[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Hey, Steve! (WAS: Re: Pumping Gas in Oregon)

Paul Johnson wrote:
> And what is the member status of those states again?  Do they matter?  Does 
> anybody on the UN give them more than token attention?  NO!  Why?  Because 
> the UN realizes they're as nutty as they really are, too!  However, the UN 
> does allow everybody to have their say.  It doesn't mean the UN is going to 
> listen to them.

    Wrong again, Paul.  You will note that 1-2 years ago the UN resolution
denouncing terrorism was softened to include a clause which allowed terrorist
activities in the event of a occupied state.  That clause was fought for and
eventually put in place to appease the very same member states you claim the
UN believe is nutty and doesn't listen to.

> That being said, since it's creation, the UN has sided with the US more often 
> than not.  And why shouldn't they?

    It has?  Not lately.  It's pretty much run counter to the US for the past,
oh... 1-2 decades.  I'd talk about more but I wasn't all that interested in
world politics when I was a kid.

> You're
> going to have to convince me the UN has lost it's way, since it seems more 
> like they're reminding us of who we are and what we expect from the rest of 
> the world.


"Article 19.

      Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right
includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive
and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

"Article 29.

      (1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and
full development of his personality is possible.

      (2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be
subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the
purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of
others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the
general welfare in a democratic society.

      (3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to
the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 19, people have the freedom of speech.
Article 29.3, but people cannot use any freedom, even the freedom of speech,
contrary to the purposes and principles of the UN.

    They're remind us of who we are?  ...  Really?


"Amendment I - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or
of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to
petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

    Strictly speaking if the US had the same exception clause to it's "freedom
of speech" as the UN has then you would be in violation of it and subject to
whatever reprimands were deemed appropriate.  The very fact that you can speak
out against the US as you do, as often as you do and the fact that your right
to do so is DEFENDED by the very same nation you abhor proves that the UN does
not nor ever has reminded us of what we are and has, indeed, run counter to
what is considered one of the founding principles of this nation.

    Somehow I doubt you'll read this or, in the off chance you do, find it

         Steve C. Lamb         | But who decides what they dream?
       PGP Key: 8B6E99C5       |   And dream I do...

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: