CDZ What's Your Brexit Hedge?

[Tehon]

. Britain is the strongest supporter of Israel in the EU and the principle conduit for US insistence on unqualified backing for the Jewish state despite its violations of law and human rights,

What laws and human rights are they violating, and why no ICJ court cases against them? They're the most watched, reported, and observed country in the region, so there should be thousands of cases brought to the ICJ. Why aren't there?

Brexit by itself won't tip the canoe but everything from support for BDS to outright anti-Semitism will get a boost if Britain pulls out and a real jump start if the Union breaks up,

The British press is the most anti-semitic press in Europe, so this is doubtful.

What laws and human rights are they violating, and why no ICJ court cases against them? They're the most watched, reported, and observed country in the region, so there should be thousands of cases brought to the ICJ. Why aren't there?

The reason is that the ICJ is not a criminal court. It has no jurisdiction over Israel's crimes against humanity.

 

[D Truth]

Nobody knows what the outcome will be or for that matter what the knock on effects of even having a vote on the subject of EU membership except that a precedent will be set for other countries to have referendums on the same subject or about staying in the Euro Zone. That last part could happen as soon as later this summer. Italy, Spain and Greece are taxiing down that runway on their own. So, massive uncertainty in probably ahead.

Do you need a hedge or do you already have one?

If I were to bet, Brexit will fail. GB is a nation that has been hellbent on genocide of it's own citizens for centuries as it were. No reason for them to stop now
.
The British have always been "black and tan" supremacist.

Now if Poland follows up... then there might be hope for the European people. France, Ger-money, Sweden are cuck full of genocidal programs... Poland, Hungary, the Czecks.... those are the people who are not bowing down to voluntary genocide. A Hillary government will no doubt push to bomb those nations like they did the serbs... Interesting considering the serbs were only fighting against the same mudslime invasion we are aware of now.

I feel bad for every pollack joke I have ever laughed at... those people have got their shit together, and they always did. Trying to learn Polish language myself.

The Polish government is not fucking around. They are obviously not trying to replace their citizens with third world hordes. They are a tremendous place to do business with. They do not tolerate degenerative commist bullshit, they were forced to try it... it was absolutely rejected. Having learned the lessons of centuries of slavery... The Polish are my hedge. Hussaria!!!!

Always outnumbered... always win.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Go on then. Lets see what you have got.

 

[Indofred]

OUT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION UK ................ GET OUT NOW!

That is the sensible vote.

All the racist shit and scare tactics about Britain losing trade with Europe is just fog, the real issue is easier to consider, Does Europe work?

In short - NO

The EU has NEVER been able to get its financial records signed off - something that would see company execs in court for, but they carry on anyway.

The EU has NEVER been able to complete a single project on time and on budget - Not one, ever.

The EU takes from Britain whilst claiming it gives to Britain. It does give, but only a small percentage of what it takes.

The EU created a false currency, all based on member states' previous currency reaching equity, a clear lie that has led to an amazingly corrupt Euro that has little to prop it up.

The EU wants the UK to pass its gold supply to Europe and become part of the Euro, something that would immediately disadvantage the UK as it would get a lower value note in exchange for each Pound exchanged.

The EU wants the UK to be part of a joint military force, putting Europe before the UK in the event of war.

The Spanish have been very clear they will try a land grab on Gib if the UK votes to exit - Friends? Not really.

The French have been very clear they will do whatever they can to block trade with the UK if Britain leaves, more friends? NOT.

The basics in this are really easy to sort out.
Europe simply doesn't work.

That means an exit vote is the only sensible option.

 

[Indofred]

The British have always been "black and tan" supremacist.

Ah, the American funded IRA terrorist groups.
Hardly Britain.

 

[Picaro]

Go on then. Lets see what you have got.

Go on then and start yet another thread on da evul Jooos n Stuff instead of derailing this thread, of which you have had nothing to add.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Meanwhile back on Planet Normal the British people will vote for jobs and security and reject nationalistic shite.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Go on then. Lets see what you have got.

Go on then and start yet another thread on da evul Jooos n Stuff instead of derailing this thread, of which you have had nothing to add.

You brought the subject up by making a false claim. You are making yourself look silly now.

 

[Picaro]

. Britain is the strongest supporter of Israel in the EU and the principle conduit for US insistence on unqualified backing for the Jewish state despite its violations of law and human rights,

What laws and human rights are they violating, and why no ICJ court cases against them? They're the most watched, reported, and observed country in the region, so there should be thousands of cases brought to the ICJ. Why aren't there?

