UN expert; CIA guilty of war crimes.

[moon]

UN Official: CIA Drone Strikes on Rescuers a War Crime

The UN’s expert on extrajudicial killings has described a tactic used by the CIA and first exposed by a Bureau investigation as ‘a war crime’.

Earlier this year the Bureau and the Sunday Times revealed the CIA was deliberately targeting rescuers and funeral-goers in its Pakistan drone strikes. Those controversial tactics have reportedly been revived.


http://www.juancole.com/2012/06/un-official-cia-drone-strikes-on-rescuers-a-war-crime.html

War crimes criminals throughout the history of the charges have refused to accept the authority of their accusers. *I don't suppose that the US of AIPAC will behave any differently. *
That is, until actual charges are brought. *

[Peter1469]

I said this several years ago. The CIA and its officers are not combatants under international law, and take on such roles at their peril.

[Calypso Jones]

Just out of curiosity. does soros fund this particular un council??

[URF8]

War crimes criminals throughout the history of the charges have refused to accept the authority of their accusers. *I don't suppose that the US of AIPAC will behave any differently. *
That is, until actual charges are brought. *

Why are you afraid to speak the name of the war criminal Obama? It's necessary to identify the source of evil in order to provide a context.

[Peter1469]

Just out of curiosity. does soros fund this particular un council??

I suspect that the US funds most of it, like it funds most of the UN budget.

[moon]

Why are you afraid to speak the name of the war criminal Obama? It's necessary to identify the source of evil in order to provide a context.

*Singling out Droneman will let the multitudes of other guilty Americans off the hook.*

[Peter1469]

Currently no Americans are on the hook. If enough nations decide that drones are a problem there will be treaties like the ones on land mines. The US would likely never sign such a treaty and would continue to us drones as we use landmines. Recall the US started marking the positions of landmines so they could be dealt with when no longer needed.

[moon]

Currently no Americans are on the hook.

*The UN expert's accusation implies differently.


UN expert; CIA guilty of war crimes.

[Peter1469]

*The UN expert's accusation implies differently.


But no Americans are on the hook. I agree that CIA acting as a combatant violates international law. But the US isn't going to prosecute its CIA. Nor will it allow some international court to do so.

As I said, no Americans are on the hook.

[Deadwood]

Accusations of war crimes and the actual laying of charges under international law is a different matter, convictions are another galaxy.

So, from that perspective, of what then is America guilty? Drone attacks? Nope. While these may be a violation of sovereignty, they are not war crimes. The killing of Obama sin Baden? Ummmm, doubt you'd ever make it stick.

But, before we go down that road, because if you do you then have a serious problem with Russia, France, Britain, Canada, Poland and anybody that set foot in Libya.....

In any event, anytime anyone says "UN" anything, I think about a hundred or more countries with an axe to grind against the west generally and the US specifically.

[moon]

As I said, no Americans are on the hook.


That depends greatly upon one's definition of ' hook '

http://www.juancole.com/2012/06/drone-questions-for-americans-jamiol-cartoon.html

[moon]

So, from that perspective, of what then is America guilty? Drone attacks? Nope. While these may be a violation of sovereignty, they are not war crimes.

Evidently the UN disagrees. * Worldwide, I'd say that the public agrees with the UN. * That puts the US of AIPAC in a corner- * *and open to any hooking processes.*

[Chris]

The UN has no authority over the US.

"Worldwide, I'd say that the public agrees with the UN."

Your evidence for this is what?



Also, what is the significance of your heavy use of asterisks?

[Peter1469]

The US pays somewhere around 70% of the UN's costs, so I would agree that the UN has no authority over the US. It is the other way around.

[Deadwood]

The US pays somewhere around 70% of the UN's costs, so I would agree that the UN has no authority over the US. It is the other way around.

That figure seems high. For years the USSR was deliberately "behind" in payments, but it has changed. But, the US does wield a lot of power through its foreign aid, Nato partners and historical friends.

The point is, that the UN is a political body not a legal one. It has no business going anywhere near "war crimes", because iof you open that door just about every country, every leader is exposed.

If the US is even officially mentioned, what then of China's role in Tibet? Russia in the Urals? Pakistan? And about 17 African countries, along with half of central America.

It's headline grabbing bullshit.

