anastrophe wrote: care to name some of these [likely fictional] forumgarden members who support "nuking iran before they nuke us"? bearing in mind the modifier "many" in that sentence. naming one simply won't do justice to the request.
The last time a poll was taken on the subject there were 10 members in favour of a preemptive strike including Chonsi, BR and Lilac Dragon. Certainly Bronwen, Captain Ray, Adam Zapple have, from memory, expressed such sentiments and I would remind you of Accountable's post :-
Would You Back Military Action Against Iran?
Americans Would Back Military Action in Iran Dispute, Poll Says
Jan. 27 (Bloomberg) -- A majority of Americans would support the U.S. taking military action against Iran if it continues to produce material that can be used to develop nuclear weapons.
A Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times poll taken this week shows 57 percent expressed support while 33 percent said they would oppose military action against Iran. Ten percent were unsure. The poll of 1,555 adults was conducted Jan. 22-25.
LINK
which appears to show that this is not an uncommon opinion. In no way are these members fictional - I do not make thing up.
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
Lulu2 wrote: Granted, I don't usually plow my way through all the rhetoric in these political threads, but I can't recall seeing anyone in favor of what Bush has done.
Perhaps you'd like to establish another of those polls? Perhaps you see what you expect to see, rather than what is? Perhaps one or two support Bush and THEY are posting more than the rest of us?
I've no idea...but I do want to remind you, Bryn, the polls here are overwhelmingly against Bush and his war efforts.
Such a poll has already been conducted (Would you back millitary action against Iran) and, although the result was 10 for 25 against, those for were overwhelmingly American (plus Golem).
Perhaps you'd like to establish another of those polls? Perhaps you see what you expect to see, rather than what is? Perhaps one or two support Bush and THEY are posting more than the rest of us?
I've no idea...but I do want to remind you, Bryn, the polls here are overwhelmingly against Bush and his war efforts.
Such a poll has already been conducted (Would you back millitary action against Iran) and, although the result was 10 for 25 against, those for were overwhelmingly American (plus Golem).
-
anastrophe
- Posts: 3135
- Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
Bryn Mawr wrote: Such a poll has already been conducted (Would you back millitary action against Iran) and, although the result was 10 for 25 against, those for were overwhelmingly American (plus Golem).
the poll suggested no such thing. conflating "military action" with "nuking them" is a falsification.
the poll suggested no such thing. conflating "military action" with "nuking them" is a falsification.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
anastrophe wrote: the poll suggested no such thing. conflating "military action" with "nuking them" is a falsification.Fortunately, my dear, some kind soul has remedied our lack. Are you ready to report back yet?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
It ain't over til it's over
Last week, the United States of America added a new feather to its plumage of flagrant violations of international law and proper conduct. The Venezuela foreign minister, Mr Nicholas Maduro, who had last week been attending United Nations General Assembly meeting was detained for 90 minutes at New York's JFK airport US authorities first denied that any incident of such had taken place, but later acknowledged saying "the state department can confirm there was an incident with Venezuela foreign minister Nicholas Maduro at JFK airport in New York," a spokesman said, adding "the state department regrets this incident.
Last week, the United States of America added a new feather to its plumage of flagrant violations of international law and proper conduct. The Venezuela foreign minister, Mr Nicholas Maduro, who had last week been attending United Nations General Assembly meeting was detained for 90 minutes at New York's JFK airport US authorities first denied that any incident of such had taken place, but later acknowledged saying "the state department can confirm there was an incident with Venezuela foreign minister Nicholas Maduro at JFK airport in New York," a spokesman said, adding "the state department regrets this incident.
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
Terrorism should not be associated with any particular faith, countries tell UN debate
un.org
There is a push from a number of States to separate the identification of terrorist groups from the legitimate struggle of peoples to free themselves from foreign occupation.
Efforts to combat terrorism have seen some positive results, but the actions of individual countries “have created divisions among people and affected interfaith harmony, he said. “Many are being subjected to racial or religious profiling, thus fomenting suspicion, misunderstanding and even hatred.
un.org
There is a push from a number of States to separate the identification of terrorist groups from the legitimate struggle of peoples to free themselves from foreign occupation.
Efforts to combat terrorism have seen some positive results, but the actions of individual countries “have created divisions among people and affected interfaith harmony, he said. “Many are being subjected to racial or religious profiling, thus fomenting suspicion, misunderstanding and even hatred.
