BS: Caliphate

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Musket
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 04:46 AM

The issue here isn't about discussing Isis and their interpretation of a Caliphate, but the idea of a Caliphate itself.

Most of the cultural, scientific and community development of the past thousand years has been through caliphates. Whilst democracy and holding to account is the predominant form of government and is to be encouraged in my view, a caliphate in itself is not about FGM, oppression of groups of people or adherence to any form of superstition.

Some of our less talented fools here seem to put forward the idea a caliphate is a form of fundamental Islamic rule. Perhaps the idea of a caliphate offends their particular superstition?

The bastardisation of the caliphate form of government is awful, but some here need to distinguish between caliphates and Islamic formed oppression. It's a bit like Israel using superstition of most of its population as an excuse to oppress neighbours and claim land contrary to International law.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 04:51 AM

Jim, I agree that a church is just a building.
It is always sad when any ancient building, church or not, is wantonly destroyed.
The destruction of the churches and mosques is also a part of the genocide of the Christian community and the brutal persecution of the Shia that is going on.
The death toll is horrifyingly worse than Gaza, as it is in Syria.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 05:36 AM

"It is always sad when any ancient building, church or not, is wantonly destroyed."
Far sadder when human beings are massacred - you have condoned and supported that and are still doing so.
"genocide of the Christian community"
You have supported the ethnic cleansing of itinerants and are suprting the genocide tat is going on in Gaza at present.
Taking sides in which genocide to support and which to oppose - is that a 'Christian ethic?'
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 05:55 AM

Some of our less talented fools here seem to put forward the idea a caliphate is a form of fundamental Islamic rule.

This caliphate unashamedly is Musket.

Far sadder when human beings are massacred - you have condoned and supported that and are still doing so.
It is sadder, and it is a lie that I have condoned such things.

You have supported the ethnic cleansing of itinerants

Another lie. Why do you always make up shit about me?

and are suprting the genocide tat is going on in Gaza at present.

There is no genocide in Gaza.
Find me anyone else but you and your mates who make such a moronic claim.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 06:28 AM

"There is no genocide in Gaza."
How many deaths of one particular group of people does it have to be to count as gencocide?
Noam Chomski - that well known "Anti-Semite" has used the term, as have numerous other Jews, in reference to Israeli policy
Chomski also refers to Israeli policy as ethnic cleansing
Jim Carroll

Statement from someone other than "me and my mates"

Israel's Crimes against Palestinians: War Crimes, Crimes Against Humanity, Genocide
by Francis A. Boyle

(The author served as Legal Adviser to the Palestinian Delegation to the Middle East peace Negotiations from 1991 to 1993. The viewpoints expressed here are his own.)

The International Laws of Belligerent Occupation
Belligerent occupation is governed by The Hague Regulations of 1907, as well as by the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, and the customary laws of belligerent occupation. Security Council Resolution 1322 (2000), paragraph 3 continued: "Calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by its legal obligations and its responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in a Time of War of 12 August 1949;..." Again, the Security Council vote was 14 to 0, becoming obligatory international law.
The Fourth Geneva Convention applies to the West Bank, to the Gaza Strip, and to the entire City of Jerusalem, in order to protect the Palestinians living there. The Palestinian People living in this Palestinian Land are "protected persons" within the meaning of the Fourth Geneva Convention. All of their rights are sacred under international law.
There are 149 substantive articles of the Fourth Geneva Convention that protect the rights of every one of these Palestinians living in occupied Palestine. The Israeli Government is currently violating, and has since 1967 been violating, almost each and every one of these sacred rights of the Palestinian People recognized by the Fourth Geneva Convention. Indeed, violations of the Fourth Geneva Convention are war crimes.
So this is not a symmetrical situation. As matters of fact and of law, the gross and repeated violations of Palestinian rights by the Israeli army and Israeli settlers living illegally in occupied Palestine constitute war crimes. Conversely, the Palestinian People are defending Themselves and their Land and their Homes against Israeli war crimes and Israeli war criminals, both military and civilian.

