GOVERNO MUNDIAL E LEGITIMIDADE

América Latina, Brasil, governo e desgoverno
CPIs mil, eleições, fatos engraçados e outros nem tanto...

Postby mends » 22 Nov 2005, 18:32

quem ouviu o Pânico hoje no rádio se deparou com algo inusitado: um debate sério, sobre o que é baixaria na TV, quem tem o direito de regular o que assistimos, qual o papel da internet na nossa vida. Antes de começar a discussão e ligar à tentativa de se estabelecer um governo mundial ilegítmo (forçando a barra, como é do meu feitio), quero deixar registrado que o Pânico ganhou mais ainda minha admiração. É o programa mais libertário da TV, hoje.
Primeiro, o caso: quem assiste sabe que, há alguns domingos, na tentativa de fazer a Sabrina “voar” levada por balões, os caras colocaram um rato na cestinha, prenderam balões e, supostamente, soltaram o rato, com uma câmara (ou câmera, pra quem não sabe, as duas palavras servem tanto para designar o aparelho quanto apara designar um aposento ou instituição)na cabeça. Pois bem: duas IMBECIS, acreditando tratar-se de verdade, mobilizaram, através da sua ONG de proteção aos animais, uma ação de repúdio, um abaixo assinado virtual que colheu 35,000 assinaturas contra o que o Pânico fez. Esse abaixo assinado foi encaminhado a um deputado, que apresentou queixa contra o programa, que foi acusado de CAMPEÃO de baixaria, teve que pagar multa, e foi citado quando do fechamento da Rede TV na semana passada (pra quem não sabe, tiraram a Tv do ar por causa do João Kleber, mas o Pânico foi citado).
Os caras explicaram a montagem que fizeram, apresentaram provas da montagem, que dizem ter encaminhado ao deputado e ao juiz, E MESMO ASSIM NÃO FORAM DESAGRAVADOS PORQUE OS 35,000 FULANOS LEGITIMARAM A AÇÃO!!!!!!!!! A ação foi legitimada por uma ONG!!!!!
ONGS: na discussão sobre controle e “supervisão” de conteúdo na TV, foi informado que planeja-se que isso fique a cargo de algumas ONGs. E o que são ONGs? SÃO FORMAS ILEGÍTIMAS DE CONTROLE, APESAR DE SEREM FORMAS LEGÍTIMAS DE REPRESENTAÇÃO. Quem elegeu a ong para supervisionar algo? Quem elegeu a ong para receber dinheiro público? A chamada “sociedade civil organizada” pode se arvorar a supervisionar e controlar a sociedade civil que, por exclusão, é denominada de “desorganizada”?
As ongs surgiram contra a “opressão”, é a pretensa “resposta da sociedade à inatividade do Estado”. Isso quer dizer que teremos que emular uma organização social “orkuteira” aqui no mundo real? Eu sou Alexandre, filiado aos amigos da cerveja, movimento dos sem bmw etc etc. Preciso dessas dimensões de representatividade para existir politicamente? Só posso existir no coletivo? MORRI COMO INDIVÍDUO??? CADÊ A LIBERDADEI INDIVIDUAL?
E por que governo mundial? Porque a lógica é a mesma do fortalecimento da ONU: quem elegeu aqueles burocratas corruptos? Quem são eles para estabelecer tratados e querer legitimar guerras? QUEM OS ELEGEU???? A mesma estrutura não democrática é emulada pela União Européia. Por isso a constituição foi rejeitada em inúmeros países , e por isso a Inglaterra, com sua milenar tradição liberal, sempre relutou em fazer parte dessa estrutura.
Depois ficam falando que eu vejo fascismo em tudo. Me diz se isso não é a morte da existência política individual.
"I used to be on an endless run.
Believe in miracles 'cause I'm one.
I have been blessed with the power to survive.
After all these years I'm still alive."

