This analysis, with which I agree, places the ICC in the same tradition and intention as all western courts at National or state levels - to punish the losers / rebels / undesirables of all conflicts (war or otherwise), in service of the elite faction that wins the day. Frequently, of course, the artifice of the structure results in some allies getting caught up in the web of consequences, and often only to serve as some kind of ‘proof’ of its impartiality, until the point has been made and the ally can retire quietly and comfortably to the countryside.
Netanyahu and Gallant in the dock at the Hague seems an incredible idea. Will the ICC send bounty-hunters into Israel to get them? Seriously, I wonder how, at this level of Wild West lawlessness, how this is expected to unfold.
Yes, I’ve seen it this way all along but you needn’t bother waiting for a verdict. The fact no power has been able to just go in and stop this Holocaust is proof enough of the impotence or, actually, phantom of intl law.
The UN was neutered at birth with the single veto power to not stop genocide. In school I found the single veto to be crazy but the students and our teacher thought it was fine.
The ICC is another joke like you describe.
And meanwhile they're pushing ww3 fear porn just like they did during the cold war.
Do we think that the predator class would dare use nukes on "their paradise"?
Remember, when they were making the bomb, they had little knowledge of the issues of radiation... Many of those scientists studied the bomb sites with little to no protection.
They were guessing at the time... And I bet they thought the bomb was clean at the time. Nope.
And that's why the cold war happened... To create an endless war as Lt Col Fletcher Prouty wrote in his book Secret Team.
Not sure where you got the 'they didn't know about radiation at the time' thing from but it makes zero sense from a scientific perspective. If they understood the science necessary to make the bomb then they knew about radiation. Radiation was indeed known about for decades by then - those evil monsters knew EXACTLY what their 'device' would do. Oppenheimer, Einstein, the lot of them. Monsters.
At the time, they were even testing the cyclotron output on people with cancer etc to see the long term effects. I will try to find the video.
The scientists didn't really know of the long term issues. Also how they managed to start the nuclear explosion was by using normal explosives to start the chain reaction. From what I remember in school it took them quite a few tries to figure out the critical mass needed.
They talked like they knew the science but really they were tinkering a lot. It's kind of like how Edison used tons of materials to create bulb filaments until he found tungsten did the best job.
I would imagine that given what these monsters were really like, their testing on people with cancer might lend some weight to your suggestion that they didn't know the long-term effects, so they wanted to test it on innocents. The history of American State types testing all manner of shit on unwitting victims goes way back before ww2 or MK-Ultra of course (Tuskegee, for example).
I am sceptical about them not knowing the critical mass because ultimately it would be a fairly simple mathematical problem. Mind you, if the likes of Miles Mathis are correct then their maths would've been all wrong, which suggests you might be right there. But then they'd have to accept that their maths was wrong and change their standard model! Which they haven't.
With regards to Edison, I've heard that he was something of a fraud who simply pilfered other people's patents and inventions and passed them off as his own. I don't have any links for that one, btw, but I'm sure a simple keyword search like 'Edison fraud' would come up with something.
So I'm kind of both with you and not with you - I can accept that they didn't know the long-term effects, but I can't ever ascribe any decency or benevolence to them. I would also say that because they were demonstrably monsters with zero conscience they would've gone straight ahead and done their evil testing. Indeed, if we look at the whole Hiroshima/Nagasaki thing and its aftermath (all those 'doctors' going in afterwards to document the whole thing), it clearly looks like one huge, monstrous 'test' on innocent human beings (the war was, after all, already won months earlier, as the firebombing of Tokyo proves).
What a jolly old codger. I would've loved to have had a fine German dinner with him, washed down with proper German beer and schnapps and gluhwein, whilst the two of us delight in demolishing the illusory edifice that constitutes modern theoretical physics.
It's all just a story - I like that. I like it a lot.
Yeah, I watched a few other videos of him and he's so open minded yet grounded. I love how he is an absurdist at heart, like when he talks about how they keep inventing particles! I think humanity sometimes falls for illusions that they dreamt up. It's absurd but not pessimistic, because in the end it works out. Every big change, science becomes less sloppy. Right now for the last 20 years we have been on a plateau. Nothing revolutionary found or invented, just speculations pretending to be "true".