The U.N. Human Rights Commission
Indeed, it is far more serious than that. On 19 October 2000 a Special Session of the U.N. Commission on Human Rights adopted a Resolution set forth in U.N. Document E/CN.4/S-5/L.2/Rev. 1, "Condemning the provocative visit to Al-Haram Al-Sharif on 28 September 2000 by Ariel Sharon, the Likud party leader, which triggered the tragic events that followed in occupied East Jerusalem and the other occupied Palestinian territories, resulting in a high number of deaths and injuries among Palestinian civilians." The U.N. Human Rights Commission then said it was "[g]ravely concerned" about several different types of atrocities inflicted by Israel upon the Palestinian People, which it denominated "war crimes, flagrant violations of international humanitarian law and crimes against humanity."
In operative paragraph 1 of its 19 October 2000 Resolution, the U.N. Human Rights Commission then: "Strongly condemns the disproportionate and indiscriminate use of force in violation of international humanitarian law by the Israeli occupying Power against innocent and unarmed Palestinian civilians...including many children, in the occupied territories, which constitutes a war crime and a crime against humanity;..." And in paragraph 5 of its 19 October 2000 Resolution, the U.N. Human Rights Commission: "Also affirms that the deliberate and systematic killing of civilians and children by the Israeli occupying authorities constitutes a flagrant and grave violation of the right to life and also constitutes a crime against humanity;..." Article 68 of the United Nations Charter had expressly required the U.N.'s Economic and Social Council to "set up" this Commission "for the promotion of human rights."

Israel's War Crimes against Palestinians
We all have a general idea of what a war crime is, so I am not going to elaborate upon that term here. But there are different degrees of heinousness for war crimes. In particular are the more serious war crimes denominated "grave breaches" of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Since the start of the Al Aqsa Intifada, the world has seen those inflicted every day by Israel against the Palestinian People living in occupied Palestine: e.g., willful killing of Palestinian civilians by the Israeli army and Israel's illegal paramilitary settlers. These Israeli "grave breaches" of the Fourth Geneva Convention mandate universal prosecution for their perpetrators, whether military or civilian, as well as prosecution for their commanders, whether military or civilian, including Israel's political leaders.

Israel's Crimes Against Humanity against Palestinians
But I want to focus for a moment on Israel's "crime against humanity" against the Palestinian People -- as determined by the U.N. Human Rights Commission itself, set up pursuant to the requirements of the United Nations Charter. What is a "crime against humanity"? This concept goes all the way back to the Nuremberg Charter of 1945 for the trial of the major Nazi war criminals. And in the Nuremberg Charter of 1945, drafted by the United States Government, there was created and inserted a new type of international crime specifically intended to deal with the Nazi persecution of the Jewish People.
The paradigmatic example of a "crime against humanity" is what Hitler and the Nazis did to the Jewish People. This is where the concept of crime against humanity came from. And this is what the U.N. Human Rights Commission determined that Israel is currently doing to the Palestinian People: Crimes against humanity. Legally, just like what Hitler and the Nazis did to the Jews.

The Precursor to Genocide
Moreover, a crime against humanity is the direct historical and legal precursor to the international crime of genocide as defined by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. The theory here was that what Hitler and the Nazis did to the Jewish People required a special international treaty that would codify and universalize the Nuremberg concept of "crime against humanity." And that treaty ultimately became the 1948 Genocide Convention.
In fairness, you will note that the U.N. Human Rights Commission did not go so far as to condemn Israel for committing genocide against the Palestinian People. But it has condemned Israel for committing crimes against humanity, which is the direct precursor to genocide. And I submit that if something is not done quite soon by the American People and the International Community to stop Israeli war crimes and crimes against humanity against the Palestinian People, it could very well degenerate into genocide, if Israel is not there already. And in this regard, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is what international lawyers call a genocidaire--one who has already committed genocide in the past.

