Another U.N. Scandal

[Gravitymaster 0]

UN threatens authors of 'racy' exposé
By Charles Laurence in New York
(Filed: 02/05/2004)


The United Nations has threatened to fire two officials who wrote an expose of sleaze and corruption during its peacekeeping missions of the 1990s.



Kofi Annan, the UN Secretary-General, is understood to have favoured an attempt to block publication of the memoir, Emergency Sex and Other Desperate Measures, a True Story from Hell on Earth, due to be published next month.

Still reeling from the Iraqi oil-for-food scandal, officials in the upper echelons of the UN are alarmed by the promised revelations of wild sex parties, petty corruption, and drug use - diversions that helped the peacekeepers to cope with alternating states of terror and boredom.

Other senior officials, however, have apparently argued that any attempt to gag the book's three co-authors - Heidi Postlewait and Andrew Thomson, who are still on the UN payroll, and Kenneth Cain, who is now a writer - would prompt more negative publicity.

Under UN staff rules, writers have to submit manuscripts for scrutiny. Authors can be disciplined if their work is not approved but they insist on publication.

Last week, a UN spokesman admitted that the book had been judged not to be within the interests of the organisation. "We can't stop them publishing, but the rule means that the two who still work for us can be disciplined and dismissed," he said.

The co-authors, who met in Cambodia in 1993 and later worked in Haiti, Kosovo, Liberia and Somalia, claim that petty corruption over expense accounts and living allowances was rife.

Ms Postlewait was in her early thirties when she went on her first trip abroad for the UN, supervising elections in Cambodia. There, she soon worked out that she could save enough money from her expense account to set herself up nicely back in New York. In other frauds, UN staff were said to quote blackmarket currency exchange rates to pad out their expenses.

The authors also complain that they encountered "bureaucratic betrayal" on missions, as the UN allegedly struck cynical deals with corrupt local officials.

One senior UN official who defended the book said that he believed it belonged in the "contemporary tradition of gritty war reporting", and would do little damage to the reputation of UN peacekeepers.

Last week, none of the three authors was available for comment. Mr Thomson, the son of missionaries, is in Cambodia, where he has built a house, and Mr Cain, a law school graduate from Harvard, is in Vietnam. The UN spokesman said that Ms Postlewait was travelling, but did not know her whereabouts.

[quade 4]

Just out of curiosity, where did you personally find this story?

If you Google the story by the slug "UN threatens authors of 'racy' exposé" the first two web sites that pop up are interesting. The first is the Telegraph from the UK where the article was orginally published, but it's the second one that pops up that interests me -- http://www.freerepublic.com -- A GOP forum.

So, what I'm curious about is did you happen across this story by yourself or is this some focused GOP talking point?

Not really sure I understand the strategy if it is.

I know a lot of folks are dissatisfied with the UN, but I'm not really sure I understand why that would be such a partisan issue. I know a lot of GOP folks were dissatisfied with the UN because it disagreed with GWB and the Iraq issue. Is that it?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

J but it's the second one that pops up that interests me -- http://www.freerepublic.com -- A GOP forum.
--
I know a lot of folks are dissatisfied with the UN, but I'm not really sure I understand why that would be such a partisan issue. I know a lot of GOP folks were dissatisfied with the UN because it disagreed with GWB and the Iraq issue. Is that it?

The freerepublic is definitely a right wing site, but that doesn't mean its articles can be dismissed out of hand, just as any on CNN can't be trusted without questioning.

Conservatives have disliked the UN for long before Iraq II for scores of attempts by the body to give itself governing powers over the world.

Personally I dislike it because it gives far too much power in the veto to the winning countries of WWII. It's a joke so long as that remains true.

And because it was so ineffective in dealing with Iraq for the last 12 years. Corrupt or incompetent, take your pick.

[nacmacfeegle 0]

"Corrupt or incompetent, take your pick."

And the alternative is.......?

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[nacmacfeegle 0]

"Just out of curiosity, where did you personally find this story?"
Be fair Paul, If you google the title of the book, its like a rash all over the results page.
Okay we've heard about the expense fiddlings, but what about the sex?

Another thing, I'm fed up with Halliburton and conspiracy...what about that Miramax?, suppressing Moore's seminal work on 9/11 and floating this piece of divisive trash more or less at at the same time.......

