Thread: Bad move North Korea

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

http://www.uscirf.gov/index.php?opti...k=view&id=2095 <political

http://www.onecountry.org/oc93/oc9306as.html <12 years old, sounds more like Jim Crowe

http://www.rferl.org/content/Tajiks_...n/1731761.html < Tajikistan not Iran

http://www.iranhumanrights.org/2008/04/students-resist/ <student's rights

http://www.netnative.com/news/02/jan/1026.html Title to article "Iran: Trial of Political Activists Begins - Basic Rights Violated in Secret Detentions"

http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2002/01/0...tivists-begins Iran: Trial of Political Activists Begins - Basic Rights Violated in Secret Detentions

http://www.englishpen.org/writersinp...alirezajabari/ < political executions

http://www.huntingtonnews.net/column...xecutions.html < nothing about religious executions

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/11/wo...iran.html?_r=1 < Article Title:Executions Are Under Way in Iran for Adultery and Other Violations

Here you go bruce. You guys that think it doesn't happen open your eyes.

Seriously god, maybe you ought to at least read the fucking things, before you offer them as evidence to add credibility to your argument. Because none of them had any relation to what you and BBM are portending.

Originally Posted by hawgballs

I read them too, and they were political executions.....none as overtly religious as "convert or die"......

Your a smart guy hawg read between the lines like you do for everything that you post.

Imagine i have my hand, up, palm towards me, fingers together and pointing up, thumb and pinky closed......now how about you reading between the lines.

Give me solid evidence that they have a "convert or die" philosophy, which BBM said and you are defending.

Originally Posted by hawgballs

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

http://www.uscirf.gov/index.php?opti...k=view&id=2095 Public Hearing of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom

http://www.onecountry.org/oc93/oc9306as.html <12 years old, Sows a pattern that has been in place

http://www.rferl.org/content/Tajiks_...n/1731761.html This one is my bad but still a good read

http://www.iranhumanrights.org/2008/04/students-resist/ was just an example of how things are there

http://www.netnative.com/news/02/jan/1026.html Same as the next

http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2002/01/0...tivists-begins First sentenceHuman Rights Watch today condemned the Iranian government’s prosecution of fifteen members of the National Religious Alliance (Melli Mazhabi) before a Revolutionary Court as a violation of their basic rights to freedom of expression and freedom of association.

http://www.englishpen.org/writersinp...alirezajabari/ [b] < A. ORIGINS OF PUNISHMENT BY EXECUTION IN IRAN TODAY



A.1 Political Origin
A. 2 Religious and Religious Precepts Origins
A. 3 Security Origin



A.1 Political Origin of the Death Sentence in Iran Today

http://www.huntingtonnews.net/column...xecutions.html [b] < The Iranian justice system is being misused to underline the absolute claim to power of the Shiite clerics, criticized the Human Rights organization.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/11/wo...iran.html?_r=1 [b] < He said the 20 additional executions were for such things as “rape, insulting religious sanctities and laws, and homosexuality.

Here you go bruce. You guys that think it doesn't happen open your eyes.

Seriously god, maybe you ought to at least read the fucking things, before you offer them as evidence to add credibility to your argument. Because none of them had any relation to what you and BBM are portending.

I thought you said you read them?

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

Originally Posted by rock_lobster

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

Originally Posted by ***COMMANDER***

I think there are a few countries that are willing to try and see what they can get away with now.... We use to have Strong (get down to business) presidents and the one we have now, many see him as weak and passive.

He is showing very soft skin to the Iranians and that approach has weakened his image. Joe biden said Obama would be tested and the decisions he is going to make is probably not the one that the people think he should make but to bare with him. I don't know if this was what he was referring to, but it would make sense.

I think ol kim doesn't think Obama has the nuts to fight back.

I guess we will see how Obama handles the situation. He is either going to prove them right, or dead wrong. I hope it is dead wrong.

Same shit happened under Bush, what did he do? What?

You've been comparing Obama to Bush a lot lately....is he or isnt he like Bush?

I'm not comparing the two, I'm comparing the similar situations they have encountered with North Korea. My point was, where was the outrage at Bush for not reacting militarily? I doubt I will get an intelligent response to this but that's par for the course around here anyways.

If you ask an intelligent question you may get an intelligent answer. You are one of the same ones that condemn Bush for the military actions he took and now you want to know why he didn't take one. Thats just stupid. You can't have it both ways trigger.

Who says he did nothing with North Korea? Why do you think North Korea has 1 2 nuke tests in 2006 and what 3 in 2009? What's the only thing that changed?

North Korea tested the waters. Found there isn't much back bones like there was before and here we are. He knew damn well if Bush, Bush sr., Reagan, maybe even Clinton were in office he wouldn't be pushing so hard. Obama lacks a back bone.