[Peter1469]

This link says the US funds 22% of the regular budget and 21% of the peacekeeping budget.
http://www.betterworldcampaign.org/issues/funding/

[URF8]

*Singling out Droneman will let the multitudes of other guilty Americans off the hook.*

My dear, all Americans are your enemies. No exceptions. However, only one of us has the power to kill multitudes of your primitive people with death from above. His name is Barack Obama. Your inability to speak his name does not bespeak seriousness on your part. No offense intended to you personally.

[URF8]

That depends greatly upon one's definition of ' hook '

http://www.juancole.com/2012/06/drone-questions-for-americans-jamiol-cartoon.html

Do you oppose all occupations with equal vehemence? I think not. I think you are inconsistent. Inconsistency precludes intellectual honesty.

[KSigMason]

In other news does anyone care what some UN shmuck thinks?

[moon]

The UN has no authority over the US.


The US of AIPAC is answerable to international law - *even if it sometimes manages to slither out from under the threat of prosecution.




"Worldwide, I'd say that the public agrees with the UN."

Your evidence for this is what?



Also, what is the significance of your heavy use of asterisks?

I read the papers.

The asterisks are due to some fault with the site software- * *I'm not posting them.*

[moon]

In other news does anyone care what some UN shmuck thinks?
Sure. *The UN has a great deal more authority than...say.....a two-bit masonic lodge in the sticks. *

[Peter1469]

The US of AIPAC is answerable to international law - *even if it sometimes manages to slither out from under the threat of prosecution.



I read the papers.

The asterisks are due to some fault with the site software- * *I'm not posting them.*


International law is not so concrete as national legal codes. There is a concept known as customary international law which means that the actions of States matter. States often act differently from written law.

[Peter1469]

Sure. *The UN has a great deal more authority than...say.....a two-bit masonic lodge in the sticks. *

What about the masonic lodges in the power centers of the world?

[Chris]

The US of AIPAC is answerable to international law - *even if it sometimes manages to slither out from under the threat of prosecution.



I read the papers.

The asterisks are due to some fault with the site software- * *I'm not posting them.*


The US of AIPAC is answerable to international law

Cite the law please.


I read the papers.

Good for you but I didn't ask you what you do in your spare time, I asked where's your evidence "Worldwide, I'd say that the public agrees with the UN." Well?


The asterisks are due to some fault with the site software- * *I'm not posting them.*

You know those asterisks are six-pointed stars like the Star of David.

[Peter1469]

The Geneva Conventions define who are lawful combatants and if you don't fit into that definition, you are a civilian. (I think we need a 3rd category- illegal combatant). CIA officers don't come close to meeting the definition of lawful combatants.

[moon]

Cite the law please.

Cite the case.




*Good for you but I didn't ask you what you do in your spare time, I asked where's your evidence "Worldwide, I'd say that the public agrees with the UN." Well?
That particular aspect of truth is discernable by reading the world's papers- *just like I said.




You know those asterisks are six-pointed stars like the Star of David.

You're wrong. *There is no point to the Star of David.

http://www.nkusa.org/images/flag-ani.gif
http://www.nkusa.org/

[Chris]

Cite the case.


That particular aspect of truth is discernable by reading the world's papers- *just like I said.




You're wrong. *There is no point to the Star of David.

http://www.nkusa.org/images/flag-ani.gif
http://www.nkusa.org/


Cite the case.

You made the claim. I take it then you can't support it.


That particular aspect of truth is discernable by reading the world's papers- *just like I said.

You made the claim. I take it then you can't support it.


You're wrong. *There is no point to the Star of David.

That's just outright wrong.

http://i.snag.gy/bhAes.jpg

[moon]

You made the claim. I take it then you can't support it.

That would be a very silly conclusion. *If you want to talk about law then you have to specify the nature of the case to which it applies. **






That's just outright wrong.

http://i.snag.gy/bhAes.jpg

No, there is no point to Zionism- *just as there is no point to armed robbery anywhere else.*

[wingrider]

You made the claim. I take it then you can't support it.



You made the claim. I take it then you can't support it.



That's just outright wrong.

http://i.snag.gy/bhAes.jpg that sure is a pretty star

[moon]

that sure is a pretty star

That's an indefensibly silly post.*

[Chris]

That would be a very silly conclusion. *If you want to talk about law then you have to specify the nature of the case to which it applies. **






No, there is no point to Zionism- *just as there is no point to armed robbery anywhere else.*

Again, you fail to support your case. If you want to discuss your claim you need to be able to support it, not pass the buck to others to do your work for you.

