These vids are always about a quarter the volume of the Vents.

I think the person who invents an automatic sound level normalizer for PCs will become famous, if not necessarily rich.

You have to crank it up for one vid, then the next blows your head off.

Between 1897 and 1974, the Comite Maritime International, a private organization of international maritime lawyers, was considered the legal body of record for determining maritime trade and safety conventions. However, United States admiralty law issues are handled by federal courts, not international bodies, and certainly NEVER the UN.

In 1958, the International Maritime Organization was established by the UN, but it is a stand-alone body, not an agency of the UN, and received little formal recognition before 1974, and has managed only to introduce sub-agencies, commissions, and beaurocracies, not viable laws.

Just saying.

Maritime law, shipping disputes, trade law, civil aviation procedures…these are all controlled by the U.N. They are never in the news and why should they be? But without the U.N. they wouldn’t exsist and the world wouldn’t run nearly as smoothly.

JaHerer22

Not quite correct. These things are controlled by international treaty.

The UN claims jurisdiction … but their claims carry little weight.

Every nation on the planet ignores UN dictates whenever it is in their interest to do so. Treaties between nations carry far more weight than UN dictate … break a treaty, and other nations may retaliate. Ignore the UN, and absolutely nothing happens.

JaHerer22 on December 12, 2006 at 9:58 AM

If you say so. The U.N. is inept at most everything. Maritime law is often carried out in international courts, nothing to do with the U.N. Anything else you listed could be set up as an international commission, devoid of any politcs. They allow the torture of people, slavery of people, genocide of people, they steal from the people (even Kofi kids got in on the take). Ask the Israeli’s how much interest the U.N. has in keeping their country safe. I will trade maritime law disputes for a couple of million lives anyday, or a few billion dollars of corrupt money.
It is naive to think a corrupt, bureaucratic world organization led by socialists, marxists, and communists solves more problems than it creates.

These are just a few you left out: Rwanda, Kosovo,Uganda’s and Sri Lanka’s child soldiers, Somalia, women being mutilated, abused, slaved around the world, children as sex objects in Thailand, Russia and elsewhere, Burma, savage tortures and killings in certain cultures of the world, while preaching ‘human rights’ and what not to the West and conveniently practicing ‘multi-culti’ and PC for these thugs.

I agree with you that the mundane and boring items are never mentioned. You and yours don’t give the same brake to the U.S. for not being able to solve the nearly unsolvable over night or nag, nag, nag for trying.

Can’t have it both ways.

The U.N. is an utter failure on 98% of the issues it was meant to address. Still, so long as the U.S. pays the most and is still in it, it must remain here.

This may be true, but the UN(useful) fails miserably when it comes to handling situations that call for a pair of balls Malkins

Maritime law, shipping disputes, trade law, civil aviation procedures…these are all controlled by the U.N

I agree, those are all very usefull to the world. But the common theme for these aspects is money. Their complicancy in the Oil for Food scandal says it all.

As you noted, the aspects that involve the wellfair of the oppressed, raped, murdered, etc., they are generally useless. Not deeming what happened in Darfur as “geneocide” is criminal.

Lets call a spade a spade, and say the the WTO could absorb the trade aspects. That would leave the UN a beaurocratic albotross that should be abandonned on an ice berg.

If the UN would start to care about the welfare of world’s citizens, I would start to care about the UN.

To write the U.N. off as completely worthless though is naive and shortsighted. The U.N. does many things effectively that no one ever hears about because they are boring, obscure, and relatively easy to agree on because they are in the best interest of most of the world. Maritime law, shipping disputes, trade law, civil aviation procedures…these are all controlled by the U.N. They are never in the news and why should they be? But without the U.N. they wouldn’t exsist and the world wouldn’t run nearly as smoothly.

I was told by a very reliable source that $1000 will buy you a deputization and a badge. Drunk driving never becomes an issue after that.

That being said, William Jefferson is a par player.

Wait…you already did that, because you feed O’Reilly his lunch every time you’re on.

Cute AND smart. Aren’t we lucky to have you?