Mr. Francis A. Boyle is a Professor in International Law.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 06:51 AM

In 2005, the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (now Fundamental Rights Agency), published a working definition of antisemitism,
.,,.,.

The above, which I have cited before, comes from Wikipedia, where this definition can be found. It is generally taken to be a reasonable statement of the case as to what, by agreement, constitutes antisemitism; and I think it is incontrovertible that there are several repetitive posters on this forum, and on this thread, who demonstrably fall foul of it. If they then feel aggrieved at being denounced as 'antisemitic' by Bruce, or by Bobad, (or by me for that matter; tho I have rather given up on contributing to threads like this, becoz, as I have mentioned before, heads against brick walls or pulling out of beard can be more constructive & satisfying), then they will do better to take the matter up with the Fundamental Rights Agency named above, than to keep arguing that we are making false accusations against them as some sort of unworthy defensive measure.

I say again, in the Words of Shaw's character: THEY ARE ANTISEMITIC [WITHIN DEFINITION CITED ABOVE]; THEY THINK THEY AREN'T, BUT THEY ARE.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Musket
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 07:00 AM

Who are you quoting when you say "ethnic cleansing of itinerants?"

Its just that it reads as if I said that?

If I did, I am more astute than I thought. That said, all my complaining over Keith's attitude is valid and based entirely on his posts. I wish to debate, hence I am on these threads in the first place. It isn't possible when people post outrageous views then attack anybody who questions them.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 07:29 AM

Stop hiding behind bits of paper Mike
The logic of your argument is that if Israel set up gas chambers and herded the Palestinian people into them it would be "Anti-Semitic" to compare them to the Nazis - give us a break!
Let Israel be judged by its actions, not by committee rules.
I have little doubt that anybody dreamed that Israel would ever sink to the depths they now have - I certainly didn't.
Why not address the criticisms Einstein, Chomski, and the Mossad people made rather than creating no-go areas in Israel's defence - or do you, as Booboo, consider them all Antisemitic?
A little Canutish to try and hold back the inevitable comparison.
"ethnic cleansing of itinerants?"
Can't remember exactly who said it, but it came up in relation to the Prawer plan and its two attempts to move Beduoins onto a toxic rubbish site
A quick shuufti pulls up these
Jim Caroll
GLOBAL RESEARCH

SIR BOB RUSSELL



Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: bobad
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 07:43 AM

Globalresearch.ca (also under the domain name globalresearch.org) may best be described as the moonbat equivalent to WorldNetDaily. It is the website of the Montreal-based non-profit The Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG) founded by Michel Chossudovsky.

Despite presenting itself as a source of scholarly analysis, Globalresearch.ca mostly consists of polemics many of which accept (and use) conspiracy theories, pseudoscience and propaganda. The prevalent conspiracist strand relates to global power-elites (primarily governments and corporations) and their New World Order.[1] Specific featured conspiracy theories include those addressing 9/11,[2] vaccines,[3] genetic modification,[4] Zionism,[5][6] HAARP,[7] global warming,[8][9] and David Kelly.[10] Analyses of these issues tend follow the lines of the site's political biases.

Apparently, contributors to Globalresearch.ca consider information sourced from anyone who seems aligned to their ideology as reliable; during the 2011 Libyan civil war the site was an apologist for Muammar al-Gaddafi,[11] reproducing his propaganda and painting him as a paragon of a modern leader. In the 2014 Ukrainian crisis the site is taking the standard "anti-globalisation" stance against the Western side and falling into the ranks of imperial Russian propaganda instead.

It's no surprise then that the site has long become a magnet for radicals, fringe figures and whacko elements from the left in general. And ironically, it has more in common with its writers' enemies and wingnut rivals than they would ever admit.

Rational Wiki

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 08:20 AM

OK Jim.
You could find no-one else claiming genocide then.

Musket,
people post outrageous views

I have never posted one, and you will never quote one because it is just more made up Musket balls.

