The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPhilip Giraldi Archive
Operating Outside the Rule of Law: Washington Pressures International Criminal Court
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

There is apparently no limit to what the United States and Israel can get away with without any consequences. The United States has been waging devastating economic warfare against Iran and Venezuela while also blaming China for a global health crisis that it is unwilling to help address due to its withdrawal from the World Health Organization. Israel meanwhile is planning on illegally annexing significant parts of the Palestinian West Bank in July, with a green light from the Trump Administration, and no one in Europe or elsewhere is even interested in initiating serious sanctions that might lead to the postponing of that decision. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has even stated flatly that the remaining Palestinians who would be annexed will not become Israeli citizens – they will instead be “subjects” of the Jewish state with no guaranteed rights or privileges.

The American Establishment is totally committed to the principle that the United States and Israel should have a “free hand” in dealing with other countries in their respective spheres of influence. That effectively means controlling the narrative so that the U.S. and the Jewish state always appear to be victims of other nations’ unprincipled behavior and also creating an environment where there can be no effective legal challenges to aggressive action.

Indeed, the one organization that was specifically set up to deal with issues like aggressive wars and ethnic cleansing, the International Criminal Court (ICC) at the Hague, has been specifically targeted by both Washington and Jerusalem to deny it any jurisdiction in situations where either country is involved. Neither Israel nor the United States has recognized the ICC for the obvious reason that they are primary sources of egregious human rights and international law violations. Israel is particularly concerned over its numerous war crimes, to include its violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention which forbids “the transfer, directly or indirectly, by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies, or the deportation or transfer of all or parts of the population of the occupied territory within or outside this territory.”

The ICC has, in fact, been targeted recently by both the Trump Administration and Congress. Two weeks ago, a bipartisan group of 69 United States senators submitted to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo a letter condemning the “dangerous politicization of the court” that “unfairly targets Israel.” The Senators urged Pompeo to continue his “vigorous support of Israel as it faces the growing possibility of investigations and prosecutions by the International Criminal Court.” The letter included the claim that “actions currently underway could lead to the prosecution of Israeli nationals…” even though “the ICC does not enjoy legitimate jurisdiction in this case.”

The assertion that the ICC does not have jurisdiction is questionable at best as the “Palestinian State” has observer status and is a member of international bodies at the United Nations. It is also a signatory to the Rome Statute that established the ICC. The Senate letter itself was predictably written by Ester Kurz, the legislative director of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which is the leading Israel advocacy group in the United States. A similar letter was also circulated in the House of Representatives, which added an “American issue” by criticizing the ICC’s intention to investigate United States war crimes in Afghanistan. It received 262 signatures.

Anticipating the threat to Israeli interests, the U.S. Congress has long made security and other assistance to the Palestinian Authority conditional, suspending all support if “the Palestinians initiate an International Criminal Court (ICC) judicially authorized investigation, or actively support such an investigation, that subjects Israeli nationals to an investigation for alleged crimes against Palestinians.” As Donald Trump has de facto cut off virtually all assistance, including the humanitarian aid given to refugees, the punishment for going to the ICC is essentially moot and the Palestinians have consequently moved ahead with their complaint in an attempt to upset the timetable for Israeli annexation.

The Senators’ letter surfaced at the same time as a warning was issued by Pompeo to the ICC that focused on Israel but was clearly intended to derail any attempts to look at American war crimes in Afghanistan. He claimed that the ICC is a political body, not a legitimate judicial institution, and accused chief prosecutor Fatou Bensouda of maliciously investigating “Israeli war crimes in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem.” His complaint paralleled the Senatorial letter, which is perhaps no coincidence, in claiming that the court has no jurisdiction and the Palestinians are not “sovereign” and therefore have no standing to go to the court in the first place.

And Pompeo concluded with a threat: “A court that attempts to exercise its power outside its jurisdiction is a political tool that makes a mockery of the law and due process. If the ICC continues down its current course, we will exact consequences.”

Israel has also claimed, as does the United States, that it is not subject to ICC “trial” because it has a functioning court system that is capable of punishing war criminals. Of course, the fact is that Israel does not do so and the U.S. only does so when embarrassed. The most recent American war criminal was convicted by military courts and then pardoned by President Donald Trump. He was even feted at the White House.

Bensouda announced in November 2017 that she would proceed with an investigation of alleged U.S. war crimes in Afghanistan. The Trump Administration expressed its anger by criticizing her in tweets, canceling her visa to the United States, and threatening legal action against her, her staff and even ICC judges. The White House warned that if the ICC even dares to detain an American citizen the United States would use military force to release him or her. President Trump, Pompeo, and John Bolton all called the ICC “political, corrupt, irresponsible, unaccountable, and lacking transparency, and therefore illegitimate.” The critique sounded oddly enough like an accurate description of the Trump Administration itself.

Bensouda, who has been timid about confronting Israel in the past, is now reportedly proceeding with the Palestinian complaint. She has also been authorized to proceed with her investigation of American crimes in Afghanistan. If there is to be an actual trial, high-level politicians, officials, and military officers from both Israel and the U.S. could be summoned for questioning. If the summonses are ignored, which is probable, the prosecutor could then issue international arrest warrants, meaning that they could be arrested and extradited to the Court if they were to travel to any of the 123 countries that are parties to the Rome Statute.

So, one can expect both the United States and Israel to continue their defamation of the ICC, to include the threats of armed response coming from Washington. An attack on The Hague might be unimaginable in the real world, but the past three years have demonstrated that Donald Trump is capable of almost anything. Until then, one hopes that Bensouda will continue her work to expose the crimes that continue to be committed in both Palestine and Afghanistan. Embarrassing the United States and Israel in a very visible and highly respected public forum might be the only way to wake up the citizens of those two countries to the terrible things that have been and continue to be done in their names.

Philip Giraldi, Ph.D. is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest.

(Republished from Strategic Culture Foundation by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 177 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. anon[299] • Disclaimer says:

    “A court that attempts to exercise its power outside its jurisdiction… If the ICC continues down its current course…”

    Here Pompeo, with his junior-college equivalent service academy degree and his DCI internship, shows why the USA is an international laughingstock.

    Every crime the ICC prosecutes is in its jurisdiction by definition. Because the ICC tries only universal jurisdiction crimes.

    The US fixates on the ICC, a single forum for criminal law, but any UN member nation or special purpose tribunal in the world can investigate and prosecute or extradite US officials who commit universal jurisdiction crimes. If the US fails to try its criminal officials, the complementarity principle applies, and the outside world can step in. That’s how a Swiss legislator scared President G.W. Bush into running wee-wee-wee all the way home like a little pussy weasel. And that was before the SCO opened up its missile gap.

    • Replies: @Verymuchalive
    , @Rich
    , @Moi
    , @sally
  2. A123 says:

    The Islamic Criminal Court [ICC] exits only to commit crimes against Infidels (Christians & Jews).

    The SJW Muslim Globalist movement loves the ICC. The ICC, among other failed Muslim contaminated bodies, support the corruption of The IslamoSoros and Mullah Merkel. Their goal is the total replacement of all Infidels (Christians & Jews) in Europe — pregnancy by rape, forced conversion, and murder are the calling cards of Jihad.

    Satan’s ICC will never have jurisdiction over the Christian & Jewish children of God. Fortunately the ICC, like all works of Allah/Satan, are incapacitated by the Souls of Righteousness. All those who believe in God rejoice in the powerlessness of Satan’s ICC.

    😇 HALLELUJAH 😇

    • Disagree: Akouo, buzzwar
  3. @anon

    Every crime the ICC prosecutes is in its jurisdiction by definition. Because the ICC tries only universal jurisdiction crimes.

    The ICC can only operate if the State has ratified the treaty and passed it into domestic law. Dr Giraldi, this is in accordance with the conventions of international law. The ICC is not some divine right super body. States have to agree to its jurisdiction. Many states have not signed or ratified the treaty and passed it into domestic law. These include Russia, China, US, India, Pakistan, Turkey, Israel and Saudi Arabia amongst others. The ICC has no jurisdiction over these states.

    • Agree: Hibernian
    • Replies: @Hibernian
    , @showmethereal
  4. anon[258] • Disclaimer says:

    verymuchalive, states ratify the Rome Statute or not. Universal jurisdiction law still binds as conventional international law for every UN member nation that has ratified the Hague or Geneva conventions, the CAT, or the genocide convention – that’s pretty much all of them, and certainly the US.

    As one forum among many for universal jurisdiction crime, the ICC can initiate a propria motu investigation whether the US likes it or not. And they have. The ICC can prosecute criminals of any nationality if the UNSC refers a case to it. The US can of course veto the referral to save some coward weasel officials’ asses – at the cost of further discrediting the veto as a get-out-of-jail-free card for countries that won some war in ancient history, and giving UN reform efforts a massive boost.

    To facilitate further mansplaining it would help if you cited specific provisions of the statute:

    https://legal.un.org/icc/statute/99_corr/cstatute.htm

  5. Lot says:

    Giraldi really lets his left-wing jihadi freak flag fly here. ICC and related Euroweenie “international courts” are always about attacking enemies of Islam, whether they are Serbs, Israelis, or American soldiers.

    As an American citizen, I can vote for those who appoint and consent to the jurisdiction of state and federal courts. When did that ever happen for the ICC?

    The United States Constitution contains the Supremacy Clause. No human law is higher in our system of government. The ICC is illegal and subversive treason.

    • Disagree: buzzwar
    • Replies: @Rev. Spooner
    , @Druid55
  6. anon[299] • Disclaimer says:

    lot, your last paragraph is gibberish. Have you ever read the supremacy clause? It simply says states can’t countermand the constitution, treaties, or federal statutes. It doesn’t tell you which law is most super-duper of them all.

    And if you’re determined to pull that thread, the most superduper law of all turns out to be the UN Charter, together with the International Bill of Human Rights and the Rome Statute, because acceptance of those three instruments are the minimal requisite for responsible sovereignty, according to the summit of the UN member nations. Congress in its wisdom augmented the constitution with the supreme law of the UN Charter, which provides no provision for withdrawal. Where the UN member nations go, you go. They went to rights and rule of law, so you Jew state genocidaires are left behind in your little Bronze Age cosplay game. The world will come back and mop you up when they get around to it. And Palestine will be free.

  7. no one in Europe or elsewhere is even interested in initiating serious sanctions that might lead to the postponing of that decision

    Mr. Giraldi, have you seen this news?

    EU countries considering sanctions if Israel annexes occupied West Bank

    “Annexation is not in line with international law. If it goes ahead, the EU will act accordingly,” Stano told the European Commission’s daily press briefing on Monday.

    Asked if Israel will be sanctioned by the EU, Stano said the decision was “up to the member states; at this stage, let’s not speculate”.

    EU countries want to approve the planned sanctions as soon as possible to discourage Israel from going forward with its plan, while EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs Josep Borrell is inclined to wait, the Haaretz report said.

    France, Spain, Ireland, Sweden, Belgium and Luxembourg are all pushing for tough punishments against Israel if it ignores warnings on the annexation, sources familiar with the discussions told Haaretz.

    Less than a month old. Not certain how serious the threat is, but I think it’s worth a closer look.

  8. @A123

    Well, it seems the ICC had the full support of the US while the Serbs and Croats were being stitched up.
    I take Giraldi’s point as being what I have maintained for decades: even when the US and/or Israel is a signatory to a treaty, they ignore any judgements against them. Treaties are for other countries to follow.

    • Agree: Biff
    • Replies: @A123
  9. @anon

    Let’s accept Lot’s proposal.

    Hold an international election to choose officials qualified to appoint judges to the ICC. Give one vote to everyone who is a citizen of a state that is a ratified signatory to the Rome Statute.

    I’m sure he’ll enjoy his crow sandwich when the results are posted.

  10. @anon

    The US has signed the Hague and Geneva Conventions. The former is very much a dead letter as is the latter. You almost never hear that act X is a breach of the Geneva Convention nowadays. They’re Conventions not Statutes after all, and nearly all parts predate the foundation of the ICC.

    As one forum among many for universal jurisdiction crime, the ICC can initiate a propria motu investigation whether the US likes it or not. And they have. The ICC can prosecute criminals of any nationality if the UNSC refers a case to it. The US can of course veto the referral to save some coward weasel officials’ asses – at the cost of further discrediting the veto as a get-out-of-jail-free card for countries that won some war in ancient history, and giving UN reform efforts a massive boost.

    Of course, like any body, the ICC can investigate. It can only effectively prosecute if it or a state which has ratified the statute has the defender in custody. So its jurisdiction is actually limited, despite its claims.
    As to Security Council referrals, these will be very rare as all 5 permanent members would have to be in agreement. Also, 3 of the 5 – the most important ones – are not members of the ICC. These three will be unwilling to give the ICC any authority unless in the most exceptional circumstances.
    As to reform of the UN, there seems very little enthusiasm for this. It is a corrupt institution, probably irreformable. But it serves the interests of the 3 main Permanent Members. Like Srdja Trifkovic, I would support its replacement by a scaled-down, more realistic organisation. This may happen, but it may take quite some time

    To facilitate further mansplaining it would help if you cited specific provisions of the statute:

    https://legal.un.org/icc/statute/99_corr/cstatute.ht

    The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court – despite its name – is a Convention. To become a Statute, it would have to be ratified by the State in question and passed into domestic law.
    The 3 Superpowers have not done so, as has the ( soon to be ) most populous country, India, as well as numerous others. The 3 Superpowers regard ratification as incompatible with their interests and status as Superpowers.

    As regards mansplaining.

    Mansplaining (a blend word of man and the informal form splaining of the gerund explaining) is a pejorative term meaning “(of a man) to comment on or explain something to a woman in a condescending, overconfident, and often inaccurate or oversimplified manner”.[1][2][3][4]

    You have condemned yourself out of your own mouth.

    • Replies: @animalogic
  11. anon[273] • Disclaimer says:

    Ah. I see. Are you a J.V. or an L.L. Bean? The US law school indoctrination is strong in you, as well as the Federalist Society’s ‘treaty-law’ brainwashing. The rigid insistence on US nomenklature is a tell. Statute means different things in international law and municipal law. Municipal means different things in international and municipal law. And despite all that law school Juche, treaties are equivalent to federal statute, and customary international law is state and federal common law. The Paquete Habana Decision. Never heard of it, right? You maybe heard about the Charming Betsy Canon, the US government’s ongoing attempt to worm out of the civilized world’s acquis.

    You’ve also absorbed the statist ‘non self-executing’ canard, which is what US state apparatchiks invoke to ratify treaties with their fingers crossed. That sort of thing makes everyone nod eagerly in windowless Pentagon offices but it doesn’t fly in the outside world. Clearly you have never watched US bureaucrats in treaty body meetings, groveling and sniveling and eating shit and lying through their teeth and getting caught.

    As for universal jurisdiction law being a dead letter, tell the CIA that. When CIA got busted for systematic and widespread torture they ran to Congress in a panic and made them edit their two favorite tortures out of the War Crimes Act. That’s another wheeze that only passes the laugh test at home. Ask Robert Lady and Sabrina Souza how dead that letter is. The US government tries to fend off command responsibility by locking up some hillbillies but again, you’d have to be aware of treaty body proceedings to see how that goes over. It’s a hoot.

    https://www.ohchr.org/EN/countries/LACRegion/Pages/USIndex.aspx
    https://upr-info-database.uwazi.io/
    http://webtv.un.org/meetings-events/human-rights-treaty-bodies/

    You also seem unaware of ongoing UN reform initiatives, which the US government fights tooth and nail. I don’t mean the US bureaucrats’ idea of reform, which is purging international civil servants and stuffing the Secretariat with spies – I mean the treaty party’s formal work. So here.

    https://centerforunreform.org/home_page/front-page/

    You also cannot talk about the US as a monolithic entity. That’s another telltale US statist tic. UN agencies vary in the extent to which the US is able to corrupt them.

    So not to be a bitch about it, but you live your life in a propaganda bubble, an ideological backwater. Welcome to the outside world!

    • Agree: Akouo
  12. Rich says:
    @anon

    I would suppose you aren’t completely wrong about the quality of a service academy education nowadays. The way they’ve been inundated with affirmative action cadets has had to diminish their quality. That being said, Pompeo graduated first in his class,rose to the rank of captain before attending Harvard Law School where he was a member of their Law Review. You may not agree with the man’s politics, but he isn’t a stupid guy.

    • Agree: St-Germain
  13. A123 says:
    @Curmudgeon

    Well, it seems the ICC had the full support of the US while the Serbs and Croats were being stitched up.

    Except the Islamic Criminal Court [ICC] never prosecuted Serbs. That was the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia [ICTY]. (1)

    To be honest, I also made that mistake at one point. ICTY operated of the Hague, so there was a great deal of jumbled reporting that confused the two bodies.

    If you want to throw ICTY under the bus with ICC, I will gladly support the effort. Almost everything the UN touches turns out badly. The UN, all its organizations, and the associated NGO’s should be disbanded. As long as they exist, they block any possible hope of forming something that might actually work.

    PEACE 😷

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Tribunal_for_the_former_Yugoslavia

    • Replies: @anon
    , @Curmudgeon
  14. anon[361] • Disclaimer says:

    Interesting point, Rich. That’s the same sheep-dip CIA gave their previous spokesmodel, Barack Obama. He too got shoehorned into Harvard, (al-Walid bin Talal greased him in, you may remember,) wafted onto the law review. Din’t author jack shit, Barack sat there listening to everybody talk and then crudely, mechanically split the difference. It was utterly predictable. They called it the Obamanometer. Like G.W. Bush, Obama is dynastic CIA nomenklatura, a spy brat (see Presidential Puppetry by Krieg.) Like G.W. Bush, Obama’s a mediocrity who can make a good solemn face. We still think of Harvard as a meritocratic place but it’s been systematically debased into CIA’s Good Housekeeping seal of approval. Petraeus taught there, for fuck’s sake, until he got canned for fucking his students, whereupon NYU hired him and set him up with more students to fuck …so yeah, Harvard’s better than NYU, I grant you.

    Pompeo’s pretty stupid in the scheme of things and it really shows when he interacts with more meritocratic countries like Russia and China. But he’s main problem is he’s batshit, a fucking primitive fanatic. Might as well thaw out Oetzi the cave man and put him on the cabinet.

    • Agree: Moi
  15. anon[171] • Disclaimer says:
    @A123

    Pus from Israel is infecting ICC. Nothing new . The question is how to get to the task of the elimination of the source of the pus

    • Replies: @Rev. Spooner
  16. barr says:

    ICC is like Torah Applying ICC rules is like applying selective reading of Torah

    “It must have been a terrible embarrassment to Hillel rabbi Matt Rosenberg at Texas A&M University, when he tried to challenge the alt-right Spencer with ‘radical inclusion and love’. Spencer was invited to the University, and Rosenberg was there to challenge his bigotry:
    “My tradition teaches a message of radical inclusion and love,” Rosenberg said, in a video picked up by the Forward, and posted by the campus newspaper The Eagle. “Will you sit down and learn Torah with me, and learn love?”

    Spencer gracefully declined the offer to pray, but in return offered an appraisal of Judaism and Zionism that literally left the rabbi speechless. Spencer actually blew Rosenberg’s pink balloon, and Rosenberg didn’t know what to do. Here is what Spencer said:
    “Do you really want radical inclusion into the State of Israel?” Spencer said. “And by that I mean radical inclusion. Maybe all of the Middle East could go move in to Tel Aviv or Jerusalem. Would you really want that?”
    Rosenberg was silent.
    “You’re not answering,” Spencer said.
    “I’m not answering,” Rosenberg said.
    “Jews exist precisely because you did not assimilate,” Spencer went on. “That is why Jews are a coherent people with a history and a culture and a future. It’s because you had a sense of yourselves. I respect that about you. I want my people to have that same sense of themselves.”
    Shock horror. With all the generalism inherent in Spencer’s appraisal, he was touching upon a very central issue for Zionism, and he connected it to the Jewish culture – it’s the exclusivist vein that Zionism champions in Judaism. Whilst there may be many Jews in the world who seek greater or lesser assimilation, Zionism basically defies, on a national level, the issue of assimilation. Zionism assumed from the outset that Jewish assimilation is not viable and should not really be attempted, and realised its exclusivism (which Jews also blamed the world for upholding) through the Jewish nation-state. The ideology became reality, the Palestinians were and are continually being ethnically cleansed, there is Apartheid. This is the manifestation of what Spencer seeks, ‘white exclusivity.’ This ‘whiteness’ is just as real and valid as Jewish ethnic homogeneity, and those who truly believe in the validity of these constructs are the racists.
    In any case, Rosenberg didn’t have an answer. Spencer’s point was, after all, compelling. What’s more, he didn’t throw spiteful words at Rosenberg, he simply took Rosenberg’s ‘radical inclusion and love’ and questioned it in light of Israeli policy and Zionist ideology, and in a rhetoric martial-arts turn of energy, gave him back the ‘’inclusion and love’ by saying how he respects Jews, respects that sense of exclusivity.
    You’ve got to hand it to this neo-Nazi, he is a masterful debater. He’s certainly not stupid. And yes, Spencer said the same thing to our website last summer: “I respect Israel as a homogenous ethno-state.” 
    But the same skills cannot be ascribed to Rosenberg. He has now admitted to not being a great debater anyway:
    “I wasn’t on the high school debate team,” Rosenberg told the Forward.
    He also thinks such a task, in the future, should be passed on to the “next rabbi”:
    “I really didn’t want to get into it. That might have been the wrong decision, but I’ll let the next rabbi deal with it,” he said.
    He continues to ‘humble’, or perhaps humiliate himself by saying “I am a simple teacher of Torah”.

    https://mondoweiss.net/2016/12/losing-debate-israel/

    • LOL: A123
    • Replies: @Omegabooks
  17. barr says:
    @A123

    Is it Torah or is it ICC? Does the law apply only when the Torah scholars say so?

    “It must have been a terrible embarrassment to Hillel rabbi Matt Rosenberg at Texas A&M University, when he tried to challenge the alt-right Spencer with ‘radical inclusion and love’. Spencer was invited to the University, and Rosenberg was there to challenge his bigotry:
    “My tradition teaches a message of radical inclusion and love,” Rosenberg said, in a video picked up by the Forward, and posted by the campus newspaper The Eagle. “Will you sit down and learn Torah with me, and learn love?”

