American and U.N. investigators apparently believe that the terrorists who carried out the deadly explosion at the U.N.’s Iraq headquarters may have been aided by some of the U.N.’s own guards. It turns out that the Iraqis who were guarding the U.N.’s headquarters in the Canal Hotel were largely the same people who were originally placed there by Iraqi Intelligence for the purpose of spying on U.N. weapons inspectors. Incredibly, the U.N. appears to have thought nothing of leaving these men in place as their guards when, after the war, the hotel became the U.N.’s operational headquarters.
Suspicion that guards may have been involved is heightened by the fact that some of them have refused to cooperate in the investigation. You would think that this experience would cause the U.N. to re-evaluate its approach, wouldn’t you? Not necessarily. A U.N. official says that the organization will not increase the number of American troops guarding its headquarters:
“It’s not that we have anything against the coalition forces, but you do realize the presence of coalition forces does intimidate some of the people we need to speak to and work with. We will always remain a soft target. We are conscious of that, but that is the way we operate. We are an open organization.”
More evidence, I guess, that the U.N. is incapable of playing a serious role in an environment as dangerous as postwar Iraq.
-
-
Most Read on Power Line
Donate to PL
-
Our Favorites
- American Greatness
- American Mind
- American Story
- American Thinker
- Aspen beat
- Babylon Bee
- Belmont Club
- Churchill Project
- Claremont Institute
- Daily Torch
- Federalist
- Gatestone Institute
- Hollywood in Toto
- Hoover Institution
- Hot Air
- Hugh Hewitt
- InstaPundit
- Jewish World Review
- Law & Liberty
- Legal Insurrection
- Liberty Daily
- Lileks
- Lucianne
- Michael Ramirez Cartoons
- Michelle Malkin
- Pipeline
- RealClearPolitics
- Ricochet
- Steyn Online
- Tim Blair
Media
Subscribe to Power Line by Email
Temporarily disabled
Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.