War crimes court opens probe into Palestinian territories

[mania]

So they smuggle construction materials in and use it for anything but defending the civilian population. Surely there was a point to this comment?

Your like a whirling dervish

I guess that is how they do it?

Make a BS statement & when called on it...left ...right...up...down...anywhere but on topic

All of this .....again came around based on your claim....Israel protects theirs Hamas does not

Carry on Morch

[Ulysses G.]

But this is all just a side show the basic fact is in 2015 no race/group of humans should be blockaded while living in their own country.

You purposely leave out humans who are attacking OTHER countries. That is how they ended up with the restrictions. Until very recently, they did not have their own country. For all intents and purposes, they still don't and won't until they honor the terms of certain treaties that they have committed to.

[Ulysses G.]

All of this .....again came around based on your claim....Israel protects theirs Hamas does not

Which is absolutely correct. In fact, Israel protects their civilians. Hamas actively encourages its civilians to commit suicide for PR purposes.

Edited January 20, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[mania]

But this is all just a side show the basic fact is in 2015 no race/group of humans should be blockaded while living in their own country.

You purposely leave out humans who are attacking OTHER countries. That is how they ended up with the restrictions. Until very recently, they did not have their own country. For all intents and purposes, they still don't and won't until they honor the terms of certain treaties that they have committed to.

Which is why a 3rd party should have long ago stepped in...

Your party 2 & obviously your story is they attacked you unprovoked

You have never set a foot wrong etc etc etc

Party 1 states reasons or claims innocence too...

Which brings us to the conclusion these kids cannot be left alone

[Morch]

So they smuggle construction materials in and use it for anything but defending the civilian population. Surely there was a point to this comment?

Your like a whirling dervish

I guess that is how they do it?

Make a BS statement & when called on it...left ...right...up...down...anywhere but on topic

All of this .....again came around based on your claim....Israel protects theirs Hamas does not

Carry on Morch

Well, you still have not demonstrated how I am wrong.

[mania]

All of this .....again came around based on your claim....Israel protects theirs Hamas does not

Which is absolutely correct. In fact, Israel protects their civilians. Hamas actively encourages its civilians to commit suicide for PR purposes.

I would not call putting their civilians in illegal settlements protecting them as much as using live bait.

But again.....3rd party needed long ago

[Ulysses G.]

Which is why a 3rd party should have long ago stepped in...

Stepped in and done what exactly? Third parties have been stepping in since before the conflict began. So far, they are not really helping.

[mania]

So they smuggle construction materials in and use it for anything but defending the civilian population. Surely there was a point to this comment?

Your like a whirling dervish

I guess that is how they do it?

Make a BS statement & when called on it...left ...right...up...down...anywhere but on topic

All of this .....again came around based on your claim....Israel protects theirs Hamas does not

Carry on Morch

Well, you still have not demonstrated how I am wrong.

Sorry you have neither proved once how your right...

Secondly I obviously do not have the secret decoder ring you & some others use

as what you call context & obvious escapes me. Add to that your constant twisting

along with your mini cheering section of one liner supporter makes for a boring read.

You have an opinion....I have an opinion...they are obviously different.

I can live with that

As stated many times.....This whole war crimes court has no real teeth but that is not the point.

The more that is brought out into the light the better.........

REGARDLESS of which side is shown to be the culprit it will allow people of the world to read & decide for themselves.

That IMO is a good thing

Edited January 20, 2015 by mania

[mania]

Which is why a 3rd party should have long ago stepped in...

Stepped in and done what exactly? Third parties have been stepping in since before the conflict began. So far, they are not really helping.

Yes agree 100% the USA cannot help

This instead will be a court that will determine war crimes.

This may help & I said why many times.

Edited January 20, 2015 by mania

[Ulysses G.]

So they smuggle construction materials in and use it for anything but defending the civilian population. Surely there was a point to this comment?

Your like a whirling dervish

I guess that is how they do it?

Make a BS statement & when called on it...left ...right...up...down...anywhere but on topic

All of this .....again came around based on your claim....Israel protects theirs Hamas does not

Carry on Morch

Well, you still have not demonstrated how I am wrong.

Details, details.

