BBC Blog Network

User Profile

Irish_Mark

Listed below are comments made by Irish_Mark between Thursday, 21st May 2009 and Friday, 25th September 2009.

«Newer
Older»

Friday 25 September 2009 8:12pm on 25 Sep 2009 Regarding Iran.
This facility didn't have to be declared because it contains no nuclear material, yet Iran told the IAEA.
The IAEA has no evidence that Iran is doing anything other than that its entitled. i.e. enrich uranium for fuel (LEU).

On the other hand, we have India, Israel and Pakistan who refuse inspections and are outside the strict NPT regime.

Remember 2002? This is what was done to Iraq. Crippling sanctions, followed by regime change.

Let's hope China sees through this orchestrated hysteria.
Wednesday 23 September 2009 12:52pm on 24 Sep 2009 Gadaffi's speech made a lot of sense.
He's certainly right about the Security Council.

The hostility shown to the Iranian speaker by Jeremy was disrespectful.
Mr. Burns got an easy ride. He spend years demonising Iraq and has now turned to Iran.
Mr. Burns scoffed when the Iranian guest pointed out that the US was funding anti-Iranian groups such as the Kurdish PJAK and Mujahedin-e Khalq Organisation (MEK or MKO).

Please Newsnight, remember that Iran is a signatory to the NPT unlike India, Pakistan and Israel. The IAEA has no evidence of military programmes and Iran's desire to control its own fuel cycle is completely understandable.
Iran non-existant military programme also serves as a useful tool for Mr. Netahyahu to deflect attention from the illegal settlement expansion.
Obama has been rebuffed. Will he recover?
Thursday 17 September 2009 4:20pm on 18 Sep 2009 #43
"Pres. Obama might also change US law to allow US combatants to go virtually anywhere in the world and kill enemies of the US virtually anywhere at any time. Exceptional times require exceptional actions in keeping ordinary citizens 'safe'."

This is already happening (c.f. extra-judicial drone killings).
The practice is a complete violation of international law and norms but if it's happening in Northern Pakistan or Somalia instead of Western Europe, nobody bats an eyelid.
In a civilised world, enemies should be held accountable in a court of law instead of a drone control room in Texas.

Sickening hypocrisy, not Realpolitik.
Thursday 17 September 2009 11:11am on 18 Sep 2009 How many of the Green Howards will return without physical or physiological injuries? Why are they going? Both of these questions are missing in Mark Urban's report.
Thursday 17 September 2009 10:44am on 18 Sep 2009 Richard Perle bemoaning the dropping of the 'missile shield' was an unintentionally humorous piece. Seymour Hersh has written about Perle's possible conflict of interests when it comes to defence systems. It would have been a chuckle to have Hersh on from New York!

But Newsnight, what possible benefit to your listeners was it to have him on? He's been discredited and wrong so many times, especially regarding Iraq, where he memorable stated that 'Iraqis would dedicate a square to George W. Bush".

You could have asked him about George Mitchell's efforts to freeze illegal settlement building in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem, but his answer would have been predictable and evasive.
An interview with President Obama 10:05am on 03 Jun 2009 #175 MagicKirin
"Israel has made generous concessions."

Leaving East Jerusalem? No.
Returning the Golan Heights? No.
Leaving the West Bank? No.
Stopping extra judicial assassinations? No.
Lifting the siege of Gaza? No.
Closing Israel's Guantanamo (Facility 1391)? No.

Yes, many concessions.
An interview with President Obama 10:00am on 03 Jun 2009 #168 MarcusAureliusII
"Iran is approaching a point where the US will have to consider decisive military action as the only effective way to deal with Iran's threat to America's vital interests once and for all."

On what grounds do you make that astonishing assertion?
Didn't the US by invading Iraq actually increase Iran's influence?
A fledgling nuclear enrichment programme monitored by the IAEA under the NPT? Perhaps it's because Israel, now faced with a US President unwilling to let it continue building illegal settlements, requires the region be destabilised again.
At every time in the recent past, when faced with the threat of peace, Israel has stepped up extra judicial assassinations, house demolitions and attacked its neighbours.

And people wonder why the US is disliked in the Middle East.
An interview with President Obama 3:21pm on 02 Jun 2009 MagicKirin

Why isn't the U.N going into North Korea or Sudan or Cuba with the same vigour?

Are those countries illegally expanding their borders?
Hasn't the ICC issued an arrest warrant for Sudanese President Bashir?

The international community would just like to see an end to the occupation of East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Golan Heights and an end to the siege of 1.4 million people in Gaza.
Israel can build within Israel's legal borders. Israel provides grants and loan guarantees for those wishing to build in the West Bank.

I am part of that community and I think President Obama is also.
Obama works to own Middle East timetable 10:26am on 21 May 2009 Nice words from Obama, especially regarding illegal settlements.
Unfortunately on the ground, we see:
- Gaza siege lifted - No
- recognition of a two state solution - No
- House demolitions in East Jerusalem or the West Bank halted - No
- Barrier construction - Halted suddenly.
What does "pro-life" mean these days? 10:08am on 21 May 2009 @gunsandreligion
As for the meaning of "pro-life," it is the opposite of "pro-death."

Except that many who claim to be 'pro-life' are solely anti-abortion and very much in favour of the death penalty.

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

Irish_Mark