FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Netanayhu's on the run
Netanayhu's on the run
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
"I wonder if he'll get nicked with this new arrest warrant? and if so, who will nick him?" I am surprised that this issue is not being more widely discussed because it is a very, very big deal. Israel may feel they can ignore the arrest warrant (just as Putin is ignoring his) but Israel's military supporters in the West now have a very big problem. | |||
"I wonder if he'll get nicked with this new arrest warrant? and if so, who will nick him? I am surprised that this issue is not being more widely discussed because it is a very, very big deal. Israel may feel they can ignore the arrest warrant (just as Putin is ignoring his) but Israel's military supporters in the West now have a very big problem. " aye, i suspect that there's quite a few more countries that would hand netanyahu over than there are countries that would hand putin over. | |||
| |||
"What are you on about? I’d they try to arrest him they’re going to have to fight Isreal.Ask the Egyptians how well that went for them" isreal v the UN ... yeah right lol | |||
"What are you on about? I’d they try to arrest him they’re going to have to fight Isreal.Ask the Egyptians how well that went for them isreal v the UN ... yeah right lol" The UN with what army? | |||
"I wonder if he'll get nicked with this new arrest warrant? and if so, who will nick him? I am surprised that this issue is not being more widely discussed because it is a very, very big deal. Israel may feel they can ignore the arrest warrant (just as Putin is ignoring his) but Israel's military supporters in the West now have a very big problem. " He'll ignore it the same as Putin. It's an empty gesture. What are the west's problems? I assume there just going to continue arming Israel. Profit over absolute everything. | |||
 | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"What a surprise Netanyahu calling it antisemitic!" It actually is How many resolutions have the UN passed on Azerbaijans cleansing of Armenians.Of the Turks attacking Syrians Of Morocco still illegally occupying land? Pakistan backing a religious theocracy in Afghanistan gets no mention or condemnation Sudan gets no attention.Neither does Somalia The UN let Haiti become a lawless anarchy and so many more All things ignored but Isreal defends itself from terrorises out to end its very existence gets all the condemnation.I think that’s antisemitic | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"I hope the Chief Prosecuter doesn't use a pager." The more pressing question for him is whether he used a condom, surely... | |||
"I don’t have a problem with the actual charge itself The headline itself is “war crime” but it actually has nothing to do with all the bombs he has dropped! the actual charge is that he is/was using starvation of a population as an act of war He is still doing it now!! Is there is anyone who can defend that, I’d love to hear it " I can defend it Hamas will prioritise their fighters over the civilian populace every single time.This aid will go to them first an foremost to shoot our men and women in the back once we’ve withdrawn They’re the ones who use food as a means of war.It is not illegal to take a weapon from your enemy | |||
"It is a symbolic move to show that most are disgusted, but like other arrest warrants it will be ignored. " A symbolic legal move is very problematic. The most basic principle of law is that it is applied evenly and fairly. Like you suggest, this is indeed blatantly political (symbolic). Moreso since they "balanced" it with a dead guy. Symbolically motivated legal moves are, by their very nature, unjust and evidence of a corrupt system. | |||
"I don’t have a problem with the actual charge itself The headline itself is “war crime” but it actually has nothing to do with all the bombs he has dropped! the actual charge is that he is/was using starvation of a population as an act of war He is still doing it now!! Is there is anyone who can defend that, I’d love to hear it " There's no need for anyone to 'defend' military action against the Hamas barbarians. Fuck around, find out | |||
"What a surprise Netanyahu calling it antisemitic! It actually is How many resolutions have the UN passed on Azerbaijans cleansing of Armenians.Of the Turks attacking Syrians Of Morocco still illegally occupying land? Pakistan backing a religious theocracy in Afghanistan gets no mention or condemnation Sudan gets no attention.Neither does Somalia The UN let Haiti become a lawless anarchy and so many more All things ignored but Isreal defends itself from terrorises out to end its very existence gets all the condemnation.I think that’s antisemitic " Correct. 
| |||
 | |||
"Israel is real not isreal "fatfnigers  | |||
| |||
"I don’t have a problem with the actual charge itself The headline itself is “war crime” but it actually has nothing to do with all the bombs he has dropped! the actual charge is that he is/was using starvation of a population as an act of war He is still doing it now!! Is there is anyone who can defend that, I’d love to hear it I can defend it Hamas will prioritise their fighters over the civilian populace every single time.This aid will go to them first an foremost to shoot our men and women in the back once we’ve withdrawn They’re the ones who use food as a means of war.It is not illegal to take a weapon from your enemy" But it IS illegal to punish an entire population in the form of starvation But I thought Israel kept telling people that the entire population is not the enemy | |||
"I don’t have a problem with the actual charge itself The headline itself is “war crime” but it actually has nothing to do with all the bombs he has dropped! the actual charge is that he is/was using starvation of a population as an act of war He is still doing it now!! Is there is anyone who can defend that, I’d love to hear it " Hasn't it always been a legitimate military tactic to disrupt supply lines? I cannot recall it being the responsibility of any side to ensure the enemy is supplied. I'm aware that you'll point out the humanitarian perspective here, saying it's for the starving civilians but when the enemy is hiding within this group and operating within this group then it would be foolish to supply them with goods as you would only be enhancing your enemies chance of survival. Gazans should stop supporting an evil terrorist regime, rise up like people have done throughout the world and throughout history and establish a peaceful, law abiding society. Stop supporting and enabling terrorism. Mrs x | |||
"I don’t have a problem with the actual charge itself The headline itself is “war crime” but it actually has nothing to do with all the bombs he has dropped! the actual charge is that he is/was using starvation of a population as an act of war He is still doing it now!! Is there is anyone who can defend that, I’d love to hear it I can defend it Hamas will prioritise their fighters over the civilian populace every single time.This aid will go to them first an foremost to shoot our men and women in the back once we’ve withdrawn They’re the ones who use food as a means of war.It is not illegal to take a weapon from your enemy But it IS illegal to punish an entire population in the form of starvation But I thought Israel kept telling people that the entire population is not the enemy " It's illegal to hide behind civilians, they are not starving them, they are not feeding the terrorists. Mrs x | |||
" Gazans should stop supporting an evil terrorist regime, rise up like people have done throughout the world and throughout history and establish a peaceful, law abiding society. Stop supporting and enabling terrorism. Mrs x" easy to say when guys with guns are roaming around left right and centre | |||
| |||
