|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
dmbfan
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
|
 Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 8:11 pm Post subject: Yes, terrorism isn't so bad...... |
 |
|
Poland? Why would anyone want to attack the Polish Ambassador? Oh wait, I forgot......it is the United States fault, and.....terrorism is NOT a problem.
| Quote: |
Security Council
SC/9138
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Public Information � News and Media Division � New York
Security Council
5754th Meeting (PM)
SECURITY COUNCIL, ADOPTING PRESIDENTIAL STATEMENT, STRONGLY CONDEMNS
ATTACK IN BAGHDAD AGAINST POLAND�S AMBASSADOR TO IRAQ
The Security Council today condemned the 3 October attack in Baghdad against Poland�s Ambassador to Iraq.
In a statement read out by its President, Leslie Kojo Christian ( Ghana), the Council underlined the need to bring the perpetrators, organizers, financiers and sponsors of that act to justice, and reaffirmed that terrorism in all its forms and manifestations constituted one of the most serious threats to international peace and security. Any act of terrorism was criminal and unjustifiable, regardless of its motivation, wherever, whenever and by whomsoever committed.
The Council called on the international community to support the Government of Iraq in exercising its responsibility in providing protection to the diplomatic community in Iraq, United Nations staff and other foreign civilian personnel working in the country. Reaffirming the need to combat by all means threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts, the Council reminded States that they must ensure that any anti-terrorism measures complied with all their obligations under international law.
The 3 October attack resulted in the wounding of the Polish Ambassador, as well as the killing of one of his security staff and the wounding of two. It also killed at least one Iraqi civilian.
Beginning at 1:45 p.m. the meeting ended at 1:50 p.m.
Presidential Statement
The full text of presidential statement S/PRST/2007/36 reads as follows:
�The Security Council condemns the 3 October attack in Baghdad against the Polish Ambassador to Iraq, which resulted in the wounding of the Ambassador and the killing of one member of his personal security detachment team and injuries to two others. The attack also killed at least one Iraqi civilian.
�The Security Council expresses its deepest sympathy and condolences to the victims of this attack and to their families, and to the Government of the Republic of Poland.
�The Security Council underlines the need to bring the perpetrators, organizers, financers and sponsors of this act to justice and urges all States, in accordance with their obligations under international law and relevant Security Council resolutions, to cooperate with the Governments of Poland and Iraq in this regard.
�The Security Council reaffirms that terrorism in all its forms and manifestations constitutes one of the most serious threats to international peace and security and that any acts of terrorism are criminal and unjustifiable, regardless of their motivation, wherever, whenever and by whomsoever committed.
�The Security Council also calls on the international community to support the Government of Iraq in exercising its responsibility in providing protection to the diplomatic community in Iraq, United Nations staff and other foreign civilian personnel working in Iraq.
�The Security Council further reaffirms the need to combat by all means, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts. The Council reminds States that they must ensure that any measures taken to combat terrorism comply with all their obligations under international law, in particular international human rights, refugee and humanitarian law.
�The Security Council reiterates its determination to combat all forms of terrorism, in accordance with its responsibilities under the Charter of the United Nations.� |
dmbfan |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Dome Vans
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Bravo again for lumping all of those on the bandwagon of leftie terrorist lovers. I think you'll find that the main reason is this, and it's from one of yours:
| Quote: |
Report: Iraq War Made Terror 'Worse'
Terrorism Has Spread Since U.S. Invasion, National Intelligence Estimate Finds
(CBS/AP) The U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq has increased the number of terrorist groups worldwide and "made the overall terrorism problem worse," a U.S. intelligence official said in a secret study.
The assessment of the war's impact on terrorism came in a National Intelligence Estimate that represents a consensus view of the 16 disparate spy services inside government, CBS News learned Sunday.
CBS News senior White House correspondent Bill Plante reports that the intelligence report contained some broad conclusions:
# The U.S. presence in Iraq is providing new recruits for militant Islam.
# The movement has spread and is now "self-generating."
# While inspired by al Qaeda, the radical movement is no longer directly tied to Osama bin Laden.
# Because of the Internet, the radical Islamist movement is more connected and no longer isolated.
The details of the Intelligence Estimate were first published in Sunday's New York Times and Washington Post.
Three leading Republicans � Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee, Sen. John McCain of Arizona and Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky � defended the war in Iraq and said it is vital that U.S. troops stay in the fight. |
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/24/iraq/main2036338.shtml
Terrorists, be they lslamic or our old buds the American terrorists you'll find that your illegal war has exacerbated the problem. So don't try the whiter than white approach. YOU kicked the hornets nest, YOU made things worse. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cbclark4
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 8:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Platitudes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dmbfan
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 8:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Wow........CBS. Good for you!
Yep, it was a hornets nest to begin with, and it was getting bigger. Of course, sympathizers keep ignoring what Saddam was up to during those 12 years of "sanctions" and what not.
I asked this question once before, but it was dodged.
Why is it so hard to belive, given Saddams "unsteady" repuation in the Middle East, how he came to power and what he did before he came to power.....................that he DID have WMD's. But, before the American led invasion (which is now known as "Mulitnational forces" ....LOL! That one is a gut buster!), he sent them off to Syria, under the cover of a human relief mission?
Why is that so hard to believe?
dmbfan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dome Vans
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 8:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cbclark4 wrote: |
| Platitudes. |
Trite remark even for you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hater Depot
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 8:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Why would he have expected the Syrians to give them back after? And why not use them to try and win the war? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cbclark4
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 8:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dome Vans wrote: |
| cbclark4 wrote: |
| Platitudes. |
Trite remark even for you. |
Yes, thank you.
Apparently my reply to the OP was made while you were composing your reply.
The UN delivers Platitudes on a regular basis never committing to action on the basis of these Platitudes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cbclark4
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 8:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hater Depot wrote: |
| Why would he have expected the Syrians to give them back after? And why not use them to try and win the war? |
Happened during the Inspections not the war. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dmbfan
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 9:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Why would he have expected the Syrians to give them back after? And why not use them to try and win the war? |
Again, why can't anyone answer the question?
And, as cbclark pointed out..........they were moved BEFORE the war.
dmbfan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dmbfan
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2007 1:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Once again..........
| Quote: |
I asked this question once before, but it was dodged.
Why is it so hard to belive, given Saddams "unsteady" repuation in the Middle East, how he came to power and what he did before he came to power.....................that he DID have WMD's. But, before the American led invasion (which is now known as "Mulitnational forces" ....LOL! That one is a gut buster!), he sent them off to Syria, under the cover of a human relief mission?
Why is that so hard to believe? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| |
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
