Time to take away all infidel technological devices not only the ones the certain ones choose they want
A devout Arab Muslim got into a cab in London. She curtly asked the 'cab driver' to turn off the radio because her religious doctrine forbade her listening to music.
The Cab driver politely asked why. His passenger replied that in the time of the Holy Prophet there was no music, especially Western music, which is the music of the infidel. The cab driver politely switched off the radio, stopped the cab and opened the door for his passenger to disembark. The Arab Muslim was surprised and asked him: "What are you doing???" The Cab driver answered: "In the time of the Holy Prophet, there were no taxis, no bombs, no plane hijacks, no west invented loud speakers in mosques that woke up newly born, the elderly and the sick at unearthly hours, no suicide attacks, no RDX, no AK 47; only 'PEACE' everywhere. So shut up, get Out and wait for a camel.
Americans intent on creating more problems in Europe and start a conflict with Russia instead of sorting out the mess they have created in Syria, Lybia etc.
How can a president about to leave make such a decision? Has the president-elect approved it? As far as I know, the government (or a president) about to leave should involve in routine business only, or am I wrong?
Nirvana? It wasn't what I meant when I said Norway was the best - i was referring to its beauty, I think I said before that Norway was better than Sweden.
BTW, I don't think we want "nirvana" as we know it is unrealistic, but we do want a country that prioritizes its own people and makes sure they are in as little danger as possible - Sweden obviously doesn't.
14. Parameter refers to a variable. It not mean "boundary condition" or "limit." Correct: "The forecast is based on parameters like inflation and interest rates." / "We need to work within budgetary limits."
The military say: secure the parameter. Doesn't it refer to the boundary then?
Right, and the wording was what concerned you most? I do agree I could have worded it a bit differently. What I wanted was to show who on earth can get on the council.
Your last sentence is perfect except for the last part of it - why is it always imperative that equal evil be found?
Again, I do agree that many other countries are not much better than some of the countries I listed, although they are waaay better than SA.
So: if there are no good countries that can qualify for such a council, let's ban the council rather than lower the standard! (and while we are at it, let's ban the UN as a whole as they do not serve their purpose anymore, what is worse is that they contribute to hell being created many times, seems heaven has always been out of question.
Been to all European countries except for: Albania, Portugal, Greece and Ireland. Visited Turkey, Georgia, Morocco, Tunisia. In the US visited: Texas, California, Washington DC and New York.
Never been to South and Central America - would love to visit Peru, Bolivia, Ecaudor and Columbia.
Never thought of visiting Pakistan, Asia is not that interesting to me.
Meet the 2017 membership of the U.N. Human Rights Council, elected by the United Nations with the mandate to “uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights“:
Saudi Arabia Venezuela China Cuba Iraq Qatar Burundi Bangladesh United Arab Emirates
The following gives you a review of the history of the region, the population throughout the history, the change of the name of the region, how the Brits/UN "resolved the ownership of the lands taken from the Otoman (Palestine - the area much, much larger than what we know today).
Of the 118,000 square kilometers originally assigned by the Mandate to create a Jewish homeland 91,000 had been given to the new Arab nation of Jordan. In later years Jordan would annex "the West Bank" which accounted for another 5700 sq km. Jordan share was now 96,700 sq km. The Golan heights were eventually given to Syria and The Gaza strip was occupied by Egypt. In total of the original land area of 118,000 sq km The Arabs received 98,000 sq km and the Jews ended up with 8000 sq km which they could inhabit and 12,000 sq km of the Negav Desert which they were not allowed to settle because 15,000 Bedouin were believed to "use" the Negav leaving it "out of bounds" for the Jews. This became known as the UN Partition plan. The Jews accepted the plan while the Arab nations rejected it. ".
The name of Palestine:
The name Palestine, which came from the Greek language and was adopted by the Romans, was given to the area when the Romans renamed "Judea" to remove the Jewish connection from the land.As we can see it didn't work. The Jews remain and they always will in their own land. But what of the Arab people who, also, can trace their history back thousands of years to the same area. What do they deserve. During the British Mandate the dividing of Palestine was to provide a homeland for the Jews and for the Arab population as well. The new country of Jordan was the Arab share of Palestine. After the new Kingdom of Jordan was set up by the British the Arab Palestinians found themselves "persons non gratis" They were no longer welcomed in Jordan. After the 1948 war there were hundreds of thousands of Arab Palestinians who found themselves refugees in the land that was rightfully theirs...Jordan.
I cannot find the article now, but remember that Kruschev was drunk when he just turned Crimea over to Ukraine, a republic in Russian Federation. Before that Crimea was autonomous, I think it was even one of the republics,
For those not completely brainwashed by MSM, read more here:
We are running in circles now obviously disagreeing on the history of the region and the cause of this last resolution.
I stand by what I said before completely convinced that:
- Isreal as a Jewish state has every right to exist where it is and no Palestinians/Arabs can question their legitimacy.
- the UN had better concentrate and pass at least a resolution or two condemning blatant human rights violations, eradication of other religious/ethnic groups etc. committed in other countries in ME in North Africa. This could then be seen as an attempt of showing the UN is not biased.
- the West should stop funding the Palestinians until they recognize the right of Isreal to exist and renounce their wow to annihilate Jews.
Peaceful Palestinians living in Israel are better off than if they were living anywhere else in that region.
I also think that 2 state solution is the only one, but it will not happen not because of the settlements, but because of the Palestinians that deny the Jews the right to live there as a nation.
I know, but grabbing the land that had not been of any interest to the Palestinians before cannot be compared to other atrocities committed by the other side or the other countries in that region - and yet the UN does not care. I do not condone taking that land, but let's admit that what the Israelis have done with that land is remarkable. In my opinion it just shows what can be done there but the Palestinians have never been interested in improving their lives, I guess it is easier to live off of donations, especially when the donors are stupid enough not to demand any concrete results.
True, we do not agree on what the problem is
As for the positive effect of the resolution - I am skeptical about that, I agree with Rizla that the resolution will be seen by Hamas, Hezbolla or whatever militants there are as carte blanche in their efforts to inflict as much damage as possible to Isreal.
The problem is that today the West is more concerned with "vile rhetoric" than the monstrous deeds committed in the mane of islam.
As for the political will - the UN focus/obsession with Isreal is the reflection of the political will turning a blind eye to the real problem - and we know how good the west is in doing that, so the muslim countries can do whatever they want. Not sure WTH New Zealand was involved in the last resolution though, I guess another US lapdog.
Capricorn143 Forum Posts (1,115)
I do agree I could have worded it a bit differently. What I wanted was to show who on earth can get on the council. 
RE: Should the United Nations be disbanded? Has it become discoloured
OMG and they will never stop when they have such support for killing!It is not their land, their land is Jordan! HISTORY!
There will be peace there when the Palestinians start loving their children more than they hate the Jews!