[mania]

So they smuggle construction materials in and use it for anything but defending the civilian population. Surely there was a point to this comment?

Your like a whirling dervish

I guess that is how they do it?

Make a BS statement & when called on it...left ...right...up...down...anywhere but on topic

All of this .....again came around based on your claim....Israel protects theirs Hamas does not

Carry on Morch

Well, you still have not demonstrated how I am wrong.

Details, details.

Que one liner supporter

[Ulysses G.]

You still have not demonstrated how he is "wrong".

[Seastallion]

The statement that "in all other conflicts, casualty figures are what are important" is not something which I subscribe to, nor was it demonstrated as true. Cause and manner of conducting warfare are often cited as being key, for example, although there are probably many ways to consider things.

I do not normally bring up the Holocaust in connection with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, not as justification nor as anything else. Barking up the wrong tree. It can be pointed out though, that the Jews in Europe were, for the most part, citizens of the relevant countries and that they were not engaged in either armed struggle against these nations. The comparisons made in support of either side's claims are usually crude, if that.

Did not suggest subtracting any numbers from any casualty lists. Soldiers are legitimate targets almost by definition. Same goes for armed militants and terrorists. I merely pointed out that not all the Palestinian casualties were civilians as often implied by lumping them together (something which, interestingly enough, is not usually applied by media sources to Israeli casualties).

You have missed the point of me mentioning the Holocaust.

Horrible figures:

Europe; Over 6 million Jews killed,

Rwanda; Nearly 1 million killed;

Cambodia: Around 1.5 million killed,

Iraq: 500 000 killed

Afghanistan; 20 000 killed.

Gaza (last 10 years) 5000 killed.

Israel: 10 000 rockets fired at them.

Doesn't look significant if the death toll was used instead, though, does it?

*posts removed to allow reply*

Was there a claim made that Israeli casualties are anywhere near the ones suffered by the Palestinians? I certainly did not make this claim. That posters sometimes express hysterical hyperbole view connecting the fate of European Jews in the Holocaust and the aims of Hamas is not something I am responsible for, nor see as constructive or meaningful. That there are certain Israeli politicians harping on these notions - fair enough, although how this makes it to be a general view is not too clear.

I truly don't get what this is about - almost as if Israel is expected to ignore attacks, stiff upper lip, chin up and carry on sort of thing. Or, put another way, suffer more casualties. Now, I'm pretty sure that's not what you mean, exactly - so do enlighten me.

I will try again try to enlighten you.

Question was, in effect; "Why quote rocket numbers when actual casualties are low, and yet in other instances it is casualties that are referred to to show the horrific toll?"

Your response was it's the thought of the rockets that counts.

Holocaust was mentioned for the irony, because when it comes to the Holocaust, the toll is what is significant. But now, for Israel, it's the thought (behind the rockets) that counts, not the toll, and the toll Israel in turn exacted is justified....because of so many rockets (most of which had absolutely no toll)!

There is nothing in what I have ever written anywhere that suggests the preposterous notion you put forward that Israel should ignore the attacks.

You will never ever convince me that killing 5000 is justified for killing 28 (over 10 years), and the callous "it's the thought that counts" will continue to bother me.

[Ulysses G.]

You will never ever convince me that killing 5000 is justified for killing 28 (over 10 years), and the callous "it's the thought that counts" will continue to bother me.

No one has suggested that it is justified by some number count - other than you. It is justified because the Palestinians have been shooting thousands of rockets into Israel and the fatalities were caused by trying to stop them.

Civilians are commonly killed in warfare, but the Israelis have one of the lowest civilian casualty ratios in the world and it would be even lower if Hamas were not purposely firing weapons from civilian areas and encouraging their people to commit suicide for PR reasons.

Edited January 20, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[willyumiii]

What good are war crime courts?

GW Bush, Cheney, and their cronies were all convicted of war crimes and they are all still free.

GW had to cancel his world travels , but staying in the states is all he needs to to to escape justice.

Again I ask, what good are war crime trials if the convicted criminals evade their due punishment so easily?

Edited January 20, 2015 by willyumiii

[Ulysses G.]

What good are war crime courts?

None when they are just a JOKE.