" Gazans should stop supporting an evil terrorist regime, rise up like people have done throughout the world and throughout history and establish a peaceful, law abiding society. Stop supporting and enabling terrorism. Mrs x easy to say when guys with guns are roaming around left right and centre" So two options stay and do nothing, hide the terrorists but die from Israeli attacks because you've stayed in the warzone and assisted terrorism. Or take up arms and fight terrorism and you may die battling the enemy. One you have no choice over, the other you do, nobody said it would be easy... Israel don't behead you, burn you, throw you of rooves for speaking out against a prophet or for wearing the wrong clothes or refusing to wear clothes, they have choices, they are difficult but others have made similar choices in the past. Or do Gazans agree with Hamas and their ultimate aims? Mrs x | |||
" Gazans should stop supporting an evil terrorist regime, rise up like people have done throughout the world and throughout history and establish a peaceful, law abiding society. Stop supporting and enabling terrorism. Mrs x easy to say when guys with guns are roaming around left right and centreSo two options stay and do nothing, hide the terrorists but die from Israeli attacks because you've stayed in the warzone and assisted terrorism. Or take up arms and fight terrorism and you may die battling the enemy. One you have no choice over, the other you do, nobody said it would be easy... Israel don't behead you, burn you, throw you of rooves for speaking out against a prophet or for wearing the wrong clothes or refusing to wear clothes, they have choices, they are difficult but others have made similar choices in the past. Or do Gazans agree with Hamas and their ultimate aims? Mrs x" who knows ... i suspect they're just trying to stay alive really. | |||
" Gazans should stop supporting an evil terrorist regime, rise up like people have done throughout the world and throughout history and establish a peaceful, law abiding society. Stop supporting and enabling terrorism. Mrs x easy to say when guys with guns are roaming around left right and centreSo two options stay and do nothing, hide the terrorists but die from Israeli attacks because you've stayed in the warzone and assisted terrorism. Or take up arms and fight terrorism and you may die battling the enemy. One you have no choice over, the other you do, nobody said it would be easy... Israel don't behead you, burn you, throw you of rooves for speaking out against a prophet or for wearing the wrong clothes or refusing to wear clothes, they have choices, they are difficult but others have made similar choices in the past. Or do Gazans agree with Hamas and their ultimate aims? Mrs x who knows ... i suspect they're just trying to stay alive really." Yeah but they must realise if they are told to stay somewhere to protect a terrorist then they are putting themselves in harms way and more importantly their kids. Flee, run away and you might survive. Hamas want these civilian deaths, particularly children's. They make great use of it for propaganda purposes. They are just treating their civilians as cannon fodder, with the promise of getting their reward in Paradise after their death. Fuck that, protect your kids now, fight for the chance to live against these evil, cowardly terrorists. Mrs x | |||
" Gazans should stop supporting an evil terrorist regime, rise up like people have done throughout the world and throughout history and establish a peaceful, law abiding society. Stop supporting and enabling terrorism. Mrs x easy to say when guys with guns are roaming around left right and centreSo two options stay and do nothing, hide the terrorists but die from Israeli attacks because you've stayed in the warzone and assisted terrorism. Or take up arms and fight terrorism and you may die battling the enemy. One you have no choice over, the other you do, nobody said it would be easy... Israel don't behead you, burn you, throw you of rooves for speaking out against a prophet or for wearing the wrong clothes or refusing to wear clothes, they have choices, they are difficult but others have made similar choices in the past. Or do Gazans agree with Hamas and their ultimate aims? Mrs x who knows ... i suspect they're just trying to stay alive really.Yeah but they must realise if they are told to stay somewhere to protect a terrorist then they are putting themselves in harms way and more importantly their kids. Flee, run away and you might survive. Hamas want these civilian deaths, particularly children's. They make great use of it for propaganda purposes. They are just treating their civilians as cannon fodder, with the promise of getting their reward in Paradise after their death. Fuck that, protect your kids now, fight for the chance to live against these evil, cowardly terrorists. Mrs x" so flee where? towards the other guys with guns who are saying get back? | |||
| |||
"Seems pretty clear some of you have zero problems with the the slaughter of innocent Palestinians ! " Seems like you have zero problem with Islamist terrorists who hide behind civilians Your ceasefire is one where we cease and your champions fire | |||
| |||
"just for balance, hamas leaders were issued with arrest warrants in the same tranche as benny boy and gallant" The arrest warrant included one dead Hamas member. The original application included some Hamas leaders (now deceased). Issuing all of them together demonstrated that this was a political, not a legal procedural process. | |||
"just for balance, hamas leaders were issued with arrest warrants in the same tranche as benny boy and gallant The arrest warrant included one dead Hamas member. The original application included some Hamas leaders (now deceased). Issuing all of them together demonstrated that this was a political, not a legal procedural process." so you say | |||
"Seems pretty clear some of you have zero problems with the the slaughter of innocent Palestinians ! " That's not true. All innocent lives lost are a tragedy, all innocent lives, no matter what gender, age, religion, nationality. All these lives matter. But you are over simplifying the issue here. Urban warfare has the highest ratio of civilian casualties then any other type of warfare. There's actually a mathematical formula that's used for calculating the number of deaths to see whether it falls with the expected range during such conflicts. In this conflict the numbers, whilst large, are not exceptional in terms of urban warfare. So it's not as if Israelis are targeting civilians deliberately because if they did the numbers would be significantly higher. Also there's the issue of innocence here. If by your actions you are protecting a terrorist or enabling them then you are culpable in their crimes. If, as a parent, you keep your child at a location where terrorists occupy or operate from, because you've been told to do so by Hamas, because they want to hide behind a 'human shield', then you are again culpable fir your child's death if it comes to that. You are no longer innocent and by definition you are now a terrorist of Hamas too. I notice you didn't mention Israeli deaths. The attack on October 7th was not obly horrific, barbaric terrorism but it was quite massive in terms of numbers killed by terrorists. Does Israel not have a right to strike back in a case like this? Mrs x | |||
"just for balance, hamas leaders were issued with arrest warrants in the same tranche as benny boy and gallant The arrest warrant included one dead Hamas member. The original application included some Hamas leaders (now deceased). Issuing all of them together demonstrated that this was a political, not a legal procedural process." You are spot on. The UN wants a kick up the arse when it does nothing against China for the millions of ethnics abused in China, Saudi and Yemen, the Syrian Civil War and all the atrocities committed there, with deaths far exceeding those in this conflict. It's definitely Political, Mrs x | |||
