×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

US Defunds UNESCO After Palestine Vote

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the in-the-case-of-politics-v-science dept.

United States 735

gzipped_tar writes "The U.S. withdrew funding after the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization's Palestine membership vote yesterday. The decision was triggered by a 1994 US law that requires financial ties to be cut with any UN agency that accords the Palestinians full membership. As Palestine actively pursues entrance to other UN agencies, the defunding list could grow. Interestingly, World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) could also be among Palestine's next target, and U.S. is the big supporter of WIPO. A much more disturbing scenario is Palestine joining the International Atomic Energy Agency, cutting American funding to the organization that monitors nuclear proliferation in states like Iran."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

735 comments

USA against the World? (5, Insightful)

Calibax (151875) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911884)

UNESCO is one of the most highly regarded and wide-spread agencies for cultural preservation in the World. There is a fundamental flaw in a law predicating U.S. contributions to the United Nations and U.N. affiliates on their members voting a certain way. UNESCO does not control its members and how they vote.

The fact that a majority of UNESCO members want to grant admission to a Palestinian state is no reason for the U.S. to "pick up its marbles and go home." UNESCO would be better with U.S. participation. The U.S. would be better off by participating in UNESCO.

This law should be repealed before the US has removed itself from every UN organization in the world.

Re:USA against the World? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37911934)

I would prefer the US get out of the UN entirely and boot them from our country.

Re:USA against the World? (0)

Elbart (1233584) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911952)

UN isn't on US-soil.

Re:USA against the World? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912032)

The UN headquarters is in New York, shithead.

Re:USA against the World? (4, Informative)

Elbart (1233584) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912052)

The area, on which the UN HQ is located, may be surrounded by NYC, but it is not _IN_ NYC, or the USA for that matter.. The more you know.

Re:USA against the World? (1)

RoccamOccam (953524) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912206)

That's interesting, I did not know about this. But, wouldn't you say that the U.S. has voluntarily removed itself from jurisdiction within those boundaries; however, it could re-establish jurisdiction, if it chose to do so? If that were true (and I don't know that it is), then it would only be (it seems to me) because the land is "owned" by the U.S.

Re:USA against the World? (1)

SomeKDEUser (1243392) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912396)

No, the land was given in perpetuity to the UN. However, the US federal and state laws apply, as per to the agreement under which the land was given.

The US could take it back, but it would be equivalent to declaring war on the entire planet at once, which would be pointless.

Re:USA against the World? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912242)

Think that will matter one motherfucking bit if for some reason we decide to start rolling tanks? Fuck no. It's in the goddamned US. Deal with it, and please seek treatment for that stick up your ass.

Re:USA against the World? (1)

SharkLaser (2495316) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912304)

US can do lots of shit, but the moment it rolls tanks into UN headquarters is the day it says goodbye to all relations to rest of the world.

Re:USA against the World? (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912342)

Think that will matter one motherfucking bit if for some reason we decide to start rolling tanks? Fuck no. It's in the goddamned US. Deal with it, and please seek treatment for that stick up your ass.

Yes, it will. You think the U.S. can live along without the rest of the world? And when I say "the rest of the world", I mean it. An act like that would not be well received even among allies (who then might decide to stop being allies).

Re:USA against the World? (1)

Elbart (1233584) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912408)

A strike against the UN over the admission of Palestine into the UNESCO? You got anger management issues or something? Or just a stupid troll? Scary, you're one scary fella.

Re:USA against the World? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912444)

The area, on which the UN HQ is located, may be surrounded by NYC, but it is not _IN_ NYC, or the USA for that matter..

That sounded like Talk Radio BS, so I looked it up on Wikipedia.

The site of the United Nations Headquarters has extraterritoriality status.[20] This affects some law enforcement where UN rules override the laws of New York City, but it does not give immunity to those who commit crimes there. In addition, the United Nations Headquarters remains under the jurisdiction and laws of the United States

The more you know.

The more you don't?

