UN blames US and Britian for failed Oil for food program

[Karmashock]

http://www.washtimes.com/world/20050415-113059-8408r.htm

:lol:

Ok ok... Annan's OWN SON was bribed to promote the scandle, Annan was too incompetent to notice, all the reports have put the blame squarely on the UN, and what does Annan do?

Blame us! :lol:

I mean, what kind of psycho bubble do you need to exist in for that to make sense? I suggest drug testing... there's nothing else that can explain that kind of cronic bad judgement beyond massive head trama or acid...

[Polaris]

im not suprised. at all. next they'll blame us for provoking 9/11. or has that already been done?

[Karmashock]

im not suprised. at all. next they'll blame us for provoking 9/11. or has that already been done?
No no, this is worse then that.

This is like someone robbing a store, then using as their defense that the police did it (people that caught them). :lol:

[Lt_Omega]

Is the U.N good for anything these days?

[Karmashock]

Is the U.N good for anything these days?
not really, they have too many pretensions, too little over sight, a rotten internal culture, and not a whole lot of will to fix it.


They're a thing to be avoided at this point... when the UN becomes as much of a hazzard to free societies as manical dictatorships, you know it's got issues.

[Papa Smurf]

I wounder about you Karma, you live in this hazy world where you are never quite right, yet you are not always wrong. I am still unsure weather its delibarate, or weather its just that you do not kow enough about the subjects you post on.

Ok ok... Annan's OWN SON was bribed to promote the scandle, Annan was too incompetent to notice, all the reports have put the blame squarely on the UN, and what does Annan do?

Blame us!

I mean, what kind of psycho bubble do you need to exist in for that to make sense? I suggest drug testing... there's nothing else that can explain that kind of cronic bad judgement beyond massive head trama or acid...
I really do love your generalisations, and sweeping comments, especially when you post on something I am following. I would ask you the same question are you on drugs?

Ill point this out to you as you seemed unwilling, or unable to see what was right in front of your face.

Your Title: UN blames US and Britain for failed Oil for food program - This is totally incorrect and relates none of the content of the artical other than our own dilussions, read the articles you post it might help, you seem so intent on attacking the UN, is it because they challenged you over the war in Iraq? The polls in the US make for interesting reading before the war and the way they viewed the UN.
http://www.americans-world.org/digest/global_issues/un/un_summary.cfm lol thank god they aint bothered updating since feb 2002 gold pure gold, I am not saying that this is gospel but it certainly is an interesting snap shot.
Odd isn't it that as soon as they say something that you do not like you spit the dummby.

What good is the UN? well lets face it they Kofi Annan stood up and bravely said that the invasion was illegal, not many would of done that, despite the obvious attacks that have been laid against him since then. Its a counter balance to The US, at least it should be, the US is overly aggressive now, I Personally have never seen a time when the UN was more needed, the UN was not as important during the cold war as there was a balance to both side the USSR had the USA and vise verse, while they played out their little conflicts through other countries. Now US goes unchecked in the world and that is a bad thing. Reading these forums is a perfect example of the sort of arrogance "you fuck with us we'll kick your ass" type attitude that i see as very dangerous. But that’s just my personal thoughts on the use of the UN.

I do not disagree that Annan should go, but only because his lack of credibility is damaging the UN. Where in that article does it say he accused Britain or America for the oil for food scandal?

What the article actually claims is that Kofi Annan asserted that Iraq had made more money smuggling oil to Jordan and Turkey than it made skimming the oil for food program. I remember the TV programs which saw this and documented it, i bet there are others here to that remember this.
Mr. Annan set off the latest dispute on Thursday by asserting that Saddam made more money smuggling oil to Jordan and Turkey -- under the noses of the United States and Britain -- than he skimmed from the 1996-2003 U.N.-run oil-for-food program.
And there is truth in this, what your article fails to say is that Britain, admits this, and in an unusually straight forward statement Britain point the blame at other nations for allowing this to happen as it suited their agenda.

And in an interesting twist that threatened to spread the poison of suspicion across some other world capitals, Straw alleged that the UK found it hard to maintain the UN sanctions regime in Iraq because of the "ambiguous approach by certain members of the Security Council to the Saddam regime."
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1079916.cms

It does not take a genius to figure out who he is suggesting. It's Particularly unhelpful but none the less probably true.

Sigh, so which 4 years old do you pwn again Karma? If this is the standard of your posting else where those people you claim follow you only do so to laugh at you.