The former United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Param Cumaraswamy, has suggested the tribunal is a private enterprise with no legal basis and questions its legitimacy.[13] The tribunal does not have a UN mandate or recognition, no power to order arrests or impose sentences, and it is unclear that its verdicts have any but symbolic significance.[14]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuala_Lumpur_War_Crimes_Commission

[willyumiii]

What good are war crime courts?

None when they are just a JOKE.

The former United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Param Cumaraswamy, has suggested the tribunal is a private enterprise with no legal basis and questions its legitimacy.[13] The tribunal does not have a UN mandate or recognition, no power to order arrests or impose sentences, and it is unclear that its verdicts have any but symbolic significance.[14]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuala_Lumpur_War_Crimes_Commission

"suggested"??

well I guess that must be the last word then General!

I knw you would respond to my post. Have a good night now.

[Ulysses G.]

Funny,

Neversure doesn't sound like a jewish name!

Come on now..what's your real name?

Read his posts more carefully. He ain't Jewish.

[Morch]

All of this .....again came around based on your claim....Israel protects theirs Hamas does not

Which is absolutely correct. In fact, Israel protects their civilians. Hamas actively encourages its civilians to commit suicide for PR purposes.

I would not call putting their civilians in illegal settlements protecting them as much as using live bait.

But again.....3rd party needed long ago

And yet you talk about side stepping....

What does does Israeli civilians living in the illegal settlements (which are in the West Bank) got to do with Israel taking measures to defend its civilians against Hamas rocket attacks? How are the Israeli illegal settlers more in danger as far as Hamas attacks go, and how are they "live bait"?

[Morch]

So they smuggle construction materials in and use it for anything but defending the civilian population. Surely there was a point to this comment?

Your like a whirling dervish

I guess that is how they do it?

Make a BS statement & when called on it...left ...right...up...down...anywhere but on topic

All of this .....again came around based on your claim....Israel protects theirs Hamas does not

Carry on Morch

Well, you still have not demonstrated how I am wrong.

Sorry you have neither proved once how your right...

Secondly I obviously do not have the secret decoder ring you & some others use

as what you call context & obvious escapes me. Add to that your constant twisting

along with your mini cheering section of one liner supporter makes for a boring read.

You have an opinion....I have an opinion...they are obviously different.

I can live with that

As stated many times.....This whole war crimes court has no real teeth but that is not the point.

The more that is brought out into the light the better.........

REGARDLESS of which side is shown to be the culprit it will allow people of the world to read & decide for themselves.

That IMO is a good thing

Israel invests efforts in defending its civilians - how is this not proven? There are shelters, alarm systems, evacuation and rescue services. There is also Iron Dome, but seeing as this is a sore spot for you, put it aside. The shelters and the rest are proof enough to any reasonable person.

Hamas does not invest any meaningful effort in defending its civilians - how is this not proven? Are there any shelters and similar measures which are for civilian use? Nope. Does it have to do with Hamas not being capable of constructing such facilities? No, it does not. Does Hamas facilitate evacuation of civilians from harm's way? No, in fact it encourages the opposite. Are Hamas personnel and leadership protected in a way which is not afforded to civilians? Yes, they are. The above should serve as proof enough for any reasonable person.

When it comes to this, you have an opinion, I present facts.

[up-country_sinclair]

The Hasbara-bots certainly are busy these days.

But what the world can see clearly and the occupiers seemingly can't is that justice is coming soon.

[Morch]

The statement that "in all other conflicts, casualty figures are what are important" is not something which I subscribe to, nor was it demonstrated as true. Cause and manner of conducting warfare are often cited as being key, for example, although there are probably many ways to consider things.

I do not normally bring up the Holocaust in connection with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, not as justification nor as anything else. Barking up the wrong tree. It can be pointed out though, that the Jews in Europe were, for the most part, citizens of the relevant countries and that they were not engaged in either armed struggle against these nations. The comparisons made in support of either side's claims are usually crude, if that.

Did not suggest subtracting any numbers from any casualty lists. Soldiers are legitimate targets almost by definition. Same goes for armed militants and terrorists. I merely pointed out that not all the Palestinian casualties were civilians as often implied by lumping them together (something which, interestingly enough, is not usually applied by media sources to Israeli casualties).

