When there is a disaster somewhere in the world–like the earthquake and ensuing tsunami that devastated nine countries in Asia over the Christmas holiday–the United States is always the first to respond. We offer help. We offer money. We offer volunteers. More often than not, the United States of America leads the world in humanitarian efforts. Natural disasters. Disease. Armed conflict. We’re the first to step up and we bring the world with us.
That apparently isn’t good enough for Jan Egeland.
Who’s that? Jan Egeland’s pathetic existence involves standing in front of television cameras and asking other nations for money. His official title is “Under-Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator,” but I prefer to think of him as “Spineless, Money-Extorting Bastard.”
Yeah, if you hadn’t guessed, I’m pretty fired up about this.
Egeland had the audacity to stand up at a press conference and chastise the United States and other western nations for not coughing up more “coin of the realm” to help the victims of this disaster.
For the record, the United States has given an initial sum of $15,000,000.00 and has pledged another $20,000,000.00 to help. We are, by far, the leading contributor of emergency funds in this relief effort. Our total so far is $35,000,000.00, and I provide that total because I’m certain that Mr. Egeland must have failed mathematics in his native Norway.
The European Union–a federation of nations–has pledged an initial $4,000,000.00 with an additional $27,000,000.00 on the way. (That’s $31,000,000.00 more for you, Jan.)
Canada and several European nations–including Spain, Germany, Ireland and Belgium–have pledged about $1,000,000.00 each.
After the United States, the largest single donor nation was Australia, providing $10,000,000.00 as well as transportation aid.
Apparently it’s not good enough for Egeland, however. Here are several comments made by that sniveling weasel:
“It is beyond me why are we so stingy, really. Christmastime should remind many Western countries at least, how rich we have become.”
“There are several donors who are less generous than before in a growing world economy.”
“[Politicians in the United States and Europe] believe that they are really burdening the taxpayers too much, and the taxpayers want to give less. It’s not true. They want to give more.”
“If, actually, the foreign assistance of many countries now is 0.1 or 0.2 percent of the gross national income, I think that is stingy, really. I don’t think that is very generous.”
Oh, really? You don’t say, Jan? You know, when I would complain to my Dad about the allowance he’d give me, do you know what he’d do? That’s right, he’d take it away. Now, I am NOT suggesting that we refuse to help the people affected by this natural disaster. The United States can and should help. Why? Because we can. Because we have the means to. Because it’s the right thing to do.
What I am suggesting is that we stop channeling these funds through the United Nations. We don’t need them to organize this. Heck, we can provide the money to the Red Cross and they can help coordinate relief efforts. The last thing I want to do, however, is send any money through to this spineless jellyfish at the UN.
You know, it doesn’t matter that now, after less than twenty-four hours, this troll has changed his story. Now Egeland says that we’re not being stingy:
“I’ve been misinterpreted when I yesterday said that I believed that rich countries in general can be more generous. It has nothing to do with any particular country or the response to this emergency. We are in early days and the response has so far been overwhelmingly positive. The international assistance that has come and been pledged from the United States, from Europe and from countries in the region has also been very generous.”
Misinterpreted, huh? I’m sorry, but there’s no way to misinterpret the use of the word “stingy” or the comments made by Jan Egeland. Instead of just owning up to his comments and apologizing for them, he blames it on everyone else “misinterpreting” what he said. Typical.
Colin Powell certainly didn’t “misinterpret” them.
Departing Secretary of State Powell defended the US, stating we were definitely “not stingy.” He went on to say, “We are the greatest contributor to international relief efforts in the world.” That statement is 100% true. Egeland drew the ire of Secretary Powell, and that may explain why he changed his tune so quickly.
Egeland, and those like him at the UN, believe in the redistribution of wealth. They think that just because the United States and other powerful nations have more, then they should give more and simply because they’re prosperous. They have a word for that economic concept, and it’s called Socialism.
The United States of America has always and will always come to the aid of people and nations in need. That is what we have always done. When it comes to the UN, we are the first to respond when there’s someone in trouble, and we’re also the first to be criticized when we voice our opinion on any topic that reflects the interests of the United States.
With Socialist rectal apertures like Jan Egeland in charge, I wonder how much of that fund will actually go to the people who need it. You know…because the UN has done such a good job with the Iraq Oil for Food program.
$35,000,000.00 is a significant initial commitment in aid, especially in that part of the world, and it’s only the beginning. We’re sending patrol planes and twelve C-130 cargo planes filled with relief supplies. It would be nice if the UN could harangue France or some other member nations that have not made individual contributions and get them to kick in some cash.
No, instead they’d rather criticize the United States like they always do. This just in…the United States is still the leading contributor of humanitarian aid.
Still.
William Smith
ConservativeBlogger.com
Loading tweets...
Comments
Powered by Facebook Comments