Bus Attendant Killed After Falling Under Moving Bus at Prasat Station

[StreetCowboy]

18 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

They're definitely not legal. I think that is already well established.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

Some on here seem to be saying it’s OK to murder suspected terrorists, or sympathisers.  I like to think we are better than that, and that by holding off from murdering Gerry Adams, we weakened his cause.  On the other hand, we were seeking peace in Ireland, not victory.

[Jingthing]

Some on here seem to be saying it’s OK to murder suspected terrorists, or sympathisers.  I like to think we are better than that, and that by holding off from murdering Gerry Adams, we weakened his cause.  On the other hand, we were seeking peace in Ireland, not victory.

I think it makes a difference where. Whacking Hamas people in Malaysia does appear to be pushing it.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[StreetCowboy]

5 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

I think it makes a difference where. Whacking Hamas people in Malaysia does appear to be pushing it.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

Whacking dissidents in your own country, whacking them overseas; either seems unjustifiably criminal.  Whacking foreigners in their own country seems like an act of war; whacking them in a third country maybe also.  

[Jingthing]

Whacking dissidents in your own country, whacking them overseas; either seems unjustifiably criminal.  Whacking foreigners in their own country seems like an act of war; whacking them in a third country maybe also.  

I wasn't talking about dissidents.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Kieran00001]

15 hours ago, ezzra said:

It's written in the old testament ' he who come to kill you, get up

earlier and kill him' that guy was no choir boy, he knew that his

days are numbered, and sooner than later, this will the fate for 

all of those who plots to kill Jews and Israelis.... 

 

Violating the Universal Declaration of Human Rights articles 3, 10 and 11, the International Covenant on Civil Political and Cultural Rights, the 4th Geneva Convention and the 1st Additional Protocol, they have committed both humanitarian and war crimes, their time will come.

[StreetCowboy]

19 hours ago, Jingthing said:

You found a quote and you're gonna run with it.

Here's a better Golda quote --

 

That’s all a bit Old Testament.  My God sent his son to tell me to love my neighbour, regardless of his race, and to turn the other cheek, because my neighbour’s sins were no excuse for my own.

 

We are none of us perfect, but we should not use the holy books to justify our crimes

[Jingthing]

That’s all a bit Old Testament.  My God sent his son to tell me to love my neighbour, regardless of his race, and to turn the other cheek, because my neighbour’s sins were no excuse for my own.
 
We are none of us perfect, but we should not use the holy books to justify our crimes

You're tripping. I was quoting Golda Meir. Not any testament. She spoke for herself and wasn't especially religious either.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[poanoi]

17 hours ago, ezzra said:

It's written in the old testament ' he who come to kill you, get up

earlier and kill him' that guy was no choir boy, he knew that his

days are numbered, and sooner than later, this will the fate for 

all of those who plots to kill Jews and Israelis.... 

i googled it and did not find any reference to the old testment,

the closest thing related was the rules of engagement for mossad

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/31/books/review-rise-and-kill-first-israel-assassinations-ronen-bergman.html

[bendejo]

On 4/21/2018 at 9:40 PM, lionsincity said:

 

Hopefully the arm of malaysian justice is quick and long too.

 

And corrupt.

 

[JimmyTheMook]

Ranking member of an Islamic terrorist organization killed?

 

Sounds like a good thing.....

 

 

[champers]

No messing about with nerve agents. Bang Bang you're dead. When will Trump start expelling Israeli diplomats from the US?

[Jingthing]

19 minutes ago, champers said:

No messing about with nerve agents. Bang Bang you're dead. When will Trump start expelling Israeli diplomats from the US?

There is no logic in your post. Only an obvious PROVOCATION. 

Nerve agents, you're referring to the Syrian government, close allies of Iran and Russia used on INNOCENT CIVILIANS.

This bang bang in Malaysia was against a known key person in terrorist organization Hamas's offensive weapon's program. 

I'm not suggesting whacking such people outside the region of conflict is exactly Kosher, it obviously isn't, but they are separate issues from chemical attacks on innocent civilians.

The USA and Israel are close allies. That isn't specifically about "trump." So the answer and you well know, is the USA isn't going to kick out Israeli diplomats as a matter of policy. Maybe next time pose a less trollish question, if you can. 

[champers]

I was referring to the nerve agents used against the former Russian spy and his daughter in Salisbury in England and drawing a comparison to Malaysia. I should have made that clear for you.

Of course, in both instances there is no cast iron proof of who the perpetrators are, just well educated assumptions.

There seems to me to be double standards at play. What has been described as a reprehensible act of a direct state assassination attempt in Salisbury against an actual state assassination in Malaysia and the subsequent sanctions from Western nations (expulsions of Russian diplomats).

 

[geriatrickid]

8 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

Violating the Universal Declaration of Human Rights articles 3, 10 and 11, the International Covenant on Civil Political and Cultural Rights, the 4th Geneva Convention and the 1st Additional Protocol, they have committed both humanitarian and war crimes, their time will come.