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
koan wrote: It ain't over til it's over
http://www.voanews.com/english/mobile/d ... ?id=284559
Last week, the United States of America added a new feather to its plumage of flagrant violations of international law and proper conduct. The Venezuela foreign minister, Mr Nicholas Maduro, who had last week been attending United Nations General Assembly meeting was detained for 90 minutes at New York's JFK airport US authorities first denied that any incident of such had taken place, but later acknowledged saying "the state department can confirm there was an incident with Venezuela foreign minister Nicholas Maduro at JFK airport in New York," a spokesman said, adding "the state department regrets this incident.
Maybe he should stick with visiting Iran if he d/n want to go through routine security screenings.
http://www.voanews.com/english/mobile/d ... ?id=284559
Last week, the United States of America added a new feather to its plumage of flagrant violations of international law and proper conduct. The Venezuela foreign minister, Mr Nicholas Maduro, who had last week been attending United Nations General Assembly meeting was detained for 90 minutes at New York's JFK airport US authorities first denied that any incident of such had taken place, but later acknowledged saying "the state department can confirm there was an incident with Venezuela foreign minister Nicholas Maduro at JFK airport in New York," a spokesman said, adding "the state department regrets this incident.
Maybe he should stick with visiting Iran if he d/n want to go through routine security screenings.
You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you.
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
zinkyusa wrote: Maybe he should stick with visiting Iran if he d/n want to go through routine security screenings.
Are you sure that that was all it was - 90 minutes sounds like a fair grilling - and is it legal where someone has diplomatic immunity?
Consider it the other way round - what if Condoleeza Rice were held for 90 minutes by the Iranians after attending a meeting there? Would you call that a routine security screening?
Are you sure that that was all it was - 90 minutes sounds like a fair grilling - and is it legal where someone has diplomatic immunity?
Consider it the other way round - what if Condoleeza Rice were held for 90 minutes by the Iranians after attending a meeting there? Would you call that a routine security screening?
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
Bryn Mawr wrote: Are you sure that that was all it was - 90 minutes sounds like a fair grilling - and is it legal where someone has diplomatic immunity?
Consider it the other way round - what if Condoleeza Rice were held for 90 minutes by the Iranians after attending a meeting there? Would you call that a routine security screening?
Wouldn't have been that long if he had cooperated I imagine, don't know if there is such a thing as diplomatic immunity on a commercial flight.
Condi flies on US gov't aircraft..
Consider it the other way round - what if Condoleeza Rice were held for 90 minutes by the Iranians after attending a meeting there? Would you call that a routine security screening?
Wouldn't have been that long if he had cooperated I imagine, don't know if there is such a thing as diplomatic immunity on a commercial flight.
Condi flies on US gov't aircraft..
You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you.
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
Bryn Mawr wrote: Are you sure that that was all it was - 90 minutes sounds like a fair grilling - and is it legal where someone has diplomatic immunity?
Consider it the other way round - what if Condoleeza Rice were held for 90 minutes by the Iranians after attending a meeting there? Would you call that a routine security screening?
Now that would definitely be racial profiling.
Consider it the other way round - what if Condoleeza Rice were held for 90 minutes by the Iranians after attending a meeting there? Would you call that a routine security screening?
Now that would definitely be racial profiling.
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
zinkyusa wrote: Wouldn't have been that long if he had cooperated I imagine, don't know if there is such a thing as diplomatic immunity on a commercial flight.
Condi flies on US gov't aircraft..
the diplomatic immunity is why it is being called a flagrant violation of international law.
he had reason to believe he shouldn't be detained. that's pretty much why the apology was issued. :rolleyes:
Condi flies on US gov't aircraft..
the diplomatic immunity is why it is being called a flagrant violation of international law.
he had reason to believe he shouldn't be detained. that's pretty much why the apology was issued. :rolleyes:
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
YZGI wrote: Now that would definitely be racial profiling.
why? by whom?
it seems like an accurate comparison
why? by whom?
it seems like an accurate comparison
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
koan wrote: why? by whom?
it seems like an accurate comparison
Sorry Koan it was just a little humor. Wrong thread eh?
it seems like an accurate comparison
Sorry Koan it was just a little humor. Wrong thread eh?
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
YZGI wrote: Sorry Koan it was just a little humor. Wrong thread eh?
