Un bugging

[ralphwiggum 6]

ok, can't find a thread about this again, os i'll just make one.

apparently, placebo watching Balschoiw was not enough.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/3488548.stm

Quote[/b] ]British spies were bugging UN Secretary General Kofi Annan's office in the run up to the Iraq war, former UK cabinet minister Clare Short has claimed.

The ex-international development secretary said she had read some of the transcripts of his conversations.

Ms Short said she recalled thinking, as she talked to Mr Annan: "Oh dear, there will be a transcript of this and people will see what he and I are saying."

Downing Street has refused to comment on the claims made in a BBC interview.

[aj_addons 0]

this is really really making me hate blair and bush even more than i already do

[Balschoiw 0]

What did you expect from two leaders who betrayed the whole UN and the whole world population ?

They both did so many illegal things that this one is a minor

incident compared to over 10.000 kills of non-combatants in Iraq. I only wished their country law would punish them but as long as noone is throwing them of their bloody chairs it´s unlikely to happen and they have all the time in the world to cover up their illegal acts.

You think Aristide in Haiti is a bad person ?

I think Bush and Blair are the ones everybody should be interested in getting rid off.

I did this pic prior to Iraq war II. Still it has not lost it´s authenticy  

Edit: tranported Aristide to Hawai

[aj_addons 0]

yep you just forgot to change the names nice job anyway mate

[WhoCares 0]

...and Aristide is in Haiti, not Hawaii

[MLF 0]

i doubt just the U.S an UK bug kofi, every country capable is up to it that includes France, China, Germany etc etc its all part of the great game.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]i doubt just the U.S an UK bug kofi

They are the only ones proven to do so. Anyway what benefit would the other nations have ? We agree with Kofi. The US and the UK have betrayed the UN. Not frnace or germany. Keep it realistic and don´t try to blame others for the UK and USA behaviour. Face it. They did it, not other countries.

[MLF 0]

tbh im not supprised that the US and UK bugged the UN and i wouldnt be suprised if france and germany tried to bug UK and US personnel and tbh i dont really see it as a big thing it happens all the time in embassys etc.

[walker 0]

Hi all

Now one of the Cabinet at the time has confirmed the UK spied on Kofi Annan.

I wonder if such spying by GCHQ on US Congress and Senatorial representatives took place. Tony Blair said it was perfectly legal for us to spy on anyone in the US. Since such spying would take place in the UK it could not be said to contravene US or UK law.

Shades of Hoover blackmailing US politicians comes to mind.

Kind Regards Walker

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]I wonder if such spying by GCHQ on US Congress and Senatorial representatives took place.

Don´t forget that UK spied on the UN on TBA´s order or wish.

[Pathy 0]

I wouldnt be suprised if its not all that uncommon.

I hate Claire Short thought.....shes just an attention grabbing @%!*@! If this woman who actually exposed the leak had been jailed she'd never opened her mouth.

[bn880 5]

This is what you do: Mount a few cruise missiles on very high velocity aircraft, pre-program them to hit where Bush and Blair might be residing and let em rip after getting close enough. No Bushy, no Blairy. Problem solved. But get Rumsie, and Cheney + Powell too.

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

Everyone is spying on everyone else, why else do you think is the UN building is in New York

I don't see what the big deal is?

[brgnorway 0]

Everyone is spying on everyone else, why else do you think is the UN building is in New York

Quote[/b] ]I don't see what the big deal is?

Well, I do! There are situations where you just wouldn't like to get caught with your pants down. This case would suit fine. Maybe one supposes this is done all the time, but would you really expect it was done in such a delicate situation? I don't know, but to say it's "done all the time" is no good excuse for me - it only shows what bad morals/ethics the "axes of the willing" have.

I loathe them and have no respect for them. Too bad no one can do anything about it!

[bn880 5]

What do you mean can't do anything about it? More like too lazy and chicken to do anyting. You have a bunch of criminals in power in the US and UK... kick their ass. EU needs to build a very strong military now to keep the US in check. Then after a while the EU will be the new US...

[brgnorway 0]

Quote[/b] ]What do you mean can't do anything about it?  More like too lazy and chicken to do anyting.

Seriously, the only thing one can do is to whithold support to secure and build up Iraq - leaving the total cost of the operation to the "axes of the evil and willing" . However, this will leave the iraqi people as hostages and they will definately suffer. If UN doesn't contribute the rest of the world will be partly responsable for the tragedy of the iraqi people. Hmm - maybe the solution will be to demand UN control over Iraq and a fairer distribution of contracts in return of UN help - to ensure the benefit of the iraqi people.

