UN map has removed Israel

[straffo]

define a "country" please.

[Momus--]

Krusher, I watched the video you linked to. What is it supposed to prove?

In response to the inflammatory comments on Israel by President Ahmadinejad of Iran, we saw:

1 - A unanimous condemnation of his comments from the UNSC.

2 - A statement by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan saying that he was dismayed at the comments and reiterating Israel's right to exist under the terms of the UN Charter.

3 - A statement condemning the comments issued by senior palestinian representative Saeb Erekat.

Did the UN use a map at a UN function that referenced Palestine and ignored Israel.. the answer is yes.

And the presence of that map, irrespective of any context, is the only "fact" you have so far produced to support your slanderous contention. Poor effort really.

Again, please post supporting evidence of your contention that the UN holds the same policy on Israel as that espoused by the president of Iran. Otherwise I have to conclude that your mouth is issuing cheques that your brain can't cash.

[Momus--]

Originally posted by lasersailor184

It is only recently that people have taken to calling the muslims from that area Palestinians, when they are closer to being Jordanians.

Totally wrong, the region was originally named Palestine after its Philistine inhabitants by the Greeks in the first Millenium BC.

[bozon]

Originally posted by Krusher
The current leader of Iran has:
...
That the Jewish state should be moved to Europe if the West wants to make up for the Holocaust.

YES PLEASE!
We are sick of the middle east. It's the middle of December and I'm wearing shorts and sweating. Give us about 500x50 km in Europe and we move instantly.

Make room euros, I'm a coma!

Bozon

[ramzey]

Momus , Krusher who the heck you are?
all your posts are in O'club, allways flame bait

[Nilsen]

Originally posted by bozon
YES PLEASE!
We are sick of the middle east. It's the middle of December and I'm wearing shorts and sweating. Give us about 500x50 km in Europe and we move instantly.

Make room euros, I'm a coma!

Bozon

You can have Svalbard! Nice and cool plus plenty of fish and russians

If there is any sand near you (doh!) then bring a few million tonnes. You will need it to put on the roads so you dont skid into the water and end up in the net of some Russian trawler.

[straffo]

Originally posted by bozon
YES PLEASE!
We are sick of the middle east. It's the middle of December and I'm wearing shorts and sweating. Give us about 500x50 km in Europe and we move instantly.

Make room euros, I'm a coma!

Bozon

carefull with what you ask , you can end in groeland (afterall it's a part of Danmark )

[Nilsen]

shhh straffo!

I'm trying to get rid of Svalbard up in arktika somewere.. dont give him other ideas!!

We also have some land down there in aunt-arktika, but i hear the arktikans are nicer people than the aunt-arktikans.

[SMIDSY]

i personally think there should be a "league" or "guild" that meets in a UN style assembly. the differences from the UN are as follows

1. it would be called something cool like the "Global Guild" or the good old "League of Nations" just because it sounds cool.
2. if one of the member nations or non-member nations stepped out of line, all the nations with a non-laughable military would go into the offending country and kick some ass.


it would keep the humanitarian roll that the current UN has but otherwise it would act more like NATO should.

anyone like this idea?




PS
i have designed a complete economic and agricultural design for antarctica. it is completely reliant on penguins, ice and solar power.

[Nilsen]

Not a bad idea SMIDSY. ive often thought abut something similar myself.

If one UN member is attacked, then all others jump on it. All nations should become members. If they want to sit on the council or not is up to them, but the rules and regulations still apply so not sitting on the council would be pointless.

The rules should be simple and easy to undestand for all without a million sub-paragraphs and ways to avoid them.

United Nations is a good enough name.. sais it all really.

[Masherbrum]

Originally posted by Krusher
You seem to be missing the point, I would draw a picture, but you might consider it out of context.

So the video link was still not good enough?

If you are wrong I could care less.
I have no need to prove it one way or the other because they (the UN) held a confrence with a map that did not include israel.


My opinion of the UN has been posted many times on this site.
They are a biased, corrupt, unprofessional and not worthy of US support.

No, you are posting file footage of past dated maps.  Still, sweet bait.   Especially the Arabic writing on the maps.  $100 says the pictures are more than 30 years old.  

Karaya

[bozon]

Originally posted by straffo
carefull with what you ask , you can end in groeland (afterall it's a part of Danmark )

Isn't Legoland part of Denmark too?
If we get it, do we get to oppress the Lego people? They seem small and plastiqe - should be easy.

Bozon

[Krusher]

Originally posted by Momus--
Krusher, I watched the video you linked to. What is it supposed to prove?

In response to the inflammatory comments on Israel by President Ahmadinejad of Iran, we saw:

1 - A unanimous condemnation of his comments from the UNSC.

2 - A statement by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan saying that he was dismayed at the comments and reiterating Israel's right to exist under the terms of the UN Charter.

3 - A statement condemning the comments issued by senior palestinian representative Saeb Erekat.



And the presence of that map, irrespective of any context, is the only "fact" you have so far produced to support your slanderous contention. Poor effort really.

Again, please post supporting evidence of your contention that the UN holds the same policy on Israel as that espoused by the president of Iran. Otherwise I have to conclude that your mouth is issuing cheques that your brain can't cash.

Huh? you try and disredit the original source, I give you a second and you dismiss it.

slanderous? again you read too much into my post. try and breath in and out in and out.  It is my opinion that the UN knew "exactly" what it was doing when it used that map. MY OPINION. you don't like it, to bad for you.

[Krusher]

Originally posted by ramzey
Momus , Krusher who the heck you are?
all your posts are in O'club, allways flame bait

who are you to ask an MP or a wannabe MP?

[Momus--]

Originally posted by Krusher
Huh? you try and disredit the original source, I give you a second and you dismiss it.

No, you initially claimed a reputable source when in fact it was a partisan UN "watchdog" site. For example, the site you linked to doesn't inform the reader that Kofi Annan later apologised for the presence of the map in question and promised to ensure that such an occurance wouldn't take place again. This is important context that was omitted.

slanderous? again you read too much into my post.

No, I read your post just fine the first time and your successive posts too.

It is my opinion that the UN knew "exactly" what it was doing when it used that map.

An opinion that isn't consistent with the facts, namely that the use of the flag wasn't endorsed by any decision-making body of the UN and by the fact that the UN Secretary General later apologised for its presence. That's the same guy who has gone on the record multiple times in condemning the rhetoric that comes from Iran on the subject of Israel, something I can't believe you'd be unaware of if you had any serious interest in the issue.

MY OPINION. you don't like it, to bad for you.

You're entitled to your opinion, but if you are going to express it in an open forum then you should be able to back it up.

So far you haven't.