:yh_rotfl
is that a little excessive? :yh_whistl
:yh_rotfl
is that a little excessive? :yh_whistl
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
koan wrote: the diplomatic immunity is why it is being called a flagrant violation of international law.
he had reason to believe he shouldn't be detained. that's pretty much why the apology was issued. :rolleyes:
don't know the details your source was a bit vague on what happened.
Rules on Diplomats
The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961, according to experts at the State Department, underwent changes in practice starting in the early 1970's. The convention basically provides that a diplomat, when in a country that has diplomatic relations with his or her country, may not be interfered with. ''Interfered with'' includes being searched. But when terrorism became a problem in travel, it became the practice for diplomats to pass through the metal detector and for checked luggage to be subjected to the usual procedures. However, diplomatic pouches, which are specifically defined and are sealed by the embassy that prepares them, are not subject to any search, including by X-ray or metal detector.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.h ... nted=print
he had reason to believe he shouldn't be detained. that's pretty much why the apology was issued. :rolleyes:
don't know the details your source was a bit vague on what happened.
Rules on Diplomats
The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961, according to experts at the State Department, underwent changes in practice starting in the early 1970's. The convention basically provides that a diplomat, when in a country that has diplomatic relations with his or her country, may not be interfered with. ''Interfered with'' includes being searched. But when terrorism became a problem in travel, it became the practice for diplomats to pass through the metal detector and for checked luggage to be subjected to the usual procedures. However, diplomatic pouches, which are specifically defined and are sealed by the embassy that prepares them, are not subject to any search, including by X-ray or metal detector.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.h ... nted=print
You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you.
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
United States officials are interpreting the actions of the people of the Middle East in a distorted manner in a bid to justify their policies to the detriment of all concerned, the Foreign Minister of Syria told the General Assembly today.
“Tragically, we all end up paying the price when the decision-makers in Washington believe that they know better, and are in a better position to understand and grasp the needs and circumstances of the Arabs, said Walid Al-Moualem. “They diagnose the ambitions and aspirations of the Arab individual in a manner that is tailored to their own vision.
He asserted that the people of the region are angered by the denial of their sovereign national rights. Summing up the collective sentiment, he said: “We want an end to the Israeli occupation of our lands in Palestine, Lebanon and the Golan. We want to recover all our usurped rights. We want the flow of American weapons to Israel, which are sowing death and destruction, to stop. We refuse hegemony over our resources and interference in our affairs.
There's that hegemony word again. It seems to be popular in speeches.
re Venezuela...how about this: The articles say it was a violation of diplomatic rights. The US apologised, indicating that they agree. So how about you go find proof otherwise. Until then, we'll assume it was a violation.
“Tragically, we all end up paying the price when the decision-makers in Washington believe that they know better, and are in a better position to understand and grasp the needs and circumstances of the Arabs, said Walid Al-Moualem. “They diagnose the ambitions and aspirations of the Arab individual in a manner that is tailored to their own vision.
He asserted that the people of the region are angered by the denial of their sovereign national rights. Summing up the collective sentiment, he said: “We want an end to the Israeli occupation of our lands in Palestine, Lebanon and the Golan. We want to recover all our usurped rights. We want the flow of American weapons to Israel, which are sowing death and destruction, to stop. We refuse hegemony over our resources and interference in our affairs.
There's that hegemony word again. It seems to be popular in speeches.
re Venezuela...how about this: The articles say it was a violation of diplomatic rights. The US apologised, indicating that they agree. So how about you go find proof otherwise. Until then, we'll assume it was a violation.
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
zinkyusa wrote: Wouldn't have been that long if he had cooperated I imagine, don't know if there is such a thing as diplomatic immunity on a commercial flight.
Condi flies on US gov't aircraft..
The aircraft you use is immaterial if you cannot get through the airport.
There is always diplomatic immunity for accredited officials - customs cannot even demand to look into their diplomatic pouch.
It's to stop rogue governments from intimidating foreign envoys and done for the same reason that embassies are considered to be part of the country they represent - to break into an embassy is equivalent to an invasion.
Condi flies on US gov't aircraft..
The aircraft you use is immaterial if you cannot get through the airport.
There is always diplomatic immunity for accredited officials - customs cannot even demand to look into their diplomatic pouch.
It's to stop rogue governments from intimidating foreign envoys and done for the same reason that embassies are considered to be part of the country they represent - to break into an embassy is equivalent to an invasion.