That's ok though! Once scientists start to see that their dreams were false, they will open their eyes and discover reality 😀 . This covid thing was a great peek into the corruption of all of science and even economics... haha.
If you wanna see some basic logic fails/hacks that quantum mechanics used watch this playlist.
I imagine a UNSC with spine to overturn the veto. Plenty of justification, and Mr. Nebenzya to clearly explain it. What's more important, life, law, and the spirit of the UN Charter, or a chronic obstacle to them?
They have to re write the rules to do it though but I wonder if that's possible if one crazy can veto anything. If it were not, then it was designed to fail human rights.
In my experience, a good rule is a generality. The exceptions that inevitably arise are handled as they happen, with pristine documentation detailing circumstances, alternatives (& pros, cons), and how the decision upholds the rule. Enough instances of similar exceptions may mean a rule should expand to incorporate that situation. But the rule reigns (content). Not process (here, vetoes). The power of the veto doesn't mean you can wield it to contravene the rule. The rule reigns and the UN rule is life and peace.
With this current string of vetoes, how many articles, what intent of the UN charter do they NOT violate? Worse, with what adolescent justification?
These vetoes (and that 'nonbinding' resolution ) are dire chronic extreme circumstances. Requiring extreme measures. The charter says we're determined to save succeeding generations. Delay kills. It already has. So the violator comes into line or the group overrides. It's so obvious. So why paralysis in the face of necessary action? And still the hand wringing over the slaughter.
But more direct, the ICJ orders Israel to vacate IMMEDIATELY. Based on international law, Israel's only legal act apparently is to leave. IMMEDIATELY. How are Dr. Ralph Wilde's Feb. presentation to the ICJ and his similar briefs and discussions not crystal clear? Probably why there's no public discussion, they seem to brook no argument.
Dr Ralph Wilde, Submission of the League of Arab States on Palestine, International Court of Justice
NATO should have been dismantled a long time ago. And the treaty is a hoot - it's redundant to the UN and it states about the opposite of what NATO members really do, they're all about WAR.
And yes UN members act for all. The UN Charter preamble: . . . HAVE RESOLVED TO COMBINE OUR EFFORTS . . .
Article 1: ". . . to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace . . ."
And also, where was the ICC when W destroyed Iraq or Obama and Libya or Syria, Yemen, etc, or Israel for the past 80 years? One can be completely ignorant and still see this court is a cover for war crimes.
The Global Majority needs an International Foreign Legion, to Defend International Law, that provides Veterans Housing and Benefits to survivors, in Neutral and BRICS Nations.
END MossadFlyingMonkeyThugs, GlobalTrollFarmSpies, Heroine, Weapons or HumanSlaveTrafficking; No more ZioNaziLegislative Dictators, MoneyLaunderers or ResourceRape, ProfitsMonopolyGenocide OR ZioNazi NuclearPower KingdomOfTerror
Grim reading. Is there ever to be any form of justice in this world? Why do we have the ICJ and ICCC if they’re verdicts and their warrants can’t be enforced?
The sad truth as the age of information moves along is there is day by day more and more reputable sources justifying and being used to justify all kinds of evil. Makes me sick when a show trial or politically motivated conviction or acquittal gets used later to say the person was indeed innocent or guilty as evidence in and of itself.
Check out NPR's recent episode of their Throughline program entitled "The Rules of War" about this same topic, broadcast on May 30, 3 days before this post. Available online.
This analysis, with which I agree, places the ICC in the same tradition and intention as all western courts at National or state levels - to punish the losers / rebels / undesirables of all conflicts (war or otherwise), in service of the elite faction that wins the day. Frequently, of course, the artifice of the structure results in some allies getting caught up in the web of consequences, and often only to serve as some kind of ‘proof’ of its impartiality, until the point has been made and the ally can retire quietly and comfortably to the countryside.
Eisenhower reportedly commented when he saw Nazi officials being arraigned at Nuremberg, "remind me to never lose a war."
I can't remember exactly who it was who described Nuremberg as a 'travesty of justice' - it was probably a lot of people, to be honest.
Ironic that these new 'international law courts' describe themselves as 'successors to Nuremberg'.
Was anyone ever prosecuted for Dresden or Hiroshima or Nagasaki? Rhetorical questions are always normal and predominant in dystopias.
Russia and Putin, however, are NOT losers. The Ukrainians are losers/victims of western hegemony.