Re:USA against the World? (0)

SharkLaser (2495316) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912054)

It's still not land that US owns. Just like airports are on international land.

Re:USA against the World? (0)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912128)

I think that Wayne County in Michigan would be astounded to find out that it doesn't have jurisdiction over DTW.

I am not sure why you think the US would cede territorial control for the building of an airport.

Re:USA against the World? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912442)

You seriously think that is the way it is? And you vote? Scary.

Re:USA against the World? (1)

skids (119237) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912132)

You know, I get regularly robocalled by Mike Huckabee trying to work me into a redstate lather over one utterly stupid idea or another. (Which is pathetic, because I live in a blue state and have never given any indication of ever being interested in anything Republican to anyone.)

This is one of the ideas he was trying to milk money out of the gullible with. If he really wanted it, maybe he should go on a campaign to get Palestine into the UN. Now that would create some amusing fireworks.

Re:USA against the World? (4, Interesting)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911940)

Pft.
The palestians have and regularly trashed historical artifacts belonging to other cultures in the region, they should have never been invited to join it. Canada is looking to defund from it as well, and with good cause.

Re:USA against the World? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37911978)

So has Israel, and they were even ejected from UNESCO over it for awhile. Either way, this article isn't about Palestine (or Israel, or anyone else in the middle east) it's about the US having a law that prevents funding for scientific and cultural pursuits for political reasons. Regardless of who the parties are, there's no good reason for such inane laws.

Re:USA against the World? (5, Insightful)

Surt (22457) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912062)

Unless, of course, you are running a democracy, and want your tax money spent in accordance with the people's wishes.
But you know, ignoring that reason there's no good reason.

Re:USA against the World? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912148)

Unless, of course, you are running a democracy, and want your tax money spent in accordance with the people's wishes...

I get it - accordance with the people's wishes, like the bailouts for the banks. Is that you meant?

Re:USA against the World? (5, Insightful)

fredrated (639554) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912198)

"tax money spent in accordance with the people's wishes"

Wow, has that happened anywhere in this country? For example, a large majority of Americans want us out of Afganistan, but don't let that bother you, just keep imagining that in this country we only spend money the people want spent.

Re:USA against the World? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912254)

Noam Chomsky has talked about this a lot: US foreign policy decisions, especially concerning Isreal, are getting really schizophrenic. People within our government are making decisions with such complete absence of rationality that it's like watching animal fear behavior. Dangerous.

Re:USA against the World? (1, Insightful)

HornWumpus (783565) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912366)

Chomsky is just like Shockley. I would listen to them about their specialties but _nothing_ else. Comes from people telling them they are super geniuses all day long IMHO.

Anything Chomsky says that is not about linguistics is equal to Shockleys comments about eugenics. Uninformed opinion.

Re:USA against the World? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912308)

So has Israel, and they were even ejected from UNESCO over it for awhile. Either way, this article isn't about Palestine (or Israel, or anyone else in the middle east) it's about the US having a law that prevents funding for scientific and cultural pursuits for political reasons. Regardless of who the parties are, there's no good reason for such inane laws.

You do realize that the US government "funding" is nothing more then money taken from its legal citizens that lawfully pay taxes (and don't get it all returned at the end of the tax year). I personally have a problem in spending any sort of money on this extra-curricular activity while in a national debt and especially while people in our own country are in crisis financially. However, I adamantly object to spending for any sort of endeavor where a terrorist lead disputed territory gets a vote on how some non-US entity gets to spend US dollars taken from the hands of US taxpayers.

It's not "inane" ... it's common freaking sense. You don't go out to movies every night (regardless of how educational in nature they are) when you can't pay the mortgage ... and you CERTAINLY don't let your wife's druggy brother get a vote on what you should spend your money on.

Re:USA against the World? (2)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912392)

Really? I guess a group of people that are using something and have done something for political reasons isn't obvious to various people. The law is fine.

