 Re: sal ek dit glo? [boodskap #72208] |
Mon, 20 January 2003 21:08  |
![DiDi[1] is tans af-lyn](/theme/default/images/offline.png "DiDi[1] is tans af-lyn")
DiDi[1]
Boodskappe: 345
Geregistreer: October 2002
Karma: 0
|
Senior Lid |
|
|
On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 20:52:06 +0000, l&p wrote:
>
> Bestaan daar 'n offisieele plek waar ek dese
> e.pos skam kan meld?
> patrick
>
Ag kom nou Long Play, moet nie spog oor die briewe nie.
Ons ander kry dit (ek twee per dag) en vee dit uit sonder
om dit te lees. Stuur dit na die welsyn toe of so iets maar
moet nie ons daarmee verveel nie. Al wat jy doen is om
te bewys dat jy steeds te veel van 'n leek is om 'n
program soos Mailwasher te gebruik.
Tannie Hester van Uit(K)trapfontein se man
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: sal ek dit glo? [boodskap #72281 is 'n antwoord op boodskap #72280] |
Wed, 22 January 2003 18:13  |
|
|
Oorspronklik gepos deur: @rogers.com
Ayanda Nkuhlu wrote:
> Bullshit Francois. Jy lieg dat jy blou word.
> Daardie briewe is geprogrameer om
> twee weekliks uitgestuur te word
> en dan na verskillende adresse.
> Daar bestaan nie 'n kans dat jy
> dit elke tweede dag in jou pos
> kry nie. As jy kan lieg kan
> jy steel ook.
Du Plessis, besef jy hoe gereeld
jou briewe driehoekig op die papier
verskyn? Die forensiese spoor word
al makliker om te volg. Ek trap in
jou spoor soos 'n goeie Boesman.
En nou van die os op die jas. As
jy 'n sin skryf waar twee werkwoorde
naas mekaar staan, maar aan verskillende
sinsnedes behoort, sit dan asseblief 'n
komma tussenin. Byvoorbeeld: "As jy kan
lieg, kan jy steel ook."
Tant Hessie van die taalforensiese
afdeling van die Derde Republiek se
speurkomitee.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: sal ek dit glo? - Tikfout [boodskap #72365 is 'n antwoord op boodskap #72362] |
Thu, 23 January 2003 22:26 |
|
|
Oorspronklik gepos deur: @rogers.com
Katryn wrote:
Toe gebruik
> hulle SA as voorbeeld, en verduidelik hoe mooi die eertydse regering
> saamgewerk het om te disarm.
Was dit die "eertydse regering" wat dit
gedoen het? Het SA ooit die "non-prolifiration
treaty" onderteken?
Gloudina
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: sal ek dit glo? - Tikfout [boodskap #72416 is 'n antwoord op boodskap #72368] |
Fri, 24 January 2003 15:16 |
Wouter Plaasvark
Boodskappe: 1004
Geregistreer: May 2006
Karma: 0
|
Senior Lid |
|
|
> Was dit die "eertydse regering" wat dit
> gedoen het? Het SA ooit die "non-prolifiration
> treaty" onderteken?
Katryn
Ek weet nie. Wat hulle netnou op CNN gesê het, was dat de Klerk het
saamgewerk en 6 kernwapens dismantle het in 1990/91 - kort voor hulle
die NPT geteken het. Ek het daaruit afgelei dat SA dus kort daarna
die treaty onderteken het. Ek sal nie verbaas wees as dit verkeerde
inligting was nie. Ek sal kyk of ek die transcript van die spesifieke
uitsending kan kry, en dan weer kyk wat presies gesê was.
Elkgeval is SA ook lid van die Zangger Committee vanaf 1993.
Weet nie of dit vir iets tel nie?
Wouter
Die onderstaande verwys ook na SA se destydse ontwapening:
The New York Times
January 23, 2003
Why We Know Iraq Is Lying
By CONDOLEEZZA RICE
WASHINGTON
Eleven weeks after the United Nations Security Council unanimously
passed a resolution demanding - yet again - that Iraq disclose and
disarm all its nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs, it is
appropriate to ask, "Has Saddam Hussein finally decided to voluntarily
disarm?" Unfortunately, the answer is a clear and resounding no.
