Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered

[Billo_Really]

He wrote the words in 1891 and didn't move to Israel until 1922, so he had no first hand knowledge of what was going on. Even some one as stupid as you ought to be able to understand that.

Maybe he visited there? Maybe he received letters from other Zionists boasting about treating the Pals like garbage? You said you didn't know what he was talking about. Now you act like you know everything about him. I have a hard time believing anything you say.

Let's be clear, you are officially saying Ahad Ha'am is full of shit?

 

[toomuchtime_]

He wrote the words in 1891 and didn't move to Israel until 1922, so he had no first hand knowledge of what was going on. Even some one as stupid as you ought to be able to understand that.

Maybe he visited there? Maybe he received letters from other Zionists boasting about treating the Pals like garbage? You said you didn't know what he was talking about. Now you act like you know everything about him. I have a hard time believing anything you say.

Let's be clear, you are officially saying Ahad Ha'am is full of shit?

That's because you are just a dim witted bigot who was interested only in finding a jew who was critical of other Jews, but after your first post on the subject, I researched him on the internet and learned that the quote you cited was written in 1891 and he didn't move to Israel until 1922. It would never have occurred to you to learn about him because you wouldn't want to come come across any facts that wouldn't support your completely irrational hostility toward Israel. Even now, if you really doubted my statement you could have googled him and found out if I was correct, but for a bigot like you, facts are the enemy.

 

[Billo_Really]

Again, you show a truly astonishing level of ignorance. They are two different organizations. I don't think I've even met anyone before quite as stupid and ignorant as you are.

Okay, you're right, they are different courts. And neither one has ruled the wall legal.

 

[Billo_Really]

Including the links you provide, you present no facts. For example, you claim the ICC ruled that the buffer zone is not under Israeli jurisdiction and then provide a link that the ICJ made such a ruling and then lie and claim the ICJ and the ICC are the same organization. On top of that you demonstrate how utterly ignorant you are of the all the facts, since the ICJ made no such ruling but offered an advisory opinion on the barrier between Judea and Samaria and pre 1967 Israel and not on the Gaza fence or buffer zone.

The links are the facts. The wall was ruled illegal. And all you can do, is attack people you disagree with.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ Billo_Really, toomuchtime_, et al,

I think there is some confusion here.

lol How stupid can you be. Your link is about the ICJ not the ICC. Your ignorance is truly vast and profound.

So they changed their name from the Criminal Court, to the Criminal Court of Justice. Big deal. It's the same organization.

(COMMENT)

They ARE NOT the same organization, although while at SHAPE, I found many people outside the security services that had similar notions.

• The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the principal judicial organ of the UN.
• The International Criminal Court (ICC) is an independent judicial body and is not part of the UN.​

There is such an agreement as the "Relationship Agreement between the United Nations and the International Criminal Court (ICC)." It is found as the Treaties Series Volume 2283, as Index # 1272, English Text beginning on page 195.

Article 2. Principles

1. The United Nations recognizes the Court as an independent permanent judicial institution which, in accordance with articles I and 4 of the Statute, has international legal personality and such legal capacity as may be necessary for the exercise of its functions and the fulfillment of its purposes.

2. The Court recognizes the responsibilities of the United Nations under the Charter.

3. The United Nations and the Court respect each other's status and mandate.
​

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Slyhunter]

Again, you show a truly astonishing level of ignorance. They are two different organizations. I don't think I've even met anyone before quite as stupid and ignorant as you are.

Okay, you're right, they are different courts. And neither one has ruled the wall legal.

Including the links you provide, you present no facts. For example, you claim the ICC ruled that the buffer zone is not under Israeli jurisdiction and then provide a link that the ICJ made such a ruling and then lie and claim the ICJ and the ICC are the same organization. On top of that you demonstrate how utterly ignorant you are of the all the facts, since the ICJ made no such ruling but offered an advisory opinion on the barrier between Judea and Samaria and pre 1967 Israel and not on the Gaza fence or buffer zone.

