Religions > Atheism > T.Blair, international war-criminal, becomes Roman Catholic...
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Mr D. Mr" |
| Date: |
22 Dec 2007 09:09:28 AM |
| Object: |
T.Blair, international war-criminal, becomes Roman Catholic... |
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7157409.stm
M.
.
|
|
| User: "Diagoras" |
|
| Title: Re: T.Blair, international war-criminal, becomes Roman Catholic... |
23 Dec 2007 12:18:12 AM |
|
|
"Mr D." <Mr D.@home.co.uk> wrote in message
news:IM9bj.12955$ov2.6485@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7157409.stm
M.
*Vatican hails Blair Church switch*
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7157998.stm
Off the record, the Pope said Blair has a cute *****!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ye Old One" |
|
| Title: Re: T.Blair, international war-criminal, becomes Roman Catholic... |
22 Dec 2007 02:19:32 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:09:28 GMT, "Mr D." <Mr D.@home.co.uk> enriched
this group when s/he wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7157409.stm
M.
I would love to see how you can make Blair into a war criminal.
--
Bob.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: T.Blair, international war-criminal, becomes Roman Catholic... |
22 Dec 2007 05:46:17 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:19:32 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:09:28 GMT, "Mr D." <Mr D.@home.co.uk> enriched
this group when s/he wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7157409.stm
M.
I would love to see how you can make Blair into a war criminal.
Materially assisting in the commission of genocide is a war crime.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ye Old One" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: T.Blair, international war-criminal, becomes Roman Catholic... |
23 Dec 2007 11:44:59 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 10:16:17 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:19:32 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:09:28 GMT, "Mr D." <Mr D.@home.co.uk> enriched
this group when s/he wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7157409.stm
M.
I would love to see how you can make Blair into a war criminal.
Materially assisting in the commission of genocide is a war crime.
But helping to stop it is as well? Strange that.
--
Bob.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: T.Blair, international war-criminal, becomes Roman Catholic... |
23 Dec 2007 05:25:18 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 17:44:59 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 10:16:17 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:19:32 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:09:28 GMT, "Mr D." <Mr D.@home.co.uk> enriched
this group when s/he wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7157409.stm
M.
I would love to see how you can make Blair into a war criminal.
Materially assisting in the commission of genocide is a war crime.
But helping to stop it is as well? Strange that.
Eh? When did Blair do that?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ye Old One" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: T.Blair, international war-criminal, becomes Roman Catholic... |
23 Dec 2007 05:56:33 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 09:55:18 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 17:44:59 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 10:16:17 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:19:32 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:09:28 GMT, "Mr D." <Mr D.@home.co.uk> enriched
this group when s/he wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7157409.stm
M.
I would love to see how you can make Blair into a war criminal.
Materially assisting in the commission of genocide is a war crime.
But helping to stop it is as well? Strange that.
Eh? When did Blair do that?
You are not aware that one of the reasons for the invasion was to stop
the killing?
--
Bob.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: T.Blair, international war-criminal, becomes Roman Catholic... |
24 Dec 2007 12:57:48 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 23:56:33 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 09:55:18 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 17:44:59 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 10:16:17 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:19:32 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:09:28 GMT, "Mr D." <Mr D.@home.co.uk> enriched
this group when s/he wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7157409.stm
M.
I would love to see how you can make Blair into a war criminal.
Materially assisting in the commission of genocide is a war crime.
But helping to stop it is as well? Strange that.
Eh? When did Blair do that?
You are not aware that one of the reasons for the invasion was to stop
the killing?
No.
Pleas esupply references for this bizarre claim.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A.Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: T.Blair, international war-criminal, becomes Roman Catholic... |
22 Dec 2007 07:02:31 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 10:16:17 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:19:32 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:09:28 GMT, "Mr D." <Mr D.@home.co.uk> enriched
this group when s/he wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7157409.stm
M.
I would love to see how you can make Blair into a war criminal.
Materially assisting in the commission of genocide is a war crime.
As is waging a war of aggression.
The various international treaties to which the US and the UK are
signatory to, say both of these, including the Geneva Conventions and
the United Nations.
Not to mention the precedents set by the Nuremberg trials, one of
which was that you need not be signatory to treaties to be guilty of
these crimes.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: T.Blair, international war-criminal, becomes Roman Catholic... |
22 Dec 2007 09:39:03 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:02:31 -0500, Christopher A.Lee
<calee@optonline.net> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 10:16:17 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:19:32 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:09:28 GMT, "Mr D." <Mr D.@home.co.uk> enriched
this group when s/he wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7157409.stm
M.
