I agree, it was a mistake on my part. That shows I can own up. Thanks for waiting for post two because that was the yank on your nose chain. Lets see in the next few pages if you whimper as well as you growl. Concerning the Alrighy Comrades list that covered two full posts I would be happy to go through each incident one by one but since this is the 21st century I will give you this as being the playing table for a discussion on Haiti.
YouTube - Noam Chomsky: US role in Haiti destruction. We could eventually cover things this far back in a 3-part series.
That is why ‘little big horn’ was in one post.
We simply have similar views on some subjects.
We simply have similar subjects.
In the two examples above (to show this is a broad pattern rather than specific to the Jews of today) the acts of the time would have been considered ‘legal’ by the ‘ones in control’ (the gray area is Haiti because she won freedom but the yoke of being oppressed after came from outside their national boundaries) . Apply the letter of rule to the documents that Canada, and all members of the UN, signed saying certain standards would be upheld inside their countries and there were ways to bring grievances to UN body for resolution. That got ****ed up as soon as the veto rule came in , everybody but the 5 might as well have walked out the door and created the ‘Outsider Nations’ that still believed in those human rights documents and made strides to achieve that if the 5 with the weapons would allow it. For all the good their donations they get back nothing but misery from at least one of the ‘big 5‘. Those documents are for the outsiders and that is how they are to treat the big 5 at all times, it has nothing to do with the big 5 having to treat them that way. It’s a playground where 5 kids are the bullies and the rest pay them for the privilege of being bullied. No revolts allowed and their progression will be monitored and limited if any of the 5 decide it should be done. The big 5 also have owners, that is where you hit the wall.
Apart from that we are complete different.
The above things done to the Indians and Haiti (former slaves who revolted) were morally wrong even to the ones who were against them. The conversation doesn’t have to go past the fact that they would have complained if the Indians treated them that way and they (US and France) put an economic yoke on Haiti that lasted for 250 years. Free as long as you give us all your gold so we can be rich and you can remain poor. Don’t hurt us even though we have killed most of your women in kids.
Today we have a lot of books and documents written by the ones in power. It has lots of pages that speak of respect for the laws and the ones who ‘represent' the enforcement arm should the rules be broken. At the extreme end is the military that every Nation has. Even in Canada the human rights that we ‘enjoy' go ‘poof' as soon as ‘ our hired servants' utter the words “Martial Law", the the ones that we paid for revolt against the masses and join the ‘hired hands' to become the new Royalty and the same rule of law carries on. That is until the masses go into revolt, then that law is suspended and the rule of no rule takes hold. Rather than individuals being targeted groups become the target and by that time a lot more than necessary are killed. Whole families have been targeted in the past in the old USSR. Most likely more than one, cruel to a certain extent but it achieved it’s purpose, rejection with now backlash down the road. Most likely the revolt also killed the ones who would have been the most helpful in forming the next batch of leaders. That is who has the ultimate power, in the past and even today. Billions would die considering the strength of the armies today but they could not kill everybody.
Down to the reality but holding onto that same concept as being the power structure, the masses are still the ones with the last say. For most situations, likely everything going on today in the world, nobody cares. Not that important in their lives. When I make a deal with somebody I make an effort to follow through without adding or subtracting things that affect the understand of that deal. If I am a Canadian and Canada has signed certain documents saying they will support something (Israel being created without any hardships falling on the local Arab population, should I cheer them when they do and boo them when they don't?
Who says I don't feel compassion for anyone deserving?
It’s selective, just like everybody else, even Attila the Hun felt compassion for the ones he liked. That doesn’t make him an acceptable member of the 21st century crowd (or what most of us are supposed to be)
We aren't talking about morality, or compassion here, the word being bandied about like a weapon, is "Law".
Morality and compassion are the two things that should be considered first. The laws we follow we written by a few who had the power already. Killing is against the law, change the law t permit killing for one side. That isn’t moral that’s a legal loop-hole.
As I've said numerous times, if you want to discuss the issue on moral or ethical grounds, it will be short and you won't get much of an objection from me.
Some other time maybe.
Of course it was a Rothscild plan, so long as you ignore large parts of history and rewrite others. In any case, it matters not in the reality of today, nor does it bear any weight on the rule and reality of law. You simply place far to much stock in this silly Rothschild conspiracy.