There is no mystery to voluntary disarmament. Countries that decide
to disarm lead inspectors to weapons and production sites, answer
questions before they are asked, state publicly and often the
intention to disarm and urge their citizens to cooperate. The world
knows from examples set by South Africa, Ukraine and Kazakhstan
what it looks like when a government decides that it will cooperatively
give up its weapons of mass destruction. The critical common
elements of these efforts include a high-level political commitment
to disarm, national initiatives to dismantle weapons programs, and
full cooperation and transparency.
In 1989 South Africa made the strategic decision to dismantle
its covert nuclear weapons program. It destroyed its arsenal of
seven weapons and later submitted to rigorous verification by
the International Atomic Energy Agency. Inspectors were
given complete access to all nuclear facilities (operating and
defunct) and the people who worked there. They were also
presented with thousands of documents detailing, for example,
the daily operation of uranium enrichment facilities as well as
the construction and dismantling of specific weapons.
|
|
|
|
| Re: sal ek dit glo? - Tikfout [boodskap #72430 is 'n antwoord op boodskap #72416] |
Fri, 24 January 2003 20:06 |
Pieter[3]
Boodskappe: 14
Geregistreer: January 2003
Karma: 0
|
Junior Lid |
|
|
Daar was meer as 6 anyway gewees
"Wouter Plaasvark" skryf in boodskap news:3e315ba4.0@news1.mweb.co.za...
>> Was dit die "eertydse regering" wat dit
>> gedoen het? Het SA ooit die "non-prolifiration
>> treaty" onderteken?
>
> Katryn
> Ek weet nie. Wat hulle netnou op CNN gesê het, was dat de Klerk het
> saamgewerk en 6 kernwapens dismantle het in 1990/91 - kort voor hulle
> die NPT geteken het. Ek het daaruit afgelei dat SA dus kort daarna
> die treaty onderteken het. Ek sal nie verbaas wees as dit verkeerde
> inligting was nie. Ek sal kyk of ek die transcript van die spesifieke
> uitsending kan kry, en dan weer kyk wat presies gesê was.
> Elkgeval is SA ook lid van die Zangger Committee vanaf 1993.
> Weet nie of dit vir iets tel nie?
>
> Wouter
> Die onderstaande verwys ook na SA se destydse ontwapening:
>
> The New York Times
> January 23, 2003
>
> Why We Know Iraq Is Lying
> By CONDOLEEZZA RICE
>
> WASHINGTON
>
> Eleven weeks after the United Nations Security Council unanimously
> passed a resolution demanding - yet again - that Iraq disclose and
> disarm all its nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs, it is
> appropriate to ask, "Has Saddam Hussein finally decided to voluntarily
> disarm?" Unfortunately, the answer is a clear and resounding no.
>
> There is no mystery to voluntary disarmament. Countries that decide
> to disarm lead inspectors to weapons and production sites, answer
> questions before they are asked, state publicly and often the
> intention to disarm and urge their citizens to cooperate. The world
> knows from examples set by South Africa, Ukraine and Kazakhstan
> what it looks like when a government decides that it will cooperatively
> give up its weapons of mass destruction. The critical common
> elements of these efforts include a high-level political commitment
> to disarm, national initiatives to dismantle weapons programs, and
> full cooperation and transparency.
>
> In 1989 South Africa made the strategic decision to dismantle
> its covert nuclear weapons program. It destroyed its arsenal of
> seven weapons and later submitted to rigorous verification by
> the International Atomic Energy Agency. Inspectors were
> given complete access to all nuclear facilities (operating and
> defunct) and the people who worked there. They were also
> presented with thousands of documents detailing, for example,
> the daily operation of uranium enrichment facilities as well as
> the construction and dismantling of specific weapons.
>
|
|
|
|
] 
Supertaal
Blog
Soek
Hulp
Lede
Registreer
Teken aan
Tuis
