Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

U.N. proving irrelevance

March 18, 2013

North Korea’s government has declared the 1953 armistice that ended fighting in the Korean War has been canceled. Not to worry, a United Nations spokesman assured reporters the same day....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(28)

taxtired

Mar-18-13 12:20 PM

The U.N. will be to busy with Chucky and his cruise ship problems.

4 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TiredOfTax

Mar-18-13 1:52 PM

The UN is irrelevant. In the case of Iraq they passed resolution after resolution and even though Iraq did not comply with any resolutions they did nothing. They are as useless as Obama in the whitehouse.

5 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrBoB51

Mar-18-13 6:53 PM

North Korea figured out Dennis Rodman wasn't Michael Jordan, like they thought. So they declared war.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

usedtolivethere

Mar-19-13 7:31 AM

The UN is as useless as TOT with her incessant attacks on Obama regardless of the question at hand

6 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrBoB51

Mar-19-13 10:31 AM

The UN has no authority on American soil. Our Constitution trumps the UN, sadly some of our politicians are intent on shredding it at every opportunity. Keep your eye on the Small Arms Treaty(ATT) being finalized at the UN right now...March 18-28. It includes (worldwide) civilian firearms and it's just possible that 2/3 of our Senate is willing to hand our second amendment over to the UN. All it would take is 12 Republicans to cave in a treaty vote. How many Repubs. went to dinner with Obama the night Ryan conducted his filibuster?.....13. Figure it out.

4 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

adkkev

Mar-19-13 11:51 AM

MrBob ... perhaps you should research things before you post about them ***********snopes****/politics/guns/untreaty.asp

7 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rschweizer

Mar-19-13 12:06 PM

MrBoB51, and anyone else who thinks so, the United Nations is NOT on US soil. It's on international neutral territory that was seceded from the United States.

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

taxtired

Mar-19-13 4:51 PM

heh rs: Can I do that also?? Tired of paying taxes. U know it all. I want diplomatic immunity also. Can I fly my own flag?? RS: help me the almighty know all.

2 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

usedtolivethere

Mar-19-13 9:06 PM

rs states facts and you mock him....typical right wing drivel

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rschweizer

Mar-19-13 10:53 PM

taxtired, where in my comment was the non-fact? Are you going to continue time and again to ignore fact.

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

taxtired

Mar-20-13 1:26 PM

The fact is your rambling on the Leader Herald will do nothing to change the world. This is a fact jack.

1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

taxtired

Mar-20-13 1:33 PM

used and rs < You sound like the same person > I guess with differant e-mails it is possible.

2 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rschweizer

Mar-20-13 1:46 PM

taxtired, I never said I'd change the world; also I'm not usedto, but I appreciate the comparison.

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

taxtired

Mar-20-13 1:53 PM

Are you sure??

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rschweizer

Mar-20-13 3:32 PM

taxtired, you continue to dodge the bullet. I asked you a question: 'where in my comment was the non-fact' regarding the Un not being on US soil?

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

taxtired

Mar-20-13 6:09 PM

Rs Go look up the facts. IT is on US soil. Did you ever here of Geneva?? And I almost thought you had an IQ.

1 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

SENSIBLEtax

Mar-20-13 8:10 PM

You may want to check on your 'facts' because it semes like you're having a difficult time understanding reality.

"The United Nations Headquarters resides in <<INTERNATIONAL>> territory in New York City"

"Though it is in New York City, the land occupied by the United Nations Headquarters, and the spaces of buildings that it rents are under the sole administration of the United Nations."

And Geneva (be it the city in Switzerland or the Convention treaty) has nothing to do with it other than also holding yet another international, sovereign piece of land.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

usedtolivethere

Mar-20-13 9:00 PM

taxtired and those like you...you are entitled to your own opinions, you are not entitled to your own facts

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrBoB51

Mar-21-13 7:39 AM

There seems to be a misunderstanding re. my statement that the UN has no authority on US soil. It simply means the UN cannot arbitrarily issue laws or directives that the US must follow. It has nothing to do with Turtle Bay property. Don't bother going to snopes or any other source...go the UN site, read all about the small arms treaty and form your own opinion.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rschweizer

Mar-21-13 12:34 PM

Bob, "It simply means the UN cannot arbitrarily issue laws or directives that the US must follow."

Sure it does. Member states are signatory to the various treaties must be in compliance or face sanction, like what's happened in other countries who refuse to comply. The US isn't above that.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

laker88

Mar-21-13 8:25 PM

tot...I just noticed a mistake in your post here. In the last line you mistakenly put Obama instead of Bush, jr.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

taxtired

Mar-22-13 10:22 AM

It is on us soil. It just has extraterritoriality status. They also have buildings in Geneva, Vienna, and Nairobi.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rschweizer

Mar-22-13 12:13 PM

taxtired, no, it's not and you continuing to say it is doesn't make it wrong. Thhey're on international soil surrounded by land that happens to itself be part of another country.

Stop already

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

taxtired

Mar-22-13 12:53 PM

It is seventeen acres and was bought for 8.5 million dollars. Then donated to the city of N.Y.

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

taxtired

Mar-22-13 1:06 PM

rs Yes it is.

ps. The buildings cost 65 million dollars. Which was an interest free loan.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 28 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web