Mobs have always been able to break the rule of law. It was a very tiny mob that stopped the Viet Nam war. A few large demonstration and the ‘elite’ changed their direction
Says you, without any supporting evidence. Even though you eventually shot yourself and your position in the proverbial foot with your own post. After denying the legality outright.
Only about boarding in International waters. I say everybody has failed to keep even one part of the original agreements that were signed, the 33 failed to protect the rights of the local Arab population, Israel failed to live up to the agreements she made as a condition of her being recognized by the UN as being a member country. Palestine has never signed on to anything so ‘legally’ she can never be in breech of breaking any UN human rights document, yet her record is far and above better than Israel when it comes to having complaints brought to the UN.
You'll get no argument from me about the rich wanting to get richer on the backs of the people. But your silly conspiracy falls short on facts and is simply a diversion.
These 60 year wars are the diversion. Public statements by the elite are the diversions simply because the truth is kept behind closed doors. When the Treaties were signed in the 1880‘s there was no intent on the British to honor them, it was a chance to round the remaining Indians all up and put into pens, then the destruction of their culture could begin, that’s what the truth looks like. The words in the back-rooms haven’t changed, the smoke-screen has the same hollow words as always.
I'm here to talk about it, post a thread on the illegality of stopping Iran from having nuclear stockpiles. I'd be interested in hearing what you think.
Stock-piles? They aren’t even allowed the material for medical uses, they trusted the West once with a deal for the fuel rods, they kept their end to the letter, the West failed to keep up even one letter of their agreement. They low-balled them, that means it was planned by the time they encouraged them to chase the (very expensive) alternative to using their oil. You cheer for things like that, I find it a little embarrassing to know Canada is tied to their hip.
Bullsh!t. This simply flies in the face of reality. There is literally a ton of documented case law and cases of the little man taking on a giant and winning.
If you have lots of seed money or a Lawyer that will work on commission then yes, if not your tough luck.
Since they don't need Israel's approval to file a grievance with the ICC, your question is ridiculous.
It has to get past the security council though, want to know the exact number of times that has been helpful to Israel?
How many times has someone brought a grievance to the ICC, about Israel?
Look it up, all the cases they have heard is in a list on their site. How many times have complaints been stopped before getting there.
Thank you for conceding that this flotilla had nothing to do with humanitarian aid, and was simply an attempt to break a lawful blockade.
That part has yet to be established, nobody has shown me where they can legally do that. Obviously there are some who think it is illegal, I’m quite willing to see how the courts rule on the things. Taking your word for it hasn’t made it to the option list and it never will. You did that to yourself by remaining silent about those steel floor joists and their ability to break something that was 200x their strength.)
The content was secondary, though I acknowledged it. The intent of my post and quoting of said article, was to highlight the tactics used to gloss over and move on, as you had mentioned once before, and have done numerous times. As I clearly stated in the post.
To make an impression on me about this we have to start at 1880, it’s that simple. The moral and legal issues go that far back. If I see it as illegal then I will support the Jews being in that land by right of religion. That gives them the right to practice their religion minus the punishment that breech any UN documents that they have signed. They never had the right to chase people away so they could become the majority. That was assured by Jews having the right to settle on land that was considered to be ‘homestead claims’. Legally they broke their word to the UN, the breech would have to be them not being recognized.
Both sides should be able to qualify for the terrorist title. The one having the most condemnations should win that title not the ones who are being slaughtered.
Like I said, you're the only one that keeps bringing up the bible.
These are Jews we are talking about. That is religion right there, their act today are even against the OT rules of dealing with neighbors. They know that, you haven’t got a clue so you can believe something that is a lie. Live with it, I don’t have to because I know better.
Unfortunately you read with blinders on. A ceasefire does not mean the conflict is over, and at anytime, when a lawful act is confronted with violence, they may use lethal for self defense. That of course is made irrelevant by the fact that the flotilla is a neutral third party, and not subject to the cease fire, nor to the agreements between Israel and Hamas. They are however subject to international law regarding armed conflict, laws of naval blockades and so on. As outlined and exampled in your own post, which you conceded to, but still argue about, incessantly. Because it is battling your ideology. Logic and fact is simply taking a back seat to what you want to believe at this point, as you attempt to find something to make it all better for you and continue your course.