You have missed the point of me mentioning the Holocaust.

Horrible figures:

Europe; Over 6 million Jews killed,

Rwanda; Nearly 1 million killed;

Cambodia: Around 1.5 million killed,

Iraq: 500 000 killed

Afghanistan; 20 000 killed.

Gaza (last 10 years) 5000 killed.

Israel: 10 000 rockets fired at them.

Doesn't look significant if the death toll was used instead, though, does it?

*posts removed to allow reply*

Was there a claim made that Israeli casualties are anywhere near the ones suffered by the Palestinians? I certainly did not make this claim. That posters sometimes express hysterical hyperbole view connecting the fate of European Jews in the Holocaust and the aims of Hamas is not something I am responsible for, nor see as constructive or meaningful. That there are certain Israeli politicians harping on these notions - fair enough, although how this makes it to be a general view is not too clear.

I truly don't get what this is about - almost as if Israel is expected to ignore attacks, stiff upper lip, chin up and carry on sort of thing. Or, put another way, suffer more casualties. Now, I'm pretty sure that's not what you mean, exactly - so do enlighten me.

I will try again try to enlighten you.

Question was, in effect; "Why quote rocket numbers when actual casualties are low, and yet in other instances it is casualties that are referred to to show the horrific toll?"

Your response was it's the thought of the rockets that counts.

Holocaust was mentioned for the irony, because when it comes to the Holocaust, the toll is what is significant. But now, for Israel, it's the thought (behind the rockets) that counts, not the toll, and the toll Israel in turn exacted is justified....because of so many rockets (most of which had absolutely no toll)!

There is nothing in what I have ever written anywhere that suggests the preposterous notion you put forward that Israel should ignore the attacks.

You will never ever convince me that killing 5000 is justified for killing 28 (over 10 years), and the callous "it's the thought that counts" will continue to bother me.

*posts removed to allow reply*

The topic deals with the ICC. As far as I am aware, and as far as I can tell from reading about previous instances where the ICC considered cases, it seems that the gravity of the alleged offenses is but one of the elements taken into account when deciding to start an investigation. That it is not the foremost consideration is not of my making nor something I have a very strong opinion about - as with many things legal, it is not necessarily the intuitive approach. As far as opening up an investigation, the question of intent may play a more central role - for example, indiscriminate fire on civilians is usually considered a violation, while actual consequences of the action more relevant to the severity of the ruling. Roughly applied to the Gaza fighting, all of the Hamas rocket attacks are almost certainly a violation, while Israel's attacks could (at least in part, not all) be demonstrated to adhere with the legal requirements stipulated by international laws. The casualty figures would be applicable to "illegal attacks", not as

a whole. Basically, if a side can satisfactory prove that it followed the rules (and bearing in mind that the rules do not have to make much sense) it stands a better chance of getting a free pass. Hence, intent (or "the thought that counts") is germane to the ICC issue. This logic was not created by Israel.

As to Israel stressing the number of rockets fired by Hamas, rather than the number of Israeli casualties - well, they would, wouldn't they? The same way that Hamas stresses the casualties as disengaged from its own share of responsibility for the death toll. Not sure how the Holocaust figures into the argument - both the Nazi aim to annihilate the Jews and the number of Jews who died are equally stressed.

I do not think that I justified the death toll. Certainly not in an all inclusive manner. Not even arguing that the death toll resulting from the ongoing fighting is in any way proportional, obviously it isn't. My objection is more to do with the underlying assumption that warfare is based on the notions of fairness, proportionality and balance. In my experience, it is not anything of the sort. The concept of proportional response does, in fact, appear in relevant international laws, but again, it is not exactly what people feel to be intuitive in the face of such mayhem. Still not sure what would be considered as a proportional action or which alternative casualty odds would satisfy the demand for balance - and without addressing at least one of these issues, hard to judge how one sees things.

If one accepts that Hamas bears responsibility (at least in part) for the casualties on its side - be it through strategic choices, neglect of civilian defenses and plainly putting its civilians in harms way - how come that this is not reflected when considering the casualty figures?

[Thorgal]

Permit me to ask a question of anybody that might wish to answer.