Re:USA against the World? (5, Insightful)

nharmon (97591) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911964)

Don't you think this is exactly the purpose they had in mind when they passed this law? To make it as costly as possible to do something the United States does not want them to do?

And since this is blocking future funding and not current funding, this is less like picking up your marbles and going home and more like simply refusing to come to any more marble games.

Re:USA against the World? (4, Interesting)

Calibax (151875) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912364)

So if certain countries want to have the U.S. removed from certain U.N. affliates, all they have to do is vote the Palestinians as members and the U.S. will defund their contributions. Consequently the U.S will have no vote, and no influence as it's no longer providing any funding.

Thus the U.S. has given countries who don't like the U.S. some power over the U.S. ability to influence U.N. organizations. The law of unintended consequences.

We don't support terror organizations (1, Flamebait)

Quila (201335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911966)

Any organization that does then should obviously not be funded by us. Pretty simple.

Re:We don't support terror organizations (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912046)

Yes I agree, We need to stop sending aid to Israel asap.

Re:We don't support terror organizations (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912064)

Actually, we have a pretty long history of supporting terror organizations.

Re:We don't support terror organizations (4, Insightful)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912158)

That's because you're using the wrong definition of "terror organizations". You're probably thinking it means "people who target and kill large numbers of civilians, typically in order to push a geopolitical agenda".

But the definition of "terror organizations" used by major news outlets, including the New York Times, is "People who use violence to oppose the United States and/or Israel". That, by definition, means the US can't support terror organizations. Also, note that the same organization that were "freedom fighters" becomes a "terror organization" as soon as they switch from fighting the USSR to fighting the US.

Re:We don't support terror organizations (2)

afidel (530433) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912374)

Which organizations were freedom fighters and became terror organizations? Most of the Mujahideen who were the freedom fighters we supported against the Russians became the norther alliance which was very much opposed to the Taliban and Al Quada. That opposition had more to do with tribal tensions than geopolitical ideals, but the guys we backed last time are mostly the guys working with us this time (despite the fact that we left them with near zero support last time once our geopolitical aims were achieved). The one bad thing about our allies over there is not that they want to kill us, it's that they are addicted to the opium money.

Re:We don't support terror organizations (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912078)

UNESCO a terror organization?

They now support terrorists (0)

Quila (201335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912334)

With the inclusion of the so-called state of Palestine. Thus we cannot suppor them.

Re:They now support terrorists (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912376)

There should be a "-1, Silly".

Re:We don't support terror organizations (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912098)

HAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH "The United States doesn't support terrorist organizations." HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Latin America would really like to have a long sit down with you. Get a drink, it's going to be a while.

The US government IS a terror organization. (-1, Flamebait)

stooo (2202012) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912202)

>> We don't support terror organizations

The US government IS a terror organization. Don't support it any more.

Re:USA against the World? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37911982)

The US will continue to participate in the organization, just not providing funding. Our "Tax paying" money shouldn't go to support the Palestinian as they act more like a Terror Group then a "state"

Re:USA against the World? (1)

sangreal66 (740295) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912196)

Those are membership dues that are being withheld. UNESCO will probably let them go unpaid for awhile, but not forever.

Re:USA against the World? (1)

stooo (2202012) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912236)

>> Palestinian as they act more like a Terror Group then a "state"

really ? give me arguments.

Re:USA against the World? (2, Insightful)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912506)

The elected government of Gaza routinely fires mortars indiscriminately into civilian population centers. That may not be terrorism (though it is certainly terrifying to the victims), but it is illegal according to international law. Funny how no one ever takes them to task for it in the media.

Re:USA against the World? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912070)

US is just not funding it....it's still a part of the organization.

Re:USA against the World? (3)

sangreal66 (740295) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912072)

It seems UNESCO and the US can get along fine without each other, as they did during the 20 years between Reagan's withdrawal from the group and Bush Jr.'s re-entry.

It will be interesting to see what happens with the WHO/WIPO/WTO/IAEA, etc. but Congress can make exceptions if they feel like it.

