# Is the United Nations good? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 6, 2002, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-united-nations-good/127288 "2002-09-06T14:40:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![vanilla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f19dbf/32.png) [@vanilla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vanilla)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2002, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-united-nations-good/127288/1 "2002-09-06T14:40:56Z")
In this link here: [http://www.getusout.org/](http://www.getusout.org/) Its claimed that the U.N. is bad, and will make Americans lose lots of its rights, including that of being able to try citizens in our own courts, etc. What exactly has the U.N. done since its inception? Has it done good for world peace? Whats bad about it? thank you. ---
**Author:** ![Soup\_du\_jour](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/848f3c/32.png) [@Soup\_du\_jour](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Soup_du_jour)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2002, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-united-nations-good/127288/2 "2002-09-06T17:57:27Z")
The UN has provided a forum for nations to try and voice their disputes with other nations without the necessity of going to war. It has given a voice to smaller or less powerful countries. It has facillitated multilateral dialogue on such varied issues as Development, Disarmament, Human Rights, and Security conerns. It holds countries accountable to their own people and to the international community for their actions. Yup, I’d say that it’s pretty good. ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2002, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-united-nations-good/127288/3 "2002-09-06T18:05:45Z")
The bullshit on that site is amazing. Someone would have to be incredibly ignorant to believe any of it. > [@](#): > > Fact: The United Nations (financed by American taxpayers!) has long been a safe harbor for terrorist and oppressive regimes which target America as the enemy. ummmm. ok… . whatever. ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2002, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-united-nations-good/127288/4 "2002-09-06T18:13:04Z")
The UN was founded with the best of intentions. IMHO it was good when it began, but it has deteriorated a lot. A clique of totalitarian nations wields more and more power. Ulimately it’s hard for the UN to be any better than it’s member countries, but it’s easy for it to be worse. It’s hard for me to think of any actions taken by the General Assembly or Security Council that have actually done any good in the last 10 years. Some of the sub-agencies are good. The World Health Organization does an exellent job and UNICEF does many good things. OTOH UNESCO has long done more harm than good, and it’s now worse than ever. Aside from not doing much useful good, the UN is inefficient and wasteful and corrupt in small ways. I wish there were some way to re-structure the UN to make it more effective, but that’s not in the cards. Given that the UN cannot be improved or replaced, I think it’s worth keeping, but just barely. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2002, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-united-nations-good/127288/5 "2002-09-06T18:56:20Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > A clique of totalitarian nations wields more and more power. Really, what clique is that, december old man? And what substantive facts do you have to support this? Please do note in advance substantive facts should include a full contexualization (e.g. 3 bad acts should be weighted according to the number of overall actions. But then you should know this.) > [@](#): > > It’s hard for me to think of any actions taken by the General Assembly or Security Council that have actually done any good in the last 10 years. Well, the phrase begins accurately enough, but one does have to question the basis of your “thoughts” – might I suggest your evaluation of [http://www.un.org/Docs/scinfo.htm](http://www.un.org/Docs/scinfo.htm) especially in regards to the specific actions cited therin? I’m afraid I can’t shake the impression that yours is an argument from ignorance. ---
**Author:** ![Maeglin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8baadc/32.png) [@Maeglin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maeglin)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2002, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-united-nations-good/127288/6 "2002-09-06T19:07:25Z")
> [@](#): > > It’s hard for me to think of any actions taken by the General Assembly or Security Council that have actually done any good in the last 10 years. With all due respect, this explains more about your memory and biases than it reveals about the UN. Just four months ago, free elections were held in Sierra Leone after ten years of astoundingly brutal civil war. These elections were made possible by the arrival of a multilateral UN peacekeeping force two years ago, which systematically destroyed the RUF (Revolutionary United Front) and jailed its insane leader, Foday Sankoh. Now Sierra Leone houses the UN’s largest peacekeeping operation anywhere. The UN’s success in Sierra Leone is almost completely unqualified. Nearly 2 million Sierra Leoneans voted freely in the last election, and UN officers are actually restoring stability to this nearly annihilated country. This is the first example I could think of off the top of my head. I am sure others will chime in with more. While I don’t disagree with you in principle, **december** , I think it is incorrect to argue that the UN has not performed multilateral “good deeds.” ---