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
The United States is promoting tensions on the Korean peninsula to justify its desire to strengthen its military presence in the region, the Chairman of the Delegation from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) told the United Nations General Assembly today.
Choe Su Hon said “it is crystal clear that Washington does not support either the denuclearization of the peninsula or the Six-Party Talks between the two Koreas, China, Japan, Russia and the US.
“The US policy towards the DPRK has gone further beyond the mere hostility, so far as to pose nuclear threats even by designating it as part of an ‘axis of evil’ and target of pre-emptive strikes, thus driving the DPRK to inevitably possess nuclear deterrent after all, he said.
Mr. Choe said the US had created the current impasse in the Six-Party Talks by scrapping an already agreed itinerary for the next round of discussions and by imposing financial sanctions on the DPRK.
“If there is anything that the United States is in favour of, that is the aggravated tension on the Korean peninsula to be used as a pretext for reinforcing its military forces in the North-East Asian region.
damn. where's the good news?
Choe Su Hon said “it is crystal clear that Washington does not support either the denuclearization of the peninsula or the Six-Party Talks between the two Koreas, China, Japan, Russia and the US.
“The US policy towards the DPRK has gone further beyond the mere hostility, so far as to pose nuclear threats even by designating it as part of an ‘axis of evil’ and target of pre-emptive strikes, thus driving the DPRK to inevitably possess nuclear deterrent after all, he said.
Mr. Choe said the US had created the current impasse in the Six-Party Talks by scrapping an already agreed itinerary for the next round of discussions and by imposing financial sanctions on the DPRK.
“If there is anything that the United States is in favour of, that is the aggravated tension on the Korean peninsula to be used as a pretext for reinforcing its military forces in the North-East Asian region.
damn. where's the good news?
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
koan wrote: United States officials are interpreting the actions of the people of the Middle East in a distorted manner in a bid to justify their policies to the detriment of all concerned, the Foreign Minister of Syria told the General Assembly today.
“Tragically, we all end up paying the price when the decision-makers in Washington believe that they know better, and are in a better position to understand and grasp the needs and circumstances of the Arabs, said Walid Al-Moualem. “They diagnose the ambitions and aspirations of the Arab individual in a manner that is tailored to their own vision.
He asserted that the people of the region are angered by the denial of their sovereign national rights. Summing up the collective sentiment, he said: “We want an end to the Israeli occupation of our lands in Palestine, Lebanon and the Golan. We want to recover all our usurped rights. We want the flow of American weapons to Israel, which are sowing death and destruction, to stop. We refuse hegemony over our resources and interference in our affairs.
There's that hegemony word again. It seems to be popular in speeches.
re Venezuela...how about this: The articles say it was a violation of diplomatic rights. The US apologised, indicating that they agree. So how about you go find proof otherwise. Until then, we'll assume it was a violation.
i didn't see where they said what the apology was for, maybe they felt security got to rough or something..You can assume anything you want..
Why do you keep posting this crap if you don't want to discuss it?
FSec of Syria now there is an unbiased source for anything relating to the US or Israel. If they want their "usurped rights" recovered why are'nt they at the negotiating table. Israel has offered.
“Tragically, we all end up paying the price when the decision-makers in Washington believe that they know better, and are in a better position to understand and grasp the needs and circumstances of the Arabs, said Walid Al-Moualem. “They diagnose the ambitions and aspirations of the Arab individual in a manner that is tailored to their own vision.
He asserted that the people of the region are angered by the denial of their sovereign national rights. Summing up the collective sentiment, he said: “We want an end to the Israeli occupation of our lands in Palestine, Lebanon and the Golan. We want to recover all our usurped rights. We want the flow of American weapons to Israel, which are sowing death and destruction, to stop. We refuse hegemony over our resources and interference in our affairs.
There's that hegemony word again. It seems to be popular in speeches.
re Venezuela...how about this: The articles say it was a violation of diplomatic rights. The US apologised, indicating that they agree. So how about you go find proof otherwise. Until then, we'll assume it was a violation.
i didn't see where they said what the apology was for, maybe they felt security got to rough or something..You can assume anything you want..
Why do you keep posting this crap if you don't want to discuss it?
FSec of Syria now there is an unbiased source for anything relating to the US or Israel. If they want their "usurped rights" recovered why are'nt they at the negotiating table. Israel has offered.
You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you.
