China slams new US-Iran sanctions as 'serious violation of intl rules'

reply to post by Gorman91



A star for your effort you can do basic image manipulation. The difference between my image and your image is that yours is not true. Where as mine is.

I recollect a saying you can bring a horse to water. But you cannot make it drink. I can point out the truth to you its up to you to think about it and to do your own research. I cannot be there to hold you hand all the time. I am not your mother.

reply to post by purplemer


So yea, uh...again....source?

reply to post by Alien Abduct


List of UN resolutions ignored by Israel

Israel leads in ignoring Security Coucil resolutions

List of United Nations resolutions concerning Israel

The Human Rights Council has adopted more resolutions condemning Israel than it has all other states combined

Israeli UN violations



I'm still looking on the United States.

It is my opinion that All countries abide by their obligations. And even if true it still doesn't change the fact that Iran is not complying with it's obligations so don't deflect.

reply to post by Alien Abduct



Pointing out the blatant hypocrisy and double standards is not deflecting.

So even if Israel or the United States ignores UN resolutions it doesn't matter because Iran is doing the same? Is that what you're saying? Basically just turning the argument around and trying to use it to justify your point of view.

So by that logic even if it's true that Iran is developing or has even acquired nuclear weapons it doesn't matter because Israel and the United States already have.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by purplemer

 

So yea, uh...again....source?

edit on 5-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

As of the year 2000, there were seven countries without a Rothschild-owned Central Bank: Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, Libya, Cuba, North Korea, Iran

Then along came the convenient terror of 9-11 and soon Iraq and Afghanistan had been added to the list, leaving only five countries without a Central Bank owned by the Rothschild Family: Sudan, Libya, Cuba, North Korea, Iran We all know how fast the Central Bank of Benghazi was set up. The only countries left in 2011 without a Central Bank owned by the Rothschild Family are:

www.thedailyeconomist.com...

reply to post by purplemer


Read the source, which lead to another source, which only said central bank....not anything about Rothschild.

The other source, which you quoted, reads:

mikephilbin.blogspot.com...

Nonexistent. Also it's a blog...blogs are not sources, at least not usually.


So....again.....Source?



Matter of fact, google searching the author, Kenneth Schortgen Jr, revealed very little. Google searching him + rothschild made it pretty clear that he's either talking out of his ass or being taken out of context.


So yea...Still waiting on a source here.



May I suggest the plausible possibility that there are only 3 central banks without Rthoschild INVESTORS, to which your claim would ultimately be groundless and irrelevant, and nothing short of either racism or hatred of an entire family just because of their name...

reply to post by Kram09


Perhaps you should look up a list of UN resolutions ignored by other countries.

I mean if you only look at one country, you will never find a good one.

You know, objectivity, multiple views, actual world averages....math.... Great stuff, it is.

reply to post by Gorman91



If you're so inclined why don't you provide them?

Yes you have a point, but seen as we're discussing three principal countries, Iran, The United States and Israel, my comments are still valid.

Again the tactic of ignoring one countries actions because everyone else does it, doesn't hold much water.

As I said previously, Israel has nuclear weapons and so does the United States, so let's not just look at Iran.

I mean if you only look at one country, you will never find a good one.

You know, objectivity, multiple views, actual world averages....math.... Great stuff, it is....


Are Israel and the United States prepared to open their facilities to international inspectors for the world to see?

Or is it one rule for them and one rule for another?

reply to post by Gorman91


I mean, you're so eager to keep demanding sources but when you're provided with some which don't match your world view you just conveniently dismiss them.

reply to post by Kram09



Well no, its actually your responsibility to show your claim is not an exception. Not mine. I did not make a claim, and I have no desire to waste my time finding them to counter you.

I am simply informing you that you are cutting out anything that could, oh, make you look bad.


As for American Inspections: www.nrc.gov...

Oh yea, why stop there?

www.spiegel.de...

www.iaea.org...

www.french-nuclear-safety.fr...

en.wikipedia.org...

You do realize we all check each other in the modern world right?