Guess the twit never rose much beyond his former sales job.

And he was in charge of the UN.

Last we heard she was sick with a cold or a flu. She didn’t eat at Taco Bell, did she? I miss her.

Why?

Because it is a corrupt club, rife with communists, Islamic republics, dictators, etc., all praising the bad guys and trashing the good.

One of the main acts performed by the UN these days is to attack Israel and the United States, and to cower against nefarious, violent, okay, I’ll say it, evil regimes.

The diplomats are in need of a little lesson.

Somalia, Iran, Palestinian areas, Nigeria, these are a few good ideas for the location for the United Nations headquarters.

I wonder how long it will last, and if the member countries, and their diplomats, will beg and plead to move back to the United States of America, and will promise to be good boys and girls and to play nice.

Once they see the contrast between the United States of America and another, less inviting host country, perhaps they will become “Enlightened” and grow a pair!

Next US ambassador to the United Nations? Not Chuck Norris. He is too nice, too good.

He might have been a successful Tang soo do and ju jitsu martial artist, and movie and television actor, but he is not a mean man, he is very nice, almost too soft.

Hmmm. Who to send?

Okay, here area few suggestions:

Shaun Hannity.

Larry Elder.

Walter Williams.

Laura Ingram.

Ann Coulter.

David Horowitz.

Michael Medved.

Ward Connerly.

Star Parker.

Thomas Sowell.

That is just an initial list, but some on the list appear to be more stead fast, decisive, and strong willed, as well as keenly astute and aware, exceptionally intelligent, and loyal to the United States of America, their fellow citizens, and possess a deep moral and ethical foundation.

William

The U.N. has its usefullness as a debating society.

This is a nice idea, except for the fact that recently, the General Assembly has become a forum for one U.S. basher after another, and one meaningless resolution after another. This is far from a debating society. It is more a “let’s see what we can do to stick a needle in the tiger’s eye today” congregation.

The current international situations regarding Iran and North Korea illustrate just how ineffective the Security Council has become. Of course, our use of the Security Council “veto” is also another in a long litany of U.S. “abuses” expounded upon by member states in the assembly.

I agree that there is some usefulness to the United Nations, and I don’t think abolishing it would be productive. However, I think that we should reduce our monetary contribution until some of OUR grievances are addressed.

thedecider on December 12, 2006 at 12:49 AM

Once again, I must bow to your superior knowledge. Thinking things through, and not having a knee-jerk reaction is the wiser thing to do. ;-)

You’re an idiot, Kofi; slink off into the darkness.

I understand the feeling, but I think its better staying in the U.S. France is becoming an Islamic society. In fact, much of Europe is being overtaken by Islamists (hence the term “Eurabia”). The U.S. still provides the best (and most neutral) environment for a productive debating society. The U.N. would not survive in Europe. I think the delegates know that even though it is not publicly acknowledged and the likes of Kofi Anan can spew his anti-American rhetoric in the comfortable confines of our borders. To me, it’s the price we pay for being the world’s oldest democracy and wealthiest superpower. We really are a shining example to the world without.

And in other news:

U.S. Military air-drops relief supplies for 160,000 displaced Kenyan flood victims. Efforts are also underway to reach about 100,000 Somali refugees in three camps cut-off by severe flooding in north eastern Kenya with a US military plane making the first of fifteen air-drops of relief supplies.

See how irrelevant your leadership was in this world Kofi?

Certainly the U.N. has shown itself bloated and corrupt. Certainly it is in dire need of an overhaul, but in the longer term, are we ready to give it up? Are we really ready to say we do not want a world-forum in which to address our position on world issues?

thedecider on December 12, 2006 at 12:20 AM

thedecider, you raise a very good point. In IMHO, if we could get rid of the corruption and recognize it as a debate society, it should stay. Oh yeah, I didn’t mean stay in the US. Move it to France, where men are pussies and the frogs are scared.

So, Allah–without getting into unnecessary details–is KP no longer one of the gang?

DaveS on December 11, 2006 at 11:30 PM

(Psst…Dave. Ixnay on the PeeKay…)