Brexit by itself won't tip the canoe but everything from support for BDS to outright anti-Semitism will get a boost if Britain pulls out and a real jump start if the Union breaks up,

The British press is the most anti-semitic press in Europe, so this is doubtful.

What laws and human rights are they violating, and why no ICJ court cases against them? They're the most watched, reported, and observed country in the region, so there should be thousands of cases brought to the ICJ. Why aren't there?

The reason is that the ICJ is not a criminal court. It has no jurisdiction over Israel's crimes against humanity.

Actually it is a criminal court and it does have jurisdiction if it so chooses to exert it; enforcement is another issue. They choose not to because no valid cases can be brought against Israel, an they know it. The UN isn't a credible institution, and it's 'Resolutions' mean nothing, they aren't laws, and because a majority of its members are just vermin representing dictatorships and organized crime syndicates.

 

[Picaro]

Go on then. Lets see what you have got.

Go on then and start yet another thread on da evul Jooos n Stuff instead of derailing this thread, of which you have had nothing to add.

You brought the subject up by making a false claim. You are making yourself look silly now.

So you're afraid to start a topic on it. No surprise, as you have nothing, as usual.

 

[Picaro]

That's the plan.

Do you see any major problems with the effects it might have on Ireland's economy? They're now competing with the UK and the Commonwealth as a tax haven and banking shelter. I don't know where Ireland's politics stand on the EU or the UK's voting on the issue.

Just because I can't see any doesn't mean anything in this context. Gadfly on Bloomberg reports the city is placing big bets to change bookmaking odds which helps move the market. There are also claims of polling numbers being gamed in order for small fry to try and shift the markets for their retirement accounts and give themselves a better chance to win at their bookie's. Ireland is probably also gaming the situation to maximize its own returns.

Small country, so not a lot of futures options being written on their currency anyway. The low to negative interest rates in the EU are of most interest for those who buy and/or spend in EU countries, same as in the U.S., and trying to guess which will get stronger and hurt borrowers is the game, which is why I don't see any major volatility worth the gamble, other than the usual short term stuff Like Hough did. The EU VAT tax on commodities is part of that dampening; it's high enough to make short term speculation unprofitable for those outside the EU to make anything.

 

[Tehon]

. Britain is the strongest supporter of Israel in the EU and the principle conduit for US insistence on unqualified backing for the Jewish state despite its violations of law and human rights,

What laws and human rights are they violating, and why no ICJ court cases against them? They're the most watched, reported, and observed country in the region, so there should be thousands of cases brought to the ICJ. Why aren't there?

Brexit by itself won't tip the canoe but everything from support for BDS to outright anti-Semitism will get a boost if Britain pulls out and a real jump start if the Union breaks up,

The British press is the most anti-semitic press in Europe, so this is doubtful.

What laws and human rights are they violating, and why no ICJ court cases against them? They're the most watched, reported, and observed country in the region, so there should be thousands of cases brought to the ICJ. Why aren't there?

The reason is that the ICJ is not a criminal court. It has no jurisdiction over Israel's crimes against humanity.

Actually it is a criminal court and it does have jurisdiction if it so chooses to exert it; enforcement is another issue. They choose not to because no valid cases can be brought against Israel, an they know it. The UN isn't a credible institution, and it's 'Resolutions' mean nothing, they aren't laws, and because a majority of its members are just vermin representing dictatorships and organized crime syndicates.

No, you are wrong. The reason cases involving Israel's crimes against humanity aren't taken to the ICJ is because that court can't hear them and has nothing to do with the validity of such cases. Sorry but you are going to have to find a new alibi to sooth your guilty conscience.

The International Court of Justice has no jurisdiction to try individuals accused of war crimes or crimes against humanity. As it is not a criminal court, it does not have a prosecutor able to initiate proceedings.
Frequently Asked Questions | International Court of Justice

 

[Picaro]

. Britain is the strongest supporter of Israel in the EU and the principle conduit for US insistence on unqualified backing for the Jewish state despite its violations of law and human rights,

What laws and human rights are they violating, and why no ICJ court cases against them? They're the most watched, reported, and observed country in the region, so there should be thousands of cases brought to the ICJ. Why aren't there?

Brexit by itself won't tip the canoe but everything from support for BDS to outright anti-Semitism will get a boost if Britain pulls out and a real jump start if the Union breaks up,

The British press is the most anti-semitic press in Europe, so this is doubtful.

What laws and human rights are they violating, and why no ICJ court cases against them? They're the most watched, reported, and observed country in the region, so there should be thousands of cases brought to the ICJ. Why aren't there?