Joey Ramone, em uma das minhas músicas favoritas ("I Believe in Miracles")
User avatar
mends
Saidero MegaGoldMember
Saidero	MegaGoldMember
 
Posts: 5183
Joined: 15 Sep 2003, 18:45
Location: por aí

Postby Danilo » 22 Nov 2005, 20:25

Domença, acho que a solução é criar uma ONG anti-ONG.
User avatar
Danilo
Saidero MegaGoldMember
Saidero	MegaGoldMember
 
Posts: 3230
Joined: 10 Sep 2003, 22:20
Location: São Paulo

Postby mends » 06 Nov 2006, 18:02

More U.N. Corruption
November 3, 2006; Page A10
Kofi Annan has famously described the United Nations as an institution of "unique legitimacy." But when he turns over the Secretary Generalship to South Korean Ban Ki Moon two months from now, he will be leaving behind an organization whose reputation for integrity and competence has never been lower.


The latest scandal is the arrest and indictment this week of U.N. procurement official Sanjaya Bahel on bribery charges. He's accused by federal prosecutors of steering more than $50 million worth of contracts to bidders in exchange for such considerations as a cheap Manhattan apartment. And his alleged misdeeds may have compromised U.N. peacekeeping missions in places like Liberia, Congo and Kosovo, where a U.N. internal investigation says favored contractors were allowed to skimp on employee salaries and pocket the money for themselves.

Last year, Russian Alexander Yakovlev pled guilty in a case involving $1 million in bribes on $79 million in contracts. And earlier this year a U.N. internal probe concluded that more than $300 million worth of contracts may have been improperly handled, either through mismanagement or outright criminality. One person who had a cozy relationship with the U.N. procurement office, by the way, was none other than Mr. Annan's son Kojo, whose role in a firm that benefited from Iraqi Oil for Food contracts has never been fully clarified.

Which reminds us that Mr. Annan's promise of U.N. reform has also gone nowhere. Christopher Burnham, the talented American brought to the U.N. Secretariat to promote reform, is quietly returning to private life. His attempts were mostly stymied by the U.N. bureaucracy and General Assembly, not that Mr. Annan tried all that hard to move its members.

It would be nice to think we can expect better from Mr. Ban. But it is telling that the South Korean Foreign Minister helped secure his new post with blandishments and pledges of aid to some of the Security Council countries that voted on him. Judging from the record of U.N. scandal, he's right to conclude that what really talks at Turtle Bay is money.
"I used to be on an endless run.
Believe in miracles 'cause I'm one.
I have been blessed with the power to survive.
After all these years I'm still alive."

Joey Ramone, em uma das minhas músicas favoritas ("I Believe in Miracles")
User avatar
mends
Saidero MegaGoldMember
Saidero	MegaGoldMember
 
Posts: 5183
Joined: 15 Sep 2003, 18:45
Location: por aí

Postby mends » 10 Nov 2006, 12:23

A CPI das ONGs: quem faz o quê?

O senador Heráclito Fortes (PFL-PI) conseguiu o número necessário de assinaturas para protocolar uma CPI das ONGs. Entrem na página do Senado (http://www.senado.gov.br/). Lá vocês encontram os nomes dos senadores e o e-mail de cada um. Enviem mensagens aos representantes das oposições (atenção para aqueles que, eventualmente, estão deixando seus mandatos). Manifestem apoio à comissão. As ditas organizações não-governamentais, no Brasil, tornaram-se, para começo de conversa, governamentais. Não raro, são braços de um partido político, o PT, e garantem a capilaridade do partido. As ONGs são hoje o que as Comunidades Eclesiais de Base (as famosas CEBs) foram um dia. Só que há uma diferença: vivemos em plena democracia. E não tem mais graça brincar de “resistência”. Não tem graça e dá um lucro danado. Há gente decente no meio disso tudo? Certamente. E, por isso mesmo, não têm o que temer. Conseguir as assinaturas e protocolar o pedido implica a instalação da comissão? Não! A Mesa do Senado pode criar dificuldades se quiser. Os partidos podem evitar indicar seus representantes, adiando a formação, embora, uma vez aprovada e instalada, o presidente da Casa seja obrigado a fazer ele a indicação se as legendas não o fizerem. A miríade de ONGs no Brasil transformou-se num buraco negro. Defende-se de tudo: mico-leão dourado, baleia, tartaruga, pau-brasil, criança que bate bumbo, malabaristas, a floresta amazônica, a mata atlântica, os casarões da Paulista, o primeiro emprego, o último emprego, os portadores de necessidades especiais... Há nisso tudo gente séria e muito picareta também. É preciso distinguir, então, quem é o quê. As que recebem dinheiro privado, desde que atuem de acordo com as leis do país, que se virem. É preciso jogar luzes sobre as que recebem dinheiro público.

