[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Historical Title: US And 14 Other European Countries Gave Saddam Chemical Arms Ahlul Bayt News Agency (ABNA.ir), Official documents point the finger at the US and 14 other European countries for equipping former Iraqi strongman Saddam Hussein with chemical weapons, says a top Iranian official. Secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council Saeid Jalili said those weapons were used by the former Baghdad regime, including in the 1987 gas attack on the northwestern Iranian city of Sardasht and in another chemical strike on the northern Iraqi city of Halabcha in 1988. He said as long as the prime suspects in those attacks as well as in the crimes committed in Vietnam are permanent members of the UN Security Council, there is a possibility that such crimes may be repeated. "As long as permanent members of the UN Security Council see their possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) as a privilege, they cannot be expected to fight WMDs," added Jalili. Referring to Saddam Hussein's repeated use of chemical arms against Iran during his eight-year imposed war on the Islamic Republic in the 80's, the senior official underscored the international community should call for the United States together with the 14 European governments to stand trial for supplying chemical weapons to Saddam Hussein. Jalili was speaking at a conference in Tehran on Tuesday June 29, marking the day, 23 years ago, when the former Iraqi regime launched a deadly gas attack on the northwestern Iranian city of Sardasht. Many of the survivors are still suffering from very serious health conditions, including severe respiratory problems and skin disorders. The day is also observed as National Day for Fight against Chemical Weapons in Iran. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 33. Gee...I thought you leftwingers said Saddam didn't have WMD's? (roaring with laughter)
#2. To: Badeye (#1) The article says "in the 80's", Boofer. No one disputes that. ROTFLMAOAY!
#3. To: Skip Intro (#2) (Edited) Boofer doesn't do the "reading thing"...it's why he gets so pissed the headlines are changed...
#5. To: war (#3) Boofer doesn't do the "reading thing"...it's why he gets so pissed the headlines are changed... Heh...a busy business owner guy has to cut corners somewhere....
#6. To: mininggold (#5) Heh...a busy business owner guy has to cut corners somewhere.... Cut the guy some slack. He has to run down to the corner gas station to answer the phone every time his business gets a call. Fortunately for him, that doesn't happen very often.
#8. To: Skip Intro (#6) Following my anti groupie is a good way to end up looking ridiculous, skippy.
#14. To: Badeye (#8) Following my anti groupie is a good way to end up looking ridiculous, Taking you seriously is an even better way.
#15. To: Skip Intro (#14) Whatever, skippy.
#16. To: Badeye (#15) Whatever, Boofer. Let's see who can get in the last word. That's a good way for a busy executive like you to spend the day.
#17. To: Skip Intro (#16) Okay. (laughing) This is a good way for an unemployed wannabe to spend the day. At least I'm doing a public service by keeping you off street corners begging for money, and muttering obscenties to those that tell you to fuck off.
#20. To: Badeye (#17) This is a good way for an unemployed wannabe to spend the day. Actually I'm a I-got-mine while you're a make-believe businessman. As hard as it must be for you to grasp, my reality has nothing to do with your imagination.
#22. To: Skip Intro (#20) Actually I'm a I-got-mine while you're a make-believe businessman. As hard as it must be for you to grasp, my reality has nothing to do with your imagination. Uh huh, sure. And Brian S made that article up....(laughing) You're losing it, skippy. Must be time for the meds, huh?
#24. To: Badeye (#22) You're going to hit 100 posts here alone today for sure. Why not go for 200?
#25. To: Skip Intro (#24)
#29. To: Badeye (#25) So tell me, skippy, which one of the above is yours? I see that it takes very little provocation for you to breech confidentiality.
#30. To: mininggold (#29) I see that it takes very little provocation for you to breech confidentiality. I see you don't understand the concept of 'confidentiality'. Hit my website, your reverse address becomes my property, kookie.
#31. To: Badeye (#30) I see you don't understand the concept of 'confidentiality'. If those are visitors to your website then you breeched implied confidentiality. If I visit a website I don't expect my ISP to be posted on a chat site. PERIOD end of story.
#32. To: mininggold (#31) If I visit a website I don't expect my ISP to be posted on a chat site. PERIOD end of story. Cuddles, you're in no position to "expect" anything. The 'net doesn't offer anonymity. Sorry darling.
#33. To: Jethro Tull (#32) Cuddles, you're in no position to "expect" anything. The 'net doesn't offer anonymity. Sorry darling. You got it, but I could lodge a complaint with one the professional organizations it belongs to and let them deal with it.
So are you publicly posting ISPs from 4um posters now? Wouldn't you know that Sarahbots like you would show so little ethical integrity.
Replies to Comment # 33. You could, and it would ignored kookie. They'd run a search on you and YOUR POSTINGS. Period. End of story. (laughing)
#37. To: mininggold (#33) You got it, but I could lodge a complaint Yes, yes, by all means.... Dial 911 and tell the nice operator all about your issues. Don't forget to mention the voices :)
End Trace Mode for Comment # 33. Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|