**Author:** ![Mighty\_Maximino](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e95f7d/32.png) [@Mighty\_Maximino](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mighty_Maximino)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2002, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-united-nations-good/127288/7 "2002-09-06T19:26:31Z")
The UN does a lot of good work – Sierra Leone is a good example, and the World Health Organization has also done tremendous amounts of good all over the world. They also have a lot of bureaucratic infighting and politicking, as well as a reputation for not paying parking tickets. Well, nobody’s perfect, and there’s certainly room for improvement. But taking information from a site that claims the UN is trying to take away “the God-given rights of Americans” seems a bit unwise. ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2002, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-united-nations-good/127288/8 "2002-09-06T19:47:23Z")
East Timor. [http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/southeast/08/14/timor.soares.trial/index.html](http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/southeast/08/14/timor.soares.trial/index.html) > [@](#): > > East Timor voted overwhelmingly to break away from Indonesia in a U.N.-sponsored referendum held on August 31, 1999. > > \< snip \> > > The Democratic Republic of East Timor was officially established in May, after the United Nations administered the tiny, half-island region following the 1999 violence. > > Portugal abandoned its 400-year presence in East Timor in 1974. This was followed by an invasion and occupation by Indonesia. Botswana. Nothing dramatic, just “help”. [http://www.bw.undp.org/the\_un\_in.html](http://www.bw.undp.org/the_un_in.html) And the Security Council was keeping busy back in 2000. [http://www.cnn.com/2000/US/09/08/millennium.summit/index.html](http://www.cnn.com/2000/US/09/08/millennium.summit/index.html) > [@](#): > > U.N. agrees to pump up peacekeeping force > Millennium Summit turns attention to African AIDS, Mideast > September 8, 2000 > > UNITED NATIONS – The U.N. Security Council voted unanimously Thursday to overhaul United Nations peacekeeping operations to create a more potent, better-financed peacekeeping force. > > Chastened by the U.N.'s recent poor record in preventing massacres, a special summit of the 15-member Security Council adopted guidelines intended to support Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s drive to give the world body more teeth. > > \< snip \> > > But while the United States, Britain and Canada sought to extend the grounds for intervention to avert disasters, Russian and Chinese leaders stressed their fierce opposition to interference in countries’ internal affairs. And, er, I couldn’t help noticing the lack of any “clique of totalitarian nations” in this action. Who exactly are you referring to, anyway? [Here](http://www.un.org/Docs/scinfo.htm#MEMBERS) is the list of current Security Council members. Please be so kind as to indicate which of them constitute the Clique, who have the coolest clothes and always get everything “their” way… > [@](#): > > Mauritius > Mexico > Norway > Russian Federation > Singapore > Syrian Arab Republic > United Kingdom > United States > Bulgaria > Cameroon > China > Colombia > Guinea > Ireland > France ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2002, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-united-nations-good/127288/9 "2002-09-06T19:54:39Z")
\<\\> In fairness to the obnoxious site mentioned in the OP, there are some UN treaties that would permit the trial of Amercans in international courts or that would restrict some normal Americna civil liberties. The US has resisted signing these treaties. However, when that site says, “take aim at the God-given rights” they entirely lose me. It makes the UN sound like the enemy of God and as if it is intentionally trying to reduce our rights. There may be some sane anti-UN sites somewhere on the web. I wouldn’t trust this one. **DDG** , I didn’t say the clique was on the Security Council. I was thinking of e.g., the African nations which recently voted to have Libya as the Chairman of the Human Rights Commission and the Arab nations that led to the passage of the many ridiculous anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian-terrorist resolutions. ---
**Author:** ![ElJeffe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/958977/32.png) [@ElJeffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElJeffe)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2002, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-united-nations-good/127288/10 "2002-09-06T19:59:12Z")
Was it the UN that was trying to sue US corportations for not paying what they believed to be a fair amount of taxes, and thus “stealing” away foreign investors? Or was that the EU? If it was the UN, I would classify that as trying to take away the rights of Americans, namely the right to structure our tax system however we damn well please. I also find it a bit hypocritical that the UN constantly criticizes the US for its human rights “atoricities”, yet fawns over China, Zimbabwe, Cuba, and others. I think overall the UN is probably more good than bad, but that doesn’t keep them from frequently annoying me. Jeff ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2002, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-united-nations-good/127288/11 "2002-09-06T20:11:43Z")
