UNESCO: What's that smell'
How many times must the Obama administration get its nose rubbed in the excrement that passes for business as usual at the United Nations before it abandons this conclave of U.S. contempt and outright corruption?
The predictable admission of "Palestine" as a full member of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) on Monday nose-thumbs adamant U.S. objections. It also triggers the requisite withholding -- by law -- of $60 million in U.S. funding to this "cultural" agency.
But don't expect that to send shock waves through Turtle Bay, which annually pockets more than $7 billion from Uncle Sam.
This "prize" for the Palestinian Authority likely will open doors to other U.N. organizations while it further distances the Palestinians from any serious peace talks with Israel. And this, as militant thugs fire rockets into southern Israel, which is a U.N. member.
The unmitigated insult of the Palestinians' admission into UNESCO is compounded by the cheers that reportedly greeted the vote — and by the laughter when Israel voted "No," reports The Heritage Foundation's Brett Schaefer.
And this the State Department calls "regrettable"?
Even for the olfactory-challenged Team Obama, it's time to wake up and smell what it's stepping in at Turtle Bay.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.