Finally Something Smart Out of Annan
The UN has been mulling since 1996 how to define terrorism. Kofi Annan has suggested a very commen sense one.
He has suggested as a definition a simple statement branding any intentional maiming or killing of civilians as terrorism, regardless of the cause.Swiss Info
This defintion fits the bill. Any intentional killing or maiming of civilians. One would assume this would include the victims of terrorism in Israel. The victims in Israel have been intentional targets of the murdering cowards who would dare to call their actions as a "resistance to occupation".
So guess what group doesn't like this defintion? You guessed it, the Arab delegation, they want to seperate the terrorism against Israel and say that it is "resistance to occupation".
In the last round of talks, four months ago, Arab delegates continued to resist Annan's proposal as contrary to the right of national liberation movements -- such as the Palestinians' -- to fight foreign occupation, diplomats said.Swiss Info
So the Arab delegates believe that Hamas, Islamic jihad, the Martyrs Brigade should be exempt from murdering Israeli citizens. Since 1993, these unholy warriors have killed over 3,200 Israelis going about their daily lives and injured over 6,200 Iraelis going about their daily lives. It is outrageous that this continues to go on and there is still debate on whether or not to condemn the terrorist acts commited against the citizens of Israel.
Unless the terrorist acts against the citizens of Israel are condemned, this statement by Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, secretary-general of the Organization of Islamic States wiil have no merit.
urged a collective Muslim response to such bombings including the adoption of "new measures to eradicate this scourge."
"Terrorism ... has inflicted so much damage and brought nothing but harm to the Muslim world and its standing, particularly by demonizing the image and reputation of Muslims in the eyes of the world," Ihsanoglu said in a statement issued in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.Swiss Info
Then there is Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and other countries that are deemed by the unholy jihadis as being occupied.
Annan needs to stick to his guns on this one. There is no justification for the intentional killing of civilians. Of course, some Muslim clerics have stated there is no such thing as a civilian.
Do you see what we are up against?
posted by SEAWITCH at
8:28:00 PM
9 Comments:
It is outrageous that this continues to go on and there is still debate on whether or not to condemn the terrorist acts commited against the citizens of Israel.
Outrageous is right. And predictable. And shameful.
The pope couldn't bring himself to mention Israel as a target of terrorism. Jewish blood? What's that?
Li'l Mamzer,
It is shameful. I say what the Pope didn't say and will post something later.
li'l I saw that about the pope too. Oy.
Seawitch -- great post! Let's hope Annan sticks to his guns...so to speak.
esther,
Thanks. So do I.
I had always thought the traditional definition was the intentional killing or maiming of civilians to affect political change, or something like that. Annan's broader definition works fine with me. . . . I think you hit the nail on the head with your observation that "there is no such thing as a civilian" to extremist Muslims. To them, every Israeli child is just a future IDF soldier.
"there is no such thing as a civilian"
Only if it is an armed Palestinian "civilian" who just shot at the Israelis.
To me, Annan's definition still leaves too many options open for those bastards.
Firstly, as Li'l Mamzer pointed out there is no such a thing as an enemy civillian according to Islam.
Secondly, they already claim that every killed Palestinian terrorist was a civilian (technically it is true - as opposed to military).
Thirdly - what about destroying property and infrastructure?
This is not covered at all.
Technically speaking if their "freedom fighters" aimed at WTC they did not intend to kill people but to destroy but the symbol of U$rael's imperialism.
I know it sounds like a far fetched excuse but the Islamist came out with more ridiculous ones and they still got tolerant attention of the media and public opinion.
I can go on.
Annan shouldn't think too much for thinking is not one of his fortes.
seawitch -
The civilian/combatant designation is important because there are many who don't see this current war as a real war but as a criminal justice issue.
li'l mamzer,
You must have commenting at the same time as me when you made your third comment. Yes, the civilian/combatant distinction is important.
"Civilian? I disagree, and I would never give them that."
I abusolutely support your stand on it.
And this is why I said this definition is NOT acceptable.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home