It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


UN Security Council rejects Cease Fire Call

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 11:40 PM
This guy Bolton makes me sick. I hope they toss him out on his ear soon. This man has done nothing but ruin all of our Foreign Relations with quite a few countries. Its not that the UN doesn't work, its that we have good-for-nothing foreign agents working not for our benefit but for the benefit of other countries under the UN roof.

UN Security Council rejects Annan's call for immediate cease-fire

By Haaretz Staff and Agencies

UNITED NATIONS - The UN Security Council late on Sunday unanimously adopted a statement deploring Israel's deadly attack on the southern Lebanese village of Qana but rejected UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan's call for an immediate truce.

The policy statement, read at a public meeting, expressed "extreme shock and distress" at the air strike by the Israel Air Force that killed at least 60 people and asked Annan to report within a week "on the circumstances of this tragic incident."

It stressed "the urgency of securing a lasting, permanent and sustainable cease-fire" and affirmed the council's determination to work "without any further delay" to adopt a resolution "for a lasting settlement of the crisis."

U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said he opposed calling for a truce, as requested by Annan in an impassioned plea to an emergency council meeting he called after the strike on Qana, the deadliest single attack of Israel's 19-day-old war against Hezbollah militants.


AIPAC Monkeyboy speaking with one of his handlers waiting for his commands from the snake Gillerman. You can almost see the conspiracy between the 2 just from the smug look on Gillermans face. He looks like hes about to burst from Glee.

Mod Edit: BB Code.

[edit on 31/7/2006 by Mirthful Me]

posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 11:48 PM
What do you expect, I knew this would happen, even said to some members of my family today that, the Security Council will not call for a ceasefire, nor would they condemm the attacks and I was right.

The UN Stands for nothing nowadays, why they keep it going goes beyond Belief, If I was Anann I would Resign and tell the world the reasons why....

As he said during his address of the security council, The Credibliity of the Whole UN was at stake, And I am afraid from what has happenned today at the un just show that the UN is pointless now adays.

The UN Security Council has passed a statement expressing "extreme shock and distress" but not condemnation of Israel's bombing of civilians in Qana.

Earlier Mr Annan said: "I am deeply dismayed that my earlier calls for an immediate cessation of hostilities were not heeded.


[edit on 30-7-2006 by spencerjohnstone]

posted on Jul, 31 2006 @ 12:13 AM
This Bolton fellow. He stopped the UN calling for a truce? WTFITSB. Whose messenger of death is this? The American people? Nah, can't be, no way - I refuse to believe that about the people of America.

How did he get that way? Wasn't he a loophole recess-appointment poser excuse for a diplomat or something? Won't he be "yesterday's news" early next year upon legislative review? He has corrupted the UN as an organization by this - most will just blame the UN. Not me. He and his political masters are culpable. Hague-bound.

Gonna do a little advanced old-school "research" on this soul-cadaver "Wilford Brimley look-alike" Bolton. See what this guy has for bones in the corporate closet and his associates. He's criminally negligent with wanton disregard for human life and provides support and comfort to State terrorists who have undeclared nuclear weapons. Bad-guy - makes the world a more unstable and dangerous place.

Victor K.

Qana v1.0, Qana v2.0...What's next?
Never forget.

[edit on 31-7-2006 by V Kaminski]

posted on Jul, 31 2006 @ 01:54 AM
UN security council would call for a stop to all military action going on now, and all the members would call for it, they simply dont call for it because the US would veto it exactly like it vetoed all of them in the past, any resolution calling to put a stop to the curent events would be vetoed by the US , so there is no point in adopting a resolution, the only country oposing is USA.
This are just a few, the rest is inside.

Year Resolution Vetoed by the USA If Multiple
Resolutions Voting Figures
1972 Condemns Israel for killing hundreds of people in Syria and Lebanon in air raids.
1973 Afirms the rights of the Palestinians and calls on Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories.
1976 Condemns Israel for attacking Lebanese civilians.
Condemns Israel for building settlements in the occupied territories.
Calls for self determination for the Palestinians.
Afirms the rights of the Palestinians.
1976 Condemns South Africa's attempts to impose apartheid on Namibia. 2
1976 For the admission of Vietnam to the United Nations. 5
(from 1975)
1977 Condemns the apartheid situation in South Africa. 3
1978 Urges the permanent members (USA, USSR, UK, France, China) to insure United Nations decisions on the maintenance of international peace and security. 119-2
Criticises the living conditions of the Palestinians. 110-2
Condemns the Israeli human rights record in occupied territories. 97-3
1978 Calls for developed countries to increase the quantity and quality of development assistance to underdeveloped countries. 119-1
1979 Calls for an end to all military and nuclear collaboration with the apartheid South Africa. 114-3
Strengthens the arms embargo against South Africa. 132-3
Offers assistance to all the oppressed people of South Africa and their liberation movement. 134-3
Concerns negotiations on disarmament and cessation of the nuclear arms race. 120-3
Calls for the return of all inhabitants expelled by Israel. 121-3
Demands that Israel desist from human rights violations. 111-2
Requests a report on the living conditions of Palestinians in occupied Arab countries. 120-2
Offers assistance to the Palestinian people. 112-3
Discusses sovereignty over national resources in occupied Arab territories. 118-2
Calls for protection of developing counties' exports. 111-2
Calls for alternative approaches within the United Nations system for improving the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms. 136-1
Opposes support for intervention in the internal or external affairs of states. 104-2
For a United Nations Conference on Women. 121-2
To include Palestinian women in the United Nations Conference on Women. 122-2
Safeguards rights of developing countries in multinational trade negotiations.
The UN has good intentions, but can not aplly anything because it would be veto by the US.

