Fellow Canuck Joseph Norland of the "Dawson's Peek" blog thinks it's time to investigate the U.N. and reconsider support for it. There's even a net-wide petition involved:

"We, the undersigned, petition the Government of the United States to form an independant [sic] commission of inquiry to determine how the United Nations has violated its Mandate, abused its power and resources, engaged in racism and anti-Jewish acts, and supported Islamic terrorism against the free world. We would also like this commission to determine if and how this organization can be rectified, and if such an organization in its present state deserves to exist at the American taxpayer's expense."

Sounds like a worthy investigation to me, for reasons that go beyond even the petition Dawson cites. Like sex abuse by U.N. workers, reports of which were suppressed by the U.N. Human Rights Commission. Or corruption scandals in Nairobi and Somalia. Among other incidents and practices that have come to light recently.

There may be good and valid reasons for remaining part of U.N. Still, this corrupt organization has not substantially reformed itself since this 1996 report. Worse, it not only turns a blind eye to terrorism and racism - it often acts as an enabler of it. The recent Durban Conference is a prime example, but certainly not the only one by any means.

Is it possible that such a deeply flawed organization could still be worth our membership? Yes, it's possible. For instance, it would be difficult to duplicate the useful presence of so many world representatives via the U.N.'s presence in New York, since some of those nations can't really afford ambassadors everywhere.

But evidence is growing that it's more than past time for serious investigation and debate concerning the U.N.'s value in its current state. Blind faith just won't do any more.