I never said that, I have yet to read the rules that govern cease-fires so I haven’t commented on that either, other than to mention it as needing further examination. It would appear to be a document that applies to one more than the other in almost every way and the other can live up to zero. Denying a people the right to have an armed police force is on the other side of what I find acceptable. You are going to have to learn that just like Israel is going to have to learn that Iran will use military force to protect the doctors and nurse on that medical ship. It will be a long term sight in Gaza harbor, who would complain about that, eh?
I've already explained to you, using your own posted laws, why that is patently false.
The Rachael Cory did not resist boarding, yet she was spirited away as if she had, not in the same article where you bolded the words. These other ship coming will have the same destination, Gaza City. The Iranian ships would turn their goods over to Egypt for inspection. Their military is there to make sure the Egyptians transfer it all and not steal the best parts for themselves. That wouldn’t appear to be illegal now that Egypt is allowing goods through. Israel has yet to supply a complete list of things the ships should not be carrying. How can they be convicted of bringing banned goods in when the list is made up on the spot, or so it seems. Let them distribute the list to the one who will be packing the crates, inspect it there and seal it with an Israel supplied device that can be tracked from space.
That's 9 Turkish citizens. Please try and keep the BS in your posts, to a minimum. Even the article quoted in your post doesn't try and lie about Furkan's nationality, despite being from a biased MSM news source, despite the fact that many of your posts claim that western media is biased in the opposite direction and do not tell the truth.
Any reports about head counts have some still missing
so until they are accounted for....?
The article contains no mention of these fictitious missing people, yet your post would have us believe it does, by the placement of that small caption. This is the same tactic your posts have claimed the pro Israeli propagandists use all the time.
If the article didn’t bring it up then I must have, you then go off on some on some conspiracy hunt.
Actually that is pretty much the purpose of mounting a defense, lol. Not to mention the investigation will be overseen by an international panel. Your post is little more then a set up to dismiss the outcome.
I would be happy to see it go through the courts, one time cover every issue back to the start, if it takes 10 years it takes 10 years, in the meantime a whole lot of people need their dual citizenship papers to be in order or they face deportation back to Israel. Easy to find, their sign reads Palestinian Refugee Camp XX
I've been looking into those claims, I'm not done yet, but from what I've seen, that malnutrition isn't as bad as in other parts of the developed world.
Remember the part where I said we could cover a certain aspect, we, here we are. Seems okay in your eyes does it. It has to be as bad as the worst places where nobody is doing anything except killing them when they are that weak. That’s you in a nutshell. You bitch about how bad the Nuns treated you yet for babies getting hacked up isn’t even enough for the world to get upset about. By the day tonnage is your whole deal, nice colorful pictures with bright colors and full markets. (is the UN distribution warehouse within 2 1/2 blocks? On a per day level do the poorest of them see the same sort of groceries coming through their doors.
The fact that your posts have switched from the starvation of, to the malnutrition of, is telling.
If you want to live peacefully with your family you do not take their plates away before they are finished eating (and then throw it on the floor in front of them) That tonnage is on a good day, the average for ‘08 was 720 tons a day not 2000 that is all supplies not just food. The items on the ‘yes’ list could be increased till it was the max without it resulting in a higher number of attacks. See their children have books and toys will not increase the number of attacks.
The strawman arguments that fill your posts are likely begin to fall short on evidence, and this is simply a switch, without conceding that starvation is not taking place.
Supply the tonnages for every month since 1967 if you are so sure of that. I had them for another thread but I’m not looking them up again. (only 3 yrs 07-09)
If the average for the year was 720 then some months it would have been less. If 2000 tone is 'red line' them that much less is below. Got some pic of the markets in that year?
Because reality is starting to sink in, but ideology is simply getting in the way of the realization that there were errors contained in your past posts.
It did sink in we are part of a lie that was told to the Arab people back when our motherland said the Arabs/Jews/Christians of Palestine could have their own independent nation. Fact is they lied by holding back that the least number would be given the most territory called Israel rather than a bigger single Nation called Palestine. That was the intended meaning of the message and it was known to be false before it was made. Legal, according to the books, yes, morally it makes them pricks in today's society and certain old ways of doing things have to change if lasting peace is an objective.
Now enough about me, if you think I am off track skip over it because I'm going to from now on.
