by hamilcarr 202 Replies latest social current
Well, Hamilcar - certainly 69% of the American public did not vote against him. And, the fact remains that if Al Gore had won his own home state, he would have been president. Regardless of the hanging chads.
But I guess that as it all happened before July 1, 2002, no crime can be charged within the legal limitations.
James,
Hillary_Step: Advertising? Really? I thought you and Hamilcar were doing that pro-bono.
I presume that is your way of saying, "I got it wrong yet again"? Rest assured, it worked. HS
No, Hillary - may way of saying things is to just say things.
What I was saying was simply this - if you know they have an advertising budget, then pray tell us what it's value was, and what it was used for. And perhaps you could enlighten us on why a world court system would need an advertising budget?
The U.S. Supreme Court seems to be getting along with a far smaller staff and without the benefit of the men in gray flannel suits.
Hamil,
Hatred of the United States? Let the average JWD poster decide. I defend a majority view among the American population.
There has been no hatred of the US displayed in this thread, only a 'hatred' of the UN and ICC by two persons. One, a US conservative who has made it clear on this Board that he will unthinkingly support such conservative ideals even if he has to put his brain into suspended animation, and the other who has no real clue what he believes about anything, but needs to feed his fetish with 'Ctrl C' and 'Ctrl V'.
Hatred of conservative politics? Claiming someone propagates hatred is very easy, giving evidence for it is hard
Another nonsense generated by the reality that arguing against the facts has made the critics of the ICC look very foolish. It is a shame that so many UC citizens cannot break away from the two party tribal mentality when it comes to politics and accept that each party has positive and negative within their manifestos. This might lead to the generation of a seriously needed, seriously equipped third party in US politics. But I suppose if one views their politics as they do a football game, this is not possible as having more than two teams on one playing field might tax the grey matter with many voters.
HS
Just a question (back on the topic) - did the ICC go ahead and let that revolutionary guy from the Congo go, after the trial got thrown out of court?
James,
lol....you really are a nut job aren't you.
Above, no more than half a dozen posts ago, you claimed that the WHOLE ICC BUDGET WAS SPENT ON WAGES. THE WHOLE OF IT. ALL OF IT!
I showed you that this notion was absolutely absurd in the extreme, and proved this to you. Now, you dwell on the issue of ICC advertising costs, so I presume that you realize that you made an idiot of yourself by suggesting that THE WHOLE OF THE ICC BUDGET WAS SPENT ON WAGES.
Nit wit. Burn has already sneeringly drawn attention to the fact that I receive advertising myself from the ICC. Who do you think paid for this MacDonalds?
Come on James, surely you can do better than this. At least with the coming election in mind, I would bloody hope so!
HS
OK - now let's slow down a little, Hillary.
I did not mean to imply that the entire budget was spent on wages...of course not. However, in business, one of the primary economic markers is the ratio of total gross income per employee. I put that ratio up (from their own public statements) as something to think about, given the time the court has been in existence and the lack of results it has produced.
Nor did I mean to imply that "each and every" employee was being paid $400,000 per year...surely there are a few of the elite making far more, while the great majority must be secretarial and support staff who are paid far less. And certainly there are other expenses, even if some of the office space is loaned to them by a friendly U.N. I just put up a statistical ratio as a point for consideration.
And I still fail to see why they would need to advertise. Of course, I go back to a time in the U.S. when our private sector attorneys at law were forbidden to advertise - we used to call this "ambulance chasing".
If you misunderstood what I was posting, then let this clear it up.
Nor did I mean to imply that "each and every" employee was being paid $400,000 per year...surely there are a few of the elite making far more, while the great majority must be secretarial and support staff who are paid far less. And certainly there are other expenses, even if some of the office space is loaned to them by a friendly U.N. I just put up a statistical ratio as a point for consideration.
The ICC is transparent in reporting its expenses.
http://www.icc-cpi.int/library/asp/ICC-ASP-7-8_English.pdf
Once again, I challenge you to trace down financial anomalies that corroborate your squandering claims.
What I am seeing here is simply another thread in which hatred of the United States, conservative politics, and in particular anyone who does not share the world-government liberal thought tank - is labeled an idiot or worse.
I hold it against you that you unnecessarily added polarization to this discussion.
That was very unwise (a fortiori when you debate anonymous posters and don't seem to grasp the dynamics of European politics).
At least 38% of republican voters are in favour of the ICC.
The situation is more complex than you may think.
Again, did not make the claim that they were squandering. My point was that a lot of money is circling the drain without any convictions to show for it.
If I had started 6 years ago to grow oranges in Florida, obtained over 100 million dollars per year in public funding to do so, and had yet to produce a single saleable orange - then I guess I would be putting some of my money into advertising (or even propaganda) as a self defense.
And, if that kind of financial model is to be considered squandering, well so be it.