R. Azevedo
"I used to be on an endless run.
Believe in miracles 'cause I'm one.
I have been blessed with the power to survive.
After all these years I'm still alive."

Joey Ramone, em uma das minhas músicas favoritas ("I Believe in Miracles")
User avatar
mends
Saidero MegaGoldMember
Saidero	MegaGoldMember
 
Posts: 5183
Joined: 15 Sep 2003, 18:45
Location: por aí

Postby mends » 19 Jan 2007, 10:12

United Nations Dictators Program
By MELANIE KIRKPATRICK
January 19, 2007; Page A15

Saddam Hussein managed to pull off the $100 billion Oil for Food scam right under the noses of the United Nations officials charged with administering it. Now another dictator with nuclear ambitions has succeeded in a similar trick, this time manipulating the United Nations Development Program in North Korea.

The story of the UNDP's lack of oversight of its operations in North Korea is revealed in previously undisclosed documents and an exchange of letters between U.S. and U.N. officials. American officials have been pushing for months for more transparency in UNDP operations in North Korea, while the UNDP has resisted.


In a Jan. 16 letter to UNDP Associate Administrator Ad Melkert, Ambassador Mark Wallace of the U.S. Mission to the U.N. lays out what American digging has found so far: The UNDP's program in the Democratic People's Republic "has for years operated in blatant violation of U.N. rules, served as a steady and large source of hard currency and other resources for the DPRK government with minimal or no assurance that UNDP funds and resources are utilized for legitimate development activities." Mr. Wallace declined to speak with me, but Richard Grenell, spokesman for the U.S. Mission, said yesterday: "We have raised serious concerns with UNDP regarding their oversight of the programs in North Korea . . . We want to ensure that U.S. tax dollars are not used to fund illicit activities."

While the precise amount of hard currency supplied through UNDP isn't known, the documents suggest it has run at least to the tens of millions of dollars since 1998 and one source says it could be upward of $100 million. An internal 1999 audit notes a budget of $27.9 million for 29 projects. David Morrison, a UNDP spokesman, says "the overall size of the program" in North Korea has been reduced in recent years. While $22.2 million was budgeted for 2005-2006, the agency spent only $3.2 million last year and $2.1 million in 2005, he says. Programs fall into four areas: humanitarian assistance, public health, environment and agriculture, and the economy.

The stakes are nonetheless very high because, unlike Saddam's Iraq, North Korea has already succeeded in testing its nuclear bomb. The hard currency supplied by the UNDP almost certainly goes into one big pot marked "Dear Leader," which Kim can use for whatever he wants, including his weapons programs. This may not violate the letter of Security Council Resolution 1718, which restricts trade in anything having to do with North Korea's nuclear or missile programs, but it certainly violates its spirit.

Unlike Oil for Food, there's no evidence to date that corrupt UNDP officials are in on the game -- though given the U.N.'s record of late, it would be unwise to rule that out before a full investigation. There is, however, plenty of evidence of willful blindness on the part of the UNDP, which let myriad rules be broken and allowed itself to become a large source of hard currency for the regime. Nor did it bring these irregularities to the attention of its governing body, the 36-member executive board.

