Chickens Come Home to Roost

[Danno 1,228]

What I do care about is rogue nations like Putin's Russia trampling on international law. That sets dangerous precedents - much like W's illegal war adventure has earlier this century.

There ya go with that "rule of Law" stuff again.

What rule of law did we stand on to help bring down the Libyan leader who was then murdered (not that I care).

I have already posted the UN agreement which allows peoples to decide their political fate.

That is a matter and rule of law.

Edited April 21, 2014 by Danno

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

There ya go with that "rule of Law" stuff again.

What rule of law did we stand on to help bring down the Libyan leader who was then murdered (not that I care).

I have already posted the UN agreement which allows peoples to decide their political fate.

That is a matter and rule of law.

The international intervention in Libya stood on solid legal ground. Specifically, it rested on UN Security Council Resolution 1973.

[Danno 1,228]

The international intervention in Libya stood on solid legal ground. Specifically, it rested on UN Security Council Resolution 1973.

The use of mercenaries is contrary to Un law.... even if your 1973 B.S. applied.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The use of mercenaries is contrary to Un law.... even if your 1973 B.S. applied.

You're much like Putin and Bush. You trample on international law and apply your imaginary whatever you want to call it instead. It's not worth having that debate with you. Find another Putin troll to get validation for your warped sense of international law. Or talk to Dennis Rodman - another one of those worshipers of the insanely authoritarian leaders.

[Danno 1,228]

You're much like Putin and Bush. You trample on international law and apply your imaginary whatever you want to call it instead. It's not worth having that debate with you. Find another Putin troll to get validation for your warped sense of international law. Or talk to Dennis Rodman - another one of those worshipers of the insanely authoritarian leaders.

Get a hold of yourself.

Do a search on a simple term such as electronic cigarettes banned (which are no more than vapor)

or FREE SPEACH ZONES.

OR any such movement and we will see one need not go far to find that old totalitarian spirit alive and well right here on our LEFT.

THis moment of clarity was a gem.

Boston Mayor Vows to Block Chick-fil-A From City

BOSTON (The Blaze/AP) — The mayor of Boston is vowing to block Chick-fil-A from opening a restaurant near the city’s “Freedom Trail” because of the company’s stance on gay marriage.

“Chick-fil-A doesn’t belong in Boston. You can’t have a business in the city of Boston that discriminates against a population. We’re an open city, we’re a city that’s at the forefront of inclusion,” Mayor Thomas M. Menino told the Boston Herald Thursday.

“That’s the Freedom Trail. That’s where it all started right here. And we’re not going to have a company, Chick-fil-A or whatever the hell the name is, on our Freedom Trail,” he added.

Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy told the Baptist Press this week that his privately owned company is “guilty as charged” in support of what he called the biblical definition of the family.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

[UncleBeer 244]

The international intervention in Libya stood on solid legal ground.

You'll just say any old thing, won't you? No conscience whatsoever.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

You'll just say any old thing, won't you? No conscience whatsoever.

Nice. An opinion piece. One that you will probably later claim was one of your presentations of fact. But that aside, we were actually talking about international law, Sherlock. Your opinion piece does not. Nice try there but you fail again. That's becoming something of a habit with you. I sometimes think you're Danno's sock-puppet.

[UncleBeer 244]

we were actually talking about international law

I'm far more concerned that the preznit tramples US laws (not to mention his own oath of office) than if he doesn't follow international rules. "Rule of law" indeed.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I'm far more concerned that the preznit tramples US laws (not to mention his own oath of office) than if he doesn't follow international rules. "Rule of law" indeed.

That's a different discussion that you are free to have. Just not with me.

[UncleBeer 244]

But that aside, we were actually talking about international law

Another example of your atrocious writing 'skillz'. Here's what you wrote:

The international intervention in Libya stood on solid legal ground.

You don't refer to international 'law' (which is a mess regardless and not to be given much credit; it's currently largely a constant stream of resolutions against 'Zionists'); you say only that the intervention stood on "solid legal ground". This while the preznit openly flouted the War Powers Act against the advice of all administration legal counsel. (cheer up: the link's from HuffPo; surely a credible lefty propaganda source)

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Another example of your atrocious writing 'skillz'. Here's what you wrote:

You don't refer to international 'law' (which is a mess regardless and not to be given much credit; it's currently largely a constant stream of resolutions against 'Zionists'); you say only that the intervention stood on "solid legal ground". This while the preznit openly flouted the War Powers Act against the advice of all administration legal counsel. (cheer up: the link's from HuffPo; surely a credible lefty propaganda source)

I gather that actually following a conversation would be too tasking for you. Talk about skills...