from Wikiquote:

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

* Though these words are regularly attributed to Voltaire, they were first used by Evelyn Beatrice Hall, writing under the pseudonym of Stephen G Tallentyre in The Friends of Voltaire (1906), as a summation of Voltaire's beliefs on freedom of thought and expression.

* Another possible source for the quote was proposed by Norbert Guterman, editor of "A Book of French Quotations," who noted a letter to M. le Riche (February 6, 1770) in which Voltaire is quoted as saying: "Monsieur l'abbé, I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write." This remark, however, does not appear in the letter.

UN spin

The UN Dispatch blog does exactly what it accuses another blogger of doing.

From Roger L. Simon: UN-Balanced Blogging on the UN Dispatch blog:

0% of Roger L. Simon's blog entries during April make reference to the following UN-related issues:[followed by self-promotion of good works of which the US is the major funder]

0% of posts on the UN Dispatch make reference to the following UN-related issues:

UN sex scandals in various African countries
UN failure to prevent genocide in Rwanda
UN oil-for-food scandal

Is Simon's hyper-focus on a single UN-related issue based on deep convictions?

Does the UN Dispatch have any justification for using the term "hyper-focus"? Could it be that they consider any attention afforded that issue to be too much? Is UN Dispatch ignoring any of the other above issues an oversight? Maybe. Or is it indicative that they just don't give a damn?

From Roger L. Simon: UN-Balanced Blogging, Part II

1. UN Dispatch is the UN's blog, and the post in question represents the UN's displeasure with Roger Simon.

False. Here's a brief quote from the 'About' section of this blog: "UN Dispatch is sponsored by the United Nations Foundation, though the views expressed herein do not represent the official views of the United Nations Foundation, or the UN."

You use the UN name, you're paid by them, they own you.

And not unexpectedly, the responses were largely dismissive, derisive, and betrayed a shallow reading of the original post.

And not unexpectedly, the responses posted on the UN Dispatch were dismissive and betrayed a desire to sweep problems under the rug.

an unfortunate reaction from some bloggers is their willingness to simply shrug off the examples of UN-related issues listed in the original post. It's clear that many of these bloggers have become accustomed to knee-jerk attacks and are unwilling (or unable) to engage in a reasoned debate.

An unfortunate reaction from UN Dispatch is their willingness to simply shrug off the examples of UN problems referred to by anyone. It's clear that the UN has become accustomed to simply talk about fixing these problems and to resort to a knee-jerk attack on the messenger because its bureaucrats are too cowardly and lazy to address the problems and actually fix them.

Europe's opposition to the USA

The happening to our America, abroad as well as at home, these years, is indeed most strange. The democratic republic has paid her to-day the terrible and resplendent compliment of the united wish of all the nations of the world that her union should be broken, her future cut off, and that she should be compell’d to descend to the level of kingdoms and empires ordinarily great.

There is certainly not one government in Europe but is now watching the war in this country, with the ardent prayer that the United States may be effectually split, crippled, and dismember’d by it. There is not one but would help toward that dismemberment, if it dared...

We need this hot lesson of general hatred, and henceforth must never forget it. Never again will we trust the moral sense nor abstract friendliness of a single government of the old world.

Walt Whitman, 1864