And your word games are unimpressive.

And you keep posting the Star of David.

[Chris]

That's an indefensibly silly post.*

Now you're projecting. Making outrageous claims that you can't substantiate and defend is silly.

[moon]

Again, you fail to support your case. If you want to discuss your claim you need to be able to support it, not pass the buck to others to do your work for you.I said-"The US of AIPAC is answerable to international law "You said-" Cite the law please."I said" Cite the case "This you have failed to do. Here's your final chance to debate with some decorum.
Making outrageous claims that you can't substantiate and defend is silly.As anybody can see, I haven't made any ' outrageous claims '. You are attempting to create a drama in order to cover your own debating inadequacies......and I think you mean the Star of Asterix ;http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/29/Asterixcover-asterix_the_gaul.jpg/250px-Asterixcover-asterix_the_gaul.jpg

[Chris]

I said-"The US of AIPAC is answerable to international law "You said-" Cite the law please."I said" Cite the case "This you have failed to do. Here's your final chance to debate with some decorum.As anybody can see, I haven't made any ' outrageous claims '. You are attempting to create a drama in order to cover your own debating inadequacies......and I think you mean the Star of Asterix ;http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/29/Asterixcover-asterix_the_gaul.jpg/250px-Asterixcover-asterix_the_gaul.jpg

Still nothing.

But you stopped posting those Stars of David. :-)

[MMC]

Evidently the UN disagrees. * Worldwide, I'd say that the public agrees with the UN. * That puts the US of AIPAC in a corner- * *and open to any hooking processes.* .....snip~


Hmmm from Post 12 it started with Worldwide, then Chris asked for a link on that first. Which there is no proof Worldwide that public agrees with the UN.

Chris then asked again where the link was and Moons repsonse was he reads the papers. Now it's to the US of Aipac is answerable to International law. With such an advanced debating tactic one would think staying on point would be key. Don'tcha think? :rollseyes:

[moon]

Newspapers, worldwide, agree with the UN expert's opinion on Droneman's program. Go look. Don't ask for links to newspapers worldwide. It's impractical. Chris has failed to cite a case. When he does , the relevant international law will follow. Why don't you attempt to help him out .

[MMC]

Newspapers, worldwide, agree with the UN expert's opinion on Droneman's program. Go look. Don't ask for links to newspapers worldwide. It's impractical. Chris has failed to cite a case. When he does , the relevant international law will follow. Why don't you attempt to help him out .

Was there some sort of comparison as to any others when it concerns Countries that break International Law. What does droneman say about the Charity of the US. Or all those humanitarian causes.. See thing is.....if it is like you say. Then why do they all want to come here? Thats the four corners of the globe.

[moon]

Waffle. The issue is the UN expert's condemnation of Droneman's program- and the UN opinion is widely supported.

[Peter1469]

Waffle. The issue is the UN expert's condemnation of Droneman's program- and the UN opinion is widely supported.

Sure. But we will have to see how it plays out. The US was against the modern convention of territorial waters. But enough other nations were for it that the US gave in. That is how international law works.

Unfortunately other nations will likely start using drones themselves and thereby legitimize them.

[KSigMason]

Sure. *The UN has a great deal more authority than...say.....a two-bit masonic lodge in the sticks. *
The UN's "authority" ends at our sovereignty.

[KSigMason]

You're wrong. *There is no point to the Star of David.
I guess there would be no point to Muslims.


What about the masonic lodges in the power centers of the world?
Yeah, I'm not sure what relevance bringing the Lodge had. I just know he has contempt for Freemasonry.

[moon]

The UN's "authority" ends at our sovereignty.Treaties take precedence.

[Peter1469]

Treaties take precedence.

Only when States follow the treaty.

[moon]

Only when States follow the treaty.

Yes, that's what treaties are for.*

[KSigMason]

Treaties take precedence.
Treaties cannot supersede or negate our Constitution, they must work in conjunction with, but they cannot supersede. I cite Reid v Covert as one example. Do some research next time.

Logically (I know, I know, you hate logic) speaking, why would we allow foreign countries to supersede our Laws without our consent? That's just f***ing stupid.