Your arrogance is sadly misplaced.

Love and Peace

[MVB]

Kofi Annan's allegations were idiotic. Karma is right with his analogy to the criminal and police officers. Where he is wrong, however, is in reading the damned article. Just as Papa says, Annan didn't blame the US and UK for oil-for-food's failure, but for letting Iraq trade oil w/ Turkey/Jordan and get a lot of money that way, which illegally violated the oil for food program. There's a relation to it, but you stretched it too far.

Still, although I know there are some people here who will desperately try and defend Annan's claim and trash the US/UK or just be argumentative, it's an idiotic assessment by the beleaugered secretary general.

[Karmashock]

Mr. Annan set off the latest dispute on Thursday by asserting that Saddam made more money smuggling oil to Jordan and Turkey -- under the noses of the United States and Britain -- than he skimmed from the 1996-2003 U.N.-run oil-for-food program.
Britain took particular umbrage at Mr. Annan's remarks, noting that a preliminary report by former Federal Reserve Board Chairman Paul Volcker blamed the United Nations for the debacle.
This is what I was refering to. Obviously I mixed one bit up but his tactics are the same. The UN was to blame for both and is trying to blame 'us' for not doing THEIR job better. It's beyond stupid.

[Papa Smurf]

http://www.progressiveboink.com/mike/img/sesamestreet/13a.jpg

MVB i do not think Kofi Annnan was using it as a defense, we are pissed off because we knew this was going on yet because some of the security council were not behind the actions and sanctions they let them pass. We were also annoyed at the insinuation that they may of let these shipments through because they were going to allied nations.

Britain pointed out quite angrily, which I must say which is very unusual, that we did our best and that we could of used help. That, Russia, France and other members (though no names were given) of the UN Security Council sat by and did nothing. And while the UN might not have made any official representations regarding oil smuggling, it was all over my TV, and had been since the end of the first war. I guess they never showed any of that on Sesame Street. (just joking)

Do not mistake this for defending Kofi as I believe he should go, but I defend the truth of the words he said, and there is truth in them. There is enough shit to throw at all parties in Iraq, no one comes out of something like this smelling of roses. (though i am sure the roses love the shit)

[Karmashock]

i do not think Kofi Annnan was using it as a defense
rank nonsense... don't even pretend you believe that.

[Papa Smurf]

I should of been more accurate with that statement for someone like you Karma, despite this thread title, i should of stated "a defense of the oil for food program". Your post was nonsense, if you want to make this about the whole of the UN then yes in away he is defending the UN, by pointing out that there is plenty of shit to throw. But it is part of a wider policy shift at the UN.

It does equate to a defense of the UN as a whole and the new tuffer stance they are taking, they are opening up to the press something that previously they had not done enough, they feel. If you want to make the whole of the UN about the oil for food program then..................lol

This is what has been happening overall recently and is the context behind the arguement, context is everything :)
http://www.columbiatribune.com/2005/Apr/20050416News021.asp

[Wicksy]

What Karma's saying is that its a bit like me having a job, then telling you to do it for me coz basically I can't be arsed to go and do it myself. Bit too risky you see.

Then you don't do my job quite right and I phone you up from my bed telling you you're a cretin coz YOU'RE not doing MY job right. Even though you're not being paid for it - in fact, its costing you billions of $ per year!

WTF.

[laserflip]

stupid foreigners trying to participate in politics. leave the thinking to americans plz, kthx. we all know foreigners cant read or write, wtf are they doing in politics?!

[/lame-ass xenophobic humour]

[Karmashock]

<bunch of stuff that either agrees with me or proves me right, followed by him saying that I'm wrong>
Glad we agree, though I don't know why you're pretending that we don't...

Annan is defending himself as he's responsible for the UN. He's the fucking head of it. Furthermore, the whole Oil for food thing was his and his son's fault... to say nothing of the treachery of the Russians and French that willfully exploited the system.

Love and peace, Karmashock.

[Papa Smurf]

No Karma you are not right, so show me were i say the he linked the oil for food program and the illegal smuggling? That is the thread is it not, that’s what is being discussed.

If you are now turning this into about the whole of the UN, ok then, firstly i would point out that the UN is not Kofi Annan to assert that is fucking idiotic, if i were to take George W Bush in the same way of America i would be calling you all a bunch of retard monkey fuckers, but no i do not take George w bush as America, as he is a person. LOL there is plenty of blame and shit to be thrown are we are so perfect at handling this kind of thing? the oil for food scandal was pretty bad 4 billion skimmed by Saddam back handers do you even understand what the oil for food scandal was? If you did you would not say Koji Annan.

