We've launched an emergency petition from citizens around the world to the U.N. Security Council. We'll be delivering the list of signers and your comments to the 15 member states of the Security Council on THURSDAY, MARCH 6.
If hundreds of thousands of us sign, it could be an enormously important and powerful message -- people from all over the world joining in a single call for a peaceful solution. But we really need your help, and soon. Please sign and ask your friends and colleagues to sign TODAY at:
In the next week, the U.N. Security Council will likely meet to decide on authorizing a war against Iraq. If the Council votes to accept a second resolution, it'll be very difficult to avert a war. But if the resolution doesn't get enough votes, it'll be a major setback for the Bush Administration's plans to invade and occupy Iraq.
In the United States and around the world, millions of us oppose a war against Iraq. We believe that tough inspections can disarm Saddam Hussein without the loss of a single life. This week may represent our last chance to win without war.
The stakes couldn't really be much higher. A war with Iraq could kill tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians and inflame the Middle East. According to current plans, it would require an American occupation of the country for years to come. And it could escalate in ways that are horrifying to imagine.
We can stop this tragedy from unfolding. But we need to speak together, and we need to do so now. Let's show the Security Council what world citizens think. You can add your voice at:
http://www.moveon.org/emergency/
Then please ask your friends, family, colleagues, acquaintances -- anyone you know who shares this concern -- to sign on today. As the New York Times put it, "there may still be two superpowers on the planet: the United States and world public opinion." The Bush Administration's been flexing its muscles. Now let's flex ours.
Sincerely, --Eli Pariser International Campaigns Director MoveOn.org March 3rd, 2003
P.S. Here's the letter we'll be delivering to the Security Council members along with the petition:
Dear Member of the U.N. Security Council,
We are citizens from countries all over the world. We are speaking together because we will all be affected by a decision in which your country has a major part -- the decision of how to disarm Iraq.
The first reason for its existence listed in the Preamble to the Charter of the United Nations is "to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind." If your country supports a Security Council resolution that would authorize a war on Iraq, you will directly contradict that charter. You will be supporting an unnecessary war -- a war which immediately, and in its unknown consequences, could bring "untold sorrow to mankind" once again.
The U.N. was created to enable peaceful alternatives to conflict. The weapons inspections under way are a perfect example of just such an alternative, and their growing success is a testament to the potential power the U.N. holds. By supporting tough inspections instead of war, you can show the world a real way to resolve conflict without bloodshed. But if you back a war, it will undermine the very premise upon which the U.N. was built.
President Bush argues that only by endorsing a war on Iraq can the United Nations prove its relevance. We argue the opposite. If the Security Council allows itself to be completely swayed by one member nation, in the face of viable alternatives, common sense and world public opinion, then it will be diminished in its role, effectiveness, and in the opinion of humankind.
We do not support this war. For billions of citizens in hundreds of countries, and for the future generations whose lives will be shaped by the choice you make, we ask that you stand firm against the pressuring of the Bush Administration, and support tough inspections for Iraq. The eyes of the world are on you.
Sincerely,
[Number] citizens of the world.
keep to the inspections. No war no war no war!!!
I can't see thousands or millions of people killed is what the people of the USA wants. I think all the killing in the world is terrible.
Thank you for your time
keep to the inspections. No war no war no war!!!
I can't see thousands or millions of people killed is what the people of the USA wants. I think all the killing in the world is terrible.
Thank you for your time
Let us ALL live in peace,your war will affect ALL of us,and bring terror to the WHOLE world.
Posted by: Mareta Olliver on March 9, 2003 08:43 PMAll live in peace?
Why don't you tell that to Saddam?
Posted by: Paul Hart on March 11, 2003 11:57 AM ¡NO A LA GUERRA!
La PAZ es el camino hacia la LIBERTAD.
Peace for the World.
PEACE is the course of
LIBERTY
Inside each stack frame is a slew of useful information. It tells the computer what code is currently executing, where to go next, where to go in the case a return statement is found, and a whole lot of other things that are incredible useful to the computer, but not very useful to you most of the time. One of the things that is useful to you is the part of the frame that keeps track of all the variables you're using. So the first place for a variable to live is on the Stack. This is a very nice place to live, in that all the creation and destruction of space is handled for you as Stack Frames are created and destroyed. You seldom have to worry about making space for the variables on the stack. The only problem is that the variables here only live as long as the stack frame does, which is to say the length of the function those variables are declared in. This is often a fine situation, but when you need to store information for longer than a single function, you are instantly out of luck.
Posted by: Morgan on January 18, 2004 06:39 PMThis code should compile and run just fine, and you should see no changes in how the program works. So why did we do all of that?
Posted by: Elias on January 18, 2004 06:40 PMThe Stack is just what it sounds like: a tower of things that starts at the bottom and builds upward as it goes. In our case, the things in the stack are called "Stack Frames" or just "frames". We start with one stack frame at the very bottom, and we build up from there.
Posted by: Augustine on January 18, 2004 06:40 PMOur next line looks familiar, except it starts with an asterisk. Again, we're using the star operator, and noting that this variable we're working with is a pointer. If we didn't, the computer would try to put the results of the right hand side of this statement (which evaluates to 6) into the pointer, overriding the value we need in the pointer, which is an address. This way, the computer knows to put the data not in the pointer, but into the place the pointer points to, which is in the Heap. So after this line, our int is living happily in the Heap, storing a value of 6, and our pointer tells us where that data is living.
Posted by: Prospero on January 18, 2004 06:41 PMInside each stack frame is a slew of useful information. It tells the computer what code is currently executing, where to go next, where to go in the case a return statement is found, and a whole lot of other things that are incredible useful to the computer, but not very useful to you most of the time. One of the things that is useful to you is the part of the frame that keeps track of all the variables you're using. So the first place for a variable to live is on the Stack. This is a very nice place to live, in that all the creation and destruction of space is handled for you as Stack Frames are created and destroyed. You seldom have to worry about making space for the variables on the stack. The only problem is that the variables here only live as long as the stack frame does, which is to say the length of the function those variables are declared in. This is often a fine situation, but when you need to store information for longer than a single function, you are instantly out of luck.
Posted by: Hercules on January 18, 2004 06:41 PM