Here is a nice quote from one of my favorite Founders:

Surely the President and Senate can not do by treaty what the whole government is interdicted from doing in any way.
-- Thomas Jefferson

[moon]

Treaties cannot supersede or negate our Constitution, they must work in conjunction with, but they cannot supersede. I cite Reid v Covert as one example. Do some research next time.

Logically (I know, I know, you hate logic) speaking, why would we allow foreign countries to supersede our Laws without our consent? That's just f***ing stupid.

Here is a nice quote from one of my favorite Founders:

Surely the President and Senate can not do by treaty what the whole government is interdicted from doing in any way.
-- Thomas Jefferson

Is this the level of thinking done by fully-grown men wearing antlers and little leather aprons ? * * Treaties trump domestic law so get used to being subservient to humanitarian values. **

[Trinnity]

The US bows to the UN at the discretion of the POTUS. We happen to have a globalist in the WH at the present time, but that can easily change in November.

[MMC]

Is this the level of thinking done by fully-grown men wearing antlers and little leather aprons ? * * Treaties trump domestic law so get used to being subservient to humanitarian values. **


First you have to have power.....Which Clearly none in the ME have. So just how do you enforce your global law? Especially when out of the entire planet and all armed Countries. The Arab ME Countries are the weakest in the entire world. So just how does the gnat defeat a Lion?

No innovation, no technologies, and no future. Guess you can become an Obamabot and run with that Hope and Change thingy. Tell you what. Keep waiting on it!

[Chris]

Is this the level of thinking done by fully-grown men wearing antlers and little leather aprons ? * * Treaties trump domestic law so get used to being subservient to humanitarian values. **

One, as a mod I say let's cut the personal jabs. If you disagree with what someone says, please argue it rationally instead of emotionally.

Two, as a member just having fun I say I see your Stars of David are back.

[moon]

One, as a mod I say let's cut the personal jabs. If you disagree with what someone says, please argue it rationally instead of emotionally.

Two, as a member just having fun I say I see your Stars of David are back.

One. I'm entitled to satirize the masonic organization if I so choose. *Any members of that pathetically silly band of overblown schoolboys posting here should understand that my contempt for their club does not extend to them personally- *and so should you. *

*Two, we've already established that it's the Star of Asterix. *In English, asterisks usually have only five points. *They are six-pointed in the Serif typeface.* *If you ever fancy putting your sectarian nonsense against my calligraphical* assertion just front up. * *Just having fun as a member, naturally.*

Three, this post directly contradicts your rules;


I guess there would be no point to Muslims. *#41.

I don't see you donning your mods' hat in any consistent sense. **

[Chris]

One. I'm entitled to satirize the masonic organization if I so choose. *Any members of that pathetically silly band of overblown schoolboys posting here should understand that my contempt for their club does not extend to them personally- *and so should you. *

*Two, we've already established that it's the Star of Asterix. *In English, asterisks usually have only five points. *They are six-pointed in the Serif typeface.* *If you ever fancy putting your sectarian nonsense against my calligraphical* assertion just front up. * *Just having fun as a member, naturally.*

Three, this post directly contradicts your rules;

*#41.

I don't see you donning your mods' hat in any consistent sense. **

As a mod I addressed your personal jab at other members. It was a friendly warning. It's not up for debate. It applies to you and anyone else.

[moon]

I'm not intending, nor offering, to debate it. *I'm pointing out that* I'm entitled to satirize the masonic organization if I so choose. * Which I do. * Masons , *Junior Elks or whatever should not take such satire personally.*

*And asterisks generally have five points in English, not six, like the bloodstained star of the synthetic State of Israel.* *Just a friendly reminder.*

Topic;


What is the Government Hiding about its Drone Assassinations?



Over the past year, the American Civil Liberties Union and reporters at The New York Times have filed several requests under the Freedom of Information Act seeking information about the CIA’s drone program and the legal justification for attacks that killed terrorists and U.S. citizens. The government answered with a Glomar response — neither verifying nor denying that it has such documents.

So both the Times and the ACLU sued, claiming that there is widespread acknowledgement by government officials of drones and targeted killing, as well as the CIA’s involvement.
http://www.juancole.com/2012/06/what-is-the-government-hiding-about-its-drone-assassinations-currier.html


American Civil Liberties Union and reporters at The New York Times suing a government accused of war crimes ? * What strange times we live in. * Let's bring back honor, truth and decency associated with freedom.*

[Chris]

Your refusal to accept a friendly moderator suggestion will be referred to the other mods. Out of my hands now.