The U.S.-led Coalition Provisional Authority, which took over responsibility for Iraqi oil revenues following the invasion, can no longer account for $8.8 billion of Iraqi oil money – twice the amount Saddam Hussein was thought to have gained from oil-for-food kickbacks...
http://www.theregular.org/node/2560
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/file_on_4/4216853.stm

So i say George W Bush is the head of the lead nation i call for his resignation, he’s the head of America, ridicules? Indeed it is, but only as ridicules as your statement.

Or how about the whistle-blower case against Custer Battles, the firm accused of defrauding U.S. taxpayers of $50 million in Iraq reconstruction funds. hummm war proffering here they would be shot, well that’s what we used to do.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7306162/site/newsweek/

Ah but I love it when Haliburton (The Bush Family Business) gets involved in the money grab

In 2004, the UN’s International Advisory and Monitoring Board (IAMB) - the international group that oversees the use of Iraqi money on Iraqi reconstruction - wanted to know more about Halliburton. Specifically, they wanted to conduct an audit of Halliburton subsidiary Kellog Brown & Root’s single-source, oh-so-lucrative Iraq contract, $1.6 billion of which came straight from Iraqi coffers. After much foot dragging, the White House finally complied, sending the IAMB heavily redacted versions of audits the Pentagon’s Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) had conducted into Halliburton’s use of the money.

Blacked out of the redacted report was the fact that Halliburton may have bilked the U.S. military out of about $100 million. Also blacked out were statements critical of KBR like “KBR was unable to reconcile the proposed costs to its accounting records” and “KBR did not always provide accurate information.”

Here’s where it gets really interesting. Wondering why the extensive redactions blocked all of the negative findings, the crack researchers in Rep. Henry Waxman’s office looked into the matter. It turns out the White House gave Halliburton a copy of the negative audit and let the company scrub out all of the negative stuff itself before it was sent to the UN group. A letter from KBR dated 9/28/04 to the Army Corps of Engineers states “we have redacted the statements of DCAA that we believe are factually incorrect or misleading and could be used by a competitor to damage KBR’s ability to win and negotiate new work.”
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=7910932
http://www.newshounds.us/2005/03/15/bush_administration_alters_halliburton_report.php
http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/investigations.asp?Issue=Iraq+Contracting+and+Reco nstruction
http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/Documents/20050315113037-84526.pdf
http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/Documents/20050315113154-55956.pdf

Furthermore, the whole Oil for food thing was his and his son's fault
Companies in order to buy the oil from Iraq had to send money to a bank account in Jordan, there were over 1300 companies involved, Koji Annan was employed by one of those companies, so tell me even if he was involved in that one companies payment (even though every report so far had cleared him). How does it make him responsible for all the others?

You might want to actually want to look at that the report you are quoting from before you start using it to bash people especially Kofi Annan which the report actually clears of any wrong doing.

"There is no evidence that the selection of Cotecna in 1998 was subject to any affirmative or improper influence of the secretary-general in the bidding or selection process," Volcker told a news conference.

"Based on the record and lack of evidence of impropriety, it is the finding of the committee that Cotecna was awarded the contract in 1998 on the ground that it was the lowest bidder,"
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=623133

to say nothing of the treachery of the Russians and French that willfully exploited the system.
Ah and now time for the paranoia marvelous!
What and you did not! American companies have made nothing out of this? America did something about the smuggling?

[Wicksy]

So i say George W Bush is the head of the lead nation i call for his resignation, he’s the head of America, ridicules? Indeed it is, but only as ridicules as your statement.
Indeed it is ridiculous.

Your 'argument' is yet another straw man, since you completely ignore the fact that it was supposed to be THE UN's FUCKING JOB to enforce the oil-for-fraud program, and subsequent oil embargoes. NOT THE US/UK'S JOB.

Annan (who's own incompetence and his son's corruption hitherto is being laid bare), or anyone else at the UN has NO FUCKING RIGHT to complain about the US/UK enforcing THEIR FUCKING RESOLUTIONS. Since they REFUSE TO ENFORCE THEM THEMSELVES. France, Russia, China, Germany. Did absolutely JACK DIDDLEY SQUAT to enforce UN resolutions.

US/UK spent billions enforcing UN resolutions, defending the Iraqi no fly zones, removing Saddam from power and now rebuilding the country as a democracy.

