WaPo Comes Out Swinging At Bolton
Everyone knew President Bush wanted John Bolton into the UN pronto, so he could begin figuratively removing a few stories from the UN HQ. The clock was ticking. Bolton needed to be in place before the reform summit Kofi Annan called for September.
So when Bolton filed amendments to the proposed reform language yesterday, it was not unexpected. Nor was the nature of the amendments. Nor was WaPo's coverage this morning. It is a festival of Bolton-bashing, Bush-bashing and defense of the UN.
Take paragraph two ... please!
That the poverty relief pledges would be lost if recipient governments continued to live fat off of them, to the detriment of the poor, is not mentioned until four paragraphs later. We're simply referencing the Monterrey Consensus instead of the UN's Millenium plan as a better approach; we're not saying don't give to the poor, we're just saying don't trust the governments and oil-for-food-style bureaucrats involved.
And "halting" global warming? Reporter Colum Lynch must be smoking a lot of greenhouse gas producing grass to think that anyone anywhere ever said measley and misdirected human efforts would ever "halt" global warming.
Bolton's amendments call, as expected, for more accountability from the UN and the corrupt nations that exploit the UN's incompetence. Those nations and UN bureacrats are expected to fight hard for continued incompetence and corruption.
That's why Bush appointed Bolton. What's WaPo's problem with that?
So when Bolton filed amendments to the proposed reform language yesterday, it was not unexpected. Nor was the nature of the amendments. Nor was WaPo's coverage this morning. It is a festival of Bolton-bashing, Bush-bashing and defense of the UN.
Take paragraph two ... please!
The United States has only recently introduced more than 750 amendments that would eliminate new pledges of foreign aid to impoverished nations, scrap provisions that call for action to halt climate change and urge nuclear powers to make greater progress in dismantling their nuclear arms. At the same time, the administration is urging members of the United Nations to strengthen language in the 29-page document that would underscore the importance of taking tougher action against terrorism, promoting human rights and democracy, and halting the spread of the world's deadliest weapons.We don't learn until paragraph nine that other countries are also submitting amendments. And look at the ordering and wording! 1. Eliminate poverty relief pledges. 2. Scrap provisions to halt climate change. Oh and by the way, 3. Curb the spread of nukes and 4. More emphasis on terrorism and promoting human rights.
That the poverty relief pledges would be lost if recipient governments continued to live fat off of them, to the detriment of the poor, is not mentioned until four paragraphs later. We're simply referencing the Monterrey Consensus instead of the UN's Millenium plan as a better approach; we're not saying don't give to the poor, we're just saying don't trust the governments and oil-for-food-style bureaucrats involved.
And "halting" global warming? Reporter Colum Lynch must be smoking a lot of greenhouse gas producing grass to think that anyone anywhere ever said measley and misdirected human efforts would ever "halt" global warming.
Bolton's amendments call, as expected, for more accountability from the UN and the corrupt nations that exploit the UN's incompetence. Those nations and UN bureacrats are expected to fight hard for continued incompetence and corruption.
That's why Bush appointed Bolton. What's WaPo's problem with that?
posted by Laer at 7:37 AM
<< Home