Community > Posts By > northrn_yanke

 
no photo
Thu 02/28/08 08:53 AM
flowerforyou :heart: flowerforyou

no photo
Thu 02/28/08 08:48 AM
there are some in here that perpetrate the lie that the war in Iraq is illegal. Even though it's been proven they are lying they still lie about it....it's not illegal until there is a ruling from the court of jurisdiction that is is illegal

Here is the listing of all cases since 2000 in the International Court of Justice which is the only court with jurisdiction over the matter.....

* 2008 Proceedings instituted by Peru against Chile (Peru v. Chile)
More...

2008

* 2006 Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Djibouti v. France)
More...
* Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay)
More...
* Status vis-à-vis the Host State of a Diplomatic Envoy to the United Nations (Commonwealth of Dominica v. Switzerland)
More...

2006

* 2005 Dispute regarding Navigational and Related Rights (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua)
More...

2005

* 2004 Maritime Delimitation in the Black Sea (Romania v. Ukraine)
More...

2004

* 2003 Sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge (Malaysia/Singapore)
More...
* Certain Criminal Proceedings in France (Republic of the Congo v. France)
More...
* Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mexico v. United States of America)
More...

* 2003 Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory
More...

* 2002 Application for Revision of the Judgment of 11 September 1992 in the Case concerning the Land, Island and Maritime Frontier Dispute (El Salvador/Honduras: Nicaragua intervening)(El Salvador v. Honduras)
More...
* Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (New Application : 2002) (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Rwanda)
More...
* Frontier Dispute (Benin/Niger)
More...

2002

* 2001 Territorial and Maritime Dispute (Nicaragua v. Colombia)
More...
* Certain Property (Liechtenstein v. Germany)
More...
* Application for Revision of the Judgment of 11 July 1996 in the Case concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Yugoslavia), Preliminary Objections (Yugoslavia v. Bosnia and Herzegovina)
More...

2001

* 2000 Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Belgium)
More...





and here's a list of pending cases...nothing here either..

List of pending cases before the Court (order by date of introduction)

# 1. Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia)
Read more...
# 2. Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Republic of Guinea v. Democratic Republic of the Congo)
Read more...
# 3. Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda)
Read more...
# 4. Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Croatia v. Serbia and Montenegro)
Read more...
# 5. Territorial and Maritime Dispute (Nicaragua v. Colombia)
Read more...
# 6. Certain Criminal Proceedings in France (Republic of the Congo v. France)
Read more...
# 7. Sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge (Malaysia/Singapore)
Read more...
# 8. Maritime Delimitation in the Black Sea (Romania v. Ukraine)
Read more...
# 9. Dispute regarding Navigational and Related Rights (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua)
Read more...
# 10. Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay)
Read more...
# 11. Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Djibouti v. France)
Read more...
# 12. Proceedings instituted by Peru against Chile (Peru v. Chile)


no photo
Thu 02/28/08 08:23 AM
Edited by northrn_yanke on Thu 02/28/08 08:23 AM
been determined illegal by the international counsel.



laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh

no photo
Thu 02/28/08 08:18 AM
Edited by northrn_yanke on Thu 02/28/08 08:19 AM
is it still going around blabbing about an illegal war that it runs and hides from its lies when it couldn't prove it....funny how it calls Bush childish names but at least Bush has the guts to stand up for what himself....maybe it should take some lessons from President Bush..huh

no photo
Wed 02/27/08 07:36 PM

SO ARE YOU INFORMED OR USELESS?



that would all depend on who your asking..bigsmile

no photo
Wed 02/27/08 07:26 PM

well i guess eveyone has there own opinion


yes but some are informed and some are just useless....

no photo
Wed 02/27/08 06:52 PM





I suppose its just a coincidence that Bush is so well connected to the saudi's and the oil industry?


WRONG,PROVE IT. The Saudi's are considered an ally with the US, but the rest of your post belongs in the pile for the 'pooper scoopers' contents.