Who is "they"?  You do realize that there is no evidence establishing the identity of the responsible party(ies), don't you? Making the claim that it was Mossad doesn't mean it was Mossad. I might very well be, but at this time there is no evidence, none, with which to substantiate that claim.  There are some who are laughing at the suggestion because Mossad has been rather useless and ineffective over the past decade earning it a reputation as an agency of bunglers.

 

Your statement is incorrect and the attempt to make a legal argument is nonsensical, and rather sad. I know you mean well, but what we have here is a murder. It might be politically motivated, perhaps due to competing Arab interests, or due to Israel or due to another foreign power, but we do not know at this time. If murders of violent political activities were "humanitarian crimes", the ICC would have thousands of crimes on its docket in any given year. Brazil, Nigeria, Egypt, etc. all have a few politically tinged murders on any given day.

 

There has been no "war crime". In case you did not know, there has to be a war, in order to have a "war crime". The tip off is the use of the word war. Go and read  Statute 156 of the ICC which defines a "war crime".

 

All that we know here is that a man who Hamas has described as the champion of its rocket accuracy program, and who Israel has described as being involved in the Gaza explosive drone production program, was shot dead. The culprits  could have been a competing faction, or maybe the man had become a double agent for another country, or maybe it was a personal vendetta. I don't know, nor do you.

 

[Kieran00001]

3 minutes ago, geriatrickid said:

Who is "they"?  You do realize that there is no evidence establishing the identity of the responsible party(ies), don't you? Making the claim that it was Mossad doesn't mean it was Mossad. I might very well be, but at this time there is no evidence, none, with which to substantiate that claim.  There are some who are laughing at the suggestion because Mossad has been rather useless and ineffective over the past decade earning it a reputation as an agency of bunglers.

 

Your statement is incorrect and the attempt to make a legal argument is nonsensical, and rather sad. I know you mean well, but what we have here is a murder. It might be politically motivated, perhaps due to competing Arab interests, or due to Israel or due to another foreign power, but we do not know at this time. If murders of violent political activities were "humanitarian crimes", the ICC would have thousands of crimes on its docket in any given year. Brazil, Nigeria, Egypt, etc. all have a few politically tinged murders on any given day.

 

There has been no "war crime". In case you did not know, there has to be a war, in order to have a "war crime". The tip off is the use of the word war. Go and read  Statute 156 of the ICC which defines a "war crime".

 

All that we know here is that a man who Hamas has described as the champion of its rocket accuracy program, and who Israel has described as being involved in the Gaza explosive drone production program, was shot dead. The culprits  could have been a competing faction, or maybe the man had become a double agent for another country, or maybe it was a personal vendetta. I don't know, nor do you.

 

 

I didn't say it was Mosad, I said they, whoever these foreign assassins were, I assumed that they were politically motivated and acting abroad on behalf of a nation, which breaks all the agreements I have listed.  If it were Israel who did it and they had of done it in either Israel or Palestine then it would have broken different agreements, but assassinating people in a third country without due process or accountability of any kind is certainly a crime against humanity and specifically the ones I listed.  As for a war crime, you are using Israels claim that there is no declaration of war possible because they do not recognise the legitimacy of Palestine, but that is not how the international Committee of the Red Cross, UN bodies, and the International Court of Justice, see it, they all agree that the 4th Geneva Convention applies to civilians of Palestine.

But no, I don't know who did it, and my reply was only made in response to the post assuming that it was Israel behind it and also implying that they had a God given right to do it, I was just countering that with the fact that if it was they who did it then they are also guilty under several international laws and those laws trump that old Abrahamic law or whatever it was they quoted.

[halloween]

5 hours ago, champers said:

I was referring to the nerve agents used against the former Russian spy and his daughter in Salisbury in England and drawing a comparison to Malaysia. I should have made that clear for you.

Of course, in both instances there is no cast iron proof of who the perpetrators are, just well educated assumptions.

There seems to me to be double standards at play. What has been described as a reprehensible act of a direct state assassination attempt in Salisbury against an actual state assassination in Malaysia and the subsequent sanctions from Western nations (expulsions of Russian diplomats).

 

Being a bit selective aren't you? In one case we have the use of a banned chemical weapon, a weapon developed by the alleged perpetrator and not readily available to others - unless of course the alleged perpetrator has been selling it.

In the latest we event we have the use of a gun, and assassins allegedly with "western features". Would you care to guess how many countries have guns and citizens with "western features"?

[geriatrickid]

3 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

I didn't say it was Mosad, I said they, whoever these foreign assassins were, I assumed that they were politically motivated and acting abroad on behalf of a nation, which breaks all the agreements I have listed.  If it were Israel who did it and they had of done it in either Israel or Palestine then it would have broken different agreements, but assassinating people in a third country without due process or accountability of any kind is certainly a crime against humanity and specifically the ones I listed.  As for a war crime, you are using Israels claim that there is no declaration of war possible because they do not recognise the legitimacy of Palestine, but that is not how the international Committee of the Red Cross, UN bodies, and the International Court of Justice, see it, they all agree that the 4th Geneva Convention applies to civilians of Palestine.