"just for balance, hamas leaders were issued with arrest warrants in the same tranche as benny boy and gallant The arrest warrant included one dead Hamas member. The original application included some Hamas leaders (now deceased). Issuing all of them together demonstrated that this was a political, not a legal procedural process." So are you trying to say that because Israel assassinated them all, it’s a political process rather than a legal one? Or you could argue that Israel didn’t let the legal process play out.. I am not playing devils advocate here.. I am just more interested in the spin… The not allowing in humanitarian aid in is a hard one to justify since you know who is taking it in, where it is being stored, and where it would then be handed out.. and you could have neutral organisations looking over the entire process | |||
" Issuing all of them together demonstrated that this was a political, not a legal procedural process. So are you trying to say that because Israel assassinated them all, it’s a political process rather than a legal one? " No. That would be illogical. The ICC should be bold enough to look at each case on its own merits. Choosing to charge two sides of one conflict in the same breath, for wildly different (and legally unrelated) crimes, is very unusual. It was clearly to demonstrate balance, or remove the inevitable "but what about the other side" contention. This is wrong. It's getting political. They undermines its integrity. | |||
"What are you on about? I’d they try to arrest him they’re going to have to fight Isreal.Ask the Egyptians how well that went for them isreal v the UN ... yeah right lol The UN with what army? What, the UN having to clear up it's left over mess, a UN that us just totally toothless money pit. " | |||
| |||
"i could be wrong but i think UN rules dictate that they can't interfere in internal affairs .... so china persecuting uighurs or the civil war in syria fall under that remit. " What is united about the UN anyway? | |||
"i could be wrong but i think UN rules dictate that they can't interfere in internal affairs .... so china persecuting uighurs or the civil war in syria fall under that remit. " https://www.icc-cpi.int/about/how-the-court-works | |||
"What is united about the UN anyway? " excellent question! is it rhetoric? | |||
"i could be wrong but i think UN rules dictate that they can't interfere in internal affairs .... so china persecuting uighurs or the civil war in syria fall under that remit. What is united about the UN anyway? " The need for a payrise | |||
"i could be wrong but i think UN rules dictate that they can't interfere in internal affairs .... so china persecuting uighurs or the civil war in syria fall under that remit. " Not sure that's correct. Think in Sudan, following on from The Security Council getting involved shows this to not be the correct position. Following on from this then other crimes which are committed by the state internally can be examined by the ICC. Mrs x | |||
"i could be wrong but i think UN rules dictate that they can't interfere in internal affairs .... so china persecuting uighurs or the civil war in syria fall under that remit. Not sure that's correct. Think in Sudan, following on from The Security Council getting involved shows this to not be the correct position. Following on from this then other crimes which are committed by the state internally can be examined by the ICC. Mrs x" so neither of us are sure then | |||
| |||
"i could be wrong but i think UN rules dictate that they can't interfere in internal affairs .... so china persecuting uighurs or the civil war in syria fall under that remit. Not sure that's correct. Think in Sudan, following on from The Security Council getting involved shows this to not be the correct position. Following on from this then other crimes which are committed by the state internally can be examined by the ICC. Mrs x so neither of us are sure then "https://www.icc-cpi.int/about/how-the-court-works You were wrong. See above link for their jurisdiction. | |||
| |||
"i could be wrong but i think UN rules dictate that they can't interfere in internal affairs .... so china persecuting uighurs or the civil war in syria fall under that remit. Not sure that's correct. Think in Sudan, following on from The Security Council getting involved shows this to not be the correct position. Following on from this then other crimes which are committed by the state internally can be examined by the ICC. Mrs x so neither of us are sure then
https://www.icc-cpi.int/about/how-the-court-works
You were wrong. See above link for their jurisdiction."Oh don't tell me I'm wrong after I've gone through all that haha, I'll be gutted, Mrs x | |||
" Gazans should stop supporting an evil terrorist regime, rise up like people have done throughout the world and throughout history and establish a peaceful, law abiding society. Stop supporting and enabling terrorism. Mrs x easy to say when guys with guns are roaming around left right and centreSo two options stay and do nothing, hide the terrorists but die from Israeli attacks because you've stayed in the warzone and assisted terrorism. Or take up arms and fight terrorism and you may die battling the enemy. One you have no choice over, the other you do, nobody said it would be easy... Israel don't behead you, burn you, throw you of rooves for speaking out against a prophet or for wearing the wrong clothes or refusing to wear clothes, they have choices, they are difficult but others have made similar choices in the past. Or do Gazans agree with Hamas and their ultimate aims? Mrs x who knows ... i suspect they're just trying to stay alive really.Yeah but they must realise if they are told to stay somewhere to protect a terrorist then they are putting themselves in harms way and more importantly their kids. Flee, run away and you might survive. Hamas want these civilian deaths, particularly children's. They make great use of it for propaganda purposes. They are just treating their civilians as cannon fodder, with the promise of getting their reward in Paradise after their death. Fuck that, protect your kids now, fight for the chance to live against these evil, cowardly terrorists. Mrs x" Antisocial personality disorder, often abbreviated to ASPD, is a mental disorder defined by a chronic pattern of behavior that disregards the rights and well-being of others. | |||
" Gazans should stop supporting an evil terrorist regime, rise up like people have done throughout the world and throughout history and establish a peaceful, law abiding society. Stop supporting and enabling terrorism. Mrs x easy to say when guys with guns are roaming around left right and centreSo two options stay and do nothing, hide the terrorists but die from Israeli attacks because you've stayed in the warzone and assisted terrorism. Or take up arms and fight terrorism and you may die battling the enemy. One you have no choice over, the other you do, nobody said it would be easy... Israel don't behead you, burn you, throw you of rooves for speaking out against a prophet or for wearing the wrong clothes or refusing to wear clothes, they have choices, they are difficult but others have made similar choices in the past. Or do Gazans agree with Hamas and their ultimate aims? Mrs x who knows ... i suspect they're just trying to stay alive really.Yeah but they must realise if they are told to stay somewhere to protect a terrorist then they are putting themselves in harms way and more importantly their kids. Flee, run away and you might survive. Hamas want these civilian deaths, particularly children's. They make great use of it for propaganda purposes. They are just treating their civilians as cannon fodder, with the promise of getting their reward in Paradise after their death. Fuck that, protect your kids now, fight for the chance to live against these evil, cowardly terrorists. Mrs x Antisocial personality disorder, often abbreviated to ASPD, is a mental disorder defined by a chronic pattern of behavior that disregards the rights and well-being of others." Are you saying that this is what Hamas is suffering from? It's no excuse for their behaviour, Mrs x | |||
| |||