I'm not saying he's a piece of shit or anything like that. Just that when it comes to these types of things he doesn't have the resolve to see it through. Don't worry though I'm sure he'll be on tv sometime this coming week talking in circles as usual.

Show me those 3 nuclear tests in 2009.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009...a-nuclear-test

Turns out it's 2 but I did say 2 or 3 because I was not possitive.

That article says 1.

You are correct I was misreading it.

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

I thought you said you read them?

I did, and none of those articles fall into the scenario which was posed......"convert or die". I am not disputing the fact that it is a theocracy, but nothing that you presented reflects the scenario that BBM has repeated a few times in this thread and you are defending. And like I said, all of it was political.

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2002/01/0...tivists-begins First sentenceHuman Rights Watch today condemned the Iranian government’s prosecution of fifteen members of the National Religious Alliance (Melli Mazhabi) before a Revolutionary Court as a violation of their basic rights to freedom of expression and freedom of association.

Yeah and the following paragraph states what?

“These individuals have been persecuted solely for expressing their political views in a peaceful and legal manner,” said Joe Stork, Washington director of the Middle East and North Africa division of Human Rights Watch. “The government has provided no evidence whatsoever to justify their incarceration.”

And for the rest of your comments about your articles, just because it mentions the word religion does not mean the the article is about religious persecutions. Read the whole fucking article, instead of cherry picking a word here or a word there......

BBC NEWS
N Korea defends nuclear programme

North Korea has boasted of being a "proud nuclear power" and warned the US that it will strike back if attacked.

The statement came after US President Barack Obama said Washington was "fully prepared" for a possible North Korean missile test.

There have been recent warnings in South Korean and Japanese newspapers that the North is preparing another long-range missile launch.

The UN toughened sanctions against the North after a nuclear test on 25 May.

The North has also recently test-fired a number of short-range missiles recently, and in April launched a long-range rocket - which it said was to put a satellite into orbit but which the US said was a missile test.

Military analysts say North Korea's longest-range missile - the Taepodong-2 - has the potential range to reach Hawaii and parts of Alaska.

'Grave mistake'

"As long as our country has become a proud nuclear power, the US should take a correct look at whom it is dealing with," said the commentary in Rodong Sinmun, the newspaper of North Korea's ruling communist party.

"It is a grave mistake for the US to think it will not be hurt if it ignores this and ignites the fuse of war on the Korean Peninsula."

The commentary was published after President Obama said the US military was ready to defend American territory.

"This administration - and our military - is fully prepared for any contingencies," Mr Obama said in an interview to be aired by CBS television on Monday.

Asked if Washington was warning of a military response, Mr Obama said no.

He added: "I don't want to speculate on hypotheticals. But I do want to give assurances to the American people that the T's are crossed and the I's are dotted."

Meanwhile, a US naval vessel is tracking a North Korean ship believed to be heading for Burma via Singapore.

South Korea's YTN news reported, citing intelligence sources, that the ship was suspected of carrying illicit weapons in violation of sanctions agreed under a new UN resolution.

China and Russia - the country's traditional allies - approved the sanctions earlier this month, and called for North Korea to return to international talks on its nuclear programme.

The UN resolution calls for inspections of ships to or from North Korea believed to be carrying goods connected to weapons of mass destruction. It also broadens the arms embargo and further cuts the North's access to the international financial system, but does not authorise the use of force.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/h...ic/8112585.stm

Published: 2009/06/22 11:40:37 GMT

© BBC MMIX

Print Sponsor
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/mpapps/pag...ic/8112585.stm
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/default.stm
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/default.stm
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/default.stm
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/sport
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/sport/
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/sport/default.stm
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/default.stm
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/default.stm
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/mpapps/pag...vote.bbc.co.uk

Originally Posted by hawgballs

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2002/01/0...tivists-begins First sentenceHuman Rights Watch today condemned the Iranian government’s prosecution of fifteen members of the National Religious Alliance (Melli Mazhabi) before a Revolutionary Court as a violation of their basic rights to freedom of expression and freedom of association.

Yeah and the following paragraph states what?

“These individuals have been persecuted solely for expressing their political views in a peaceful and legal manner,” said Joe Stork, Washington director of the Middle East and North Africa division of Human Rights Watch. “The government has provided no evidence whatsoever to justify their incarceration.”

And for the rest of your comments about your articles, just because it mentions the word religion does not mean the the article is about religious persecutions. Read the whole fucking article, instead of cherry picking a word here or a word there......

Your right hawg taking sentences directly from the article means I'm wrong and your right. Talk about cherry picking those were direct quotes from the article not an opinion like someone elses. Who could that be. Oh yeah that was you.