    Spencer gracefully declined the offer to pray, but in return offered an appraisal of Judaism and Zionism that literally left the rabbi speechless. Spencer actually blew Rosenberg’s pink balloon, and Rosenberg didn’t know what to do. Here is what Spencer said:
    “Do you really want radical inclusion into the State of Israel?” Spencer said. “And by that I mean radical inclusion. Maybe all of the Middle East could go move in to Tel Aviv or Jerusalem. Would you really want that?”
    Rosenberg was silent.
    “You’re not answering,” Spencer said.
    “I’m not answering,” Rosenberg said.

    “Jews exist precisely because you did not assimilate,” Spencer went on. “That is why Jews are a coherent people with a history and a culture and a future. It’s because you had a sense of yourselves. I respect that about you. I want my people to have that same sense of themselves.”

    Spencer said the same thing to our website last summer: “I respect Israel as a homogenous ethno-state.” 

    He {Rabbi} continues to by saying “I am a simple teacher of Torah”.

    https://mondoweiss.net/2016/12/losing-debate-israel/

  18. barr says:

    Mark Dubowitz,Eric Edelman,
Reuel Marc Gerecht and Ray Takeyh ,Michael Rubin have been inciting war against Iran .

    Someone told the senate that these guys were expert without telling that they had been schooled by the academy run by Netanhyu , American and Israeli Libermans ,Bennet,settlers of west bank , Wolfowitz and Kissinger . These later mentioned names are tainted ,have outlived the shelf life ,and have squandered the chances of further passive acceptances by the US public . So the new arrangements of putting some new faces .This is another MO of AIPAC JINSA and PNAC. Change the names ,bring new anti -Americans and get a new war for Israel

  19. Fatou Bensouda is probably on a mossad/cia hit list. Wouldn’t be surprised if she mysteriously disappears soon.

  20. Biff says:
    @Rich

    Pompeo admits to the world he “lied cheated and stole” losing all credibility as any kind of leader – who’s gonna believe anything he says or does now?
    Not too bright in my opinion – or actually really dumb.

  21. Hibernian says:
    @Verymuchalive

    International law consists of well established customs (which globalists want to inflate in order to further their aims) and written, properly ratified, treaties. If we accept, as some people want us to, that a body that has “World” or “International” in its name has the jurisdiction that DC has over the states, the local governments, and the people of the USA, we’re finished. Especially when the body has the word “Criminal” in its name.

    • Disagree: Akouo
  22. Hibernian says:
    @anon

    “…giving UN reform efforts a massive boost.”

    The only reforms that make sense for the UN are reduction to a standing worldwide diplomatic conference, with no power, except over its own premises, on a neutral site in the middle of an ocean, or abolition. Affiliated health, education, and welfare organizations would either become independent, and voluntary, or, if the evil they do outweighs the good, be abolished.

  23. Hibernian says:
    @anon

    “To facilitate further mansplaining…”

    Thank you, AOC.

  24. anon[178] • Disclaimer says:

    hibernian, nyuk nyuk, cracks me up how all you hasbarayids give yourself Irish handles. It’s true, people love mics as much as they hate Israelis. The reason everybody loves mics is because the shinners are right there with the Palestinians. The Irish remember their own colonial days, and their genocide.

    Very nice model UN speech you made there! The high school cafeteria was riveted by your eloquence. But the world knows what they want. They don’t give a shit what you think. They going to abolish the UN. And replace it with a new thing with no veto for Axis-of-Talmud traitor assholes.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  25. Nations only see the crimes of their adversaries, not their own. They cannot admit, perhaps even to themselves, what really motivates them: power. And power ultimately destroys them.
    https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/

  26. “The Islamic Criminal Court [ICC] exits only to commit crimes against Infidels (Christians & Jews).”

    Ohh my friend, you do realize that your comments are shooting me and you in the head.

    The foundation for the ICC are the Nuremberg tribunal trials. And I Toe my country, and I am fond of Israel, but the hypocrisy here is fundamentally undermining the US. And it is doing so in every area of our existence. The US is powerful enough to withstand scrutiny.

    And the hypocrisy that should frighten anyone who if scriptural faith and practice is the scrutiny and judgement of God. You do realize that God does not rejoice in his faithful embracing wrong dong. Mistaking hos grace for approval is what has the US in some deep troughs internally and if we keep it up —

    those troughs will only get bigger.

    When I look down that scope of history through revelations — it would be an error to assume the Eagle is the US – presumptuous.

    “Christ warns ‘Be careful not to test God.’ The purpose of Israel is to be a light among nation — one the primary beams — just conduct.

    Certainly we can test the veracity of any claim in the system we were key in creating without jumping up and down like spoiled children. If god is for Israel who can be against her — that doesn’t mean Israel gets o run amock as she wills. Just because one gets away with wrong does not mean God approves of wrong.

    Have a little faith.

    • Replies: @A123
  27. @A123

    Thanks for pointing that out.
    However, it really doesn’t alter my conclusions. The US and Israel regularly ignore judgements against them.

  28. A123 says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    The foundation for the ICC are the Nuremberg tribunal trials.

    The foundation for the Nuremberg Court was creation for a limited purpose, serving that pupose, and disbanding. As the Court’s foundation was inherently transitory, it was protected from overach, bloat, and mission creep.

    The foundation of the ICC is 100% structurally opposite from Nuremburg Court. It is standing body with permanent civil service, thus creating a bureaucrat class. Any side pushing a political agenda can manipulate the court by influencing the bureaucracy.

    I am sure that the ICC was created with the best of intentions. It probably worked OK at the beginning. However, it is now a lost cause that needs to be disbanded. I am not proposing a double standard. Every nation should join the U.S. & Israel by withdrawing from the failed ICC.

    PEACE 😷

  29. “The foundation for the Nuremberg Court was creation for a limited purpose, serving that pupose, and disbanding. As the Court’s foundation was inherently transitory, it was protected from overach, bloat, and mission creep . . .”

    The courts purpose was to prosecute those who violated, the Geneva Convention’s prohibitions regarding the rules of conduct during wartime. Based on the available record the Nuremberg Tribunal served as foundational model for the ICC.

    Test one: purpose — to establish a permanent model for use regarding international violations of the law

    https://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/nuremberg-trials

    Test Two: prosecutions: based on the record this is not an anti Jewish or American system – pages 1 and 2 are a list of defendants or intended defendants — It appears that Muslims are not exempt from investigation or prosecution by the court’s own record.

    Nothing supports your claims and I reject all but one, I have no doubt that bureaucracy is a problem

    https://www.icc-cpi.int/cases#Default=%7B%22k%22%3A%22%22%2C%22s%22%3A11%7D#2ae8b286-eb20-4b32-8076-17d2a9d9a00e=%7B%22k%22%3A%22%22%7D

    Pending investigations:
    https://www.icc-cpi.int/#

    • Replies: @Wally
  30. ” It is standing body with permanent civil service, thus creating a bureaucrat class. Any side pushing a political agenda can manipulate the court by influencing the bureaucracy.”

    This is just a rationale that is wade water.

    All bureaucracies have staff and paperwork and the subsequent procedures and administrative morasses that accompany them. By your press, we should dismantle Congress, the Supreme Court, the executive office — well ok — eliminate government because by definition, it creates a bureaucratic class — employees.

    I fully support defending the US from prejudicial prosecutions, but the case you lay has little or no support. There is a case to be made to protect military service members from international witch hunts — but you are not making that case.

    • Replies: @A123
  31. @Rich

    Trump’s predecessor attended HLS — member (Editor, if I recall) of their Law Review — although I also seem to recall that he’s the only Editor to not publish even one article in the Law Review.

    And he IS still an insufferable twit who’s never held a productive job — likely never will hold a productive job … 

    • Replies: @Rich
  32. @barr

    Or do you mean Talmud?

  33. @A123

    You’ve out done yourself here A123.
    This rises to the heights of an Elmer Gantry, or a Girolamo Savonarola….

  34. @Verymuchalive

    “It can only effectively prosecute if it or a state which has ratified the statute has the defender in custody. So its jurisdiction is actually limited, despite its claims.”
    Trial & conviction are ideal outcomes. However, a respectable investigation does have its uses — if it can convict a person or State in the world court of “public opinion”.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  35. A123 says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    All bureaucracies have staff and paperwork and the subsequent procedures and administrative morasses that accompany them.

    To keep a government bureaucracy functioning there must be:

    — Clear Rules & Limits
    — Separation of Powers
    — Effective Oversight & Enforcement

    No government is 100% in all these categories, but the ICC is near 0%:

    — Separation of Powers, at a minimum means that the ICC cannot arbitrarily re-write its charter.
    — The Clear Rules require a “signatory nation”. The ICC is obviously exceeding its authority by illicitly claiming additional powers over an issue between a non-nation and a non-signatory nation.
    — Oversight & Enforcement is non-existent. There is not even a hint of action trying to contain the ICC’s illicit activity.
    _______

    There is another clear difference between Nuremberg and the ICC:

    — The Nuremburg process functioned after the WWII was over.
    — The ICC’S illicit process is during Muslim attacks on Jews (Collective Rocket Punishment launches, non-uniformed combat troops attacking children).

    If Eisenhower had been charged with a non-existent crime in the run up to D-Day, what would have been the U.S. response? The faux-court attempting to illicitly interfere with Allied Forces combat operations would have been ignored or explosively sanctioned.

    Netanyahu and Israel are being illicitly charged by the ICC faux-court in an blatant espionage attempt to intervene in an ongoing conflict. The ICC should consider itself lucky to be merely ignored.

    — The foundation of Nuremberg was to clean up after a war.
    — The foundation of the ICC is picking sides in a highly biased attempt to change the outcome of a current conflict.

    It may not have started this way — However, based on current events the functional foundation of the ICC and the functional foundation of Nuremberg are diametrically opposed.

    PEACE 😷

    • Replies: @Ann Nonny Mouse
  36. Moi says:
    @anon

    Sometimes I seriously wonder if we are more evil than than the popular image of Nazi Germany. Why I even raise this is because of the following, simple point: Look at how we reacted after 9/11, something for which no state/government was responsible for. Secondly, if what was done to Germany with the “treaty” of Versailles had been done to the US, what would have been our reaction.

    Just asking…

    • Replies: @Old and Grumpy
    , @Druid55
  37. Moi says:
    @A123

    You’re raving. What has Allah got to do with anyone of this? On the other hand, the bloodthirsty Yahweh apparently gave a real estate deed to the Jews to occupy Palestine. Israel is a dictatorship when it comes to Occupied Palestine.

    • Agree: Larchmonter420
  38. I heard the late Justice Scalia, speaking very expensively at a private dinner, excoriate the idea of Americans – certainly American servicemen – being tried by such an international tribunal. How does that fit PG’s idea of where American objections derive from?

    • Replies: @Biff
    , @Larchmonter420
  39. “To keep a government bureaucracy functioning there must be:

    — Clear Rules & Limits
    — Separation of Powers
    — Effective Oversight & Enforcement”

    Oy Veh!

    I am not sure why you are still making these arguments. The data sets presented contradict your every point.

    The ability to exercise authority requires cooperation and or the ability to enforce its mandate. But the rues governing the ICC and it’s mandate of operation was negotiated ia the UN. Now there;s a reason why some countries won’t sign – and hose are obvious let’s get your real miss here — that the US refuses to support a body it helped create for the purposes of international order —

    But won’t sighn because by doing so it grants some level of jurisdictional ebeyance to a body not in the Constitution. Not een a doubt wbout why —

    Yet the US and Israel are demanding that non-signatories to various treaties abide by the rules;

    the ruling against China regarding law of the sea economic development — in which China is a signatory conditionally and the US is not.

    The US is leading the way to enforce nuclear development rules against nations who are not signatories —

    So our real complaint only valid complaint is that the US nor Israel have signed the agreement and are therefore not subject to it. That by the rules of conduct regarding the geneva convention — the US can act a it will — no rules apply. In other words, there is not legal body to whom the US would cooperate wit on conduct.

    I think you are making the point of the article. The US willful and unwillingness to old herself accountable for her conduct in violation of the norms governing nations. The leader of the free world who invaded more than three countries, intervened in more than three more by use of violence none of who were either a threat to the US or her allies does so in violation of the rues merely because she can.

    That’s the definition of a rogue nation.

    So the court has no jurisdiction but would submit ts findings to the UN for their enforcement by the UN’s rules. Which if course I get that dance. But the point is made, you have no ethical standard by which to impugn others because at the end the day — ethics is not really the issue. Well, I have news for you — the cooperation of the US and Israel is not required, because the US has not jurisdictional authority over Afghanistan and by your accord, has no authority to block , prevent the same in any manner a challenge Afghanistan cooperation with the court. The same applies o Palestine, Iraq, Yemen, Libya as nonsignatories have no legal standing to challenge even the jurisdiction of the court;’s activities outside of the US.

    And central to the argument. Clearly among the many in the international community, the court has value purpose and some jusridiction — even if it lacks the ability to enforce the question.

    So much for your Mexican two step. Now for your complaint about antijewish US orientation and some manner of Muslim canard — nonsense.

    As for your circular nonsense about bureaucracy — enough said.

    ———————————

    1. No the court is responding a complaint that the Israel in violating the established rule regarding international territories – the annexation of Palestine minus Palestinian consent is a violation as is the occupation of the territory referred to as the occupied territory and more — the cities that are build in Palestine minus Palestinian consent. Further whether Israel have violated the standards and norm of Human Rights set down by the UN –

    2. Whether the US engaged in violations of international law regarding her conduct in Afghanistan.

    I for one expect you to provide support for your positions. And from start to finish, your contends contain no such support, just your claim.

    Change the outcome of the current conflict — I am not sure they are that ambitious. But the rules governing territorial boundaries are clear enough. And certain a court can look at the rules and the conduct and make a determination – even if they are unable to enforce it.

    But the US as her own kettle of justice issues here at home that include enforcing the rules governing our own border.

    • LOL: A123
    • Replies: @A123
  40. “— Separation of Powers, at a minimum means that the ICC cannot arbitrarily re-write its charter.
    — The Clear Rules require a “signatory nation”. The ICC is obviously exceeding its authority by illicitly claiming additional powers over an issue between a non-nation and a non-signatory nation.
    — Oversight & Enforcement is non-existent. There is not even a hint of action trying to contain the ICC’s illicit activity.”

    Based on your own arguments,

    neither the US no Israel has standing as they are not signatories.

    ——————————————-

    “Jurisdiction
    The Court may exercise jurisdiction in a situation where genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes were committed on or after 1 July 2002 and:

    the crimes were committed by a State Party national, or in the territory of a State Party, or in a State that has accepted the jurisdiction of the Court; or
    the crimes were referred to the ICC Prosecutor by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) pursuant to a resolution adopted under chapter VII of the UN charter.
    As of 17 July 2018, a situation in which an act of aggression would appear to have occurred could be referred to the Court by the Security Council, acting under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, irrespective as to whether it involves States Parties or non-States Parties.

    In the absence of a UNSC referral of an act of aggression, the Prosecutor may initiate an investigation on her own initiative or upon request from a State Party. The Prosecutor shall first ascertain whether the Security Council has made a determination of an act of aggression committed by the State concerned. Where no such determination has been made within six months after the date of notification to the UNSC by the Prosecutor of the situation, the Prosecutor may nonetheless proceed with the investigation, provided that the Pre-Trial Division has authorized the commencement of the investigation. Also, under these circumstances, the Court shall not exercise its jurisdiction regarding a crime of aggression when committed by a national or on the territory of a State Party that has not ratified or accepted these amendments.

    Complementarity
    The ICC is intended to complement, not to replace, national criminal systems; it prosecutes cases only when States do not are unwilling or unable to do so genuinely.

    Cooperation
    As a judicial institution, the ICC does not have its own police force or enforcement body; thus, it relies on cooperation with countries worldwide for support, particularly for making arrests, transferring arrested persons to the ICC detention centre in The Hague, freezing suspects’ assets, and enforcing sentences.

    While not a United Nations organization, the Court has a cooperation agreement with the United Nations. When a situation is not within the Court’s jurisdiction, the United Nations Security Council can refer the situation to the ICC granting it jurisdiction. This has been done in the situations in Darfur (Sudan) and Libya.

    The ICC actively works to build understanding and cooperation in all regions, for example, through seminars and conferences worldwide. The Court cooperates with both States Parties and non-States Parties.”
    https://www.icc-cpi.int/about/how-the-court-works/Pages/default.aspx#legalProcess

    Sounds like a body fully aware of her boundaries.

    • Replies: @Chris Bridges
  41. The zionists took over America in 1913 with their privately owned FED and IRS and since that time the ZUS became a rogue nation under zionist control and with the creation of Israel these two have continued their destruction of any nation that dared to oppose the zionist will, which was backed by the full power of the ZUS military industrial complex.

    They have gone so far in their pursuit of the destruction of nations to attack and destroy the WTC and kill some 3000 Americans , which was blamed on the Arabs to give the ZUS and Israel the excuse to destroy the middle east for the zionist greater Israel agenda.

    Trump will upon being re-elected, will attack Iran for his zionist overlords and plunge the world into a third world war, as Russia will be forced to come to the defense of Iran as they know, if Iran falls Russia is next, and Putin realizes this and has given Russia first strike capability.

    Read the book The Controversy of Zion by Douglas Reed, excerpts of which are on henrymakow.com and can be had on amazon, and read the Protocols of Zion, which is in operation before our every eyes.

    • Agree: FLgeezer, Druid55
  42. Head zionazi A123 is here with the Jew State party line. Note how he fixates on the org chart, when the forum is just one of multitudes that can prosecute grave US or Israeli crimes. Since the court limits its jurisdiction to universal jurisdiction crimes, any UN member nation or special tribunal can horn in. In fact it is their erga omnes responsibility. And under the complementarity principle, the ICC steps in when cognizant states are unwilling or unable to prosecute – like the USA and Israel.

    A123’s also pulled some counterfactual out of Gantz’ ass, something about Ike involving the old nullum crimen sine lege principle. But it’s irrelevant Jew State pilpul because current precedent holds that if you committed a crime against peace or humanity and it wasn’t exactly written into law, so what, you should have known. Like, genocide wasn’t a crime when Hitler didn’t do it to the Jews, but tough shit, and anyway now that the Jew State’s doing it to the Palestinians, it’s a crime.

    Also A123 appears ignorant that the Nuremberg Principles, Verdict, and Charter have been rigorously codified as Crimes Against Peace and as internationally wrongful acts in breach of jus cogens. The ICC or anybody else handles the former and the ICJ handles the latter. Between them the zionazis’ nuts are in the vice. Can’t Jewsplain your way out of this one. Nope, you’re primitive, bestial enemies of all mankind. We will decapitate your state.

  43. I support some of Giraldi’s positions but he is WAY off base here. THe ICC is not a legitimate organization. It is a kangaroo court run by a bunch of smug, America-hating, leftists, most of them European socialists.
    The very idea that of an “international court” is frankly absurd on its face. Can a court of Congolese judge a case in Switzerland? These various “international” courts are as legitimate as, say, the European Union. I do hope Trump, in his next term, works to abolish both.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  44. So, one can expect both the United States and Israel to continue their defamation of the ICC, to include the threats of armed response coming from Washington. An attack on The Hague might be unimaginable in the real world, but the past three years have demonstrated that Donald Trump is capable of almost anything.

    Dr. Giraldi, being an ex-CIA, you are aware that Coronavirus if from Wuhan. It should be called, “Wuhanvirus”, but the head of WHO, took a bribe from China and instead of naming it after the city of Wuhan, he named it after the city of Corona.

    China created the Wuhanvirus to completely destroy USA economy, but due to America being an exceptional nation, the Chinese failed. What another nasty thing China will do next?

    Israel has to make a decision, either they keep USA as friend or China! They can’t have their cake and eat it (too)! What they think, are they exceptional nation like USA?

    No way! Isreal has to leave China as a friend, or USA will leave Israel as a friend.

    God bless you Dr. Giraldi!

  45. @EliteCommInc.

    You completely miss the point. You can throw out all the baloney you want. The bottom line is that the United States is a sovereign power, period. Our country can, if it chooses, ratify a treaty but it is under no obligation to recognize any outside power at all, for any reason. Only wooly-headed Mr. McGoo One World fools can fail to understand that. The ICC does not and never will have any authority over the USA nor will any other international or foreign organizastion, except under the narrowly defined terms of a treaty ratified by the Senate. If a U.S. citizen were to be arrested under an order from such a “court”, both the members of the court and the “authorities” doing the arresting would be subject to arrest by U.S. authorities for kidnap. The issue of U.S. and Israeli human rights violations (real enough) is for the citizens of those countries to resolve, nobody else.

  46. Biff says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Justice Scalia, speaking very expensively

    That prick was expensive.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  47. @Wizard of Oz

    I heard the late Justice Scalia, speaking very expensively at a private dinner, excoriate the idea of Americans – certainly American servicemen – being tried by such an international tribunal. How does that fit PG’s idea of where American objections derive from?

    Justice Scalia is right as US being an exceptional nation! Dr. Giraldi wrongly thinks and believe that USA is not an exceptional nation!

    What do you think, is USA an exceptional nation or not?

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  48. @Moi

    Yes and no. The US is just the rabid pitbull, who is dangerous with a limited intelligence. Whoever owns us cares not a wit about international law. They are playing a never ending perverse game of Stratego. I maintain that someday the rulers will decide to give Israel a dose of destruction. Just like what the US is currently seeing.

    • Agree: Moi
  49. Don Bacon says:

    from ICC Forum

    In its first ten years, the ICC’s investigations and prosecutions have all concerned situations in Africa. The Court has issued arrest warrants for two African heads of state, and has opposed efforts by African governments to avoid ICC involvement in several situations. Moreover, the Court has declined to investigate crimes allegedly committed in Venezuela and by British soldiers in Iraq. These actions among others have led to charges, particularly among African political leaders, that the ICC is targeting Africa inappropriately.

    The situation is discussed here

  50. A123 says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    I am not sure why you are still making these arguments. The data sets presented contradict your every point

    .

    Let me fix that for you….

    I am sure why I am still making these accurate arguments. The data sets presented support my every point.

    1. No the court is responding a complaint that the Israel in violating the established rule regarding international territories

    Where is the “signatory nation” for this inquiry? No matter how much hand waving and distraction you put forth, a “territory” as a matter of law is not a “nation”.

    Israel is clearly not violating the 1920’s established Rule of Law supported & affirmed by the UN’s own Charter. Section 80, I believe. Only rogue nations and institutions believe that “Complying with International Law is a Crime”.
    _____

    2. Whether the US engaged in violations of international law regarding her conduct in Afghanistan.

    ICC staff investigated and found inadequate evidence to bring any case (1).