UN can go to fuck. It needs rearranging or demolishing. They should really start by examining the UN Human Rights (Wrongs) Commission. Members of which are: Sudan, Zimbabwe, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Libya and an assortment of other regimes whose human rights records are just as exemplary.

[Karmashock]

Papa, I'd ask, with Wicksy's permission, that you take his post as my reponse. I don't think I could say anything without repeating his points in my own words.

That Annan is saying this now is obviously a defensive statement. That Annan is being held responsible for the failures of his position is common knowledge. That his position bears no similiarity to that of the US presidency is implicid unless you know nothing of American civics or UN internal structure. For example, the president could not give his son control of some factor of the government have it escape oversight. The US system has many checks and balances where by power is broken and groups are compelled to investigate each other. The UN has no such system and clearly has too few such system to deal with their growing power.


The US voting system had a similiar problem. When the nation was founded the government didn't have that much power. We were mostly self run communities that were very regional. As time went by the government became more and more powerful. After the civil war the federal government's powers were increased greatly and as a result those checks and balances had to be increased. For example, all our voting laws were over haulled. This had little to do with jim crow and such, though that was an issue. More it had to do with votes being bought. Prior to this point it was not illegal because it had never been a problem before. It was either considered improper or a poor investment. However as the power of the stations increased the politicians and instrests that supported them didn't really care and it was worth it. So it was made illegal.

The UN needs such checks and balances and Annan is an unquestionable disgrace. If you want to change the subject by bringing up Bush, that's your business, but all that really does is speak to the weakness of your arguement. It's just what annan is doing... it's a wounded animal thrashing in the water.

[Papa Smurf]

removed because it was pointless baiting

Your 'argument' is yet another straw man, since you completely ignore the fact that it was supposed to be THE UN's FUCKING JOB to enforce the oil-for-fraud program, and subsequent oil embargoes. NOT THE US/UK'S JOB.
If you do not understand the structure of the UN and the charter I do not have time to explain all that to you, what i will say is that yes the oil for food program was the responsibility of the UN, the boarder patrols were the responsibility of UN which the UK and US undertook on their behalf. We took it on ergo it was our responsibility, if you have a problem with that take it up with the government. But if you are saying that the UN should have an armed force i am all for that, but there are many dangers associated with this type of undertaking. The UN is not the government of the world, you seem to be holding them up to this standard, they are an organisation which enables the formulation of international law, remember they do not vote in that law they are there to make sure all members are heard, not just America and Britian, they are the mechanism, we are the cogs.

Annan (who's own incompetence and his son's corruption hitherto is being laid bare), or anyone else at the UN has NO FUCKING RIGHT to complain about the US/UK enforcing THEIR FUCKING RESOLUTIONS. Since they REFUSE TO ENFORCE THEM THEMSELVES. France, Russia, China, Germany. Did absolutely JACK DIDDLEY SQUAT to enforce UN resolutions.
Not true France contributed planes many of them, they only withdrew support when we launched operation desert fox which attacked targets outside the no fly zone.
In March,1997, France announced its withdrawal from the reconnaissance flight operation in northern Iraq launched by the US, the UK and France. After the US and the UK launched the "Desert Fox" military operation in December,1998, Iraq reiterated that it would not recognize the southern and northern "no-fly zones" illegally set up in Iraq's territory by the US and the UK. Iraq also shelled and intercepted British and American planes patrolling in the "no-fly zone", while the US and the UK time and again bombed the targets in or even outside the "no-fly zones" in Iraq.
So I am afraid you are wrong Wicksey, there are other things these nations did like Germany hosted the HQ for the no fly zones etc etc

Koji Annan has not been proved corrupt, try reading the report, not jumping to half asses conclusions.

US/UK spent billions enforcing UN resolutions, defending the Iraqi no fly zones, removing Saddam from power and now rebuilding the country as a democracy. I do not recall the the removal of Saddam being a UN resolution

UN can go to fuck. It needs rearranging or demolishing. They should really start by examining the UN Human Rights (Wrongs) Commission. Members of which are: Sudan, Zimbabwe, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Libya and an assortment of other regimes whose human rights records are just as exemplary.
The UN is reforming this process was set in motion 6 months ago!
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=reform+at+the+UN&meta= pick any of them, bottom of page 1 is reform of the Un commission on human rights. But not based on the kind of criteria you would want.
Does their nationality make them bad people? You missed the US off that list, if countries which commit crimes again humanity can not sit then neither can the US, as Guantanamo bay rumbles on.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/americas/2002/inside_camp_xray/default.stm
Nice really nice.