-----------------------



*Two, we've already established that it's the Star of Asterix. *In English, asterisks usually have only five points. *They are six-pointed in the Serif typeface.* *If you ever fancy putting your sectarian nonsense against my calligraphical* assertion just front up. * *Just having fun as a member, naturally.*


*And asterisks generally have five points in English, not six, like the bloodstained star of the synthetic State of Israel.* *Just a friendly reminder.*

Interesting how you now defend a software bug.

Remember, you earlier claimed the stars of David were software bugs:


The asterisks are due to some fault with the site software- * *I'm not posting them.*

So which is it, moon?

[moon]

Your refusal to accept a friendly moderator suggestion will be referred to the other mods. Out of my hands now. Trolling/insult deleted
Interesting how you now defend a software bug.Remember, you earlier claimed the stars of David were software bugs:So which is it, moon?Defend a software bug ? What are you talking about ? Why is it that everybody here resorts to pompous gibberish when they can't get their own way in a debate ? You LOST the asterisk exchange. The asterisks are nothing to do with me. YOU decided to make them into some sort of sectarian symbol- except they're not.You've also refused to follow the topic as laid down in post #52.

[Peter1469]

Yes, that's what treaties are for.*

But that is my point. Oftentimes States sign treaties and ignore them. Look at Kyoto. Hardly any State met (or even tried to meet) their obligations.

[KSigMason]

Is this the level of thinking done by fully-grown men wearing antlers and little leather aprons ? * * Treaties trump domestic law so get used to being subservient to humanitarian values. **
So instead of arguing logically, and attempting to refute my FACTS, you attack an organization I belong to. Quite pathetic.

I'd like the UN to try and enforce anything. What are they going to do, write a sternly written letter? Oh my.


One. I'm entitled to satirize the masonic organization if I so choose.
You sure do, but how is it relevant to the topic? It's not. Instead of attacking the message and joining in civil discussion, you mudsling and attack the messenger.


*Any members of that pathetically silly band of overblown schoolboys posting here should understand that my contempt for their club does not extend to them personally- *and so should you. *
I promise you, I haven't worn antlers in years, but some of our outfits can be...silly. I could care less though for your contempt of my organization, but as I said before, it has no relevance in this topic, unless my very presence warrants attacks against the Masons regardless of the topic at hand. You have some growing up to do buddy.

[Peter1469]

Is this the level of thinking done by fully-grown men wearing antlers and little leather aprons ? * * Treaties trump domestic law so get used to being subservient to humanitarian values. **

The US Senate has refused to ratify many treaties for precisely that reason: they felt that the treaty did not pass Constitutional muster, so they refused to ratify it.

[moon]

But that is my point. Oftentimes States sign treaties and ignore them. Look at Kyoto. Hardly any State met (or even tried to meet) their obligations.

*The US never ratified Kyoto- *to its everlasting shame.* Ratification ties you in. *Take international waters treaties as an example, albeit not perfect. *Domestic voices might rage and spit but those boundaries are going nowhere without international treaty. * Breaking such treaties would be fatal to any administration. *The notion that domestic concern overrides international treaty is the dream of false patriots with a hard-on for trouble.*

[moon]

The US Senate has refused to ratify many treaties for precisely that reason: they felt that the treaty did not pass Constitutional muster, so they refused to ratify it.

***Sure, the government of the day has to agree treaties and ratification seals them, but once completed they dominate policy. *A megalomaniac like Adolf might drive his tanks- *or drones- *through them but look what happened to him.* * You might even say that failure to abide by Kyoto broke America. * Without constraints the rest of the industrialized world overtook the US and bought it. * Sixteen trillion already, is it ?* *And a filthy planet.*

[MMC]

Hey Moon.....are you from Palestine? Are you a Arab? What is your Country of Origin? So why are you against the US?

Ever had to get into it with an American? Is the reason you are so upset with Americans due to the fact that some American put his foot off into your azz. Gave you that azz-whipping you deserve.....huh? Due to all that shit-talkin you do?

[moon]

Hey Moon.....are you from Palestine? Are you a Arab? What is your Country of Origin? So why are you against the US?