    Recently, a panel of International Criminal Court (ICC) judges unanimously rejected Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda’s November 2017 request to open an investigation into possible war crimes and crimes against humanity during Afghanistan’s brutal armed conflict.

    The real question is, “Why is rogue prosecutor Bensouda still employed?” The obvious answer is that rogue nations support Bensouda’s efforts to undermine the Rule of Law.
    ____

    Russia, China, India, Israel, and the U.S. all refuse to support the rogue court. The ICC is widely viewed as highly political and lacking objectivity.

    The best solution is to abandon the “ICC foundation” and return to the “Nuremburg foundation”. If the community of civilized nations needs a Court to handle a specific matter, it can form one that has limited jurisdiction & lifespan to deal with that specific matter. A good example of the “Nuremburg foundation” is the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia [ICTY]. It was created for a limited purpose and dissolved in 2017.

    PEACE 😷
    _______

    (1) https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/04/23/afghanistan-icc-abandons-field

  51. Tony Hall says:

    Until then, one hopes that Bensouda will continue her work to expose the crimes that continue to be committed in both Palestine and Afghanistan.

    The Chief ICC persecutor is not enthusiastic about doing her job to say the least. See

    https://ahtribune.com/interview/3675-norman-finkelstein.html

  52. @Larchmonter420

    Exceptional indeed if not, as some would like to think, properly excepted from the rules that civilised countries should obey.

    BTW sorry for not picking up that the bloody Autofill or Spellchecker had provided “expensively” for “expensively.”.

  53. Enough of Palestine, the Hague, and all that crap. The US should have driven to Moscow at the end of WWII as Patton knew. The Middle East, Russia, and China should all rightfully be ruled by the Anglo-Saxon with the Jews tossed on the scrap heap. It was weakness that consigned us to this bleak future. More weakness is not the answer.

  54. Petermx says:

    “Israel meanwhile is planning on illegally annexing significant parts of the Palestinian West Bank in July, with a green light from the Trump Administration, and no one in Europe or elsewhere is even interested in initiating serious sanctions that might lead to the postponing of that decision. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has even stated flatly that the remaining Palestinians who would be annexed will not become Israeli citizens – they will instead be “subjects” of the Jewish state with no guaranteed rights or privileges.”

    I have a feeling Mr. Giraldi and others are talking to a mostly deaf audience even on this website when the article is critical of Jews or Israel. Just as the whites that get on their knees and ask for forgiveness when a Black Lives Matter [thug] “asks” them to or a group of police officers “take a knee” when a group of looters order them to in a chant, most Americans and even many Europeans know who the boss is when the subject is Jews or Israel. They’re afraid of their own shadow when that is under discussion.

  55. @Lot

    When Lotspecifically states that he’s an American citizen, it reinforces my belief that he’s an Israeli or a zionist dual citizen with loyalty to zion.

  56. @anon

    It’s quite simple, you lance the boil.

  57. sally says:
    @anon

    So, one can expect both the United States and Israel to continue their defamation of the ICC, to include the threats of armed response coming from Washington.

    Defamation is an intentional act, defended only by a universal truth ?

    I have long wondered if media content providers whose content promotes, propagates, denies or defends activities of themselves or others, when such content violates or would have to violate human rights in order to be made active, makes the content provider and media distributor into inf ringers into the space of universal rights of mankind.

    If it were up to me, I would argue that aiding and abetting a politician in an effort or activity that abuses or infringes on human rights falls within infringement jurisdiction of universal rights courts.

    Seems to me the activities of all actors at any nation state, whether or not they subscribe to human rights, fall within the jurisdiction of every universal rights court; humans who operate nation states have no rights, no standing, no basis to argue they are exempt from being held accountable for their infringements on human rights.

    Actors with nation state privileges have no standing to claim exclusion for responsibility to their fellow humans by virtue of a nation state power because neither power or nation state are real. They are virtual, descriptive, and attributive, but not real, therefore not human, and for that reason, not substantive in anyt argument about the scope of universal [human] rights.

    AS John Locke, https://worldhistoryofideas.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/john-locke-lecture-history-241.pdf
    argues, the rights of mankind are derived not from a nation state, but from God himself. Recognition of these have been embodied in many documents, (among them. the America Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776..” the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and the Nature’s God entitle them, ) vs”.. the political rights of a few politicians who have assumed power by authority they themselves established .. ;

    the right of self determination is listed amount the universal rights at the UN as are many other human rights.
    So it is difficult to image how a nation state can refuse to submit those who operate under its authority to a court, whose jurisdiction is based in the universal god given rights of mankind.

    Nation states actors will have to defend their claim to immunity with bloodshed.. IMO

  58. @anon

    The world will come back and mop you up when they get around to it. And Palestine will be free.

    Bingo!

    Be patient.

    The US is in terminal decline. From the start, its “democratic” system was easily subverted by money, which is the method expertly used by the Jews to subvert other countries over its five-thousand year history of serial — and moderately successful — attempts at suicide-by-goy.

    China is well on its way to global preeminence (Note I don’t use the word “dominance”). And China is not a democracy to be easily subverted by Jewish money. It’s leadership, no doubt as craven as any, is still vastly more savvy than the “for sale” leadership of the Western “liberal democracies”. So China will be resistant to subversion by Jewish money. They will be the next great power, but they will never be Israel’s bitch and guardian. (In this they are like Russia, which also has been resistant to Jewish subversion, a fact that manifests in a thousand-year blood feud and incandescent hatred of Russia ever since the Rus terminated the Jewish Khazar Empire in 969AD.)

    With the final collapse of US power, the first stage of which we are now witnessing, Israel will be hanging out there with its ass in the wind, with no great power bitch to protect it. At that point the pattern of five-thousand years will repeat, and the Zionist cancer , shrieking “Anti-Semitism! anti-Seimitism!” to no avail, will pass from the pages of history”.

    I’m an American and a Jew, just not a Zionist criminal or tribal accomplice.

  59. @A123

    Is it true that the jews do not believe in either Heaven or Hell and after death they (jews) cease to exist? I have read this many a times. Then I also read that the talmud states that “Jesus boils in a tub of excreta for all eternity’.
    How can this be true if there’s no afterlife?

    • Replies: @A123
  60. @A123

    ” I’m sure that the ICC was created with the best of intentions”

    Yeah from their point of view it was, and that being opposing the US and relentlessly pursuing the goal of world communism.
    The ICC is fervently revered by Germany which represents the epitome of “authority worship”, and would just love to present shackled, humiliated, American GIs being tried for fabricated “War crimes” to the US hating world media.

    As far as treaties being broken by the US : ANY international treaty the US signs amounts to nothing more than grab your ankles, as the entire globe consists of enemies of the US.

    AJM “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army vet, and pro Jazz artist.

  61. @A123

    There is no “ongoing conflict”. That suggests two equal sides. There is genocide, pure and simple. Cunning, creeping genocide. Genocide of the indigenous people by European invaders whose own common culture is hatred, hatred of everyone who is not one of them. And whose primary, critical doctrine is that they are hated by everyone who is not one of them. To hate and be hated is their existential necessity. Genocide of the hated is what it’s all about.

    That criminals decline to be tried for crime, claim immunity from prosecution, does not validate their crime, and does not validate their claim to immunity, nor their pretence at accusation of them is hatred of them.

  62. Rich says:
    @Anthony Aaron

    Yes, Barry did attend Harvard Law School and was on their Law Review, but he was so obviously a completely affirmative action student, I’m sure he wasn’t taken seriously. In fact, because of affirmative action, all black accomplishments are suspect and they’re all in over their head. Look at their latest hero, a confessed, convicted violent felon who ran a porn channel. These people are getting laughable.

    • Agree: Druid55
  63. A123 says:
    @Rev. Spooner

    Then I also read that the talmud states that “Jesus boils in a tub of excreta for all eternity’.

    Mullah Spooner,

    I am a Christian, and I can unequivocally state that the Son of God is not boiling in anything.

    Only Muslim liars, such as yourself, spread this blood libel. Your false Prophet, the Anti-Christ Muhammad, is certainly in Hell and will suffer for Eternity. As to the method, I cannot say.

    PEACE 😷

    • Replies: @geokat62
    , @Druid55
    , @anonymous
  64. “Let me fix that for you….’

    You don’t even get an A for effort.

    1. I made no case that the US was in violation nor did i make a case that the ICC has pressed one. What I said was clearly they desire to investigate. So your entire hopscoth is based on comments I did not make —

    — there’s a term for that — straw man — making up a comment not in play and responding to the made up argument you yourself made. This is a frequent ploy of yours. It confuses the course of the discussion all the while giving you cover for positions that simply fail as avoid having to make that admission. Some of your opponents do that as well . . .
    No sale here.

    2. Oy and veh veh . . . laughing. we are not talking about the 1920’s and the parameters for Israel are closer to 1948, when the UN actually recognized the boundaries set aside for the state of Israel. Again, nice try, but your tendency to slip and slide only reveals that you as someone who engages in dishonest exchange and that is sad, be cause one might support your positions if not for the nature and and choices you make to advance them.

    Let’s get you up to speed on the matter.
    https://www.npr.org/2011/05/24/136495202/background-israels-pre-1967-boundaries

    3. where the ICC stand as to the US and Afghanistan and it seems you are incorrect again and again and again . . .based not on say so – but the record. By the way it is not just the US

    https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/11/20/afghanistan-and-international-criminal-court

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/international-criminal-court-prepares-legal-war-on-the-us

    laughing more mirror bending to change the discussion. Look your goal is to legitimize the court thus far, you haven;t provided a shred of evidence that are biased. Your claims that they are anti-Israel and anti US are not supported by the case load they have — neither China, India, Russia or anyone else determines the validity of a case — it’s the evidence, not whether one likes or dislikes said organization and this far — you have presented nothing that supports your contends. And that is disappointing.

    Because as a conservative who has spent a good deal of effort supporting the current executive, your advocacy is more damaging than helpful.

    • Replies: @A123
  65. @Rich

    It’s undeniable that he is brilliant. But he’s also a psychopath of the John Wayne Gacy sort: all about power and dominance, utterly bereft of conscience and empathy.

    When the truth finally emerges, we will find that Pompeo, in league with Netanyahu, was behind the Covid-19 bioweapon attack against China and Iran. Their hope was to destroy China — and Iran — in a manner to allow “plausible deniability” (a direct non-nuclear military attack would have been a “land war in Asia” debacle, almost certain to escalate out of control, and a nuclear attack barely “thinkable” and clearly impractical as it would have provoked Chinese nuclear retaliation).

    (And for those who think I have crossed over into “Conspiracy Theory” territory, let me add this. The “Epstein business” was in hindsight, a self-evident and breathtakingly brilliant Mossad honey trap. Every person who traveled to Orgy Island on the Lolita Express, knows it now, and knows what the Mossad/Israel has on them. To a moral certainty, the Mossad has in its possession a library of videos of influential US (and other Western world) persons having sex with underage girls, Donald Trump among them. Thus is explained both the Epstein “suicide” and the deafening silence across the media space re “l-affaire Epstein”.)

    Not just “interesting times”, fabulously interesting times.

    … far from the coming hunger games, beyond the nuclear blast zone, safe and prosperous in “Brigadoon”.

    • Replies: @schnellandine
  66. anon[491] • Disclaimer says: • Website

    right, you lance the boil with your recourse to rebellion – as an insider threat, a domestic subversive, or a human, not just with marches but with foot dragging, dissimulation, desertion, false compliance, pilfering, feigned ignorance, slander, arson, and sabotage.

    yes, sally, Jeff Fager is the USA’s Hans Fritzsche

    The US Stasi has nothing to fall back on but its Schild plan:

    https://www.moonofshanghai.com/2020/06/the-next-american-revolution.html

    So whose side are you on, Phil?

  67. A123 says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    1. I made no case that the US was in violation nor did i make a case that the ICC has pressed one.

    LOL

    This is clearly a lie on your part.

    You brought up the Afghanistan-US engagement. The only possible reason for you to do so is because you are implicitly “making a case that the US was in violation”

    confuses the course of the discussion all the while giving you cover

    ROTFL

    Confusing the issue is your #1 tactic. Having been defeated on the merits, you are desperately attempting to retreat from your own fact set. The maneuver is both feeble and obvious.

    it’s the evidence, not whether one likes or dislikes said organization and this far — you have presented nothing that supports your contends. And that is disappointing.

    It is you that are short on evidence.

    There is no Senate ratified Treaty making the U.S. subordinate to the ICC. Even if such a document was ratified, odds are it would be overturned as Unconstitutional. The rogue nations backing the current ICC have no legal (or moral) jurisdiction to investigate the U.S.

    The Rule of Law makes it clear that:

    — The rogue ICC has no jurisdiction to investigate Russia
    — The rogue ICC has no jurisdiction to investigate China
    — The rogue ICC has no jurisdiction to investigate India
    — The rogue ICC has no jurisdiction to investigate Israel
    — The rogue ICC has no jurisdiction to investigate the U.S.

    You can use strawman arguments and deceit as much as you want. Everyone rational sees that you are incoherently flailing about, trying to defend the indefensible.

    PEACE 😷

  68. I don’t know about Israel but we don’t break any moral laws, either domestically or internationally, plain and simple.

    • Replies: @Ann Nonny Mouse
  69. Art says:

    Just think – come Jan 2021 – NO MORE POMPEO!

    • Replies: @A123
  70. While I see the logic in avoiding a one-size-fits-all comprehensive jurisprudence applicable to every nation on earth, there remains a necessity for nation-states to agree upon some manner of civil adjudication of dispute that obviates the need for war.

    Unequivocally rejecting this means, an offending polity essentially provides a casus belli for any party unable to redress its grievances in a civil manner, simultaneously conceding that it possesses no vehicle other than force by which to resolve controversy.

    In brief, those who reject even the concept of an international body by which to civilly adjudicate the Palestinian conflict essentially admit that they have no reasonable argument which would withstand legal scrutiny. They’re telling us that war and war alone is the path forward.

    As such, they have no grounds upon which to complain about “terrorism.”

  71. Wally says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    said:
    “The courts purpose was to prosecute those who violated, the Geneva Convention’s prohibitions regarding the rules of conduct during wartime. Based on the available record the Nuremberg Tribunal served as foundational model for the ICC. ”

    – Except they did NOT “prosecute those who violated, the Geneva Convention”.

    – The Nuremberg proceeding were Show Trials staged to give the appearance of legitimacy.

    – Recall that at Nuremberg it was ridiculously accepted that Jews were ‘exterminated en masse in steam chambers’ at Treblinka.

    -Recall that the very real & excavated Soviet 1940 massacre of some 20,000 Poles at Katyn & surrounding region was ‘proven’ at Nuremberg as being a German crime.

    – Recall that at Nuremberg it was admitted by those participating in the Show Trials that the Germans were routinely tortured to get ‘confessions’

    – Recall that at Nuremberg, the absurdly claimed Zyklon-B (a slow acting insect agent) ‘gas chambers’ were given ‘judicial notice’ (accepted as fact in post war trials and could not be argued against) even though no forensic study for these ‘gas chambers’ was ever presented, the falsely accused had little chance for defense, how convenient it all was.

    recommended:
    Nuremberg – Fair Trial or Show Trial ?: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11053

    • Replies: @Curmudgeon
  72. A123 says:
    @Art

    Just think – come Jan 2021 – NO MORE POMPEO!

    Are you sure?

    Even in the unlikely event that the DNC wins….

    President Hillary will take over after Biden’s suspicions accident tragic death. The NeoConDemocrat Clinton administration is certain to deploy force overseas. It is counterintuitive, but… Pompeo is actually more likely to keep his position if the DNC wins.

    PEACE 😷

  73. anon[150] • Disclaimer says:

    All these poor saps who don’t know their rights but don’t want them. A miracle of CIA brainwashing here.

    And poor A123 reduced to Soviet shoepounding for his unsupported assertions. This is not like your country, there are smart people here. Tell it to Fatou Bensouda. Hebernian and A123 are the Dresie and Casie of Jew State Apartheid.

    https://publicdelivery.org/roger-ballen-twins/

  74. Art says:

    These days it is accepted practice by rational communities – that if a cop kills someone – that he is immediately relieved of duty until the right or wrong of his action is determined by authorities.

    New Rules for the world community.

    If a sovereign head of state kills many of his citizens – he then must immediately step down to be judged. The same thing with killing neighbors. (Start a war – you will lose power and be judged – period.)

    • Replies: @Curmudgeon
  75. 1. “This is clearly a lie on your part.”

    Read the my comments and the subsequent references. I stated — investigation. They desire to investigate the matter . That is quite a different question that whether there is a case . . . again making up arguments that are not on the table. But you might want to examine some examples brought by others to reinforce that a case might be made. I did not make that argument. It is a nonissue to the central question of the ICC intends.
    which according to their procedures starts with investigating — clearly you have not read the material that rebuts your entire advance here.

    2. “It is you that are short on evidence.

    There is no Senate ratified Treaty making the U.S. subordinate to the ICC. Even if such a document was ratified, odds are it would be overturned as Unconstitutional. The rogue nations backing the current ICC have no legal (or moral) jurisdiction to investigate the U.S.’

    Yawn — the ICC as I clearly note does not make a case for jurisdiction over any nation, even signatories — in other words as they state I note verbatim. Again an issue that is not on the table — and I won’t be baited into it. Having previously acknowledged that the US is not a signatory and stated the reasons why a state would avoid such a standard – your position is merely repetition of a matter not in dispute.

    That I am advocating that the US is subject to the ICC is entirely false. What I said us that the US should be cooperative or at least neutral(that’s new) as opposed to thwarting the ICC mission. Furthermore as indicated by the record, the ICC is not anti-Israel nor anti US and there is no evidence that they are.

    ——————————————-

    As to jurisdiction: as negotiated via the UN the ICC can investigate suspected criminal activity as she will. She can investigate issues inside states where governments have operated. If the government of Afghanistan desires an investigation or Iraq desires and investigation, or Yemen or Libya or Syria, or timbuk tu for that matter . . .and those states agree/cooperate — then the actions f those countries involved will be investigated — period. What you are confusing is the ability to investigate verses the ability to enforce measures of result. And perhaps why you make so many errors in analysis.

    I have never advocated that the ICC has enforcement powers except via the recognized channels. And i have further made it clear of the liklihood of any service member seeing the inside of an international court via this process, except via the mechanisms to which the all parties are linked, save for example extradition treaties for crimes, for example.

    “— The rogue ICC has no jurisdiction to investigate Russia
    — The rogue ICC has no jurisdiction to investigate China
    — The rogue ICC has no jurisdiction to investigate India
    — The rogue ICC has no jurisdiction to investigate Israel
    — The rogue ICC has no jurisdiction to investigate the U.S.”

    again,

    a. they have every right to investigate
    b. there is a difference between the right to investigate and the jurisdictional issues of detention, arrest or even access to data inside states minus said states permission — and why the US is revoking VISAs
    That has no weight on the investigation save that which the ICC gives it.

    And by the way, the US intervention in Syria is a violation of international rules of conduct.
    The repeated bombing runs by Isarel in Syria is a violation of the international rules of conduct
    The confiscation of territory by Israel of Palestinian land minus Palestinian consent anywhere in Palestine proper s a violation of the rules governing international conduct
    If the US has engaged in aiding abetting this illegal conduct then the US is in-violation of the rules of conduct
    The attack on Iraq was a violation of the international rules of conduct

    Now my position is that the US have legitimacy in conducting her affairs, that means avoiding conduct hat threatens her ability to operate as a legitimate power minus having to rely on the use of force.

    I take you have read the issues regarding the territorial dispute and the irrelevance of referring to 1920

    Good grief.

    • Agree: AnonStarter
    • LOL: A123
    • Replies: @AnonStarter
    , @A123
  76. @Wally

    Wally, you forgot the pedal driven brain bashing machine. http://cwporter.com/textussr52.htm

    • Replies: @Wally
  77. The best way for the US to protect US service personnel is by avoiding getting dragged into needless interventions using force – period.

  78. @Art

    These days it is accepted practice by rational communities – that if a cop kills someone – that he is immediately relieved of duty until the right or wrong of his action is determined by authorities.

    I believe that has always been standard operating procedure, it’s just that it was never publicized and up until a few decades ago, not all that common. Clinton militarizing the police forces changed all that.

    • Replies: @Art
  79. @Jeff Davis

    , the Mossad has in its possession a library of videos of influential US (and other Western world) persons having sex with underage girls,

    …the value of which decreases by the minute, nearing zero within a few years. I’d look for preemptive deep fakes to flood, after which real vids would be disregarded generally.

  80. @EliteCommInc.

    Your only mistake is that you’re trying to argue in good faith with someone who isn’t.

    Some folks are just plain fire. Feeding them only adds fuel.

    • Replies: @A123
  81. geokat62 says:
    @A123

    Mullah Spooner, I am a Christian…

    Pastor Hagee, is that you?

    • LOL: ChuckOrloski, A123, Art
    • Replies: @A123
  82. Wally says:
    @Curmudgeon

    Oh yeah.

    – Then there’s “I breathed through the keyhole in the gas chamber to stay alive.”
    Or: ‘the SS made sausages in the gas chambers’.
    Or: ‘delayed action gas which allowed Jews to walk to the mass graves and jump in’.

    – In fact, ALL the so called “survivors” make impossible claims and contradict each other every single time.
    That’s why so few testified in courts. And when they did they made fools of themselves.
    The mentioned Nuremberg Show Trials proves that quite well.

    endless examples:

    videos / Holohoax Tales: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12988

    the so called ‘Holocaust’ / theatre of the absurd: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=66

    Ridiculous “holocaust testimonies”: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=7033

    • Replies: @anarchyst
  83. Druid55 says:
    @A123

    Typical A123 zio-freakszoid lies and nonsense!! You’re so predictable!!

  84. Druid55 says:
    @Lot

    Lot, A123, fran tubbyman, aaron all the zios never fail with their shite. Everybody here knows who/what they are, yet they persist. Talmudist trash!

    • Replies: @Art
  85. Hibernian says:
    @anon

    I’ve been commenting here long enough that people know my persona is not fake. I’m sorry if my very dim view of the UN isn’t radical enough for you. Sticks and stones may break my bones but ethnic slurs will never hurt me.

  86. Hibernian says:
    @animalogic

    …if it can convict a person or State in the world court of “public opinion”.

