We’re all pirates now

Scaramouche:

International “Human Rights” Court Declares That Somali Pirates Have “Rights,” Too, Orders France to Pay Up for Its Violation

somali-pirates

Sing: Yo ho ho and a barrel of “human rights” lunacy

You may have heard by now that Hillary Clinton thinks the best way to bring about world “peace” is to “empathize”–yes, “empathize”– with our enemies.

Hillary_Clinton_portrait32131

That’s right. The POTUS-in-waiting wants us to “walk a mile in the shoes” (so to speak) of the likes of Kim Jong Un, Vladimir Putin, the Grandiose Ayatollah and everyone everywhere who is making jihad his/her life’s (and death’s) work.– Hillary Clinton’s “Empathy” Tripe a Recipe for Doom, Kaboom and Catastrophe

Related:

For Holder, Obama and co., the cops are the bad guys

U.S. President Obama and Attorney General Holder attend the National Peace Officers Memorial Service at the Capitol in Washington“Holder: Cops Must Pretend Some Facts Don’t Exist”

The left’s coup on America is complete. Disarming the American people even further and leaving us completely exposed. No jihadic theology, no ideology, no “Middle Eastern,” no gender, as identifying characteristics. - Pamela Geller

10349955_668563849955546_3703869333496783908_n-1

5 thoughts on “We’re all pirates now”

  1. Pft! I never heard Hillary empathize with that vast Right Wing cabal she was always moaning about.

    The Somali’s should be paid alright, but with lead.

  2. Our human rights are not a gimme! The International “Human Rights” Court seem to be naively under the misapprehension that murdering, thieving terrorists can choose to break international law yet get compensation for being held in custody for a short extra time. Does the International Human Rights court support terrorism? Are Somali pirates on their payroll?

  3. “Criminals have rights, too!”

    Actually, NO, they don’t.

    See, the Law is a social contract, where people agree to not attack (thereby innocent) others, first.

    From agreeing to this, we get our only right (to not be attacked first) and we have our only responsibility (to not attack others first).

    But when one chooses to break that contract BY attacking others first, one also thereby gives up one’s own right to not therefore be defensively (counter-)attacked by on’es attempted victims, second.

    That counter-attacking second bit, was formerly known as “JUSTICE.”

    And even the courts do it, sometimes years later, when the perp is no longer a clear and present danger, because, as even the falsely divided civil and criminal laws agree, one must pay for what one takes.

    The only job of any court of judge is to determine who started it, and to punish the instigating aggressors for their (even if failed) attempts; after all, it’s the thought (intent) which counts!

    And court or judge which refuses to do so, has abdicated their position of authority, and have become criminally negligent.

  4. Re: “Criminals have rights, too!”

    Actually, NO, they don’t.

    See, the Law is a social contract, where people agree to not attack (thereby innocent) others, first.

    From agreeing to this, we get our only right (to not be attacked first) and we have our only responsibility (to not attack others first).

    But when one chooses to break that contract BY attacking others first, one also thereby gives up one’s own right to not therefore be defensively (counter-)attacked by on’es attempted victims, second.

    That counter-attacking second bit, was formerly known as “JUSTICE.” Criminals also used to be known as “Out-Laws” because their own choices had placed them outside the protections of the Law; it was hterefore open season on them.

    And even the courts do it, sometimes years later, when the perp is no longer a clear and present danger, because, as even the falsely divided civil and criminal laws agree, one must pay for what one takes.

    The only job of any court or judge is to determine who started it, and to punish the instigating aggressors for their (even if failed) attempts; after all, it’s the thought (intent) which counts!

    Any court or judge which refuses to do so, has abdicated their position of authority, and have become criminally negligent.

  5. Re: “Criminals have rights, too!”

    Actually, NO, they don’t.

    See, the Law is a social contract, where people agree to not attack (thereby innocent) others, first.

    From agreeing to this, we get our only right (to not be attacked first) and we have our only responsibility (to not attack others first).

    But when one chooses to break that contract BY attacking others first, one also thereby gives up one’s own right to not therefore be defensively (counter-)attacked by one’s attempted victims, second.

    That counter-attacking second bit, was formerly known as “JUSTICE.” Criminals also used to be known as “Out-Laws” because their own choices had placed them outside the protections of the Law; it was therefore open season on them.

    And even the courts do it, sometimes years later, when the perp is no longer a clear and present danger, because, as even the falsely divided civil and criminal laws agree, one must pay for what one takes.

    The only job of any court or judge is to determine who started it, and to punish the instigating aggressors for their (even if failed) attempts; after all, it’s the thought (intent) which counts!

    Any court or judge which refuses to do so, has abdicated their position of authority, and have become criminally negligent.

Comments are closed.