I would love to see how you can make Blair into a war criminal.
Materially assisting in the commission of genocide is a war crime.
As is waging a war of aggression.
Quite.
There are at least 8 *separate* counts that I can think of off the top
of my head with which Blair can be brought to trial on the charge of a
war crime, or war crimes.
I merely mentioned #1.
The various international treaties to which the US and the UK are
signatory to, say both of these, including the Geneva Conventions and
the United Nations.
Make that 11 counts.
Not to mention the precedents set by the Nuremberg trials, one of
which was that you need not be signatory to treaties to be guilty of
these crimes.
Make that 17.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ye Old One" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: T.Blair, international war-criminal, becomes Roman Catholic... |
23 Dec 2007 11:46:54 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 14:09:03 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:02:31 -0500, Christopher A.Lee
<calee@optonline.net> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 10:16:17 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:19:32 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:09:28 GMT, "Mr D." <Mr D.@home.co.uk> enriched
this group when s/he wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7157409.stm
M.
I would love to see how you can make Blair into a war criminal.
Materially assisting in the commission of genocide is a war crime.
As is waging a war of aggression.
Quite.
There are at least 8 *separate* counts that I can think of off the top
of my head with which Blair can be brought to trial on the charge of a
war crime, or war crimes.
I merely mentioned #1.
The various international treaties to which the US and the UK are
signatory to, say both of these, including the Geneva Conventions and
the United Nations.
Make that 11 counts.
Not to mention the precedents set by the Nuremberg trials, one of
which was that you need not be signatory to treaties to be guilty of
these crimes.
Make that 17.
So far from the truth you look rather silly.
--
Bob.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: T.Blair, international war-criminal, becomes Roman Catholic... |
23 Dec 2007 05:24:55 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 17:46:54 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 14:09:03 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:02:31 -0500, Christopher A.Lee
<calee@optonline.net> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 10:16:17 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:19:32 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:09:28 GMT, "Mr D." <Mr D.@home.co.uk> enriched
this group when s/he wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7157409.stm
M.
I would love to see how you can make Blair into a war criminal.
Materially assisting in the commission of genocide is a war crime.
As is waging a war of aggression.
Quite.
There are at least 8 *separate* counts that I can think of off the top
of my head with which Blair can be brought to trial on the charge of a
war crime, or war crimes.
I merely mentioned #1.
The various international treaties to which the US and the UK are
signatory to, say both of these, including the Geneva Conventions and
the United Nations.
Make that 11 counts.
Not to mention the precedents set by the Nuremberg trials, one of
which was that you need not be signatory to treaties to be guilty of
these crimes.
Make that 17.
So far from the truth you look rather silly.
Please enlighten me.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ye Old One" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: T.Blair, international war-criminal, becomes Roman Catholic... |
23 Dec 2007 05:55:28 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 09:54:55 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 17:46:54 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 14:09:03 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:02:31 -0500, Christopher A.Lee
<calee@optonline.net> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 10:16:17 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:19:32 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:09:28 GMT, "Mr D." <Mr D.@home.co.uk> enriched
this group when s/he wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7157409.stm
M.
I would love to see how you can make Blair into a war criminal.
Materially assisting in the commission of genocide is a war crime.
As is waging a war of aggression.
Quite.
There are at least 8 *separate* counts that I can think of off the top
of my head with which Blair can be brought to trial on the charge of a
war crime, or war crimes.
I merely mentioned #1.
The various international treaties to which the US and the UK are
signatory to, say both of these, including the Geneva Conventions and
the United Nations.
Make that 11 counts.
Not to mention the precedents set by the Nuremberg trials, one of
which was that you need not be signatory to treaties to be guilty of
these crimes.
Make that 17.
So far from the truth you look rather silly.
Please enlighten me.
I think you need to read up on the UN authority with respect to Iraq.
Maybe then you will understand how wrong you are.
--
Bob.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: T.Blair, international war-criminal, becomes Roman Catholic... |
24 Dec 2007 12:56:56 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 23:55:28 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 09:54:55 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 17:46:54 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 14:09:03 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:02:31 -0500, Christopher A.Lee
<calee@optonline.net> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 10:16:17 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:19:32 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:09:28 GMT, "Mr D." <Mr D.@home.co.uk> enriched
this group when s/he wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7157409.stm
M.
I would love to see how you can make Blair into a war criminal.
Materially assisting in the commission of genocide is a war crime.
As is waging a war of aggression.
Quite.
There are at least 8 *separate* counts that I can think of off the top
of my head with which Blair can be brought to trial on the charge of a
war crime, or war crimes.
I merely mentioned #1.
