Americans joined the Iraqi people last week in celebrating the news that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, was killed.  It was certainly a small victory for a free Iraq and U.S. security.  But America faces many security threats around the world, including the prospects of a nuclear Iran and others.  In addition, according to Fox News Channel senior correspondent and anchor Eric Shawn, a threat to America's security is headquartered right here in the United States -- the United Nations.

Eric Shawn is the author of a new book entitled The U.N. Exposed:  How the United Nations Sabotages America's Security.  Recently, Mr. Shawn joined CFIF Corporate Counsel & Senior Vice President Renee Giachino on "Your Turn – Meeting Nonsense With Common Sense" to discuss his book. 

The following are excerpts from the interview that aired on WEBY 1330 AM, Northwest Florida's Talk Radio.

GIACHINO:  My next guest is veteran newsman Eric Shawn, who is a senior correspondent and anchor for the Fox News Channel.  He has been a television reporter for more than 25 years, and has covered stories everywhere from the Persian Gulf to Somalia to the White House to the O. J. Simpson trial.  Mr. Shawn lives in New York City with his family. 

Mr. Shawn has authored a recently-released book titled The U.N. Exposed:  How the United Nations Sabotages America's Security.  Eric, thanks so much for joining us this afternoon to discuss your new book.

SHAWN:  Hi Renee.  It is good to be with you today.

GIACHINO:  How are things in New York?

SHAWN:  Fine, I think it may be little hotter than it is in Florida.

GIACHINO:  With so much going on in our world – the War in Iraq, the energy crisis, the immigration debacle, to just name a few, why should we pay attention to the United Nations?

SHAWN:  We should be paying attention because that is the forum in which the world community gets together, or is trying to get together, to deal with the greatest threats of our time.  Sadly, it is not.  That is why I wrote this book, and why I called the book The U.N. Exposed, because I wanted to tell the truth about what is going on.  I am an objective reporter going in – I am just an old crime and city hall reporter -- and I went in covering the U.N. for Fox News and saw what happens.  The U.N. is instead jeopardizing America's security, because it cannot deal with terrorism.  More importantly, the Security Council right now cannot deal with Iran – a potentially nuclear Iran that is totally violating international covenants and laws.  The Security Council is paralyzed in gridlock because Russia and China have basically been bought off with millions of dollars in contracts.  So that is sadly why you are not getting any progress out of the Security Council.

GIACHINO:  In the beginning of the book, you start out by exposing how the United Nations embraces terrorists, and I think you have made the case.  The U.N. continues to endanger America and Americans.  Isn't that right?

SHAWN:  It's sad but true.  And I lay these facts out in the book.  All you have to do is look at the fact that terrorism-supporting countries like Syria sit in on the terrorism committee meetings.  That is absurd.  Can you believe that the Vice-Chairman of the main anti-terrorism committee at the United Nations, which is called the Counter-Terrorism Committee, or the CTC, refuses to condemn terrorism?  Five innocent people were killed in a bombing in Israel in January, and our ambassador, John Bolton, went in to have the Security Council condemn it as it should.  But he was blocked by the Vice-Chairman of the Counter-Terrorism Committee, who did not want to criticize Syria or Islamic Jihad.

It is the history and the continual pattern at the United Nations that I think jeopardizes us.  A Congressional study in the late '90s showed that Iranian Jihad missiles could have the potential to hit the eastern seaboard of the United States.  And what is the U.N. trying to do to deal with that?

The U.N.'s anti-al Qaeda team had a big meeting, and less than half the nations showed up.  Ambassador Bolton said they give only lip service, and the efforts are failing.  He begged his other diplomats to have more in-depth meetings on what to do about al Qaeda in their own countries.  Renee, do you know how many countries showed up?

GIACHINO:  One?

SHAWN:  I wish.  That would be good.  Nobody.  Not one diplomat showed up for the in-depth meetings or requested the in-depth meetings on al Qaeda.  It's sad, it's pathetic, and that is where I see the U.N. completely failing on the job when you consider the threats facing our country.

GIACHINO:  In the second chapter of your book The U.N. Exposed, you detail the media's relationship with the U.N. and how cozy it has been.  You referred to yourself as a city crime beat reporter, but obviously you are a lot more than that as a senior correspondent and anchor for Fox News.

