It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US Proposes Travel Ban - I'm a little Concerned

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 08:41 AM
link   
In a CNN article I was reading this morning with respect to North Korea and their nuclear weapons program, the US is proposing to the UNSC that it place a travel ban on anyone who supports their program.


Additionally, the U.S. resolution would impose a travel ban on people who support Pyongyang's weapons programs.


Full Article Here

Now, although i'll concede that what they probably MEAN is financial support, but that isn't clearly defined...but up to this point NK hasnt USED any nuclear weapons on anyone, they havent sold their technology to anyone, they havent sold raw materials to anyone (that can be ascertained).

The above being said, although I certainly dont support any nefarious use at ALL of their nuclear program, in the article it really makes no mention specifically of their NUCLEAR program, only a travel ban on anyone who supports their weapons program.

Let's say I DID support their weapons program..as an American I CERTAINLY want to have that right as the Constitution has given me...yet, the language in that article suggests otherwise...anyone else pick up on that?

Your thoughts?



AB1




posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 10:22 AM
link   
The ban is on North Korean leaders. k?

Its so funny to hear all this anti-americanism on this site. People are searching all across the internet to find a few lines that they can twist and critize america for. Grow up.


[edit on 10/12/06 by pugachev]



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by pugachev
The ban is on North Korean leaders. k?

Its so funny to hear all this anti-americanism on this site. People are searching all across the internet to find a few lines that they can twist and critize america for. Grow up.


[edit on 10/12/06 by pugachev]


Is that what this was? ARGH....these people need to be baned from ATS for posting misleading material.



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by pugachev
The ban is on North Korean leaders. k?

Its so funny to hear all this anti-americanism on this site. People are searching all across the internet to find a few lines that they can twist and critize america for. Grow up.


[edit on 10/12/06 by pugachev]


Who's criticizing America? Im criticizing a decision on a policy. Furthermore, AS a patriotic soul, I have been endowed with this right.

Some people are searching all across the internet to ensure that they have no cognizance of anothers context. Grow up



P.S. for the record, no it's NOT "k"...and in the mentioned article there is NO separation between only North Korean leaders or not...THAT would be exactly what concerns me, not that I owe you an explanation honestly.



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 10:51 AM
link   
Perhaps you should check more than one source next time. I apologize for my comment. Its just so many of these topics on this forum are created just to make America look bad and nothing more.



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by pugachev
Perhaps you should check more than one source next time. I apologize for my comment. Its just so many of these topics on this forum are created just to make America look bad and nothing more.


It's ok
but ya know what, my struggle (seemingly endless) is to make America look GOOD again! It did once, and it can again.



AB1



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 10:59 AM
link   
From msnbc.com

The United States has circulated a new U.N. Security Council resolution that seeks to ban travel by people involved in North Korea’s weapons program but softens some other measures to win Russian and Chinese support.



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by pugachev
From msnbc.com

The United States has circulated a new U.N. Security Council resolution that seeks to ban travel by people involved in North Korea’s weapons program but softens some other measures to win Russian and Chinese support.


Yea, I think it's a matter of semantics, and just the reporters interpretation of the draft resolution. CNN says anyone who supports while msnbc reports people who are involved ... what the final resolution states im sure is all thats important.


AB1



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by alphabetaone

Originally posted by pugachev
Perhaps you should check more than one source next time. I apologize for my comment. Its just so many of these topics on this forum are created just to make America look bad and nothing more.


It's ok
but ya know what, my struggle (seemingly endless) is to make America look GOOD again! It did once, and it can again.



AB1


I know what you mean. These past few years it just seems like America has took a u-turn for the worse.



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 11:02 AM
link   
The relevant points from the US sponsored, draft UN Resolution are:-


# Asks nations to freeze funds or other financial assets held by individuals or entities providing support for North Korea's nuclear and ballistic missile programs.

# Establishes a Security Council sanctions committee that would ask U.N. member nations to report on steps they have taken to implement the resolution, determine banned items and designate individuals and entities subject to sanctions.

# Allows nations to prohibit the entry or transit of individuals and their families if they support the North's polices on weapons of mass destruction. Exceptions are travel for humanitarian needs or religious obligations.


www.cnn.com...

Pretty standard fare really.

So unless your're a North Korean General, Nuclear Scientists, or are bank rolling NK's nuclear programme, it's highly unlikely you'll be listed as one of the designated individuals.

Or is their something you're not telling us? Why does your father spend so long in Pyongyang .......



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 11:04 AM
link   
I understand what you mean but let's be realistic. Do you really see them passing a resolution that states ANYONE who supports the program? I don't. Does anyone know where to get a copy of this draft resolution?



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Essan
Or is their something you're not telling us? Why does your father spend so long in Pyongyang .......


LOL he stopped spending all that time in 2002...but I'd bet you could just IMAGINE the phone bills incurred since then.


But, seriously, this:



Allows nations to prohibit the entry or transit of individuals and their families if they support the North's polices on weapons of mass destruction.