I am so frequently impressed by the depth of understanding displayed here of international institutions, foreign affaires, foreign commerce and international exchanges. The sophistication in which posters are able to discern the differing institutions, their effects and the complex relationships. No. I’m sorry, I am lying. Please reverse all of the above. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ElJeffe \* > Was it the UN that was trying to sue US corportations for not paying what they believed to be a fair amount of taxes, and thus “stealing” away foreign investors? Or was that the EU? This muddle of uncomprehension refers to the action brought by the **EU** in the context of the **WTO** in re **the United States Government** ’s illegal export subsidies via tax policy (two holdings on this matter and recent judgement on level of damage, see FT articles in past week). Always encouraging to see how people get their facts straight. At least you managed the EU. Note, the mechanism applied is one which the US makes frequent recourse to also. Two way street and all that, this free trade thing. Further note, the **WTO** is not a UN organization. > [@](#): > > If it was the UN, I would classify that as trying to take away the rights of Americans, namely the right to structure our tax system however we damn well please. When one undertakes treaty obligations, one undertakes to make compromises in the interest of large mutual benefits. Childish playgroundesque fits of pique by the misinformed, the ignorant not withstanding. > [@](#): > > I also find it a bit hypocritical that the UN constantly criticizes the US for its human rights “atoricities”, yet fawns over China, Zimbabwe, Cuba, and others. I find it rather hypocritical that posters such as yourself make such assertions, arguments from ignorance. ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2002, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-united-nations-good/127288/12 "2002-09-06T20:23:29Z")
Vanilla, honey, that’s a classic Conspiracy Theory website. What were you looking for when you found _them_? 😃 Typical of all Conspiracy Theory websites, they put up a lot of jingoist buzz words and catch phrases, all of which are calculated to get you upset, but none of which are supported by any facts. I will debunk one thing, as that’s all I have the patience for, with this sort of thing. 😃 In bright blue letters it proclaims, “The United Nations Wants Control of YOUR Child!” and then below it says, in much tinier, gray print, “Every child is our child - Motto of the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)” Well, sheesh, that’s dumb enough (twist the UNICEF motto to make it seem sinister? :rolleyes: ), but there’s more. If you click on that link, it says: > [@](#): > > Are you concerned that…the UN’s aim has always been to take over our educational system? > > The UN launched its Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in 1946 with the announced intent to usurp parents’ rights to educate and train their children. UNESCO heavyweight Dr. Luther Evans stated, “UNESCO’s is a radical program… To make the system of the UN and its specialized agencies work, we must sweep past traditional barriers…” (emphasis added.) Radio newscaster Paul Harvey condemned UNESCO’s undermining of patriotism in one of his broadcasts: “Through UNESCO, American children are influenced away from their national allegiance. American children are being indoctrinated with world government.” It’s just stupid and paranoid. It’s a gross (and bizarre) misrepresentation of what UNESCO stands for. And it’s also, quite simply, 100% wrong. UNESCO _wasn’t_ founded “with the announced intent to usurp parents’ rights to educate and train their children”. You can go and read the UNESCO constitution [here,](http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001255/125590e.pdf#constitution) where Article I, “Purposes and Functions”, on page 8 (PDF document) talks about, um, their purposes and functions. It doesn’t say anything that even remotely sounds like “usurp parents’ rights”. It’s all about “education” and “cultural understanding”. Only a truly paranoid conspiracy theorist could twist this into something sinister. And actually, it even says, at the end of Article I, in Paragraph 3: > [@](#): > > With a view to preserving the independence, integrity and fruitful diversity of the cultures and educational systems of the States Members of the Organization, the Organization is prohibited from intervening in matters which are essentially within their domestic jurisdiction. Duh :rolleyes: This directly contradicts what the website wants you to think, which is that UNESCO somehow wants to indoctrinate the world’s children ("YOUR children! **"** :eek: **"** ). UNESCO doesn’t want anything of the kind. Dumb, dumb, dumb. ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2002, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-united-nations-good/127288/13 "2002-09-06T20:37:50Z")