The various international treaties to which the US and the UK are
signatory to, say both of these, including the Geneva Conventions and
the United Nations.
Make that 11 counts.
Not to mention the precedents set by the Nuremberg trials, one of
which was that you need not be signatory to treaties to be guilty of
these crimes.
Make that 17.
So far from the truth you look rather silly.
Please enlighten me.
I think you need to read up on the UN authority with respect to Iraq.
I did that years ago.
Maybe then you will understand how wrong you are.
No, in fact it reinforced my judgement.
Now: Are you going to stop this hand-waving and actually tell me why
you make these bland negative generaliztions, adn never bother to give
more information other than "you are wrong"?
Or am I forced to assume that you do not have any evidence or
knowledge upon which you base your position.
I have tomes of evidence to support my position, and am backed up by
some of the highest legal opinions on the planet.
Well, I'll give you one more chance.
Tell me *why* I am wrong, please.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ye Old One" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: T.Blair, international war-criminal, becomes Roman Catholic... |
24 Dec 2007 04:07:31 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 17:26:56 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 23:55:28 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 09:54:55 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 17:46:54 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 14:09:03 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:02:31 -0500, Christopher A.Lee
<calee@optonline.net> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 10:16:17 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:19:32 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:09:28 GMT, "Mr D." <Mr D.@home.co.uk> enriched
this group when s/he wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7157409.stm
M.
I would love to see how you can make Blair into a war criminal.
Materially assisting in the commission of genocide is a war crime.
As is waging a war of aggression.
Quite.
There are at least 8 *separate* counts that I can think of off the top
of my head with which Blair can be brought to trial on the charge of a
war crime, or war crimes.
I merely mentioned #1.
The various international treaties to which the US and the UK are
signatory to, say both of these, including the Geneva Conventions and
the United Nations.
Make that 11 counts.
Not to mention the precedents set by the Nuremberg trials, one of
which was that you need not be signatory to treaties to be guilty of
these crimes.
Make that 17.
So far from the truth you look rather silly.
Please enlighten me.
I think you need to read up on the UN authority with respect to Iraq.
I did that years ago.
Maybe then you will understand how wrong you are.
No, in fact it reinforced my judgement.
Now: Are you going to stop this hand-waving and actually tell me why
you make these bland negative generaliztions, adn never bother to give
more information other than "you are wrong"?
If, as you claim, you have read the UN resolutions, then you already
know why you are wrong.
Or am I forced to assume that you do not have any evidence or
knowledge upon which you base your position.
I have tomes of evidence to support my position, and am backed up by
some of the highest legal opinions on the planet.
Only one set of opinions matter - that of the United Nations.
Well, I'll give you one more chance.
Tell me *why* I am wrong, please.
Because you, like so many others, do not refer to the resolutions of
the Security Council of the United Nations.
Clue: Read the resolution that authorized action against Iraq, then
the resolution that set up the ceasefire after the liberation of
Kuwait.
--
Bob.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: T.Blair, international war-criminal, becomes Roman Catholic... |
25 Dec 2007 04:51:49 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 10:07:31 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 17:26:56 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 23:55:28 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 09:54:55 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 17:46:54 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 14:09:03 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:02:31 -0500, Christopher A.Lee
<calee@optonline.net> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 10:16:17 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:19:32 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:09:28 GMT, "Mr D." <Mr D.@home.co.uk> enriched
this group when s/he wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7157409.stm
M.
I would love to see how you can make Blair into a war criminal.
Materially assisting in the commission of genocide is a war crime.
As is waging a war of aggression.
Quite.
There are at least 8 *separate* counts that I can think of off the top
of my head with which Blair can be brought to trial on the charge of a
war crime, or war crimes.
I merely mentioned #1.
The various international treaties to which the US and the UK are
signatory to, say both of these, including the Geneva Conventions and
the United Nations.
Make that 11 counts.
Not to mention the precedents set by the Nuremberg trials, one of
which was that you need not be signatory to treaties to be guilty of
these crimes.
Make that 17.
So far from the truth you look rather silly.
Please enlighten me.
I think you need to read up on the UN authority with respect to Iraq.
I did that years ago.
Maybe then you will understand how wrong you are.
No, in fact it reinforced my judgement.
Now: Are you going to stop this hand-waving and actually tell me why
you make these bland negative generaliztions, adn never bother to give
more information other than "you are wrong"?
If, as you claim, you have read the UN resolutions, then you already
know why you are wrong.
Or am I forced to assume that you do not have any evidence or
knowledge upon which you base your position.
I have tomes of evidence to support my position, and am backed up by
some of the highest legal opinions on the planet.