The links are the facts. The wall was ruled illegal. And all you can do, is attack people you disagree with.

 

[Slyhunter]

RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ Billo_Really, toomuchtime_, et al,

I think there is some confusion here.

lol How stupid can you be. Your link is about the ICJ not the ICC. Your ignorance is truly vast and profound.

So they changed their name from the Criminal Court, to the Criminal Court of Justice. Big deal. It's the same organization.

(COMMENT)

They ARE NOT the same organization, although while at SHAPE, I found many people outside the security services that had similar notions.

• The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the principal judicial organ of the UN.
• The International Criminal Court (ICC) is an independent judicial body and is not part of the UN.​

There is such an agreement as the "Relationship Agreement between the United Nations and the International Criminal Court (ICC)." It is found as the Treaties Series Volume 2283, as Index # 1272, English Text beginning on page 195.

Article 2. Principles

1. The United Nations recognizes the Court as an independent permanent judicial institution which, in accordance with articles I and 4 of the Statute, has international legal personality and such legal capacity as may be necessary for the exercise of its functions and the fulfillment of its purposes.

2. The Court recognizes the responsibilities of the United Nations under the Charter.

3. The United Nations and the Court respect each other's status and mandate.
​

Most Respectfully,
R

**** any group that is majority Muslim.

 

[Billo_Really]

That's because you are just a dim witted bigot who was interested only in finding a jew who was critical of other Jews, but after your first post on the subject, I researched him on the internet and learned that the quote you cited was written in 1891 and he didn't move to Israel until 1922. It would never have occurred to you to learn about him because you wouldn't want to come come across any facts that wouldn't support your completely irrational hostility toward Israel. Even now, if you really doubted my statement you could have googled him and found out if I was correct, but for a bigot like you, facts are the enemy.

I'm not going to do your own homework for you, you lazy *****. You make the claim, you back it up. And you don't know a flying **** what I am interested in. You're just a piece of shit asshole, who's too ***** to face reality on its own terms. That's why you constantly attack others.

You and that Prince are two peas in a pod. You both walk around like your shit don't stink and you both think you can do whatever the **** you please. I'd like to see you say, the shit you say, in a bar face-to-face.

 

[Slyhunter]

That's because you are just a dim witted bigot who was interested only in finding a jew who was critical of other Jews, but after your first post on the subject, I researched him on the internet and learned that the quote you cited was written in 1891 and he didn't move to Israel until 1922. It would never have occurred to you to learn about him because you wouldn't want to come come across any facts that wouldn't support your completely irrational hostility toward Israel. Even now, if you really doubted my statement you could have googled him and found out if I was correct, but for a bigot like you, facts are the enemy.

I'm not going to do your own homework for you, you lazy *****. You make the claim, you back it up. And you don't know a flying **** what I am interested in. You're just a piece of shit asshole, who's too ***** to face reality on its own terms. That's why you constantly attack others.

You and that Prince are two peas in a pod. You both walk around like your shit don't stink and you both think you can do whatever the **** you please. I'd like to see you say, the shit you say, in a bar face-to-face.

typical liberal can't win with words threaten violence to shut your opponent up.

 

[Billo_Really]

RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ Billo_Really, toomuchtime_, et al,

I think there is some confusion here.

lol How stupid can you be. Your link is about the ICJ not the ICC. Your ignorance is truly vast and profound.

So they changed their name from the Criminal Court, to the Criminal Court of Justice. Big deal. It's the same organization.

(COMMENT)

They ARE NOT the same organization, although while at SHAPE, I found many people outside the security services that had similar notions.

• The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the principal judicial organ of the UN.
• The International Criminal Court (ICC) is an independent judicial body and is not part of the UN.​

There is such an agreement as the "Relationship Agreement between the United Nations and the International Criminal Court (ICC)." It is found as the Treaties Series Volume 2283, as Index # 1272, English Text beginning on page 195.

