Our Friends The UN – And Kofi Annan.

Canada’s Prime Minister, Jean Chrétien, wants to allow Secretary General Kofi Annan, and the United Nations to dictate our foreign policy, and with whom we will be allied. And that’s a tragedy.

Just so you will have an idea of whom we are dealing with in Kofi Annan and the UN, here are a few facts, of which you might, or might not be aware:

In 1994, Kofi Annan was the head of the United Nations Peace Keeping Forces. And Canadian General Romeo Dallaire, was the senior UN military leader responsible for the UN troops in Rwanda. He reported directly to Kofi Annan.

In 1994, General Dallaire had received incontestable proof that the Rwandan Hutus, encouraged by the Hutu led government, were planning a genocidal campaign against the Tutsis and moderate Hutus. The General presented these FACTS to Kofi Annan with a plan to intervene. Kofi Annan said no.

As a direct result of Kofi Annan and the UN’s decision to ignore General Dallair, as many as; and possibly more than 800,000 Tutsis, and some moderate Hutus were massacred. Many of whom were hacked to death by Hutu children wielding machetes.

In 1995, the same Kofi Annan, in the same position of UN authority, refused to allow his UN troops to intervene in mostly Moslem Srebrenica, where Serbs were creating a genocide of their own.

The Dutch commander responsible for the UN forces in the region, Colonel Ton Karremans, asked UN Headquarters for air support, these requests were repeatedly denied. And as another result of Kofi Annan’s reluctance to do his job, it is estimated by conservative figures, that more than 7,000 people died in Srebrenica.

In the flimsiest defense of Kofi Annan, and in condemnation to the UN, it was the Security Council, to whom Annan reported, which couldn’t agree to authorize the use of force in order to defend the Tutsis in Rwanda, and the Moslems in Srebrenica.

As usual, the Security Council’s reluctance to do what was right, was based solely upon political considerations. But; had Kofi Annan INSISTED, the right decisions would have been taken, and a great many lives would have been saved.

But Annan didn’t insist. Instead, he participated in a massive coverup to keep the threat of genocide out of the public eye PRIOR to the massacres. And after the massacres, he once again participated in a UN coverup to insulate himself and his UN pals from culpability.

The UN coverup was so extensive, that Canadian General Romeo Dallaire, who more than anything wanted to “spill his guts”, was ORDERED by the UN, and Kofi Annan, not to give testimony at an international inquest.

The fact that Kofi Annan was not the only person responsible for the massacres at Srebrenica, and in Rwanda, does not exonerate him. It only implicates him as part of a larger conspiracy.

The way the UN and Kofi Annan were “punished” for their complicity in these horrors, was in the awarding to them, of the Nobel Peace Price in the year 2001, to be equally shared between the UN and Kofi Annan. A prize and cash, both dripping with blood.

The United Nations is in itself a major part of the problem, opposed to being a part of the solution. The genocide in the former Yugoslavia ended only after President Clinton authorized the massive use of NATO troops and American air power, which forced the Serbs to end their war against civilians.

Clearly, if left to the UN’s devices, the genocide in the Balkans would have gone into the millions of people. And the entire region would have erupted into warfare. Most likely sucking in central Asia and Eastern Europe. And what kind of peace would that have been?

It is now the end of October 2002, and the world is once again poised for a major confrontation between evil and good. Iraq versus the World. And once again, the UN Security Council and Kofi Annan are standing in the way of resolving a regional issue with global consequences. And as usual, Canada is betting on the loser.

I have to seriously wonder if anyone in Ottawa ever takes the time to read a little bit of history, to understand who are the “talkers” and who are the “walkers”; as in: who talks the talk, and who walks the walk? It’s doubtful.