Consider staffing. The UNDP's Pyongyang office is dominated by government employees selected by North Korea. According to a redacted version of a 2004 internal audit, "The government provides only one candidate for each post and does not provide detailed qualifications, work experience or personal details to the office." The auditors recommended that the UNDP recruit its own staff. A status update, dated Dec. 15, 2006, dryly notes that "the Government is not yet ready to consider such a shift at present."

In addition to appointing the UNDP's staff, the North Korean government requires that UNDP pay their salaries to the government, which presumably takes its cut. That's the way it works for North Korean workers who labor abroad or who work for South Korean companies in the Kaesong Industrial Complex north of the DMZ. In yet another violation of the rules, UNDP gives local staff a cash "meal stipend" of $120 a month, which is another hard currency contribution.

Speaking of cash, the UNDP also accedes to Pyongyang's demands that it pay cash to local government vendors. That's another violation of U.N. rules, as is placing North Korean staffers in jobs that give them control of financial records, personnel actions, and equipment and supplies. To cite just one example of abuse, the 1999 internal audit found that the UNDP checkbook was not kept in a secure location and no check register was maintained reflecting checks written.

But who needs a checkbook? According to the same audit, cash is the only means of payment that the government accepts. The UNDP does not use purchase orders in North Korea and local purchases -- including those over $1,000 -- are made in cash. That includes local office costs, which are typically provided in kind by the host country. North Korea even charges rent, to the tune of $2 million a year, according to one source who has looked at the program.

Meanwhile, there is little if any oversight of the UNDP's projects in North Korea, which, according to a U.N. document, numbered 30 last year. UNDP regulations require one official, on-site visit a year but since Pyongyang prohibits foreigners from visiting some of the project sites, that's another rule that's out the window. Audits of individual projects are spotty at best and in the case of "nationally executed" or "NEX" projects -- that is, those run by the North Korean government with funds provided by the UNDP -- they are often done by the government itself, giving new meaning to the adage about the fox running the henhouse.

It's anyone's guess as to whether the UNDP work in North Korea is benefiting the people for whom it is intended. According to Mr. Wallace's letter, "In the absence of real audits and site visits it is impossible for UNDP to verify whether or not any of the funds paid to the DPRK for supposed use in UNDP programs have actually been used for bona fide development purposes or if the DPRK has converted such funds for its own illicit purposes."

The U.S. sits on the agency's executive board, and in 2005 contributed $105 million, 11.4% of UNDP's core budget (plus an additional $142 million for specified projects). Yet American officials have had to fight for even the most basic information on the UNDP's activities in North Korea. When the U.S. Mission asked for copies of the internal audits of the North Korean operations, it was rebuffed. "Internal audit reports are important management tools for Executive Heads and, therefore, confidential," wrote Kemal Dervis, UNDP's head, on Jan. 5. After protests, American officials were finally permitted to review three internal audits -- 1999, 2001, 2004 -- but were not allowed to retain copies.

Meanwhile, as the U.S. was pressing for answers about North Korean shenanigans involving the UNDP, three North Korean officials were traveling to New York, courtesy of the U.N., for, among other things, next week's meeting of the UNDP executive board. The U.N. picked up their business-class, trans-Pacific tickets at $11,959 each. When U.S. officials objected, the UNDP, in a rare flash of insight, changed its policy.

"Starting immediately after the forthcoming Board meeting, UNDP will not reimburse government officials' travel or other costs for attending Board meetings," writes Mr. Melkert, the associate administrator, in a Jan. 12 letter to Mr. Wallace. It apparently occurred to Mr. Melkert and his boss, Mr. Dervis, that it might not be appropriate for the U.N. to pay for officials of a country that is abusing the U.N. to come to U.N. headquarters to lobby for re-funding its operations.