Ever had to get into it with an American? Is the reason you are so upset with Americans due to the fact that some American put his foot off into your azz. Gave you that azz-whipping you deserve.....huh? Due to all that shit-talkin you do?




*I wouldn't dignify such a disgraceful outburst with a relevant response. **

Chris;

One, as a mod I say let's cut the personal jabs.

Go get him, Chris.*

[Chris]

*I wouldn't dignify such a disgraceful outburst with a relevant response. **

Chris;


Go get him, Chris.*

Yes, he shouldn't get personal, nor should you, like with your "Why is it that everybody here resorts to pompous gibberish when they can't get their own way in a debate ?"

And, once again, this is not debatable. You've already been warned and had arguments with moderation deleted, so don't bother.

[moon]

I repeat my effort to filter all this pompous crap from post #52 and to resurrect the topic;


What is the Government Hiding about its Drone Assassinations?*



Over the past year, the American Civil Liberties Union and reporters at The New York Times have filed several requests under the Freedom of Information Act seeking information about the CIA’s drone program and the legal justification for attacks that killed terrorists and U.S. citizens. The government answered with a Glomar response — neither verifying nor denying that it has such documents.

So both the Times and the ACLU sued, claiming that there is widespread acknowledgement by government officials of drones and targeted killing, as well as the CIA’s involvement.
http://www.juancole.com/2012/06/what...s-currier.html


**Anybody resorting to further off-topic personal attacks is a hypocritical troll. *

[MMC]

*I wouldn't dignify such a disgraceful outburst with a relevant response. **

Chris;


Go get him, Chris.*


Of course you wouldn't.....which is why you don't want people to know what Country you are from or what you are. Afraid they will start bashing your country and that sect you come from.

Funny how you a troll....come here talking shit about the US and Israel. Then when people start coming at you for things you cry. Then if they are a Mod you are so concerned that it is a mod that is talking to you. Yet you have no problem throwing your digs in. Like your little US of AIPAC deal. Your little humor at astericks. All that little tedious bullshit that a gnat does to giant. Trolling to illicit a response huh Moon.

You have got into with four mods now. All over your incessant whining that no one will debate you with the tactics you would want. Seems you want respect but don't give any.

So I am going to give it to you straight Moon. If you don't like it here and the all the Mods are a problem, and most of the members here are a problem to you. Then don't let the door hit you in the azz on the way out. Catch my meaning. Now you can go cry to the Admin and tell him MMC was picking on you. Here want me to report myself Moon. YO ADMIN.....Come and see what I had to say to this Individual.

I mean you say you are so intelligent correct.....then why would someones who is allegedly intelligent hang out with a bunch of people he don't like nor get along with them. Hell if a couple of us didn't come into your's and your pal's threads. No one would be. As you can see 95% of the liberals avoid Foreign Affairs. Plus over 7/8ths of this site avoids you.

So now you got it straight and now you know where you are standing. Capece!

[Chris]

Of course you wouldn't.....which is why you don't want people to know what Country you are from or what you are. Afraid they will start bashing your country and that sect you come from.

Funny how you a troll....come here talking shit about the US and Israel. Then when people start coming at you for things you cry. Then if they are a Mod you are so concerned that it is a mod that is talking to you. Yet you have no problem throwing your digs in. Like your little US of AIPAC deal. Your little humor at astericks. All that little tedious bullshit that a gnat does to giant. Trolling to illicit a response huh Moon.

You have got into with four mods now. All over your incessant whining that no one will debate you with the tactics you would want. Seems you want respect but don't give any.

So I am going to give it to you straight Moon. If you don't like it here and the all the Mods are a problem, and most of the members here are a problem to you. Then don't let the door hit you in the azz on the way out. Catch my meaning. Now you can go cry to the Admin and tell him MMC was picking on you. Here want me to report myself Moon. YO ADMIN.....Come and see what I had to say to this Individual.

I mean you say you are so intelligent correct.....then why would someones who is allegedly intelligent hang out with a bunch of people he don't like nor get along with them. Hell if a couple of us didn't come into your's and your pal's threads. No one would be. As you can see 95% of the liberals avoid Foreign Affairs. Plus over 7/8ths of this site avoids you.

So now you got it straight and now you know where you are standing. Capece!MMC, as a moderator I suggest you not take personal jabs at others.

I'm going to close this thread for a bit to let things cool off.