Only one set of opinions matter - that of the United Nations.
Well, I'll give you one more chance.
Tell me *why* I am wrong, please.
Because you, like so many others, do not refer to the resolutions of
the Security Council of the United Nations.
Clue: Read the resolution that authorized action against Iraq, then
the resolution that set up the ceasefire after the liberation of
Kuwait.
Clue: I *have* read it, several times.
And much more beside.
I have had a copy of same for years now.
Why don't you quote it?
Why don't you say ANYTHING CONCRETE at all??????????????
(Don't answer that, I acutally know why.)
I'll give you one more opportunity to concretely substantiate your
claims, or into the plonk bin with ye.
Such would be a pity, as I have usually considered you to be a
level-headed evidence based kind of guy.
But you are floundering on this stretched lie to an enormous extent.
If you do not care to give me even an iota of actual evidence to
support your ludicrously ignorant position, then it is in to the bozo
bin with you, along with the other delusional ignorant liars for their
causes, atheist or not.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ye Old One" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: T.Blair, international war-criminal, becomes Roman Catholic... |
25 Dec 2007 03:19:03 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 25 Dec 2007 21:21:49 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 10:07:31 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 17:26:56 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 23:55:28 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 09:54:55 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 17:46:54 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 14:09:03 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:02:31 -0500, Christopher A.Lee
<calee@optonline.net> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 10:16:17 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:19:32 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:09:28 GMT, "Mr D." <Mr D.@home.co.uk> enriched
this group when s/he wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7157409.stm
M.
I would love to see how you can make Blair into a war criminal.
Materially assisting in the commission of genocide is a war crime.
As is waging a war of aggression.
Quite.
There are at least 8 *separate* counts that I can think of off the top
of my head with which Blair can be brought to trial on the charge of a
war crime, or war crimes.
I merely mentioned #1.
The various international treaties to which the US and the UK are
signatory to, say both of these, including the Geneva Conventions and
the United Nations.
Make that 11 counts.
Not to mention the precedents set by the Nuremberg trials, one of
which was that you need not be signatory to treaties to be guilty of
these crimes.
Make that 17.
So far from the truth you look rather silly.
Please enlighten me.
I think you need to read up on the UN authority with respect to Iraq.
I did that years ago.
Maybe then you will understand how wrong you are.
No, in fact it reinforced my judgement.
Now: Are you going to stop this hand-waving and actually tell me why
you make these bland negative generaliztions, adn never bother to give
more information other than "you are wrong"?
If, as you claim, you have read the UN resolutions, then you already
know why you are wrong.
Or am I forced to assume that you do not have any evidence or
knowledge upon which you base your position.
I have tomes of evidence to support my position, and am backed up by
some of the highest legal opinions on the planet.
Only one set of opinions matter - that of the United Nations.
Well, I'll give you one more chance.
Tell me *why* I am wrong, please.
Because you, like so many others, do not refer to the resolutions of
the Security Council of the United Nations.
Clue: Read the resolution that authorized action against Iraq, then
the resolution that set up the ceasefire after the liberation of
Kuwait.
Clue: I *have* read it, several times.
Then you have now labeled yourself a liar in my books, and a very
stupid one at that.
And much more beside.
I have had a copy of same for years now.
The go and take reading comprehension lessons.
Why don't you quote it?
Because there is no need to quote it.
Resolution 678 (29 November 1990) is short and sweet.
686 (2 March 1991) laid down the terms for the ceasefire and 687 (3
April 1991) actually implements the ceasefire subject to Iraq's taking
the required steps. 707 (15 August 1991) condemns Iraq's serious
violation of 687.
These serious violations led to the restart of military action under
the authority of the United Nations Security Council.
Now, it will not escape your attention, that there was ample
opportunity to either the UNSC to have called a halt at any time, or
for the full UN to have passed a motion of censure - none were even
attempted.
Why don't you say ANYTHING CONCRETE at all??????????????
(Don't answer that, I acutally know why.)
I'll give you one more opportunity to concretely substantiate your
claims, or into the plonk bin with ye.
Too late retard, you are going into mine right now.
Such would be a pity, as I have usually considered you to be a
level-headed evidence based kind of guy.
I am. I've also had more than enough legal training to have learned
how to read UN Resolutions (not hard, in the main they are very
clearly written). I've also learned NOT to allow my political beliefs,
which are strongly anti Tony Blair and everything his party has done
to my country, to deflect from our legal obligations to the UN.
But you are floundering on this stretched lie to an enormous extent.