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
SALEH SAID MEKY, Minister of Health of Eritrea, said issues of peace and security remained of paramount importance to his country and the Horn of Africa. Eritrea wished to bring to the Assembly’s attention Ethiopia’s reckless flouting of international law that was threatening peace and security in the region. Demarcation of the boundary between Eritrea and Ethiopia remained stalled, due to Ethiopia’s rejection of the final and binding arbitration decision, contrary to the terms and conditions of the Algiers Peace Agreement. Ethiopia had violated that treaty with impunity and continued to occupy sovereign territories of a Member State. Its unlawful conduct had also obviously been encouraged and supported by certain Powers in the Security Council.
He said that three years ago, when Ethiopia’s Prime Minister had sent an ominous letter to the Council announcing his Government’s blatant rejection of the Boundary Commission decision and calling for a “new mechanism to overrule the legal award, the Council and Secretary-General had accommodated Ethiopia’s unlawful conduct and appointed a Special Envoy in contravention of the legal agreement. When that Special Envoy scheme had proved unworkable, the United States had employed its full diplomatic clout to unlawfully alter the legal award under the rubric of a “new initiative. That plan consisted of directly planting a senior United States expert as an adjunct to the Boundary Commission and bestowing upon him wide powers to alter the demarcation decision. The package further envisaged a new and political body outside the Boundary Commission to accommodate Ethiopia’s additional requests. The scheme in effect rendered fundamental tenets of the Algiers Agreement null and void. One could only surmise that Ethiopia’s original rejection of the Boundary Commission award had been tacitly supported by Washington from the outset. The United States had resorted to further measures, particularly the seizure of financial and other assets of Eritrea’s Washington Embassy in contravention of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Immunities and Privileges. Eritrea wished to lodge a complaint before the Assembly and solicit support from the international community for redress and restitution.
Even Eritrea's in on it.
zinky, I would discuss the issue but I'm not going to redefine words from the dictionary with you. If you have evidence that shows something different happened then, for goodness sake, post it!
He said that three years ago, when Ethiopia’s Prime Minister had sent an ominous letter to the Council announcing his Government’s blatant rejection of the Boundary Commission decision and calling for a “new mechanism to overrule the legal award, the Council and Secretary-General had accommodated Ethiopia’s unlawful conduct and appointed a Special Envoy in contravention of the legal agreement. When that Special Envoy scheme had proved unworkable, the United States had employed its full diplomatic clout to unlawfully alter the legal award under the rubric of a “new initiative. That plan consisted of directly planting a senior United States expert as an adjunct to the Boundary Commission and bestowing upon him wide powers to alter the demarcation decision. The package further envisaged a new and political body outside the Boundary Commission to accommodate Ethiopia’s additional requests. The scheme in effect rendered fundamental tenets of the Algiers Agreement null and void. One could only surmise that Ethiopia’s original rejection of the Boundary Commission award had been tacitly supported by Washington from the outset. The United States had resorted to further measures, particularly the seizure of financial and other assets of Eritrea’s Washington Embassy in contravention of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Immunities and Privileges. Eritrea wished to lodge a complaint before the Assembly and solicit support from the international community for redress and restitution.
Even Eritrea's in on it.
zinky, I would discuss the issue but I'm not going to redefine words from the dictionary with you. If you have evidence that shows something different happened then, for goodness sake, post it!
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
This the same Eritea?:
1. The Eritrean government cracked down on the free press and on opposition in 2001 when questions about the conduct of the war were raised.
2. The government also failed to implement the new constitution and to hold long-promised elections.
3. Later, the government of Eritrea enforced the Italian colonial practice of requiring government approval of all practiced religions.
Do keep these fair and unbiased reports coming. I won't bother with the DPRK it's to easy..
1. The Eritrean government cracked down on the free press and on opposition in 2001 when questions about the conduct of the war were raised.
2. The government also failed to implement the new constitution and to hold long-promised elections.
3. Later, the government of Eritrea enforced the Italian colonial practice of requiring government approval of all practiced religions.
Do keep these fair and unbiased reports coming. I won't bother with the DPRK it's to easy..
You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you.
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
zinkyusa wrote:
Do keep these fair and unbiased reports coming. I won't bother with the DPRK it's to easy..
What, pray tell, are you talking about? These are from the UN website.
www.un.org/ga
the one outside newspaper report had it's link posted. other than that it is from the UN speeches.
Do keep these fair and unbiased reports coming. I won't bother with the DPRK it's to easy..
