censored input to 'Israel is not above the law'

 
[This post may evolve; update 1, 2.]

-=*=-

'Target comment' by Haha : @ 25May'10,6:59pm

"If you believe Israel is in breach of the law, then how do you reconcile the fact that:

1. Israel always has at least an arguable legal case for the issues you mention,

2. The International Court has made no binding resolutions on such issues, and

3. No successful legal case has been brought against Israel on such issues, in the sixty years since its creation?

Two possibilities there. The first is that Israel somehow controls the entire UN and the entire international justice system.

The second possibility is that your opinion on those issues might be wrong."

Reply Alert moderator

My response, posted 26May'10,12:51am

«The absence of a criminal record does not imply the innocence of the accused - this is a fallacy of the non sequitur type.

Proof: *ALL* perpetrators start out with no record.

Further, a 62+ year record of 'no conviction entered' may well be due to serious corruption of the justice system.

Proof: *These* perpetrators live in half of a duplex, 'gifted' to them by the so-called applicable 'justice system.'

(One could argue that that 'system' had no right to do such gifting; I do so argue, as slightly more strenuously, do the ELO/Os - erstwhile legal owner/occupiers - mostly hapless Palestinians.)

Further, the very same perpetrators illegally occupy most of the other half of the duplex.

Proof: Most if not all 3rd party countries, including the perpetrators very own 'protectors' acknowledge the illegality of the occupation.

Further, the perpetrators claim to 'own' their protectors' Congress. A parliament amenable to being 'owned' is also corrupt.

Please consider:
"The Federal Government is expelling an Israeli diplomat after it found Israel faked Australian passports that were used in a hit on a top Hamas leader in Dubai."
[abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/05/24/2907598.htm]

Repeat: "... Israel faked Australian passports ..."»

Above did not appear; my retry, posted 26May'10,3:51pm

«The absence of a criminal record does not imply the innocence of the accused - this is a fallacy of the non sequitur type.

Proof: *ALL* perpetrators start out with no record.

Further, a 62+ year record of 'no conviction entered' may well be due to serious corruption of the so-called justice system.

Proof: The absence of convictions does *not* imply an absence of offences.

Please refer to the prior discussions re: alien invaders vs. erstwhile legal owner/occupiers.

Please refer to the prior discussions re: abuse of occupation.

Proof: Most if not all 3rd party countries, including the perpetrators very own 'protectors' acknowledge the illegality of the occupation 'settlements.'

Further, the alleged perpetrators claim to 'own' their protectors' Congress. A parliament amenable to being 'purchased' is also corrupt.

Both the abuse of the occupation and the act of corrupting are usually considered to be criminal acts.

Please consider:
"The Federal Government is expelling an Israeli diplomat after it found Israel faked Australian passports that were used in a hit on a top Hamas leader in Dubai."
[abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/05/24/2907598.htm]

Repeat: "... Israel faked Australian passports ..."»

waiting...

-=*=-
 
Update 1; 11:45. AusBC comment clock now 6:19:13pm; well past my 2nd try time; assume censored.

[«back»]

-=*=-
 
Update 2; 27May'10,7:47. Next submit @ 26May'10,11:03pm also failed to appear; assume censored:

«JohnnoH @ 25May'10,8:14pm

"Israel has the God given right to exist ..."

Um.

Could we see the evidence, please?


JohnnoH @ 25May'10,8:07pm

"You mean it was a criminal act for the Jews to regain their homeland in 1947?"

Um.

Could we see the pre-'47 title deeds, please?

Then let the people - honestly, openly & fully informed - decide.»

What to do? Lost my democratic voice to AusBC censorship.

[«back»]