What do you think should happen if the drug cartels in Juarez, Mexico, began firing some 2,000 rockets into the city of El Paso, Texas?

Should the authorities of the city of El Paso, the state of Texas and the US government respond and what should that response be?

Your comments are solicited.

A better analogy would be if it was the Mexican government doing that with orders from Mexico City. Hamas IS the government of Gaza.

Changed per your suggestion. Thx.

Was El Paso not in previous Aztec territory along the Rio Grande ?

Actually no. Back to school with you, mate.

Aztec warrior pictures 2.jpg

Aztec empire originate from Nahua people. They came from Aridoamerica to Mesoamerica.
Aridoamerica is now known as Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico and Arizona.

Why do you try to 'Americanize' the Palestino-Israeli conflict with this Mexican and Brown Power simulation, read provocation ?

It's completely off topic...

[Ulysses G.]

But what the world can see clearly and the occupiers seemingly can't is that justice is coming soon.

The Palestinians are going to be dispersed to the rest of the Arab world, which where most of them originated from anyway? That would be justice, considering the fact that they started the conflict in the first place and have refused to make peace for the last 100 years.

[dexterm]

THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) — The prosecutor of the International Criminal Court launched a preliminary probe Friday that could clear the way for a full-scale investigation into possible war crimes in Palestinian territories

Many said this day of justice would never come, but it's nearly here.

Many continue to say other larger and more significant events will never come to pass. But God willing, they might.

Keep clapping. It won't do any good.

1. There is no nation called Palestine and there never was in history.

2. There isn't a people called "Palestinians" and there never was until Arafat and the PLO (terrorist organization aligned with the Black Panthers) called themselves that beginning in the late 1980's.

3. There is no international court which has jurisdiction over Israel. All the anti Semitics can do is mouth off.

4. Israel is an extremely powerful nation militarily - a member of The Group of Five. Who's going to come and get them?

This is all noise designed to get some attention for terrorist rocket launchers, or so they hope. It won't work. People have already chosen sides and those who are on the side of the terrorists will lose every time.

1. Palestine is recognized by the UN as an observer state. And courageous Sweden, many more to follow, has officially recognized Palestine as a state. The times are a changing.

2. Check your history. Palestinians have been around long before Israel

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine

King Herod himself was a Palestinian, born in the area of the later British Mandatory Palestine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herod_the_Great

3. The world will suddenly become a smaller place for convicted Israeli war criminals for fear of international arrest warrants

4. BDS and EU sanctions will come and get Israel. The writing is on the wall.

“A boycott of Israeli products by European countries, in the event that peace talks fail, would constitute a dramatic blow to the Israeli economy, Finance Minister Yair Lapid warned on Wednesday, in an address at the Institute for National Security Studies conference. Based on an evaluation prepared by the Finance Ministry’s chief economist, Lapid said that even a low-scale boycott would “hit every Israeli citizen directly in his pocket.”

http://www.timesofisrael.com/lapid-israel-faces-economic-crisis-if-peace-talks-fail/

Edited January 21, 2015 by dexterm

[Ulysses G.]

2. Check your history. Palestinians have been around long before Israel

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine

You never tire of posting complete fabrications. Ancient Israel existed long before a bunch of Arabs started calling themselves "Palestinians" after losing, yet another, war in 1967.

Your link refers to a geographical area that included the Kingdom of Israel. It has nothing to do with an independent Arab country called "Palestine", because one has never existed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Israel

Edited January 21, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[ggold]

THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) — The prosecutor of the International Criminal Court launched a preliminary probe Friday that could clear the way for a full-scale investigation into possible war crimes in Palestinian territories

Many said this day of justice would never come, but it's nearly here.

Many continue to say other larger and more significant events will never come to pass. But God willing, they might.

Keep clapping. It won't do any good.

1. There is no nation called Palestine and there never was in history.

2. There isn't a people called "Palestinians" and there never was until Arafat and the PLO (terrorist organization aligned with the Black Panthers) called themselves that beginning in the late 1980's.

3. There is no international court which has jurisdiction over Israel. All the anti Semitics can do is mouth off.

4. Israel is an extremely powerful nation militarily - a member of The Group of Five. Who's going to come and get them?

This is all noise designed to get some attention for terrorist rocket launchers, or so they hope. It won't work. People have already chosen sides and those who are on the side of the terrorists will lose every time.