Doesn't bother you? To me it says:

Any nation can prohibit entry to you or your family members if you support their policies


.... Well, what if I did? I have the right to support their policy on how they maintain their weapons program, but yet reserve the right to NOT support their policy of exercising those weapons on another population.

[edit on 12-10-2006 by alphabetaone]



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by pugachev
The United States has circulated a new U.N. Security Council resolution that seeks to ban travel by people involved in North Korea’s weapons program


Does that include Rumsfeld?

Rumsfeld: Director of a company which wins $200m contract to sell nuclear reactors to North Korea


Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, sat on the board of a company which three years ago sold two light water nuclear reactors to North Korea - a country he now regards as part of the "axis of evil" and which has been targeted for regime change by Washington because of its efforts to build nuclear weapons.



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 11:17 AM
link   
Frankly, when I get into a "mood" out of frustration, no doubt, I sometimes come to the irrational conclusion that the U.S. should enact a travel ban on ALL people wanting to enter the country.

Forget about those Japanese tourists. From Europe? Nope, you can't come in. I see that you are from the Middle East....no way that you are getting into the U.S., that's for sure. Oh, your'e from China? How nice for you. Sorry, you'll have to go home, you can't come in. The gates are closed. The US is closed to all foreigners.

I wonder what the world reaction would be. Would the U.S. be safer under such circumstance?

Like I said, I sometimes feel this way, when I get into a mood. I get so sick and tired about people blindly criticizing the United States simply because they hate George Bush or Dick Cheney as if they are representative of all Americans. Nonetheless, they were elected (yeah, I know, they stole the election just like Kennedy stole the election from Richard Nixon in '60) and they represent the people of the U.S.

Why do we jump to defend people who support the enemies of this country. North Korea is certainly not the friend of the U.S. The policies that NK are pursueing is certainly NOT in the best interests fo the U.S. so why is it so irrational to "lock out" or exclude those who openly support our "enemy", NK.?



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by benevolent tyrant

Why do we jump to defend people who support the enemies of this country. North Korea is certainly not the friend of the U.S. The policies that NK are pursueing is certainly NOT in the best interests fo the U.S. so why is it so irrational to "lock out" or exclude those who openly support our "enemy", NK.?


BT, I think you may be missing the point of why I find this of concern.

Im not ascribing to their policy AT ALL...nor do i necessarily see anyone here, at least, jumping to NK's defense on their policy.

I DO, however, although im repeating myself, reserve the RIGHT to support their policy. Im granted that as an American Citizen!

Ya know something, it starts out SO small....with just a few people saying something repeatedly, until enough are people are saying it for it to become almost understood that its FACT. And if wording like that goes unchecked and unchallenged THATS when people start REALLY losing their freedom and liberty.

Al Quaida is PERFECT example of what NOT to do within an organization or community. All it takes is a few people saying:

Americans = hate
Americans = hate
Americans = hate
.
.
.
Americans = hate


Now, the ancestry has woven the fabric of hate for ALL Americans as the word has passed down the line, and children are born, etc etc etc...


Likewise with unchecked policy even from (YES) within our own Government...if they idly slip by us simple little wording like that, and it takes hold, and more and more people ascribe to it's authority, before you know it, it becomes a defacto law that NOW the only battle is trying to get others to see why it should NEVER have put into place to begin with.


Supporters = ban
Supporters = ban
Supporters = ban
.
.
.
Supporters = ban




Seems to ME that within the last few years (10 to 20) or so, the concensus has been "Well, its easier to ask for forgiveness than permission"

Does that concern me? you bet it does.



posted on Oct, 13 2006 @ 04:09 AM
link   
Just remember, this is a UN Resolution, it's not a law!

A number of Similar UN resolutions already exist, imposing travel restrictions on named individuals in connections with:-

Al Qaida

Yugoslavia (in connection with war crimes)

Ivory Coast

Congo

Iraq

Lebanon

Liberia

Sierra Leone

Sudan


www.ukun.org...


The latest resolution will simply add NK to this list.



posted on Oct, 13 2006 @ 07:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by mecheng

Originally posted by pugachev
The United States has circulated a new U.N. Security Council resolution that seeks to ban travel by people involved in North Korea’s weapons program


Does that include Rumsfeld?

Just three years ago?

Incredible. Thanks for bringing that one up.



posted on Oct, 13 2006 @ 08:07 AM
link   
Rummy... It’s funny what a hypocrite he is (really all politicians). It’s ok to sell nuclear reactors to the North Koreans a few years ago when he's making money off the deal but now turn around and suddenly they are one leg in the axis of evil. It's almost as funny as the picture of him shaking the hand of Sadam Hussein a few years ago.

I'm not blaming him alone on this, just think his hypocrisy is funny. I don't know a lot of the history behind the deal but what was Clinton and congress thinking when they decided it was a good idea to give that lunatic a nuclear reactor?


[edit on 13-10-2006 by mecheng]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join