Not at all, I've given you enough rope and you have used it to hang
yourself. You may be at odds, politically, with the war - but one
thing you cannot argue with is its legality - unless you want to argue
with the UN.
If you do not care to give me even an iota of actual evidence to
I should not have needed to - if only you had read the resolutions.
support your ludicrously ignorant position, then it is in to the bozo
bin with you, along with the other delusional ignorant liars for their
causes, atheist or not.
** PLONK **
--
Bob.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A.Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: T.Blair, international war-criminal, becomes Roman Catholic... |
22 Dec 2007 09:55:12 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:09:28 GMT, "Mr D." <Mr D.@home.co.uk> wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7157409.stm
"Last year, Mr Blair, who is now a Middle East peace envoy, said he
had prayed to God when deciding whether or not to send UK troops into
Iraq."
This is the guy who whined about being treated as a religious nutter
"for mentioning God".
His remark about praying to God when deciding whether or not to send
UK troops into Iraq confirmed what people knew about him since his
pussyfooting about creationism in state-funded schools, faith schools
etc..
He whines that Britain (a country where most people are atheist,
agnostic or Christians "who don't really believe") should be more like
the US when it comes to religion. In the same speech where he whines
about being a religious nutter.
He is so out of touch with reality he can't grasp that all this just
reinforces his religious nuttership.
A Prime Minister _has_ to make decisions that affect the country and
the world for rational reasons.
Praying to God about it makes him worse than unfit for office.
It makes him dangerously irrational.
So God tells him to take part in an illegal war of aggression using
horrifying weaponry that causes genetic damage to both the invaded
people and his own troops, with cancers, reproductive deformities etc,
as part of occupation that has slaughtered hundreds of thousands of
civilians etc.
Does he seriously think the residents of the region don't blame him as
one of those behind it?
He now wants to do the same thing to another country in the same area.
And he imagines he will be accepted in the region as a "peace envoy"?
It's sick. And would be a joke if it weren't so tragic.
He and those (if any) who appointed him can only be deranged.
Who appointed him?
Did the Bush administration twist a few arms?
Did he invent the office for himself?
I can't find anything about the creation of this post.
But does he honestly expect to be treated like an honest broker?
It's like Mussolini giving up his dictatorship of Italy to become a
peace envoy to the countries Hitler was at war with or occupying
during WW2.
What are future historians going to say?
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Horne, _the_ chancellor *" |
|
| Title: Re: T.Blair, international war-criminal, becomes Roman Catholic... |
23 Dec 2007 02:32:18 AM |
|
|
Christopher A.Lee <calee@optonline.net> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:09:28 GMT, "Mr D." <Mr D.@home.co.uk> wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7157409.stm
"Last year, Mr Blair, who is now a Middle East peace envoy, said he
had prayed to God when deciding whether or not to send UK troops into
Iraq."
I'm always a bit disappointed that these "nutters" never tell us what
God told them. What kind of accent does God have?
This is the guy who whined about being treated as a religious nutter
"for mentioning God".
His remark about praying to God when deciding whether or not to send
UK troops into Iraq confirmed what people knew about him since his
pussyfooting about creationism in state-funded schools, faith schools
etc..
He whines that Britain (a country where most people are atheist,
agnostic or Christians "who don't really believe") should be more like
the US when it comes to religion. In the same speech where he whines
about being a religious nutter.
He is so out of touch with reality he can't grasp that all this just
reinforces his religious nuttership.
If you had committed the international war crimes he had, you'd need a
blanket of escapism as well!
I notice the catholic church is delighted and said "such an
"authoritative personality" choosing to join the Catholic Church "could
only give rise to joy and respect"."
They're clearly on crack.
--
(*) of the royal duchy of city south and deansgate -www.davidhorne.net
(email address on website) "If people think God is interesting, the
onus is on them to show that there is anything there to talk about.
Otherwise they should just shut up about it." -Richard Dawkins
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: T.Blair, international war-criminal, becomes Roman Catholic... |
23 Dec 2007 02:36:38 AM |
|
|
David Horne, _the_ chancellor (*) wrote:
What kind of accent does God have?
I think he'd sound like Apu Nahasapeemapetilon. :-)
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act *
* of the whole American people which declared that *
* their legislature should make no law respecting *
* an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the *
* free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of *
* separation between church and state." *
* --Thomas Jefferson, 1802 *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ye Old One" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: T.Blair, international war-criminal, becomes Roman Catholic... |
22 Dec 2007 02:21:04 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 10:55:12 -0500, Christopher A.Lee
<calee@optonline.net> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
So God tells him to take part in an illegal wa
What war would that be then?
--
Bob.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