    Lynch law by another name. Also see, “The process is the punishment.”

  87. Druid55 says:
    @Moi

    912 was a mossa/cia/neocon job!

  88. A123 says:
    @AnonStarter

    NonStarter,

    As usual, your lack of Faith in God leads you to the exact opposite of reality.

    Why do you keep making the same hell-fire mistake?

    You are setting yourself up for failure in this life and the next.

    PEACE 😷

    • Replies: @anonymous
  89. A123 says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    a. they have every right to investigate
    b. there is a difference between the right to investigate and the jurisdictional issues

    This assertion is truly mind boggling in its denial of jurisprudence. You are arguing that “Courts may ignore Jurisdiction” .

    You have conceded that the ICC:
    — Is not a “Court” As It lacks jurisdiction.
    — Has nothing to do with “Criminality” as it can investigate anything.

    In the interest of Comity, I will try to meet you half-way. The ICC needs a new & accurate name to reflect your admission that it is not a Court.

    I humbly suggest that the ICC be rechristened renamed New York Times 2.0.

    The NYT2 (f.k.a. ICC) shall:
    — Be openly anti-Semitic
    — Conduct obviously biased investigations
    — Produce one-sided propaganda for SJW Globalism, as funded and directed by your IslamoSoros
    — Undermine the Rule of Law in favor of rogue, anti-Christian nations

    PEACE 😷

  90. A123 says:
    @geokat62

    Pastor Hagee, is that you?

    If you want Pastor/Mullah Hague, you need to ask EliteCommunist. He is the one attempting to confer Vatican-like divine status on the Hague.

    PEACE 😷

  91. anarchyst says:
    @Wally

    Hitting the holohoax (oops I mean “holocaust™”) head-on doesn’t work because of the jew-controlled media which has declared “holocaustianity™” to be the new worldwide “state religion” from which no dissension from its “orthodoxy” is permitted.
    The only way to counter “holocaustianity™” is to point out the scientific and engineering impossibility of every “holocaust™” claim.
    Let’s look at a number of claims that have been made and have been ingrained in “holocaust™” orthodoxy:
    — using “bug spray” (Zyklon B) as an execution agent (ha ha)
    —“gas chambers” with ordinary wooden doors, not gas-tight doors
    —“gas chambers” with no means to ventilate the chambers after “operation”
    —“gas chamber” chimney not connected to anything
    —“blood spurting out of the ground” for weeks and months
    —“crematoria stacks with visible flames” (not possible) crematoria burn clean
    —“thousands of bodies cremated per day” (not possible)
    —“multiple bodies” in one “muffle” to “speed up” operations
    —“lampshades, soap and shrunken heads”, oh my
    —“the ability to tell when jews are being cremated by the smell or color of smoke”
    —“claimed burial grounds not being permitted to be disturbed” per jewish “law”
    NONE of these claims are possible or valid and can be easily debunked using sound scientific and engineering principles.
    I have been thrown out (asked to leave) those “jewish freak shows” called “holocaust™” museums for merely attempting to point out these facts.

    • Replies: @Wally
  92. @Biff

    “expansively” of course though Autofill obviously didn’t like it. He was expansive in manner . He told very good jokes. The sort for which tenure was almost essential.

  93. Art says:
    @Curmudgeon

    These days it is accepted practice by rational communities – that if a cop kills someone – that he is immediately relieved of duty until the right or wrong of his action is determined by authorities.

    I believe that has always been standard operating procedure, it’s just that it was never publicized and up until a few decades ago, not all that common.

    Cops act for sovereigns when killing civilians. It is the power of the sovereign that allows the cops to kill. Making them step down after a killing, is a good thing.

    It is time to make sovereigns do the same. Country leaders should have to step aside for a period of time and be made to justify their killing of civilians. The same goes for war making on neighbors.

  94. Art says:
    @Druid55

    Lot, A123, fran tubbyman, aaron all the zios never fail with their shite. Everybody here knows who/what they are, yet they persist. Talmudist trash!

    That is the Jew way – lie and lie and lie until our mind just gives up.

    On UR it is not working very well anymore. They are pretty much laughed at. They do it for the uninformed visitor. We must not let them go on and on unchallenged.

  95. Jorge Videla [AKA "jorge videla IV"] says:

    Neither Israel nor the United States has recognized the ICC for the obvious reason that they are primary sources of egregious human rights and international law violations.

    stopped reading there phil.

    the US and japan are the only countries on earth with freedom of speech. all countries without this 100% obvious and most important human right should be nuked.

    AND israel is one of those countries.

    the ICC is a criminal organization.

    are you a “late life homosexual” or what?

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  96. Wally says:
    @anarchyst

    said:
    “Hitting the holohoax (oops I mean “holocaust™”) head-on doesn’t work because of the jew-controlled media which has declared “holocaustianity™” to be the new worldwide “state religion” from which no dissension from its “orthodoxy” is permitted.
    The only way to counter “holocaustianity™” is to point out the scientific and engineering impossibility of every “holocaust™” claim.”

    – Well yes, if you had checked you’d see that’s exactly what I have done & more, see:
    https://www.unz.com/?s=holocaust&Action=Search&ptype=all&commentsearch=only&commenter=Wally

    Indeed, a nice list, all of which myself, Ron Unz, & others here have covered.

    No need to play games, that’s what they do. Taking them head-on is the away to avoid the trap they set with irrelevant politics.

    The fact that free speech on the subject is not allowed is a damning mark against the ‘Holocau$t Industry”

    Regards.

  97. “You have conceded that the ICC:
    — Is not a “Court” As It lacks jurisdiction.
    — Has nothing to do with “Criminality” as it can investigate anything.

    In the interest of Comity, I will try to meet you half-way. The ICC needs a new & accurate name to reflect your admission that it is not a Court.

    I humbly suggest that the ICC be rechristened renamed New York Times 2.0.

    [MORE]

    The NYT2 (f.k.a. ICC) shall:
    — Be openly anti-Semitic
    — Conduct obviously biased investigations
    — Produce one-sided propaganda for SJW Globalism, as funded and directed by your IslamoSoros
    — Undermine the Rule of Law in favor of rogue, anti-Christian nations”
    ——-

    Om response, let’s just stay where I came in

    ““Jurisdiction
    The Court may exercise jurisdiction in a situation where genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes were committed on or after 1 July 2002 and:

    the crimes were committed by a State Party national, or in the territory of a State Party, or in a State that has accepted the jurisdiction of the Court; or
    the crimes were referred to the ICC Prosecutor by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) pursuant to a resolution adopted under chapter VII of the UN charter.
    As of 17 July 2018, a situation in which an act of aggression would appear to have occurred could be referred to the Court by the Security Council, acting under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, irrespective as to whether it involves States Parties or non-States Parties.

    In the absence of a UNSC referral of an act of aggression, the Prosecutor may initiate an investigation on her own initiative or upon request from a State Party. The Prosecutor shall first ascertain whether the Security Council has made a determination of an act of aggression committed by the State concerned. Where no such determination has been made within six months after the date of notification to the UNSC by the Prosecutor of the situation, the Prosecutor may nonetheless proceed with the investigation, provided that the Pre-Trial Division has authorized the commencement of the investigation. Also, under these circumstances, the Court shall not exercise its jurisdiction regarding a crime of aggression when committed by a national or on the territory of a State Party that has not ratified or accepted these amendments.

    Complementarity
    The ICC is intended to complement, not to replace, national criminal systems; it prosecutes cases only when States do not are unwilling or unable to do so genuinely.

    Cooperation
    As a judicial institution, the ICC does not have its own police force or enforcement body; thus, it relies on cooperation with countries worldwide for support, particularly for making arrests, transferring arrested persons to the ICC detention centre in The Hague, freezing suspects’ assets, and enforcing sentences.

    While not a United Nations organization, the Court has a cooperation agreement with the United Nations. When a situation is not within the Court’s jurisdiction, the United Nations Security Council can refer the situation to the ICC granting it jurisdiction. This has been done in the situations in Darfur (Sudan) and Libya.

    The ICC actively works to build understanding and cooperation in all regions, for example, through seminars and conferences worldwide. The Court cooperates with both States Parties and non-States Parties.”
    https://www.icc-cpi.int/about/how-the-court-works/Pages/default.aspx#legalProcess

    Works in cooperation with nation states. Contrary to your challenge for which you have provided no evidence — the ICC is not anti-jewish or anti-US. They fully expect states to act in accordance with the rules governing violations of law in host states and their own as well as those recognized by the UN, specifically with the UN security council and the Geneva Conventions. There is no evidence that they operate outside the norms governing best practices with respect to their investigation and subsequent processes.

    That covers the arena for nonsignatories laugh. You have a peculiar sense of jurisdiction and practices

    1. explicit jurisdiction for signatories still requires nation state cooperation.
    2. implicit in this is an expectation that even nonsignatories desire legal and just frame works and will based on the evidence act accordingly with their frames of legal purpose and practice

    There is no indication that the court is seeking enforcement jurisdictions beyond their mandate on nonsignatories or signatories. You assert as much but provide not a single instance to support it.

    No. The ability to investigate and perform trials is well withing their mandate. Ad while they no enforcement power to arrest and penalize. They certainly may conduct trials and make verdicts in cases brought before them. The fact that a nation state objects, does not cooperate does not in fact deny or invalidate the process.

    In essence your argument seems to be

    a. if a state ruling cannot be enforced, there was no crime.
    b. if a state does not cooperate that no crime has occurred.
    c. in other words – no wrong exists if a country says no wrong was committed, regardless of the evidence or the case

    No. I am not arguing that a court may ignore their jurisdictional boundaries, in fact, I go to great lengths at repeating exactly what the ICC says about its jurisdictions and what it not do or seeks to do

    It does seek to violate any nation’s sovereignty, nor is there evidence that it has done so or taken any action mi bus the cooperation of existing entities in play.
    ———————————

    Repeating in various forms what you have previously stated to create new distractive arguments is not at all expressing cooperativeness. You remind me of the women who ran over a guy. And in the interest of comity the insurance company acting on her behalf said, here’s some money, you can have it if you say that her running over you was your fault. i will have to respond in like manner as the man in question. Based on the evidence, the incident is entirely the fault of the woman who an over the man and neither he nor i will grant ground otherwise.

    And this is where you lose and lose entirely — your position is based on power dynamics, not on the principles of justice — not as man would have it but God through Christ — having introduced faith as a principle you are now bound by it. God does not see justice through the eyes of power dynamics —

    righteousness is not predicated on who has power it is state of existence whether it it is enforceable or not – regardless of jurisdiction. Your attempt to tweek out some legal ease fails on its own accord based on the rules and evidence in play

    you mouth about 1920 — but we are not talking about 1920 when that is pointed out to you — you avoid the obvious by turning on unrelated issues — such anti-christian posture but to date not a single shred of evidence that the ICC is against christians

    you are now about the nyt and the icc while providing no support that there is link between the the two and that of there were, it is at pertinent to the issues on the table. There is no evidence that the ICC is engaged in a campaign of propaganda merely against jews, christians israel or the US —
    Given the number of Muslims on trial or under investigation — your comment about a proislamic bet remains unsupported and undermined by the evidence
    The evidence further indicates that regardless of faith issues the court is dealing with acts of criminal conduct and holds no favoritism

    Thus far all you have done is demonstrate how far you will deviate from best practices, honesty, forthright discussion in defense of positions that are not in any manner supported by the evidence. Your own arguments undermine the positions you hold as repeatedly demonstrated throughout the discussion.

    At no time do I reject the standing of the ICC as a court based on its stated purpose, policies procedures and practices.

    The moniker: EliteCommInc. has no affiliations with communism, democracy, libertarianism, socialism — I am a die hard capitalist in the formal understanding of the term. Of paramount value and importance to the point of annoyance is my stance on integrity, fair play, and honest dealings as foundational.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  98. Until america awakes to what it has reaped for supporting those that call themselves jews and the spiritual adultery the jews do continually . Unfortunately that day doesn’t look to appear until after jews cull a major portion of the american populace . American has been a captured state since at least the end of its “civil war” ,and probably before.

    To any Palestinian who may read this.

    You will not overcome those that call themselves jews by violence , but by practicing what Jesus Christ taught love thy enemies , do good unto them in so doing ye shall heap coals of fire on them (their consciousness)
    Here is one PAian that stands opposed to the satanists which call themselves jews

  99. @Jorge Videla

    Israel is one of which countries? I have to ask because you didn’t bother to check or edit for logical consistency. Is that BTW because you don’t switch your brain on or because you lack courtesy to your readers?

  100. Let’s not beat about the bush. It is the greater nation of Zion and its satraps who are attacking the ICC. Recently the Australian Ambassador to the Netherlands stated that Australia does not recognise the ICC’s jurisdiction in the case against Israel, because Palestine is not a country. As an Australian, that does not represent my position, nor millions of my countrymen.

    The ambassador’s name? Matthew Neuhaus. From the most Jewish postcode in Sydney. Do the maths….

  101. @EliteCommInc.

    Thus far all you have done is demonstrate how far you will deviate from best practices, honesty, forthright discussion in defense of positions that are not in any manner supported by the evidence. Your own arguments undermine the positions you hold as repeatedly demonstrated throughout the discussion.

    Be honest.

    Can we really call what he has to offer an “argument”? You’ve been here long enough to see him for what he’s worth. Why expect anything different this time around?

    Never ceases to amaze me. Both Fran and this bozo have been in my ignore filter for quite some time now, yet their tacitly diversionary drivel — as well as the inexplicably large volume of responses it draws — continues to clutter up so many threads to no end.

    I’d say their mission to keep otherwise intelligent individuals occupied with nonsense has, quite unfortunately, attained a significant measure of success.

    What ever happened to “Don’t feed the trolls”?

    • Replies: @A123
    , @ChuckOrloski
  102. A123 says:
    @AnonStarter

    NonStarter the Troll,

    Let me help you with that….

    NonStarter’s Racist Mission is promoting violence and keeping otherwise intelligent individuals occupied with nonsense.

    For one of UR’s most notable trolls to attack me….. I must be doing something right. NonStarter personally fears both my accuracy and my honesty.

    PEACE 😷

  103. @AnonStarter

    ⭐AnonStarter inquired:
    _What ever happened to “Don’t feed the trolls”?”

    In 1950’s America, TV ran popular Smokey the Bear commercials. Smokey said, “Only you can prevent forest fires.”

    Same goes for the preventiom of trolls who “happen” to proliferate & try to burn this article by Phil Giraldi.

    Smokey Orloski advisory: “Don’t feed your comment/oxygen to A123, and others.” They will die by talking to themselves.

    • LOL: A123
    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  104. teo toon says:

    The united States Constitution overrides any treaty, law, edict, EO, diktat, or damned white lab coat. No branch of the Federal government can yield any part of the united State’s sovereignty short of total defeat in a war. Has there been a war wherein we were defeated? No.

    • Replies: @A123
  105. teo toon says:
    @anon

    Anon299: the principle of seriality applied to the Constitution means — as ruled by the Supreme Court — the phrase

    This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land…

    is a prioritized list: the Constitution comes first; next are “the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof”; then, and lastly are treaties.

    The ruling implies that those who wrote the Constitution were not stupid and had studied the law.

  106. geokat62 says:

    They’re starting to connect the dots in the UK:

    Hopefully, it won’t be too long before the rest of the West catches up.

  107. geokat62 says:

    Today is 53rd anniversary of the USS Liberty massacre…

    • Thanks: Robjil, AnonStarter
    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  108. “What ever happened to “Don’t feed the trolls”?

    i generally respond to a conversation as it pans out — however that is. And in this case the commenter in question is from my side of aisle. And I thin it would be a good idea for him to consider that his methods actually are sometimes damaging not only himself but the aisle itself.

    • Replies: @A123
    , @AnonStarter
  109. A123 says:
    @teo toon

    The United States Constitution overrides any treaty, law, edict, EO, diktat, …

    I concur.

    And, I have made this point before. The Constitution assigns judicial powers to U.S. Courts. The *only* method to move judicial powers to another body is an Amendment. A Senate ratified Treaty cannot alter the Constitution.

    Both the UN are the ICC, are 100% devoid of executive, legislative, and judicial authority. There is no Constitutional Amendment transferring those powers.
    _____

    My understanding is that the Russian Constitution has very similar limitations. Which is why it also refuses to abide by the rogue ICC.

    PEACE 😷

  110. @ChuckOrloski

    In 1950’s America, TV ran popular Smokey the Bear commercials. Smokey said, “Only you can prevent forest fires.”

    Those ran clear through the eighties. Avid campers would also be very familiar with Smokey. Good memories.

    Smokey Orloski advisory: “Don’t feed your comment/oxygen to A123, and others.” They will die by talking to themselves.

    Wise counsel, indeed.

    That’s how I’ve always perceived many of your comments: admonition against fanning forum flamebait. (Just remember to include Incitatus. ;-))

    • Thanks: ChuckOrloski
    • Replies: @Art
  111. A123 says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    The problem is that your embrace of rogue international institutions is damaging to both you and the “aisle itself”.

    Submission to illegitimate non-authority would be a sign of weakness. It would dramatically undermine U.S. strength with important non-ICC global powers such as Russia, China, and India.
    _____

    You also create additional problems by appearing vary your position. This may be unintentional, but readers perceive inconsistency when:

    — Challenged about “jurisdiction” you say that it is not relevant to “investigation”.
    — Then in later posts, you cycle back to maximum aggressiveness on “jurisdiction”.

    All online forums have an issue with the trade-off between “concise” and “precise” messaging. However, it is difficult for anyone to interact meaningfully with you when we cannot nail down your position.

    PEACE 😷

  112. @EliteCommInc.

    my side of aisle

    Okay.

    Well, I’ve seen you support Israel’s “right to exist” — however baseless that propaganda is in light of the conflict’s historical background — but I’m at a loss as to why you imagine someone such as this fellow — who obviously does not find you to be on his side of the aisle — would ever entertain the slightest notion that he should reconsider his methods when they’ve proven fairly successful at disrupting and diverting discussion.

    You do realize we’re talking about someone who has claimed the First Amendment doesn’t apply to legal boycotts of Israel, don’t you? There’s a good chance he’s getting paid just to disrupt threads such as this one, or aren’t you familiar with Israel’s generous subsidies toward troll armies? (Another memory-holed link replete with further links for your consideration.)

    Frankly speaking, you don’t belong on that side of the aisle, but don’t let this raggedy bum tell you what you should or shouldn’t do.

    By all means, feel free to continue apace in your conversion effort. I’ll just sit here and watch the thread fill up with steam as you pour water on hot coals.

  113. “The problem is that your embrace of rogue international institutions is damaging to both you and the “aisle itself”.

    Submission to illegitimate non-authority would be a sign of weakness. It would dramatically undermine U.S. strength with important non-ICC global powers such as Russia, China, and India.
    _____

    You also create additional problems by appearing vary your position. This may be unintentional, but readers perceive inconsistency when:

    — Challenged about “jurisdiction” you say that it is not relevant to “investigation”.
    — Then in later posts, you cycle back to maximum aggressiveness on “jurisdiction”.

    All online forums have an issue with the trade-off between “concise” and “precise” messaging. However, it is difficult for anyone to interact meaningfully with you when we cannot nail down your position.”

    Let’s try this,

    provide an example of a contradiction or a choice to change positions. Just a reminder, there’s a difference in what is meant by enforcement and the investigation. The issue of jurisdiction is laid out by the ICC itself —- and I provide that description verbatim with the appropriate reference.

    And have done so at least twice. And nothing about anything they have done or do suggests anything rogue. Name a single violation of the international norms — there isn’t one. They have every right to investigate crimes and issues similarly related and brought before them.

    And contrary to nearly every accusation you make — the evidence as provided states flatly you are wrong based on the actual record. the act that you chosen to ignore it doesn’t change the data sets presented.

    1. no evidnce of bias against the US
    2. no evidence of a unique bias against jews or Israel
    3. no evidence of bias against christians
    4. no evidence of bypassing , subverting, violating the sovereignty of any nation
    5. operates and cooperates with existing governmental structures and international agencies and created by the same
    6. no example of practices or policies or procedures that violate another sovereignty
    7. no jurisdictional contradiction in practice or policy

    Contrary to your comments the organization is recognized by the UN as its official capacity and history of cooperation with the UN and the UNSC, that has signatories cross the globe make it official, as previously note by another commentator it was legitimate enough for:

    http://hkellysocials.weebly.com/nato-kosovo-and-international-criminal-court-icc.html

    the US was very cooperative with the organization to legitimately engage the cited issues. Again the evidence is against you.

    8. The ICC has every right to investigate and make decisions regarding cases, despite its inability to enforce.

    My position is very clear, the US should not seek to undermine the work of the ICC based on fears of bad press. As an international role model, supporting and working with organizations seeking just outcomes, ultimately protects the US services who may have to engage in international action and further serves as a counter balance to consider whether our own actions are warranted. But in taking the matter further, the US invaded Iraq one the supposed bases for UNSC violations, despite the rejection of the UNSC and the UN general , the US chose to invade regardless and used the UN supposed violations as cover — that is an example of rogue behavior.

    Israel’s annexation of Palestinian territory, minus the sent of the Palestinians is a violation of the rules of conduct regarding territorial sovereignty. On the one hand you demand abeyance to territorial sovereignty and in the same breath support the violation of the sovereignty of others Palestine, Syria, etc.

    And you have yet to demonstrate that the ICC has in fact violated a state’s sovereignty minus that states cooperation or that it intends to do so.

    On the question of relevance anyone can investigate whatever they so choose — jurisdiction to take action on the same is a different question. But the ICC to their credit has gone through great lengths to establish a protocol and rational for their investigative authority among signatories and non-signatories by using existent systems.

    Now should you desire to make case that the UN, NATO, InterPol, etc are illegitimate you are welcome to do so. But to have any weight — you need to support your case with evidence.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
    , @A123
  114. @EliteCommInc.

    Just a reminder, there’s a difference in what is meant by enforcement and the investigation.

    Israel’s refusal to allow even a superficial, non-enforceable investigation of the matter by a third party is, of itself, telling us all we need to know.

    Methinks the lady doth protest too much.

  115. A123 says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    FYI: NonStarter is a known Racist & paid shill for Iran. You are on solid ground ignoring his debauched ranting. He provides comic relief though. I enjoy laughing at him.

    Now should you desire to make case that the UN, NATO, InterPol, etc are illegitimate you are welcome to do so.