It’s incidents like this that make one want to take the UN and shake it. How anything but trouble come from an international meeting on world hunger that cheered Robert Mugabe. Mugabe is carrying out a policy of intentionally starving many of his own people through a policy of “selective starvation.” However, they jeered our Secretary of State, who was announcing a billion dollars of aid for developmental aid. > [@](#): > > On Monday, dozens of presidents and prime ministers cheered Mr. Mugabe as he assailed Tony Blair, the British prime minister, for criticizing Zimbabwe’s land redistribution program in a speech at a United Nations sustainable development meeting in South Africa. Two days later, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell was jeered at the same meeting when he accused Mr. Mugabe of violating human rights and pushing the nation to the brink of starvation by ordering thousands of whites to hand over their farms to black novice farmers. [http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/06/international/africa/06ZIMB.html](http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/06/international/africa/06ZIMB.html) > [@](#): > > The ZANU-PF government of President Robert Mugabe is carrying out a policy of selective starvation against its political enemies. The denial of food to opposition strongholds has replaced overt violence as the government’s principal tool of repression in Zimbabwe. Mortality and morbidity rates will continue to accelerate if this policy is not reversed. [http://allafrica.com/stories/200208290169.html](http://allafrica.com/stories/200208290169.html) ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2002, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-united-nations-good/127288/14 "2002-09-06T20:48:14Z")
\>\>Was it the UN that was trying to sue US corportations for not paying what they believed to be a fair amount of taxes, and thus “stealing” away foreign investors? Or was that the EU? If it was the UN, I would classify that as trying to take away the rights of Americans, namely the right to structure our tax system however we damn well please. So much ignorance in such a short paragraph. Now I begin to understand why web sites like the one linked in th OP have people who actually believe them. The EU sued the US in the WTO for breaking commitments it had voluntarily made. The WTO ruled in favor of the EU and said they were entitled to slap tariffs on US products. The US has admitted it was in the wrong and is just trying to get a lower settlement. The US can pull out of the WTO whenever it wants and become a pariah in isolation. Then it can do as it well damn pleases as far as subsidising exports although there will be few exports to subsidise. \>\> I also find it a bit hypocritical that the UN constantly criticizes the US for its human rights “atoricities”, yet fawns over China, Zimbabwe, Cuba, and others. Can you show me any evidence that “the UN constantly criticizes the US for its human rights “atoricities”, yet fawns over China, Zimbabwe, Cuba, and others”? Of course you can’t. because you just made that up. \>\> I think overall the UN is probably more good than bad, but that doesn’t keep them from frequently annoying me. Maybe if you dealt with facts instead of with imaginary things you would be less annoyed. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2002, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-united-nations-good/127288/15 "2002-09-06T20:53:56Z")
I suppose that it might be too much to ask for you to be able to distinguish between attendees at a single conference and the UN per se? The forum was for the attendees to express themselves… The UN as the institution is not to blame for anti-American feeling in certain quarters. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > \*\*It’s incidents like this that make one want to take the UN and shake it. How anything but trouble come from an international meeting on world hunger that cheered Robert Mugabe. Mugabe is carrying out a policy of intentionally starving many of his own people through a policy of “selective starvation.” However, they jeered our Secretary of State, who was announcing a billion dollars of aid for developmental aid. [http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/06/international/africa/06ZIMB.html](http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/06/international/africa/06ZIMB.html)[http://allafrica.com/stories/200208290169.html](http://allafrica.com/stories/200208290169.html) \*\* ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2002, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-united-nations-good/127288/16 "2002-09-06T21:03:26Z")
Decided to go look for this: > [@](#): > > the Arab nations that led to the passage of the many ridiculous anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian-terrorist resolutions. Well, right off the bat, no matter how much I Google, I don’t find anything that resembles a “pro-Palestinian terrorist” UN resolution, either in the General Assembly or in the Security Council. The UN, as far as I can tell, has never passed a resolution in favor of either terrorists or terrorism, whether Palestinian, Italian, Afghan, Chechen, Malaysian, or any other of the Baskin-Robbins 31 Flavors of Terrorism, and if you think otherwise, I’d like to see a cite, please. Next I will look for the “Arab nation” clique, controlling the UN on behalf of their friends, the Palestinians, and working steadily against Israel, their enemy. Ah ha! In 1998, the resolution to let Palestine at least join in the conversation at the UN. [http://www.palestine-un.org/news/jul98\_res.html](http://www.palestine-un.org/news/jul98_res.html) > [@](#): > > The General Assembly overwhelmingly adopted resolution 52/250, entitled “Participation of Palestine in the work of the United Nations”, with 124 votes in favor, 4 against and 10 abstentions. The four negative votes were…the United States, Israel and Micronesia, with the addition of the Marshall Islands. > > The abstentions were Bulgaria, Democratic Republic of Congo, Honduras, Liberia, Malawi, Paraguay, Poland, Romania, Rwanda and Zambia. > > A total of 47 Member States were absent from the vote, 22 of which could not vote due to arrears. > > The revised text that was adopted was cosponsored by the same sponsors of the original draft resolution in December. Indonesia introduced the draft resolution before the Assembly