U.S. denies visas to Iran officials for U.N. meeting: report

Comments (16)
MetalHead8 wrote:

Somehow, im sure the lack of Iranian Presense at a Human Rights meeting will un-noticed. Iran in the past has shown there stance on human rights and how little they care for it

Nov 17, 2012 1:32pm EST  --  Report as abuse
MetalHead8 wrote:

Somehow, im sure the lack of Iranian Presense at a Human Rights meeting will un-noticed. Iran in the past has shown there stance on human rights and how little they care for it

Nov 17, 2012 1:32pm EST  --  Report as abuse
majkmushrm wrote:

If the UN had any integrity, they’d move to Switzerland. If the US had any integrity, we’d be embarrassed.

Nov 17, 2012 1:41pm EST  --  Report as abuse

majkmushrm wrote:
If the UN had any integrity, they’d move to Switzerland. If the US had any integrity, we’d be embarrassed.

Man that was profound LOL, I totally agree, it’s time for U.N.to move to a more neutral country other than USA. Keep in mind that most expenses are borne by US tax payers. But the words human rights and Iran are not totally synonomous.

Nov 17, 2012 2:01pm EST  --  Report as abuse
IRanEagles wrote:

Good job!
Why the killer and torturer of journalists and its own people be allowed to attend these meetings? Maybe to laugh at others ??
These Mullas are not elected leaders of people of IRAN. The world knows that well.

Nov 17, 2012 2:12pm EST  --  Report as abuse
sjfella wrote:

I agree, time to let someone else have the U.N. and all the associated costs.

Nov 17, 2012 2:19pm EST  --  Report as abuse
paintcan wrote:

They US didn’t do this to any number of former hated regimes in the past and why they do it now isn’t very well explained here.

The US is the host country and it has decided unilaterally to act like doorkeeper for the UN as well?

Why didn’t the author of this article ask for the opinions of various members of the GA and even the SC and especially of the UN committee affected? Are they supportive of the US action?

Nov 17, 2012 5:27pm EST  --  Report as abuse
usagadfly wrote:

Yes, the UN should sell its property in the USA and move to a country that commits to not interfering with UN operations and functions.

Of course, the USA made such a commitment once. Like many US commitments to the non-powerful. such “commitments” are, like US civil “liberties” and “rights”, optional.

Nov 17, 2012 6:17pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AdamSmith wrote:

Iranians are far less evil than America or Israel.

For many years the US lived with the Soviet Union in possession of thousands of nuclear tipped intercontinental ballistic missles, aimed right at American cities.

The Soviet press, for example the official newspaper Pravda, routinely published major editorials calling for the destruction of imperialist America, the capitalist exploiter of mankind.

Yet Russia for all its rhetoric, was run by human beings, and as human beings do, even fanatical communists, they considered their own interests, and their families. They never used any of their thousands of nuclear weapons on anybody.

The same with Chinese communists. They have nuclear missles. They, too, have families and children they love. And so too with Iranians Moslems. They too have families and children they love.

But the cleverest Hollywood script writers and propagandists on Earth reside in Israel, and they have the world believing that Iran, who has invaded nobody, would immediately use a nuclear weapon if it had one.

Israel itself, constantly threatening to strike Iran, is driving the world toward war. Israel, the great criminal nation, steals more land from defenseless Palestinians every day, while cleverly diverting our attention by pointing their finger at Iran.

Israel, who every day steals land, who bulldozes homes, cuts down olive tree groves, who kills Palestinian children with tanks and helicopters. This same Israel cleverly points their finger at Iran, who steals nobody’s land, and invades nobody.

Of all the nations that possess nuclear arms (Israel, America, France, England, India, Pakistan, Russia, China) Iran would be a safer bet to be responsible and rational.

It was only America who has used its nuclear weapons on fellow humans, when we dropped two of them on Japan after she was already defeated, at the end of WWII. General Eisenhower was very much against it.

The world will be better off if Iran does have a nuclear deterrent. Iran is a huge country with 73 million people. The sooner Iran has nuclear missles to defend itself, the sooner the threat of war will recede.

Nov 17, 2012 7:00pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ladygoodman wrote:

If Iran is developing nuclear weapons, it’s because the US doesn’t invade countries that possess them. The US is in the process of setting Iran up for a conflict reminescent of the propagandic projectile vomit of the Bush admininstration. The only WMDs found in Iraq were the chemical weapons sold to Sadam Hussein by Reagan to use against Iran. And everyone wonders why the rest of the world hates us. Hoping against hope that everyone has had enough of this and won’t cave to the fear and war mongering yet again because this time could be the last time. Pray for peace.

Nov 17, 2012 7:36pm EST  --  Report as abuse

“accuses of seeking nuclear weapons, a charge Tehran denies.”

No reuters you say “an accusation Tehran denies” not a charge… learn how to speak the english language. A charge is based on evidence, an accusation is based on nothing.

Also why do you keep saying Iran “hoped” to attend this meeting??

You are really over stressing the word “hoped” here… is it because you don’t want to admit they have a right under the UN charter as a member state to freely attend these meetings?

You really go out of your way to bend the english language to your propaganda needs dont you!

The US denies the visas beause they know that Irans diplomats will be using the conference to slam the US on their horrendous human rights violations and Washington would rather use it as a platform to serve their imperial agenda instead…

The same reason they were barred from the GFC summit…

Nov 17, 2012 7:53pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Anyways as some one said above its a Hollywood script keep calling Iranians terrorist and keep arming their neighbours with multi billion dollar defense contracts.
Just like they played the boogie man card with the russians calling them commies with nukes. Absolutely shameful.

Nov 17, 2012 8:38pm EST  --  Report as abuse

@MetalHead8 Is English a second language dude? Well, shame on the English as A Second Language School for hebrew Speakers which you attanded.

Nov 17, 2012 9:00pm EST  --  Report as abuse

@majkmushrm Well said. And unfortunately how very true.

Nov 17, 2012 9:04pm EST  --  Report as abuse
unreason wrote:

pendingapproval:
charge, n.
8. An accusation of a wrong of offense; allegation;
indictment; specification of something alleged.
[1913 Webster]

Do you deny the Iranians “hoped” to attend? If so, why did they request visas in the first place? So your opposition to the word choice is not based on meaning or alleged propaganda, but rather lack of your chosen propaganda. Even so, the article does mention what you complain it does not.

wrt your second comment: how is any of that relevant to this article?

Nov 18, 2012 3:14am EST  --  Report as abuse
MetalHead8 wrote:

@Schlomo, well i can tell English is your second language with the poorly constructed insult. I know your not big on thinking before you speak, but you have to try.

@unreason – your wasting your time, im afriad. Pendingapproval is the king of irrelevant information

Nov 20, 2012 11:43am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.