    As I stated up in #109, without an Amendment no Constitutionally reserved powers were granted to the UN. Therefore the UN has no legislative, executive/regulatory, or judicial power over U.S. citizens, territory, or governmental organization. Anything in the UN Charter that violates the Constitution is inherently a “void act” that is automatically null under the Rule of Law.

    Given that the UN can neither regulate nor legislate, the vast majority of the UN’s actions are legally dubious. The UN cannot investigate the U.S. The UN cannot create a sub-organization and give it powers that the UN itself does not have.

    On the question of relevance anyone can investigate whatever they so choose — jurisdiction to take action on the same is a different question.

    This still makes no sense to me. In a legal system the purpose of a Criminal Investigation is to uncover facts that would be used in a Criminal Trial. If the body has no power to engage in the Criminal Trial, then the Criminal Investigation has no valid Purpose under the Rule of Law.

    Under the U.S. Constitution it seems likely that any American targeted by the ICC could bring suit for Harassment, Mis-use of Authority, and/or other similar charges.

    As the ICC has no power to investigate or prosecute the U.S , does it makes sense that the body has the power to chase others? That seems like a double standard.

    Israel’s annexation of Palestinian territory, minus the sent of the Palestinians is a violation of the rules of conduct regarding territorial sovereignty.

    The UN’s illegal actions stole Jewish land in direction violation of the Rule of Law in relation to territorial sovereignty established in the 1920’s. There is no possible reason to investigate the Jewish people recovering their stolen property in Judea & Samaria.

    I have to dig around for the exact UN Charter language. I vaguely remember it as being Section 80, but it has been quite a while since I have looked at that train wreck of a document.

    If the ICC was willing to investigate and prosecute the UN, that would be a step in the right direction. However, that seems highly unlikely.

    PEACE 😷

    • Replies: @A123
  116. @geokat62

    A timely salute to the Liberty crew, to those who have cast off the dead weight of this mortal husk and those who continue to bravely endure this vale of tears.

    @ EliteCommInc.

    On which side of the aisle do you find yourself with respect to USS Liberty veterans, the vast majority of whom are convinced that Israel attacked their vessel deliberately?

  117. A123 says:
    @A123

    ADDENDUM

    I remembered it correctly. UN Charter, Section 80, gives force to prior claims thus making the 1947 partition a “Void Act”: (1)

    One hundred years ago in April, after World War I, the allied powers gathered in San Remo, Italy and adopted an unprecedented resolution, for the first time ever entrenching the Jewish people’s pre-existing historical rights to the land as unequivocal legal rights under international law.

    The San Remo Resolution, which followed the 1917 Balfour Declaration that called for the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, formed the basis in 1922 of the adoption of the Mandate for Palestine.

    The Mandate for Palestine, adopted by the League of Nations, the precursor to the United Nations, recognized the “historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine” and the “grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country.”

    Even Article 80 of the U.N. Charter enshrined the guiding principles of the San Remo Resolution—notwithstanding the dissolution of the Mandate—by holding that

    “nothing in this chapter shall be construed in or of itself to alter in any manner the rights whatsoever of any states or any peoples or the terms of existing international instruments to which Members of the United Nations may respectively be parties.”

    Therefore, even after the adoption in 1947 of the U.N. Partition Plan, and since then with all subsequent U.N. resolutions, the legal rights granted to the Jewish state at San Remo have been retained.

    One may ask, then, how can you annex territory to which you are legally entitled and that which already has been assigned to you?

    Indeed, it is factually incorrect to assert that Israel intends to “annex” parts of Judea and Samaria—territory to which it has legitimate claim and that never has been part of a “state of Palestine.”

    More accurate would be to say that Israel is “extending Israeli sovereignty” or “applying Israeli law” to parts of Judea and Samaria.

    The ICC’s illicit investigation in contradiction to the Rule of Law makes it a rogue organization.

    PEACE 😷
    _______

    (1) https://www.jns.org/opinion/annexation-vs-sovereignty-words-matter/

  118. anonymous[421] • Disclaimer says:
    @A123

    Don’t lowlifes like you understand that the more insane and demented you sound, the bigger the laughingstock you become? Do you actually think intelligent people will take seriously the rantings of retarded freaks like you?

    You are an evil loser, who is getting shriller by the day, as you fall deeper into the devil’s abyss. As someone implied, you’ve simply outdone your usual insanity. But, I am sure you can do even worse. Don’t you disappoint next time.

    [MORE]

    Allah/Satan

    A small clarification for those evangelical faeces-for-brains who subscribe to that sacrilege… “Allah is Satan” t-shirts anyone?

    Allah SWT is the One God of all existence, and the Lord of Jesus Christ PBUH… just to place it in context of the Christian faith, even if redundant in saying so.

    Didn’t the blessed Christ say…

    Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one.

    Which appears to be quite similar as this verse from the Holy Quran;

    [Jesus said], “And indeed, Allah is my Lord and your Lord, so worship Him. That is a straight path.” : 19.36

    In other words, the basis of the Islamic faith is also; “The LORD our God, the LORD is one.” Surely, that is one Bible verse which has incredibly survived those numerous revisions. If only the world’s Christians took that single Bible verse literally, with no other embellishments, they would all be blessed true monotheists, and not the pagan polytheist mangods-worshippers they are now.

    So, if Muslims worship the Lord of Jesus, and Christians also worship the Lord of Jesus, evangelical morons are essentially calling their Lord… Satan!!

    But yes, I do understand that Christians do not actually believe that Muslims worship the Lord of Jesus, because they witness their “Lord” as a father-figure mangod, which we true monotheists utterly reject. I suppose it is the Unseen God of the true monotheists, some Christians refer to as “Satan.” They utter an evil which they will regret much.

    Anyway, I see the likes of A123 to be utterly irredeemable. His diseased soul is lost to the devil. But, perhaps others still have hope. May the Almighty One guide them.

  119. Druid55 says:
    @A123

    You’re no christian, and everything he said about the talmud is true. Its a book of satan

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  120. @Druid55

    Watch Forbidden Pilgrimage, which details the systemic persecution and murder of Palestinian Christians by Israel.

    I’m having a difficult time understanding how so many American Christians can just throw their Palestinian brethren-in-faith under the bus as they do. Could it be that they don’t have all the facts, or are they just that indifferent to the tyranny under which they live?

    • Replies: @A123
    , @Art
  121. Art says:
    @AnonStarter

    Smokey Orloski advisory: “Don’t feed your comment/oxygen to A123, and others.” They will die by talking to themselves.

    An occasional “TROLL” never hurts.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  122. @Art

    Definitely agreed, though since he’s taken up residence in my ignore list, I don’t have that option.

    I highly recommend relegating him to that list. Were others to do the same, Mr. Orloski’s sage counsel would yield some pleasant results.

  123. “As I stated up in #109, without an Amendment no Constitutionally reserved powers were granted to the UN. Therefore the UN has no legislative, executive/regulatory, or judicial power over U.S. citizens, territory, or governmental organization. Anything in the UN Charter that violates the Constitution is inherently a “void act” that is automatically null under the Rule of Law.”

    you are whistling nonsense up the wrong tree. the UN has no jurisdiction withing US proper. It’s international jurisdiction is limited by its ability to enforce the rules by which all of its members UNSC would enforce. This is not about the US proper. And UN authority over it.

    This about the establishment of that state of Israel as granted by UN authority as to the boundaries. And that the US is obligated to abide by by status membership —- You really do have a problem with jurisdictional issues.

    So when the US went before the UN to seek support the UN said no. Meaning any attempt to claim UN violations for US action would be a violation. The UN had not granted the US authority to act unilaterally on its behalf —- yet in its complaints it cited those as causes —

    That pertains to Iraq.

    Further, with regards to Israel, for the US to aide in the annexation of Palestinians territory minus the consent of the Palestinians is a violation. As previously having provided the issues and territorial rules — the issue is not about US sovereignty but the sovereignty of Palestine.

    Nice try again to change the subject with these nonsequitors — they are rejected.

    The artocle you choose to reference is not relevant to my argument which is very simple:

    make your case against the ICC based on evidence to support your claims — as yet you ave not done so. Further in that line analysis, i cite several international bodies that have cooperated with and utilized the ICC not only does the international signatories grant ICC legitimacy but so do those organizations in question. Your burden is to present evidence tat they are not a legitimate ICC body with the power to investigate and hold trails for misconduct.

    You are further expected to present evidence that the court has acted in a rogue manner.

    ———-

    “The UN’s illegal actions stole Jewish land in direction violation of the Rule of Law in relation to territorial sovereignty established in the 1920’s. There is no possible reason to investigate the Jewish people recovering their stolen property in Judea & Samaria.

    I have to dig around for the exact UN Charter language. I vaguely remember it as being Section 80, but it has been quite a while since I have looked at that train wreck of a document.

    If the ICC was willing to investigate and prosecute the UN, that would be a step in the right direction. However, that seems highly unlikely.”

    Oy veh.

    this is just stunning nonsense. Israel was destroyed in 70 AD by the Romans. Now some would argue that Israel was destroyed by God for disobedience. But on the secular plain there is not Israel until 1948 granted by the UN via UNSC mandate. The Balfore agreement letter recognizes that Israel along with sic other ethnic groups should have an established homeland in Palestine. It was not a legal document. It was a reference for a proposal and that by the grace of God —

    Your continued attempts to reference anything as to any legal or even ethnic claim to the land of Israel is entirely without merit. As a nation Israel was not in existence until 1948 and I have presented with the appropriate data — the territorial boundaries and rules are clearly defined. I certainly understand why some enjoy muddying the water with legal ease and attention to details all mean to distract as one might for pulling a rabbit out of one;s hat. But here in this discussion you have no hat much less a rabbit.

    Goodness — I have never net anyone so devoid of conscience in discussion and there are plenty that abound — the remo reference you are trying to apply — pertained to the six ethnic groups to which a potential consideration for homeland would applied — not just Israel . No discussion of Palestine by any governing authority with control of the territory ever intended or implied or stated that Palestine would for jews only — those were nonbinding discussion in an attempt ti lay a framework of establishing homelands for at six ethnic groups and certainly not Israel alone. Oy!

    • LOL: AnonStarter
    • Replies: @A123
  124. A123 is ten greasy pimply izzies playing pocket pool in a cubicle in Herzliya. The extremely scarce good looking Izzies are out on kibbutzes bonking american jews so they have fond memories of zionazi genocide. But the homely snaggletoothed losers of A123 are put to work furiously reading stuff they never heard of and typing their hairy little knuckles to the bone, trying to sound like lawyahs. This helps them get used to the celibate loser life to which they are doomed even in a country like israel teeming with repulsive horsefaced nymphomaniacs. Poor sad fucks, the only head they’ll ever get was from their mohel. Only elitecomm has the compassion to pretend to take them seriously. Nobody else reads their yammering talmudic pilpul.

  125. A123 says:
    @AnonStarter

    I’m having a difficult time understanding how so many American Christians can just throw their Palestinian brethren-in-faith under the bus as they do. Could it be that they don’t have all the facts, or are they just that indifferent to the tyranny under which they live?

    NonStarter,

    Your Taqiyya deception has been exposed. U.S. Christians have the facts about Muslim ethnic cleansing of Bethlehem. Once 80%+ Christian, now less than 20%.

    They are not indifferent. U.S. Christians see the undeniable TRUTH that Abbas is the tyrant repressing Christians.

    PEACE 😷

  126. “More accurate would be to say that Israel is “extending Israeli sovereignty” or “applying Israeli law” to parts of Judea and Samaria.”

    An doing so is in violation of the 148 mandate and the rules governing sovereign states. Laughing. i used to walk gingerly around the issue of Israel and God’s plan. But your arguments are so beyond the parameters of just cause, rationality, norms and truthfulness that there’s hardly a hint of hesitation and that’s rare fare for me — because i tend to think God is as he is described in scripture and his ways are not ours . . . but your tactics here are so beyond the and integrity that I am quite certain that God is not in them — but purely human ambition. Power games of men certainly the the power of the Holy Spirit.

    Let me know when you have evidence to support the issue(s) initially on the table.

    1. no evidnce of bias against the US
    2. no evidence of a unique bias against jews or Israel
    3. no evidence of bias against christians
    4. no evidence of bypassing , subverting, violating the sovereignty of any nation
    5. operates and cooperates with existing governmental structures and international agencies and created by the same
    6. no example of practices or policies or procedures that violate another sovereignty
    7. no jurisdictional contradiction in practice or policy

    Evidence — still waiting.

  127. Art says:
    @AnonStarter

    I’m having a difficult time understanding how so many American Christians can just throw their Palestinian brethren-in-faith under the bus as they do. Could it be that they don’t have all the facts, or are they just that indifferent to the tyranny under which they live?

    If you understand that the Southern Christian Zionists are also ardent anti-black racists – then things start to fall in line. They view Israel and Palestinians antagonism in the same way that they see themselves and blacks in the US.

    • Replies: @Robjil
    , @AnonStarter
  128. “His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed
    by Jews in any other country.”

    [MORE]

    The legal goal was not to create Palestine as a legal entity, but to create a homeland for Hews and nonjews alike. odd how people like you never actually note the entire document. Most importantly, the League of Nations tasked Great Britain with administering the far development of the homelands process among parties and surprise surprise, the jews terrorized by murder and mayhem their efforts to be equitable to a people who had lost the value and the gift of God through — open disobedience.

    Now if in fact Go was using the League of nations and the UN to build a homeland for the jews — then Jews in grateful appreciation should have respected God’s tools —

    Not only did Jews not respect the tools of god they subverted the same and continue to do so today. There no single unitary legal, ethnic, historical claim to the land of Palestine held by Jews alone. And if in fact God was at play using those authorities you site — its very clear that the disobedience that lost that and in the first place remains in play. So excuse me for finding your abuse of the record in contempt not only of the rules established by men but apparently — there’s no respect for the authorized authority of god.

    Laugh. You’d have more veracity if you simply said, we are going to do what want regardless of man or God —

    i fully embrace whatever plans God has for isarel, but when Israel’s plans subvert the essence of God including god’s platform for must conduct — I must object.

    The Balfour Declaration was a November 2, 1917 letter from British Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour to Lord Rothschild that made public the British support of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. The Balfour Declaration led the League of Nations to entrust the United Kingdom with the Palestine Mandate in 1922.

    Background
    The Balfour Declaration was a product of years of careful negotiation. After centuries of living in a diaspora, the 1894 Dreyfus Affair in France shocked Jews into realizing they would not be safe from arbitrary antisemitism unless they had their own country.

    In response, Jews created the new concept of political Zionism in which it was believed that through active political maneuvering, a Jewish homeland could be created. Zionism was becoming a popular concept by the time World War I began.

    World War I and Chaim Weizmann
    During World War I, Great Britain needed help. Since Germany (Britain’s enemy during WWI) had cornered the production of acetone—an important ingredient for arms production—Great Britain may have lost the war if Chaim Weizmann had not invented a fermentation process that allowed the British to manufacture their own liquid acetone.

    It was this fermentation process that brought Weizmann to the attention of David Lloyd George (Minister of Ammunitions) and Arthur James Balfour (previously the Prime Minister but at this time the First Lord of the Admiralty). Chaim Weizmann was not just a scientist; he was also the leader of the Zionist Movement.

    Diplomacy
    Weizmann’s contact with Lloyd George and Balfour continued, even after Lloyd George became prime minister and Balfour was transferred to the Foreign Office in 1916. Additional Zionist leaders such as Nahum Sokolow also pressured Great Britain to support a Jewish homeland in Palestine.

    Although Balfour, himself, was in favor of a Jewish state, Great Britain particularly favored the declaration as an act of policy. Britain wanted the United States to join World War I and the British hoped that by supporting a Jewish homeland in Palestine, the world Jewish community would be able to sway the U.S. to join the war.

    ——-
    Again note; the rights of nonhewish inhabitants are not to be infringed”
    —————————-

    Announcing the Balfour Declaration
    Though the Balfour Declaration went through several drafts, the final version was issued on November 2, 1917, in a letter from Balfour to Lord Rothschild, president of the British Zionist Federation. The main body of the letter quoted the decision of the October 31, 1917, British Cabinet meeting.

    This declaration was accepted by the League of Nations on July 24, 1922, and embodied in the mandate that gave Great Britain temporary administrative control of Palestine.

    The White Paper
    In 1939, Great Britain reneged on the Balfour Declaration by issuing the White Paper, which stated that creating a Jewish state was no longer a British policy. It was also Great Britain’s change in policy toward Palestine, especially the White Paper, that prevented millions of European Jews to escape from Nazi-occupied Europe to Palestine before and during the Holocaust.

    The Balfour Declaration
    Foreign Office
    November 2nd, 1917
    Dear Lord Rothschild,
    I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty’s Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet.
    His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.
    I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.
    Yours sincerely,
    Arthur James Balfour

    https://www.thoughtco.com/balfour-declaration-1778163

  129. A123 says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    Your total lack of conscience and consistency is truly absurd.

    [Facepalm]

    I did not even speak about Iraq. Yet more obvious misdirection and obfuscation on your part.

    [Double Facepalm]

    The “Jewish Nation” was granted land in the 20’s. This grant was affirmed by Section 80 of the UN Charter. And, your only defense is that the Jewish Nation was not yet named “Israel”. Oy veh indeed !!!

    The UN, UNSC, and ICC have all gone rogue and are acting in violation of the Rule of Law, including Section 80 of the UN Charter. Do you *actually* believe that the UN can openly breech its own foundational document? ROTFL

    It is illegal for the rogue ICC to interfere in internal Israeli Jewish Nation matters that are outside of its “investigative jurisdiction”. There is simply no way to separate Criminal Investigation from Criminal Jurisdiction. You have provided no credible case to suggest otherwise.

    You duck, bob, weave, evade, and deflect in lengthy fashion but your systematic deception has failed.

    The evidence has been provided. When will you open your heart and your mind and accept it?

    PEACE 😷

  130. Robjil says:
    @Art

    The Scofield bible is root of the insanity of many Protestant sects these days.

    It all began in 1901, a German Jewish Zionist named Samuel Untermeyer set up this Jewish cult for non-Jews. He procured the creation of the Scofield bible which many Protestant sects use today. Scofield “Christian”Zionism is a Jewish sect for non-Jews. It is not Christianity. Early Christians of the first centuries of Christianity would be quite puzzled by this Scofield sect. Why is Israel above Christ or why is Israel is even talked about? Christ was for all nations.

    Here is how it all began.

    https://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=110533

    [MORE]

    In 1901, Scofield was offered a membership in the Lotus Club of New York, a prestigious club in the literary circles of the United States catering to non-Christians. This was a club in which one had to be invited and have a sponsor. He settled there and listed it as his residence for the next 20 years. It was here that he presented his ideas for a new Christian Bible concordance, and was taken under the wing of Untermeyer (1858-1941)—a criminal attorney well known for his political connections, bribery and for being a fanatical Zionist agent of the Rothschild banking cartel.

    Look at who Scofield met to create this bible for the Protestant sects. Notice that he met Schiff who later destroyed Imperial Russia with Communism.

    Untermeyer introduced Scofield to numerous Zionist and socialist leaders, including Samuel Gompers, Fiorello LaGuardia, Abraham Straus, Bernard Baruch and Jacob Schiff. These people financed Scofield’s research trips to Oxford and arranged for the publication and distribution of his concordance.

    Untermeyer placed Zionism as the centerpiece for Protestant sects with this bible that he created for Scofield.

    “Why would a wealthy German Jew like Untermeyer living in America sponsor Scofield and spend money on a man who was working on a new Bible translation and preaching Jesus Christ?” Torell asked.

    Jewish leaders long ago recognized the bonanza for them if they could force the teaching of an imminent rapture on Christians and move them to abandon their moral hold on society. Darby was financially supported and Scofield, Darby’s successor, could make this teaching central in all Christian churches. Removal of Christians from politics and public schools would leave the door open for Jewish writers and political leaders to move in and remove the Bible and prayer from public schools and political institutions. The ACLU is a Jewish organization, having only a few Gentiles in it for window dressing, he stated.

    Well, Scofield’s bible created the Zion faux christian Zombism we have today. It was a gold mine for Zionism. It is a gift that keeps giving for the Zionists and nothing for humanity. It keeps Scofield Protestants silent about about crimes by big Jews, Zionism or Israel.

    In 1907, the International Zionist movement had its “payday” when, after some 120 years they were finally able to have a document produced that would forever change the theology of Christian churches around the world so that, in time, believers in Christ would be transformed into Christian Zionists. Even though they had to “pay good money” to further the cause of fundamentalism, it was worth it to them because the fundamentalists would be led like a bull with a ring in his nose in the direction the Jewish masters wanted them to go.

    Forty-one years later, the political state of Israel came into existence. “Without the Scofield Bible, it never would have happened,” Torell said.

    The Zion uber alles people are very happy with the results coming from this Scofield bible. It is a Judaism for non-Jews and not Christianity at all. It helped birth Israel into existence. This all explains why the “silence” by Scofield “Christian Zionists who say they are Christians but they are not.

    It is impossible to overstate the influence of Cyrus Scofield on 20th century Christian beliefs. The Scofield Bible is the standard reference work in virtually all Christian ministries and divinity schools. It is singularly responsible for the Christian belief that it is Hebrew Prophecies that describe the pre-Tribulation Second Coming of Jesus, and not, instead, a Zionist vision of a man-made New World Order.

    Here is more about this Scofield bible’s history.

    https://proliberty.com/observer/20090507.htm

    • Thanks: Art
  131. “Your total lack of conscience and consistency is truly absurd.
    . . .
    The evidence has been provided. When will you open your heart and your mind and accept it? et al.”

    A. Uhh, noting for jews alone, but rather a compendium of considerations. I have provided the references concerning the 1920 discussion, there was no official grant of anything. There was a conceptual framework for establishing jews on Palestine along the other ethnic groups that occupied the territory each with their own jurisdictions – it was never intended as a Jewish nation soley.

    B. Your are talking about the diaspora, the conceptual narratives that might form the basis for a nation, a people that share that common narrative and mythos, but as nation state name or without name — nothing existed regarding Palestine.

    C. You reference an article in the UN Carter and seem to fail to comprehend what it means — in the case o annexation Israel has no authority to annex any portion of Palestine minus agreement by Palestine — hence the previous reference to the territorial boundaries ad the rules therein. And for the US to facilitate such an act would be aiding and abetting a violation of the rules. Palestine is not Israel proper and Israel’s conduct as thought it is exceeds their recognized national boundaries. Your assertion as is your tac — assumes a truth that is in fact not true —

    i.e. annexation of parts of Palestine as Israeli territory — it is not and the UN has every authority to call Israel and the US on that fact and the ICC in investigating that land grab is well positioned to examine the matter. As well as the cities that Israel is building in Palestine proper.

    based on your own presentation — the UN is not in breech, not even close.

