You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
International-UN-NGOs
The U.N. Insignia Emerges as a Global Target for Al-Qaeda Attacks
2007-12-26
An interesting article in the Washington Post, that no one will ever see 'cos it was published on page A14 on Christmas Day. Of note is the article's analysis, because it gets Al-Q's motivations nearly 100% wrong. Also of note is the UN's response to getting blown up:
..."The United Nations is nothing but a tool of crime," bin Laden said in a 2001 statement. "We are being massacred every day while the United Nations continues to sit idly by."

U.N. officials say the latest bloodshed underscores the need to shake that perception. "We must do even better in explaining to the public and the media the role of the United Nations, wherever we operate," U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon told U.N. staff members at a memorial for their lost colleagues in New York, after a trip to Algiers. "We must make clear we are not there to represent the interests of any one group of nations over another. We must make clear that we are there to clear mines, build schools, run clinics, advance the rule of law, help protect the environment and help protect human rights."

Ban has pledged to review U.N. security procedures to ensure the safety of tens of thousands of workers in the field. But some U.N. officials say there is only so much the agency can do. "Do you go to the U.S. fortress model?" asked one senior U.N. official, referring to Washington's effort to reinforce its overseas embassies after al-Qaeda bombings of two U.S. embassies in East Africa in 1998. "I doubt the U.N. could ever do that."
Posted by:Seafarious

#11  Also from WAFF.com > RUSSIA'S BIG ENERGY SECRET - Despite its international rhetoric/reputation to the contrary, artikle claims that Russ GAZPROM can barely meet Russ domestic demand for natural gas. *Article - Russ gas fields are actually dwindling = in decline, and widout amy new investments andor discoveried, AFTER 2010 RUSS MAY NO LONGER BE ABLE TO MEET EVEN LOCAL DEMAND.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2007-12-26 21:16  

#10  OTOH, WAFF.com > ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISM MADE IN THE USA + THE NEO-OTTOMAN EMPIRE [CHRONICLES April 2006]. America allegedly is using Radical Islamism-Terrorism as PROXY to encircle, destabilize and destroy its own ally Europe, in the name of Global Empire???
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2007-12-26 21:11  

#9  "The U.N. Insignia Emerges as a Global Target for Al-Qaeda Attacks"

Other than endless whining and nattering, what's the downside?
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut   2007-12-26 17:44  

#8  maybe not so much 'red on maroon' as red on moron
Posted by: Abu do you love   2007-12-26 17:16  

#7  Al Q's getting whupped in Iraq, so they desperately need to find a softer target: If they can't be the strongest horse, don't be the weakest horse.

So, what happens now with the attitude of the liberals who 'say' that the UN is the most important institution in the world?
Posted by: Ptah   2007-12-26 14:44  

#6  We must do even better in explaining to the public and the media the role of the United Nations...

Perhaps Mr. Ban hasn't noticed yet that it's not the "public" or mostly not even the "media" that continues to bomb his facilities. It's just possible his message is falling on the wrong ears.
Posted by: Seafarious   2007-12-26 13:16  

#5  Perhaps this is why the UN was negotiating with the Taliban in Afganistan - trying to cut a "don't shoot us and we'll say nice things about you" deal with AQ via an intermediary.

BTW__ MHW, nice snark/pun
Posted by: Nautae cum puella in concubitu sunt 2007   2007-12-26 11:45  

#4  maybe not red on red

more like red on maroon
Posted by: mhw   2007-12-26 10:11  

#3  We must do even better in explaining to the public and the media the role of the United Nations...

Please do. I've been trying to figure it out for a while myself...
Posted by: Raj   2007-12-26 09:41  

#2  "We must make clear that we are there to clear mines, build schools, run clinics, advance the rule of law, help protect the environment and help protect human rights."

And that is why from the Taliban's point of view, they are enemy #1. Every single one of those things will undermine and destroy the rule of the Taliban.

The Taliban can only exist in a state of chaos and near anarchy. Theirs is a rule of whim, not laws, and they only have power as long as they can tear down any other organization or order. They are barbarians in the truest sense.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2007-12-26 08:32  

#1  Why don't I feel sorry for these upstanding men and women persons who are only trying to help?
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2007-12-26 08:18  

00:00