Death”

15995756-abstract-word-cloud-for-cultural-pluralism-with-related-tags-and-terms

By Olivia Pierson

Cultural pluralism is as old as the hills – or at least as old as the Babylonian Empire on whose riverbank shores even the captive Jews were tolerated to sit and weep. Multiculturalism, on the other hand, is a 20th Century bastardization of tolerance, which the United Nations invented to socially engineer Western democracies to cope with overwhelming immigration, mostly from Third World slave-pens. The pious and politically correct preachers of “diversity” and “equality” raised multiculturalism in the West to the status of a new religion, as if the world needed yet another one of those.

With the truth emerging after murderous events in Paris, can there still be any doubt that multiculturalism has epically failed in the West? In the last five years Angela Merkel has admitted its failure; so have Nicolas Sarkozy and David Cameron. But how has it failed so?

Multiculturalism is a modern liberal tenet which states that all cultures are equal regardless of the diverse practices of each culture.  This should not be confused with cultural pluralism which holds that all citizens, no matter what culture they hail from, are equal before the laws of the land –the one host culture.  The host culture is necessarily dominant, hence being the yearly recipient of hundreds of thousands of immigrants bidding farewell to their homelands.   Read more »

Guardian editorial thinks Helen Clark is inappropriate to lead the UN

This must be devastating for Helen Clark to read, in what is probably her favourite media organisation, one that she usually gets a  free reign in opining on whatever she feels like, has published an editorial suggesting that she is inappropriate to succeed Ban Ki Moon as UN General Secretary.

The United Nations confronts war, famine, disease, climate change and much else, but perhaps the greatest and most persistent challenge the organisation has faced is the tendency of its member states to deny it the leadership its work requires. The issue is back, as it is every decade, with the selection of a new secretary general to take over in 2016.

The UN enshrined the idea of harnessing the talents of a group of men and women from around the world, accountable to governments but working exclusively for the global good. It has only sometimes, and quite by accident, been fulfilled. When there is sufficient leadership to give life to it, the arts of peace flourish and the global discourse is enriched. When there is not, a price is paid in blood.

Fair, noble aspirations…if somewhat motherhood and apple pie in their outlook.

The editorial then disses the British candidate before setting upon Helen Clark.

The field of those seeking to be the next secretary general is widely felt to be underwhelming. Helen Clark, the head of the UN Development Programme, gave an example of how a UN official should not behave when, before the current secretary general was even halfway through his term, she began to discuss, in these pages, her interest in succeeding him. It is time for something more serious. A small search committee should be established, led by Kofi Annan, with representatives of the permanent members of the security council, other regions, and a professional headhunter, and it should work through most of next year. The idea that candidates should be limited to one region is unfounded and can be dispensed with. The council should recommend more than one candidate to the general assembly, which should make an appointment for a single term of seven years.

Read more »