Will you prove me wrong this time?
No.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 08:29 AM

And Sir Bob an Nazi supporter no doubt?
The term ethnic cleansing is now being applied to Israel's Bedouin policy widely, within and without Israel - Google it.
It refers to the rubbish dump plan as well as the use of chemical sprays and high powered hoses to drive Bedouins from their homes to make room for settlers.
It's just been announced that the death toll now totals 980 Palestinians and 38 Israelis, and likely to rise.
An Israeli tank attack on an occupied home left 16 dead in one family - Hamas under the bed, no doubt!
Whole townships have been leveled and the survivors are using the cease fire to search for possible survivors and bodies.
Has any of you defenders of the faith come up with a figure on your sliding scales before this can be referred to as genocide rather than simple mass murder.
Murderous thugs - no less!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Musket
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 09:12 AM

Well considering you deny that The UN do not see Israeli aggression as legitimate, you seem to fit the description "outrageous" so far as I can see.

Linking your lies about The UN to saying that bombing children, hospitals, schools etc is legitimate just compounds your sickness.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: bobad
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 10:01 AM

It would appear that Musket has a "thing" for the Caliphate just as he has a "thing" for Hamas. Why am I not surprised?

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 10:15 AM

Well considering you deny that The UN do not see Israeli aggression as legitimate, you seem to fit the description "outrageous" so far as I can see.

Musket dear, international law allows a nation to intervene over a border in self defence.
I know that you do not believe that, and it is amusing how you posture and declaim your lack of knowledge on this.

I have tried to educate you, but your little mind is closed as well as ignorant.

Keep stating what most people will know to be completely wrong, and we can all continue to laugh at the posturing fool.

Linking your lies about The UN to saying that bombing children, hospitals, schools etc is legitimate just compounds your sickness

I have not lied, I have stated facts.
International law says that, with provisos, legitimate targets may be engaged even if civilian damage and casualties are likely or inevitable.
The crime is in siting those targets near civilian homes and facilities.

Again your ignorance and inability to understand is profound, but very funny.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 10:53 AM

"I have tried to educate you, but your little mind is closed as well as ignorant."
Arrogant bullshit to cover the fact that you have no real defence for the genocide that is taking place other than to support it, which is exactly what you are doing
You have the death toll and the deliberate massacre of an entire family - justfy that one
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 11:04 AM

Not arrogant bullshit but facts.
You two are just incapable of understanding.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 01:42 PM

"You two are just incapable of understanding."
Comes from not being "infallible" eh?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Mrrzy
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 02:06 PM

Well, it was *supposed* to be about the Caliphate. Now it seems to be an object lesson.

It was already Thursday, but His Lordship's artificial limb could not be found.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 02:08 PM

The Israelophobes are driven to hijack threads, any threads, to attack Israel.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: bobad
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 02:29 PM

175,000 and counting - Oh yawn........no "Palestine" hashtag!


http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/Middle-East/85-Syria-troops-killed-in-jihadist-takeover-Monitor/articleshow/39052684.cms

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 02:38 PM

Stop hiding behind bits of paper Mike
The logic of your argument is that if Israel set up gas chambers and herded the Palestinian people into them it would be "Anti-Semitic" to compare them to the Nazis - give us a break!
.,,.

Constantly astounded at the rubbish one of Jim's apparent intelligence can keep on unblushingly coming out with. Time for him to "give us all a break".

Re pt 1: Hardly 'hiding behind a piece of paper' to cite the findings of an official committee set up by a recognised international body for the express purpose of establishing a definition of the topic immediately under consideration.

Pt2 - Let me know when they do, Jim; and I will stop thinking you 'antisemitic' in going on as if they already have -- which, just as a matter of fact, they haven't, you know; or anything remotely approaching it; and only a hostilely motivated fool could even suggest such a contingency. Honestly don't know what in hell you are on about —

-- & don't believe you really do either. You do sometimes get a bit carried away by your own rhetorical verbosity, you know, dear old chappie: and almost invariably make the sort of bloody fool of yourself which anyone with half an iota of sense can see you have done here, with that idiotic invented contingency quoted above.