Quote[/b] ]You have a bunch of criminals in power in the US and UK... kick their ass.  

As much as I'd love to it seems difficult. Hopefully things will change if US get's another president.

Quote[/b] ] EU needs to build a very strong military now to keep the US in check.  Then after a while the EU will be the new    US...

No that won't happen due to a number of factors. It's not enough to be a military superpower. You also need to be an economic superpower. And that is where EU will lose out to US. Demographic estimates rules this out because of the prospects of birthrates is so much lower in EU nations than in the US. We will have fewer youths in our work force - we will have a proportional much higher rate of elderly who must be funded and as a military superpower we are not very willing to commit suspect invasions to protect our intererests due to our colonial history.

Another factor to consider is that during the cold war - the real war was not fought in the central areas of interest but rather in the periphery such as african, asian and central american areas. I have a problem seeing EU engage in situations like that - indirectly confronting US - but I have no problem seeing US do the same  

[bn880 5]

Quote[/b] ]What do you mean can't do anything about it? More like too lazy and chicken to do anyting.

Seriously, the only thing one can do is to whithold support to secure and build up Iraq - leaving the total cost of the operation to the "axes of the evil and willing" . However, this will leave the iraqi people as hostages and they will definately suffer. If UN doesn't contribute the rest of the world will be partly responsable for the tragedy of the iraqi people. Hmm - maybe the solution will be to demand UN control over Iraq and a fairer distribution of contracts in return of UN help - to ensure the benefit of the iraqi people.

Yup, and the big issue I see with this is how do you stop something like htis in the future? SOmeone goes in and punds some Nation into the dark ages without UN consent ;) and then leaves... then everyone has a humanitarian obligation now. I say instead of investing money to rebuild the next nation like that, it would be better to declare war on the agressors(as they attack) and set up a defense in the target nation if they want it. That's what real justice would be, but I again forget we live in an injustice.

[brgnorway 0]

Quote[/b] ]What do you mean can't do anything about it?  More like too lazy and chicken to do anyting.

Seriously, the only thing one can do is to whithold support to secure and build up Iraq - leaving the total cost of the operation to the "axes of the evil and willing" . However, this will leave the iraqi people as hostages and they will definately suffer. If UN doesn't contribute the rest of the world will be partly responsable for the tragedy of the iraqi people. Hmm - maybe the solution will be to demand UN control over Iraq and a fairer distribution of contracts in return of UN help - to ensure the benefit of the iraqi people.

Yup, and the big issue I see with this is how do you stop something like htis in the future?  SOmeone goes in and punds some Nation into the dark ages without UN consent ;)  and then leaves... then everyone has a humanitarian obligation now.   I say instead of investing money to rebuild the next nation like that, it would be better to declare war on the agressors(as they attack) and set up a defense in the target nation if they want it.  That's what real justice would be, but I again forget we live in an injustice.  

That is so true!

Maybe the best solution would be not to engage in helping out in Iraq as this would possibly give a strong signal to the idiots that whenever they fuck up they will have to sort out the bill by themselves. I guess the american public will be unwilling to pick up the bill when the economy goes down the drain next time.

[bn880 5]

Pretty easy to do, not to help, not sure exactly how serious of an effect it will have on Iraqi population. I dunno, see that's the little game they played, "they can't possibly let Iraq turn into another Afghanistan can they", and the UN says, "nope we won't".

Frustrating.

[brgnorway 0]

Pretty easy to do, not to help, not sure exactly how serious of an effect it will have on Iraqi population.  I dunno, see that's the little game they played, "they can't possibly let Iraq turn into another Afghanistan can they", and the UN says, "nope we won't".

Frustrating.

yes, if the phrase "between a rock and a hard place" had any relevance it must be in this situation

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

bn880-

Quote[/b] ]Yup, and the big issue I see with this is how do you stop something like htis in the future? SOmeone goes in and punds some Nation into the dark ages without UN consent ;) and then leaves... then everyone has a humanitarian obligation now. I say instead of investing money to rebuild the next nation like that, it would be better to declare war on the agressors(as they attack) and set up a defense in the target nation if they want it. That's what real justice would be, but I again forget we live in an injustice

Well id say Saddam was doing a fair job of keeping Iraq in the dark ages anyway wouldnt you (though sanctions didnt help)?