Article 2. Principles

1. The United Nations recognizes the Court as an independent permanent judicial institution which, in accordance with articles I and 4 of the Statute, has international legal personality and such legal capacity as may be necessary for the exercise of its functions and the fulfillment of its purposes.

2. The Court recognizes the responsibilities of the United Nations under the Charter.

3. The United Nations and the Court respect each other's status and mandate.
​

Most Respectfully,
R

I just admitted that. You need to control your *****! You need to check your boy!

Now that I think about it, maybe you just did. I take back what I said.

 

[Billo_Really]

That's right. And I'm man enough to admit it. How many posters around here would do that?

 

[Billo_Really]

**** any group that is majority Muslim.

Is your real name Stephan Miller?

 

[Billo_Really]

typical liberal can't win with words threaten violence to shut your opponent up.

I won with words and I didn't threaten violence. Not everything ends with people throwing down. I was merely making the point that the things he says here, he wouldn't say to someone face-to-face.

 

[Markle]

What the Pals want is simple, they want freedom. They want an end to the illegal and immoral occupation of Palestinian land by the Israeli's. They want Israel to respect international law and human rights. Human rights, that's something MBS and his Saudi bitches, don't respect.

The Palestinians have bent over backwards trying to appease Israel and all they've gotten in return, is more suffering.

Appease? Is that what you call suicide bombers and rockets?

President Bill Clinton negotiated an agreement between Israel and Yassar Arafat which would have given Palestine 95% of their demands. Arafat walked away. Why?

 

[toomuchtime_]

Including the links you provide, you present no facts. For example, you claim the ICC ruled that the buffer zone is not under Israeli jurisdiction and then provide a link that the ICJ made such a ruling and then lie and claim the ICJ and the ICC are the same organization. On top of that you demonstrate how utterly ignorant you are of the all the facts, since the ICJ made no such ruling but offered an advisory opinion on the barrier between Judea and Samaria and pre 1967 Israel and not on the Gaza fence or buffer zone.

The links are the facts. The wall was ruled illegal. And all you can do, is attack people you disagree with.

It's not a question of disagreeing, you simply have not posted one honest word in this exchange. No ruling was issued by the ICJ or ICC on the Gaza fence or buffer zone. The advisory opinion you are referring to was about the barrier between pre 1967 and Judea and Samaria. The Gaza fence and buffer zone are nowhere near the barrier the ICJ was talking about. Again, you show yourself to be so ignorant tha if you had any personal integrity, you would acknowledge you do not know enough to hold any opinion at all.

 

[toomuchtime_]

That's because you are just a dim witted bigot who was interested only in finding a jew who was critical of other Jews, but after your first post on the subject, I researched him on the internet and learned that the quote you cited was written in 1891 and he didn't move to Israel until 1922. It would never have occurred to you to learn about him because you wouldn't want to come come across any facts that wouldn't support your completely irrational hostility toward Israel. Even now, if you really doubted my statement you could have googled him and found out if I was correct, but for a bigot like you, facts are the enemy.

I'm not going to do your own homework for you, you lazy *****. You make the claim, you back it up. And you don't know a flying **** what I am interested in. You're just a piece of shit asshole, who's too ***** to face reality on its own terms. That's why you constantly attack others.

You and that Prince are two peas in a pod. You both walk around like your shit don't stink and you both think you can do whatever the **** you please. I'd like to see you say, the shit you say, in a bar face-to-face.

I don't constantly attack others, just ignorant bigots like you.

 

[toomuchtime_]

RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ Billo_Really, toomuchtime_, et al,

I think there is some confusion here.

lol How stupid can you be. Your link is about the ICJ not the ICC. Your ignorance is truly vast and profound.

So they changed their name from the Criminal Court, to the Criminal Court of Justice. Big deal. It's the same organization.