But no, I don't know who did it, and my reply was only made in response to the post assuming that it was Israel behind it and also implying that they had a God given right to do it, I was just countering that with the fact that if it was they who did it then they are also guilty under several international laws and those laws trump that old Abrahamic law or whatever it was they quoted.

You are off on a tangent and are illogical. First you say you are not claiming  Israel did it, then you are saying Israel is guilty of a war crime. The Red Cross, the UN "bodies" do not determine what qualifies as a war crime.  The ICC has established the definition and  the war crime law is quite clear; A murder does not qualify as a war crime unless it occurs during ongoing hostilities and is in the area of conflict. Your wanting it to be a war crime will not make it a war crime because it does not meet the definition of the statute. Go and read the definition and then come back and explain how a murder of these circumstances meets the definition.

 

One doesn't even know if this was a political settling of accounts, a religious dispute, a betrayal in business dealings or spy stuff. Let the investigation  proceed and wait for the  facts of the event to be established. You are assuming that the Hamas claim of an Israeli assassination is legit. In the past, Hamas and Fatah have killed each other and blamed Israel. Also, in the past Israel has killed people who present a threat to its security. It seems this chap may have been somewhat of a threat.  If he was indeed designing and facilitating the construction of  explosive drones, or in perfecting the accuracy of rockets to be fired at Israel, then he was a legitimate target. War crimes  differentiate between non combatants and combatants and whether their activities make them a legitimate target.  Hamas says he was a combatant, which deflates your argument that he was an innocent angel.  In any case, I intend to await the establishment of some actual facts.

 

 

 

 

[champers]

35 minutes ago, halloween said:

Being a bit selective aren't you? In one case we have the use of a banned chemical weapon, a weapon developed by the alleged perpetrator and not readily available to others - unless of course the alleged perpetrator has been selling it.

In the latest we event we have the use of a gun, and assassins allegedly with "western features". Would you care to guess how many countries have guns and citizens with "western features"?

I would imagine a number of countries have developed a nerve agent as the one used in Salisbury. The UK is one and at a facility close by to Salisbury.

The shooting in Malaysia does leave a lot of room for speculation and those pointing the finger at Mossad are doing so because they appear to have the means and motive more than others.

[Kieran00001]

2 hours ago, geriatrickid said:

You are off on a tangent and are illogical. First you say you are not claiming  Israel did it, then you are saying Israel is guilty of a war crime. The Red Cross, the UN "bodies" do not determine what qualifies as a war crime.  The ICC has established the definition and  the war crime law is quite clear; A murder does not qualify as a war crime unless it occurs during ongoing hostilities and is in the area of conflict. Your wanting it to be a war crime will not make it a war crime because it does not meet the definition of the statute. Go and read the definition and then come back and explain how a murder of these circumstances meets the definition.

 

One doesn't even know if this was a political settling of accounts, a religious dispute, a betrayal in business dealings or spy stuff. Let the investigation  proceed and wait for the  facts of the event to be established. You are assuming that the Hamas claim of an Israeli assassination is legit. In the past, Hamas and Fatah have killed each other and blamed Israel. Also, in the past Israel has killed people who present a threat to its security. It seems this chap may have been somewhat of a threat.  If he was indeed designing and facilitating the construction of  explosive drones, or in perfecting the accuracy of rockets to be fired at Israel, then he was a legitimate target. War crimes  differentiate between non combatants and combatants and whether their activities make them a legitimate target.  Hamas says he was a combatant, which deflates your argument that he was an innocent angel.  In any case, I intend to await the establishment of some actual facts.

 

 

 

 

 

No, you need to work on your reading comprehension.  I said I am not making any assumption, I was replying to a poster who made the assumption and I was merely pointing out to them what that would mean, legally.

 

The Red Cross don't determine what constitutes a war crime?  The Red Cross defined the term, the rest followed them, you know not what you speak!

 

The ICC have already made their judgement on this a long time ago and it was that Palestine is protected under the rules of war while they are occupied by Israel, that is their call, your interpretation is worthless.

 

Again, I am not the one making assumption but replying to someone else's assumption.

 

"If he was indeed designing and facilitating the construction of  explosive drones, or in perfecting the accuracy of rockets to be fired at Israel, then he was a legitimate target."

Israel claims something called, anticipatory self-defense, something they made up and illegal in international law, there are no exceptions in the law, extra judicial killings are illegal.

[malagateddy]

My bottom line is..one evil religious scummer's bit the dust

Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[malagateddy]

Can someone please explain to me why..if one person talks to and worships an imaginary friend..he/she is considered insane..YET..when a group of people do the same it is called religion!!



Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app