on behalf of its cosponsors, which consisted of Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Comoros, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Guinea, Indonesia, Jordan, Kuwait, Malaysia, Mauritania, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Viet Nam and Yemen. Eureka! The Arab Clique appears!..Er…I was not aware that Vietnam and Cuba were “Arab nations”. Guinea? Bangladesh? Indonesia? Malaysia? Afghanistan? [Here](http://www.middleeastnews.com/ArabLeague.html) is the membership list for the League of Arab Nations. > [@](#): > > Algeria > Bahrain > Comoros > Djibouti > Egypt > Iraq > Jordan > Kuwait > Lebanon > Libya > Mauritania > Morocco > Oman > Palestine > Qatar > Saudi Arabia > Somalia > Sudan > Syria > Tunisia > U.A.E. > Yemen So, lemme see, take away 7 non-Arab nations from the “Arab Clique” that submitted the resolution, that leaves…Algeria, Bahrain, Comoros, Djibouti, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Mauritania, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen…that leaves 15 “Arab Nations”. So the “clique of Arab Nations” is evidently one-third non-Arab. Well, gee, I think that’s mighty generous of the Arab Clique, to share power like that. Kudos to them for letting Wee Folks like Vietnam play on their Arab Clique team… So, anyway, got any cites? I’d especially like to see the word “many”, as in “many resolutions”, illustrated. ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2002, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-united-nations-good/127288/17 "2002-09-06T21:44:07Z")
I should have said an _Arab and Muslim bloc_. There have been many resolutions which criticized Israel but ignored or even endorsed Palestinian terrorism. This topic would be worth at least a full thread on its own. Here are some cites. I could easily find more. [http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/UN/unantisem.html](http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/UN/unantisem.html) [http://www.adl.org/ads/israel\_ad\_042602.asp](http://www.adl.org/ads/israel_ad_042602.asp) [http://www.adl.org/PresRele/UnitedNations\_94/4076\_94.asp](http://www.adl.org/PresRele/UnitedNations_94/4076_94.asp) [http://www.adl.org/PresRele/IslME\_62/4074\_62.asp](http://www.adl.org/PresRele/IslME_62/4074_62.asp) [http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf\_faq\_palestine\_un\_anti\_israel\_bias.php](http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_faq_palestine_un_anti_israel_bias.php) [http://christianactionforisrael.org/un/news\_un.html](http://christianactionforisrael.org/un/news_un.html) The last one appears to be the most comprehensive. As far as pro-terrorism, there was a controversy when the General Assembly passed a resolution about a year ago, which criticized Israel and subtly endorsed Palistinian terrorism by reference to an earlier resolution by another UN committee, which had endorsed the use of terrorism by Palestinians. It’s easy to find examples of UN resolutions that critcized or censured Israel while simply ignoring ongoing mass murder by Palestinian groups, even in cases where the Israel action was in reaction to a Palestinian attack. In fact, the US made news of a sort just a couple of weeks ago, by announcing that they would henceforth veto any such resolution. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2002, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-united-nations-good/127288/18 "2002-09-06T23:14:37Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > \*\*\<\\> > > In fairness to the obnoxious site mentioned in the OP, there are some UN treaties that would permit the trial of Amercans in international courts or that would restrict some normal Americna civil liberties. The US has resisted signing these treaties. However, when that site says, “take aim at the God-given rights” they entirely lose me. It makes the UN sound like the enemy of God and as if it is intentionally trying to reduce our rights. > > There may be some sane anti-UN sites somewhere on the web. I wouldn’t trust this one. > > **DDG** , I didn’t say the clique was on the Security Council. I was thinking of e.g., the African nations which recently voted to have Libya as the Chairman of the Human Rights Commission and the Arab nations that led to the passage of the many ridiculous anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian-terrorist resolutions. \*\* ---
**Author:** ![milroyj](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a88e57/32.png) [@milroyj](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/milroyj)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2002, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-united-nations-good/127288/19 "2002-09-07T00:40:22Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Duck Duck Goose \* > **Well, gee, I think that’s mighty generous of the Arab Clique, to share power like that. Kudos to them for letting Wee Folks like Vietnam play on their Arab Clique team…** Likewise, kudos to the Arab Clique for having such upstanding countries as Vietnam on their side. Or not. YMMV ---
**Author:** ![TheeGrumpy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/779978/32.png) [@TheeGrumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TheeGrumpy)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2002, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-united-nations-good/127288/20 "2002-09-07T02:03:19Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally posted by \*\*Maeglin \*\* > The UN’s success in Sierra Leone is **almost completely** unqualified. Tee hee. 😃 [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-united-nations-good/127288.md?page=2)