1. Palestine is recognized by the UN as an observer state. And courageous Sweden, many more to follow, has officially recognized Palestine as a state. The times are a changing.

2. Check your history. Palestinians have been around long before Israel

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine

King Herod himself was a Palestinian, born in the area of the later British Mandatory Palestine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herod_the_Great

3. The world will suddenly become a smaller place for convicted Israeli war criminals for fear of international arrest warrants

4. BDS and EU sanctions will come and get Israel. The writing is on the wall.

“A boycott of Israeli products by European countries, in the event that peace talks fail, would constitute a dramatic blow to the Israeli economy, Finance Minister Yair Lapid warned on Wednesday, in an address at the Institute for National Security Studies conference. Based on an evaluation prepared by the Finance Ministry’s chief economist, Lapid said that even a low-scale boycott would “hit every Israeli citizen directly in his pocket.”

http://www.timesofisrael.com/lapid-israel-faces-economic-crisis-if-peace-talks-fail/

King Herod was an edomite not palestinian. The only part that was called Philistines is now the Gaza strip this was long before the Greeks came along! So you are mixing history to suite you're rhetoric.

Good luck with points 3 and 4, The ICC are a long way from getting any verdict if at all. BDS is failing and the EU has enough of it's own problems, with the Greek elections and the likely hood that they will leave the Euro. Besides I don't think they are feeling to kind towards the muslims with what happened in France a couple weeks ago!

Even Hamas aren't happy with the EU any more. hahahahaha

Edited January 21, 2015 by ggold

[willyumiii]

Permit me to ask a question of anybody that might wish to answer.

What do you think should happen if a militant branch of the Mexican government in Juarez, Mexico, began firing some 2,000 rockets into the city of El Paso, Texas?

Should the authorities of the city of El Paso, the state of Texas and the US government respond and what should that response be?

Your comments are solicited.

Edited to change "Drug cartels" to "a militant branch of the Mexican government".

Well a question/what if is fine .....but we would start at the beginning

Mexico would not have a grievance with the USA for stealing their land & blocking them like POW's in areas.

Nor would the USA be blocking their access to the sea

Nor would USA severely limit their imports of anything but weapons

Yet Israel does all those things. Limiting to basic supplies & at times not even that

As a sidebar this is what I found so funny about Morch claiming basically ........

"That Israel invests its best efforts to protect its citizens, and Hamas does nothing of the sort - is not debated"

Yet it is well known that the most severely restricted import is building materials of any kind. Especially

Concrete & Steel...Israel claims being they do not want Hamas to build shelters or tunnels

Mainly they do not want them rebuilding homes/cities they smash with bombs or bulldozers

in their ever greater quest for Israel expansion lands.

No country in the world that operates POW camp like blockades should be tolerated much less helped.

So basically to your what if the answer would be of course defend/return fire.

But again it would never happen as the US would not do what Israel does...

and yet our tax dollars in great quantities go to help these?

Maybe better to ask would the US fire on Mexico if Mexico did what Israel does?

Maybe Mexico grabs Texas & locks its people into areas denying them this or that

Should the US fire on Mexico? Should those locked in Texas seek revenge?

"Mexico would not have a grievance with the USA for stealing their land & blocking them like POW's in areas.

Nor would the USA be blocking their access to the sea"

Excuse me, but your knowledge of history seems to be severely limited!

The USA took Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and most of California from Mexico.

And yes, they did lose a lot of access to shipping from Texas and from California.

Have you ever heard of the ports of Oakland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego?

Some pretty major deep water shipping ports there.

I could go further and start talking about the agriculture, and minerals ( California Gold ) and other things the U.S took from Mexico, but why bother?

Mexico was a very poor example for you to use!

[mania]

Mexico was a very poor example for you to use!

Yes thanks but I didn't use it Chuck did

Or maybe your responding to him?

But since you used my post I am just saying

Also on your history lesson...yes of course that was then & this is now.

Otherwise the Indian Nation would be rising up no?

Edited January 22, 2015 by mania

[Scott]

An off-topic post has been removed. Please stay on the topic.