The first to ignore the UN??? Many did so pre 1980... Shall we list them, even European nations???
On Apr 8, 2:09 pm, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: > If I'm not mistaken the US does not consider six men (Che had resigned from > ALL Cuban service) talking politics and basicallly starving in the outback > to be a reasonable threat... in this case there is no point to be made by > you. As far as some of the other excursions made by Cuba during their > "foreign travels", those soldiers were on loan to the Soviet bloc.... Is the > US responsible for UN actions ?? > > And as far as deserving to be convicted... what difference does it make... > the first to openly ignore the UN was indeed, you guessed it, the US under > Raygun Ronnie, when he unilaterally pulled the US from the ICJ jurisdiction > AFTER being convicted and an 18 billion dollar (still unpaid) verdict > was rendered for war crimes............ > > How soon the right points fingers forgetting they paved the way. > > On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 11:36 AM, dick thompson <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > What a contortionist you libs are. You think Castro was invited into > > Bolivia when he sent Che there? You think he was invited when he sent his > > people to the other countries? > > > THE ANNOINTED ONE wrote: > > > Should they ??? No. He has not made a single overt or covert move > > outside his borders that did not include an invitation of another (the > > affected) sitting sovereign government. That would be the US method > > and why the Spanish feel they have a right to act. > > > On Apr 8, 10:42 am, dick thompson <[email protected]> > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > You didn't answer my question. Should the US courts indict Castro? If > > he then showed up in NYC to speak at the UN he could then be arrested. > > Do you support that? > > > THE ANNOINTED ONE wrote: > > > They have the right to reach internationally on affairs they think > > affect or affected their interests in any way. > > > Gee, the US does just that as well. > > > On Apr 8, 8:33 am, dick thompson <[email protected]> > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > So then you would be with the program if the US courts put out an > > indictment against Castro or Mugabe or Putin? That would be just > > hunky-dory with you? > > > There was a reason that Saddam was tried in the Iraqi courts, not the US > > courts and that reason was the legal one that the Iraqis were setting up > > a Republic and had jurisdiction. > > > How on earth does Spain have any jurisdiction over the US officials in > > any way, shape or form. In fact how did they have any jurisdiction over > > Pinochet for that matter. This is little men playing games and trying > > to act as if they were big men - just like this rookie president we are > > stuck with now. > > > THE ANNOINTED ONE wrote: > > > Someone has to. > > > On Apr 7, 8:31 am, dick thompson <[email protected]> > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > http://online.wsj.com/video/spanish-court-weighs-charges-against-form...quoted > > text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > -- > Mark M. Kahle, ,www.filacoffee.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