"If the ICC have taken this step, there must a prima facie case against the accused. It follows that they must stand trial and be judged on the evidence. If their are innocent or feel their actions are justified they have nothing to fear. It's what Israel would have wanted after WWII right?" it's what they actually did .... israel actually k!dnapped those accused of war crimes from places like argentina, dragged them over to israel, put them on trial which was broadcast on television then executed them. that's one hell of a pecedent to set | |||
"If the ICC have taken this step, there must a prima facie case against the accused. It follows that they must stand trial and be judged on the evidence. If their are innocent or feel their actions are justified they have nothing to fear. It's what Israel would have wanted after WWII right?" But it's not applied in systematic way, it is very political. The examples I gave before show this. Mrs x | |||
"If the ICC have taken this step, there must a prima facie case against the accused. It follows that they must stand trial and be judged on the evidence. If their are innocent or feel their actions are justified they have nothing to fear. It's what Israel would have wanted after WWII right?But it's not applied in systematic way, it is very political. The examples I gave before show this. Mrs x" Antisocial personality disorder, often abbreviated to ASPD, is a mental disorder defined by a chronic pattern of behavior that disregards the rights and well-being of others. | |||
"If the ICC have taken this step, there must a prima facie case against the accused. It follows that they must stand trial and be judged on the evidence. If their are innocent or feel their actions are justified they have nothing to fear." From a group memory perspective in Israel, "that's what they told Captain Dreyfus". Not every act against Israel or Israelis is antisemitic, but one can understand their sensitivity. Just like not every arrest of a black in Alabama is racist, but they sure seem to get a lot more attention from the law than whites. Just like any ethnic group who gets a hugely disproportionate amount of scrutiny in terms of any wrongdoing, Israel, Israelis and Jews start to wonder about motive. This emphatically does not mean that Israel is always right or above reproach. " It's what Israel would have wanted after WWII right?" Exactly what are you implicitly equating here, and why aren't you doing so explicitly? If you list up the crimes, intentions and methods of those put on trial after WW2, against the current Israeli leadership, this would be laughable. | |||
"If the ICC have taken this step, there must a prima facie case against the accused. It follows that they must stand trial and be judged on the evidence. If their are innocent or feel their actions are justified they have nothing to fear. It's what Israel would have wanted after WWII right? it's what they actually did .... israel actually k!dnapped those accused of war crimes from places like argentina, dragged them over to israel, put them on trial which was broadcast on television then executed them. that's one hell of a pecedent to set" But they didn't set a precedent did they? But it sounds better for your narrative if you try to establish they did. Painting Israel in a negative light to gain support for your ideas. Anyway don't let the truth get in the way of a good story. Civilisations have pursued individuals they have claimed have committed all sorts of crimes, across other nations borders for thousands of years. Thousands. So if we can ignore this them, yeah ok Israel set the precedent. But it's not the truth, does Troy ring any bells for you, maybe not, who can tell. Mrs x | |||
"If the ICC have taken this step, there must a prima facie case against the accused. It follows that they must stand trial and be judged on the evidence. If their are innocent or feel their actions are justified they have nothing to fear. It's what Israel would have wanted after WWII right?But it's not applied in systematic way, it is very political. The examples I gave before show this. Mrs x Antisocial personality disorder, often abbreviated to ASPD, is a mental disorder defined by a chronic pattern of behavior that disregards the rights and well-being of others." What's repeating oneself, without giving an answer called? Mrs x | |||
"If the ICC have taken this step, there must a prima facie case against the accused. It follows that they must stand trial and be judged on the evidence. If their are innocent or feel their actions are justified they have nothing to fear. It's what Israel would have wanted after WWII right? it's what they actually did .... israel actually k!dnapped those accused of war crimes from places like argentina, dragged them over to israel, put them on trial which was broadcast on television then executed them. that's one hell of a pecedent to setBut they didn't set a precedent did they? But it sounds better for your narrative if you try to establish they did. Painting Israel in a negative light to gain support for your ideas. Anyway don't let the truth get in the way of a good story. Civilisations have pursued individuals they have claimed have committed all sorts of crimes, across other nations borders for thousands of years. Thousands. So if we can ignore this them, yeah ok Israel set the precedent. But it's not the truth, does Troy ring any bells for you, maybe not, who can tell. Mrs x" so you're saying nobody was k!dnaped from a third party country and taken back to israel, put on trial then executed? | |||
"If the ICC have taken this step, there must a prima facie case against the accused. It follows that they must stand trial and be judged on the evidence. If their are innocent or feel their actions are justified they have nothing to fear. It's what Israel would have wanted after WWII right?But it's not applied in systematic way, it is very political. The examples I gave before show this. Mrs x" Well if it's politically motivated, let a trial proceed on the presented evidence in a court of law and in fill public view. If the accused are innocent they will be acquitted. What is there to fear? | |||
"If the ICC have taken this step, there must a prima facie case against the accused. It follows that they must stand trial and be judged on the evidence. If their are innocent or feel their actions are justified they have nothing to fear. It's what Israel would have wanted after WWII right?But it's not applied in systematic way, it is very political. The examples I gave before show this. Mrs x Well if it's politically motivated, let a trial proceed on the presented evidence in a court of law and in fill public view. If the accused are innocent they will be acquitted. What is there to fear?" I would hand myself in, to prove my innocence, | |||
"If the ICC have taken this step, there must a prima facie case against the accused. It follows that they must stand trial and be judged on the evidence. If their are innocent or feel their actions are justified they have nothing to fear. It's what Israel would have wanted after WWII right?But it's not applied in systematic way, it is very political. The examples I gave before show this. Mrs x Well if it's politically motivated, let a trial proceed on the presented evidence in a court of law and in fill public view. If the accused are innocent they will be acquitted. What is there to fear?" Who’s conducting this trial? We’ll never be given a fair hearing if the court is already biased | |||
"If the ICC have taken this step, there must a prima facie case against the accused. It follows that they must stand trial and be judged on the evidence. If their are innocent or feel their actions are justified they have nothing to fear. From a group memory perspective in Israel, "that's what they told Captain Dreyfus". Not every act against Israel or Israelis is antisemitic, but one can understand their sensitivity. Just like not every arrest of a black in Alabama is racist, but they sure seem to get a lot more attention from the law than whites. Just like any ethnic group who gets a hugely disproportionate amount of scrutiny in terms of any wrongdoing, Israel, Israelis and Jews start to wonder about motive. This emphatically does not mean that Israel is always right or above reproach. It's what Israel would have wanted after WWII right? Exactly what are you implicitly equating here, and why aren't you doing so explicitly? If you list up the crimes, intentions and methods of those put on trial after WW2, against the current Israeli leadership, this would be laughable." Nothing to laugh at. Irrespective of the scale of atrocities, the victims are just as dead either way. If there are war crimes to answer for, justice must be done. No excuses. | |||