    Again, the game is force as authority, not a legal mandate.

    D. Wait a minute make u your mind. — you claim the support of the UN mandates — false claims as they are — and at the same time call the UN a rogue entity. All in when it creates Israel and establishes boundaries, but rogue when it contends that Israel is exceeding their authority. I remember this game as a kid, I will play as long as the rules are what I say they are and everyone agrees and everyone who doesn’t are just big meany rogue actors.

    Again a rogue action or actor — operating outside the rules and expected norms willfully; one who willfully violates the rules and expected norms. I take it your neighbor can walk across the street to your property and lay claim to any portion they desire —

    E. My press remains– provide a single data set tat supports that the ICC is acting in a manner in violation of norms established by others or themselves.

    F —

    G. to the extent that nations agree to the abide by the process they have jurisdiction — they state quite cleanly that they are not intent on violating anyone’s sovereignty — if you ave evidence they have — you are invited to present it. Should the nation of Afghanistan bring a case against the US — the ICC has every right to investigate and withing whatever rules accorded between themselves and Afghanistan can proceed according to the standards, procedures and practices they have established for themselves in cooperation o previously stated organisations —
    —————————

    You might want to cease the circular rationalizing here — there’s a very large list of supporting material required to make your case. And you are not even skimming the mist of the surface water.

    • Replies: @A123
  132. @Art

    If you understand that the Southern Christian Zionists are also ardent anti-black racists – then things start to fall in line. They view Israel and Palestinians antagonism in the same way that they see themselves and blacks in the US.

    Sure, I can see where you’re coming from. This dynamic certainly exists.

    But a Christian zionist needn’t hail from the south nor even manifest prejudice against black folk. We have to bear in mind that hypocrisy runs deep in the zionist camp, whether among self-professed Christians or Jews. As such, it’s hardly surprising to find the ADL professing to “stand with African-Americans” while training cops to use lethal force against them. This is the very same organization that was founded in defense of the charlatan Leo Frank, who fought ardently to frame a black man for the rape and murder of a teenage girl he himself committed.

    Anyone trying to defend Israel while decrying racism in the same breath is bound to tie himself in a Gordian Knot.

    • Replies: @Art
  133. A123 says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    Good grief…

    — The evidence is 100% clear, irrefutable and unchallengable
    — The binding law is 100% clear, irrefutable, and unchallengable

    I will take one last stab at explaining the evidence and binding law to you in the simplest possible manner.
    ______

    -1- The irrefutable evidence shows that binding law from ~1920 … Derived from San Remo & Balfour … Established legal standing and boundaries for the Jewish Nation.

    -2- The irrefutable evidence shows that … Section 80 of the UN Charter affirmed the prior binding law with relation to the ~1920 legal standing an boundaries for the Jewish Nation.

    -3- The irrefutable evidence shows that … The UN violated binding law in 1947 … Openly defying the 1920’s binding law by stealing and violating territorial boundaries. Additionally, the UN lost all credibility by intentionally breaching Section 80 of its own Charter. Thus, the evidence irrefutably shows that the UN became a rogue organization in 1947.

    -4- The irrefutable evidence shows that under binding law … ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda violated binding law by knowingly making false charges predicated on the UN’s proven violation of 1920’s binding law that took place in 1947. Thus, the evidence irrefutably shows that the ICC is a rogue organization, as it allowed its prosecutorial arm to violate binding law.
    _____

    Please, do not attempt to:

    — Refute binding law that is irrefutable.
    — Refute evidence that is irrefutable.
    — Create evasive or circular reasoning in an attempt to deflect from the irrefutable binding law and irrefutable evidence.

    Only irrational, racist, Jesus haters (e.g. Art & NonStarter) are so deranged that they deny evidence and deny binding law. Do you really want to embrace their irationality, hatred, racism, and blasphemy?

    I cannot stop you from sinning as you have Free Will. All I can do is provide warning that you are placing your soul in grave danger. Please, do not close your heart to the voice of The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit.

    PEACE 😷

  134. Art says:
    @AnonStarter

    Anyone trying to defend Israel while decrying racism in the same breath is bound to tie himself in a Gordian Knot.

    “It is a principal of human nature to hate those whom we have injured.” — Gaius Cornelius Tacitus

    The Blacks and Palestinians did NOTHING to deserve the hate heaped on them.

    Clearly Israeli Jews and white Southerners have injured – thus their personal hate.

    Their hate comes with being human – hating is the only way they can live with themselves.

    • Replies: @A123
  135. A123 says:
    @Art

    Warmonger Art,

    Let me Fix That For You:

    Anyone trying to defend Islam while decrying racism in the same breath is bound to tie himself in a Gordian Knot.

    Infidels (Christians and Jews) did NOTHING to deserve the hate heaped on them.

    Clearly Arab & Persian Muslims have injured the innocent – thus their personal hate.

    Their hate comes with Islam – Jihadi hatred in the name of the False Prophet Muhammad is the only way they can live with themselves.

    PEACE 😷

  136. anonymous[421] • Disclaimer says:
    @Chris Bridges

    I do hope Trump, in his next term, works to abolish both.

    Lol! In his next term the most pressing matter on his agenda will be the dismantling of the United States of Mordor.

    I pray this evil entity elects a leader who will prove to be the most harmful for its wellbeing. The Orange-utan does appear to fit the bill quite nicely, but it is always wiser to leave such things to God’s will.

  137. oy laugh.

    The only binding end of the Balfor letter is that Great Britain was appointed to administer the territory. Their intent was to provide a homeland for the jews. It was not intended as a single land grant to Jews, but instead one for jews, without violating the rights of the non-jews already in existence —

    The Letter itself only expresses a desire and one supported by the British Government for land for some six ethnic groups — nothing and nothing was a binding agreement, gift, law, regulation, promise — but and expressed goal, but that goal was not soley for Israel.

    Since the League of Nations and the UN maybe distant cousins, but neither established any historical legal frame work from one to the other granting jews anything. After WWII and the vents known as the holocaust, the jewish people had enormous sympathy from the international community and the primary power holders, saw an opportunity to move forward with a homeland for the jews in Palestine — there was never any intent to grant Jews all of Palestine.

    Te binding territory are the boundaries established prior to the 1967 conflict. But we have covered that territory and the sequence and the issues regarding the establishment of those borders has been provided in the referenced cites. Israel’s building of cities within Palestine proper is a violation. The intended annexation is also a violation should it occur. Any country supporting said violations is also in violation. Now the Article you so desire to pin cotton threads to bars the UN from interfering in the internal affairs of any state. Palestine is not Israel and the Israel’s attempt to exceed the original territorial boundaries is a violation. In other words, Israel has no mandate for operating outside of her borders. An that attempt is ell withing the domain of the UN and Palestine to challenge. And the international laws and expectations regarding territorial boundaries is in play and can be enforced. If Israel wants said territory, she make make a bid for the same to the Palestinian Authority and come to some arrangement. I have absolutely no issues and i suspect neither the UN, UNSC, the ICC or any other body would object to that approach, whether they would support it is another matter. However, if one wants to avoid “rogue” behavior such a as forced land grab — that would be the proper process.

    Palestine seeking asking the ICC to investigate abuses of human rights is proper an should Israel have human rights complaints they are certainly invited to make their case. If in fact they believe they have some legal claim to the territory outside of Israel, such as the parcel they seek to annex, they should make their case to the UNSC, UN General Assembly, the ICC, etc. That too would be proper conduct regarding disputes.

    Here’s the teeeter tawter (again) you are pinning your contention to;

    [MORE]

    “Chapter XII — International Trusteeship System
    Article 80
    “1. Except as may be agreed upon in individual trusteeship agreements, made under Articles 77, 79, and 81, placing each territory under the trusteeship system, and until such agreements have been concluded, nothing in this Chapter shall be construed in or of itself to alter in any manner the rights whatsoever of any states or any peoples or the terms of existing international instruments to which Members of the United Nations may respectively be parties.

    2. Paragraph 1 of this Article shall not be interpreted as giving grounds for delay or postponement of the negotiation and conclusion of agreements for placing mandated and other territories under the trusteeship system as provided for in Article 77.”

    Please provide the agreement that grants Israel the right to build cities, fences, roads, or a street lamp in Palestine proper minus the permission/consent cooperation of the Palestinians . Further provide the agreement that grants Israel the right to annex any parcel or inch of Palestinian territory. Which must be in play as a stated in the article you reference.

    Furthermore, please demonstrate that Israel has in accordance with Chapter 6 of the UN charter has approached the Palestinian Authorities in a bid to make their claims to said land in as part of Palestinian territory.

    Regarding the conduct of states, especially in the case of Palestine and Israel, please indicate the UNSC ruling, guiding document mandated approval an support for any act of force, in these cases, the practice of Israel building cities in Palestine proper and the purported annexation as required in Chapter Six articles 33 – 39 of the UN Charter.

    Reference: Chapter VII — Action with respect to Threats to the Peace, Breaches of the Peace, and Acts of Aggression
    Article 39
    “The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security.”

    Clearly based on the Isarel’s threat to annex territory, it’s continued violations by building cities and other infrastructures in Palestine proper her behavior is a threat to international peace and as such invites intervention by the UNSC by order of the following UN Charter guidelines and directives regarding the same.
    ————————-

    Since you continue to invoke the supernatural, please state in which Gospel and verse admonitions by Jesus Christ that Israel – re-established by Go’s grace, grants israel the right to take territory that belongs to another. And further please not the gospel and scripture that mandates his followers to support such behavior as annexing with permission another’s parcel of land, build cities on land not belonging to Israel, engage in war activities or other acts of violence against her neighbors. Please not the Chapter and verse that releases Israeli from the grace of god to act as a light unto the nations of the one and only true God. Please note the chapter and verse in which God commands, permits, encourages, condones the taking of territory of another. But for the moment let;s deal with your reasoning here. On the one hand you asset the Authority not only of the UN but the League of nations. You abuse the actual record to support some nonsensical legal status in 1920 — never happens. But in the very same breath, you claim that the same organisations are now incapable of doing what one must believe they were ordained by god to to do — if in act 1948 is god’s plan. You further confuse your own purposes because by admitting the UN authority, you also bring in play the rues regarding territorial boundaries. And here Israel is clearly in violation and as such in violation of God whom you so desire to lean on for justification. I agree god uses the secular for his will, if that is the case with israel, then there’s no reason to assume that the UN is not now so acting. And nothing the UN, the ICC are doing to violate the Israel’s sovereignty. Nothing. Since Palestine is not Israel, and Palestine has sought the organizations in question to investigate the actions in question — it is safe to say that god himself is engaged. As for my personal faith — I fully support Israel’s right to exist and value the promises given. but those are go’s domain and I am hard pressed to see god contradicting himself on matters of theft of another’s property.

    ——————

    And certainly I have been threatened by powerful people before under the cloak of God’s reproach —- frankly, I don’ buy it and i have no intention of living in fear because powerful people of god deem it their will as god’s to to engage in nefarious activities against others in God’s name.

    • Replies: @A123
  138. anonymous[263] • Disclaimer says:
    @A123

    I am a Christian

    Lol! I believe you. I knew you were one of those ZioChrizzie puke-for-brains!

    I can unequivocally state that [Jesus] is not boiling in anything.

    Yes, one of those things we can agree on categorically. But, the same can’t be said about your fate. 😀

    And, “Son of God”? It goes something like this, right?

    A “Son” who was reincarnated from the “Father,” and thus is the “Father” and the “Son” at the same time, but distinctly different too, 2 (or 3) persons in 1, both fully human and fully “god”…

    [MORE]

    What pagan abomination is this? Did you phuck-heads commission the hindoos to come up with this vile pagan garbage? Seriously, aren’t you rabid pagans pathetic?

    Only Muslim liars, such as yourself, spread this blood libel.

    Coming to the aid of your frenemies, yeah? This is so hilarious. Now, consider this…

    Two peoples… One Judenscum… One Chrizzie… the Chrizzie finding inspiration from the Judenscum, “in-his-image” and “Old Testament” etc., hence the hyphenation, Judaeo-Christian… but, at the spiritual level both are enemies, with the Judenscum viscerally hating the Chrizzie’s mangod deity… the Chrizzie swallowing it all and awaits the slaughter of the Judenscum… the Judenscum play along, sniggering, marvelling at the stupidity of the Chrizzie…

    Am I getting warm? Yeah, pagan?

    the Anti-Christ Muhammad

    Repeating a lie, even a million times, will not make it the truth… try to understand, pagan scum!

    The Holy Quran was revealed to mankind through the blessed Muhammad SAW. Do these verses prove he was an anti-Christ (God forbid)?

    Mary, the Devout
    “And (mention) when the angels said, ‘O Mary, indeed God has chosen you, purified you, and chosen you above the women of the worlds.’ ‘O Mary, be devoutly obedient to your Lord and prostrate and bow down along those who bow down (in prayer).’ This is a part of the news of the unseen, which We reveal to you (O Muhammad). You were not with them when they cast lots with their pens to (decide) which of them should take care of Mary, nor were you with them when they disputed.” (Quran 3:42-44)

    The Good news of a new-born child
    “(And mention) when the angels said, ‘O Mary, indeed God gives you the good news of a word from Him, whose name will be the Messiah Jesus, the son of Mary, held in honor in this world and in the Hereafter, and of those who are near to God.’ ‘He will speak to the people in the cradle, and in old age, and he will be of the righteous.’ She said, ‘My Lord, how can I have a son when no man has touched me.’ He said, ‘So (it will be,) for God creates what He wants. When He decides something, He only says to it, ‘Be,’ and it is. And He will teach him the Book and wisdom and the Torah and the Gospel. And (will make him) a messenger to the Children of Israel (saying), ‘Indeed I have come to you with a sign from your Lord. I make for you out of clay the likeness of a bird, then breathe into it, and it becomes a bird by the permission of God. And I heal the blind and the leper, and I bring the dead to life by the permission of God. And I inform you of what you eat and what you store in your houses. Surely, there is a sign for you in that, if you are believers. And (I have come) confirming the Torah that was (revealed) before me, and to allow you some of what was forbidden to you. And I have come to you with a proof from your Lord, so fear God and obey me. Indeed, God is my Lord and your Lord, so worship Him. This is the straight path.” (Quran 3:45-51)

    “And mention in the Book (the story of) Mary, when she withdrew from her family to an eastern place. And she placed a screen to seclude herself from them. Then We sent to her Our angel (Gabriel), and he took the form of a well-created man before her. She said, “Indeed I seek refuge with the Most Merciful from you, if you do fear God.” (The angel) said, ‘I am only the messenger of your Lord to give to you (the news of) a pure boy.’ She said, ‘How can I have a son, when no man has touched me (in marriage), and I am not a prostitute?’ He said, So your Lord said, ‘It is easy for Me. And We will make him a sign to people and a mercy from Us. And it is a matter (already) decided.’” (Quran 19:16-21)

    The Immaculate Conception
    “And she who guarded her chastity, so We breathed (a spirit) into her through Our angel, and We made her and her son (Jesus) a sign for the worlds.” (Quran 21:91)

    The Birth of Jesus
    “So she conceived him, and she withdrew with him to a remote place. And the pains of childbirth drove her to the trunk of a palm tree. She said, ‘I wish I had died before this, and had been long forgotten. Then (baby Jesus) called her from below her, saying, ‘Don’t be sad. Your Lord has provided a stream under you.’ Shake the trunk of the palm tree towards you, and it will drop on you fresh ripe dates. So eat and drink and be happy. And if you see any human, then say, ‘Indeed I have vowed a fast to the Most Merciful so I will not speak to any human today.’ Then she carried him and brought him to her people. They said, ‘O Mary, indeed you have done a great evil.’ ‘O sister of Aaron, your father was not an evil man, and your mother was not a fornicator.’ So she pointed to him. They said, ‘How can we speak to a child in the cradle?’ (Jesus) said, ‘Indeed, I am a slave of God. He has given me the Scripture and made me a prophet. And He has made me blessed wherever I may be, and He has enjoined on me prayer and charity as long as I remain alive. And (has made) me kind to my mother, and did not make me arrogant or miserable. And peace be upon me the day I was born, and the day I will die, and the day I will be raised alive.’” (Quran 19:22-33)

    The Excellence of Mary
    “And God gives as an example for those who believe, the wife of Pharaoh, when she said, ‘My Lord, build for me a home near You in paradise, and save me from Pharaoh and his deeds, and save me from the wrongdoing people.’ And (the example of) Mary, the daughter of Imran, who guarded her chastity, so We blew (the spirit of Jesus) into her through Our angel (Gabriel). And she believed in the words of her Lord, and His scriptures, and she was of the devout ones.” (Quran 66:11-12)

  139. A123 says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    I am sorry that you mind is closed to evidence and law. You turn your back on reason.

    I do not understand how you can hate Jews so much that you justify the theft of Jewish land. You are without compassion.

    I offer forgiveness. That is all that I can do.

    Everything else is up to you.

    PEACE 😷

  140. “I do not understand how you can hate Jews so much that you justify the theft of Jewish land. You are without compassion.”

    Nothing and and I mean nothing in my comments expresses a hare for jews or any unique animosity for jews any more than i might have for anyone else. I fully support israel’s right to exist, their right to self defense. I further do not reject the promises that are locate in scripture nor can I reject the expectations noted in those same Scriptures. But for those leaning on scripture from a christian point of view —

    Christ first and last ad then Christ first and last. Not the US first ad last, not the arabs first and last, not Israel first and last — Christ and christ alone —- and when one deviates from Christ’s expectations and attempts to replace them via some secular political perspective, then one is walking on thin ice or no ice .0001 cm thick. God establishes nation states, but nation states are not substitutes for God nor do they abide by the expectations set by God —” to administer justice” they routinely fail —- Israel is o be light unto the nations of a just and forgiving God. I have no knee-jerk objection to Israel seeking the Borders God so established for her — however, there are mechanisms by which Israel can make those attempts, that are not violations of the law, and do not require excessive force against anyone. It is a very tough row to hoe: telling Palestinians not throw rocks when Israelis are encroaching on their back yard and doing so by force and without compensating them via some agreement. Nor can I as a leaner in the direction of Christ condone my country for doing so —-

    I think Palestinians throwing anything is counter productive — but from strict legal point of view they have every right to defend their land —

    I have taught, laughed, supped, discussed, debated ad mourned for and with jews and i fully hope they come to know Christ and allow God to fulfill his will for them.

    I am going to reject your standard of disagreement as a sign of hate. It is another one of a numerous nonsequitors you invite into discussion. However, lest we stray further. You are again invited to provide evidence that the ICC has in fact acted in rogue manner. You have stated it. You have misrepresented both history and the law, but you have yet to provide a single example ti support your case.

    laughing . . . when I read your claims that I hate jews, I have to laugh because jewish women are the only group of women would consider marrying outside of my own faith . . .

    hate — you are wrong again.

    You might want to rethink advocating behaviors that are near guaranteed to lead to needless and unjustified violent conflict and ending your posts

    with

    “Peace” it is troublingly contradictory.

    Anyway, you have a slew of issues for which you ave not responded, I will leave you to get on it — evidence is encouraged.

    • Replies: @A123
  141. A123 says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    … not throw rocks when Israelis are encroaching on their back yard and doing so by force and without compensating them via some agreement.

    Your intentional mischaracterization of Israeli activity shows your bias. Israelis are trying to recover stolen property. They want *their* backyard returned to them. And, they have both the moral and legal right to recover stolen property.

    Everyone realizes the current occupiers are descendants, not the original thieves. However, they still illegally hold stolen property. If the Muslim occupiers of Judea & Samaria were willing to negotiate in good faith, relocation with compensation would be a workable solution. They could go to East Bank Palestine or other Muslim lsnds.

    — Jews are willing to propose this.
    — Christians are willing to support the idea.
    — Muslims refuse to consider it.

    You need to start with the Muslim behavioural issues, such as intransigence, that prevent peace. Blaming the Jewish victims of Muslim violence and theft is counter-productive.

    invited to provide evidence that the ICC has in fact acted in rogue manner.

    From #134:

    -4- The irrefutable evidence shows that under binding law … ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda violated binding law by knowingly making false charges predicated on the UN’s proven violation of 1920’s binding law that took place in 1947. Thus, the evidence irrefutably shows that the ICC is a rogue organization, as it allowed its prosecutorial arm to violate binding law.

    evidence is encouraged.

    I provided 100% of the necessary evidence, no additional evidence is required.

    Accepting evidence is encouraged. Get on that now.

    PEACE 😷

  142. i have but one response here and it is the same response as before

    The original borders as established in 1947/48 cease building on Palestine proper. It’s not hard, those are the rules.

    I am not sure who the original natives of the territory are. However, they lost that parcel in a war or wars with Israel. Israel lost that parcel in a war with Rome among others. Who has occupied that land since that loss has been several ethnicities, I think even some christians. Now in 1947/48, the UN allowed the Jews to occupy as their own portion of that territory. And those boundaries are clear.

    Great Britain as the administrator had always intended to aide in creating homelands for several ethnics groups occupying Palestine. It was never intended to be all for Jews. That record is very clear. There I no legal binding anything prior to 1947/48.

    The only evidence that exists of any part violating the territorial boundaries established in Israel
    — they have deliberately established cities in Palestine proper minus any permission from Palestine and as such — they are in violation. They are further making an attempt to cease further Palestinian territory minus the assent or cooperation of the People of Palestine. Should they make that attempt, they would be in violation.

    The balfor letter is not a law, and no law was established in 1920, it merely expresses the British intent to support a homeland for jews — nothing supports that they intended to give all of Palestine to jews. In fact the letter expressly states — nothing should be done to deprive or hinder the rights of the nonjewish natives of Palestine.

    Now should you desire to maintain that the letter is law then the law forbid the violations of rights of the pre-existing nonjewish populations prior to the Jews arriving in response to a homeland.

  143. “If the Muslim occupiers of Judea & Samaria were willing to negotiate in good faith, relocation with compensation would be a workable solution. They could go to East Bank Palestine or other Muslim lsnds.
    — Jews are willing to propose this.
    — Christians are willing to support the idea.
    — Muslims refuse to consider it.
    You need to start with the Muslim behavioural issues, such as intransigence, that prevent peace. Blaming the Jewish victims of Muslim violence and theft is counter-productive.’