Every reporter treasures his or her relationships with his or her sources.  Where did things go wrong with these U.N. correspondents?  Why does mainstream American media seem to ignore these U.N. issues that you exposed in this book?

SHAWN:  I think a few reasons.  One, I think it still is the political sacred cow for many.  If you are being objective and actually reporting things about the U.N., then you are labeled as U.N.-bashing.  Or they say that you hate the U.N.  That's not the case with me.  I don't like a corrupt U.N. – one that is inefficient and bought off by Saddam Hussein, and one that cannot deal with the Iranian situation.

The reporters at the U.N. are different than any other press corps in our country.  And I have been part of the White House press corps and city hall press corps.  I reported throughout Florida with the William Kennedy Smith trial, crimes, and everything.  The press corps at the U.N. is almost part of the culture.  It is not an American press corps.  They are mostly from foreign countries, so they don't have the same rules that we have.  For example, believe it or not, some members of the U.N. press corps also work for the U.N.  They get paid by the U.N. for consulting, writing speeches, and hosting U.N. programs.  That's like the reporters from the State House in Tallahassee, in the bureau, working for the Governor at the same time that they are reporting on him.  It is a total violation of American journalistic standards, and that is one of the problems there.

The other problem is that so much of everything that they do at the U.N. is in secret.  The audits that revealed the problems in the oil-for-food program were not released publicly, because there is not a public oversight of United Nations' operations like what we have with our government.  They do not have that, so they can keep their things secret and not tell anybody.

GIACHINO:  Right.  There are no sunshine laws or FOIA requests.

SHAWN:  Not at all.  There is no FOIA, no sunshine, and they keep these audits by the Secretariat, which is Kofi Annan's office, secret even from member states.  They used to keep the audits to themselves, and that is how you get the problems such as Oil-for-Food.

GIACHINO:  In your book The U.N. Exposed, you focus on many recent scandals with the United Nations.  One of the things that you vet out very well is that the root of the problem is how ardently anti-American so many of the U.N.'s member states happen to be.  You also touched on the fact that the reporters' attitudes are also a reason why we Americans are not aware of some things going on in the U.N..  Is it your observation that this is a recent development, or have we Americans always been viewed negatively by U.N. members and reporters?

SHAWN:  It has always been the case.  Sometimes it is more extreme than not.  When I write that, and I give examples in the book, it's not that they hate our guts or anything.  It is much more insidious and subtle.  If you are a diplomat to the U.N. from another country and take a position from the United States, you get lauded and applauded, especially back home.  It's like you are taking on the big guy.

I don't mind – if you want to disagree with the Bush Administration policies, go ahead.  Be my guest.  But don't just be knee-jerk reactionary against American ideals, which are the ideals upon which the U.N. was actually founded.  It happened during the Clinton Administration.  Russia, China, and France in the Security Council throughout the '90s, with a Democratic President, opposed American and British efforts to clean up Oil-for-Food.  And that's one of the issues.  It has been there forever.

You have to remember that Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a Democratic icon of course, was the U.N. ambassador in the '70s.  In 1978, he wrote a book called A Dangerous Place, in which he called the U.N. "corrupt" and wrote about this anti-Americanism.

GIACHINO:  Speaking of ambassadors, I know there was a lot of skepticism and even criticism when John Bolton was appointed U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations.  In your opinion, how has he done, and how do you think he has been perceived?  Has he helped our image with the other member states, or hurt us in the cause?

SHAWN:  I think he has been rather effective.  Every time I look at him I think of Yosemite Sam the cartoon character with the bushy moustache.

GIACHINO:  Oh no, now I am going to laugh every time I see him on television.

SHAWN:  I know.  Every time I see him I think of Yosemite Sam.  He is cool, he is reserved, he is polite, he is very intellectual, and very down-to-earth.  And he gets along just fine. 