(COMMENT)

They ARE NOT the same organization, although while at SHAPE, I found many people outside the security services that had similar notions.

• The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the principal judicial organ of the UN.
• The International Criminal Court (ICC) is an independent judicial body and is not part of the UN.​

There is such an agreement as the "Relationship Agreement between the United Nations and the International Criminal Court (ICC)." It is found as the Treaties Series Volume 2283, as Index # 1272, English Text beginning on page 195.

Article 2. Principles

1. The United Nations recognizes the Court as an independent permanent judicial institution which, in accordance with articles I and 4 of the Statute, has international legal personality and such legal capacity as may be necessary for the exercise of its functions and the fulfillment of its purposes.

2. The Court recognizes the responsibilities of the United Nations under the Charter.

3. The United Nations and the Court respect each other's status and mandate.
​

Most Respectfully,
R

I just admitted that. You need to control your *****! You need to check your boy!

Now that I think about it, maybe you just did. I take back what I said.

lol You just admitted what? You just said the ICJ is the same organization as the ICC.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ Billo_Really, et al,

Again, you are confused. Unlike a Judgment, Advisory opinions are not necessarily the last word.

Including the links you provide, you present no facts. For example, you claim the ICC ruled that the buffer zone is not under Israeli jurisdiction and then provide a link that the ICJ made such a ruling and then lie and claim the ICJ and the ICC are the same organization. On top of that you demonstrate how utterly ignorant you are of the all the facts, since the ICJ made no such ruling but offered an advisory opinion on the barrier between Judea and Samaria and pre 1967 Israel and not on the Gaza fence or buffer zone.

The links are the facts. The wall was ruled illegal. And all you can do, is attack people you disagree with.

(COMMENT)

There are three things you need to know when you are talking about the Advisory Opinion:

Are decisions of the Court binding?

Judgments delivered by the Court (or by one of its Chambers) in disputes between States are binding upon the parties concerned. Article 94 of the United Nations Charter lays down that "each Member of the United Nations undertakes to comply with the decision of [the Court] in any case to which it is a party".

Judgments are final and without appeal. If either of the parties challenges their scope or meaning, it has the option to request an interpretation. In the event of the discovery of a fact hitherto unknown to the Court which might be a decisive factor, either party may apply for revision of the judgment.

As regards advisory opinions, it is usually for the United Nations organs and specialized agencies requesting them to give effect to them or not by whatever means are appropriate for them.​

EXCERPT from EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

7. The request does not ask or require the ICJ to pronounce itself on Israel/Palestine boundaries. In order to answer the question the ICJ needs only to take account of the fact that the Wall is being built by Israel in the OPT, including in and around East Jerusalem, beyond the Armistice Line of 1949 (the “Green Line”). The essential facts are simple: wherever the precise boundaries of the OPT lie, there is no doubt that the greater part of the Wall has been built by Israel well inside occupied Palestinian territory. The facts upon which the ICJ can rely in responding to the Request are of public record and are well-documented, including in United Nations reports.​

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Slyhunter]

typical liberal can't win with words threaten violence to shut your opponent up.

I won with words and I didn't threaten violence. Not everything ends with people throwing down. I was merely making the point that the things he says here, he wouldn't say to someone face-to-face.

Last time I said something, in a public forum online, anti-muslim someone went to my boss about it and got me fired for it. I live in a right to work state, can't sue em for doing it.

 

[Billo_Really]

Appease? Is that what you call suicide bombers and rockets?

President Bill Clinton negotiated an agreement between Israel and Yassar Arafat which would have given Palestine 95% of their demands. Arafat walked away. Why?

Because it wasn't a fair agreement.

You need to realize, the bombers and rockets are in response to Israeli aggression. They are defending themselves with the only things they have. Israel is the most militarized country on earth and is constantly launching missiles, drone strikes and shooting at everything that moves. Yet you never talk about that.