"If the ICC have taken this step, there must a prima facie case against the accused. It follows that they must stand trial and be judged on the evidence. If their are innocent or feel their actions are justified they have nothing to fear. It's what Israel would have wanted after WWII right?But it's not applied in systematic way, it is very political. The examples I gave before show this. Mrs x Well if it's politically motivated, let a trial proceed on the presented evidence in a court of law and in fill public view. If the accused are innocent they will be acquitted. What is there to fear? Who’s conducting this trial? We’ll never be given a fair hearing if the court is already biased" It is a case brought by South Africa I believe so I would think they will be carrying out the prosecution. so no bias | |||
"If the ICC have taken this step, there must a prima facie case against the accused. It follows that they must stand trial and be judged on the evidence. If their are innocent or feel their actions are justified they have nothing to fear. It's what Israel would have wanted after WWII right?But it's not applied in systematic way, it is very political. The examples I gave before show this. Mrs x Well if it's politically motivated, let a trial proceed on the presented evidence in a court of law and in fill public view. If the accused are innocent they will be acquitted. What is there to fear? I would hand myself in, to prove my innocence, " So why hadn't any terrorist leader handed themselves in? Mrs x | |||
"If the ICC have taken this step, there must a prima facie case against the accused. It follows that they must stand trial and be judged on the evidence. If their are innocent or feel their actions are justified they have nothing to fear. It's what Israel would have wanted after WWII right?But it's not applied in systematic way, it is very political. The examples I gave before show this. Mrs x Well if it's politically motivated, let a trial proceed on the presented evidence in a court of law and in fill public view. If the accused are innocent they will be acquitted. What is there to fear? Who’s conducting this trial? We’ll never be given a fair hearing if the court is already biased It is a case brought by South Africa I believe so I would think they will be carrying out the prosecution. so no bias" The case would be heard by the ICC not South Africs, Mrs x | |||
"If the ICC have taken this step, there must a prima facie case against the accused. It follows that they must stand trial and be judged on the evidence. If their are innocent or feel their actions are justified they have nothing to fear. It's what Israel would have wanted after WWII right?But it's not applied in systematic way, it is very political. The examples I gave before show this. Mrs x Well if it's politically motivated, let a trial proceed on the presented evidence in a court of law and in fill public view. If the accused are innocent they will be acquitted. What is there to fear? I would hand myself in, to prove my innocence, So why hadn't any terrorist leader handed themselves in? Mrs x" Because they were murdered. | |||
"If the ICC have taken this step, there must a prima facie case against the accused. It follows that they must stand trial and be judged on the evidence. If their are innocent or feel their actions are justified they have nothing to fear. From a group memory perspective in Israel, "that's what they told Captain Dreyfus". Not every act against Israel or Israelis is antisemitic, but one can understand their sensitivity. Just like not every arrest of a black in Alabama is racist, but they sure seem to get a lot more attention from the law than whites. Just like any ethnic group who gets a hugely disproportionate amount of scrutiny in terms of any wrongdoing, Israel, Israelis and Jews start to wonder about motive. This emphatically does not mean that Israel is always right or above reproach. It's what Israel would have wanted after WWII right? Exactly what are you implicitly equating here, and why aren't you doing so explicitly? If you list up the crimes, intentions and methods of those put on trial after WW2, against the current Israeli leadership, this would be laughable. Nothing to laugh at. Irrespective of the scale of atrocities, the victims are just as dead either way. If there are war crimes to answer for, justice must be done. No excuses." Correct Mrs x | |||
"If the ICC have taken this step, there must a prima facie case against the accused. It follows that they must stand trial and be judged on the evidence. If their are innocent or feel their actions are justified they have nothing to fear. It's what Israel would have wanted after WWII right?But it's not applied in systematic way, it is very political. The examples I gave before show this. Mrs x Well if it's politically motivated, let a trial proceed on the presented evidence in a court of law and in fill public view. If the accused are innocent they will be acquitted. What is there to fear? I would hand myself in, to prove my innocence, So why hadn't any terrorist leader handed themselves in? Mrs x Because they were murdered." What? As a legitimate target of a conflict it is not murder. And Hamas has restructured its leadership so why haven't they handed themselves in? Mrs x | |||
"If the ICC have taken this step, there must a prima facie case against the accused. It follows that they must stand trial and be judged on the evidence. If their are innocent or feel their actions are justified they have nothing to fear. It's what Israel would have wanted after WWII right?But it's not applied in systematic way, it is very political. The examples I gave before show this. Mrs x Well if it's politically motivated, let a trial proceed on the presented evidence in a court of law and in fill public view. If the accused are innocent they will be acquitted. What is there to fear? Who’s conducting this trial? We’ll never be given a fair hearing if the court is already biased It is a case brought by South Africa I believe so I would think they will be carrying out the prosecution. so no biasThe case would be heard by the ICC not South Africs, Mrs x" South Africa present evidence to the icc, the icc then decide the case should be heard and set out to arrest the accused. If the accused is put before the court SA would prosecute Israel would defend and the icc judges would hear the case, just like any other court, except no jury. the judges decide. | |||
"If the ICC have taken this step, there must a prima facie case against the accused. It follows that they must stand trial and be judged on the evidence. If their are innocent or feel their actions are justified they have nothing to fear. It's what Israel would have wanted after WWII right?But it's not applied in systematic way, it is very political. The examples I gave before show this. Mrs x Well if it's politically motivated, let a trial proceed on the presented evidence in a court of law and in fill public view. If the accused are innocent they will be acquitted. What is there to fear? I would hand myself in, to prove my innocence, So why hadn't any terrorist leader handed themselves in? Mrs x Because they were murdered.What? As a legitimate target of a conflict it is not murder. And Hamas has restructured its leadership so why haven't they handed themselves in? Mrs x" They should. | |||