When he was appointed, there was all this raucous because it was a recess appointment.  One of the ambassadors told me he did not care, because half the guys appointed to the U.N. are put in place by one man – a dictator.  So it did not matter to them.  What he is doing, just like Senator Moynihan and Jean Kirkpatrick, is being blunt and being truthful, and he is trying to hold the U.N. responsible for its actions.  Look at the Human Rights Council.  He was criticized because the U.S. was one of only four countries that voted against this new Human Rights Council.  That council was supposed to clean up the old committee, which had some of these horrible nations like Libya and Sudan, the worst human rights abusers, as members.  Well, guess what?  He was right.  They had the election the other week, and Cuba is back on the Human Rights Council.  Saudi Arabia and other countries that discriminate and completely disregard human rights are back on.  So he is right.  He is there, he is speaking out, he is being blunt, and he is defending American ideals in the United Nations.

GIACHINO:  As I understand it, the United Nations was created after World War II to promote peace and international understanding.  Has it ever met that mission? 

SHAWN:  I think it has somewhat.  They say they have averted 100 or more clashes.  It does humanitarian missions pretty well – 104 million people around the world would starve to death were it not for the oil-for-food program, for example.  UNICEF does well dealing with shots for the kids, and this sort of thing.  So it does humanitarian tasks pretty well.  However, even that has come under justifiable criticism when it is examined.  And I trick-or-treated like most kids on Halloween every year with the little UNICEF box.

GIACHINO:  That's right, and you write about that in the book.  I had forgotten about that program.  I don't think of that little box as being from the U.N.  But as you point out in your book, that is one of the endeavors of the United Nations.

SHAWN:  And it is probably one that we remember the most because kids still do that.  But the American Institute of Philanthropy in Chicago studied UNICEF, and gave it a grade of a "C" because only 54% of the funds go to people who need it.  Compare that to the American Red Cross, which gets an "A."

GIACHINO:  Right.  I think in the book you said that 90% of the Red Cross money goes to its recipients.

SHAWN:  That's right.  I think it is actually 91% from the American Red Cross.

GIACHINO:  That's encouraging.  I know a lot of folks around here in the aftermath of the hurricanes received support from the American Red Cross.  I think anytime people look at where they are going to put their disposable income, they ought to be asking those kinds of questions, researching as you did to find out exactly how the money is being spent, where it is going, and whether it could possibly be going into the Oil-for-Food program.

SHAWN:  We know that firsthand.  Look at the tsunami.  That was the great gem for the U.N.  But according to The Financial Times, 35% -- more than 1/3 of the money -- raised for the tsunami victims went back to pay U.N. salaries and administrative costs.

GIACHINO:  It is unconscionable.  Here you think you are giving $100, but only $65 of it makes it overseas.  And $35 of it goes to these folks who you point out in your book live in New York City but don't even pay taxes. 

Your book has been described as a must-read for folks who are interested in getting the full story on the U.N.'s record of failure and scandal.  In the beginning of the book, you tell the story of Major Jim Ewald, a gentleman who was shot down by a French missile, but who states in the introduction that he thinks the United States needs the U.N.  I am anti-U.N.  The folks who regularly listen to this program know that.  But you are not calling for the U.N. to be dismembered, are you?

SHAWN:  No, I think what we need to do is reform it.  We need something where the world can get together and deal with the threats that we are facing now.  We cannot always do it alone.  I think that we would not be in the War in Iraq if the U.N. had done its job properly, and if the Security Council had backed up what it said to Saddam Hussein.  And that is what we are facing again with Iran.  The Security Council is not backing up what it said last month, which was "pretty-please, Iran stop uranium enrichment."  They need to back that up properly.  If the U.N. would get together and do the right thing, that is what I am looking for and that is what I am asking.  But I completely understand your point of view to say "what do we need it for?"

Something very interesting is already happening on the score.  Look at the fact that the greatest success recently in terms of terrorism was Mommar Kadafi giving up his weapons of mass destruction and his nuclear material.  Guess who did that?  It was not the U.N.  It was John Bolton's idea called the Proliferation Security Initiative.  It is 60 nations, a separate coalition of the willing, that got together and are out there now trying to stop nuclear proliferation.  They stopped a ship in Italy that had Libyan material on it, and that made Kadafi give up.  Look what is happening with Iran now.  The Treasury Department is going around talking to foreign banks about not dealing with Iran.  So now you have some of the big European banks refusing to deal with Iran any more.  That is going to help the situation.  That is us doing our own thing – sort of like a coalition of the willing.  And I think that is what is going to happen with Iran.

