November 15th, 2006

Ted Turner and the UN

The JBS has a news story containing a video of Ted Turner supporting (albeit with a very, very weak argument) the United Nations followed by an accurate review:

In the online video linked to above, Ted Turner answers questions pertaining to the United Nations asked by participants of The People Speak forum (a site that "engages people of all ages and backgrounds in thoughtful discussions about the value of international cooperation for the United States and the world").

During this Q&A session Mr. Turner was asked the following question:

What do you have to say to all the Americans who think the UN isn't accomplishing its job and that the US should withdraw from it?

Mr. Turner replied, "I think that they haven't really learned everything that they need to know about the U.N…." He continued to compare the United Nations with the federal government – America cannot run without the federal government and the world cannot be run without the UN.

Mr. Turner is correct regarding one point: Americans "haven't really learned everything that they need to know about the U.N." Because if they did, they'd certainly be willing to reconsider our nation's membership in that widely misunderstood body.

The United Nations was founded in 1945, and its chief architect was Alger Hiss, an advisor to President Roosevelt, and a Soviet spy. Since the creation of the UN, which was only 61 years ago, the global-government-oriented agency has been involved in one military conflict after another. Hundreds of thousands of people have died in places like Korea, Somalia, Afghanistan and Iraq.

For our part, the United States had won every war prior to the founding of the UN, but since it was established the U.S. has been in one no-win conflict after another.

Throughout its history the UN has built a reputation of sex-scandals and corruption.

And let us not forget about the Rwandan massacre that took place only 12 years ago when 800,000 Rwandans were killed in an ethnic-cleansing spree that took place from April to June of 1994. The so-called UN "peacekeepers" who were already in the region were ordered not to get involved with the endless murders that took place in Rwanda even though they had the means to stop it.

For the reasons stated above, and many others, one of the original campaigns of the John Birch Society was to "Get US Out! of the UN."

Over the past 61 years Americans have witnessed the real fruits of the UN. Americans who don't want to see the UN become what its founders intended for it to be, which is a world government, should continue to press Congress to immediately withdraw from the United Nations.

Indeed, anybody who really knows why the UN exists and what it is up to would be downright opposed to it (unless they were world-government socialists as well). This governing body is highly inefficient and unworthy of America’s participation. Alger Hiss was an evil man who was able to sway us into becoming a member of that body, a regrettable event that must be corrected if our national sovereignty is to remain intact.

5 Responses to “Ted Turner and the UN”

  1. Dan
    November 15, 2006 at 2:15 pm #

    *Shakes head*

    Not again.

    This governing body is highly inefficient and unworthy of America’s participation.

    And America’s government is a shining beacon for effeciency and worthiness?

    Connor, why are you buying into this crap?

  2. Kelly Winterton
    November 15, 2006 at 3:37 pm #

    I guess Ted Turner and the MSM are synonomous. That would explain his viewpoint.

  3. APJ
    November 15, 2006 at 10:13 pm #

    I don’t think the UN is perfect but:

    Number of World Wars in the 61 years before the UN existed: 2

    Number of World Wars since the UN existed: 0 (unless you believe people like Glen Beck and those who say WWIII has already begun).

    Yes, they are not terribly efficient and could have done better in Darfur and other hot spots (situations which would have occurred whether the UN existed or not), but it at least keeps the world’s powerful nations in check to an extent. (and no I am not a world-government socialist)

  4. APJ
    November 15, 2006 at 10:17 pm #

    I might add that, if the purpose of the UN is to establish a one-world government that usurps the United States’ soveignty, then why hasn’t it happened? I mean, UN proponents have lived and died without that objective coming any closer to fruition. If these one-world government types are so bent on this, why isn’t it happening more quickly and by force?

  5. Curtis
    November 16, 2006 at 1:41 pm #

    The UN is only as effective as its members allow it to be. Most of the US’s biggest beefs against the UN are that the UN doesn’t allow the US to enact its atrocities with impunity. Of course, the US has been able to use the UN as a tool to get its dirty work done much of the time. There are many good actions that are initiated by the UN such as FISSBAN, a movement to ban the production of fissile nuclear weapons grade material. It was supported by every nation voting in a general assembly vote in 2004… except for the US. The vote was 147-1. The UN has been used as a tool by the US to gain support for much of its wars in past years. In the 70’s, our UN ambassador, Moynihan, bragged that he was able to stop the UN from taking action against Suharto in his murders of 200,000 East Timorese, in an action overtly condemned by the US, but covertly supported to the hilt by our government (well documented).

    The greatest threat to our sovereignity is not from the UN, far from it. It is from our own sinfulness and atrocities and repression of the weak people’s of the world. That is where our sovereignity will fall if at all.

Leave a Reply

Leave your opinion here. Please be nice. Your Email address will be kept private.