Nashville’s Good Guys With Guns Show That America’s Courage Is Not Extinct
The Biden Administration's Shameless Aversion to Responsibility
In the Alphabet Mafia, Does the ‘T’ Stand For ‘Terrorist?’
In Defense of Netanyahu
Supreme Court May Finally Rein In Disabilities Act Abuses
Watch How Thomas Massie Engages With Democrat Colleague Screaming About Gun Control
A Nation Divided and a World in Turmoil
When Seconds Count, Police Are Just Minutes Away – and That’s Why Kids...
Here's What Was Seized From the Zulock Mansion
Picking Up the Pieces: How I Help Women Rebuild Their Lives
Restoring Trust In Government By Using the IQA
Biden's Use of Vice President Kamala Harris
No, Miscarriage and Abortion Are Not the Same
The Deliberate Deterioration of American Values
Why the US Needs to Ban TikTok

U. Sless U.N.

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of

On March 26, 2010 a South Korean naval vessel sunk in the waters off the western coast of the Korean peninsula.

According to the New York Times at the time:

"The sinking immediately raised suspicions about the possible involvement of North Korea, whose navy has skirmished with South Korean ships in the waters off the Korean Peninsula."
Over the course of the Spring and Summer it became absolutely, undeniably, irrefutably, unquestionably, patently, and definitely clear that the South Korean ship was sunk by the North Koreans.

North Korea, not known as a country in which you would want your teenaged daughter to do a semester abroad, denied knowing that there was a country known as South Korea; much less knowing was water in the region; much less having seen a ship in the area; much, much less having sunk it.

The South Koreans, who lost 46 sailors in the attack, did a full "Law & Order: Criminal Intent" deal and found a piece of the torpedo which had been fired at their ship showing markings clearly identifying it as being of North Korean manufacture.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was quoted by CBS, on May 24, as saying:

"We are working hard to avoid an escalation of belligerence and provocation."

Really? Why?

If Venezuela had sunk an American warship in international waters off the west coast of South America would Hillary Clinton have urged us to "avoid an escalation of belligerence and provocation?"

Well, she probably would, and Barack Obama would have sent Hugo Chavez a bouquet of flowers and an autographed CD of John Lennon singing "All we are saying, is give peace a chance."

Bill Clinton would have launched an attack against the Presidential Palace in Caracas. George W. Bush would have launched an invasion … of Cuba.

So, the United Nations began looking into this situation which began, remember, on March 26. This past Friday - July 9 - the United Nations Security Council finally got around to issuing a statement condemning the sinking of the South Korean ship.

The United Nations Security Council did not condemn North Korea for the act. It simply condemned the act.

That would be like Attorney General Eric Holder condemning voter intimidation without actually condemning the Black Panthers who were doing the intimidating.

Oh, wait. Holder didn't even go that far. He refused to even investigate reports of Black Panthers intimidating voters in Philadelphia.

Where was I? Oh, yes, the United Nations.

Because China now, effectively, owns the United States, they now control what the Security Council says or does not say; does or does not do.

China did not want North Korea to be publically blamed for sinking the South Korean ship and made it known it would veto any statement which assigned such blame.

So, the United Nations Security Council issued a statement which stated, in part:

In view of the findings of the Joint Civilian-Military Investigation Group led by the Republic of Korea … which concluded that the DPRK was responsible for sinking the [ship], the Security Council expresses its deep concern.

Note the careful construct: It had been determined that North Korea (DPRK) was responsible and that was a matter for "deep concern."

But the Security Council gave North Korea equal time when it said:

"The Security Council takes note of the responses from other relevant parties, including from the DPRK, which has stated that it had nothing to do with the incident."

Kim Jong-il was at lunch when the South Korean ship was sunk. Don't know nothin' about no torpedoes sinkin' no ships.

It took the U.N. from March 26 to July 9 to negotiate a statement which condemned the sinking of a naval vessel but, in spite of overwhelming evidence, refused to condemn the country which launched the attack.

We pay about a fifth of the U.N. budget. We allow the representatives to the U.N. to live in luxury housing in mid-town Manhattan, eat in the best restaurants, drink the finest wines.

As we've discussed here before, if the world were serious about having a United Nations it would be headquartered in someplace like Ethiopia or Chad, where the action is.

The budget request for FY 2011 from the Obama administration for UN activities is about $4 billion. That represents about one out of every five dollars the United Nations will spend.

The United Nations is a great idea - on paper. In reality it is worse than useless, because it allows rogue nations like North Korea to commit an act of war and get away with it.

Let's say good-bye to the U. Sless U.N.

One the Secret Decoder Ring page today: Links to the NY Times original report on the sinking of the South Korean ship; a piece on the US Attorney General ignoring the Black Panthers; and the text of the U.N. statement about the attack.

Also, a Mullfoto submitted by a reader of a great license plate and a Catchy Caption of the Day.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member


Trending on Townhall Video