So this is the test, as John Bolton says, of the Security Council and U.N. credibility.  If they cannot deal with Iran, then that means they cannot deal with anything.  And then I think your view would be justified and would be accepted.  Because if you have on the security side a U.N. that cannot deal with an Iran and Darfur, cannot not deal with Osama Bin Laden, cannot deal with Saddam Hussein, and cannot deal with Iran, then I can see people saying that they may do charity well but obviously cannot do security.  And that is why I subtitled my book How the U.N. Sabotages America's Security, because that is what is happening now.

GIACHINO:  And it fails the world. That is the point.  Why do we need the U.N.?  We've got the Oil-for-Food scandal, and your book does a great job of exposing many troubling things about the U.N.  One, in particular, is how the U.N. workers have repeatedly turned children into sexual prey.  You also write in the book how U.N. ambassadors and staff enjoy luxurious, tax-free Manhattan lifestyles.  A lot of this is on my money and the good hard-earned money of many Americans.  And the book talks about how much the U.S. contributes to the U.N. annually.  Can you share your research with the listeners?

SHAWN:  Yes, we pay 22%.  We are number 1.  We are biggest contributor with about $2 billion, and maybe up to $3 billion with everything else, at the U.N. every year.  And you have to ask whether we get our money's worth.  What do we get for that?  I am sure your answer is that we get absolutely nothing.  And if you read my book, I am sure you could very rightfully come to that conclusion, especially on security, and on the way that they live their life here.  Do you know that this is a humanitarian non-profit organization?  Yet they have a mansion for Kofi Annan.  In the book I say it is worth $19 million.  Just a few doors down from Kofi's house, another house just went on the market.  Guess how much they are asking?

GIACHINO:  $22 million?

SHAWN:  Try $42 million.  So you have the head of this non-profit organization living in what is probably a $45 to $50 million mansion.  Is that right?

GIACHINO:  No.

SHAWN:  Exactly.  The whole view is just wrong.  And I think that is part of the hypocrisy of what I call "U.N. World."  It is on the planet earth, because I go over there a lot, but everything is just upside-down like Alice in Wonderland.  From putting Iran on the disarmament committee, to the diplomats – the place is inverted, and it has to get back to its principles.  And I don't know if it can.  One of the stories that I most love is that the ambassador of China, the largest Communist country on earth, bought an apartment in one of Donald Trump's buildings, where the apartments sell for $14 million. 

GIACHINO:  That is the biggest challenge.  And some of that may take Kofi Annan to resign or get kicked out, or whatever the case may be.

Just so I don't forget to do this.  Could you give the listeners your website address?

SHAWN:  Sure.  You can obviously go to Amazon, but I have a website at www.ericshawnnewsman.com, and you can get some excerpts of the book and even see me on Jon Stewart's show.  Even he understands the problems with the U.N., and totally agrees.

GIACHINO:  Go ahead caller, it's your turn.

CALLER:  I've got one comment and a couple of questions real quick.  It seems that the U.N. is a secret society on our shores.  Is that correct?

SHAWN:  You've hit something on the head.  You are actually practically right.  What I mean by that is they don't have, as Renee mentioned before, any sunshine law or any FOIA.  The oversight that we have from Congress only has to do with the money.  There are Congressional hearings, and when the Undersecretary of the United Nations went down a few weeks ago for a hearing, he refused to be sworn in to testify.

CALLER:  Isn't that interesting?  So it is sort of like the SSS – secret society on our shores.

SHAWN:  Good point.  So when we give them $2-3 billion dollars each year, and one of their chief executive officers refuses to be sworn in for testimony, you have to wonder what is up.  They have audits, one of which was the Volker Commission headed by former Fed Chairman Paul Volker, investigating Oil-for-Food.  The Volker Commission released 58 audits, and that's the basis of one of my chapters, which I call "$400,000 in a desk drawer."   They found $400,000 in a desk drawer in the U.N. office, and people taking money whenever they wanted.