Re:USA against the World? (4, Insightful)

mmcuh (1088773) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912130)

I don't think the current Congress can do anything at all. Certainly not in any issue that has even the slightest chance of being kidnapped by demagogues.

Re:USA against the World? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912140)

You would think things might change in 17 years that would change people's minds... But then again, Cuba still can't be visited.

Re:USA against the World? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912154)

UNESCO is one of the most highly regarded and wide-spread agencies for cultural preservation in the World. There is a fundamental flaw in a law predicating U.S. contributions to the United Nations and U.N. affiliates on their members voting a certain way. UNESCO does not control its members and how they vote.

The fact that a majority of UNESCO members want to grant admission to a Palestinian state is no reason for the U.S. to "pick up its marbles and go home." UNESCO would be better with U.S. participation. The U.S. would be better off by participating in UNESCO.

This law should be repealed before the US has removed itself from every UN organization in the world.

The Palestinians didn't join UNESCO to preserve anything. They did it to pressure Israel and bolster their attempts to gain statehood. The U.S. doesn't approve of this route to statehood for Palestine. Until the Palestinians learn to control their terrorist organizations, I don't approve either. Not to say that I'm happy with Israel or it's settlement plans. Still, I don't see the need to pay for what I don't approve of. Neither does the U.S. I'd say.

Re:USA against the World? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912350)

Of course the US doesn't approve of this route. Because this route might actually work. At least it might be enough to get them defacto statehood. The US isn't really interested in pushing the Peace process, because pushing the peace process requires them to pressure Israel to make some concessions. And making Israel make concessions is the same as being anti-semitic in the media's eyes.

Re:USA against the World? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912168)

How the US sees it:

1) US pulls funding.
2) UNESCO cries.
3) UNESCO kicks Palestine out.

How China could easily play it:

1) US pulls funding.
2) China offers to fund it.
3) China gains global influence.

The world isn't the same as it was 20 years ago. Regardless what people think about Israel/Palestine, it's a dangerous game, economically.

Re:USA against the World? (1, Insightful)

JackieBrown (987087) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912388)

China loans money. They do not give it away. They are smarter than the US in this.

Re:USA against the World? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912432)

China COULD play it that way, but the question really is; WILL China play it that way?

Its the favorite line of every arm-chair political analyst. "X organization doesn't need U.S. funding, Y country/countries could easily fill the gap!" yet it never happens.

If the world doesn't like the U.S. strong-arming the U.N., why don't they just relocate the U.N. headquarters? Because no one wants to take on the financial, security and political responsibility of doing so.
If the world doesn't like the U.S. strong-arming the IMF, why don't they just form an opposing organization? Because no one wants to take on the financial and political responsibility of doing so.
If the world doesn't like the U.S. oil dependency to cause massive political interference in the Middle East, why don't they aggressively push to adopt green energy? Because no one wants to take on the financial and political responsibility of doing so.

Re:USA against the World? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912190)

UNESCO is mostly known for having employees use their dimplomatic immunity to employ slaves.

Re:USA against the World? (1)

Coeurderoy (717228) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912326)

Unesco would be better with US only if the US would have a very different type of government...
With the two current "incumbents", all the additional money the US bring to the Unesco only serve the goals of a few US corporations that nobody needs.

Yee Hah! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37911888)

Let the antisemitism fly!

Re:Yee Hah! (3, Insightful)

spidercoz (947220) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912452)

Thinking Israel is no better than all the other fuckers over there in the armpit of the world is hardly antisemitism.

Re:Yee Hah! (3, Insightful)

BlackPignouf (1017012) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912500)

The one thing that pisses me off more than Jew haters are the people who consistently play the antisemitism card.
If I don't agree with one bonehead decision from Israel, it's because it's a bonehead decision.
If I think Avigdor Lieberman is an asshole, it really is because he's an asshole.
I couldn't care less about religion.

International Atomic Energy Agency (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37911960)

Is Palestine joining this agency even possible.

