Did The UN Think No One Would Notice?

We're still coming to grips with the horrors that unfolded last year when the tsunami triggered by a 9.1 earthquake killed hundreds of thousands of people throughout South Asia and one has to wonder just how effective the charitable efforts were. The UN called for urgent relief aid to be collected and the UN itself collected nearly $600 million. Yet, 30% of the amount the UN itself collected never got to its intended recipients. It got consumed in the UN - in overhead. Most charities strive to keep overhead to a minimum - under 10%. Some do exceedingly well. The UN is at the other end of the spectrum.

Considering the UN's inability to account for billions in the oil for food scandal, plus their inability to deliver on their aid committments to tsunami victims, is it any wonder that the UN finds itself getting hammered by those who think that it is a den of thieves and that it has outlived its usefulness?

Others blogging the UN perfidy: Mister Snitch.

UPDATE:
Discerning Texan who comments on the Mark Steyn flaying of the UN and those critics who considered the US efforts stingy. If only those at the UN were somehow more stingy with how much they took out of the pot before sending it on to the South Asians who needed the money to rebuild.

UPDATE:
Wizbang also notices the UN perfidy and Jay Tea considers that the UN is acting like a protection racket that takes a 1/3 of all monies as 'protection.'

UPDATE 12/28/2005:
Six Meat Buffet also notices the UN thievery and says people should never give money to a UN run charity.