United Nations To Take Over The Alamo

[Old Bookaroo]

Treasure Hunter:

The United Nations is an "international zone" - not part of the USA. Just as our embassies and consulates around the world are part of our nation - not the country in which they are located.

I continue to doubt that the flag of the UN will fly above the American flag at the Alamo.

Good luck to all,

~The Old Bookaroo

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A History of Mining on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska - Grab it through Amazon!

[Red James Cash]

Nothing like a friendly note to another member of TN.

Any time,just let me know.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Treasure Hunter:

The United Nations is an "international zone" - not part of the USA. Just as our embassies and consulates around the world are part of our nation - not the country in which they are located.

I continue to doubt that the flag of the UN will fly above the American flag at the Alamo.

Good luck to all,

~The Old Bookaroo

UN sits on US soil. It needs to leave.

Attack in Benghazi was Embassy grounds, "part of our nation" as you say. So why has their not been a congressional investigation into the attack on American soil. Why haven't people who were negligent in their duties and took part in a coverup been held accountable and called before congress to answer a congressional investigation?

Can't have your cake and eat it too.....


Sent from my new Galaxy Note3
now Free

 

[Old Bookaroo]

Treasure Hunter:

Although I don't see the relationship between the two, I will point out I've lost count of the number of Congressional investigations, inquiries, etc. into Benghazi. I've seen figures between 12 and 24.

I don't believe the compound attacked in Benghazi was an Embassy. That's in Tripoli. I believe the Benghazi property was a CIA or other governmental entity safehouse.

Several times the Bush Administration claimed Gitmo wasn't US soil and therefore our laws didn't apply there. I have always found that to be a remarkable dangerous position to take.

Back to Benghazi - People have been held accountable. There was no coverup.

Good luck to all,

~The Old Bookaroo

2.0: If the United States had actively supported the League of Nations following The Great War, instead of pulling into our borders and becoming isolationist, could it have prevented WW II? Obviously no one can say it would have. But could it? Was Woodrow Wilson correct?

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Treasure Hunter:

Although I don't see the relationship between the two, I will point out I've lost count of the number of Congressional investigations, inquiries, etc. into Benghazi. I've seen figures between 12 and 24.

I don't believe the compound attacked in Benghazi was an Embassy. That's in Tripoli. I believe the Benghazi property was a CIA or other governmental entity safehouse.

Several times the Bush Administration claimed Gitmo wasn't US soil and therefore our laws didn't apply there. I have always found that to be a remarkable dangerous position to take.

Back to Benghazi - People have been held accountable. There was no coverup.

Good luck to all,

~The Old Bookaroo

2.0: If the United States had actively supported the League of Nations following The Great War, instead of pulling into our borders and becoming isolationist, could it have prevented WW II? Obviously no one can say it would have. But could it? Was Woodrow Wilson correct?

Not a single person that was there at the time of the attack has been allowed to testify, I am surprised you don't know that. In fact government is hiding them.

Hillary lied before Congress, more than enough evidence available on that now. She needs to appear before congress and answer why she lied when there are cables between state depth and Benghazi about the imminent danger and the fact they al quaeda had already posted on the net there going to attack.



Sent from my new Galaxy Note3
now Free

 

[pippinwhitepaws]

outrageous....perhaps the UN can take control of the rest of texas also...i'd sure feel better...

 

[Old Bookaroo]

Treasure Hunter:

So your complaint isn't the lack of investigations - if Sec. Clinton testified somebody was looking into this. I don't agree that she lied.

Ambassador Stephens was offered additional security and turned it down. I'm sure you already knew that.

I've read Internets rumors about those on the scene being hidden. I've seen no real evidence so far.

Have you read Under Fire by Burton & Katz? Or the magazine except from it?

Good luck to all,

~The Old Bookaroo

 

[austin]

mysanantonio.com has a story on it today. Claims that the Statue of Liberty and Mount Rushmore already are U.N. Heritage Sites. Rationale is that more tourist dollars will flow. But I agree with TH. U.S. out of UN and UN out of U.S. By the way, Mayor Castro's momma gave an interview to CNN that she had already discussed here(San Antonio). Maintains that the whole thing happened because a bunch of drunk anglos started trouble to get their hands on Texas...

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Appears our national soverenity has been sold out many times...

The following are World Heritage Sites in the United States:

Kluane/Wrangell-St. Elias/Glacier BayGrand Canyon National Park*(Grand Canyon, AZ)Redwood National and State Parks*(Crescent City, CA)Yosemite National Park*(Yosemite National Park, CA)Mesa Verde National Park*(Mesa Verde, CO)Everglades National Park*(Homestead, FL)Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument*(Honolulu, HI)Hawaii Volcanoes National Park*(Hawaii National Park, HI)Cahokia Mounds State Historic Site*(Collinsville, IL)Mammoth Cave National Park*(Mammoth Cave, KY)Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park*(West Glacier, MT)Chaco Culture, including*Aztec Ruins*(New Mexico)Taos Pueblo*(Taos, NM)Carlsbad Caverns National Park*(Carlsbad, NM)Statue of Liberty*(New York, NY)Independence Hall*(Philadelphia, PA)La Fortaleza & San Juan National Historical Site*(San Juan, Puerto Rico)Great Smoky Mountains National Park*(Gatlinburg, TN)Monticello*and the*University of Virginia*(Charlottesville, VA)Olympic National Park*(Port Angeles, WA)

http://www.state.gov/p/io/unesco/c48319.htm

Sent from my new Galaxy Note3
now Free

 

[pippinwhitepaws]

omg...history is a lost method.

