THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ VI

Let me see, I think it comes under the heading of:

REVOLUTION

Typical leftist logic - "they did the bad stuff, we did the good stuff"..... spare me the BS ...... "it is usually exactly backwards." In fact in this particular instance it is exactly backwards: Klugman was playing the typical leftist game of mischaracterizing history by substituting alleged intentions for actual actions and their actual causes and effects.

Perhaps you are unwittingly confusing the Constitution with the Declaration. There is no reference to REVOLUTION in the Constitution. While there isn't any specific reference to the word REVOLUTION in the Declaration, there is discussion in there following dissolve and separation.

Alleged and quoted intentions carry zero weight when evaluating the consequences of actual actions. Palestinian Jews did not murder and maim Palestinian Arabs. Maniacal Palestinian Arabs did murder and maim Palestinian Jews. Palestinian Jews did and do defend themselves against the maniacal Palestinian Arabs that murder and maim Palestinian Jews. That is the reality. All the rest is your fantasized rationalization for the previous and current maniacal Palestinian Arab behavior.

The test of my assertions here is an easy risk free matter. First, the Palestinian Arabs eradicate or incarcerate Arafat and the rest of the current maniacal Palestinian Arab murderers and maimers. Second, they demand in return that the Palestinian Jews re-submit the Barak-Clinton proposal for renegotiation. Third, they wait and see what happens. I bet that after the Palestinian Arabs accomplish the first two steps, the Palestinian Jews will agree within 90 days to the Barak-Clinton proposal. The reason it might take 90 instead of 7 days is the Israelies might have to first replace some leaders of their own government. If I'm wrong, new maniacal Palestinian Arabs can easily be fomented and turned loose to resume the sick maniacal work.



Palestinian Jews immigrated to Palestine and purchased property from the Arabs at premium prices. They didn't expropriate anything. Then in 1948, acting in accord with a UN resolution, they declared their independence. Then these Palestinian Jews acting in their own self-defense won with US help a series of both reactive and pre-emptive defensive wars against those who threatened and did in deed attempt to destroy Israel.



The British fled Palestine in 1948. They thereby ceased being a cause of the maniacal Palestinian Arab behavior.

I miss this thread. I have not been back so often since it has been renamed Ican.

ha ha ha....

I would that the Arabs in Palestine had followed a Gandhian resistance to the European immigrants, and that the Zionists had not looked to establish an exclusivist state there, an "actual action" which they brought to fruition, your denials notwithstanding, ican. The Zionists did visit violence, bigotry and discrimination upon the Arabs in Palestine, and the Arabs did respond with violence, and the Zionists responded with more violence. It's as simple as that, ican. "Consequences of actual actions," ican, your denials notwithstanding. For all of the land that the Zionists purchased, it amounted to all of seven or so percent of the land in Palestine, UN resolution gave them more than fifty percent, the Arab population there outnumbered the Zionist, and the Arabs rejected partition. You equate integration with destruction, ican. You are a segregationist. The Zionists then engaged in ethnic cleansing of the land they seized after their declaration of independence.

He is maniacal, that ican.

InfraBlue, That's the reason why I never respond to his posts addressed to me.

Why Did the Chicken cross the Road?

Coalition Provisional Authority:

The fact that the Iraqi chicken crossed the road affirmatively demonstrates that decision-making authority has been transferred to the chicken well in advance of the scheduled June 30th transition of power. From now on the chicken is responsible for its own decisions.

Halliburton:

We were asked to help the chicken cross the road. Given the inherent risk of road crossing and the rarity of chickens, this operation will only cost the US government $326,004.

Muqtada al-Sadr:

The chicken was a tool of the evil Coalition and will be killed.

US Army Military Police:

We were directed to prepare the chicken to cross the road. As part of these preparations, individual soldiers ran over the chicken repeatedly and then plucked the chicken. We deeply regret the occurrence of any chicken rights violations.

Peshmerga:

The chicken crossed the road, and will continue to cross the road, to show its independence and to transport the weapons it needs to defend itself. However, in future, to avoid problems, the chicken will be called a duck, and will wear a plastic bill.

1st Cav:

The chicken was not authorized to cross the road without displaying two forms of picture identification. Thus, the chicken was appropriately
detained and searched in accordance with current SOP's. We apologize for any embarrassment to the chicken. As a result of this unfortunate incident, the command has instituted a gender sensitivity training program and all future chicken searches will be conducted by female soldiers.

Al Jazeera:

The chicken was forced to cross the road multiple times at gunpoint by a large group of occupation soldiers, according to eye-witnesses. The chicken was then fired upon intentionally, in yet another example of the abuse of innocent Iraqi chickens.

Blackwater:

We cannot confirm any involvement in the chicken-road-crossing incident.

Translators:

Chicken he cross street because bad she tangle regulation. Future chicken table against my request.

U.S. Marine Corps:

The chicken is dead

Too bad the chicken wasn't plucked before the marine killed it.