"Should the request be endorsed by the Board and approved by the General Conference, the Government concerned should deposit an instrument of acceptance of the Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency with the United States Government, the depositary Government under Article XXI (C) of the Agency's Statute.

The instrument of acceptance of the Statute should be on the lines of the attached model No.2, subject to any changes necessitated by the constitutional practice and diplomatic protocol of the State concerned, and should be sent to the Department of State, Washington, USA."

With Jews You Lose (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37911976)

America has gone from fighting Nazis in the 1940s to protecting modern day Nazis in Israel.

Don't kid yourself.. if you own a piece of land (like Palestine) that Jews desire, your people will suffer an epic genocide.

This is the way of the Jew.

It's the Palestinians who have the Nazi connection (-1, Offtopic)

Quila (201335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912074)

Collaborating with Hitler and Himmler to achieve the eventual eradication of Jews.

Too bad for you, Hitler lost. There wouldn't be Jew left alive in Palestine if he had won, because the local Muslims would have murdered them with Hitler's support. The only question is whether they would have been murdered locally or sent off to the established death camps.

Re:It's the Palestinians who have the Nazi connect (2)

Daniel_Staal (609844) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912240)

And now the power has shifted, and the other side is showing what they've learned. (Hint: Nothing about how to be good people, lots about how to sell oppression.)

I fail to see progress.

Re:It's the Palestinians who have the Nazi connect (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912306)

How many of the people who did that are still alive?

What happened then has nothing to do with what is happening now.

Re:It's the Palestinians who have the Nazi connect (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912312)

If your talking politics then you need to know that Israel has defied more international legislation than any other country in the world according to UN.

If your talking religion then I'm afraid what you say makes no sense when you realise that the Quran states a Muslim can not be a Muslim unless they accept Jews and Christians as their brethren who possess books that originally eminated from God. During the crusades, the so called Christian army slaughtered the united Christians, Jews and Muslims who lived in peace together in the middle east. Additionally, you would find in the history books that the Jews regard their golden era in Europe during the time of Muslim Spain where they were given refuge and not discriminated against ( http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-768956312207897325 ). In fact they were elevated to high positions within society. So please keep your seeds of discord and hate speech to yourself whilst everyone continues to work on uniting mankind.

WIPO? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912016)

I don't think that the US would have any second thoughts about getting out of WIPO. They are already pretty much bypassing it every way they can with other multilateral treaties and organisations. TRIPS or ACTA, anyone?

Ah Henry Ford was right ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912066)

US democratic values at work.
It seems they copied Henry Fords rule "Any customer can have a car painted any colour that he wants so long as it is black".
Actually it would be a good thing if the US removed itself from all UN institutions and other international organisms.
Less american influence, the better the world will be.

Re:Ah Henry Ford was right ... (1)

stooo (2202012) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912266)

True. Note that Hitler was a good customer of Ford. Did Hitler buy only black cars ?

Re:Ah Henry Ford was right ... (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912480)

For definitions of 'Good customer' that mean 'eventually steal (expropriate) your plants and equipment'.

Not that Henry Ford, Joe Kennedy and Prescott Bush didn't agree with Hitler regarding the Hebrews. But that is another discussion.

Re:Ah Henry Ford was right ... (2)

Brad1138 (590148) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912464)

As an American, I think we should be much less involved in world affairs, we have our own problems to deal with. Let the rest of the world police itself. That being said, I get sick and tired of assholes (like parent AC) that criticize and bash the U.S. while living in a country that most likely takes aid from us and/or has been protected by our military at their Governments request.

News For Nerds (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912086)

Don't you think this is getting ridiculous? This isn't even close to news for nerds.
Not to mention this news is a few days old, the editors must be desperate for page views.

Discrimination is good for the peace process (2, Interesting)

bigsexyjoe (581721) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912102)

Yes, of course, the U.S.'s discrimination against Palestine in all matters is very helpful. The U.S. said the peace process benefits from pulling out of UNESCO, so of course it does. Just as funding Israel's military and violations of International Law helps the peace process.

