Leader Faults UN Inaction Over Syria - New York Times [getdailynow.blogspot.com]
Wainy Days #17 'Jonah and the Manilow'More: www.MyDamnChannel.com Follow us on Twitter: www.twitter.com Like us on Facebook: www.facebook.com 2008 Webby Award Winner Best Comedy Series David's effort to impress a girl with Barry Manilow tix doesn't go quite as planned. Starring David Wain (The State, Wet Hot American Summer), Ali Marsh (Stella, Seinfeld), Matt Ballard (Stella, The Wrong Coast). CAST David -- David Wain Ellen -- Ali Marsh Matt -- Matt Ballard Scalper -- David Yazbek Renee Zellweger -- Jenny Maguire Kofi Annan -- Justin Lord Charlie Rose -- Reed Birney Bouncer -- Chris Crockett Giant -- Jack Fisher
MOSCOW â€" The Obama administration acknowledged on Friday that a shipment of Russian-made equipment confiscated on its way to Damascus did not violate sanctions, but said that Moscow’s policy of supplying aid to President Bashar al-Assad of Syria was “still morally bankrupt.â€
Russia’s foreign minister, Sergey V. Lavrov, said the cargo confiscated on Wednesday contained electronic components for a radar station and that such equipment fell within the bounds of international agreements. In Washington, a State Department spokesman, Victoria Nuland, did not dispute that but expressed the administration’s “grave concern†over Russia’s support for Mr. Assad, whose government is fighting a 19-month-old uprising that has turned into a civil war.
“No responsible country ought to be aiding and abetting the war machine of the Assad regime and particularly those with responsibilities for global peace and security as U.N. Security Council members have,†Ms. Nuland said.
Of the shipment, she said, “we have no doubt, this was serious military equipment.â€
On Friday, Mr. Lavrov offered the most detailed explanation Russia has given in its dispute with Turkey over the Moscow-to-Damascus flight, which was intercepted by Turkish warplanes on Wednesday and forced to land in the Turkish capital, Ankara, where the passengers and crew members had to wait for hours. Turkish inspectors examined the aircraft and impounded what Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan described as Russian munitions bound for Syria’s Defense Ministry.
“We have no secrets,†Mr. Lavrov said. “We have studied the situation: there were no weapons on this airplane, of course, and there could not be. On the airplane there was cargo, which a legal Russian shipper sent via legal means to a legal customer.â€
It remains unclear why the shipment was sent to Damascus via a commercial airliner.
The Russian newspaper Kommersant reported on Saturday that the cargo had been sent by a company based in Tula, which produces antitank, antiaircraft and anti-artillery systems, as well as radar equipment. The company identified, KBP Tula, was accused by the United States in 2003 of providing weapons and sophisticated military equipment to Saddam Hussein, the Iraqi leader, in violation of United Nations sanctions.
The plane was permitted to leave on Thursday, but Russia and Syria protested the Turkish actions. Russia demanded a further explanation, and Syria said it would file a complaint with international aviation authorities.
The dispute has escalated tensions between Turkey, a NATO member, and Russia, the major arms supplier to Mr. Assad. The fighting has shown no sign of easing and has raised fears that the Middle East will be destabilized, as hundreds of thousands of refugees have spilled into Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq.
Turkey’s leaders, who were once close to Mr. Assad, have turned against him and are major backers of the insurgents, who have operated from Turkey and have secured areas of Syrian territory along the Turkish border.
In Istanbul on Saturday, according to news reports, Mr. Erdogan, the Turkish prime minister, criticized the United Nations Security Council, and in particular China and Russia, for failing to take decisive steps to end the Syrian crisis.
China and Russia â€" both permanent members of the Security Council â€" have vetoed resolutions intended to pressure the Syrian government to end the fighting and seek a peaceful political transition.
“If we wait for one or two of the permanent members,†Mr. Erdogan said, according to The Associated Press, “then the future of Syria will be in danger.â€
The inaction, Mr. Erdogan said, according to media reports, was encouraging the Damascus government to continue its brutal assault.
“The U.N. Security Council has not intervened in the human tragedy that has been going on in Syria for 20 months, despite all our efforts,†Mr. Erdogan said, according to Reuters. “There’s an attitude that encourages, gives the green light to Assad to kill tens or hundreds of people every day.â€
Recommend Leader Faults UN Inaction Over Syria - New York Times Issues Question by etha(n_e)scapes: What does "separation of church and state" mean? First, what exactly does it mean? Does it mean that laws can't be enforced upon the church? Second, why was this "separation" put into place? Best answer for What does "separation of church and state" mean?:
Answer by *Logan* (formerly ✞†L†✞)
Separation from religion and government.
Answer by Gravity Bear
Your ignorance is astonishing. It means that people that think like you, should have no business controlling anything in our government. It means that the church should have no influence in our government. And it was put into place because if the church lead our government we would all be morons.
Answer by Superfuzz
It means religious doctrine shouldn't affect a countries laws and so outdated religious ethics don't affect the general public. For example, in some (heavily religious) countries adultery is punishable by death and imprisonment, because it goes against certain religious texts. However in civilised parts of the world, adultery is obviously frowned upon but people aren't punished by the law.
Answer by Kevin S
It means that we have the right to be governed by laws that have nothing to do with religion. Which is good.
Answer by Rosie
What?!
Answer by Kelsey
It's supposed to mean that religion does not interfere with laws. They don't combine at all. Because this is supposed to be a free country, people are supposed to be able to have their own religion without having laws determined by other religions enforced on them. Take for example, if you lived in a Hindu society, but you lived a christian lifestyle, you wouldn't want Hindu laws to be enforced upon you because that's not your religion.
Answer by lainiebsky
It means that neither inter feres with or influences the other. It was put into place by leaders who had seen the abuses that national religions had led to in Europe.
Answer by light of truth
It means that the government does not support any one religion but allows all religions to exists within it jurisdiction while not allowing said religions to influence said government.
Answer by Jerry
It simply means that there will not be a state sponsored religion as there is in England. It does not mean that people should be kept from practicing their religion as many try to do.
Answer by Jabberwock
No, the law applies to everyone. it's that no church has any special place in society at an official level; it recieves no special benefits or protection, and has no place in formulating legislation or policy. It is an entirely independent institution that is just as liable under the law as any other or individuals.
Answer by debbie2243
No religion in politics No politics in religion The state and government do enforce laws on the church like building permits, requirements for sewerage, water, electricty,garbage, etc They didn't want bibles in the courtroom. They didn't want religion to dictate to them.
Answer by Old Timer Too
Separation of Church and State has two applications, all stated in the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution. First, congress shall pass no laws limiting the practice of religion. This was violated a long, long time ago. Second, congress shall pass no laws promoting a particular religion. The general thinking that it applies to any religion was violated a long, long time ago (and never was enforced). The bottom line is that religion (of any kind) cannot be supported by government funds. That concept was also violated by giving tax credits and by not taxing church properties. Fortunately, most church _businesses_ are taxed and rightly so, unless they fully qualify as a non-profit organization. It is a concept and that's about all, but it is given lip service and the courts do (generally) recognize it as valid and applicable.
0 comments:
Post a Comment