[ShepherdsDog]

Gee, the last time I was there, there were plenty of arabs in the area, a lot of them with Israeli citizenship. Perhaps you should learn what genocide is before you bandy this term about. Your flippant use of it demonstrates you don't know its correct usage.

[Demian_164]

i know all about arabs with israeli citizenship. i studied with three of them this past year, and they told me how they were abused and harassed regularly. actually in st. petersburg some jews saw them speaking arabic and were talking about them in hebrew, talking about the "filthy arabs" "terrorists" etc...they were quite shocked to find them answer back to them in hebrew!

forgive me, i dont know how to embed pictures

http://www.google.ca/imgres?imgurl=http ... 41&bih=581

so the link is the best i can do. palestinians are being systematically "cleansed" "driven out" whatever you want to call it out of their homelands.

you can also check this link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Koenig_Memorandum

or read about bibi's words in 2003 about the problem of the "arab demographic threat"

[desertdude]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

$1:

Where was NATO when a ship of its member country was attacked in international waters.

When did this happen? I don't recall any NATO ship being attacked in international waters.

Maybe you forget Turkey was a part of nato

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Pseudonym Pseudonym:

What if the democratically elected leaders are pursuing a policy that would lead to genocide?

You mean like Hamas calling for the destruction of Israel. Don't bring that up, it interferes with the cherry picking.

Yes and like Israel, and Hamas have publically renouced any such pervious statements

$1:

Where NATO was legally obliged to respond to the attack

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Really??

Yes, that what do you think the treaty is for to get toghter on friday nights for a BBQ ?

[desertdude]

Pseudonym Pseudonym:

What if the democratically elected leaders are pursuing a policy that would lead to genocide?

Yes, a great a loss of almost a million Ruwandan life would have been saved if it did.

[desertdude]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Ahhhh....now I get it it. The ship carrying terrorists and terrorist sympathizers that was intercepted by the IDF before it could violate a legal blockade.

Blockade was illeagal, Attacks in international waters were illeagal. IDF response to the flotilla as "disproportionate" "betrayed an unacceptable level of brutality".

Hey but don't let the facts get in the way of your bias.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/se ... -brutality

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?N ... otilla&Cr1

[GreenTiger]

Thanos Thanos:

I'm appalled that the Israelis didn't immediately order an airstrike. Even if they didn't kill the evil little fucker they would have succeeded in scaring the shit out of him as badly as Reagan did to Khadafi.

There are times I agree with you. A couple of the new cruise missles would have the The Pygmy from Tehran and solved a lot of problems, the Mullas would be jumping out of their bath robes, but I think their people would be very quitely jumping for joy that there is one less tyrant making their life miserable.

[Zipperfish]

GreenTiger GreenTiger:

Thanos Thanos:

I'm appalled that the Israelis didn't immediately order an airstrike. Even if they didn't kill the evil little fucker they would have succeeded in scaring the shit out of him as badly as Reagan did to Khadafi.

There are times I agree with you. A couple of the new cruise missles would have the The Pygmy from Tehran and solved a lot of problems, the Mullas would be jumping out of their bath robes, but I think their people would be very quitely jumping for joy that there is one less tyrant making their life miserable.

Ah, if only it were that easy, eh? Just assassinate the leader of whatever country and the problem will be solved. We could save billions of lives. Just think--no more wars. Just shoot the leader. Better yet, put the leaders of the squabbling countries together in the Octagaon.

I see it's the foreign policy fool's parade in here today.

[GreenTiger]

I'm not saying that if that pig fucker aka His Excellency Mr Achmood Amadinajad were to pass beyong the valley of the shadow to his 72 virgins that it would solve very many problems, but it certainly wouldn't ruin my morning coffee. I think some others would feel the same way.

[martin14]

desertdude desertdude:

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Ahhhh....now I get it it. The ship carrying terrorists and terrorist sympathizers that was intercepted by the IDF before it could violate a legal blockade.

Blockade was illeagal, Attacks in international waters were illeagal. IDF response to the flotilla as "disproportionate" "betrayed an unacceptable level of brutality".

Hey but don't let the facts get in the way of your bias.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/se ... -brutality

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?N ... otilla&Cr1

Well, when you become the judge of the world, then it maybe.

Until then, posting someone else's opinion is pretty poor.

