Why the World Cup Kicks the U.N.'s...
By: Rachel Marsden
Two major international events are currently underway -- the World Cup soccer
tournament and the inaugural session of the United Nations Human Rights Council.
People around the world appear to be far more enthralled with a soccer
tournament than they are with the UN's latest excuse for a powwow.
In keeping with that spirit, here are some reasons why the World Cup is better
than the UN:
* The UN's World Health Organization is constantly nagging us about the dangers
of junk food. But when anti-cheeseburger cranks leverage the World Cup to
publish articles in medical journals, telling us that World Cup sponsorship by
McDonald's, Budweiser, and Coca-Cola is bad for our health, we can write them
off. No sane person can tune in while English team captain David Beckham is
playing, rivet their attention to the ads lining the field, and think, "I wonder
how many calories are in my beer?" Get a life.
* At the World Cup, a player who doesn't follow the rules gets ejected from the
match after two yellow cards.
The UN has its own version of yellow cards. They're called "resolutions."
Third-world dictators collect them like trading cards. Saddam Hussein was
allowed to rack up 17 of them before being taken out of the game.
* Unlike with the UN, there's incentive to excel in the World Cup. Mediocrity is
rewarded with a trip home. And players from humble, working-class backgrounds
like England's Beckham and Rooney, and Brazil's Ronaldinho, have been driven to
succeed rather than wallow in victimhood.
Even Iran doesn't dare pull the same kind of stunts at the World Cup that it
does with the UN.
Iran's envoy to the Human Rights Council meeting is the prosecutor whom Canada
holds responsible for the arrest and subsequent death of Canadian journalist
Zahra Kazemi. Meanwhile, although Holocaust-denying Iranian President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad had initially considered going to Germany for the World Cup, he
wisely reconsidered (perhaps realizing Holocaust denial can get you arrested
there).
* While the UN promotes a pie-in-the-sky, "one world" ideal, the World Cup
operates successfully on the far more realistic principles of patriotism and
balkanization -- even recognizing the English St. George flag over that of the
United Kingdom.
If the UN ran the World Cup, all players would be thrown onto a single team with
identical jerseys, and they'd let the worst players score all the goals.
* At the World Cup, the riots always seem to involve England's supporters, while
UN events draw various leftist hooligans. English fans can actually fight, and
aren't going to whine and run to court over a little pepper spray in the face.
Protesters at the UN-sponsored World Urban Forum in Vancouver recently had their
leftist t-shirts confiscated. That's not likely to happen at the World Cup.
Judging by media coverage, rowdy soccer fans seem to opt for body art over
clothing, forgoing all this messing around with t-shirts when the authorities
arrive. Take note, lefties. How about considering a full-frontal Che Guevara
tattoo?
* At the World Cup, the U.S. can leave the party early and choose to focus on
baseball and basketball, if they'd rather--and not worry about getting stuck
with the bill. At the UN, well, the U.S. is stuck with the bill.
* Finally, on Christmas Day, 1914, during World War I, British and German
soldiers reportedly got together and had a friendly game of soccer during a
brief, informal truce. If only the UN had that kind of an effect.
Here's a start: Beckham for UN Secretary General!
PUBLISHED: TORONTO SUN (June 30/06)
COPYRIGHT 2006 RACHEL MARSDEN