The thing is that those audits would not have been released publicly.  They are kept within Kofi Annan's office and not even given to the member states.  It was only the pressure from the Oil-for-Food scandal that made them be released.  And when you talk about a secret society, I don't know if you work in a company, but anyone who works in a company knows that the auditors can audit all of the expenses.  At the U.N., if the auditors come to you and say they want to audit your division, you have the right to say "no."  The head of the Oil-for-Food program said he that did not want his office audited.  That's one reason why Oil-for-Food was not audited properly.

CALLER:  Can you dig up the salaries that people are making?

SHAWN:  Some of that is public. But actually it is deceptive.  Some of the high-ranking people make $160,000 - $170,000.

CALLER:  And living a lavish lifestyle.

SHAWN:  Yes, but that's not paying American taxes.  That's why I have a chapter called the "Pinstripe Posse and the Sultan of Sutton Place."  When you talk about the lifestyles, they do not pay their taxes.  But listen to this, which I have seen with my own eyes.  There is a local coffee shop up from the U.N., and when I go live for Fox News, I like to go there.  Well, the diplomats come in and I have seen them use a little plastic card called "Privileges and Immunities," which lets them slip out on sales taxes.  I have seen them use it, and give it to Gus for a 60-cent sales tax off the $4.85 cheeseburger.

CALLER:  I really believe that.

SHAWN:  I saw it with my own eyes in September during the Summit, and I put that in the book.  So consider that, the fact that they still owe us $19 million in parking tickets, and the fact that diplomatic immunity lets them skip out on crimes.  I know of a diplomat who was drunk as a skunk and ran over a New York City Police officer, putting him in the hospital.  But the cops could not arrest him because he was a diplomat. 

CALLER:  I am for getting the U.N. out of our country.  I don't know how New York can go for having a garbage pit in their city.

SHAWN:  You know the way I look at this, and the only way I can say that I like having them in the city, is that I like having the waiters and busboys at the nice restaurants.  I would not want to see them thrown out of work.

CALLER:  I see.

SHAWN:  No, that's a joke.  My point is I understand where you are coming from.  And that is why I wrote this book.  Look at the lifestyles that they lead, and the fact that the Secretary General lives in this type of mansion that is so at odds with their mission, which is to be a non-profit humanitarian organization to help the poorest people in the world.  Yet when they come to New York, they buy these multi-million dollar townhouses off Park Avenue.  It gets to a point where it is absurd.

CALLER:  What I wonder is whether the people in New York, especially in the city, know that these people are skipping out on their taxes by using the little green card like you talked about?

SHAWN:  No, I never saw it anywhere else, and didn't even read about it.  I saw it with my own eyes, and I did my investigating.  I also talked to folks at the State Department and U.S. mission as a reporter does.  I asked about the card, and they told me about it.  But I never saw it publicized anywhere else.

CALLER:  And so the people in New York are ignorant of the fact that they are getting away with not paying any of these taxes.

SHAWN: I think you are absolutely right.  For years we have known about the parking, that they don't pay their parking tickets, and it used to be much worse than now.  Now it is down to about $19 million that they owe the city government.  If you live in New York, it is a big joke that they still owe us $19 million in parking fees.  But it is not a joke.  It is serious because they are not living up to being good citizens.

CALLER:  I cannot believe that Mayor Bloomberg would not put a little pressure on them.

SHAWN:  Well, he did.  He got together with the State Department.  What they decided to do, and they have only done it for two years now, is deduct 10% off the foreign aid that Congress gives these nations.

GIACHINO:  Whoopee do.

SHAWN:  Yes, isn't that good?

GIACHINO:  Well at least it's a start.

SHAWN:  Yes, it's a start.  What they do is take the parking ticket, whatever they owe, then they add 100%, and that amount is what is deducted from the foreign aid amount.

CALLER:  Well this is very enlightening.  Thank you for your time.

GIACHINO:  We've got another caller.  Go ahead, it's your turn.

CALLER:  I have a suggestion as to how the U.N. might be able to better serve the world.  That is to be relocated to the only continent in the world that belongs to anyone and everyone and nobody, and that is Antarctica.

SHAWN:  I think you are right.  The diplomats would skip out in a hurry because they could not go to any nice restaurants.

CALLER:  We don't know how many ways penguins can be served.  At least they would not have refrigeration problems for their produce.