Best regards as ever

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 01:06 AM

BTW ~~ Considering the tedious interminability of the portentous documents you continually see fit to copy/paste here, and appear to expect any human being to plough right thru, I think an accusation of 'hiding behind pieces of paper' somewhat ill becomes you, James!

Regards again

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Musket
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 02:23 AM

Am I dreaming or has Keith repeated yet again that Israel is legitimate in bombing children?

He keeps talking of international law yet The UN keeps reiterating that Israel is an aggressor and has no more right than Hamas.

It is this attitude, when repeated by important people rather than armchair soldiers such as Keith, that make situations worse.

On another thread I referred to the vast number of resolutions and sanctions against Israel. I even quoted from Keith's favourite source Wikipedia.

Pathetic.

In the meantime, Bradford City Council are flying the Palestinian flag outside the city hall. Not everybody is taken in by the fodder Keith loves to read and salivate over.

He says my comments are amusing. His make decent people queasy.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 03:25 AM

"and I will stop thinking you 'antisemitic' in going on as if they already have"
And I will stop regarding you as a cowardly hypocrite when you extend your disapproval of Israel beyond broken camera and fruit trees to take in the deliberate wholesale slaughtering of defenceless human beings - that's a promise.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 03:43 AM

Not much concerned with your opinion of me, Jim: so obviously do not greatly value your 'promise'.

But Happy Birthday to you nevertheless. Enjoy!

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 03:50 AM

"Not much concerned with your opinion of me"
Sadly the feeling is mutual
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 04:08 AM

Still hope enjoyed Poulaphouca, mind...

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 04:40 AM

Am I dreaming or has Keith repeated yet again that Israel is legitimate in bombing children?

You are dreaming.
It is illegal to attack civilians.

He keeps talking of international law yet The UN keeps reiterating that Israel is an aggressor and has no more right than Hamas.

The UN reiterates no such thing, except that General Council resolutions always go against Israel.
You will find no official reiterating such bollocks.

This thread is not about Israel and Gaza BTW.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 04:41 AM

BBC
"Enshrined in Article 51 of the UN Charter, the right of self-defence is accepted as a fundamental principle of international law. While aspects of this principle are disputed, it is universally agreed that a state can defend itself against an armed attack.

There is some debate as to the intensity that an armed attack should reach before a state can lawfully resort to self-defence. Most international lawyers would agree that rockets launched against civilians that disrupt the social life of part of a country constitute an armed attack for the purposes of Article 51"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20415886

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 05:36 AM

There has never been any question of defence other in the minds of those who wish to defend Israel's genocide.
Hopefully, the country who has suffered greatly under political extremism, (which was fully supported by our own dear Mrs T) will give inspiration to others with its announced boycott of all Israeli goods
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 07:42 AM

"Most international lawyers would agree that rockets launched against civilians that disrupt the social life of part of a country constitute an armed attack for the purposes of Article 51"
BBC.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Musket
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 01:26 PM

Ha! Ha HA!!

"The UN reiterates no such thing, except that General Council resolutions always go against Israel."

Eeh. if I were in the pub, I'd be shouting that one at you over the bar every time you'd have the barefaced cheek to show your sad face in there.

Hey Keith! Repeat that one about self defence again? It's about the first time you have said anything in favour of the Palestinian struggle.

I suppose I should stop goading him.   He doesn't have the intelligence to make an argument you could discuss against or even, Clapton forbid, agree with.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 01:51 PM

"The UN reiterates no such thing, except that General Council resolutions always go against Israel."

If that is so funny or wrong, produce an example of UN reiterating that.

You can't because it is bollocks.

I have quoted Ban Ki Moon and other officials on this.
The General assembly always votes against Israel, but that is not the UN position.

You just have no idea about any of this.
Your are indeed an inadequate, posturing buffoon.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Musket
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 03:27 AM

Tell you what I do know, having chaired a few bodies, including government quangos before now.

