 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The other day, one of the Democratic candidates — I forget which — sneered at Bush for his "contempt for the United Nations." When he became president, this guy, there would be no such contempt for this laudable and golden organization.
But why? I would like to ask this candidate — if I could remember which one it was — the following: What do you think of the U.N. human-rights commission? I mean, think of that holy-sounding name: United Nations Human Rights Commission. In the chairman's seat is Qaddafi — his government. Other members of the commission are Cuba, China, Sudan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Zimbabwe. That is a murderer's row (literally, unfortunately). Remember that, the day before the beginning of the Iraq war, Castro rounded up 75 dissidents — independent journalists, independent librarians, democracy activists — and threw them into dungeons. Not long after, Costa Rica introduced a resolution at the U.N. human-rights commission calling for the release of those dissidents. Castro denounced all supporters of the resolution as "vile lackeys" and "miserable puppets" of the yanqui regime. (It's sort of nice to know — isn't it? — that, even in 2003, Communists still talk like Communists.) Castro needn't have worried: The commission refused to approve the resolution. A spokesman for the dictator (Castro, I'm talkin') hailed this rejection as "a new moral victory for Cuba." I suppose it was. The commission did agree to send a human-rights monitor to the island — but Castro wouldn't permit it, even though the proposed envoy was a Frenchwoman not exactly known for her sympathy with Castro's prisoners. All right: Then the United States asked that Cuba be denied a seat on the human-rights commission for the upcoming year. I mean, given that it's one of the biggest human-rights violators on the planet, why should it serve on the human-rights commission? (Of course, as much can be said for many other members, as I have noted.) The U.N. said nothing doing: Castro would stay. So the United States — to its credit — walked out of that meeting. All right, I'm done with my rant: but the next time a Democrat, or anyone else, sneers at my contempt for the United Nations, I'm going to say, "I got your contempt right here, pal."
A couple of items from our conversation: Kouchner does not believe that the French government handed out passports to fleeing Saddam thugs in Syria — passports enabling them to escape Allied justice. I wonder — but it's a relief that Kouchner doesn't think so. He says that much of the nation is rooting for U.S. failure in Iraq, so as to justify France's pre-war position. He believes occupation forces should be as various as possible: using as much of the world's troops as possible, including those from nations that opposed the United States. He says that support for Saddam Hussein — yes, support for Saddam — rose dramatically in France when Bush's name became mud. He says that, in a way, Saddam became the new Che Guevara: the darling of the trendy and stupid. He identifies the main problem as ignorance, particularly of history. He also says that the only way to handle the North Korean problem is to get rid of the regime — otherwise, nothing is possible. Kouchner was one of the very, very few French figures to see the necessity of destroying Saddam, and to argue loudly for it. It saddened him that France had abandoned its historic role of light of liberty (very historic, some might crack). Anyway, it's not every day you get to shake the hand of someone who's done so much good, for so many, and it was good to see the charming, righteous Socialist.
In any case, here it is, if you're so inclined.
Well, that's sort of a balm to the soul.
No, seriously, do come — you can investigate here. I can pretty much guarantee you won't be disappointed. We specialize in satisfied customers.
If a child said to me, "Tell me a story, please," I'd have to go and get someone else's book. I couldn't just close my eyes and say, "Okay: Once upon a time . . ." But if the child wanted to hear opinions on the U.N. human-rights commission: no problem! I bring this up because I was touched by something J. K. Rowling said. This (apparent) genius and zillionaire — author of the Harry Potter books — said that she got the idea for her series while riding a train from Manchester to London. "It was as if the story was there for me to discover." Yes, that's how it is — or should be: You don't generate it yourself; you just see it, and serve as the vehicle for its expression. But I don't see it! Which is why I'm writing these Impromptus . . .
Hot, yes — but not necessarily untrue.
Tell it, Judge.
Okay: Recently, Newsweek quoted Teresa Heinz Kerry, who said, "People out there need simple things. Like, 'Mrs. Reagan says, Just say no, so maybe I can.' She was also a good wife — a good spouse, I mean — in terms of pushing the president, or not pushing." . . . a good spouse, I mean . . . What is wrong with people? Why are they so allergic to the words "wife" and "husband"? What wonderful, divine words they are, bursting with meaning! Husband! Wife! Say 'em loud and say 'em proud, and don't be intimidated. (Like I have to tell you that, Impromptus reader?)
"Hi, Jay: I found myself thinking of you (and Ward Connerly) today while my fiancé and I were filling out a marriage-license application at the Milwaukee County Courthouse. Down at the bottom of the form were boxes to indicate the race(s) of the intendeds. I immediately thought of your correspondent who suggested that college applicants misreport their races [in an act of civil disobedience]. I looked at my fiancé and said, 'Hey, shall we leave this blank?' He responded, 'Yeah, it's none of their business anyway.' So, with a tingle of excitement at our rebellion against the racialization of, well, everything, we turned in our form. "Upon being asked why the boxes were blank, we responded that we preferred not to answer that question. Of course, we were promptly informed that the State of Wisconsin will not issue a marriage license without recording the race(s) of the two people to be married. Not being in a position to move out of state, we meekly complied, as people usually do when they are up against robotic bureaucrats. "So that, as they say, was that. But we tried!" And a damn good try it was. |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
<% dim printurl
printurl = Request.ServerVariables("URL")%>
ay I rant about the U.N. for just a sec? Thanks. (Impromptus-ites never
mind — as far as I know.)
Whenever I write like this, a friend of mine says, "Something in
your Wheaties this morning?"
