Terrorists
Sometimes the strangest things make me laugh. Yesterday fellow Atriot Moonbootica linked to an article at the Al Jazeera website in one of her comments. I followed the link and found myself chuckling. Well, for a little while.
Iran's parliament has approved a nonbinding resolution to label the CIA and the US army as "terrorist organisations".
The move is seen as a diplomatic tit-for-tat after the US senate also voted in favour of a motion urging the state department to designate Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps a "terrorist organisation." ...
The parliament said the two organisations were terrorists for a number of reasons.
It said they were involved in dropping nuclear bombs in Japan in World War II and used depleted uranium munitions in the Balkans, Afghanistan and Iraq.
It also said they supported the killings of Palestinians by Israel, bombed and killed Iraqi civilians and tortured terror suspects in prisons.
The resolution urges Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's, the Iranian president, government to treat the two as terrorist organisations.
It also paves the way for the resolution to become legislation which, if ratified by the country's constitutional watchdog, would become law. [Emphasis added]
Now, this "tit for tat" resolution is just as silly as the one passed last week by Senate. Both are non-binding and essentially meaningless, or are they? While I much prefer a war of words to shooting wars, too often the first is a prelude to the second, as we learned in March, 2003. Our administration has become quite adept at catapulting the propaganda, and the Iranians may just have given the White House another rock to toss around.
Furthermore, the Iranian resolution is a little different than the usual insults hurled our way. Rather than simply calling us "running dogs" or "the great Satan," the Iranians put some bite into their resolution by listing some of the actions which justified the use of the term "terrorist organization." I find myself hard-pressed to deny any of the actions taken by the US. All have happened, and the rest of the world has been complaining (albeit gently so as not to annoy the World's Bully) about each and every one of them for over four years now.
Suddenly the article wasn't funny anymore.
Iran's parliament has approved a nonbinding resolution to label the CIA and the US army as "terrorist organisations".
The move is seen as a diplomatic tit-for-tat after the US senate also voted in favour of a motion urging the state department to designate Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps a "terrorist organisation." ...
The parliament said the two organisations were terrorists for a number of reasons.
It said they were involved in dropping nuclear bombs in Japan in World War II and used depleted uranium munitions in the Balkans, Afghanistan and Iraq.
It also said they supported the killings of Palestinians by Israel, bombed and killed Iraqi civilians and tortured terror suspects in prisons.
The resolution urges Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's, the Iranian president, government to treat the two as terrorist organisations.
It also paves the way for the resolution to become legislation which, if ratified by the country's constitutional watchdog, would become law. [Emphasis added]
Now, this "tit for tat" resolution is just as silly as the one passed last week by Senate. Both are non-binding and essentially meaningless, or are they? While I much prefer a war of words to shooting wars, too often the first is a prelude to the second, as we learned in March, 2003. Our administration has become quite adept at catapulting the propaganda, and the Iranians may just have given the White House another rock to toss around.
Furthermore, the Iranian resolution is a little different than the usual insults hurled our way. Rather than simply calling us "running dogs" or "the great Satan," the Iranians put some bite into their resolution by listing some of the actions which justified the use of the term "terrorist organization." I find myself hard-pressed to deny any of the actions taken by the US. All have happened, and the rest of the world has been complaining (albeit gently so as not to annoy the World's Bully) about each and every one of them for over four years now.
Suddenly the article wasn't funny anymore.
posted by Diane at 4:15 AM
1 Comments:
Well at least in the case of the CIA, their non-uniformed status applies to the definition of terrorist, and their conduct...
Post a Comment
<< Home