Lindyy
:heart: :heart:
Both then-president Bush and the current president have had personal and deep financial ties with the Saudi royal family. Author and journalist Craig Unger documents $1.4 billion that has “made its way” from the Saudi royal family to “entities tied” to the Bush family, according to Unger’s controversial book "House of Bush, House of Saud.”

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/20/politics/main612852.shtml


OH YES, the great left wing liberal media. How stupid of me not to know this!!!laugh laugh

Lindyy

dont be daft lydy I know your not stupid so tell me exactly what isnt true and prove it to me as you would attempt to prove something to a jury, being as our Hero Joe Friday would say "Just the facts ma'm"drinker


funny how your asking for proof....you do know what the words controversial and contends means don't ya..?

Both then-president Bush and the current president have had personal and deep financial ties with the Saudi royal family. Author and journalist Craig Unger documents $1.4 billion that has “made its way” from the Saudi royal family to “entities tied” to the Bush family, according to Unger’s controversial book "House of Bush, House of Saud.”

Unger contends that the documented oil holdings and affiliations of both Bush presidents has led to a policy of inaction in the post-Sept. 11 world.

no photo
Wed 02/27/08 06:44 PM
what his son did does not make his statement incorrect. spin away doc, but facts are facts. and by the way his sons crime was petty compared to Cheneys links to Halliburton


his son was arrested and tried so we know the facts and the evidence of his illegal activities...what facts do you have that Cheney and/or Halliberton committed any crimes?

no photo
Wed 02/27/08 06:04 PM
gives the impression that you are missing the point, or simply misunderstand the 'antitrust' aspect of the EC ruling.

Also, you incorrectly state that '... increased fine was all about the rates Microsoft was charging...'.



well here's another headline...maybe you should read more and post less..... noway

"EU fines Microsoft record US$1.3 billion for charging rivals too much"

http://technology.canoe.ca/2008/01/14/4772175-ap.html


no photo
Wed 02/27/08 04:33 PM

Barack all the freakin' way! Too many people unemployed to put another Republican back in office.


Obama will have to have everyone employed to collect enough taxes to pay for all those socialized programs he's promised....huh

no photo
Wed 02/27/08 04:25 PM



When are liberal socialists ever going to take responsibility for their actions. They can't seem to teach their children any moral values at home. They expect the shool to educate them about sex. They teach them that anything is ok and abortion is a legitimate means of birth control and then they want to blame the government for the rise in teenaged pregnancies. Teenage sex is the reason for teenage pregnancy. Teach your children to be responsible and perhaps they will act responsible. However, if you teach them there are no moral values don't blame the government if they act in an immoral manner. Any parent who has a pregnant teenager has only to look in the mirror to see who is responsible. That face looking back at you wont be George Bush.


because the left wants to leave all the traditional values behind...huh


That's B.S.!! Do you live in the USA, btw?

Oh, yeah, btw, this Democrat that "leaves all traditional values behind" is taking her child to church tonite.



that's BS??...we have the same problem with the left wingnuts in Canada and even moreso than in the US...huh

no photo
Wed 02/27/08 04:17 PM

Yankee, can we shame you if we see you in a cut and paste thread, then? :wink:


nope...but I can shame myself sometimes...bigsmile

no photo
Wed 02/27/08 04:14 PM




apparently he does..


do you always have to make personal comments that are off topic?



apparently I do.


Hahahahalaugh

Thanks for participating...
"not using spellcheck"


It gives people something to focus on besides argueing about petty issues..... I'm always at service.....drinker


I have to admit you have a point about arguing about petty issues....your right, madman is much too petty to bother with..bigsmile

no photo
Wed 02/27/08 04:09 PM
I will continue to take your personal insults as the fact you have a hard time expressing yourself properly


doc has more than enough talent to express himself.....maybe what you don't like is his bluntness talking about the way it is...and maybe you don't like the fact he is talking from personal hands-on experience which leaves you in a position of SOL with your bleeding heart copy and paste "stories"...

no photo
Wed 02/27/08 04:00 PM
apparently he does..


do you always have to make personal comments that are off topic?

no photo
Wed 02/27/08 02:03 PM
Edited by northrn_yanke on Wed 02/27/08 02:03 PM



How does the rate that Microsoft was charging fall into an antitrust issue in the fist place.