Re:Discrimination is good for the peace process (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912176)

Why is the "peace process" between Palestine and Israel any of the U.S.'s damn business in the first place?

Re:Discrimination is good for the peace process (2)

0123456 (636235) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912246)

Why is the "peace process" between Palestine and Israel any of the U.S.'s damn business in the first place?

Because Eschatologists have votes and you can't have Armageddon if there's peace in the Middle East.

Re:Discrimination is good for the peace process (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912502)

If I remember that one snippet of revelations I actually read correctly, I thought peace in the Middle East was supposed to be the trigger for Armageddon. Meh.

Re:Discrimination is good for the peace process (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912510)

Why is the "peace process" between Palestine and Israel any of the U.S.'s damn business in the first place?

Same reason why Cuban affairs are seen as internal US politics.

Re:Discrimination is good for the peace process (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912178)

Couldn't have said it better.

Re:Discrimination is good for the peace process (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912180)

There is no peace process, and every time I hear that term it makes me sick.
You cannot call something a peace process where one side keeps having less and the other keeps having more the longer it drags on.
Very clear that the side that keeps having more is prolonging the process forever until the other side is gone.

Re:Discrimination is good for the peace process (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912302)

Hey, man, didn't you hear? War IS peace.

Re:Discrimination is good for the peace process (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912440)

If the Palestinians stopped firing rockets tomorrow, there would be peace. If the Israelis dismantled their military tomorrow, there would be no more Israel. Fact. Why enable groups who are enabling the aggressors?

Go ahead, mod troll and let the anti-Sematism flow.

Anyone Else... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912116)

Read that as 'UNATCO'?

A start (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912208)

How much more money can we cut from the toilet flush of internationalism?

Re:A start (0)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912548)

Beats me, but we'd sure be a lot better off if the US kept out of everything. Sure, it would ruin the US economy entirely, but why should I care?

I can't believe there is such a law (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912220)

So basically let me get this right. The only obvious only real solution to the Palestine issue, Palestinian statehood, would essentially force the US to pull out of the UN almost completely? That's just dumb.

I can see why this law was put in place, it is setup to automatically bully the UN organisations into not recognizing Palestine. It is no means a legitimate reason. US repeal this law and other like it, otherwise you will lose the respect of the world more than you already have.

Re:I can't believe there is such a law (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912336)

Um, no. This law ceases to exist when peace is declared and the problem is solved.

The world helping to cut our budget (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912244)

What more is there to say?

I read the headline as.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912252)

I read the headline as:
"US Defends UNESCO After Palestine Vote"

Anyway... today's news is reporting Benjamin Netanyahu calling for accelerated construction in the West Bank [nationalpost.com] and Israel effectively punishing Palestinians for the Unesco move [telegraph.co.uk] .

Can someone with a clear understanding of the situation please explain how this these actions by Israel are Just? Is Israel encroaching on Palestinian land?

Why are the Palenstines bad again? (0)

Nyder (754090) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912256)

I'm sorry, i'm a bit lost.

What did the Palestines do to us? I know we hate them, i just don't understand why.

Did they copy copyrighted software? Do they not sell us oil? Are they communist? Oh, i know, they host Wikileaks?

I know this doesn't have anything to do with religion, since we made America it's own country because of the lack of freedom to believe/worship how people wanted to worship/believe. Oh, and because of Taxes, so maybe Palestine are taxing us?

I understand why the world hates us, but i can't understand why we would hate the Palestines, unless it's because they are Arabs and it's cool to hate Arabs.

Re:Why are the Palenstines bad again? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912414)

They aren't Jews. That's why. Everyone knows it, but it sounds 'anti-semetic' to say it.

Let's pull all foriegn aid.. (0)

Brad1138 (590148) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912278)

I get Sick and Tired of listening to how the rest of the world hates us, but they still want our money. We give more money to more countries than any other country, and most of those countries citizens turn around and bash us. F THEM!

