I doubt anything fruitful will come from dissecting your post and answering questions to which the answers are clearly in previous posts, and merely risks getting this thread locked, so I'll do this just once. The answer to your question above:
Why would it be locked?
I can't see why anything I have said would be so triggering that it would be necessary to not be able to talk about it. If you want to call it ignorant on my part im good with that, but I would also think that maybe it is just not understanding what it is I actually am saying. I do not agree at all with how non-Jewish people are treated in Isreal, Gaza, and the West Bank, and im guessing many other places in that region.
If you need a beat to talk about it im good with that, am not trying to troll you at all. I am really trying to help people online understand that the attack on us all is trying to make it so we can't talk about complex issues that have many viewpoints that some are being cherry picked to radicalize us all to the extent possible on any of the many positions one could take on the issue. And while I am expressing what it is that I have seen/think about the information I have digested on this, and all the other history I have from living in a nation that my own people have been so genocided that my ancestry is not considered "American" for the last 45 years, I am not so married to anything that I would be upset about discussing it.
It's a non-disputable fact Hamas can't be trusted.
Agreed
This has no bearing at the topic at hand and is irrelevant to the ICC's actions and evidence gathering process.
How can you be so certain about this?
With what we know has been happening in the attack on us all, how can you actually be sure? And I am not even saying that they could not have the information necessary through independent means to bring criminal charges against Bibi (and I really am happy to see them do it), how would you know that they are not doing it to just set up a scandal that they can push against this for a while to stir the pot?
It's also a non-disputable fact Hamas' attackers behave like animals. Reiterating the burned grandmas suggests it's relevant, while it's not. It gave Israel the right to attack, it does not put Nethanyahu above the law.
Agreed about Netanyahu, bit it is relevant in the retaliation that is going on currently. I don't see how it wouldn't be.
McConnel being a dickhead isn't relevant either, it's his comment that it's a kangaroo court I referenced. Kangaroo courts do something like both sides trolls, throwing spaghetti at the wall, selling narratives.... politics.
So a troll using a troll from another area is not relevant if this is indeed being done to set up a troll?
That's some courts in the US, that's not the ICC. It would cease to exists near instantly.
I appreciate that you are that confident in them and their goals.
There's no reason or precedent to think it is doing any of that, that's just pretend, to create a narrative, a spin, yours.
Ok.
A lot of career officials right now can say the same thing though, so while I have zero problem with them bringing this lawsuit, prior to actual trials I won't hold my breath about the validity of it.
The international community, legal experts from all colors and flavors, the ICC, *I*, we are not attacking Biden, we are not trolling a both sides story (I am too pro-israel and more reluctantly pro-Palestine), we are extremely dissappointed by Biden's and Blinken's knee-jerk responses and poor arguments that will never ever be considered valid reasonable responses at something like the ICC.
Could that be because all those people who are disappointed are just not as read in on what is going on behind the scenes to help end this horrendous war that is being conducted and don't understand the tight rope that dealing with essentially two terrorist (Bibi and Hamas) trying/willing to kill everyone in-between them to get at one another?
Biden's and Blinken's knee-jerk responses and poor arguments that will never ever be considered valid reasonable responses at something like the ICC.
So then what I read this as being is that by coming out and condemning this, it really doesn't change shit that the ICC does so it is cheap politics that they can toss out there to hopefully keep them and the terrorists killing everyone in between them at the table for as long as it takes to end this shit?
Nobody suggest outrage to Biden's comments, that's the world upsidedown, it was Biden who claimed it's outrageous.
I apologize, based on the last sentence, 'disappointed' would be more appropriate in this case.
Which is like cherrypicking from the bible if you understand your history and how we and the US came to be...
I don't get it.
The answer to your other question: "What are they actively doing to try to obstruct this?" is in the first 5 words where you cut off my quote, the remaining part of this sentence.
If I cut off words in your quote I did not intend to do that.
K I double checked, I think you just missed that I actually did not cut those, they are just in the part above it.
The answer to your other question: "What are they actively doing to try to obstruct this?" is in the first 5 words where you cut off my quote, the remaining part of this sentence.
How is the ICC knowing it would cause backlash, and Biden backlashing about how it is unhelpful behind the scenes actively obstructing it? America as far as I know isn't even part of the ICC and are not doing anything to stop anything.
Excellent article:
With interesting tidbit:
The Rome Statute allows the UN Security Council to draw on its Chapter VII authority to vote to defer for 12 months any investigation of sitting officials on the basis that an indictment or arrest warrant would create an impediment to peace and security.
This would be a legal and legitimate strategy available to the US (or any member of the UNSC) for postponing further action by the court. Of course, the success of this strategy would require the other permanent UNSC members to agree to refrain from using their veto.
I didn't go further because of the cookies, but sounds good to me.
Biden should stick with trying to being peace in the region and sticking to doing what we can to get food through that pier to help the northern Gazans, and making sure that the potshots trying to kill innocent people throughout the region do as little damage sa possible. And other outside aggitator dictators have as hard a time as possible to help take advantage of this war by increasing the heat on their own neighbors.
Trump was horrible for this region, he has a lot to answer for the instability caused by Netanyahu when he just signed America's name on the line to do whatever the hell Bibi wanted and thought they could get away with.
www.memri.org