CI, in today's world one cannot be certain the chicken was indeed in an 'unPLucked' state when found.

So true!

Umm ... kemosabe, this mean trouble for pale face in white tepee?
Yes Tonto, I'm afraid so.


Kurds, Shiites at odds over role of interim constitution

By Associated Press, 6/8/2004 21:45

ADVERTISEMENT
BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) The passage of a U.N. resolution on Iraq has drawn attention to hints made by Iraq's two main Kurdish parties that they might not participate in the new government if the U.N. measure didn't endorse the interim constitution.

The resolution adopted unanimously late Tuesday by the U.N. Security Council makes no mention of the Transitional Administration Law, which will serve as Iraq's temporary constitution after the new interim government takes power on June 30 and until a new constitution is written and approved in a referendum late next year.

The country's leading Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Husseini al-Sistani, had warned of trouble if the Security Council gave any legitimacy to the interim charter, adopted in March.

The Kurdish demands were contained in a letter Sunday from Jalal Talabani of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan and Massoud Barzani of the Kurdistan Democratic Party to the United Nations.

A PUK official, Araz Talabany, said Tuesday that the letter asked that reference to the interim constitution be made in the Security Council resolution providing international legitimacy to U.S. plans for transferring power to the Iraqis.

''They said that in the future they might not participate in the government or in the coming elections'' planned by Jan. 31 if the new resolution failed to mention the interim resolution, the aide said before the U.N. vote.

Talabany, the aide, said the interim constitution stipulates from some Kurdish rights, such as federalism. ''What they are asking for is the least of the rights of the Kurdish people.'' he said.

In his own letter to the United Nations, al-Sistani said that any effort to give legitimacy to the interim charter, known as the Transitional Administrative Law, by mentioning it in the Iraq resolution ''runs counter to the will of the Iraqi people.''

''This law, which has been written by an unelected council under the occupation and its direct influence, restricts the national (body) due to be elected at the beginning of the new year to draft Iraq's permanent constitution,'' al-Sistani said. ''This runs against law and is rejected by the majority of the Iraqi people.''

Al-Sistani objected to the interim constitution because it was not drafted by an elected body but was instead approved by the U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council. He has insisted that the interim charter should not tie the hands of a future elected body that will draft a permanent constitution next year.

The Kurds won a major concession in the interim constitution which states that if a majority of voters in three of Iraq's 18 provinces reject the permanent charter, it will not be approved. Kurds control three provinces.

Shiites complain that gives a veto to an ethnic community which forms about 15 percent of the population. Shiites are believed to comprise about 60 percent.

SOURCE

One sunny day in 2005 an old man approached the White House from across Pennsylvania Avenue, where he'd been sitting on a park bench. He spoke to the U. S. Marine standing guard and said, "I would like to go in and meet with President Bush." The Marine looked at the man and said, "Sir, Mr. Bush is no longer president and no longer resides here." The old man said, "Okay" and walked away. The following day, the same man approached the White House and said to the same Marine, "I would like to go in and meet with President Bush." The Marine again told the man, "Sir, Mr. Bush is no longer president and no longer resides here." The man thanked him and, again, just walked away. The third day, the same man approached the White House and spoke to the very same U. S. Marine, saying "I would like to go in and meet with President Bush." The Marine, understandably agitated at this point, looked at the man and said, "Sir, this is the third day in a row you have been here asking to speak to Mr. Bush. I've told you already that Mr. Bush is no longer the president and no longer resides here. Don't you understand?" The old man looked at the Marine and said, "Oh, I understand. I just love hearing it." The Marine snapped to attention, saluted, and said, "See you tomorrow."

LOL

I wonder what Gelisgesti has to say about the positions taken by the New PM and the New President of the Interim Government of Iraq?


The new PM said that the coaltion forces would have to stay until security was assured.

The new president said that the coalition were the friends of the Iraqis.

Sounds like Sistani is getting serious ....


Letter From Ayatullah Sistani To UN Security Council
Jun 08, 2004

H. E. Head of the United Nations Security Council,

Greetings,

We have been informed of the attempts to include the so called "administrative law for the transitional period" in the new UNSC Resolution on Iraq, with a view to making it appear internationally legitimate.

This "law" that has been drawn up by an un-elected council under occupation, and through its direct influence, would restrict the national assembly which is due to be elected early next year - to draw up the permanent Iraqi constitution.

This is against the laws and rejected by most Iraqi people. Therefore, any attempt to make this "law" appear legitimate by including it in the international resolution is considered as contrary to the desire of the Iraqi people and a forewarning to dangerous consequences.

Kindly convey the position of the Religious Marja'iyya in this regard to their Excellencies the honorable members of the Security Council.

Thank you

Seal of the Office of Ayatullah Seestani in Najaf
6 June 2004


SOURCE

shhhhh
(it is probably prudent to avoid mention of the attendant advantage to having our friend happily occupied on a single thread)

Our 'friend' wears many faces and is a quick change artist ... of mediocre ability ... methinks