Re:Let's pull all foriegn aid.. (1)

JonySuede (1908576) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912438)

Most peoples in the world do not hate Americans on a personal level, they mostly hate your government and his vulgar display of power.

Excellent news for Unesco (3, Insightful)

Coeurderoy (717228) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912290)

This is an excellent news for Unesco, It did leave it alone from 1984 till 2002/3 and this was mutch better than the years between 2003 and Now.

First it will remove a large cadre of US employees from Unesco staff, and since there is a total disconnect between the US point of view on education and culture and the rest of the world it will enable the Unesco to work more efficiently without having to focus on making large american corporations and large US private universities happy.

It also shows how spitefull the current administration is (well the other party would probably do the same), influence at the unesco is largelly dependent on the size of each state contribution, so the US with 22% would have buried the palestinian, in practice maybe one or two managers and at most half a dozen palestinian employees will be hired, and probably mostly active in some cultural history preservation task in the middle east.

The US could have said publicly that the vote of Unesco is not binding for them, and that the officially "protest" the cooptation of a non state as a full member, but that they would go on working with Unesco to further cultural, etc....

But no, they have to "punish" the UN, well certainly there are a lot of undemocratic and unsavory regime who have influence there, but remember many are "allies" of the US, and there is no easy way to get people of the world represented.
To those who think that the US should "remove itself from the UN", just remember that this would in practice mean that "big countries" would unilaterally govern by "divide and conquer", so in the "best (from US point of view) case" you would have an "imperial republic" leading the world by having a small minority (only about 5% of the world population are US citizens) vote for everybody else, in the more likely case you would have the Communist Party of China ruling the world... (US waste of money in the financial system created the crisis which now pushes the European to borrow money from the PRC, how long do you think it will take till you have to pay the interests ?).

So meanwhile thank you very much leaving the Unesco alone...

How about not admitting terrorist groups (4, Insightful)

CapitalOrange (1552105) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912362)

Its funny how there is so much concern for the lack of funding that may result from this. But there is 0 concern that the Palestinian organization/ terrorist groups (aka Hamas) that make up their government are not forced to comply with the standards established by the organization. It supposed to support peace, freedom right and understanding. I didn't know supporting suicide bombings was a plus on the application. The bottom line is just a couple of weeks ago the Palestinians cheered many returned from jail for committing unspeakable acts of murder on civilians and the UN member countries (most of which are run by thuggish dictators) looked the other way. The UN has a long history of antisemitism, from the Durban conference to multiple other examples. The US foots far too much of the bill for these organizations as it is. If they want to continue in their racist ways, it shouldn't be on our dime. PS this isn't just for new projects, UNSECO won't get another dime going forward. Other agencies should keep this in mind before supporting a group on multiple terrorist list (Hamas) with a full membership in a international body.

Changes (1)

tmosley (996283) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912390)

When did we go from "America the Beautiful" to "America the Butthurt"?

That is beside the point that we didn't need to be funding UNESCO in the first place, but to leave over something like this is just stupid. If you are going to leave, leave on principle, and leave all these unconstitutional organizations while you are at it. Withdraw from all the countries where we are not bound by treaty to be, and renegotiate the treaties binding our forces to those remaining nations as soon as possible. We can trade with anyone and everyone, but we don't need to wave guns in their faces while we do it. It is time the US stopped being a world paramilitary (no longer just police) force, and started being a world citizen again.

Do that, and terrorism against America will evaporate like a bad dream almost overnight.

The American Ego rears its ugly head once again (0)

spidercoz (947220) | more than 2 years ago | (#37912516)

The U.S. opposes it, it's obviously bad.

The U.S. is in favor of it, of course it's good.

The U.S. would never do anything other than what's in the best interests of the world/country/people because we're free/democratic/capitalist so that makes us better than everyone else.

(sarcasm meter overload...)

mature (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37912522)

I have seen more mature 5 year olds than the US goverment

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...