SHAWN:  You mentioned moving it.  There is a group called Move America Forward that started last summer with a petition plan to move it to Geneva, Switzerland.  They have a big complex in Geneva.  And we are hearing this from Americans now.  Whether or not you like the U.N., folks are saying, "why does it have to be here?"  And "if you want the U.N., fine, but why does it have to be here?  Put it somewhere else."

GIACHINO:  Sure, put it in Yemen.

SHAWN:  That's right, put it in Yemen or Haiti or someplace.

GIACHINO:  It would be interesting to see how many still wanted to serve from one of those places, where they are not going to be able to live off the local, state and federal taxpayers.

SHAWN:  I think they would all quit if they actually did that.

GIACHINO:  Okay, now I have my solution.  We'll get them all to quit and then we don't need to dismantle it.

SHAWN:  You know they are building a new building.  The building needs renovation.  They have a $1.6 billion loan, and you know where the money came from -- us taxpayers.  Guess what happens?  The construction manager, who is a New York professional construction developer, was there for a few months but just quit.  He quit because he said he could not work in that environment, where everybody is second-guessing him and everything has to go through a committee.  It doesn't work.

GIACHINO:  We have another question from a caller who did not want to come on the air.  What is it with the U.N. and our national parks – these international biospheres?

SHAWN:  That is an interesting point, and I am glad that you brought it up.  They are constantly having conferences about international issues, and trying to run many international issues.  Some work.  For example, they do have something in the civil aviation department where everyone has to speak English.  That's one thing.  But they also pick on other issues.  In July, there is going to be a big handgun symposium, and I think they are going to try to ban handguns.  They also want to tack on .07% for every nation to help end poverty.  That is a great goal, but my question is, "where does the money go, who gets the money, and how do we know the U.N. is going to be accountable?"  And the answer is that we don't.  That would add about $100 billion a year, and the Bush Administration has already turned it down.  Plus, the French want to add a tax on plane tickets.

GIACHINO:  Yes, and it is not just the French.  There are several European nations that are looking at doing that.  They are looking at ways to increase tax dollars, and they are looking particularly at the big hubs. 

SHAWN:  That is one thing the U.N. is trying to do, and is looking at as a way to fund their programs.  They claim they don't have enough money to do what they want to do.  They always have their hand out.  Right now they want $500 million, which includes buying out 1,000 U.N. employees.  So they have decided to give them $100,000 each.

GIACHINO:  That's better than the automobile companies are offering our folks here, who are paying their local, state, and federal taxes and their parking and speeding tickets. 

SHAWN:  Well someone asked how they came up with the $100,000 and no one has an answer.

GIACHINO:  And we won't because we cannot audit them.

SHAWN:  Good point. 

GIACHINO:  I started out this interview by asking you why we should be paying attention to the United Nations when we have all these other issues at the forefront of American's minds.  After reading your book, is it an understatement for me to tell the listeners that if they truly want to understand those issues – the issues of today -- then they need to understand the U.N. and why it needs to be exposed?  Isn't it true that the U.N. is the root of a lot of the problems that we are facing today – the War in Iraq, the energy crisis?  Can't we trace a lot of that back to the U.N.?

SHAWN:  I think you have a point in that if the U.N. were efficient and worked properly, some of these issues would not be issues.  I talk in the book about how I am astounded that the U.N. has escaped criticism on the War in Iraq.  Whether you are for the war or against it, there is a war.  It could have been prevented and it could have been stopped if Saddam Hussein had learned early on that the U.N. Security Council means what it says – that he violated those 17 resolutions and we didn't know the whereabouts of those weapons of mass destruction.  I think he would have come clean, and there would have been clarity about that. 

Are you ready for this one?  No one talks about the billions of dollars of weapons that he bought through the '90s via the oil money, and which he audited and funneled right through the Security Council.  So they let him buy a billion dollars worth of weapons that he was not supposed to have in the first place.  Trust me, I think they have escaped rightful, justified criticism for what has happened.

In terms of other issues such as immigration, there is no such thing as an "illegal immigrant" in U.N. terms.  They call them "irregular migrants," and they encourage migration and immigration.  They encourage legal immigration.  But they also say that "irregular migrants" should be treated the same as regular migrants once they are in the country of their destination.  Translated from U.N.-Speak, that means that illegal aliens should be treated just the same as legal aliens.