The reason is that the ICJ is not a criminal court. It has no jurisdiction over Israel's crimes against humanity.

Actually it is a criminal court and it does have jurisdiction if it so chooses to exert it; enforcement is another issue. They choose not to because no valid cases can be brought against Israel, an they know it. The UN isn't a credible institution, and it's 'Resolutions' mean nothing, they aren't laws, and because a majority of its members are just vermin representing dictatorships and organized crime syndicates.

No, you are wrong. The reason cases involving Israel's crimes against humanity aren't taken to the ICJ is because that court can't hear them and has nothing to do with the validity of such cases. Sorry but you are going to have to find a new alibi to sooth your guilty conscience.

The International Court of Justice has no jurisdiction to try individuals accused of war crimes or crimes against humanity. As it is not a criminal court, it does not have a prosecutor able to initiate proceedings.
Frequently Asked Questions | International Court of Justice

I don't have a 'guilty conscience', that's just projection by those who have some sort of Joooos Fetish. The ICJ can handle all those cases, and make rulings, and as I said enforcement is a different issue, but there is nothing to prevent anybody from filing cases and having them ruled on. they don't, because they have nothing to file on and they know it, it's just propaganda and antisemitic gibberish.

You and Tommy can start a thread on it. Tommy of course is just a troll and of no interest.

 

[Tehon]

. Britain is the strongest supporter of Israel in the EU and the principle conduit for US insistence on unqualified backing for the Jewish state despite its violations of law and human rights,

What laws and human rights are they violating, and why no ICJ court cases against them? They're the most watched, reported, and observed country in the region, so there should be thousands of cases brought to the ICJ. Why aren't there?

Brexit by itself won't tip the canoe but everything from support for BDS to outright anti-Semitism will get a boost if Britain pulls out and a real jump start if the Union breaks up,

The British press is the most anti-semitic press in Europe, so this is doubtful.

What laws and human rights are they violating, and why no ICJ court cases against them? They're the most watched, reported, and observed country in the region, so there should be thousands of cases brought to the ICJ. Why aren't there?

The reason is that the ICJ is not a criminal court. It has no jurisdiction over Israel's crimes against humanity.

Actually it is a criminal court and it does have jurisdiction if it so chooses to exert it; enforcement is another issue. They choose not to because no valid cases can be brought against Israel, an they know it. The UN isn't a credible institution, and it's 'Resolutions' mean nothing, they aren't laws, and because a majority of its members are just vermin representing dictatorships and organized crime syndicates.

No, you are wrong. The reason cases involving Israel's crimes against humanity aren't taken to the ICJ is because that court can't hear them and has nothing to do with the validity of such cases. Sorry but you are going to have to find a new alibi to sooth your guilty conscience.

The International Court of Justice has no jurisdiction to try individuals accused of war crimes or crimes against humanity. As it is not a criminal court, it does not have a prosecutor able to initiate proceedings.
Frequently Asked Questions | International Court of Justice

I don't have a 'guilty conscience', that's just projection by those who have some sort of Joooos Fetish. The ICJ can handle all those cases, and make rulings, and as I said enforcement is a different issue, but there is nothing to prevent anybody from filing cases and having them ruled on. they don't, because they have nothing to file on and they know it, it's just propaganda and antisemitic gibberish.

You and Tommy can start a thread on it. Tommy of course is just a troll and of no interest.

Just because you keep repeating it doesn't make it true Dorothy.

The International Court of Justice has no jurisdiction to try individuals accused of war crimes or crimes against humanity. As it is not a criminal court, it does not have a prosecutor able to initiate proceedings.
Frequently Asked Questions | International Court of Justice

 

[Fishlore]

What laws and human rights are they violating, and why no ICJ court cases against them? They're the most watched, reported, and observed country in the region, so there should be thousands of cases brought to the ICJ. Why aren't there?

The British press is the most anti-semitic press in Europe, so this is doubtful.

What laws and human rights are they violating, and why no ICJ court cases against them? They're the most watched, reported, and observed country in the region, so there should be thousands of cases brought to the ICJ. Why aren't there?

The reason is that the ICJ is not a criminal court. It has no jurisdiction over Israel's crimes against humanity.

Actually it is a criminal court and it does have jurisdiction if it so chooses to exert it; enforcement is another issue. They choose not to because no valid cases can be brought against Israel, an they know it. The UN isn't a credible institution, and it's 'Resolutions' mean nothing, they aren't laws, and because a majority of its members are just vermin representing dictatorships and organized crime syndicates.