Netanyahu and Gallant in the dock at the Hague seems an incredible idea. Will the ICC send bounty-hunters into Israel to get them? Seriously, I wonder how, at this level of Wild West lawlessness, how this is expected to unfold.
Thank you I have a more understanding of this now , it’s very depressing ,these institutions are not fit for purpose
They will be if the Global South has anything to do with it.
I hope so
Yes, I’ve seen it this way all along but you needn’t bother waiting for a verdict. The fact no power has been able to just go in and stop this Holocaust is proof enough of the impotence or, actually, phantom of intl law.
The UN was neutered at birth with the single veto power to not stop genocide. In school I found the single veto to be crazy but the students and our teacher thought it was fine.
The ICC is another joke like you describe.
And meanwhile they're pushing ww3 fear porn just like they did during the cold war.
Do we think that the predator class would dare use nukes on "their paradise"?
Remember, when they were making the bomb, they had little knowledge of the issues of radiation... Many of those scientists studied the bomb sites with little to no protection.
They were guessing at the time... And I bet they thought the bomb was clean at the time. Nope.
And that's why the cold war happened... To create an endless war as Lt Col Fletcher Prouty wrote in his book Secret Team.
Not sure where you got the 'they didn't know about radiation at the time' thing from but it makes zero sense from a scientific perspective. If they understood the science necessary to make the bomb then they knew about radiation. Radiation was indeed known about for decades by then - those evil monsters knew EXACTLY what their 'device' would do. Oppenheimer, Einstein, the lot of them. Monsters.
At the time, they were even testing the cyclotron output on people with cancer etc to see the long term effects. I will try to find the video.
The scientists didn't really know of the long term issues. Also how they managed to start the nuclear explosion was by using normal explosives to start the chain reaction. From what I remember in school it took them quite a few tries to figure out the critical mass needed.
They talked like they knew the science but really they were tinkering a lot. It's kind of like how Edison used tons of materials to create bulb filaments until he found tungsten did the best job.
I would imagine that given what these monsters were really like, their testing on people with cancer might lend some weight to your suggestion that they didn't know the long-term effects, so they wanted to test it on innocents. The history of American State types testing all manner of shit on unwitting victims goes way back before ww2 or MK-Ultra of course (Tuskegee, for example).
I am sceptical about them not knowing the critical mass because ultimately it would be a fairly simple mathematical problem. Mind you, if the likes of Miles Mathis are correct then their maths would've been all wrong, which suggests you might be right there. But then they'd have to accept that their maths was wrong and change their standard model! Which they haven't.
With regards to Edison, I've heard that he was something of a fraud who simply pilfered other people's patents and inventions and passed them off as his own. I don't have any links for that one, btw, but I'm sure a simple keyword search like 'Edison fraud' would come up with something.
So I'm kind of both with you and not with you - I can accept that they didn't know the long-term effects, but I can't ever ascribe any decency or benevolence to them. I would also say that because they were demonstrably monsters with zero conscience they would've gone straight ahead and done their evil testing. Indeed, if we look at the whole Hiroshima/Nagasaki thing and its aftermath (all those 'doctors' going in afterwards to document the whole thing), it clearly looks like one huge, monstrous 'test' on innocent human beings (the war was, after all, already won months earlier, as the firebombing of Tokyo proves).
Oh yeah, the math is guesswork...
https://youtu.be/ev7e9sfWIJo
Heinz von Foerester
What a jolly old codger. I would've loved to have had a fine German dinner with him, washed down with proper German beer and schnapps and gluhwein, whilst the two of us delight in demolishing the illusory edifice that constitutes modern theoretical physics.
It's all just a story - I like that. I like it a lot.
Yeah, I watched a few other videos of him and he's so open minded yet grounded. I love how he is an absurdist at heart, like when he talks about how they keep inventing particles! I think humanity sometimes falls for illusions that they dreamt up. It's absurd but not pessimistic, because in the end it works out. Every big change, science becomes less sloppy. Right now for the last 20 years we have been on a plateau. Nothing revolutionary found or invented, just speculations pretending to be "true".
That's ok though! Once scientists start to see that their dreams were false, they will open their eyes and discover reality 😀 . This covid thing was a great peek into the corruption of all of science and even economics... haha.