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[freeflydrew 0]

you just don't write a book, shitting on the company where you work! That's like if I wrote a book telling the true personalities of all my colleagues at the school where I work, or we all started telling the public what actually goes on at the dropzones, before, during and after we go skydiving.

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

Not really sure I understand the strategy if it is.

Why does there have to be a strategy, or even a partison line? It's news, plain and simple. At least that's how I see it.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[Gravitymaster 0]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/05/02/wsex02.xml&sSheet=/portal/2004/05/02/ixportal.html

[ranchhand28 0]

My quick $0.2:

News or not, the article is very dramatic. The writers are not martirs...

Like in any other company, we, UN staff members (yes, I'm one of them), are bound by our employment contracts and staff rules and regulations. If you like it, you sign it, and are obliged to abide by it. If you don't, well, just go look for employment elsewhere.

The staff rules are explicit, concise and clear: any material for publication MUST BE SUBMITTED for approval of the Administration. If approval is denied, and still one publishes the material, this consitutes grounds for termination of one's employment contract since it is a breach of conduct.

Plain and simple, the writers all knew what they were doing, and knew the consequences. If they will be fired or not... that's a whole different issue.

It would actually be better that they didn't... Less drama would be created, and they would not be sanctified... (and would still have to do the walk of shame along the corridors....).

Peace...

Thereza

[quade 4]

Quote

The freerepublic is definitely a right wing site, but that doesn't mean its articles can be dismissed out of hand, just as any on CNN can't be trusted without questioning.

The only reason I Googled it was because he had given the name of the author, but not the publication. I was more than satisfied with the Telegraph as the original source, but when Free Republic popped up right underneith it, alarm bells started going off.

I think what disturbs me is that Free Republic seems to comb the news of the word for stories favorable to its position, collates them and then people use IT as their news source.

I had a skydiver tell me something -very- disturbing the other day. The skydiver said they no longer listen to the news on radio or TV and doesn't subscribe to a newspaper. The skydiver said that all they had to do was log on to dropzone.com and if there was anything newsworthy, we'd be discussing it here and that's how they knew what was going on in the world. Truly disturbing.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Like in any other company, we, UN staff members (yes, I'm one of them), are bound by our employment contracts and staff rules and regulations. If you like it, you sign it, and are obliged to abide by it. If you don't, well, just go look for employment elsewhere.

Sorry, the UN is not a company. It is the singular world peace organization. It should be open to scrutiny and should not have too many (any?) secrets.

[kallend 2,147]

Quote

Quote

Like in any other company, we, UN staff members (yes, I'm one of them), are bound by our employment contracts and staff rules and regulations. If you like it, you sign it, and are obliged to abide by it. If you don't, well, just go look for employment elsewhere.

Sorry, the UN is not a company. It is the singular world peace organization. It should be open to scrutiny and should not have too many (any?) secrets.

Do you think UN employees should have fewer rights than corporate employees, then?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Sorry, the UN is not a company. It is the singular world peace organization. It should be open to scrutiny and should not have too many (any?) secrets.

Do you think UN employees should have fewer rights than corporate employees, then?

I don't see how you could reach that conclusion.

I'm arguing quite the opposite. In corporate America whistle blowers have limited protection. UN employees should have far more leeway to report out what is going on within the organization.

[freeflydrew 0]

Why should UN employees have far more leeway to report out what's going on within the organization? This type of restriction is standard in most companies, organizations, and governments! So some people who are working together get wasted and have a 3 way or whatever, why should it be ok for them to publish a book detailing those events and degrade the very organization that they work for? It's sooo not a reflection of the United Nations Organization, and the entire thing, from whatever went on, to the writing and publishing of those events, is so totally unprofessional, that I can't believe that any of those people are actually going ahead with this and were ever employed by the UN in the first place!

What's that old saying... You don't shit in your own backyard?

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

you just don't write a book, shitting on the company where you work! That's like if I wrote a book telling the true personalities of all my colleagues at the school where I work, or we all started telling the public what actually goes on at the dropzones, before, during and after we go skydiving.

Do you think it's appropriate for someone to write such a book or article after they have left the employer? If so, would it be appropriate for a skydiver to write such a book after they stop skydiving?

