Untitled document

Bryan over at Hot Air notes a pathetic attempt by the United Nations to spread manure propaganda happy-group-think to American schoolchildren by teaming up with Marvel comics. This is beyond lame and Marvel should be ashamed.

This is a waste of a perfectly good fictitious super hero.

In a move reminiscent of storylines developed during the World War II, the U.N. is joining forces with Marvel Comics, creators of Spider-Man and the Incredible Hulk, to create a comic book showing the international body working with superheroes to solve bloody conflicts and rid the world of disease.

The UN has to resort to fiction to bolster its image because a book about the UN doing any good would by definition have to be a work of fiction.

The comic, initially to be distributed free to 1 million U.S. schoolchildren, will be set in a war-torn fictional country and feature superheroes such as Spider-Man working with U.N. agencies such as Unicef and the “blue hats,” the U.N. peacekeepers.

Why not set the book in an actual war-torn country and highlight the heroic acts of real, actual US military men and women to help the people who live there? There is no shortage of those real heroes. We don’t need to credit their deeds to made-up comic book characters.

But for the UN to do that would be to admit that there are real heroes in the world that the UN has done all it can to oppose. So there goes that.

Would those be the "blue hats" that set up child sex rings and force women into prostitution? Or is it the "blue hats" who abandon civilians to genocide after getting them all into one place for the convenience of their murderers? Inquiring minds really would like to know which group of "blue hats" Spidy will have his name associated with. And which Marvel superhero will help out with the corruption in various UN programs? Will the Incredible Hulk be renamed the Incredible Bribe in the interests of truth in advertising?

Seriously, Marvel, you really should be ashamed about cooperating with this outfit to brainwash American children. Parents, you are on notice to be ready to raise holy hell with your local school boards if they allow this into your children's schools. And feel free to tell Marvel just how happy you are about the company they keep.

This entry was posted in World news. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Un-Superheroes

  1. john says:

    Marvel went down the tubes long before this – look up that pathetic mess called the Civil War.

    This is just the icing on a big old heap of… oh use your imagination.

  2. Yuri says:

    Any foreign force stationed in a country would pose problems, as Abu Ghraib and Blackwater clearly show.
    Remember the recent news about how much money can not be accounted for in Iraq? Wasn’t it at least ten times what was skimmed in the UN’s oil for food program?

    In any case, making children think about things that happen outside their town is great.

  3. Gaius says:

    No, Yuri. You’re trying a moral equivalency argument. Neither of the two you mention are in any way equivalent to reports like this:


    I’d as soon not have kids exposed to things like that, there or here.

    And Oil for food wasn’t even close to exposed or reported on thoroughly. it is also just the tip of the corruption iceberg – according to the UN itself – before they dropped the stonewall into place:


  4. Yuri says:

    I’m not trying, I’m actually succeeding 😉

    I can dig out a lot of horrific news links, accusations and innuendos too (did you notice, for example, that Haliburton moved outside the US jurisdiction right after the 2006 elections?). Do you seriously believe that amount of corruption in the US had been thoroughly exposed?
    Bottom line is: this world is ugly, and the war especially so, and I just do not see the reason to use “one bad apple” when it’s us bad, and “you inhuman devils” if it’s anybody else. This country has a lot of soul searching and problem fixing to do before it can even pretend to be a moral leader of the world again.

    P.S. And last time we were undoubtedly the moral leaders – we created the UN as a tool of international legitimacy, he-he

  5. martian says:

    And what fools we were for doing so, Yuri! I just love you “USA is the root of all evil” types. Yes, the world is ugly and, like any society composed of humans, we Americans have our bad apples and corrupt people. However, as a nation, I will stack up our record of morality against that of any other nation in the world and do so proudly and without reservation.

    No Yuri, you’re not succeeding, you’re just exposing yourself as another self-loathing liberal on a guilt trip.

  6. Yuri says:

    martian, I’m not sure which part of my message read “USA is the root of all evil”. I do not think it is the case, after all I immigrated into this country and it’s been very good to me, and I have no desire to move anywhere else. But I do have strong (yes, liberal) feelings about the policies of this country for the last two-three decades, and I think I have strong arguments that we stopped being the moral example to others. Guilt has nothing to do with it, really – only (very proudly American) sense of fairness.

  7. John says:

    Martian, you are dead wrong. The US does have a right (and a duty) to protect its national security – and in that sense, it has not acted any better or worse than other countries in the world.

    However, it is a fact that today, more than any other time in history, it has chosen to do so through means other than the multilateral way. I think you have to ask yourself how much that has meant a distancing from the teachings of our Founding Fathers, especially their call for respecting the sovereignty of all nations.

    And I gotta say: even worse than the “USA is the root of all evil” types are the “USA is the moral leader of the world” ones!

  8. martian says:

    John, it is people like you who are dead wrong – on so many levels. You give your liberalism away with that phrase “other than the multilateral way”. And then you have the gall to invoke the Founding Fathers to justify it! Go back and read your history. If you can find a single Founding Father who was a multi-lateralist I’d like to know about it. Actually, due to the world circumstances at the time, most of the Founding Fathers were, at most, neutral on the idea of multi-lateralism while many were actual isolationists – products of their times. Would that we could still be so. Unfortunately, the world of today is not the same world that our Founding Fathers lived in. 9/11 has shown us we can no longer sit safe and cozy behind our ocean barriers and let the rest of the world go to hell in their own way. We ignored the terrorists for too long and the victims of 9/11 paid for that.

    I have no problem, whatsoever, the Bush approach – the best defense is a good offense. I like the idea that we are no longer waiting to be attacked before doing something to defend our people and our home. Over and over again after 9/11 and on the runup to the Iraqi invasion I heard you liberals yelling that you wanted to see the “smoking gun” before we took action. The problem with that is, if the gun is smoking that means it’s been fired and likely someone was hit as a result.

    I have long been a proponent of this approach. In fact, as far back as 1985 the Rochester Democrat & Chronicle published a letter from me in which I advocated an international military force administered by the UN (this was back when I was still enough of an idealist to actually believe in that bunch of rabble) that would be dedicated to wiping out terrorism world-wide. That force would not wait for attacks but would actively seek out and destroy any and all terrorist groups world-wide. I’m an equal opportunity kind of guy. I don’t care what race, creed, national origin, sexual orientation or whatever they might be – if they commit a terrorist act they are dead meat. It just took the world a while to catch up with me. 😉

Comments are closed.