Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Bin Laden Mosque in Kosovo
REVEALED: What the U.S. has done to its stature via the Balkans: Yesterday, while 77 countries voted in favor of the Serbian initiative requesting the ICJ to rule on the legality of the unilateral secession of its Kosovo province, take a look at the power team voting against:
Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Albania and United States of America.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
From theÂ De-construct.net blog:
Statement of the Day
“Perhaps 48 countries did recognize Kosovo independence, but it may be worth mentioning that the other 144 did not.”
â€“ Dumisani Kumalo, South Africa’s Ambassador to the UN, in response to American ambassador during General Assembly’s debate about Serbian initiative
Serbia Wins Majority Support in United Nations
Oct 8th, 2008 | By De-Construct.net | In Current, Kosovo-Metohija Crisis
US and Albania, Part of a Painfully Small World Minority
Serbian resolution requesting an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on “whether the unilateral declaration of independence of Kosovo is in accordance with international law” was accepted in the UN General Assembly on Wednesday, with 77 countries voting in favor and 6 against….74 countries abstained but, according to the General Assembly voting regulations, Serbia needed a simple majority, where only the votes ‘for’ and ‘against’ are being counted, while the abstentions are not taken into account.
“We are surprised with the number of states which voted for the resolution. We support the International Court of Justice opinion, but an advisory opinion cannot affect Kosovo independence”, Britain’s UN Ambassador John Sawers said after the vote.
Previously, Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremic urged the representatives of the United Nations to support Serbia’s ICJ intiative.
Jeremic: Voting Against Means Secessionists Always Win
Sending the resolution to the court, Jeremic told the UN General Assembly, would reduce tensions in the region and in the rest of the world.
“The Republic of Serbia believes that sending this question to the ICJ would prevent the Kosovo crisis from serving as a deeply problematic precedent in any part of the globe where secessionist ambitions are harbored,” Jeremic said explaining Serbia’s request.
“We also believe that the ICJ advisory opinion would provide politically neutral, yet judicially authoritative guidance, to many countries still deliberating on how to approach UDI in line with international law,” Jeremic added.
He stated that Serbia believes “that recourse to the Court would strengthen the rule of law in international relations, and make the proposed course of action a symbol of the world community’s resolve to take the UN Charter as its guide”.
“Supporting this resolution would also serve to reaffirm a fundamental principle: the right of any member State of the United Nations to pose a simple, basic question â€” on a matter it considers vitally important â€” to the international court,” Jeremic set out, noting that to vote against would be in effect a vote to deny the right of any country â€“ now or in the future â€“ to seek judicial recourse through the UN system.
Jeremic underscored that “to vote against would also mean accepting that nothing could be done when secessionists in whichever part of the globe assert the uniqueness of their cause, and claim exception to the universal scope of the international legal order”.
“The question posed is amply clear and refrains from taking political positions on the Kosovo issue. The answer to come, in the form of an advisory opinion, will be based on international law, in accordance with the ICJ’s Statute and Rules of Procedure,” Jeremic pointed out.
Severe Blow to the Separatists and their Western Sponsors
…European Union, which aims for a united foreign policy, once again failed to reach a consensus with the UK and France abstaining, while Slovakia, Greece, Cyprus, Spain and Romania voted in favor. In the discussion that preceded the voting, Serbia was supported by Panama, Cuba, Mexico, Indonesia, Costa Rica, Algeria, Egypt, South Africa… The United States and Albania voiced their opposition to the adoption of the resolution, while Turkey abstained.
Great Britain criticized Serbian initiative, claiming it was “politically motivated”. US representative Rosemary DiCarlo said her country will vote against, since Washington considers Kosovo Albanian separatists’ declaration to have been “in line with international law”.
“United States are fully supporting the International Court of Justice, but in regards to the resolution before us, we believe the advisory opinion is unnecessary and unhelpful, and therefore we shall vote against it”, the US ambassador said, stressing that 48 countries have recognized Pristina separatists’ declaration.
“Perhaps 48 countries did recognize Kosovo independence, but it may be worth mentioning that the other 144 did not,” South Africa’s Ambassador to the UN Dumisani Kumalo said, emphasizing his country supports Serbian initiative.
The plenary session, despite Great Britain’s insistence, was not attended by the Pristina war criminals, butchers, narcodealers and separatists.
Even though mafia state on Serbian territory was recognized only 24 hours ago by one more EU member â€” Portugal â€” East River diplomats believe adoption of the Serbian resolution will represent a “severe psychological blow to the further recognitions”, being that the states which have not formed a clear stand on the issue are expected to await the ICJ opinion prior to making any moves.
According to Tanjug, the prevailing view of the UN delegates is that recent events in Georgia have made Western position more precarious, since predictions of opponents of imposed severing of southern Serbian province have proved correct â€” amputation of Kosovo province did create a precedent, encouraging secessionist movements throughout the world.
Countries voting in favor of Serbian initiative (77 UN member states):
Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Chile, China, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Fiji, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Honduras, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Liechtenstein, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mexico, Montenegro, Myanmar, Namibia, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Philippines, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Timor-Leste, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Viet Nam, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Jesus: “Mohammed, my kingdom is not of this world”
Mohammed: “Mine is…”
We are Losing Europe to Islam
[ISLAM]Â With reference to Shari’a courts which are now officially part of the British legal system Diana West bitterly notes that tolerance has transformed British democracy into a culture that promotes a religion that is the absolute antithesis of the British value system. Five of these courts have been given legally binding authority for their decisions. These courts have already upheld male supremacy in inheritance and domestic violence against women, dropping charges against husbands for violence against their wives.
West warns that the Europe we know will be lost if its tolerance of diversity continues to encourage the incorporation of Islamic beliefs into formerly democratic bodies of law. She notes that protests against the integration of Islamic laws into democratic societies are met with responses labeling such campaigners as extremists or racist. Many Europeans, naturally adverse to such labels, are instead bending over backwards to avoid such allegations by legitimizing the incorporation of Islamic law into their societies.
Failure to protest this recent activity will not encourage multicultural diversity, rather it is an open invitation for further Islamic aggression and dominance.Â
The IHC recommends that you read this article in full.