GIACHINO: We have another question from a caller.  Do you know whether there are a lot of Muslim countries in the U.N?

SHAWN:  Well, there is the Arab block.  That is a very powerful block that is constantly criticizing Israel and condemning Israel, and they are actually defending terrorism.  They say that resorting to violence in the sake of fighting for "national liberation" is okay.  And that is the older argument that they have used in Israel.  What I point out in my book is that that fits al Qaeda beautifully.  Osama Bin Laden's view is that we are all infidels, and that we have occupied Muslim countries.  Therefore, you have got Muslim countries as members of the U.N. basically supporting Bin Laden's view, since it supports violence against "occupation."  And I think that is one of the most morally crippling issues that we have at the U.N. right now.

GIACHINO:  What is Israel's position at the United Nations?

SHAWN:  Israel is in the United Nations, but they are constantly beat up and criticized through resolutions.  Sadly, they are not permitted to be members of certain committees – say the Security Council.  For the first time in the history of the United Nations, the U.N. ambassador from Israel is one of the 21 Vice-Presidents of the General Assembly, and that is a big deal.  And he joked about it.  I told him congratulations, and he said he was not sure whether he should be congratulated or receive condolences because he knows that it is sort of a ceremonial post.  That has changed somewhat.  John Bolton was the man who got the "Zionism is Racism" resolution repealed, but it is still there.  And it is still widespread, and Israel is still singled out.

And Taiwan, of course, is still not allowed to be a member because China does not want them.

GIACHINO:  We have more calls.  Go ahead caller, it's your turn.

CALLER:  I take it that there is no purpose at all for the U.S. to be in the U.N., except to spend our tax dollars?

SHAWN:  You know what, that is an interesting point and I understand that view.  I would like to think that it can change.

CALLER:  Haven't we believed that for 61 years?

SHAWN:  Yes we have.  I think that if people feel that way, then they should get in touch with Henry Hyde, who is the Chairman of the International Relations Committee.  Right now there is a bill there to try to reform the place.

CALLER:  But it is never going to be reformed.  Much of the reason that Africa is in the shape that it is in is because they sent U.N. peacekeepers there, but they are just having a good time there.

SHAWN:  You're right, and in the book I note that there has been half a trillion dollars, or something through the years, spent.  And the question remains:  where does the money go?  It goes into those regimes to pump up the governments, and not to the people.

Let me have you go another step.  Zack Wamp is a Congressman from Tennessee, and is going to have a bill in a few weeks that is going to call for the U.S. to get out of the U.N. by 2007.  I am waiting to try to do this story.  He is drawing up the bill now.

CALLER:  The U.N. has not been responsible for U.S. safety in any way.

SHAWN:  I think you should try Zack Wamp from Tennessee.  I try to be an optimist.  I understand what you are saying, but I try to be an optimist.

CALLER:  I understand what you are saying but it is hard.  There are a trillion dollars here, and a billion dollars there, and then we have to work six months before we have to start working for ourselves.  Very interesting.

SHAWN:  Thank you.  I hope you enjoy the book.

GIACHINO:  I am going to see if I can get more information about this bill that might be introduced very soon – to get the U.S. out of the U.N.  We have less than a minute left and one more caller.

CALLER:  Wouldn't it benefit us to stay in the U.N., just to keep an eye on it?

SHAWN:  That's an interesting point.  I think it benefits us only from the sense that we need a place where all the countries can be together.  Maybe you have two different U.N.s – one that does humanitarian work if they do that well, and not deal with the security.  Right now we are moving away from the U.N. on Iran by dealing with the European banks ourselves.  So in some ways, it is already happening.  A "Coalition of the Willing," at least to go after Iran financially, has already started.  So that is the secret story -- that the Administration is already moving away from the U.N. quietly.  They're not saying it explicitly, but that is the actual reality.

GIACHINO:  Okay, that's all the time we have.  Thanks so much.

SHAWN:  My pleasure.

To read more about The U.N. Exposed:  How the United Nations Sabotages America's Security, click here.