The position of a body is the resolution of its highest ratifying assembly. In the case of The UN, that would be the general assembly. (Yes, funnily enough I have checked that. Years ago in fact when fishing for WHO funding for a UNHCR project we got involved with.)

So, first you say The UN don't have resolutions against Israel, then you say nobody listens to them (inadvertently a fact) and then you say the position of The UN isn't decided by The UN.

Not much point in carrying on till your medication stabilises. When you said buffoon, for a minute there I thought you meant me. Sorry, you don't have to introduce yourself. Most people on Mudcat seem to know you and where you are coming from...

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 04:34 AM

No one listens to the General Assembly which is dominated by grubby dictatorships each with a vote.
What does Ban Ki Moon say?

It takes a buffoon to pontificate on something they know so little about.
You thought there were UN "sanctions" against Israel.
You thought there were EU "restrictions."
You thought that any civilian death means a war crime is committed.
You did not know that EU, Canada and most democracies recognise Hamas as terrorists and Israel as acting in self defence.
You are an ignorant buffoon.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Musket
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 04:51 AM

Err.. Let's see.

Yes there are.
Yes there are.
Yes, when there is no recognised war, as in this case.
No, they are both seen as aggressors and defending, as diplomacy demands.

Look Keith, I know you are one of those sad old buggers who likes to impress people, pretending to be a soldier and all that. Good luck to you. My mate Pete even went as far as an SAS badge to sew on his blazer. No harm in that.

But you have to know where to stop. You are trying to impress people who actually know what they speak of, and some of us feel embarrassed for you.

Grubby dictatorships with a vote... Let's leave it at that eh? At least you can go out on a silly high note. That's worthy of your pet worm, never mind you.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 04:57 AM

You still have not learned anything then.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 05:19 AM

Take the first one.
UN sanctions against Israel.
What are they Musket?

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Musket
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 06:39 AM

There are 23 pending sanctions through resolutions for The USA to either lift their veto or move to abstention. Obama, according to BBC reports, told Netanyahu over the weekend that they will be implemented if Israel doesn't cease hostilities.

You are purposely muddying the waters by differentiating between sanctions in force and sanctions awaiting enforcement. Oh, by the way, your stupid comment about dictatorships getting resolutions through? Members of the security council have a veto on implementation as The USA demonstrates. The sanction is there, the veto is about implementation. The technical term is "resolve to sanction."

Far right websites don't tell you that bit. You'll have to broaden your reading matter.

Prat.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 07:49 AM

There are no UN sanctions in force.
You stated that there are.

No wonder you sign yourself Prat!

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Teribus
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 09:13 AM

"There are 23 pending sanctions through resolutions for The USA to either lift their veto or move to abstention."

Complete and utter bullsh*t Musket

A resolution is drafted and discussed by the Security Council of the United Nations. A final wording is agreed and a vote is taken. Any of the five permanent members can then veto the resolution and if that happens then that particular resolution is dead in the water - it cannot be "resurrected", there could be no lifting of veto or alteration of position - The phrase "That the council remains seized on or fixed on" relates to the possible drafting of new resolutions on the same subject.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 10:25 AM

http://news.yahoo.com/congressman-genocide-against-christians-going-iraq-white-house-164618191.html


Virginia Republican Rep. Frank Wolf says there is a genocide being perpetrated against the Christians of Iraq and the White House hasn't said a word about it, much less acted to stop it.

The terrorist group the Islamic State, an al Qaida off shoot that has taken over large swaths of Iraq in recent months, told Christians in the Iraqi city of Mosul they had to convert to Islam by July 18 or they would be killed, according to the Economist. The only other option they were given was to leave Mosul, a city which has had a Christian presence for nearly two millennia. So thousands of Christians have now fled the city in fear for their lives.

"It is genocide. It meets the test of genocide," Wolf said Friday on Hugh Hewitt's radio show, which this writer guest hosted. "The definition of genocide was put together by the UN by a guy named Raphael Lemkin. But it is the eradication of a group of people – race, culture, ethnicity, religion. So this meets the official test of genocide."