    1. It is impossible to demand that the Palestinian population negotiate anything at all — while Israel is in violation of the territorial boundaries. In fact any demand that Palestinians do anything to cooperate with Israel while Israelis are in Palestine proper without permission is simply unreasonable. You cannot demand that others operate in a manner that Israel herself is unwilling to engage. it is their territory and they want israel out of it. I am hard pressed no to tell people they have negotiate with people who are squatting on their territory and at the same time engaged in acts of violence against them —

    Again it’s the negligent driver demanding that the party injured must accept x dollars and admit guilt — There’s no way I can support Israel’s demand that owners accept responsibility for israel’s violations. They certainly can if they choose, but I would not be a party ti supporting any such suggestion.

    2. Certainly people of faith and in practice in Christ can support what they will. laugh.

    3. laughing. A product is not for sale because you want to buy it. A product is for sale if the owner(s) want to sell it. It might help to get off their front porch before making accusations concerning one’s good faith negotiating posture.

    As long as you keep jumping the fence of the territorial boundaries, it’s hard to justify that people cease protecting their yard from repeated claim jumpers. I agree that the rock throwing, suicide bombings are unhelpful — but they are entitled too defend their parcel as they see fit.

    Since there is no law granting israeli territory after the loss to the Romans — nothing is binding until 1947. Now i am keenly aware that jews prior to 1947 began researching the original boundaries of Israel from ancient times. However, none of that research is applicable outside the scope of the boundaries in establish in 1947.

    You have yet even established what you think the law is from 1920 — the letter nor the League f Nations made no such legal provisions for palstine to become Israel or a Jewish homeland based on anything prior to 1947. I am aware that the UN negotiators for Palestine were blindsided. And it an extent it worked. But it only went so far before the Palestinians had had enough. In any case it is what it is and Israel needs to abide the boundaries. And should the Palestinians decide to sell — they will set the price. that is how ownership works.

    • Replies: @A123
  144. anonymous[263] • Disclaimer says:
    @A123

    your lack of Faith in God

    Lol! But, do pagans like you have “Faith in God”?

    You are mangods-worshippers just like the hindoos. And, how did you come about this godless faith? Pure hearsay… just like the hindoos. Do you think hindoos have “Faith in God”?

    Your paganism is just a lite version of hindooism;

    Pagan Mangods. check.
    Father/Son mangods. check.
    Reincarnation of mangods. check.
    Polytheism with a pathetic facade of “monotheism.” check.
    Convoluted theological deceit masquerading as profundity of the “divine.” check.
    False Saints. check. (“saint”/charlatan Theresa? lol!)
    Asceticism/celibacy leading to various degeneracies. check.

  145. “Asceticism/celibacy leading to various degeneracies. check.”

    I appreciate your advocacy for Christ, but you do realize tat Christ was celibate and on occasion practiced asceticism (periods of fasting) as a means to discipline the body.

    And all people of faith and practice in Christ who are not married are expected to be celibate. While I myself am not a ascetic there is no indication that asceticism leads to degenerate behavior.

  146. Not a single square inch of land is created during those accords, that was to come later under the admin of the British in cooperation with the party’s involved. I included the reference noting the proposals by Zionists and Oy and Oy even the Jewish leadership involved would dispute everyone of your claims and on the prima facie — of the accords and their proposals — Jews engaged in any restriction, discrimination of any other occupants rights in palestine is prohibited. And the Zionists openly propose that themselves — again proposed — what is in accord with the intent — a jewish home in Palestine, not jewish home of Palestine —

    THE SAN REMO CONVENTION 1920

    [MORE]

    The San Remo Conference decided on April 24, 1920 to assign the Mandate [for Palestine] under the League of Nations to Britain. The terms of the Mandate were also discussed with the United States which was not a member of the League. An agreed text was confirmed by the Council of the League of Nations on July 24, 1922, and it came into operation in September 1923.

    The Council of the League of Nations:

    Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and

    Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and

    Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connexion of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country;

    and

    Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have selected His Britannic Majesty as the Mandatory for Palestine; and

    Whereas the mandate in respect of Palestine has been formulated in the following terms and submitted to the Council of the League for approval; and

    Whereas His Britannic Majesty has accepted the mandate in respect of Palestine and undertaken to exercise it on behalf of the League of Nations in conformity with the following provisions; and

    Whereas by the aforementioned Article 22 (paragraph 8), it is provided that the degree of authority, control or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory, not having been previously agreed upon by the Members of the League, shall be explicitly defined by the Council of the League of Nations;

    Confirming the said Mandate, defines its terms as follows:

    Article 1.

    The Mandatory shall have full powers of legislation and of administration, save as they may be limited by the terms of this mandate.

    Article 2.

    The Mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing institutions, and also for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion.

    Article 3.

    The Mandatory shall, so far as circumstances permit, encourage local autonomy.

    Article 4.

    An appropriate Jewish agency shall be recognized as a public body for the purpose of advising and cooperating with the Administration of Palestine in such economic, social and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish national home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, and, subject always to the control of the Administration, to assist and take part in the development of the country.

    The Zionist Organization, so long as its organization and constitution are in the opinion of the Mandatory appropriate shall be recognized as such agency. It shall take steps in consultation with His Britannic Majesty’s Government to secure the cooperation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home.

    Article 5.

    The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of, the Government of any foreign Power.

    (Britain then gave Transjordanian Palestine- about 70% of Palestine- to King Abdullah and called it Transjordan. It is now called Jordan. This is not to say that that the Jews were promised that they could settle in all of Palestine. Palestine was a loose regional term in those days and even included Damascus. See article 25 and chapter 11 on the Weizmann-Faisal agreement)

    Article 6.

    The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.

    Article 7.

    The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.

    Article 8.

    The privileges and immunities of foreigners, including the benefits of consular jurisdiction and protection as formerly enjoyed by Capitulation or usage in the Ottoman Empire, shall not be applicable in Palestine.

    Unless the Powers whose nationals enjoyed the aforementioned privileges and immunities on August 1st, 1914, shall have previously renounced the right to their re-establishment, or shall have agreed to their non-application for a specified period, these privileges and immunities shall, at the expiration of the mandate, be immediately re-established in their entirety or with such modifications as may have been agreed upon between the Powers concerned.

    Article 9.

    The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that the judicial system established in Palestine shall assure to foreigners, as well as to natives, a complete guarantee of their rights.

    Respect for the personal status of the various peoples and communities and for their religious interests shall be fully guaranteed. In particular, the control and administration of Waqfs shall be exercised in accordance with religious law and the dispositions of the founders.

    Article 10.

    Pending the making of special extradition agreements relating to Palestine, the extradition treaties in force between the Mandatory and other foreign Powers shall apply to Palestine.

    Article 11.

    The Administration of Palestine shall take all necessary measures to safeguard the interests of the community in connection with the development of the country, and, subject to any international obligations accepted by the Mandatory, shall have full power to provide for public ownership or control of any of the natural resources of the country or of the public works, services and utilities established or to be established therein. It shall introduce a land system appropriate to the needs of the country having regard, among other things, to the desirability of promoting the close settlement and intensive cultivation of the land.

    The Administration may arrange with the Jewish agency mentioned in Article 4 to construct or operate, upon fair and equitable terms, any public works, services and utilities, and to develop any of the natural resources of the country, in so far as these matters are not directly undertaken by the Administration. Any such arrangements shall provide that no profits distributed by such agency, directly or indirectly, shall exceed a reasonable rate of interest on the capital, and any further profits shall be utilized by it for the benefit of the country in a manner approved by the Administration.

    Article 12.

    The Mandatory shall be entrusted with the control of the foreign relations of Palestine, and the right to issue exequaturs to consuls appointed by foreign Powers. He shall also be entitled to afford diplomatic and consular protection to citizens of Palestine when outside its territorial limits.

    Article 13.

    All responsibility in connexion with the Holy Places and religious buildings or sites in Palestine, including that of preserving existing rights and of securing free access to the Holy Places, religious buildings and sites and the free exercise of worship, while ensuring the requirements of public order and decorum, is assumed by the Mandatory, who shall be responsible solely to the League of Nations in all matters connected herewith, provided that nothing in this article shall prevent the Mandatory from entering into such arrangements as he may deem reasonable with the Administration for the purpose of carrying the provisions of this article into effect; and provided also that nothing in this Mandate shall be construed as conferring upon the Mandatory authority to interfere with the fabric or the management of purely Moslem sacred shrines, the immunities of which are guaranteed.

    Article 14.

    A special Commission shall be appointed by the Mandatory to study, define and determine the rights and claims in connection with the Holy Places and the rights and claims relating to the different religious communities in Palestine. The method of nomination, the composition and the functions of this Commission shall be submitted to the Council of the League for its approval, and the Commission shall not be appointed or enter upon its functions without the approval of the Council.

    Article 15.

    The Mandatory shall see that complete freedom of conscience and the free exercise of all forms of worship, subject only to the maintenance of public order and morals are ensured to all. No discrimination of any kind shall be made between the inhabitants of Palestine on the ground of race, religion or language. No person shall be excluded from Palestine on the sole ground of his religious belief.

    The right of each community to maintain its own schools for the education of its own members in its own language, while conforming to such educational requirements of a general nature as the Administration may impose, shall not be denied or impaired.

    Article 16.

    The Mandatory shall be responsible for exercising such supervision over religious or eleemosynary bodies of all faiths in Palestine as may be required for the maintenance of public order and good government. Subject to such supervision, no measures shall be taken in Palestine to obstruct or interfere with the enterprise of such bodies or to discriminate against any representative or member of them on the ground of his religion or nationality.

    Article 17.

    The Administration of Palestine may organize on a voluntary basis the forces necessary for the preservation of peace and order, and also for the defence of the country, subject however, to the supervision of the Mandatory, but shall not use them for purposes other than those above specified save with the consent of the Mandatory. Except for such purposes no military, naval or air forces shall be raised or maintained by the Administration of Palestine.

    Nothing in this article shall preclude the Administration of Palestine from contributing to the cost of the maintenance of the forces of the Mandatory in Palestine.

    The Mandatory shall be entitled at all times to use the roads, railways and ports of Palestine for the movement of armed forces and the carriage of fuel and supplies.

    Article 18.

    The Mandatory shall see that there is no discrimination in Palestine against the nationals of any State Member of the League of Nations (including companies incorporated under its laws) as compared with those of the Mandatory or of any foreign State in matters concerning taxation, commerce or navigation, the exercise of industries or professions, or in the treatment of merchant vessels or civil aircraft. Similarly, there shall be no discrimination in Palestine against goods originating in or destined for any of the said States, and there shall be freedom of transit under equitable conditions across the mandated area.

    Subject as aforesaid and to the other provisions of this mandate, the Administration of Palestine may, on the advice of the Mandatory, impose such taxes and customs duties as it may consider necessary, and take such steps as it may think best to promote the development of the natural resources of the country and to safeguard the interests of the population. It may also, on the advice of the Mandatory, conclude a special customs agreement with any State the territory of which in 1914 was wholly included in Asiatic Turkey or Arabia.

    Article l9.

    The Mandatory shall adhere on behalf of the Administration of Palestine to any general international conventions already existing, or which may be concluded hereafter with the approval of the League of Nations, respecting the slave traffic, the traffic in arms and ammunition, or the traffic in drugs, or relating to commercial equality, freedom of transit and navigation, aerial navitation and postal, telegraphic and wireless communicatiion or literary, artistic or industrial property.

    Article 20.

    The Mandatory shall co-operate on behalf of the Administration of Palestine, so far as religious, social and other conditions may permit, in the execution of any common policy adopted by the League of nations for preventing and combating disease, including diseases of plants and animals.

    Article 21.

    The Mandatory shall secure the enactment within twelve months from this date, and shall ensure the execution of a Law of Antiquities based on the following rules. This law shall ensure equality of treatment in the matter of excavations and archaeological research to the nationalals of all States Members of the League of Nations….

    Article 22.

    English, Arabic and Hebrew shall be the official languages of Palestine. Any statement or inscription in Arabic on stamps or money in Palestine shall be repeated in Hebrew and any statement or inscription in Hebrew shall be repeated in Arabic.

    Article 23.

    The Administration of Palestine shall recognize the holy days of the respective communities in Palestine as legal days of rest for the members of such communities.

    Article 24.

    The Mandatory shall make to the Council of the League of Nations an annual report to the satisfaction of the Council as to the measures taken during the year to carry out the provisions of the mandate. Copies of all laws and regulations promulgated or issued during the year shall be communicated with the report.

    Article 25.

    In the territories lying between the Jordan and the eastern boundary of Palestine

    (Palestine originally included land in what is now Jordan)

    as ultimately determined, the Mandatory shall be entitled, with the consent of the Council of the League of Nations, to postpone or withhold application of such provisions of this mandate as he may consider inapplicable to the existing local conditions,

    (Jewish immigration east of the Jordan might be put on hold if the Mandate authorities thought it inapplicable.)

    and to make such provision for the administration of the territories as he may consider suitable to those conditions, provided that no action shall be taken which is inconsistent with the provisions of Articles 15, 16 and 18.

    Article 26.

    The Mandatory agrees that if any dispute whatever should arise between the Mandatory and another Member of the League of Nations relating to the interpretation or the application of the provisions of the mandate, such dispute, if it cannot be settled by negotiation, shall be submitted to the Permanent Court of International Justice provided for by Article 14 of the Covenant of the League of Nations.

    Article 27.

    The consent of the Council of the League of Nations is required for any modification of the terms of this mandate.

    Article 28.

    In the event of the termination of the mandate hereby conferred upon the Mandatory, the Council of the League of Nations shall make such arrangements as may be deemed necessary for safeguarding in perpetuity, under guarantee of the League, the rights secured by Articles 13 and 14, and shall use its influence for securing, under the guarantee of the League, that the Government of Palestine will fully honour the financial obligations legitimately incurred by the Administration of Palestine during the period of the mandate, including the rights of public servants to pensions or gratuities.

    The present instrument shall be deposited in original in the archives of the League of Nations and certified copies shall be forwarded by the Secretary General of the League of Nations to all Members of the League.

    http://adespicabletruce.org.uk/page75.html

    http://adespicabletruce.org.uk/page71.html

  147. A123 says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    1. It is impossible to demand that the Palestinian population negotiate anything at all — while Israel is in violation of the territorial boundaries. In fact any demand that Palestinians do anything to cooperate with Israel while Israelis are in Palestine proper without permission is simply unreasonable.

    ROTFLMAO.

    You cannot possibly be serious. I have to believe everything else you have posted is disengenous.

    Here is your invitation to Reality Street. By blaming Jewish victims of Muslim violence you make progress impossible.

    (Chortle)… Let Me Fix your premise to match REALITY….

    It is impossible to demand that the Jewish population negotiate anything at all — while Muslims occupy the indisputably Jewish lands of Judea & Samaria in violation of the Jewish Nation’s territorial boundaries. In fact any demand that Israelis do anything to cooperate with Muslim occupiers, while the Muslim occupiers are in the Jewish Nation proper without permission, is simply unreasonable.

    (Facepalm) … Your position becomes even more unconscionable when you advocate legal trickery to retroactively condone 1,400+ years of Muslims thievery. Remember, the Muslim Occupier goal is dismemberment of the Jewish Nation to establish their judenfrei land from “The River To The Sea”.
    _____

    Despite the unreasonable and unconscionable Muslim Occupier stance — Jews were willing to negotiate and tried to do so for decades. Perhaps you have accidentally shown a light on the problem. Violent Islam and its servitors, such as yourself, see the willingness to negotiate as weakness.

    The impending unilateral extension of Jewish Sovereignty, to indisputably Jewish Land, in the Jewish Nation is a huge step forward. It ends your incorrect perception of the Jewish Nation as weak negotiators.

    Until the violent Muslim Occupiers of Judea and Samaria offer serious concessions, there will be no further credible attempts at negotiation. There is one solution that could work — Compensation to Muslims who renounce claims to Jewish land and then return home. However, the Muslim Occupiers need to come to the table or with something that makes this peaceful vision achievable. Clearly the longer Islam delays the lower the compensation goes, and it is a one-way ratchet down.

    PEACE 😷

  148. “You cannot possibly be serious. I have to believe everything else you have posted is disingenuous.”

    In anticipation of more irrelevance, I took some time to refresh the Accord in question, already familiar with their content, I was able to find what I think is the entire agreement. In short and I am repeating myself here;

    Jews are granted a home in Palestine. They are not granted Palestine as home. And if one wanted to be by the letter of the proposal what it states is that until such time as Israel is granted nationhood in Palestine rights of all other parties are to be respected and upheld on par with the jews.

    [MORE]

    The administration of the process governed by the the nation of Great Britain. They (LON) opted not to make the attempt to partition land for the respective occupants of Palestine, save for Palestine itself ad specific locations Jews could settle — they were not granted all of Palestine, at the accords. Article after article restates the same, reinforces the same is careful, perhaps too careful in not making any specific grants other than the conceptual dynamic o a future Israel in Palestine. I have been generous regarding the issues. But as you insist, what those accords indicate is that israel is violation of those accords — which you claim are binding. But you on;y want that bind on the imagined land grant o Palestine, you ignore the volumes of mandates that demand certain behaviors, such as respect for current occupants, no denial of rights, on any level, no quartering of the nonjewish occupants . . . . I mean if you really want the letter of the law —

    Israel has been in violation the minute they opted to act against the administrative authority o Great Britain.

    1.

    From the Intro/Preamble:

    “Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and . . .”

    Note: (in palestine) “in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people . . .”

    a. So this comment,

    “Your position becomes even more unconscionable when you advocate legal trickery to retroactively condone 1,400+ years of Muslims thievery. Remember, the Muslim Occupier goal is dismemberment of the Jewish Nation to establish their judenfrei land from “The River To The Sea”.

    b. Given the time in question, there is not legal Jewish Israeli land. So there was noting to dismember, in fact, based on the record, the Muslim leaders at the time, seem to welcome a return of the jews for very practical reasons, but not a some intended abeyance to for Palestinians to lie under a Palestine ruled by Israel. That discussion very clearly repeated by jews and nonjews.

    2.

    But your claims should be supported by the same references in the Remo agreement that you claim is binding, locate any such provision. that grants any parcel of land other than a return to palestine in which the Hews may have a homeland, the process of which is under the authority of the LON and administered by the UN, Finding any such provision will be difficult because it does not exist. The binding agreement you want to rely on does not grant any territory at all. One cannot even spit hairs to get there. A return to Palestine to create a homeland in Palestine.

    3.

    Then come WWII and the LON becomes the UN which is the organization that the LON bequeathed its provision to in case of an interruption of the League, such a global war . . . . the UN as such merely picks up where the League left off . . . Why does their mandate remain if that what you wish,

    Here ya go,

    “Article 28.

    In the event of the termination of the mandate hereby conferred upon the Mandatory, the Council of the League of Nations shall make such arrangements as may be deemed necessary for safeguarding in perpetuity, under guarantee of the League, the rights secured by Articles 13 and 14, and shall use its influence for securing, under the guarantee of the League, that the Government of Palestine will fully honour the financial obligations legitimately incurred by the Administration of Palestine during the period of the mandate, including the rights of public servants to pensions or gratuities.’

    Great Britain never terminates its management of the region and as the administrative authority accepted that the UN was now the ultimate arbiter id decider in matters of how to create a jewish state in Palestine — the mandate is ten still in force and Israel’a attacks Great Britain legally and ” binding” as you state were in violation of the Remo Accords. That violence to gain territory minus the admin. of Great Britain and the UN, former the LON were in violation and any territory gained as result is by the binding agreement — null and void as it was obtained in violation of the accord you claim is binding. That bind according to the document I think is in perpetuity and as you demand would require the return of property, land, belonging to the occupants in question. And the expectation would be binding that Jews pay compensation resulting form the illegal activities resulting from said acts of violence for the purpose of undermining the legal administrator of the region –

    4. 1947/48 The UN under the admin of great Britain commences to the specific roles of defining territorial boundaries within Palestine.

    Laughing. I think I stated somewhere that the real deal here as far as Israel is concerned that everybody play by their rules, regardless of the facts. These demands of binding 1920 agreements are not serious, because it’s clear they don’t say or grant what you have been claiming. In fact, real a picture in which when it comes to disputes — and no agreement should be reached, the matter will be decided by a court. Whether it is the ICC or the some other similar body. we are not talking about internal Israel but Palestine proper, so your complaint that no court has jurisdiction — is simply rejected by the Remo accords provisions binding as you say to this day so the dispute between Israel and Palestine over said territory is exactly the kind of question the ICC would take up – contrary to your contend. Speaking of a lack of faith, so as opposed to airing the matter out, Israel is making hay to cloud the issues, subvert UN jurisdiction, and authority in accord with the Remo provisions.

    I have to say as someone who supports Israel, i am rather disappointed that God’s chosen people are so fearful, that they must muddy the water, obfuscate, name call, avoid, anything but lay their cards on the table to make their case.

    5.

    You are welcome to provide the provision in which [Palestinians must negotiate their land rights with Israel. Names the article that demands Palestinins agree with your demands at any level. We already know that the provisions don’t grant Palestine to Israel. I used to hang out on a Jewish dating site and in their forums this discussion was not uncommon —

    6.

    Until this discussion and some others I ad always considered jews tough negotiators, but at the end of the day they don’t really negotiate as in this instance, they demand they be given all the cards to pay as they wish or they will go stand in the corner or m create some level of chaos and then blame their targets. Back to the car running over the cyclist driving legally and safely in the prescribed lane being hit by said driver and said drier demanding that target of their negligence admit guilt — turning truth on its head by creating chaos and confusion.

    • Replies: @A123
  149. Laughing the simple version

    Name the article or provision that grants Israel either Judea or Sumeria. You claim to hang your hat on r=the 1920 accords, provide proof that either Judea or Sumaria were granted to Israel. I will excuse the fact that neither exist accept in ancient times and Israel was destroyed in 70AD and simply is not even a valid reference in either considering ancient Sumaria or Judea.

    Calling upon nonexistent entities to validate your vision of the status quo regarding territorial integrity in the 21st Century is an interesting way to go. But if you can find the document that so grants . . . have at it. Remember it was your choice — 1920.