What, pray tell, are you talking about? These are from the UN website.
www.un.org/ga
the one outside newspaper report had it's link posted. other than that it is from the UN speeches.
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
koan wrote: What, pray tell, are you talking about? These are from the UN website.
www.un.org/ga
the one outside newspaper report had it's link posted. other than that it is from the UN speeches.
They are quotes of the Minister of Health of Eritrea..Who can believe such tripe from an official of such a lowlife government?
Why do you keep posting quotes from such losers? I don't care if they come from UN website, it's irrelavent to their veracity.
You can stop anytime, it's quite clear what your agenda is koan.
www.un.org/ga
the one outside newspaper report had it's link posted. other than that it is from the UN speeches.
They are quotes of the Minister of Health of Eritrea..Who can believe such tripe from an official of such a lowlife government?
Why do you keep posting quotes from such losers? I don't care if they come from UN website, it's irrelavent to their veracity.
You can stop anytime, it's quite clear what your agenda is koan.
You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you.
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
koan wrote: What, pray tell, are you talking about? These are from the UN website.
www.un.org/ga
the one outside newspaper report had it's link posted. other than that it is from the UN speeches.
I fear that Zinky is not suggesting the reports are biased but the speakers making the speech in the first place.
They are "the horses mouth" and the speeches do reflect the feelings in other countries and so should be given consideration and not just dismissed out of hand.
www.un.org/ga
the one outside newspaper report had it's link posted. other than that it is from the UN speeches.
I fear that Zinky is not suggesting the reports are biased but the speakers making the speech in the first place.
They are "the horses mouth" and the speeches do reflect the feelings in other countries and so should be given consideration and not just dismissed out of hand.
-
anastrophe
- Posts: 3135
- Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
Bryn Mawr wrote: I fear that Zinky is not suggesting the reports are biased but the speakers making the speech in the first place.
They are "the horses mouth" and the speeches do reflect the feelings in other countries and so should be given consideration and not just dismissed out of hand.
double standard. when bush makes a speech, the vultures here descend, to pick it apart, and suggest that virtually every comment is a lie, made up by the speech writers, not a reflection of the feelings in the US, but rather a crafted article of propaganda.
thus, when Ahmadinejad makes poetic calls for peace and justice, they are referred to as moving, lovely, powerful words from the man himself. when Bush makes poetic calls for peace and justice, they are taken as cynical propaganda by morally bankrupt speechwriters, nothing more.
twas ever thus.
They are "the horses mouth" and the speeches do reflect the feelings in other countries and so should be given consideration and not just dismissed out of hand.
double standard. when bush makes a speech, the vultures here descend, to pick it apart, and suggest that virtually every comment is a lie, made up by the speech writers, not a reflection of the feelings in the US, but rather a crafted article of propaganda.
thus, when Ahmadinejad makes poetic calls for peace and justice, they are referred to as moving, lovely, powerful words from the man himself. when Bush makes poetic calls for peace and justice, they are taken as cynical propaganda by morally bankrupt speechwriters, nothing more.
twas ever thus.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
Bryn Mawr wrote: I fear that Zinky is not suggesting the reports are biased but the speakers making the speech in the first place.
They are "the horses mouth" and the speeches do reflect the feelings in other countries and so should be given consideration and not just dismissed out of hand.
Yes exactly, Koan you posted the link the UN speeches are you planning on posting every speech or just the ones that trash the US?
They are "the horses mouth" and the speeches do reflect the feelings in other countries and so should be given consideration and not just dismissed out of hand.
Yes exactly, Koan you posted the link the UN speeches are you planning on posting every speech or just the ones that trash the US?
You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you.
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
zinkyusa wrote: Yes exactly, Koan you posted the link the UN speeches are you planning on posting every speech or just the ones that trash the US?
Welcome to the thread called "General Assembly addresses of September 2006" wherein the speeches given at the UN GA might be discussed.
you are welcome to go find glowing reports that support the US. I am just posting the current news. In order, leaving out one item... something about the Afghanistan drug trade needing to be controlled.
Welcome to the thread called "General Assembly addresses of September 2006" wherein the speeches given at the UN GA might be discussed.
you are welcome to go find glowing reports that support the US. I am just posting the current news. In order, leaving out one item... something about the Afghanistan drug trade needing to be controlled.
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
lol
wasn't the Taliban conquering that drug trade problem?
wasn't the Taliban conquering that drug trade problem?