[edit on 31-7-2006 by pepsi78]

posted on Jul, 31 2006 @ 04:24 PM
Once again the UN had indefinately postponed any meeting with regards to an International Force going into Lebanon:

A UN official said the meeting had been delayed "until there is more political clarity" on the path ahead in the Middle East conflict.

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan called for the meeting last week, but said that any talks would be preliminary because the Security Council has not yet set out a mandate for what an international force would do.

Oh do they mean until more innocent civillians are killed, on both sides before they will do anything about it, All of this reminds me of what happenned when there was a the Kosovo war, again innocent women, children and men were being killed, an all the UN Did was sit an argue pospone decisions on implementing any force or calling for a ceasefire.

posted on Jul, 31 2006 @ 04:55 PM
A UN resolution for a cease fire would do nothing more than maintain the status quo, and THAT, my friends, would be the real tragedy. Yes indeed, to come out of this war, and this devastation, with only the promise of another, future round of warfare upon the rebuilding of Hezbastardollah in Lebanon would be a shame, worse even than the carnage witnessed recently.

Bolton is a wise man, and indeed, Condi Rice has put it plainly, the old order of business in Lebanon can be no more. To allow it to be as it was will surely result in more of the same.

Kudo's to Israel for pressing forward to exterminate Hezbastardollah once and for all.

posted on Jul, 31 2006 @ 05:04 PM
Yes the extermination of the Arabs will keep on going under the watchful eye of the God of the US . . .

Funny that US can not stop from making enemies in the middle east . . .

I guess US will rule the world and Israel will follow behind . . .

Then when the next terrorist attack hits our nation then we can claim again that we are targeted because our freedoms and what we stand for.

Then we can proceed with another invasion of more sovereign countries . . .

US rules the world but not as a democracy building nation but as adestroyer.

posted on Jul, 31 2006 @ 10:45 PM

UN Security Council rejects Cease Fire Call

Good, the war is perfectly legitimate. The UN should've been more invovled for the decades that the UNIFIL group was there, to jump in now and tell Israel that it can't attack the very forces that weren't supposed to be in lebanon in the first place would be ludicrous.

Anyway, the UN is meaninless. What would it have done if the SC had a resolution that demanded an immediate cease fire? Hezbollah's not even a member of the UN.

posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 05:50 PM

Good, the war is perfectly legitimate.

This War is not Legitimate. Allowing over 800 or more innocent women and children and others to be killed, is not legitimate and the UN Should hang its Head in shame. And anyways it was the U.S. who blocked the UN fromc alling for a Immediate Ceasfire, so not all of the UN Agrees that this war is Legitimate what so ever.

Anyway, the UN is meaninless.

The U.N. Became meaningless everysince Kosovo, they were too slow in doing anything with regards to that... Im afraid the UN does not fit in to todays world, Individual countrie bypass the UN everytime they want to invade another country or start another war with another country. The UN should be disbanded once and for all.

posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 06:05 PM

Originally posted by Nygdan
Anyway, the UN is meaninless. What would it have done if the SC had a resolution that demanded an immediate cease fire? Hezbollah's not even a member of the UN.

That's debatable.

Lebanon is one of the first members of the UN:

Lebanon -- (24 Oct. 1945)

Hez has 23 0f 128 seats in parliment:

Hezbollah is an active participant in the political life and processes of Lebanon (much in the same way as Hamas in Palestinian communities). In 1992, it participated in Lebanese elections for the first time, winning 12 out of 128 seats in parliament. It won 10 seats in 1996, and 8 in 2000. In the general election of 2005, it won 14 seats nationwide, and an Amal-Hezbollah alliance won all 23 seats in Southern Lebanon.

So it's fair to say that Hez IS indeed a member of the UN. If even by proxy.

posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 09:27 PM

Originally posted by intrepid
So it's fair to say that Hez IS indeed a member of the UN. If even by proxy.

Then by proxy Lebanon engaged in an illegal war of agression. With Iran and Syria funding hezbollah, that also means that they've been undermining the sovreignty of the Lebanese. Things get worse if Hezbollah is 'the' government of lebanon, whereas now its just a popular militia with some representatives in the independant lebanese government.
And if hezbollah is part of the UN, then its bound by the original agreement that created Israel in the first place, and certainly has agreed to not indiscriminately fire into Israel (in so far as firing rockets at 'cities', rather then military targets). Hezbollah's only advantage is that its an independant milita, unbound by international law.

Allowing over 800 or more innocent women and children and others to be killed, is not legitimate

Since when?

And anyways it was the U.S. who blocked the UN fromc alling for a Immediate Ceasfire

The US voted, its permited to vote. The US, and its powers within the UN, are as much a part of the UN as Annan's office or the initial suggestion that there be a call for a cease fire.

posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 09:59 PM
Nidigan it's simple to lable things , but what would you do if you ran out of options?
If you had no option at all and to try to solve the problem you had to do something.

this are facts.
lebanese civilians were captured in the passed war off the streets and are beeing held by the israely till this day
The past war against lebanon was not just, so no matter how you put it, those people were captured in a war that has no justice at all.
Lebanon has asked for them back numeros times, the UN asked for their return, a resolution was issued.

Are the above 3 points I made fake? NO
Okay here is the key question.
What do you do when everything else fails?
Israel has ignored the law, can you please tell me what would be an option?
Israel has ignored UN resolution that asks for the lebanese people held in israel to be given back to lebanon.
This resolution is very old, so this mejure done by hesbolah is as a last resort. It's really how I see it.
The soldiers were captured for a swap, and not for agresion against israel, it was done as a last resort options because there were no other options.
So what do you do when some one ignores the law, refuses to give people captured off the street iligaly and claims that it will never give them back even if the UN says so, what do you do?

new topics

top topics


log in