by Josh Greenberger

The term "organized crime" usually conjures up visions of extortion, loan sharking, contract killings, illegal gambling and the like. It seldom brings up images of large-scale corporations, much less an international enterprise that's entrusted with billions of dollars and given the latitude to issue, presumably moral-based, "resolutions" and "condemnations." But the United Nations (UN) has over the years turned into an establishment that more closely resembles an "organized crime family" than a "peacekeeping organization."

During the seventies and eighties, the UN was responsible for running a multi-billion dollar aid program to help hundreds of thousands of refugees from eastern Ethiopia settle in Somalia. UN officials knew that this influx of Ethiopians into Somalia was due to Somalian dictator Siyad Barre's promise of a better life through UNHCR (UN High Commissioner for Refugees) support.

But instead of giving these refugees a better life, Barre armed them to the teeth and had them help his government fight the Somali National Movement rebels. In an attempt to escape Barre's genocide, 2.5 million people were eventually displaced.

UN "peacekeeping" troops went to the Congo in 2000 to stop a raging border war. In the years that followed, there were widespread allegations of sexual abuse of Congolese women, boys and girls by UN personnel. Rev. Alfred Buju, the Catholic priest in the eastern town of Bunia, remarked that the people feared UN personnel.

It got so bad that an entire contingent of South African troops was removed from the Congo because of sex crimes against them.

By 2005, of the hundreds of sex crime allegations against UN personnel, only two were prosecuted.

In 2001 it was reported that UNHCR officials in Nairobi had been taking bribes for at least five years from thousands of refugees seeking resettlement in the West. This corruption was hardly a secret; it had been the topic of common gossip in refugee circles in Nairobi.

The now-infamous oil-for-food program, which ran from 1996 to 2003, allowed Iraq to sell oil to generate funds for humanitarian goods for the Iraqi people. Under UN management, and under the watchful eye of then-UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, this program turned into the most massive scam in history. In an epidemic of illegal kickbacks and illegal oil surcharges, the deception involved over 60 countries and over 2,000 companies. Russian and French companies and individuals got most of the contracts as reward for their governments' opposition to sanctions against Iraq.

This is far from an exhaustive list of known UN corruption. Who knows how many UN crimes are still going unreported.

Ironically, or comically, the UN's Human Rights website page reads: "Virtually every United Nations body and specialized agency is involved to some degree in the protection of human rights." I would suggest changing "protection" to "violation."

The notion that the UN could make biased resolutions and unscrupulous condemnations may have seemed like a stretch to some people a few years ago. After all, it's supposed to be a "peacekeeping organization." But in light of years of habitual and substantial criminal behavior, it's harder to believe that any decision the UN makes can be just, honest or impartial.

In the last four years alone, it's estimated that 300,000 people have been killed and 2.2 left homeless in the Darfur genocide. There's been not one General Assembly resolution condemning Sudan for human rights violations in all this time.

In its entire history, the UN Human Rights Commission never adopted a single resolution critical of some other flagrant human rights violators: China, Syria, Saudi Arabia and Zimbabwe.

Where is "the protection of human rights?"

Yet, Israel, a state in which Arabs enjoy more rights and freedom than they do in most Arab states, a state who's laws are so liberal that Arabs even sit in the Israeli Parliament, has been the subject of 70% of all UN Human Rights Council country-specific criticisms. Calling this "bias" is a laughable understatement. The words that best describe this disgraceful situation are bigotry, racism and moral bankruptcy.

Over the years, the UN has done far more to exacerbate conflict than to facilitate peace. You'd be hard-pressed to find conflicts that were brought to an end as a direct result of UN efforts. But accounts of massive human pain and suffering directly attributable to the UN are innumerable. There are even cases of the UN siding with terrorists.

In 2000, UN video cameras caught Hezbollah terrorists kidnapping Israeli soldiers. Despite repeated requests by the Israelis to turn over the tapes, then-UN Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, refused. For a "peace organization" not to hand over evidence that may help capture terrorists is absolutely appalling. What's worse, a UN soldier later claimed UN troops actually assisted in the kidnapping.

There is a well-publicized video of UN ambulances moving armed Palestinian fighters and weapons around in Gaza. There are pictures of the UN and Hezbollah flags flying side by side at a Lebanese Observation post. How much more does one need to understand how utterly depraved this decrepit organization is?

The UN has become indistinguishable from the very despot nations it purports to safeguard us against. With terrorists actively seeking nuclear weapons, we can no longer afford UN corruption and smokescreen "resolutions" and "condemnations" that detract world attention from the real and serious threats we face today. The UN must be revamped to at least remotely resemble an entity belonging to the human race.

If we continue to allow diplomatic immunity to be misinterpreted as a license to create mayhem, we could soon be faced with some absurd dilemmas, like: If Osama bin Laden comes to New York as an ambassador of a Middle Eastern country, do we give him a police escort to the UN or to downtown booking?

by Josh Greenberger