"If the ICC have taken this step, there must a prima facie case against the accused. It follows that they must stand trial and be judged on the evidence. If their are innocent or feel their actions are justified they have nothing to fear. It's what Israel would have wanted after WWII right?But it's not applied in systematic way, it is very political. The examples I gave before show this. Mrs x Well if it's politically motivated, let a trial proceed on the presented evidence in a court of law and in fill public view. If the accused are innocent they will be acquitted. What is there to fear? Who’s conducting this trial? We’ll never be given a fair hearing if the court is already biased It is a case brought by South Africa I believe so I would think they will be carrying out the prosecution. so no bias" South Africa is extremely biased(Our fault mostly but still they’ll have last grievances affect current judgement) Let me ask you a question so you can understand the Israeli position A man writes a report upon race relations in a country.He has made statements expressing his hatred for said country.He supported a genocide and blames said country for his nation being unable to complete it.Said country also prevented his nation from hanging hundreds of thousands more people.There are squares in other countries dedicated to his nations crimes Is he biased when he writes the report? | |||
"If the ICC have taken this step, there must a prima facie case against the accused. It follows that they must stand trial and be judged on the evidence. If their are innocent or feel their actions are justified they have nothing to fear. It's what Israel would have wanted after WWII right?But it's not applied in systematic way, it is very political. The examples I gave before show this. Mrs x Well if it's politically motivated, let a trial proceed on the presented evidence in a court of law and in fill public view. If the accused are innocent they will be acquitted. What is there to fear? Who’s conducting this trial? We’ll never be given a fair hearing if the court is already biased It is a case brought by South Africa I believe so I would think they will be carrying out the prosecution. so no bias South Africa is extremely biased(Our fault mostly but still they’ll have last grievances affect current judgement) Let me ask you a question so you can understand the Israeli position A man writes a report upon race relations in a country.He has made statements expressing his hatred for said country.He supported a genocide and blames said country for his nation being unable to complete it.Said country also prevented his nation from hanging hundreds of thousands more people.There are squares in other countries dedicated to his nations crimes Is he biased when he writes the report?" There is no bias. If so were how I suppose the bias is seeing another set of people in an apartheid system I would concede that. But lets hear your reason for this bias. | |||
"If the ICC have taken this step, there must a prima facie case against the accused. It follows that they must stand trial and be judged on the evidence. If their are innocent or feel their actions are justified they have nothing to fear. It's what Israel would have wanted after WWII right?But it's not applied in systematic way, it is very political. The examples I gave before show this. Mrs x Well if it's politically motivated, let a trial proceed on the presented evidence in a court of law and in fill public view. If the accused are innocent they will be acquitted. What is there to fear? Who’s conducting this trial? We’ll never be given a fair hearing if the court is already biased It is a case brought by South Africa I believe so I would think they will be carrying out the prosecution. so no bias South Africa is extremely biased(Our fault mostly but still they’ll have last grievances affect current judgement) Let me ask you a question so you can understand the Israeli position A man writes a report upon race relations in a country.He has made statements expressing his hatred for said country.He supported a genocide and blames said country for his nation being unable to complete it.Said country also prevented his nation from hanging hundreds of thousands more people.There are squares in other countries dedicated to his nations crimes Is he biased when he writes the report? There is no bias. If so were how I suppose the bias is seeing another set of people in an apartheid system I would concede that. But lets hear your reason for this bias." So his personal opinion will not affect his judgement? | |||
"If the ICC have taken this step, there must a prima facie case against the accused. It follows that they must stand trial and be judged on the evidence. If their are innocent or feel their actions are justified they have nothing to fear. It's what Israel would have wanted after WWII right?But it's not applied in systematic way, it is very political. The examples I gave before show this. Mrs x Well if it's politically motivated, let a trial proceed on the presented evidence in a court of law and in fill public view. If the accused are innocent they will be acquitted. What is there to fear? Who’s conducting this trial? We’ll never be given a fair hearing if the court is already biased It is a case brought by South Africa I believe so I would think they will be carrying out the prosecution. so no bias South Africa is extremely biased(Our fault mostly but still they’ll have last grievances affect current judgement) Let me ask you a question so you can understand the Israeli position A man writes a report upon race relations in a country.He has made statements expressing his hatred for said country.He supported a genocide and blames said country for his nation being unable to complete it.Said country also prevented his nation from hanging hundreds of thousands more people.There are squares in other countries dedicated to his nations crimes Is he biased when he writes the report? There is no bias. If so were how I suppose the bias is seeing another set of people in an apartheid system I would concede that. But lets hear your reason for this bias. So his personal opinion will not affect his judgement?" Whos personal opinon. | |||
"So his personal opinion will not affect his judgement?" that's what a trial is dude .... the prosecution is bias against the defendant, the defence is bias for the defendant. the judge makes a decision on the evidence presented by the the prosecution and defence | |||
"I wonder if he'll get nicked with this new arrest warrant? and if so, who will nick him? I am surprised that this issue is not being more widely discussed because it is a very, very big deal. Israel may feel they can ignore the arrest warrant (just as Putin is ignoring his) but Israel's military supporters in the West now have a very big problem. He'll ignore it the same as Putin. It's an empty gesture. What are the west's problems? I assume there just going to continue arming Israel. Profit over absolute everything. " couldn’t agree more | |||
"If the ICC have taken this step, there must a prima facie case against the accused. It follows that they must stand trial and be judged on the evidence. If their are innocent or feel their actions are justified they have nothing to fear. From a group memory perspective in Israel, "that's what they told Captain Dreyfus". Not every act against Israel or Israelis is antisemitic, but one can understand their sensitivity. Just like not every arrest of a black in Alabama is racist, but they sure seem to get a lot more attention from the law than whites. Just like any ethnic group who gets a hugely disproportionate amount of scrutiny in terms of any wrongdoing, Israel, Israelis and Jews start to wonder about motive. This emphatically does not mean that Israel is always right or above reproach. It's what Israel would have wanted after WWII right? Exactly what are you implicitly equating here, and why aren't you doing so explicitly? If you list up the crimes, intentions and methods of those put on trial after WW2, against the current Israeli leadership, this would be laughable. Nothing to laugh at. Irrespective of the scale of atrocities, the victims are just as dead either way. If there are war crimes to answer for, justice must be done. No excuses." Everything you say is perfectly logical. That said, why hasn't that logic worked, historically, for blacks in Alabama? Because bias exists, even in freedom loving democracies, let alone a bureaucratic and political body. | |||