    ________________

    here’s a story for you. There once was a man of God. And god promised him a family counting among the stars and the sands. When his wife heard this she laughed. Because she was barren. God said don’t laugh — really you are going have a child. The man thinking that God must be crazy as gods are decided to take matters into his own hands. So he impregnated his servant, with his wife’s approval — for certainly that is what God meant.

    The servant girl was not the intended but nonetheless she gave birth. And there began a series of consequences for which the man, his son, (born not of his servant, but from his wife). From that day(the servants son was born) to this the choice to make God’s promise happen has been one pain in the side.

    Ancient Judea and Sumaria — Oy veh.

  150. A123 says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    You suggestion that a home = freeway and everyone gets to trample through, is exactly the opposite of what all rational humans think of as the word “home”. The entire human race understands that homes have controllable borders that keep others out. Your bizarre position is inherently inhumane.

    Accepting evidence is necessary, let me know when you are willing to do so.

    Until then, there is in point in trying to engage with an evidence denier. You are far too prejudiced and anti-Semitic too think rationally on this issue. Goodbye.

    PEACE 😇

  151. Before proceeding, i would like to extend my appreciation to Dr. Giraldi for his patience in permitting this long and tedious exchange – particularly my comments and references of entire documents. I further appreciate your patience regarding the references to faith and practice —

    ———————————

    “You suggestion that a home = freeway and everyone gets to trample through, is exactly the opposite of what all rational humans think of as the word “home”. The entire human race understands that homes have controllable borders that keep others out. Your bizarre position is inherently inhumane.”

    Not at all quite the opposite. Clear boundaries were created before 1967 ( i won’t get into the other violations of Israel before then because the burden of your 1920 binding law — actually crushes nearly every argument you make clearly, Israel and Palestine can have territorial sovereignty. That each governs as they see fit within the same. Absolutely no question on the matter of sovereignty.

    However, based on those territorial boundaries Israel is the only one in breach of the same. And that breach is according to the rules of the “binding law of 1920” that you desire to rely for your claims.

    laugh. I am simply stating what the UN negotiated settlement accomplished separate states or at the very least territories for Jews and Palestinians – nonjews. It is israel that desires further land beyond their borders claims. Which in itself is fine. However, thy have repeatedly violated the territorial integrity of the Palestinians and as such

    1. should correct those violaions
    2. Palestinians are should not be imposed or expected to negotiate until then or that Israel compensates said Palestinians for those violations to Palestinian satisfaction
    3. Palestinians to decide whether they desire to negotiate as the land they occupy is theirs
    4. And the ICC or some other entity under the auspices of the 1920 provisions and UN agreement of 1947/48 are certainly within their jurisdiction, to investigate claims regarding this issue.

    You are still invited to provide a single reference that the Remo Accords of 1920 grant Israel ancient Judea or Sumeria.

    • Replies: @A123
    , @AnonStarter
  152. A123 says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    Accepting evidence is necessary, let me know when you are willing to do so.

    It is restated below MORE tag for your convenience. Until you accept the irrefutable evidence we cannot proceed further.

    PEACE 😷

    [MORE]

    From #134

    Good grief…

    — The evidence is 100% clear, irrefutable and unchallengable
    — The binding law is 100% clear, irrefutable, and unchallengable

    I will take one last stab at explaining the evidence and binding law to you in the simplest possible manner.
    ______

    -1- The irrefutable evidence shows that binding law from ~1920 … Derived from San Remo & Balfour … Established legal standing and boundaries for the Jewish Nation.

    -2- The irrefutable evidence shows that … Section 80 of the UN Charter affirmed the prior binding law with relation to the ~1920 legal standing an boundaries for the Jewish Nation.

    -3- The irrefutable evidence shows that … The UN violated binding law in 1947 … Openly defying the 1920’s binding law by stealing and violating territorial boundaries. Additionally, the UN lost all credibility by intentionally breaching Section 80 of its own Charter. Thus, the evidence irrefutably shows that the UN became a rogue organization in 1947.

    -4- The irrefutable evidence shows that under binding law … ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda violated binding law by knowingly making false charges predicated on the UN’s proven violation of 1920’s binding law that took place in 1947. Thus, the evidence irrefutably shows that the ICC is a rogue organization, as it allowed its prosecutorial arm to violate binding law.

  153. @EliteCommInc.

    Looks like you won.

    Are there Cliffs Notes available? I’m a little pressed for time.

    • Replies: @A123
  154. A123 says:
    @AnonStarter

    All rational observers see that EliteComm lost:

    — He was incapable of accepting irrefutable evidernce.
    — His Taqiyya (1) deception twisting the word of San Remo to change “home” into “anti-home” failed so badly it came across as comedy.

    You may be right about one thing though. EliteComm does appear to be an anti-Semitic, hate filled Muslim. He is on your SJW Globalist side, along with your George IslamoSoros.

    PEACE 😷
    _______

    (1) http://muslimfact.com/bm/terror-in-the-name-of-islam/islam-permits-lying-to-deceive-unbelievers-and-bri.shtml

  155. “Are there Cliffs Notes available? I’m a little pressed for time.”

    Laughing.

    Well, the pits may be on target but getting some kind of positive response is another issue entirely.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  156. “-1- The irrefutable evidence shows that binding law from ~1920 … Derived from San Remo & Balfour … Established legal standing and boundaries for the Jewish Nation. . . ICC is a rogue organization, as it allowed its prosecutorial arm to violate binding law.”

    A. Based on the agreement of 1920

    [MORE]

    1. No boundaries for an Israelie Nation were created. The boundaries established were to create a clear Palestine.
    2. The agreement acknowledges that at some point in the future with greater Palestine, jews can found a nation.
    3, The process when it takes place will be soley administered by Great Britain.
    4. The final agreements will be settled by the LON and any disputes among members will be addressed by a judicial court system, i.e. the ICC. (and I am being generous here because hews are not member states and disputes addressed are by member states) But as a courtesy, and in some due I would think it fair to consider disputes between and among those living in Palestine.

    Note: no article in the Remo Accords grants a parcel to the creation of Israeli boundaries anywhere in Palestine – not one inch. There is no binding law that acknowledges any such boundaries. The binding expectation are o the accords in total and none of them include territorial boundaries for a jewish state. And none of them even suggest that Jews be given all of Palestine or as you now press, Judea or Samaria.. It does do so in context. it does do so literally. In fact, what is the case is that Palestine is to be governed as singular multi-ethnic society, until such time as nations or unique sovereign jurisdictions can be created. Articles: 9, 10

    B. Article 28.

    “In the event of the termination of the mandate hereby conferred upon the Mandatory, the Council of the League of Nations shall make such arrangements as may be deemed necessary for safeguarding in perpetuity, under guarantee of the League, the rights secured by Articles 13 and 14, and shall use its influence for securing, under the guarantee of the League, that the Government of Palestine will fully honour the financial obligations legitimately incurred by the Administration of Palestine during the period of the mandate, including the rights of public servants to pensions or gratuities.”

    The United Nations replaces LON and the Mandatory, Great Britain reports to the UN authority on the administration of the Remo Agreement of Palestine for the purpose of creating a nation for hews in Palestine proper.

    1. At no time does the UN or the Mandatory bequeath, literally or in context Palestine to the Jews. 2. The 1920 agreement respecting the rights of all inhabitants is enforce — when Israel begins a bombing and terror campaign against Great Britain in violation o the agreement seizing territory and property in violation of the Agreement of 1920 –

    C.
    In 1947/48 — Great Britain on the approval of the UN began a process of creating sovereign territories for the jews and nonjews. At the end that process despite Israeli bombings, and terror activities, in violating the “binding agreement” Israel was granted it’s own territorial boundaries. Carved out of greater Palestine, but did not include nor was there any intent to grant an Israeli state of all of Palestine proper. Any attempt to use the 1920 accords to that end are unsustainable by the provisons en total

    D.

    Before that there is nothing establishing a state of Israel nor are there any territorial boundary created for that end in the 1920 accords. Any attempt to use the 1920 accords to that end are unsustainable by the provisons en total

    E.

    The UN is not in violation of the 1920 agreements nor could they as the granting authority they could amend any part of the agreement or the agreement in total. however in keeping with the intent and the purposes of the agreement the UN has operated in compliance of the 1920 and has the authority to engage in disputes between member states aparty to the agreement of 1920. There are further in compliance of the 1920 agreement and article 80 of UN charter having not violated the sovereignty of any state.

    F. —

    G.

    Further, since no property lines were drawn in 1920 granting any party an autonomous region claims based on that contention would unsustainable, invalid and readily dismissed. There simply is no issue regarding sovereign territories created in 1920, save the kines regarding Palestine proper from which and in which autonomous sovereignty would be created, one of several would be the state for the jews. Nothing prevents the UN from referring disputes among parties to a judicial authority for disposition, ie. the ICC or similar situated body.

    Should any of the paryies involved consider that any adjudicator be unfairly biased, they are welcome to submit why they should recuse themselves

    If any involved party belies that their disposition would be unfairly biased against because of backdoor improper communications for example, they should certainly make that case for recusal and there is no indication that members of the ICC or similarly situated organiations would not recuse for the purpose of fairness to all concerned.

    Note: based on what has been presented here, there is not evidence that the ICC has violated its mandate, exceedet its authority, seeks unfair treatment to any party. The ICC and the UN have conducted themselves in accordance with the demands of the 1920 Remo Accords and the UN charter.

    And that being clearly evidenced, even by the accusing party, neither the UN nor the ICC should be considered exceeding the norms of the related guidelnes or the general rules of conduct among members and one must reject the contention that they operated as rogue entities.

    • LOL: A123
    • Replies: @A123
  157. “LOL”

    You are welcome to sight the provision. Name a single sentences that indicate Palestine proper is delegated to the Jews and the Jews alone for a nation for Jews.

    It really is that simple.

  158. A123 says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    (Laughing)

    It should be obvious at this point that:

    — I am aware that you are a Muslim liar, incapable of honorable behaviour.
    — Your Taqiyya deception will never convince me to abandon the TRUTH.

    What do you hope to achieve by posting more painfully obvious misinformation?

    If your goal is to provide comedy by struggling ineffectually in public view. Please proceed…. Comic relief is hard to come by.

    We are not laughing with you. We are all laughing at you.

    PEACE 😷

  159. @EliteCommInc.

    Well, the pits may be on target but getting some kind of positive response is another issue entirely.

    Of course you’re entirely on target. That’s never been the issue.

    And I suppose I can’t really begrudge you the effort, save out of concern for your own time and energy. You and I may not see eye-to-eye on everything, but at least you can identify and expose the weaker links retaining your general view.

    All and all, I’d say, “Well done.” His position has never been defensible from jumpstreet, though. I mean … Clinging to hackneyed hasbara and exposing jihadis in the linen closet doesn’t really bode well for one’s integrity.

    Never has.

  160. “It should be obvious at this point that:
    — I am aware that you are a Muslim liar, incapable of honorable behaviour.
    — Your Taqiyya deception will never convince me to abandon the TRUTH.
    What do you hope to achieve by posting more painfully obvious misinformation?
    If your goal is to provide comedy by struggling ineffectually in public view. Please proceed…. Comic relief is hard to come by.
    We are not laughing with you. We are all laughing at you.”

    be that as it may,

    I am not laughing at all at this point. Some very serious policy advances are being made in support of Israel based on false information.

    I am still waiting for you to provide a anything at all that indicates that the accords you are talking about created borders for Israel, much less that Palestine itself was granted to Israel.

    Some instance that the ICC is biased against Israel or the US by some ruling. Merely indicating that they intend to investigate is not a sign of bias. The UN ‘s jurisdiction extends from and through the accords you say establish a jewish nation – it does not. I get why you are pouting when upon extermination the opposite is indicated.

    Muslim . . . wrong again. And while I may have my issues with Muslims, I am not inclined to support some falsehood such as Palestine belongs to Israel and that was established in 1920 based on some ancient Judean Sumarian states that went long ago from history. I have no knee jerk objection to Israel acquiring more territory — but right of conquest is not a right granted in the 1920 Agreement nor 1947/48 discussion of partitioning Palestine.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  161. @EliteCommInc.

    correction:

    “The UN ‘s jurisdiction extends from and through the accords you say establish a jewish nation – it does not grant Palestine to Israel or a Israel.

    I get why you are pouting when upon extermination the opposite is indicated.”

    • Replies: @A123
  162. “All and all, I’d say, “Well done.”

    Very generous of you.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  163. A123 says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    RPTLMAO

    You whinge and you whine and you refuse to accept evidence. And, then you try to turn it around. It are both silly and sad. Verging on pathetic.

    Please present evidence of the use of the exact phrase “Muslim Nation” or “Muslim Home” in those documents you are histrionicially flapping about. Nothing vague and off point like “other”, an explicit declaration exclusive to “Muslims”.

    PEACE 😷

  164. “Please present evidence of the use of the exact phrase “Muslim Nation” or “Muslim Home” in those documents you are histrionicially flapping about. Nothing vague and off point like “other”, an explicit declaration exclusive to “Muslims”

    I am not sure what you are talking about here. It was your call to consider the 1920 Remo agreements and the Balfour letter. I simply placed both documents on the table as written. What they says fairly clear.

    1. Jew should be provided a space for a homeland in Palestine
    2. That all other nonjews should be accorded equal standing
    3. until such time of establishing sovereign states in Palestine all parties will share equal standing
    4. Great Britain is tasked with ensuring the said equal standing and practices until such time as sovereign territories can be created for Jews and nonjews.
    5. Ultimate approval for said sovereign creations rests with the LON and then the UN.
    6. Acts of violence, threats and other activities violating the rights of residence in palestine are a isolation of the agreement
    7. There are/can be financial consequences for the violating those rights
    8. diagreements are to be settled by the Mandatory Great Britain, The UN and by a court proceeding.

    ————

    At no time in any agreement did LON or the UN grant sole authority of Palestine to the Jews. But created boundaries by which parties could establish themselves as they so chose.

    There is not right f conquest granted in the LON charter, The Remo Accords and Article, nor the UN Charter. Any and such action would be treated as violations and sanctions can be imposed on one or more parties who engage in force.

    Judean or Samarian claims are invalid as they are not part of any action regarding Palestine.

    Note: I was laughed at by millions over the use of excessive and needless at the hands of police, mocked, laughed at, called names over y reasons to avoid using force in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya . . . etc.

    No one is laughing about those issues now — though they are still mocking and name calling and laughing at me. All one can do is laugh in return.

    • Replies: @A123
  165. A123 says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    You are misquoting badly. The documents:

    *Explicitly endorsed* a Jewish National homeland
    *Intentionally omitted* a Muslim National homeland

    You need to show an equally explicit Muslim National homeland acknowledgement in the original documents.

    Get on it — evidence is encouraged.

    PEACE 😇

  166. @EliteCommInc.

    Very generous of you.

    Thanks, but generosity has less to do with it than simple observation.

    I don’t know … Should I experience schadenfreude over this guy’s abject self-embarrassment?

    Seems a bit cruel, even for him.

  167. “— *Explicitly endorsed* a Jewish National homeland
    *Intentionally omitted* a Muslim National homeland’

    You are attempting change the issus here.

    1. There is no question that the intention was to provide jews a homeland that they could call their own But there was never any consideration that homeland would be all of Palestine.

    2. Whether or not the nonjewish Palestinians chose to create a nation state is entirely up to them in my view — but the territorial boundaries were established to create to distinct sovereign entities

    Palestine and Israel

    At the current time Israel is in violation of those boundaries and her claims to a ‘right of ownership” y conquest was rejected before the conflicts as is clear — upon cessation the international standard – rule – expectation is that parties essentially go home

    At your request and demand I am applying the standards set by the 1920 Accords and the subsequent UN standards, both binding as you have repeatedly stated. Israel’s behavior in violating those standards invites sanctions and the adjudication of the issues by a court in compete alignment with the 1920 Remo agreements (binding in perpetuity), the LON (under the Mandatory – Great Britain) and extended jurisdictions to and through the UN and enforceable by the same.

    Again, Israel has a right to exist. She has a right to self defense. She has no right to encroach beyond her borders, regardless of how loosely autonomous and sovereign Palestine is governed by her convening authority. There s no “whoever can make better use of the land” mandate in any provision of the 1920 – accords or subsequent administrative bodies . . .

    building structures for whatever reason minus the approval of the Palestinians in Palestine proper is improper and a violation of the Remo Agreements concerning behavior as well as the rules governing sovereign states.

    Should Israel desire more of Palestine nothing prevents them engaging negotiations for the same attempting to coerce negotiations by encroaching on the sovereign province of Palestine is a violation.

    Currently what Israel is doing is standing on the feet of Palestine claiming thy own the feet and demanding that the Palestinians sell an arm. Hardly a situation or behavior inviting productive discussion, should the Palestinians even be interested in selling or talking.

    • Replies: @A123
  168. A123 says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    “— *Explicitly endorsed* a Jewish National homeland
    *Intentionally omitted* a Muslim National homeland’

    You are attempting change the issues here.

    No. I am forcing you to stay on point. And, you obviously do not like that.

    The international community explicitly recognized the Jewish National home. Affirming thousands of years of historical, ancestral ties to the land.

    — If they intended a Muslim National home on the West Bank, why were they not equally explicit?

    The obvious answer is that they never intended for a Muslim Nation on that territory. You are attempting (and failing) to twist the documents inside out to achieve your predetermined outcome instead of accepting what they actually mean.

    PEACE 😇

  169. “No. I am forcing you to stay on point. And, you obviously do not like that.

    The international community explicitly recognized the Jewish National home. Affirming thousands of years of historical, ancestral ties to the land.”

    My initial response,

    1. There is no question that the intention was to provide jews a homeland that they could call their own But there was never any consideration that homeland would be all of Palestine.

    clearly states that that i agree that the accord were designed to provide a a homeland in Palestine for Jews,. It was further intended for sovereign state for other ethnicities as conditions saw fit. However, there was never any intention of granting jewish control, sovereignty, ownership over all of Palestine. The key point here is sovereignty, when the others in Palestine decide of ever to crate their own states or exist as a sovereign Palestine loosely ethnically inhabited is up to Palestine, not Israel.

    2. I am sure you would like to stray why others have yet to create nation states in Palestine. That is a matter for them. But if you press the matter, you will not appreciate the obvious answer. Despite that is entirely non-consequential to Palestinian sovereignty. In short, that is none of Israel’s business.

    Not at all, as has been my consistent position — whether, how and when Palestine intends to make itself a stated nation as Muslims, Christians, Zoroastrians, or men and women from Mars is their business. Furthermore, The 1947/48 resolution, designated the territorial boundaries for the Jews is not the LON, UN or the 1920 Accords bestowing nationality, but creating a sovereign space for nationality. Those boundaries are clear and Palestine has every right to defend them.

    And every attempt, act by Israel to encroach on said boundaries is a violation of every agreement on the matter from 1920 forward.

    • Replies: @A123
  170. A123 says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    The discussion no longer fits this thread, and has moved here:

    https://www.unz.com/anepigone/blacks-all-lives-matter/#comment-3960517

    PEACE 😇

  171. “The discussion no longer fits this thread, and has moved here:

    https://www.unz.com/anepigone/blacks-all-lives-matter/#comment-3960517”

    Laughing . . .

    O may or not respond over at AE’s site. But make no mistake, the discussion belongs where it started and that is here where the matter of boycotting the ICC doesn’t have much weight based on the accusations.

    But one prefers to be where they have choir. I understand.

    • LOL: AnonStarter, A123
    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  172. @EliteCommInc.

    Just posted a “thread disruption warning” over in AE’s thread.

    If the show must go on, please keep it here.

  173. My position is simple:

    There is no evidence that the ICC is biased as you claim. As such your accusations are unfounded. My response to avoid as much as possible your intended suggestion that I am in some manner in league with forces against Israel, hence the careful response about what I may personally believe against what can be demonstrated to a “truth”.

    You made accusations: I took it upon myself to examine whether the ICC was as you described. And since their docket is loaded with Muslims under investigation and some manner of prosecution – there dos appear to be any indication that are targeting Israel based on some tainted motive.

    Thus far they appear to operate as a body in accordance with the norms expected of judicial entity. It’s not that I or my organization has any agenda against Israel or the US.

    You in response have introduced a series of issues and made references to documents and organizations to support your positions, but upon reading the documents and the actions of said organization — they do not support that Palestine was granted to Israel. Nor do they support that Israel has any right to violate the established borders agreed upon in 1947/48.

    (I am being generous – when I say agreed upon — the Palestinians had serious objections).

    As by your demand: The References: The Balfor Letter, The Articles of the Remo Agreement of 1920, LON, Great Britain a Mandatory, and the UN do not grant, do not suggest that Jews were granted control over all of Palestine — nor that Palestine en-total was intended to be soley for Jews to establish a nation.

    Those binding documents you want enforced to “inperpetuity” guarantee that all of the occupants of Palestine shall have equal rights. That Jews will granted some parcel of land by which they can create a nation in Palestine. And until that time Great Britain as Mandatory has adminstrative authority, to include the protection of rights of of Palestine’s inhabitants regardless of ethnicity or religion. Such as are including — religious ad cultural places, shrines, etc.

    In 1947/48 territorial boundaries were established in Palestine. Those lines represented sovereign locations: Palestine and the nation state that the Jews call Israel. The documents and organization governing that process – the UN have rules and regulatory mandate that bar nations from using force to violate the integrity of state boundaries. Israel’s claim to land by way of conquest is not a right by the ‘binding” charter s expressed in article 80 and is enforceable via the UNSC and the UN may further refer the matter to a judicial body. However, the claim that Israel has “right by conquest” in contradicted by the following: Remo Agreement of 1920, LON, and the UN Charter rules/laws governing nation members.

    Furthermore that disputes between members of the LON/UN that cannot be resolved via the designated bodies in authority will remanded for disposition by a judicial body/process, such as, the ICC.

    There is no law, rule or normative expectation among the members of the UN, that bars Afghanistan, Palestine, or any nation from bringing a case before the ICC. The following organizations have used the ICC and cooperate the ICC: The United States, Germany, Great Britain, France, Belgium, NATO, InterPol and others, even though they may not have been signatories.

  174. @Verymuchalive

    True… But the US attempts to exercise authority in places it has no jurisdiction… I think that is Mr. Giraldi’s point

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Philip Giraldi Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
Shouldn't they recuse themselves when dealing with the Middle East?
A Modern Guernica Enabled by Washington
Pressuring Candidates Even Before They Are Nominated
But is it even a friend?
The gagged whistleblower goes on the record.
Today’s CIA serves contractors and bureaucrats—not the nation.