Real justice according to bn880 would be militarily supporting brutal dictators when they are interfered with by outside ( and supposedly allied) nations? This somewhat differs from my idea of justice. As i recall Iraq was not a part of NATO so mutual defence doesnt really apply. If you really think some european nations, Canada and perhaps some developing countries have a duty to enforce international law by force then you must go in against countless countries involved in numerous breaches of UN law. Isnt it really true that this is some preposterous anti-US (and uk by association) posturing without any real constructive content?

Doesnt Mugabes starvation and ethnic cleansing of his own people in many ways deserve action as much as Bush and Blairs little war (little compared to the giant wars of history), As does the fighting in the Congo (thankfully now being addressed), Burmas ruthless suppression of its own people, Chinas still brutal occupation of Tibet, Israels enforced occupation, numerous small conflicts in Africa and elsewhere

etc etc

In this case two democratic countries (one a member of the EU, the other generally regarded as the worlds only current superpower) invaded an undemocratic country led by a murderous genocidal thug, with the stated aim of bestowing democracy and especially disarming it of WMD.

The WMD are strategically misplaced (ie-theyre not in Iraq) the democracy is elusive at the moment and will be tenous at best but this is still far from e.g. Germanys invasion of Poland, and to have militarily supported Saddams regime or the Taliban in those wars in the name of international justice would have been a little ludicrous (if only a little more ludicrous than the invasion of Iraq itself was 'in order to enforce the security council resolution' when the security council itself was set against it, an invasion that im still against in timing and in principle given the circumstances).

Even if the UNs support had been gained, those 10,000 dead people would more than likely have fallen down just as dead.

We had a humanitarian obligation long before Iraq or Afghanistan was invaded, in the long term problem of how to help people under dictatorships that are not interested in seeing them helped and the problem of lessening the grievous

inequalites between rich and poor countries.

[bn880 5]

Well id say Saddam was doing a fair job of keeping Iraq in the dark ages anyway wouldnt you (though sanctions didnt help)?

Of course Saddam was no great leader, but also Iraq would not be where it was 2 years ago had it not been for the US playing their games much earlier.

Quote[/b] ]Real justice according to bn880 would be militarily supporting brutal dictators when they are interfered with by outside ( and supposedly allied) nations?

That's not what I said, so your idea of jsutice is kind of: who ever has more military power can do what they want?

Quote[/b] ] This somewhat differs from my idea of justice. As i recall Iraq was not a part of NATO so mutual defence doesnt really apply. If you really think some european nations, Canada and perhaps some developing countries have a duty to enforce international law by force then you must go in against countless countries involved in numerous breaches of UN law.

Like I said, we live in a world of injustice, and without pre-set unions or pacts nop one stands up for justice. Well the UN tries after the damage is done.

Quote[/b] ] Isnt it really true that this is some preposterous anti-US (and uk by association) posturing without any real constructive content?

No, absolutely not. What it is, is people being lost in beurocracy and methology forgetting what morals and standing up for what's right is. And if you think it was right to go into Iraq then... okay, anyway, it is clear people (as a whole) do not stick their necks out without A) Clear benefits for themselves in the future or B) when being pinned in a corner

So this is what I'm saying, it certainly is sickening to watch the world let the US/UK take over Iraq, and by what game, by what methods... just horrific!

EDIT: I see now you are in the UK, maybe that's why it ticks you off that someone can suggest this. So was it fun to live a perfectly normal life while 10000 people were killed and more still die? How many buildings damaged in London?

[ralphwiggum 6]

it seems from my fast browsing that this thread is going off topic.

anyways, I don't like the fact that US and UK tried to not honor some decency, but then again, other nations need to do the same thing. just that US and UK were caught this time doesn't mean other nations are not doing so. kinda funny that France and Germany are not coming out to condemn US and UK

[Longinius 1]

They are probably not saying anything because they dont want to jump the gun. Wait and see.

In the news today, Hans Blix also suspected to have been bugged by the US.

I say we rid ourself of all nations, throw up a couple of more stars on the US banner and nominate Bush our führer!

[MLF 0]

your all jumping the gun a bit its only claire short here and it aint even been proved, i doubt someone of her so called rank in the government would be allowed to see files that sensitive, if anyone watched that political program on BBC1 after Q time with Portillo they would now what im talking about.