I’m not sure of the pertinence of the question you raise.

While Microsoft tried to fight the antitrust claims from the Brussels court, as it had done with similar antitrust charges from US courts in the late 90’s, and lost on every single counts, it has long since exhausted its legal recourse against the Euro Commission Antitrust Claims, and has recognized, and complied with the Brussels courts requests, only way too late.

The current ‘fines’ do not deal directly with the rather old 2004 Brussels decision which fell against Microsoft. Rather, it is a ‘fine’ for failure to comply with the long-standing court request.

That is how Microsoft was hit Wednesday by an 899 million euro ($1.34 billion) fine from the European Commission for REFUSING TO COMPLY with its long-standing 2004 request to provide competitors with key software data at a fair price, the heart of US and Euro Antitrust claims.

Again Microsoft tried every possible means to avoid facing the request, but has now decided to comply with the Euro Commission requests, settled the ‘fines’ which they don’t even contest, and put this old 2004 judgment behind them.

The bottom line is that Microsoft was long ago stopped by US Antitrust judgments in their monopolistic, and unfair Interoperability trade practices towards the US domestic markets.

While they tried to extend their unfair trade practices to Euro markets, they have now been clearly stopped from doing so in 2004 by a Euro Commission ruling, and have been fined recently for not complying with the said court ruling.

As for your claims that …

‘… the fine will increase our costs of purchasing Microsoft products…’,

that would be very unlikely.

Although 1,3 billion$, is a lot of money to you and me, it is but a drop in the bucket for Microsoft.
On the other hand, opening up free competition through fair ‘interoperability’ practices, will make compatible PC products, to be run on Microsoft Operating systems, much more affordable for the average consumer.

That’s what antitrust rulings seek to achieve: ‘free and fair competitive markets’, meant to benefit consumers.



I don't know if you read the article but the increased fine was all about the rates Microsoft was charging...they dropped the rates for the EU but left the rates in place for the rest of the world...in my humble opinion screw EU...I run my own business and no one tells me what my rates are...noway

EU regulators said the company charged “unreasonable prices”

no photo
Wed 02/27/08 01:59 PM

Canada is only a state of mind...


if that...lol

no photo
Wed 02/27/08 01:53 PM
I didn't see canada on the list either...bigsmile

no photo
Wed 02/27/08 12:14 PM

When are liberal socialists ever going to take responsibility for their actions. They can't seem to teach their children any moral values at home. They expect the shool to educate them about sex. They teach them that anything is ok and abortion is a legitimate means of birth control and then they want to blame the government for the rise in teenaged pregnancies. Teenage sex is the reason for teenage pregnancy. Teach your children to be responsible and perhaps they will act responsible. However, if you teach them there are no moral values don't blame the government if they act in an immoral manner. Any parent who has a pregnant teenager has only to look in the mirror to see who is responsible. That face looking back at you wont be George Bush.


because the left wants to leave all the traditional values behind...huh

no photo
Wed 02/27/08 12:11 PM

Madisonman is doing just fine and I am proud of him. I noticed that these comments may be slanted against him. But ,I hope he keeps on, keeping on!! I think he is being realistic, and has good topics that need discussed. If his opinion does not agree with mine, I will not try to belittle him or try to bulldoze him over. It is very obvious to me that some try to do that. Do unto others as you would have them do to you. We all may slip up a little at times.drinker drinker drinker :wink: :wink:


didn't you know that madman is a Zionist??....laugh