Also under U.S. pressure, the UNDP now says it will stop transferring hard currency to the Kim Jong Il regime. "We have instructed the DPRK Country Office that all payments in hard currency to government, national partners, local staff and local vendors should end at the latest by 1 March 2007," writes Mr. Melkert, in the Jan. 12 letter.

UNDP spokesman Mr. Morrison says his agency's operations in North Korea "fully comply" with the decisions of the executive board and with the board-approved financial regulations. UNDP is taking "all necessary measures to avoid misperceptions or unintended consequences," he says, and will institute "any additional measures the board may deem necessary." Since Mr. Wallace's letter presents a very different assessment of UNDP actions in North Korea, that should make for an animated board meeting next week.

At that meeting, the U.S., along with Canada, Japan, Belgium and Serbia, plan to request a "deferral" of the agency's programs in North Korea until a full accounting of its operations can be made. An independent, outside audit is an essential first step. A full-scale investigation along the lines of the Volcker Commission's Oil for Food probe would be even better. And don't stop at the UNDP. The North Korean operations of other U.N. agencies -- Unicef, the World Food Program, the Population Fund -- also deserve scrutiny. It's crucial to determine whether, like Saddam Hussein's manipulation of the Oil for Food program, Kim Jong Il has been busy using the resources of the United Nations for his own illicit purposes.

Ms. Kirkpatrick is a deputy editor of the Journal's editorial page.
"I used to be on an endless run.
Believe in miracles 'cause I'm one.
I have been blessed with the power to survive.
After all these years I'm still alive."

Joey Ramone, em uma das minhas músicas favoritas ("I Believe in Miracles")
User avatar
mends
Saidero MegaGoldMember
Saidero	MegaGoldMember
 
Posts: 5183
Joined: 15 Sep 2003, 18:45
Location: por aí

Postby mends » 12 Feb 2007, 17:14

Uma verdade inconveniente
Mais virulentos que petralhas, segundo percebo, sãos os ongueiros. Estão furiosos comigo. Compreendo. Por mim, estariam todos desempregados, quem sabe fazendo malabarismo em farol, já que a maioria resistiria a pegar no pesado e nem mesmo se esforçaria para vender chiclete, uma atividade ao menos produtiva, que faz circular o dinheiro... Há ONGs sérias? Deve haver. No Brasil, a sua força avassaladora corresponde aos últimos, creio, dez anos. Reparem como o Brasil melhorou nesse período... Bastou uma década de militância ativa dessa gente para que, por exemplo, a favela deixasse de ser alguma coisa que precisava acabar para se tornar uma produtora de valores alternativos. Sem dúvida, uma conquista e tanto!
A seriedade das ONGs, pra mim, se traduz numa evidência: quantas vítimas fatais vocês conhecem do alimento geneticamente modificado? Repito a pergunta: quantas pessoas já foram prejudicadas por milho ou soja transgênicos? Mostrem-me uma única reportagem relatando um caso. Agora procurem saber — eu não sei: estou propondo uma pauta aos jornais e revistas — quantas são as ONGs existentes destinadas a combater os transgênicos. E depois tentem investigar quantas são as organizações não-governamentais voltadas ao combate da diarréia infantil, a principal causa da morte de crianças pobres no Brasil. Eu sou capaz de jurar que há mais ONGs preocupadas com tartarugas do que ocupadas em combater a tuberculose, que mata muito mais do que AIDs e recebe bem menos recursos de entidades tanto públicas como privadas. Eis uma verdade inconveniente.

http://www.reinaldoazevedo.com.br
"I used to be on an endless run.
Believe in miracles 'cause I'm one.
I have been blessed with the power to survive.
After all these years I'm still alive."

Joey Ramone, em uma das minhas músicas favoritas ("I Believe in Miracles")
User avatar
mends
Saidero MegaGoldMember
Saidero	MegaGoldMember
 
Posts: 5183
Joined: 15 Sep 2003, 18:45
Location: por aí


Return to Política

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron