United States Vetoes U.N. Security Council Resolution (Yassin)

[hang a left]

http://sandiego.cox.net/cci/portal/_pagr/127/_pa.127/669?view=article&id=D81HQUN80
United States Vetoes U.N. Security Council Resolution Condemning Killing of Hamas Leader

Ambassador to the United States John Negroponte addresses the U.N Security Council, Tuesday, March 23, 2004, in New York.The United States and Algeria were unable to agree Tuesday on a U.N. Security Council statement that would have condemned Israel's assassination of Hamas spiritual leader Sheik Ahmed Yassin. (AP Photo/ Louis Lanzano)
03-25-2004 11:19 PM
By CHRIS HAWLEY, Associated Press Writer

UNITED NATIONS -- The United States vetoed a U.N. Security Council resolution Thursday condemning Israel's assassination of a Hamas leader, calling the measure "one-sided" and saying it ignored the group's bloody record of terrorism.

The United States had demanded that the resolution on the death of Ahmed Yassin include a mention of attacks by Hamas and other militant groups. Algeria, the resolution's sponsor, had resisted identifying the groups by name or citing specific attacks.

"This Security Council does nothing to contribute to a peaceful settlement when it condemns one party's actions and turns a blind eye to everything else occurring in the region," U.S. Ambassador John Negroponte said before the vote that came after days of bitter debate.

The vote was 11 countries in favor, three countries abstaining, and one country against _ the United States.

[rpannier]

1. How About Something Creative...

Like the U.S. sponsors a resolution condemning Hamas and the terrorist killings and Algeria put forth their resolution on the assassination of Yassin. And all sides agree to vote for both. Afterall, their both appaling and both deserve condemnation.

[yltlatl]

2. Sharon perpetuates the war...

on purpose. Mass violence is frequently the tool of the powerful. Aaron the Clown had a worthwhile (though true to form mawkishly offensive) segment tonight: some little Palestinian kid saying he wishes he could be like his dead 16-yr-old older brother: a martyr.

When this is all over and they convene the war-crimes tribunal, this veto will just be another charge on the indictment.

[burrowowl]

3. Welcome to DU, yltatl!

Aaron Sharon is not a clown. He is a war criminal and a crook.
And just barely escaped going to prison being judged by Israeli Judges.
Remeber also the Liberty!

[yltlatl]

6. Read the post pls.

I started w/ Sharon, but "Aaron" referred to Aaron Brown on CNN. Sharon's name is "Ariel", and yes he is a war criminal, and one of the charges should be "waging agressive war"--the same charge of which dozens of Nazis were convicted at Nuremberg and subsequently hanged.

Anyway, thanks for the welcome--glad to be here.

[Pert_UK]

4. Well at least the UK had the balls to abstain!

:eyes:

For FUCK'S SAKE, when is the US going to get a grip on this?

It is ludicrous to claim that whenever you offer criticism of one side for a specific act, you also have to add in caveats about how evil the other side is.

If the UN was issuing a statement condemning Hamas, I can't imagine the Americans demanding that a line about Israel's ill deeds.

OF COURSE Hamas is a terrorist organisation that needs to be stopped, but that doesn't mean that Israel (or anybody else) is above international law and able to do whatever they like.

I've been criticised on here before now when I posted a story about the IRA directly from the BBC website and with no additional comments. It was simply about the IRA refusing to give any more assistance in finding the bodies of those they'd killed during the 70s. I got abuse because I'd failed to mention the "hundreds of years of British oppression of Irish Catholics", even though it was an LBN story on a specific topic.

This is the same, IMHO - you CAN condemn one group for an individual action WITHOUT having to add "But of course, the other side are a bunch of bastards".

I am sickened that the UK abstained on this, and frustrated but not surprised by the US position.

[ze_dscherman]

5. Veto No. 79

by the U.S. that blocks a Security Concil resolution which condemns Israel. Just for the record.

[Suspicious]

9. Yep.

This is completely standard and expected behavior from the U.S. No surprise at all.

[SOS]

7. Always entertaining to see Negroponte

voting on issues of terrorism and human rights....

"John Negroponte was ambassador to Honduras from 1981-1985. As such he supported and carried out a US-sponsored policy of violations to human rights and international law. Among other things he supervised the creation of the El Aguacate air base, where the US trained Nicaraguan Contras during the 1980's. The base was used as a secret detention and torture center. In August 2001 excavations at the base discovered the corpses of 185 people, including two Americans, who are thought to have been killed and buried at this base.

During his ambassadorship, human rights violations in Honduras became systematic. The infamous Battalion 316, trained by the CIA and Argentine military, kidnaped, tortured and killed hundreds of people. Negroponte knew about these human rights violations and yet continued to collaborate with them, while lying to Congress."

[tlcandie]

8. Yet another black eye for the US!

Surprised? NOT!

[THUNDER HANDS]

10. what would be the point of condemning Hammas?

Since Hammas isn't a nation?

Isn't the U.N. just supposed to stick to condemning nations, not specific organizations or groups of people?

[tinnypriv]

11. In other news

"Night follows day"

"Gravity continues"

"Bush tells a lie".