Jump to content

Scott Tracy

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    2,179
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Scott Tracy

  1. 13 minutes ago, placeholder said:
    21 minutes ago, Scott Tracy said:

    If I were the Hungarian or German (Prussian) governments. I would ignore any ruling made in any US Court.

    Perhaps if the plaintiffs and the defendants were US citizens, this could fly. Sue in your own country first.

     

    Just my opinion. 

     

    Why do you assume that the plaintiffs aren't US citizens?

     

    It matters not if just the plaintiffs are US citizens. It matters if both the plaintiffs and defendants are. Please note the 'and' in the statement.Perhaps I should have italicized it to show emphasis.

    In this case, the defendants are not US citizens, therefore in my view, the litigation should take place in Germany or Hungary, since the cases hinge on German and Hungarian actions and laws at the time being in force.

    The Supreme Court of the United States appears to have been asked to pass judgement on the actions and laws of another state. 

  2. 28 minutes ago, placeholder said:

    As for the rest of the mitigatory stuff you're trying to shovel in the Nuremberg laws are very clear about who is and who isn't a Jewish citizen.

     

    Is there such a person as a Jewish citizen? I was of the understanding that citizenship was dependent upon internal political circumstances, one of which may be nationality.  You can be a national of a country, but may not be a citizen, who has full political, social and civil rights. 

     

    So, my question remains. Is there such a person as a Jewish citizen?

    • Like 2
  3. Article 2, Section 2, Clause 2...

     

    and [the President] shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law....

     

    He has nominated, but the Senate may not 'consent'..

     

    I must admit as a non US citizen, I find this a little perplexing. A political  appointee for any position is not unknown among other governments, including my own.  To nominate an experienced ex-soldier as Secretary of Defense seems eminently sensible to me. The emphasis is on 'ex' soldier. He is a civilian now, not a serving soldier.

    The 7 year gap between retiring and being appointed seems a little bizarre, though.

    Can anyone explain the reason?

  4. 18 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

    The machine gun was placed on a pick-up truck and was controlled by a satellite."

     

    someone placed the machine gun on the pick up. Someone placed the pick up. Someone provided the gun, pick up, ammunition, camera and AI, etc... 

     

    And yet..."No terrorists were present on the ground... Martyr Fakhrizadeh was driving when a weapon, using an advanced camera, zoomed in on him," 

  5. I respected Prince Harry for all he went through as a youngster, and that he served as a soldier and went into harm's way.

     

    I lost all respect for him when he decided he would no longer be a working royal. I keep seeing headlines and wonder what happened to being out of the public eye, to live a normal life...no, actually I don't wonder at all. I hate that journalists give him the time of day. He is heading down the road of David Icke. And good luck to him, but I really do not wish to see his name in the media ever again. 

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...