 

[Old Bookaroo]

austin:

Have you watched any of the PBS series on Latinos in what is now the US of A?

The original settlers in both California and Texas generally got the short end of the stick. Particularly astonishing in Texas, because many of them supported the Revolution.

Good luck to all,

~The Old Bookaroo

 

[pippinwhitepaws]

UNESCO World Heritage Centre - The Criteria for Selection


I don't know if this is an attempt to confuse and incite people...why would anyone do that...

do read the criteria for posting to the heritage list...

Selection criteria:
1.to represent a masterpiece of human creative genius;
2.to exhibit an important interchange of human values, over a span of time or within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture or technology, monumental arts, town-planning or landscape design;
3.to bear a unique or at least exceptional testimony to a cultural tradition or to a civilization which is living or which has disappeared;
4.to be an outstanding example of a type of building, architectural or technological ensemble or landscape which illustrates (a) significant stage(s) in human history;
5.to be an outstanding example of a traditional human settlement, land-use, or sea-use which is representative of a culture (or cultures), or human interaction with the environment especially when it has become vulnerable under the impact of irreversible change;
6.to be directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance. (The Committee considers that this criterion should preferably be used in conjunction with other criteria);
7.to contain superlative natural phenomena or areas of exceptional natural beauty and aesthetic importance;
8.to be outstanding examples representing major stages of earth's history, including the record of life, significant on-going geological processes in the development of landforms, or significant geomorphic or physiographic features;
9.to be outstanding examples representing significant on-going ecological and biological processes in the evolution and development of terrestrial, fresh water, coastal and marine ecosystems and communities of plants and animals;
10.to contain the most important and significant natural habitats for in-situ conservation of biological diversity, including those containing threatened species of outstanding universal value from the point of view of science or conservation.

The protection, management, authenticity and integrity of properties are also important considerations.

Since 1992 significant interactions between people and the natural environment have been recognized as cultural landscapes.

 

[pippinwhitepaws]

quote"
1
Tentative List

The first step a country must take is to make an ‘inventory' of its important natural and cultural heritage sites located within its boundaries. This ‘inventory' is known as the Tentative List, and provides a forecast of the properties that a State Party may decide to submit for inscription in the next five to ten years and which may be updated at any time. It is an important step since the World Heritage Committee cannot consider a nomination for inscription on the World Heritage List unless the property has already been included on the State Party's Tentative List.

 

[pippinwhitepaws]

2
The Nomination File

By preparing a Tentative List and selecting sites from it, a State Party can plan when to present a nomination file. The World Heritage Centre offers advice and assistance to the State Party in preparing this file, which needs to be as exhaustive as possible, making sure the necessary documentation and maps are included. The nomination is submitted to the World Heritage Centre for review and to check it is complete. Once a nomination file is complete the World Heritage Centre sends it to the appropriate Advisory Bodies for evaluation.

 

[pippinwhitepaws]

3
The Advisory Bodies

A nominated property is independently evaluated by two Advisory Bodies mandated by the World Heritage Convention: the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) and the World Conservation Union (IUCN), which respectively provide the World Heritage Committee with evaluations of the cultural and natural sites nominated. The third Advisory Body is the International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM), an intergovernmental organization which provides the Committee with expert advice on conservation of cultural sites, as well as on training activities.

 

[pippinwhitepaws]

number three is the one I like...conservation and restoration...training....

wow...radical ideas.

4
The World Heritage Committee

Once a site has been nominated and evaluated, it is up to the intergovernmental World Heritage Committee to make the final decision on its inscription. Once a year, the Committee meets to decide which sites will be inscribed on the World Heritage List. It can also defer its decision and request further information on sites from the States Parties.

 

[pippinwhitepaws]

5
The Criteria for Selection

To be included on the World Heritage List, sites must be of outstanding universal value and meet at least one out of ten selection criteria. These criteria are explained in the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention which, besides the text of the Convention, is the main working tool on World Heritage. The criteria are regularly revised by the Committee to reflect the evolution of the World Heritage concept itself.

Until the end of 2004, World Heritage sites were selected on the basis of six cultural and four natural criteria. With the adoption of the revised Operational Guidelines, only one set of ten criteria exists.

 

[Dave44]

Well keep going scribe. There is more.

 

[pippinwhitepaws]

such hubris: texans believe the Alamo is only important to them....
many Mexican troops fell in this battle...and still no monument to their sacrifice...
even the Japanese were allowed to build memorials to the fallen on American territorys.

it just seems like some people just have to fuss about anything good that might happen.

 

[Old Bookaroo]

pippinwhitepaws:

There was a major fuss over a Sioux monument at the Little Big Horn Battlefield and they won!

I've visited the Gettysburg battlefield, and there is a monument contributed by every state that lost soldiers there.

Now, granted the last one - I believe it was Alabama - couldn't bring itself to do that until the 1930's (again, this is from memory) but eventually they all did.

Have you seen the photo of Union and Confederate vets shaking hands over the stone fence at the top of Cemetery Ridge?

Good luck to all,

~The Old Bookaroo