Your 'argument' is yet another straw man No lol I am afraid its the other way round my sad little right wing friend (thank god for these forums I might of actually stayed voting Tory, you convinced me that i should never of associated myself with people like you and Howard). I do not see one piece of evidence to any claim you make, all you have is insinuation and misdirection.

Last time you tried to use the UN and the SCR 1441 to justify the war, lol now you are saying its worthless you should make up your mind. you have a lot of personal opinion but very little facts.

The last thing i will say is that the new tuffer stance by the UN is regretable i do not think it will further international peace and harmony, it will only serve to further divide the world and ultimatly lead to a less stable planet. However the concept of the UN is still sound the world needs a strong UN, stronger than it is now certainly. I am all for reform in the right ways, the UN should not pander to one country as America would seemingly want it too, it is the world organisation and there for must be representative of the world.

[Wicksy]

Foam is coming from your mouth Wicksey wipe it away. (sorry copied that from Karma, made me laugh, been wanting to us it)
Foam wiped as requested. Oh but what's that... looks like you have some too on your bottom lip... ah I see, it's the jizzum of Jaques Chirac and other assorted Frenchmen!

But if you are saying that the UN should have an armed force i am all for that
They do. They're called UN Peacekeepers. ROFL. What a joke. Were there any UN peacekeepers monitoring the no-fly zones or patrolling the Iraqi borders? Nope. They were all in East Timor and the Congo raping children.

The UN is not the government of the world
You shouldn't mind too much that the Coalition didn't obtain a second UN resolution before invading Iraq then, should you? Not that we needed one...

you seem to be holding them up to this standard
Damn right. They profess to be, and many people (notably anti-warites) believe them to be. Otherwise why did they all kick up so much fuss about a second Iraq war resolution?

they are there to make sure all members are heard, not just America and Britian
who says they dont? Last time i checked, there were 15 UNSC members (3 of which are permanent other than US/UK), and over 150 UNGA members. They all voted for the Iraq UN resolutions. Only the Coalition members had the balls to uphold those resolutions. France, China, Russia, Germany, Kofi Annan? PAH! They just sat on the sidelines whinging about other nations upholding their own resolutions! PATHETIC!

Koji Annan has not been proved corrupt
Learn to read. I never said he'd been "proven" anything. I said his corruption is being laid bare. Read the report yourself. Oh and its "Kojo", you idiot. Learn to spell before you learn to read. Oh and learn how to use punctuation as well will ya... your writing is virtually incomprehensible.

I do not recall the the removal of Saddam being a UN resolution
Learn to read. I never said that either. The UN (well, France, Russia, Germany etc) doesn't have the balls to make such a resolution. They were too busy lining their own pockets with Saddam's ill-gotten money. You have to admit, removing Saddam from power was a darn good thing to do, wasn't it?


The UN is reforming this process was set in motion 6 months ago!
GOOD! ITS LONG PAST TIME!

Does their nationality make them bad people?
No fool, stop putting words in my mouth. The despicable actions of their governments make those nations completely unsuitable for a position on a Human Rights Commission. The credibility of the UNHRC is therefore less than zero. Not good for world human rights, is it?

You missed the US off that list, if countries which commit crimes again humanity can not sit then neither can the US, as Guantanamo bay rumbles on. http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/americas/2002/inside_camp_xray/default.stm Nice really nice.
ROFL!!!!!!!!!
Lets look at that "in depth" article you so generously submitted:
Each prisoner has been given: US army standard-issue 2cm-thick foam sleeping mat, One blanket, Two buckets (one for water, one for waste), A one quart flask, Two orange boiler suits, A pair of flip-flops, Two bath towels (one for washing, one for use as a prayer mat), A washcloth, Toothpaste, Soap, Shampoo, A copy of the Koran

Prisoners are served three meals a day, all of which are "culturally appropriate":
Breakfast - typically bread, cream cheese, an orange, a pastry, a roll, a bottle of water
Lunch - typically a box of cereal, two cereal bars, a packet of peanuts, one packet of crisps, one packet of raisins, a bottle of water
Evening meal - typically white rice, red beans, a banana, bread, a bottle of water

Regime: Breakfast followed by 'shower opportunity and personal time', Doctor visits to address any medical issues, Lunch, Exercise period, Mail call - pens and paper are provided, letters may be written under supervision, pens are collected afterwards, Evening meal

Wow. Sounds like hell on Earth! How did these prisoners get there again? Oh yea that's right. They were fighting a war in Afghanistan for the Taleban and Osama Bin Laden. They wore no military uniform and did not identify themselves as combattants. Remind me again about the Geneva conventions, will ya?