[Demian_164]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

GreenTiger GreenTiger:

Thanos Thanos:

I'm appalled that the Israelis didn't immediately order an airstrike. Even if they didn't kill the evil little fucker they would have succeeded in scaring the shit out of him as badly as Reagan did to Khadafi.

There are times I agree with you. A couple of the new cruise missles would have the The Pygmy from Tehran and solved a lot of problems, the Mullas would be jumping out of their bath robes, but I think their people would be very quitely jumping for joy that there is one less tyrant making their life miserable.

Ah, if only it were that easy, eh? Just assassinate the leader of whatever country and the problem will be solved. We could save billions of lives. Just think--no more wars. Just shoot the leader. Better yet, put the leaders of the squabbling countries together in the Octagaon.

I see it's the foreign policy fool's parade in here today.

you said it! who knew murder could be so convenient?

[desertdude]

martin14 martin14:

Well, when you become the judge of the world, then it maybe.

Until then, posting someone else's opinion is pretty poor.

Well I think it counts much more than yours or shep's

Next time you head a UNHRC panel and come up with one, we'll all listen to yours. Until then....

[martin14]

desertdude desertdude:

martin14 martin14:

Well, when you become the judge of the world, then it maybe.

Until then, posting someone else's opinion is pretty poor.

Well I think it counts much more than yours or shep's

Next time you head a UNHRC panel and come up with one, we'll all listen to yours. Until then....

Our opinion is the right one, cause the blockade is up, and it will stay for a while longer.

[desertdude]

LOOOL, best argument ever.

Why ?

Because I told you so !

When you come up with a little more substance in your arguments. you know where find to me

Cheerois

[ShepherdsDog]

The fact that you give any weight to the UNHRC is ridiculous. The Sec Gen of the UN thinks its a joke.

$1:

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told the organization's widely-criticized Human Rights Council to drop rhetoric and bloc voting and get on with actually defending ordinary people from abuse........"This Council can have a tremendous impact," Ban told the 47-nation forum. "But you, its members, must rise above partisan posturing and regional divides. The Council must address human rights abuses wherever they occur."

Independent human rights groups say the council has fallen under the control of a bloc of Islamic and African states, usually back by China, Cuba and Russia, who protect each other from criticism.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE4BB67820081212

UNHCR the biggest joke in the UN circus. Anyone who has had to work with those tits knows it.

A Statement from Kofi Anna on the obvious bias of the UNHCR:

$1:

Meanwhile, we must realize the promise of the Human Rights Council, which so far has clearly not justified all the hopes that so many of us placed in it.

Of course, it’s encouraging that the Council has now decided to hold a special session on Darfur next week. I hope against hope that it will find an effective way to deal with this burning issue.

But, I am worried by its disproportionate focus on violations by Israel. Not that Israel should be given a free pass. Absolutely not. But the Council should give the same attention to grave violations committed by other States as well.

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/ ... 88.doc.htm

$1:

UN's Ban faults rights council over Israel
UN secretary-general expresses disappointment at human rights watchdog's decision to single out Israel. US diplomat accuses council of 'pathological obsession with Israel'

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340 ... 19,00.html

The UNHCR head even thinks they are a bunch of schmucks.

$1:

The president of the United Nations Human Rights Council has called for the Geneva-based body to reform, echoing earlier criticism by President Bush.
Doru Costea's comments came as the Council's sixth session ended on Friday, against the backdrop of clashes in Myanmar. The Council has planned a special session on Tuesday to discuss the situation in the Southeast Asian nation.



Costea told the Swiss Le Temps newspaper that changes were necessary following the Council's failure in the Middle East.

Bush had complained during a speech before the UN Plenary Assembly on Tuesday that the Council focused too much attention on Israel and not enough on countries such as Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea and Iran.

"I agree with him. The functioning of the Council must be constantly improved," Costea told Le Temps on Saturday. He added that the Council must examine the behaviour of all parties involved in complex disputes and not place just one state under the magnifying glass.

http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/politics/fo ... id=6171460

The UNHCR.... It has no credibility even with the UN, and using it as an example undermines your own.

[desertdude]

Sorry shep nothing personal, but I still give it more weight than you or martin and it does matter more than what is said here on CKA. Although you are not totally wrong by that any resolution with anything to do with Israel is vetoed by the US

Still scraping the bottom of the barrel I'm afraid by comming up with two year old links.