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

So some people who are working together get wasted and have a 3 way or whatever, why should it be ok for them to publish a book detailing those events and degrade the very organization that they work for? It's sooo not a reflection of the United Nations Organization, and the entire thing, from whatever went on, to the writing and publishing of those events, is so totally unprofessional, that I can't believe that any of those people are actually going ahead with this and were ever employed by the UN in the first place!

It's unprofessional to write a book about unprofessionalism and corruption in an organization? An organization that a good chunk of the planet holds in especially high regard? What exactly is the problem with someone reporting the truth? (Let's assume for now that it is true)

I'm curious about your viewpoint and would appreciate it if you provided greater detail.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[quade 4]

Depends on if it's true or not and the purpose.

If we assume the information is true and the story is being written to save life, property or the world, then the story ought to be written no matter what the circumstance.

If the story is being written as a documentary about an industry with truely something insightful to say (Pirates of Silicon Valley for instance) -- it can probably ONLY be written once outside the company.

If the story is being written in solely an attempt to "get back" at the "bastards" then it's probably best not to write it no matter what the circumstance.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Why should UN employees have far more leeway to report out what's going on within the organization?

Because when people at the UN screw up, the consequences are higher. Had it been doing its job, the second war in Iraq may not have occurred. Not a definite, but they certainly dropped the ball on enforcing sanctions and conducting effective inspections, and it may have been because of personal financial motivations. That sort of thing should be reported out if known, employee contracts be damned.

As I'm sure you're aware, there is great disdain for the role of the UN by Americans. Acting unprofessionally and then trying to forbid any discussion of it certainly won't improve that impression. We'll always distrust it because it threatens our authority, but it's much worse when we view it as a corrupt largess of bureaucratic peaceniks who want to apply socialism on a world wide stage.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

If the story is being written in solely an attempt to "get back" at the "bastards" then it's probably best not to write it no matter what the circumstance.

Oh... I see. You mean like Richard Clarks book?

[freeflydrew 0]

Quote

Quote

Why should UN employees have far more leeway to report out what's going on within the organization?

Because when people at the UN screw up, the consequences are higher. Had it been doing its job, the second war in Iraq may not have occurred. Not a definite, but they certainly dropped the ball on enforcing sanctions and conducting effective inspections, and it may have been because of personal financial motivations. That sort of thing should be reported out if known, employee contracts be damned.

As I'm sure you're aware, there is great disdain for the role of the UN by Americans. Acting unprofessionally and then trying to forbid any discussion of it certainly won't improve that impression. We'll always distrust it because it threatens our authority, but it's much worse when we view it as a corrupt largess of bureaucratic peaceniks who want to apply socialism on a world wide stage.

I'm not even going to touch this one... but thank you for your response.

[wmw999 2,587]

Quote

As I'm sure you're aware, there is great disdain for the role of the UN by Americans

That would be some Americans. I'm not among them, and many others also aren't.

Many of the same Americans who want to know all the juicy details of the UN are the same ones who think that criticism of the President etc. is tantamount to treason.

Rules and manners only work if they apply to everyone, not just the folks you want them to.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Many of the same Americans who want to know all the juicy details of the UN are the same ones who think that criticism of the President etc. is tantamount to treason.

And there are those who can't see a difference between healthy debate and treason.

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

Do you think UN employees should have fewer rights than corporate employees, then?

Do you think INSERT REPUBLICAN OFFICIAL NAME HERE should have fewer rights than corporate employees, then?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[wmw999 2,587]

Quote

And there are those who can't see a difference between healthy debate and treason.

I completely agree with you.

Of course, I have a feeling that what you consider to be treasonous isn't what I would. Is it only treasonous to disagree with Bush, or was it treasonous to disagree with Clinton also?

Or does Bush having started a war that I disagree with his stated rationale(s) and timetable for starting put him beyond disagreement?

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

Many of the same Americans who want to know all the juicy details of the UN are the same ones who think that criticism of the President etc. is tantamount to treason.

Funny you say that, because last night I was thinking that many of the people eager to excuse the UN, or suppress the book right off the bat are the same people who want all the juicy details of everything that the current administration has done.

Oh well, back to my lunch. . .

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.