Asked if President Barack Obama has spoken out against this atrocity, Wolf said he has not.

"No, the president hasn't said anything, the State Department hasn't said anything," he lamented. "Frankly, nobody is saying anything."

Asked what the United States could do about the situation in Mosul, Wolf listed several options.

"There is a lot we can do," he said. "One, the President of the United States can urge the Kurdish government to continue to guard and protect the Christians."

"Secondly, we can give some of the foreign aid that we are already giving, give it to a group like Catholic Relief or World Vision or a group like that, to provide relief – water, food, clothing," he continued. "Thirdly, we can tell the Maliki government to start protecting the Christian sites and the Christian communities. [Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-]Maliki flew out – all the Shia were flown out of Mosul – and they left the Christians there to die."

"And lastly," Wolf concluded, "every person who is listening should call their congressman and their senator and insist that they insist the White House do something."

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 10:43 AM

If genocide is recognised UN is bound to intervene, so it will not be recognised.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 11:00 AM

My congressman Frank Wolf of Virginia was one of the co-sponsors of House Resolution 1765. Frank has been in Congress a long time and he is reported to be the largest recipient of Israel PAC money in the state of Virginia. In his promotional literature Frank brags about what a great family man he is, including pictures of himself with his grandchildren. I wish him and his family no ill, but I would like to make him think of the consequences of how he votes in Congress. Put Frank and his whole family into a burned out shell of a house in Gaza for a few days without food or water, knowing that to stick their heads out invites a round from an Israeli sniper. See how he would like it. What would be his reaction if one of his grandchildren were to become sick only to be denied access to a hospital three hundred yards away because an Israeli border patrol thug is trying to show how tough he is?...

Philip Giraldi is a former CIA Officer

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 11:06 AM

Greggie boy,

What does Gaza have to do with the Caliphate?

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 03:05 PM

You mean what does Frank Wolf have to do with it, Bullshot?

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 03:24 PM

Greggie, you total shithead, the comment that Wolf made is about the actions of the "caliphate"

The subject of this thread.

If you have further problems, try taking your head out of your ass before making a post next time.

"The terrorist group the Islamic State, an al Qaida off shoot that has taken over large swaths of Iraq in recent months, told Christians in the Iraqi city of Mosul they had to convert to Islam by July 18 or they would be killed, according to the Economist. The only other option they were given was to leave Mosul, a city which has had a Christian presence for nearly two millennia. So thousands of Christians have now fled the city in fear for their lives.

"It is genocide. It meets the test of genocide," Wolf said Friday on Hugh Hewitt's radio show, which this writer guest hosted. "The definition of genocide was put together by the UN by a guy named Raphael Lemkin. But it is the eradication of a group of people – race, culture, ethnicity, religion. So this meets the official test of genocide."
"

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 04:10 PM

But it is the eradication of a group of people – race, culture, ethnicity, religion. So this meets the official test of genocide."
"

A group of people like the Palestinians, perhaps?

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: bobad
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 04:23 PM

"A group of people like the Palestinians, perhaps?"

You really are a fucking antisemite aren't you Greg?
Israel treats its Palestinian citizens better than any of it's neighbouring Muslim countries do. They themselves say that. They also say that they prefer living in Israel, where they have equal rights as citizens, than in any Muslim country. Palestinian majority villages and towns refuse to become incorporated in the West Bank in a land exchange proposal. Your attempt to demonize Israel with your vicious lies makes you an antisemite.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 04:29 PM

It is all tied together, no tail wagging the dog here. When Israel fights with its next door neighbors it stirs up the anger of the entire region. When Israel picks on Palestinians regional factions look around to see who they can attack as a counter measure. One assumes any jews still in Iraq are buried deep and out of sight, or more likely, left. That makes christians and minority sect muslim residents next in the picking off pecking order.

SRS