Why should secular nations that has decades of experience need international inspections when they simply have universally agreed standards? A nation like Iran is a theocracy. I wouldn't want them to have nuclear technology any more than the Pope or the Mormons.

If you're a theocracy, you ought to be checked by secular nations.

reply to post by Gorman91


Those links don't show anything.

The De Spiegel one is an interview with some German technicians and their experiences at Fukushima.

The wikipedia one...well I fail to see how that's relevant, again the United States and Israel are not mentioned, no mention of American or Israeli sites being opened up for inspection.

The others you've just given a link to their main page and not provided anything else, but you'll probably say it's my job to look....

reply to post by Gorman91

I wouldn't want them to have nuclear technology

You might not want Iran to have nuclear technology but they are perfectly within their rights to develop it.

reply to post by Kram09


They are nuclear regulations of the major world powers. You asked why America won't open itself to nuclear inspection from the world. Because we already do to our own people and have a proven track record. Even the Russians, yes even counting Chernobyl, have a pretty good record. As the Germans, and the French. Maybe even the Chinese, though I don't know because they don't make many things public (hmm, funny you don't go after them).

You know what they have in common?

Secular countries with proven sane leaders.


You know what Iran isn't? That.


Rights are not given to those who have proven themselves nonsensical and insane. A man who claims his nation has no gays does not have a right to nuclear technology.

Why do you think the entire world is always eying North Korea and Pakistan?

You know what more? America wouldn't deserve nuclear technology if someone crazy like Bachmann became president. Someone as batsh*t insane as her does not have a right to such things. And the only difference I see between her and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a cross instead of a crescent moon.


Crazy people do not have a right to technology that has the capacity to not only kill themselves but also everyone around them beyond their borders.

It's that simple.

reply to post by Kram09


I didn't know the inspectors were knocking at the doors of the American facilities?

Show me where the United States is breaking the NPT?

-Alien

reply to post by Gorman91

Perhaps you should look up a list of UN resolutions ignored by other countries.

Yes but the difference is some countries deem it fit to behave like world police. In such a postion you would expect them to adhere to the same laws as they enforce...

reply to post by Gorman91

They are nuclear regulations of the major world powers. You asked why America won't open itself to nuclear inspection from the world. Because we already do to our own people and have a proven track record

Proven track record of being the only country to use them bomb on a civilian population... Plz find embedded an image to highlight Americas proven track record.

reply to post by purplemer


OH HEY ANOTHER SOURCELESS IMAGE!

How about you list the organizations Iran has supported? How about you take off the list the nations the US have supported in the same way. Hmm, you seem to be forgetting Iraq also for Iran...


Better yet, include categories for all the nations I mentioned with nuclear regulations.


ha, well what do you know, you may find more in common than you would like.


But all the same, this is ignoring what I said. Iran is a theocracy. Not a secular government. You also attempted to change the point of the conversation by listing interventions, which are not indications of insanity or incompetence. The Soviet Union did the same in far many nations and far more continents, and for justifiable reasons too.

Originally posted by purplemer


Yes but the difference is some countries deem it fit to behave like world police. In such a postion you would expect them to adhere to the same laws as they enforce...

Some nations do find the need to act like police. If one nation is going to do it, you have to have another. You can't have one nation alone police the world. Russia, the EU, America, and China sound like sane, competent, secular groups to do it. Iran does not. And what laws do they enforce other than no nukes for crazy people. It's really that simple, and I am happy I live in a world where Russia China and the EU would probably bash the US in the face if someone like Bachmann got elected and tried to do anything. So yes, they actually do follow the laws they enforce because Bachmann sure as hell wouldn't have access to nukes without Chinese or Russian permission.


Oh and purplemer, did you find a source for your Rothschild claim yet?

reply to post by Gorman91

those who have proven themselves nonsensical and insane

All I'll say on this is:

I'm familiar with history and I've been following the news closely this past fortnight. I certainly know who have proven themselves nonsensical and insane and it's not the Iranians...

reply to post by Kram09


But of course not the Iranians if you limit it to only the last 2 weeks. If you'd been watching the news out of Iran since 2003, you'd know why they don't sound insane today. It's because over the past few years there has been a minor change of power. The ayatollah got fed up with Ahmadinejad's rhetoric, and so more or less ordered him silent. Some say he would be guaranteed to loose the next election if he kept it up. As a result, the insanity of Iran took a couple of sig figs down a notch. Now that the slightly sane Ayatollah is more or less running the nation.