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
anastrophe wrote: double standard. when bush makes a speech, the vultures here descend, to pick it apart, and suggest that virtually every comment is a lie, made up by the speech writers, not a reflection of the feelings in the US, but rather a crafted article of propaganda.
thus, when Ahmadinejad makes poetic calls for peace and justice, they are referred to as moving, lovely, powerful words from the man himself. when Bush makes poetic calls for peace and justice, they are taken as cynical propaganda by morally bankrupt speechwriters, nothing more.
twas ever thus.
Did I suggest that the speeches were all truth and light? I suggested that they be given consideration and not just dismissed as biased - just as I give speeches by GWB consideration before dismissing them as biased :wah:
The trick is to extract the truth from the inevitable inbuilt bias whilst keeping your own inevitable inbuilt bias to a minimum.
thus, when Ahmadinejad makes poetic calls for peace and justice, they are referred to as moving, lovely, powerful words from the man himself. when Bush makes poetic calls for peace and justice, they are taken as cynical propaganda by morally bankrupt speechwriters, nothing more.
twas ever thus.
Did I suggest that the speeches were all truth and light? I suggested that they be given consideration and not just dismissed as biased - just as I give speeches by GWB consideration before dismissing them as biased :wah:
The trick is to extract the truth from the inevitable inbuilt bias whilst keeping your own inevitable inbuilt bias to a minimum.
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
There is, in fact, no bias. That's what they really said. Whether they are right or not is not currently the issue. But that is certainly debatable. They are, however, the most factual reports of what was said that you can get.
As for the report on the detaining of foreign ministers, the UN is now going to look into the matter. So we'll likely find out how big or small the violation was.
As for the report on the detaining of foreign ministers, the UN is now going to look into the matter. So we'll likely find out how big or small the violation was.
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
zinkyusa wrote: i didn't see where they said what the apology was for, maybe they felt security got to rough or something..You can assume anything you want.."The incident was our fault," Brownfield told the television channel Globovision, saying the minister had done nothing wrong but his purchase of a one-way ticket in cash had triggered security procedures designed to target terrorists.
Maduro on Saturday said he had earlier been detained for more than 90 minutes in a room at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York and his travel documents had been taken away.
The minister believed it was a U.S. reprisal for Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's speech at the UN General Assembly in which he called U.S. President George W. Bush "the devil."
Brownfield acknowledged that the airport authorities had disrespected Maduro, but ruled out any government order to mistreat the minister.
He also denied allegations that the U.S. government had deliberately interrupted the satellite signal for a ceremony where Chavez was donating fuel to New York residents.
The U.S. Homeland Security Department at first denied Maduro had been mistreated, but later the U.S. State Department apologized for the incident.
Maduro and the Venezuelan government, however, rejected the apology and demanded a UN inquiry.
Maduro on Saturday said he had earlier been detained for more than 90 minutes in a room at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York and his travel documents had been taken away.
The minister believed it was a U.S. reprisal for Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's speech at the UN General Assembly in which he called U.S. President George W. Bush "the devil."
Brownfield acknowledged that the airport authorities had disrespected Maduro, but ruled out any government order to mistreat the minister.
He also denied allegations that the U.S. government had deliberately interrupted the satellite signal for a ceremony where Chavez was donating fuel to New York residents.
The U.S. Homeland Security Department at first denied Maduro had been mistreated, but later the U.S. State Department apologized for the incident.
Maduro and the Venezuelan government, however, rejected the apology and demanded a UN inquiry.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
spot wrote: "The incident was our fault," Brownfield told the television channel Globovision, saying the minister had done nothing wrong but his purchase of a one-way ticket in cash had triggered security procedures designed to target terrorists.
I find it hard to believe that, with all the background checks that they perform, that the officials did not know who the guy was.
Given this, what were they trying to do?
Whatever it was, it was bound to stir up a storm.
I find it hard to believe that, with all the background checks that they perform, that the officials did not know who the guy was.
Given this, what were they trying to do?
Whatever it was, it was bound to stir up a storm.
General Assembly addresses of September 2006
Bryn Mawr wrote: Given this, what were they trying to do?"ruled out any government order to mistreat the minister" is a long way beyond the nudge it would have taken. Of course he was being messed around, he's a foreign minister with full diplomatic immunity in New York. The airport doesn't know the protocol, there of all places?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.