Free Markets, Free People


Why the UN is a disgrace and an enemy of freedom

Primarily it is about attitude.  And that additude translates into action.  Forget the words they mumble, consider what they do.

Sometimes, though, the words tumble out and give you a real peek behind the mask.  UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon did some mumbling the other day which is a prime indicator of why the UN is both a disgrace and a threat to freedom.  He spoke about “freedom of speech”.  And, apparently learning from Obama, he tries to have it both ways, but in the end it is clear he really doesn’t consider speech a “freedom” or a “right” so much as a privilege that he and others like him get to define and limit:

“Freedoms of expression should be and must be guaranteed and protected, when they are used for common justice, common purpose,” Ban told a news conference.

“When some people use this freedom of expression to provoke or humiliate some others’ values and beliefs, then this cannot be protected in such a way.”

“My position is that freedom of expression, while it is a fundamental right and privilege, should not be abused by such people, by such a disgraceful and shameful act,” he said.

Note all the caveats and conditions.  Who gets to define “abuse”?  Where did this right not to be humiliated come from?  And since when does that pseudo “right” trump freedom of speech?

I’ll tell you when – when despots so decide it does, that’s when.

And the UN is a collection of despots seeking power, which, thankfully, been mostly denied over it’s history. But in this topsy-turvy world, I wouldn’t be surprised to see them gather more and more over time.

The only person in this scenario who should be disgraced and ashamed is the UN’s Secretary General after those disgusting thoughts were uttered.

The more I watch the utter nonsense that’s going on in this country and the world these days, the more I begin to think that Orwell just missed it by a few decades.

2034?

~McQ

Twitter: McQandO

Facebook: QandO

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Tumblr
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

23 Responses to Why the UN is a disgrace and an enemy of freedom

  • Um… I’m offended by his statement, so how can he make it? It’s obvious he is saying this to provoke people like me. So such speech should be banned ;)

  • I seem to recall that the USSR had a constitution that was chock-a-block with rights.
    Which were a bitter joke to the people living under it.

    Freedoms of expression should be and must be guaranteed and protected, when they are used for common justice, common purpose.

    And there you have it.  The collective good.  Not the INDIVIDUAL RIGHT.
    Again…over my dead body.
    Not to repeat misef…but there is NO reason we are hosting this gang of enemies on our soil OR footing the bulk of the bill for them.  GET THEM OUT…and seriously consider getting US out altogether.

    • Tom Friedman has a moment of lucidity

      I read several such comments from the rioters in the press last week, and I have a big problem with them. I don’t like to see anyone’s faith insulted, but we need to make two things very clear — more clear than President Obama’s team has made them. One is that an insult — even one as stupid and ugly as the anti-Islam video on YouTube that started all of this — does not entitle people to go out and attack embassies and kill innocent diplomats. That is not how a proper self-governing people behave. There is no excuse for it. It is shameful. And, second, before demanding an apology from our president, Mr. Ali and the young Egyptians, Tunisians, Libyans, Yemenis, Pakistanis, Afghans and Sudanese who have been taking to the streets might want to look in the mirror — or just turn on their own televisions. They might want to look at the chauvinistic bile that is pumped out by some of their own media — on satellite television stations and Web sites or sold in sidewalk bookstores outside of mosques — insulting Shiites, Jews, Christians, Sufis and anyone else who is not a Sunni, or fundamentalist, Muslim. There are people in their countries for whom hating “the other” has become a source of identity and a collective excuse for failing to realize their own potential.

      • Damn, doesn’t that sound just like MSNBC ?

      • an insult — even one as stupid and ugly as the anti-Islam video on YouTube that started all of this — does not entitle people to go out and attack embassies and kill innocent diplomats

        Perhaps the video wasn’t stupid at all.
        Rationality, the ability to make critical distinctions….

  • Don’t worry…. You will still be allowed to poke fun at Christians and Jews all you want. Guaranteed

    • There is a play…popular on Broadway, I understand…that is written with the entire purpose of denigrating LDS religion and its followers.  It does that using explicitly obscene content.
      Hill-larry Clinton is reported to have found it a riot!  (See what I did there?)
      Nobody from the Pentagon was known to call the play’s backers (unless it was for tickets).

  • Pretty much.
    Disband the UN.
    Now.
    Unilaterally, if needful, by vetoing everything or just leaving and pointedly ignoring all of its “resolutions” and mocking it as an illegitimate disgrace, which is what it’s really always been.

  • Well, it WOULD amount to one less continuing expense.

  • “When some people use this freedom of expression to provoke or humiliate some others’ values and beliefs, then this cannot be protected in such a way”

    Then he’s really gonna hate what I have in store for him…

  • Also, has anyone seen my black flag, or have a spare I can borrow? I must have left mine at the last “We <3 Menken” gathering…

  • Well, there are actually dozens of other reasons.

  • Funny, but I remember when Orwell was quoted in the late sixties and early seventies by the far-left—in reference to conservatives (and sometimes liberals)—a similar situation to the use  of the Gadsden Flag.

  • “Freedoms of expression should be and must be guaranteed and protected, when they are used for common justice, common purpose,” Ban told a news conference.
    They must be guaranteed and protected regardless of the purpose they are used for, as standards of justice is what freedom of expression is used to determine.
    “When some people use this freedom of expression to provoke or humiliate some others’ values and beliefs, then this cannot be protected in such a way.”
    Yes, they can and they must – else who are we to determine what values and beliefs SHOULD be provoked or humiliated?
    “My position is that freedom of expression, while it is a fundamental right and privilege, should not be abused by such people, by such a disgraceful and shameful act,” he said.
    Other people do not feel that the act was either disgraceful or shameful.  Who, then, is to be the arbiter of what is shameful and disgraceful?  You?  Me?  Who has earned that privilege, and how?

  • “the more I begin to think that Orwell just missed it by a few decades.”

    Orwell intended his book to be a warning.  People like this guy think it’s an instruction manual.

michael kors outlet michael kors handbags outlet michael kors factory outlet