If you wanna see some basic logic fails/hacks that quantum mechanics used watch this playlist.
https://youtu.be/Zm9tUVI6Ehk?si=nvdLUnpx8GSeTOt8
I imagine a UNSC with spine to overturn the veto. Plenty of justification, and Mr. Nebenzya to clearly explain it. What's more important, life, law, and the spirit of the UN Charter, or a chronic obstacle to them?
They have to re write the rules to do it though but I wonder if that's possible if one crazy can veto anything. If it were not, then it was designed to fail human rights.
In my experience, a good rule is a generality. The exceptions that inevitably arise are handled as they happen, with pristine documentation detailing circumstances, alternatives (& pros, cons), and how the decision upholds the rule. Enough instances of similar exceptions may mean a rule should expand to incorporate that situation. But the rule reigns (content). Not process (here, vetoes). The power of the veto doesn't mean you can wield it to contravene the rule. The rule reigns and the UN rule is life and peace.
With this current string of vetoes, how many articles, what intent of the UN charter do they NOT violate? Worse, with what adolescent justification?
https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter/full-text
These vetoes (and that 'nonbinding' resolution ) are dire chronic extreme circumstances. Requiring extreme measures. The charter says we're determined to save succeeding generations. Delay kills. It already has. So the violator comes into line or the group overrides. It's so obvious. So why paralysis in the face of necessary action? And still the hand wringing over the slaughter.
But more direct, the ICJ orders Israel to vacate IMMEDIATELY. Based on international law, Israel's only legal act apparently is to leave. IMMEDIATELY. How are Dr. Ralph Wilde's Feb. presentation to the ICJ and his similar briefs and discussions not crystal clear? Probably why there's no public discussion, they seem to brook no argument.
Dr Ralph Wilde, Submission of the League of Arab States on Palestine, International Court of Justice
https://youtu.be/EUrLQES3TmY?feature=shared
The international law of self-determination and the use of force requires an immediate end to the occupation of the Palestinian West Bank and Gaza
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/sites/laws/files/ralph_wilde_palestine_policy_brief.pdf
Isn't it funny that there's crap like NATO which makes member states act for all, but when it comes to the UN, there's no such thing?
The League of nations was put down to create the UN because the ptb still wanted to do their dirty deeds done cheap 😂.
NATO should have been dismantled a long time ago. And the treaty is a hoot - it's redundant to the UN and it states about the opposite of what NATO members really do, they're all about WAR.
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.htm
And yes UN members act for all. The UN Charter preamble: . . . HAVE RESOLVED TO COMBINE OUR EFFORTS . . .
Article 1: ". . . to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace . . ."
International Law? What fucking international law!!!
Courts for thee but not for me!
And also, where was the ICC when W destroyed Iraq or Obama and Libya or Syria, Yemen, etc, or Israel for the past 80 years? One can be completely ignorant and still see this court is a cover for war crimes.
The ICC considered indicting Obama, but then they remembered he was just an African American and not an African, so they decided against it.
ShowBama
It would be nice if Lindsay Graham's "We'll be next" assessment, turned out to be a prophecy. But alas, your skepticism appears to be well-justified.
The Global Majority needs an International Foreign Legion, to Defend International Law, that provides Veterans Housing and Benefits to survivors, in Neutral and BRICS Nations.
END MossadFlyingMonkeyThugs, GlobalTrollFarmSpies, Heroine, Weapons or HumanSlaveTrafficking; No more ZioNaziLegislative Dictators, MoneyLaunderers or ResourceRape, ProfitsMonopolyGenocide OR ZioNazi NuclearPower KingdomOfTerror
Grim reading. Is there ever to be any form of justice in this world? Why do we have the ICJ and ICCC if they’re verdicts and their warrants can’t be enforced?
The sad truth as the age of information moves along is there is day by day more and more reputable sources justifying and being used to justify all kinds of evil. Makes me sick when a show trial or politically motivated conviction or acquittal gets used later to say the person was indeed innocent or guilty as evidence in and of itself.
So, it's all just another shiny distraction to let the blood continue to flow, while we're hypnotized with "justice" kabuki.
🙏🏽 Audio, please, sir? 🙏🏽
Check out NPR's recent episode of their Throughline program entitled "The Rules of War" about this same topic, broadcast on May 30, 3 days before this post. Available online.
It's probably just à coincidence.
fear not, for jew bibi should be convicted