" Nothing to laugh at. Irrespective of the scale of atrocities, the victims are just as dead either way. If there are war crimes to answer for, justice must be done. No excuses." For the record, Netanyahu should indeed be held to account. But not while he's fighting a legitimate war, without overwhelming evidence of war crimes that have been sufficiently investigated to be seen as such. Since the population of Gaza has risen by 2% over the past year and the casualty rate has stabilised after the initial military action and the civilian to combatant casualty ratio is low by modern warfare standards, then there is a question around there being overwhelming evidence of war crimes. All of this notwithstanding, he should be held to account, domestically. If there is either no credible domestic court (there currently is) or overwhelming evidence that is being ignored, then the ICC can and should step in. | |||
" Nothing to laugh at. Irrespective of the scale of atrocities, the victims are just as dead either way. If there are war crimes to answer for, justice must be done. No excuses. For the record, Netanyahu should indeed be held to account. But not while he's fighting a legitimate war, without overwhelming evidence of war crimes that have been sufficiently investigated to be seen as such. Since the population of Gaza has risen by 2% over the past year and the casualty rate has stabilised after the initial military action and the civilian to combatant casualty ratio is low by modern warfare standards, then there is a question around there being overwhelming evidence of war crimes. All of this notwithstanding, he should be held to account, domestically. If there is either no credible domestic court (there currently is) or overwhelming evidence that is being ignored, then the ICC can and should step in." He is already awaiting trial in his own country, while this genocide carries on even his own people can not trial him. | |||
" Nothing to laugh at. Irrespective of the scale of atrocities, the victims are just as dead either way. If there are war crimes to answer for, justice must be done. No excuses. For the record, Netanyahu should indeed be held to account. But not while he's fighting a legitimate war, without overwhelming evidence of war crimes that have been sufficiently investigated to be seen as such. Since the population of Gaza has risen by 2% over the past year and the casualty rate has stabilised after the initial military action and the civilian to combatant casualty ratio is low by modern warfare standards, then there is a question around there being overwhelming evidence of war crimes. All of this notwithstanding, he should be held to account, domestically. If there is either no credible domestic court (there currently is) or overwhelming evidence that is being ignored, then the ICC can and should step in." Can you please stop this now, you know the Politics forum is no place for incisive, factually correct discourse. The truth helps nobody here and being objective and rationale just muddys the waters further, so no more I beseech you, Mrs x | |||
" If there is either no credible domestic court (there currently is) or overwhelming evidence that is being ignored, then the ICC can and should step in." credible is good word .... currently the israeli's are resisting the likud party government on their attempt to limit the courts power to serve constitutional justice to politicians. perhaps there'll be an outcome to that process when the fighting has ended. | |||
| |||
"Surprise, Surprise, the British Chief Prosecuter of the ICC is being investigated for sexual misconduct while his brother is a convicted sex offender. Such charmers!" You can get pretty much any job these days even if you've sexually abused women. What a sad state of affairs. | |||
"Surprise, Surprise, the British Chief Prosecuter of the ICC is being investigated for sexual misconduct while his brother is a convicted sex offender. Such charmers! You can get pretty much any job these days even if you've sexually abused women. What a sad state of affairs." how many times ya going to roll this out mate ya sounding a bit unhinged another woman just got a top job with trump how many’s that now they don’t seem to be worried as much as you | |||
" Nothing to laugh at. Irrespective of the scale of atrocities, the victims are just as dead either way. If there are war crimes to answer for, justice must be done. No excuses. For the record, Netanyahu should indeed be held to account. But not while he's fighting a legitimate war, without overwhelming evidence of war crimes that have been sufficiently investigated to be seen as such. Since the population of Gaza has risen by 2% over the past year and the casualty rate has stabilised after the initial military action and the civilian to combatant casualty ratio is low by modern warfare standards, then there is a question around there being overwhelming evidence of war crimes. All of this notwithstanding, he should be held to account, domestically. If there is either no credible domestic court (there currently is) or overwhelming evidence that is being ignored, then the ICC can and should step in. He is already awaiting trial in his own country, while this genocide carries on even his own people can not trial him." He's in the middle of a trial in Israel, the prosecution rested their case in July this year and his defence was due to start in December. Stop telling half truths just to suit your narrative, it makes you and your arguments look silly, Mrs x | |||
" Nothing to laugh at. Irrespective of the scale of atrocities, the victims are just as dead either way. If there are war crimes to answer for, justice must be done. No excuses. For the record, Netanyahu should indeed be held to account. But not while he's fighting a legitimate war, without overwhelming evidence of war crimes that have been sufficiently investigated to be seen as such. Since the population of Gaza has risen by 2% over the past year and the casualty rate has stabilised after the initial military action and the civilian to combatant casualty ratio is low by modern warfare standards, then there is a question around there being overwhelming evidence of war crimes. All of this notwithstanding, he should be held to account, domestically. If there is either no credible domestic court (there currently is) or overwhelming evidence that is being ignored, then the ICC can and should step in. He is already awaiting trial in his own country, while this genocide carries on even his own people can not trial him.He's in the middle of a trial in Israel, the prosecution rested their case in July this year and his defence was due to start in December. Stop telling half truths just to suit your narrative, it makes you and your arguments look silly, Mrs x" Half truths, you have just wrote he has been on trial in July, and his defence was due to start in December where is the half truth in that. | |||