They say the change of political power is defined in this recent image:




How long did it take you to see where the President is, compared to where the Ayatollah is? That's because the image purposefully is meant to make the President just look like one of many amongst the underlings.

....the photo is implied to state that Ahmadinejad is now under a leash. You can also see the Vice President, nearly invisible affront the religious power's forward force.


But that does not remove the insanity of their government in the past, and worse, that they still have power.

Simply put, you often shut the hell up when you have a military fleet on our front door and a couple thousand bombs pointed at you and all you've got are a few tanks and toys from the 70s and 80s.





I could go on into conspiracy waters. That maybe this was all planned. They are making it so that the nuclear facilities survive the war. It almost sounds like they are planning to die, so that their nation can live. Who knows. I don't. But that doesn't change the insanity in it all. To board up your nuclear facilities, but leave your cities wide open.

Originally posted by Gorman91

You do realize we all check each other in the modern world right?

Oh, Gorman91, you are by far the biggest hyppocrite ever.

The US stops "any" resolution in the UN security counsil it doesn't want to confirm to. So, only subcommisions of the UN are able to handle any cases of, lets say "Depleted Uranium". That DU was "banned" back in '96 following the use of it in Yougoslavia, didn't stop the US from using it in Iraq.

And Gorman91, I don't see you weep over the deformed infants born in Iraq.

Gorman91, the US is a coward ... it only attacks smaller, more or less defenseless nations with depleted uranium. They starve N-Korea, and then blame it on the N-Korean government ... in a drama, that sounds more like a B-Movie, than reality. Where the Italian-American mafia-boss, says to his victim after killing him ... "see what you made me do, it's your own fault".

I have yet to see the US, show any "cohones" (balls). And as people are pointing out, hey take on Israel ... they're the biggest baddy, among the baddies. You wanna disarm someone of their nuclear weapons, that's where you should start.

Affirmed that weapons of mass destruction and, in particular, nuclear weapons should have no role to play in international relations and thus should be eliminated;

That's what the UN says, so what is Israel doing with Nuclear weapons?

Putting it in English for you, if Israel has the right to threaten it's neighbors with Nuclear Weapons, then Iran has the right to develope the same and create a "nuclear-standoff".

This is just a "logical" argument ... but then is the new "stealth" boat, the US is developing.

Oh, here is a UN statement for ya.

rged all States to be guided in their national policies by the need to curb production and spread of weapons of mass destruction or with indiscriminate effect, in particular nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, fuel-air bombs, napalm, cluster bombs, biological weaponry and weaponry containing depleted uranium;

Am I reading "cluster-bombs" here ... isn't that what was used in Iraq? am I reading DU here? am I reading fuel-air bombs and napalm?

Oh, that sure makes the US a real good guy in Vietnam, doesn't it?

Agent Orange is the code name for one of the herbicides and defoliants used by the U.S. military as part of its herbicidal warfare program, Operation Ranch Hand, during the Vietnam War from 1961 to 1971. Vietnam estimates 400,000 people were killed or maimed, and 500,000 children born with birth defects.[1]

Agent Orange effect

Another Agent-Orange effect

Mai Lai - Goons

Here is another picture for you, Gorman91, it's probably the one Americans use as an example for "Blows your brains out".

Blows your mind

Americans cleaning the world of bad people

And here is the heritege the US leaves behind.

The US spreading liberty around the world


So when you're saying how the US is conforming to inspections and is playing a good guy, you are literally talking out of your behind, Gorman91. The US is a mass murderer, who has in his posession a weapon of mass destruction, and is using this weapon to threaten the entire world. And to ensure, that the US is excluded in all accounts of war crime. And more to the point, the US is the only nation in the world, that uses chemical weapons, radioactive weapons, and nuclear weapons.

The US can't be accused of war crimes ... because it alone holds the power to murder others.