March 22, 2010, - 5:19 pm
If American or Israeli soldiers did this, there would be outrage around the world. And there would be courts-martial galore.
But when United Nations “Peacekeepers” rape women and father children, well, it’s not only no big deal, but they escape any and all discipline. Yup, for all of the Blacks who convert to Islam, it’s bad enough that Muslims first traded them into slavery (and in many places still have them as slaves today). But if that doesn’t make the case for them, this example of 14 Muslim U.N. soldiers engaging in “wide-spread sexual exploitation and abuse” against Blacks in the Ivory Coast should at least make a dent. And it’s yet another reason the U.S. should do what it doesn’t have the guts to: get out of the U.N. There’s a reason they call the U.N. “peacekeepers,” the “beasts in blue berets.” Or as my friend, Dean, says, “Muslim peacekeepers, the official definition of oxymoron.”
As the United Nations worked to restore peace and protect women and children in Africa’s troubled Cote d’Ivoire three years ago, it announced it was investigating “serious allegations of wide-spread sexual exploitation and abuse.”
Shockingly, the alleged perpetrators were with the U.N.—Moroccan troops serving as peacekeepers.
A confidential probe by U.N. and Moroccan investigators turned up evidence that 14 soldiers were involved, according to a person familiar with the matter; DNA analysis showed some of them had fathered children with the victims. But the U.N. has never disclosed the results of the investigation or whether any of the soldiers were punished.
The Moroccan government has stated that no conclusive evidence of abuse was found and that it dropped all charges.
Shocker. That’s “justice” in the Muslim Mid-East.
More than six years after the United Nations implemented a zero-tolerance policy for sexual misconduct by its peacekeepers, the organization is still struggling to persuade member states to investigate and discipline accused soldiers.
“It’s my biggest headache and heartache, this whole issue,” says Alain Le Roy, who has served as the U.N.’s under-secretary-general for peacekeeping operations since 2008.
The U.N. has long been plagued by allegations that some of its peacekeepers around the world—who are supposed to protect local populations—committed rape, exploited children or trafficked in arms or minerals. . . .
But interviews and U.N. documents show the problem continues. Sexually related allegations against U.N. military forces last year rose 12% to 55; some of the allegations involved minors. . . .
Indeed, the investigative and disciplinary process for accused peacekeepers remains shrouded in secrecy, despite vows by U.N. officials to make it more open.
Wait a sec. Isn’t this the same UN that repeatedly tells the U.S. it must be open about how it treats Islamic terrorists? Talk about hypocrisy. Rape of innocent indigenous peoples–cover that up. But waterboarding terrorists–we want the details for international outrage.
Although the U.N. recently began publishing statistics on a Web site, it still doesn’t detail allegations, specify the number of alleged perpetrators or announce the results of investigations. . . . Nor does the U.N. publicly criticize countries that don’t cooperate in investigations or respond to requests for information.
And here’s the money quote from a UN official:
“The ambition, of course, is to be zero tolerant,” says Inga-Britt Ahlenius, under-secretary-general for Internal Oversight Services. “But you have to be realistic.“
So they can be 1% tolerant of rape at the U.N.? 15% tolerant of rape? I’m curious as to what “realistic” is.
Do you think Israeli or American officials could get away with saying something like that with a straight face? Think again. United Nations? More like United Rapists.
Tags: abuse, beasts in blue berets, Cote d'Ivoire, Ivory Coast, Moroccan, Morocco, Muslim, peacekeepers, peacekeeping force, rape, sexual assault, U.N., U.N. peacekeepers, UN, United Nations