No, you are wrong. The reason cases involving Israel's crimes against humanity aren't taken to the ICJ is because that court can't hear them and has nothing to do with the validity of such cases. Sorry but you are going to have to find a new alibi to sooth your guilty conscience.

The International Court of Justice has no jurisdiction to try individuals accused of war crimes or crimes against humanity. As it is not a criminal court, it does not have a prosecutor able to initiate proceedings.
Frequently Asked Questions | International Court of Justice

I don't have a 'guilty conscience', that's just projection by those who have some sort of Joooos Fetish. The ICJ can handle all those cases, and make rulings, and as I said enforcement is a different issue, but there is nothing to prevent anybody from filing cases and having them ruled on. they don't, because they have nothing to file on and they know it, it's just propaganda and antisemitic gibberish.

You and Tommy can start a thread on it. Tommy of course is just a troll and of no interest.

Just because you keep repeating it doesn't make it true Dorothy.

The International Court of Justice has no jurisdiction to try individuals accused of war crimes or crimes against humanity. As it is not a criminal court, it does not have a prosecutor able to initiate proceedings.
Frequently Asked Questions | International Court of Justice

The statement about ICJ is correct; however, it does not tell the whole story about possible prosecution of Israeli officials for crimes against Palestinians. UN rules and procedure allow for the creation of ad hoc courts to try such crimes. The most famous example is the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia or ICTY.

These courts are established by resolution of the UN Security Council. ICTY heard charges of breaches of the Geneva Conventions, violations of the laws or customs of war, genocide and crimes against humanity.

The politics of the establishing resolution make it far more likely that should the SC be prevented by nothing more than a US veto, the US would broker an agreement by Israel in return, i.e. a plea deal. Such an arrangement would require assent by other SC members and the Palestinian Authority. It would, in fact, be the "peace process" the US has been blathering about for fifty years.

 

[Picaro]

Rather than bother with the propaganda above, the ICJ hears cases of criminality, and has since its inception, contrary to the claims above, between countries and peoples. The reason no cases have been brought against Israel is because they haven't violated any, it's that simple.

For instance:

List of All Cases | International Court of Justice

• Application for Revision of the Judgment of 11 July 1996 in the Case concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Yugoslavia), Preliminary Objections (Yugoslavia v. Bosnia and Herzegovina)
  
  
  More...

• 
  2000
• Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Belgium)
  
  
  More...

• 
  1999
• Territorial and Maritime Dispute between Nicaragua and Honduras in the Caribbean Sea (Nicaragua v. Honduras)
  
  
  More...
• Aerial Incident of 10 August 1999 (Pakistan v. India)
  
  
  More...
• Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Croatia v. Serbia)
  
  
  More...
• Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Rwanda)
  
  
  More...
• Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda)
  
  
  More...
• Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Burundi)
  
  
  More...
• Legality of Use of Force (Yugoslavia v. United States of America)
  
  
  More...
• Legality of Use of Force (Serbia and Montenegro v. United Kingdom)
  
  
  More...
• Legality of Use of Force (Yugoslavia v. Spain)
  
  
  More...
• Legality of Use of Force (Serbia and Montenegro v. Portugal)
  
  
  More...
• Legality of Use of Force (Serbia and Montenegro v. Netherlands)
  
  
  More...
• Legality of Use of Force (Serbia and Montenegro v. Italy)
  
  
  More...
• Legality of Use of Force (Serbia and Montenegro v. Germany)
  
  
  More...
• Legality of Use of Force (Serbia and Montenegro v. France)
  
  
  More...
• Legality of Use of Force (Serbia and Montenegro v. Canada)
  
  
  More...
• Legality of Use of Force (Serbia and Montenegro v. Belgium)
  
  
  More...
• LaGrand (Germany v. United States of America)
  
  
  More...

... and more. All kinds of cases involving violations of 'international law'. It just annoys antisemites that Israel exists, that's all. How many 'Resolutions' does the UN ever pass on Israel's 'neighbors', or genocidal gangsters like the current freely elected murderers in Gaza or the PA territories? It's ridiculous nonsense the ICJ can't rule on those disputes; they can, yet nobody ever brings such a case before them.

And it is also why Tommy and the rest are terrified of starting a thread on it. lol

 

[skye]

 

[Picaro]

Is the voting over yet? I haven't checked.

 

[skye]

Is the voting over yet? I haven't checked.

still voting....I think...


ok


polls closing now...


counting under way...

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Brexit isn't going to pass.