Recent Posts

Show posts from buddies only

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-declines-michael-avenatti-nike-conviction-review/

LOL. Hilarious he even tried.

Of the (semi-)realistic outcomes, Brown & Tester holding on.

[Also not really sure where he told women to "stay in the kitchen" he just said being a parent was important]

As with just about all partisan "double standard" accusations you could say the same thing in reverse. The people who thought it was "great for athletes to be bigger than their sport and speak out on issues they're passionate about" seem to like that a lot less when socially conservative Catholics do it.

"Muh both sides. Of course da libs are whining about telling women they should stay in the kitchen and Pride Month is evil, those are roughly equivalent to opposing police brutality in my eyes"

You're not really disagreeing with me. You like players speaking out when they agree with you, but not when they disagree with you which is the same position you're criticizing conservatives for having. The "free speech" defenses of Kaepernick weren't really why they supported him, it was just because they agreed with him.

Also not really sure where he told women to "stay in the kitchen" he just said being a parent was important, which wouldn't have been remotely noteworthy or controversial if he said it about men. This whole thing is a nothingburger, was expecting it to be so much worse when I looked at what he said based on the reaction to it. If anything the reaction proves that it needed to be said.

Weird how that comment about how important being a parent over having a job is was exclusively targeted for the women in the crowd

As I said earlier, if someone had said men need to remember that being a father is more important than their job 0% of people would complain about that and this wouldn't be a news story.

If someone says men shouldn't hit their wives or children I'm not going to assume the person likes it when women do that, that's not how logic works.

An he didn’t say that, geeh I wonder why?

No. I can eat ____ for hours.

[Luso-Congolese Treaty of 1802]

Luso-Congolese Treaty of 1802
1. The Portuguese Empire recognizes the House of Agua Rosada as the one legitimate dynasty of the Kingdom of Congo and shall provide all supports necessary to protect the dynasty.
2. The Portuguese shall receive exclusive slaving rights within the Kingdom of Congo.
3. King Garcia V and his successors in the House of Agua Rosada shall receive 1/3 of the revenue on slaves sold by the Portuguese from the Congolese territory to Brazil, paid annually.
4. The Portuguese shall receive exclusive European settlement rights within the Kingdom of Congo.
5. The Portuguese shall receive exclusive European development and mining rights within the Kingdom of Congo.
6. A Portuguese fort, the Fortaleza de Braganca, shall be erected at the confluence of the Kasai River and the Congo River. The garrison at the Fortaleza de Braganca shall provide instruction and training in European warfare to the local population.
7. Colonel Miguel Pereira Forjaz is hereby appointed Portuguese Military Ambassador to the Kingdom of Congo and shall serve as an advisor to King Garcia V.
8. King Garcia V and his successors in the House of Agua Rosada shall pay an annual tribute equal to 40$500 real to Prince Regent Joao VI and his successors in the House of Braganca.
9. This treaty shall expire should Clause 8 be violated, or on December 1, 1900, whichever occurs first.

x Prince Regent Joao VI of Portugal

Luso-Matamban Treaty of 1802
1. The Portuguese Empire recognizes King Francisco II as the one legitimate King of Matamba, and the Kingdom of Matamba as the one legitimate state in the central Highlands, and shall provide all supports necessary to protect his dynasty and kingdom.
2. The Portuguese shall receive exclusive European settlement rights within the Kingdom of Matamba.
3. The Portuguese shall receive exclusive European slaving rights within the Kingdom of Matamba.
4. The Portuguese shall receive exclusive European cotton production rights within the Kingdom of Matamba.
5. King Francisco II and his successors shall receive 1/3 of the revenue on cotton sold by the Portuguese from Matamban territory, paid annually.
6. King Francisco II and his successors shall pay an annual tribute equal to 20$500 real to Prince Regent Joao VI and his successors in the House of Braganca.
5. This treaty shall expire should Clause 4 be violated, or on December 1, 1900, whichever occurs first.

x Prince Regent Joao VI of Portugal

[The reaction of the Prosecutor’s office came in a tweet, whose text is also below. The key language is this: “When individuals threaten to retaliate against the Court or Court personnel….such threats, even when not acted upon, may also constitute an offence against the administration of justice under Art. 70 of the Rome Statute]

https://www.cfr.org/blog/international-criminal-court-prosecutor-threatens-united-states-senators

After the prosecutor called for the arrest warrants for top Israeli officials, 12 United States Senators wrote to the ICC. The full text of the letter is below. The final paragraphs read:

If you issue a warrant for the arrest of the Israeli leadership, we will interpret this not only as a threat to Israel’s sovereignty but to the sovereignty of the United States.

The United States will not tolerate politicized attacks by the ICC on our allies. Target Israel and we will target you. If you move forward with the measures indicated in the report, we will move to end all American support for the ICC, sanction your employees and associates, and bar you and your families from the United States. You have been warned.

The reaction of the Prosecutor’s office came in a tweet, whose text is also below. The key language is this: “When individuals threaten to retaliate against the Court or Court personnel….such threats, even when not acted upon, may also constitute an offence against the administration of justice under Art. 70 of the Rome Statute….”

The House and Senate should quickly pass the sanction the ICC bill so the message comes out that yes we fully intend to undermine them.

Actually they should add a provision to the bill which would make it a felony to charge any American under "ICC authority". So if the ICC Prosecutor even tries to ask for charges against these senators, then that ICC prosecutor can be indicted under US law

For the crime of what exactly? Not bending over for whatever the hell Washington says, just because half of Congress is in bed with Bibi?

Attempted Kidnapping would be one but it could be a new offense as well as the law would be new.

Lmfao. If serving out a warrant for a crime is "attempted kidnapping," then I never want to hear another word about being "tough on crime" from anyone of you people again.

Domestic law is not the same as international law and it’s ridiculous to put international law on that same standard.

Anyone know how GOOD may fare? I find the party pretty interesting.

Last time they got two MPs nationally and one provincial legislator in Western Cape. They won't do any better than that this time and they could lose all three, although De Lille is enough of a household name that they might save something.

I do hope these sanction pass so these ICC prosecutors realize that there powerless and there power come from countries deciding if there warrants are politically advantageous to them.

Well duh, international law isn't enforceable by the institutions themselves. It exists because the nations of the world have decided that the rules should exist. They decided it is better for them to agree on restraints on states than the 'might makes right' world that keeps producing atrocities, wars and crimes against humanity.

We never agreed to institutions like the ICC existing which is why we not only have not signed on to the ICC but it’s also part of our laws that the ICC attempting to arrest an American is equal to a declaration of war on us

I do hope these sanction pass so these ICC prosecutors realize that there powerless and there power come from countries deciding if there warrants are politically advantageous to them.

Well duh, international law isn't enforceable by the institutions themselves. It exists because the nations of the world have decided that the rules should exist. They decided it is better for them to agree on restraints on states than the 'might makes right' world that keeps producing atrocities, wars and crimes against humanity.

A one-night stand with one, I'm not that shallow to decline it.

A legitimate romantic relationship-f*** no!

Wouldn't be opposed to a one-night stand, especially with an older woman in some position of authority who preferably isn't already attached. But from what I've seen on dating apps, I don't really think I appeal to pro-life, anti-feminist, openly gold-digger, tradwife, MAGA, openly evangelical Protestant, etc. women around my age who somehow aren't already taken- beyond them being mostly (Non-Hispanic) White women who prefer Non-Hispanic White men.

That being said, I don't necessarily count registered GOPers or low-engagement Trump voters as "out-loud-and-proud Trump supporters".