I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

Good up the good work.

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

Payday loan online will benefit visitors near Hawaii with immense fees, when citizens are near a} point of financial embarrassment.

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

I enjoyed reading your blog. It is so interesting reading other peoples personal take on a subject.

I found your post comments while searching Google. Very relevant especially as this is not an issue which a lot of peaople are conversant with.

juan e amici

thought you might enjoy this drawing

profound… very good…

Sure there was, the ruling established that a fine was due. The US just dragged out the settlement on how much the fine would be, until they could help rig an election in their favor through the embargo.

Game, set, and match.

You really aren’t a very good player though. You move the goalposts, like all ‘con-men’ do.

Fight On Iraqi Freedom Fighters !!!!!!!!!!

Repel and Destroy All Invaders and Occupiers and OIL Stealers !!!!

The Fight Is Becoming A Little More Fair, No ??

“In spite of this resolution, the U.S. still elected not to pay the fine.”

As I have demonstrated, there was no “fine” assessed or levied that the U.S. “elected not to pay.”

Game, set, and match.

Yet the decision was decided that one was due.

(13) By twelve votes to three,
Decides that the United States of America is under an obligation to make reparation to the Republic of Nicaragua for all injury caused to Nicaragua by the breaches of obligations under customary international law enumerated above;

IN FAVOUR: President Nagendra Singh; Vice-President de Lacharrière; Judges Lachs, Ruda, Elias, Ago, Sette-Camara, Mbaye, Bedjaoui, Ni and Evensen; Judge ad hoc Colliard;

AGAINST: Judges Oda, Schwebel and Sir Robert Jennings.
(14) By fourteen votes to one,

Decides that the United States of America is under an obligation to make reparation to the Republic of Nicaragua for all injury caused to Nicaragua by the breaches of the Treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Navigation between the Parties signed at Managua on 21 January 1956;

IN FAVOUR: President Nagendra Singh; Vice-President de Lacharrière; Judges Lachs, Ruda, Elias, Oda, Ago, Sette-Camara, Sir Robert Jennings, Mbaye, Bedjaoui, Ni and Evensen; Judge ad hoc Colliard;

AGAINST: Judge Schwebel.

(15) By fourteen votes to one,

Decides that the form and amount of such reparation, failing agreement between the Parties, will be settled by the Court, and reserves for this purpose the subsequent procedure in the case;

IN FAVOUR: President Nagendra Singh; Vice-President de Lacharrière; Judges Lachs, Ruda, Elias, Oda, Ago, Sette Camara, Sir Robert Jennings, Mbaye, Bedjaoui, Ni and Evensen; Judge ad hoc Colliard;

AGAINST: Judge Schwebel.

It is clear your knowledge and understanding of the case does not extend beyond using Google and Wikipedia.
Comment by Exley — February 7, 2007 @ 7:24 pm

It is clear your knowledge and understanding of the case does not extend beyond talking points. The judgement was that reparations were due. Whether those occurred, were settled, or were finally dropped by the Nicaraguans as a means to end the embargo against them is a different matter. International law sided with Nicaragua, and categorically decided that reparations were due.

Check, and mate.

“The Court is requested to adjudge and declare that compensation is due to Nicaragua, the quantum thereof to be fixed subsequently, and to award to Nicaragua the sum of 370.2 million US dollars as an interim award. After satisfying itself that it has jurisdiction to order reparation, the Court considers appropriate the request of Nicaragua for the nature and amount of the reparation to be determined in a subsequent phase of the proceedings. It also considers that there is no provision in the Statute of the Court either specifically empowering it or debarring it from making an interim award of the kind requested. In a cases in which one Party is not appearing, the Court should refrain from any unnecessary act which might prove an obstacle to a negotiated settlement. The Court therefore does not consider that it can accede at this stage to this request by Nicaragua.”

http://www.icj-cij.org/icjwww/icases/inus/inus_isummaries/inus_isummary_19860

” It also considers that there is no provision in the Statute of the Court either specifically empowering it or debarring it from making an interim award of the kind requested. In a cases in which one Party is not appearing, the Court should refrain from any unnecessary act which might prove an obstacle to a negotiated settlement. The Court therefore does not consider that it can accede at this stage to this request by Nicaragua.”

Ha ha ha!!!!

Ok, Ex, whatever. You bring me all the “law” you want. I will bring justice when you are prepared for that.

Of course they did, we were going to continue boycotting them if they didn’t. It doesn’t change the fact we violated the law, and that the UN found us guilty of doing so.

We are in fact more in violation of international law than Saddam was, but hey, who cares when the US does immoral acts. We’re doing it for God, right? We can safely set aside our morals to prevent a larger moral catastrophe, right?

You moral relativists are so cute when support illegal acts and terrorism while claiming the high ground. You’re like small children that claim you had the toys first. Too bad there wasn’t a supernanny around to help your parents raise responsible and mature children. The world would have been a better place if that had happened.

I just use google.com, a search machine and typed: US vs Nicaragua + UN resolution. Its from a site named wikipedia.

Now, dont offend by the simplicity of my instructions, it is just that certain people, like my parents, dont know how to use internet and since your question remind me theirs, thats why I put it that way.

After Columbia, I would say that Mexico has the best grains of coffee. But I dont drink coffee from Starbucks or other US company or from Nestle, they win 30 times what the farmer wins. Its modern slavery and its allowed by the WTO.

Mexican elections: Just like latinamerican elections. Middle class afraid of changes that contribute to a fair society. Ruling class inventing propaganda to stay in power and lower classes struggling to survive. Same thing, different days. I am as dissapointed as you, but in a sense, I guess its OK, probably when we realise how dumb we are as a society, we can start changing things.

The ruling did in many ways clarify issues surrounding prohibition of the use of force and the right of self-defence. Arming and training the Contra was found to be in breach with principles of non-intervention and prohibition of use of force, as was laying mines in Nicaraguan territorial waters.

Nicaragua’s dealings with the armed opposition in El Salvador, although it might be considered a breach with the principle of non-intervention and the prohibition of use of force, did not constitute “an armed attack” which is the wording in article 51 justifying the right of self-defence.

The Court also considered the United States claim to be acting in collective self-defence of El Salvador, and found the conditions for this not reached, as El Salvador never requested the assistance of the United States on the grounds of self-defence.

Please note Exley, that item one violated UN Customary International Law.

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

I hope you don’t practice law for a living, you’re unsuited to the profession.