UN official slams U.S. tsunami aid as 'stingy'...

[Muckmaw1]

Originally posted by Widewing
97 million??? I believe that it was 30 million.

Egeland (a Norwegian) was full of baloney and he knew it because he spent all day today back-tracking.

Simple facts:

Only a small percentage of U.S. aid is counted by the UN. They exclude food aid, of which the U.S. regularly gives 2.5 times the total (measured in dollar value) provided by the rest of the entire planet. The UN also discounts private contributions to relief organizations and charities, which totals more than that given by the U.S. government in terms of dollars.

On the UN's list of 25 leading nations in humanitarian aid, it seems that Norway is on top because it gives 0.9% of its nominal GNP as foreign aid. The UN claims that the U.S. only gives 0.19% of its GNP as aid. However, when you factor in food aid and private contributions the U.S. rises to the top by a significant margin (3.2%). Egeland had the audacity to suggest that Americans be taxed to provide more funds for the UN to give away. Considering that Norway taxes it citizens at a level that would cause a revolution in America, I think we can ignore his comments as those of dedicated UN socialists without a pot to piss in, so they try to piss in ours. We are viewed as under-taxed by nations who are taxed to death... Misery demands company.

In light of the 21 billion dollar oil for food scandal managed by the UN, and in light of the probability that Iraq bought Security Council votes with massive bribes from oil smuggling, how can anyone tolerate this corrupt, anti-liberty, anti-American collection of worthless human refuse any longer?

I read that the UN owes Consolidated Edison (the power company that supplies power to the UN headquarters) 16 million dollars in unpaid power bills.

You know what, turn off their power, just like they would any other habitually delinquent rate payer, and send the whole lot home. At the very least, the U.S. should reduce their support (we Americans pay the bulk of the operating costs of the UN) to a level on par equal to our vote. This organization has outlived its usefulness. Even the hopeless League of Nations had greater credibility.

My regards,

Widewing

Perfect.

[Replicant]

I take back what I said about my government.  They've increased their £1 million to £15 million ($29,000,000).  Perhaps they do have a conscious afterall.

UK based charities have so far raised £3 million.

[lazs2]

thanks wiedewing..

there has allways been an anti UN movement here..  the reasons are simple.   Americans don't even want their own government telling em what to do... they certainly don't want a band of effite liberals with a chip on their shoulder against us having any say.... we don't want incompetent UN military leaders leading our troops and...

 we have allways been the most generous of countries in  the world... we don't need this jan ahole telling us what we should give.   I didn't see the UN pouring money at Florida during its last disaster... I don't see the UN doing anything to help iraq... they allowed a sadistic madman to stay in power and kill more people a year than this entire disaster while using the opportunity to line their pockets with billions of dollars at the expense of the people who were being tortured and killed in iraq.

I spit on this norwegian jan ahole and the UN.

lazs

[Gh0stFT]

What Replicant said.

Every help is a good help, no matter how much money spent!
but since some here compare, comparing the aid to what is spent for      
new weapons alone, it is laughable, sad but true.

R
Gh0stFT

[mosgood]

Originally posted by Widewing
97 million??? I believe that it was 30 million.

Egeland (a Norwegian) was full of baloney and he knew it because he spent all day today back-tracking.

Simple facts:

Only a small percentage of U.S. aid is counted by the UN. They exclude food aid, of which the U.S. regularly gives 2.5 times the total (measured in dollar value) provided by the rest of the entire planet. The UN also discounts private contributions to relief organizations and charities, which totals more than that given by the U.S. government in terms of dollars.

On the UN's list of 25 leading nations in humanitarian aid, it seems that Norway is on top because it gives 0.9% of its nominal GNP as foreign aid. The UN claims that the U.S. only gives 0.19% of its GNP as aid. However, when you factor in food aid and private contributions the U.S. rises to the top by a significant margin (3.2%). Egeland had the audacity to suggest that Americans be taxed to provide more funds for the UN to give away. Considering that Norway taxes it citizens at a level that would cause a revolution in America, I think we can ignore his comments as those of dedicated UN socialists without a pot to piss in, so they try to piss in ours. We are viewed as under-taxed by nations who are taxed to death... Misery demands company.

In light of the 21 billion dollar oil for food scandal managed by the UN, and in light of the probability that Iraq bought Security Council votes with massive bribes from oil smuggling, how can anyone tolerate this corrupt, anti-liberty, anti-American collection of worthless human refuse any longer?