" Nothing to laugh at. Irrespective of the scale of atrocities, the victims are just as dead either way. If there are war crimes to answer for, justice must be done. No excuses. For the record, Netanyahu should indeed be held to account. But not while he's fighting a legitimate war, without overwhelming evidence of war crimes that have been sufficiently investigated to be seen as such. Since the population of Gaza has risen by 2% over the past year and the casualty rate has stabilised after the initial military action and the civilian to combatant casualty ratio is low by modern warfare standards, then there is a question around there being overwhelming evidence of war crimes. All of this notwithstanding, he should be held to account, domestically. If there is either no credible domestic court (there currently is) or overwhelming evidence that is being ignored, then the ICC can and should step in. He is already awaiting trial in his own country, while this genocide carries on even his own people can not trial him.He's in the middle of a trial in Israel, the prosecution rested their case in July this year and his defence was due to start in December. Stop telling half truths just to suit your narrative, it makes you and your arguments look silly, Mrs x Half truths, you have just wrote he has been on trial in July, and his defence was due to start in December where is the half truth in that." You make it so easy haha... "The trial of Benjamin Netanyahu began following investigations into allegations of bribery, fraud, and breach of trust by him and close political allies within his inner circle during his fourth and fifth terms as Israel's prime minister. The Israel Police began investigating Netanyahu in December 2016 and subsequently recommended indictments against him. On 21 November 2019, Netanyahu was officially indicted for breach of trust, accepting bribes, and fraud, leading him to legally relinquish his ministry portfolios other than prime minister. Netanyahu's trial in the Jerusalem District Court began on 24 May 2020, with witness testimony starting on 5 April 2021. The prosecution listed 333 witnesses.The prosecution rested in July 2024, and defense, starting with Netanyahu's testimony, is scheduled to begin in December 2024". From a quick Google search. The last paragraph is EXACTLY what I said. No half truths, haha, except you telling half truths that I'm not telling the truth, oh the irony, Mrs x | |||
" Nothing to laugh at. Irrespective of the scale of atrocities, the victims are just as dead either way. If there are war crimes to answer for, justice must be done. No excuses. For the record, Netanyahu should indeed be held to account. But not while he's fighting a legitimate war, without overwhelming evidence of war crimes that have been sufficiently investigated to be seen as such. Since the population of Gaza has risen by 2% over the past year and the casualty rate has stabilised after the initial military action and the civilian to combatant casualty ratio is low by modern warfare standards, then there is a question around there being overwhelming evidence of war crimes. All of this notwithstanding, he should be held to account, domestically. If there is either no credible domestic court (there currently is) or overwhelming evidence that is being ignored, then the ICC can and should step in. He is already awaiting trial in his own country, while this genocide carries on even his own people can not trial him.He's in the middle of a trial in Israel, the prosecution rested their case in July this year and his defence was due to start in December. Stop telling half truths just to suit your narrative, it makes you and your arguments look silly, Mrs x Half truths, you have just wrote he has been on trial in July, and his defence was due to start in December where is the half truth in that. You make it so easy haha... "The trial of Benjamin Netanyahu began following investigations into allegations of bribery, fraud, and breach of trust by him and close political allies within his inner circle during his fourth and fifth terms as Israel's prime minister. The Israel Police began investigating Netanyahu in December 2016 and subsequently recommended indictments against him. On 21 November 2019, Netanyahu was officially indicted for breach of trust, accepting bribes, and fraud, leading him to legally relinquish his ministry portfolios other than prime minister. Netanyahu's trial in the Jerusalem District Court began on 24 May 2020, with witness testimony starting on 5 April 2021. The prosecution listed 333 witnesses.The prosecution rested in July 2024, and defense, starting with Netanyahu's testimony, is scheduled to begin in December 2024". From a quick Google search. The last paragraph is EXACTLY what I said. No half truths, haha, except you telling half truths that I'm not telling the truth, oh the irony, Mrs x" What the hell are you on about, stupid is what stupid gets. | |||
" Nothing to laugh at. Irrespective of the scale of atrocities, the victims are just as dead either way. If there are war crimes to answer for, justice must be done. No excuses. For the record, Netanyahu should indeed be held to account. But not while he's fighting a legitimate war, without overwhelming evidence of war crimes that have been sufficiently investigated to be seen as such. Since the population of Gaza has risen by 2% over the past year and the casualty rate has stabilised after the initial military action and the civilian to combatant casualty ratio is low by modern warfare standards, then there is a question around there being overwhelming evidence of war crimes. All of this notwithstanding, he should be held to account, domestically. If there is either no credible domestic court (there currently is) or overwhelming evidence that is being ignored, then the ICC can and should step in. He is already awaiting trial in his own country, while this genocide carries on even his own people can not trial him.He's in the middle of a trial in Israel, the prosecution rested their case in July this year and his defence was due to start in December. Stop telling half truths just to suit your narrative, it makes you and your arguments look silly, Mrs x Half truths, you have just wrote he has been on trial in July, and his defence was due to start in December where is the half truth in that. You make it so easy haha... "The trial of Benjamin Netanyahu began following investigations into allegations of bribery, fraud, and breach of trust by him and close political allies within his inner circle during his fourth and fifth terms as Israel's prime minister. The Israel Police began investigating Netanyahu in December 2016 and subsequently recommended indictments against him. On 21 November 2019, Netanyahu was officially indicted for breach of trust, accepting bribes, and fraud, leading him to legally relinquish his ministry portfolios other than prime minister. Netanyahu's trial in the Jerusalem District Court began on 24 May 2020, with witness testimony starting on 5 April 2021. The prosecution listed 333 witnesses.The prosecution rested in July 2024, and defense, starting with Netanyahu's testimony, is scheduled to begin in December 2024". From a quick Google search. The last paragraph is EXACTLY what I said. No half truths, haha, except you telling half truths that I'm not telling the truth, oh the irony, Mrs x What the hell are you on about, stupid is what stupid gets." You posted, 3 days ago... "He is already awaiting trial in his own country, while this genocide carries on even his own people can not trial him." He is not awaiting trial this has been going on for years but it's going on. You say... "his own people cannot trial him", well they can and they have, who's stupid haha, Mrs x | |||
| |||
"I wonder if he'll get nicked with this new arrest warrant? and if so, who will nick him? I am surprised that this issue is not being more widely discussed because it is a very, very big deal. Israel may feel they can ignore the arrest warrant (just as Putin is ignoring his) but Israel's military supporters in the West now have a very big problem. " A week on. And it turns out that Starmer and his sidekick Lammy the Lamb is the only Western leader who is willing to arrest him. That's worked out well for 2TK hasn't it? | |||
"I wonder if he'll get nicked with this new arrest warrant? and if so, who will nick him? I am surprised that this issue is not being more widely discussed because it is a very, very big deal. Israel may feel they can ignore the arrest warrant (just as Putin is ignoring his) but Israel's military supporters in the West now have a very big problem. A week on. And it turns out that Starmer and his sidekick Lammy the Lamb is the only Western leader who is willing to arrest him. That's worked out well for 2TK hasn't it?" apart from ireland, belgium, netherlands, slovenia, austria etc etc etc ..... good fiction story though, keep going | |||
| |||