No lol I am afraid its the other way round my sad little right wing friend (thank god for these forums I might of actually stayed voting Tory, you convinced me that i should never of associated myself with people like you and Howard).
So you're basing your vote on the fact that I will vote Tory? LOL. You flatter me. I on the other hand am not so petty - I will not vote one way just coz you're voting the other. Good luck with the Lib Dems - you'll need it! Most people in the country have the good sense not to touch them with a barge pole - I notice you do not have such perception.

Last time you tried to use the UN and the SCR 1441 to justify the war, lol now you are saying its worthless
Uhh, when did i say it was worthless, fool? I didn't of course. It is not worthless now that the Coalition of the Men With Balls have enforced it. Had we not, then yes it would've been worthless. France, Germany, Russia and China certainly weren't about to rush into Iraq to deal with the ruthless, brutal, murdering, raping, pillaging dictator that was Saddam Hussein (who's now in jail incidentally - thank god he's not in that Cuban holiday camp, at least he's likely to suffer where he is now!). No, they were too busy lining their pockets with his blood-stained CASH.

The last thing i will say is that the new tuffer stance by the UN is regretable i do not think it will further international peace and harmony, it will only serve to further divide the world and ultimatly lead to a less stable planet.

Uhh, wait...

the concept of the UN is still sound the world needs a strong UN, stronger than it is now certainly.
So you believe the new "tuffer" stance is regrettable. Yet "the world needs a strong UN, stronger than it is now certainly". I fail to see how these 2 viewpoints are consistent IN ANY WAY. The UN is a weak, pathetic husk - you admit that. Yet you disagree with "tuffening it up". Weird.

you should make up your mind. you have a lot of personal opinion but very little facts.
Touche. See above.

[Wicksy]

UN peacekeepers sexually abused Liberia women, girls (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1114741318425)

UN peacekeepers sexually abused and exploited local women and girls in Liberia and more accusations are expected, a UN spokesman said Friday.

Stephane Dujarric said a preliminary investigation by the UN mission in Liberia indicated that some allegations against its personnel could be substantiated, while others could not.

"The allegations range from the exchange of goods, money or services for sex to the sexual exploitation of minors. The peacekeeping department here in New York as well as the mission on the ground are taking appropriate follow-up action," he said.

A UN official speaking on condition of anonymity said the number of allegations could eventually total 20.

The head of the mission in Liberia, Jacques Paul Klein, is to step down when his contract expires at the end of the month, a UN spokesman announced Thursday. His deputy Abou Moussa will temporarily take over.

The allegations of sex abuse in Liberia are just the latest to be leveled against UN peacekeepers who have been accused of exploiting the very people they were sent to protect in missions from Bosnia and Kosovo to Cambodia, East Timor and Congo.

Dujarric said the number of allegations against UN peacekeepers around the world would likely increase.

"The United Nations treats this issue with the utmost seriousness and as we continue to clamp down on misconduct throughout all peacekeeping missions it is very likely that the number of these allegations will increase," he said.

Last month a UN report by Prince Zeid Al Hussein, Jordan's UN ambassador on peacekeeper sex abuse, said the UN's military arm was deeply flawed and recommended withholding salaries of the guilty and proposed requiring nations to pursue legal action against perpetrators.

Currently, UN troops and employees accused of wrongdoing are sent home, and are confronted by their own government but are often never punished.

UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan commissioned the report after more than 150 allegations of sexual exploitation of girls as young as 13 by UN peacekeepers in Congo surfaced.

Yet more evidence (if any were needed) that the UN is useless. No, it's worse than useless. It's a fucking liability to the world.

[Karmashock]

any force is made up of men... idle men... men without without their wives...

this sort of thing is inevidable... price of being human...

The UN is no better then any army when it comes to this sort of thing... though they're pathetically lacking on so many other levels...

My big issue with the UN is that I don't recognize their authority. It's not legitimate. The whole thing needs to be reorganized. If that body were worth a damn and if they used their forces with a little back bone, then I'd like the UN... but minus that they strike me as dangerous... or wasteful.