I read that the UN owes Consolidated Edison (the power company that supplies power to the UN headquarters) 16 million dollars in unpaid power bills.

You know what, turn off their power, just like they would any other habitually delinquent rate payer, and send the whole lot home. At the very least, the U.S. should reduce their support (we Americans pay the bulk of the operating costs of the UN) to a level on par equal to our vote. This organization has outlived its usefulness. Even the hopeless League of Nations had greater credibility.

My regards,

Widewing

Americans know we are fortunate to live in a great country and don't have a problem sending aid.  When have we NOT?

We DO have a problem with being criticized for not doing enough by countries and organizations that will do even less in this emergency and nothing at all when we have problems of our own.

Unfortunately, I believe that most americans know in thier hearts that the rest of the world will not be there for us in our time of need.  They will just expect us to take care of it as they expect us to take care of them.


You're right on the money Widewing

[mosgood]

Originally posted by GScholz
10% of your contribution is an insignificant fraction? Then I guess the whole ammount can't be much either. For every $100 you 280 million Americans give, we 4.5 million Norwegians give $10.

If Egeland got you Scrooges to open up your fat wallets a little more, then he did a good job.

If anything he created a larger animosity for the U.N. by the american people.  You don't ask for money by insulting the historically largest contributors.

[mosgood]

Originally posted by GScholz
That might be the future since people tend to get PO'ed by comments like this from ignorant American ass-holes like you.

Why am I an Ass-Hole?  Explain it.

[mosgood]

Originally posted by GScholz
That might be the future since people tend to get PO'ed by comments like this from ignorant American ass-holes like you.

Also, people can get PO'ed by those comments, but calling huge aid givers "stingy" as A-O-K?

[mosgood]

Originally posted by GScholz
You need an explanation?

You're an adult (assuming) and you said it..... explain it.  

Originally posted by GScholz

The world will be there if and when you need help. The world do not expect you to take care of them ... Are you as deluded that you actually believe that the USA is taking care of the whole shrecking world?!

Your boy Jan seems to think we have a large responsiblity too....... but to answer your question...  I believe that the U.S. has been such a large contibuter of aid in the past, that it has become thought of as required and that DOES get a little annoying.  IMHO.

This situation is horrible and of course everyone wants to help... but to have the U.N. shove the collection hat up anyone asss is rediculous.

Originally posted by GScholz If and when you do need help from others, you will get it ... unless we are so fed up with your constant ignorant whining and arrogance that we'll just watch and laugh instead. Who knows?

[indy007]

Originally posted by GScholz
10% of your contribution is an insignificant fraction? Then I guess the whole ammount can't be much either. For every $100 you 280 million Americans give, we 4.5 million Norwegians give $10.

If Egeland got you Scrooges to open up your fat wallets a little more, then he did a good job.

Hate to break it to ya, but the majority of us don't have fat wallets. Most people I know are happy to keep their bills paid & food on the table.

[mosgood]

Originally posted by GScholz
He shouldn't need to ask for it. Do you think you'll get gratitude from people that have to beg for your table scraps?

Who said he HAD to ask for it??

Why do you think that the U.S. WASN't going to help???

Are you actually thinking before you say nthese things or are you just throwing out the first thing that comes to your mind to say?

[mosgood]

Originally posted by GScholz
Btw. Crumpp, calling me "anti-American" does not hurt me anymore. In fact every time guys like you post here you make it that much more true.

More spiteful insults.......  pattern forming here.....

[Crumpp]

Anybody know the total percentage of all government humanitarian aid the United States gave out to the world last year?

According to CNN:

Forty Percent of the WORLDS total humanitarian aid budget is provided by the United States.  Less than ten percent of the world's population funds 40 percent of the bill.

As for the "insult".  It was not.  It was simply the truth.  Name a post by you that supports anything the US does.  In your eyes we can do no right.

Your cries of "foul play" have the credability of a Black Panther or KKK member claiming they are insulted because someone called them racist.

Crumpp

[Pongo]

The guy that said the US is stingy is an idiot. Same kind of idiot that still thinks that the US is doing Iraq a favour by killing 100 000 of them trying to save them.
He would fit in well here.

[Suave]

This capitilization of tragedy for the purpose of international face is so typically human.