Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-01-30-Speech-4-115"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030130.3.4-115"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
I have ultimately voted against this report because I am disappointed at the vote on successive amendments. My vote was determined by the fact that some improvements tabled by my group, all of which were balanced and in the interests of a free Europe were rejected, and amendments that clearly fall in line with the interests of Saddam Hussein’s regime were adopted. It is worthy of the utmost condemnation that the majority has in this way betrayed the spirit of the very compromise that will guide the laborious drafting of the joint text.
This vote might well be celebrated in Baghdad and has, to this extent, at least one positive aspect: it highlights the deceptiveness of the argument of those who are rooted in an archaic left-wing ideology and have boundless rhetoric that appears to condemn but in fact simply plays into Saddam Hussein’s hands. It is a paradox that this resolution, which consequently loses much of its virtue, should have been adopted by those who, even in yesterday’s debate, called Saddam Hussein, amongst other things, nothing less than a ‘dictator and murderer’ – and yet do not follow this harsh and accurate verbal condemnation to its logical conclusion.
The final vote, in fact, contains a perverse paradox. Many Members will have voted in favour because they believe that in doing so they are preserving world peace. If it has any effect, however, particularly the effect of being celebrated in Baghdad and of weakening international political pressure on Saddam Hussein, this vote might have brought us closer to war."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples