ICJ can only make advisory judgement that is not binding legally?

 I am sure many could still remember the hilarious arbitration case brought up by the Philippines against China on the claims of South China Sea islands. The Pinoys are still claiming that the arbitration pronouncement by a court that appointed its own judges, paid by the Pinoys, without China agreeing and attending, is legally valid and binding. In all purposes, the so called arbitration court was nothing more than a self appointed private court by a single party, paid and self appointed judges, with no relevance or legality as China, the other party, did not agree to the arbitration.

What credibility or legality did that arbitration court has compared to the International Court of Justice now hearing the genocide case against Israel? What is the ICJ? According to Wikipedia,

'The International Court of Justice (ICJ), also called the World Court,^[1] is the only international court that adjudicates general disputes between nations, and gives advisory opinions on international legal issues. It is one of the six organs of the United Nations (UN),^[2] and is located in The Hague, Netherlands.

The ICJ is the successor of the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ), which was established in 1920 by the League of Nations. ...

The ICJ consists of a panel of 15 judges elected by the UN General Assembly and Security Council for nine-year terms. No more than one judge of each nationality may be represented on court at the same time, and judges collectively must reflect the principal civilizations and legal systems of the world.'

The ICJ. with full association and authorisation from the UN, and with its judges carefully appointed to ensure a fair hearing, could only give advisory opinions on international issues. The judgement of this court is only advisory, not necessary to be complied with, not legally binding. Holy cow, what is the point of getting a hearing and judgement from this court? At best it is a pyrrhic victory of sort, a political victory for the winning party. So, whatever findings from the Court, Israel and the Americans could totally ignore it and continue with their genocide against the Palestinians. The finding or judgement cannot be enforced, not even by the fake international policemen of the USA. It is as good as a moot court in process. What good can it do?

And, the back lane self appointed arbitration court, paid for by one party, with its judges appointed by one party, the Philippines are claiming that its finding were legally binding and enforceable, because it is associated with the UN and its office is in the Hague.

Can you believe it?

The most troubling issue of the genocide case brought up by South Africa is that quite a number of African states are not supporting it, with some even supporting the Americans and the Israelis. Is it that the genocide case has no merit or there is more to it than African Unity and African independence from their colonial masters, and would not be bullied or coerced by them to toe the line of their ex colonial masters?

Likewise, with the poor Palestinians, an Arab and Muslim tribe, not all the Arab and Muslim states are defending them with some on the side of the Americans and the Jews, and quietly supporting the genocide. I am sure the strange behaviours of some African states and the Arab and Muslim states are not because of coercion or bribery. The Americans and Jews are such peace loving and morally upright people and would not resort to coercion or bribery. All the American allies and crony states would vouch for the integrity of the Americans and the Jews...voluntarily, be the attack dogs of the Americans, also voluntarily.

What do you think? Black Ops? No coercion?

The rise of the Philippines as the most powerful country in Asean

 Those reading the main media cannot help but come across with the impression that the Philippines is now the most power country in Asean, militarily. It is the only Asean country that is taking on China head on, even going to war with China. It is building up its military capability with the help of the USA, Japan and Australia. In many ways, the Philippines is similar to the powerful European state called Ukraine.

Ukraine is also a very powerful military country in Europe and did not need to think twice to go to war with Russia. And it is very confident that it would triumph over Russia. How can it lose when the Americans promised Ukraine to do all it takes to beat the Russians? And not only they have the Americans on their backs, they have NATO and the rest of the western world willing to fund and finance the war. And Russia is only a single country, isolated, fighting alone.

The Ukraine War is a sure win for the Ukrainians from the start, and is still winning.

The Philippines is even in a better position than Ukraine. Not only it has an outstandingly smart leader like Zelensky, it has the Americans, NATO, Japan, Australia and South Korea willing to fund and finance its war against China. And if the Americans exert more pressure on Asean, many Asean states would also be on the side of the Philippines to fight China. There is no reason for the Philippines not to win this war against China. And the Pinoys are brave soldiers, the best in Asean, and with the best military weapons the US, NATO, Japan and the rest of its supporters can provide.

The other advantages for winning this war are, the Philippines would become very rich like Ukraine. Like Zelensky, all Marcos Jr needs to do is ask and will be given, money and weapons. And Philippines will become the de facto leader of Asean and calling the shot in Asean and the region. This is a great opportunity for Marcos Jr and the Philippines to be great and become the biggest regional power in South East Asia.

God bless the Philippines, Marcos Jr and the Philippine people. They all deserved to win this war against China. Good luck.

I will place my bet on the Philippines to win. The Pinoys will be the pride of Asean, and there will be peace in the region after this war.

Staking a claim to the nation's reserves

 Singapore is very proud of its $1 trillion reserves or thereabout. It is too complicated to know the exact amount, or maybe it is a state secret. The mentioning of this $1 trillion reserves would make every Singaporean salivate. And that is the closest they could get to this mountain of money. Can see cannot touch, or maybe a little handouts now and then, and must be very grateful for the mercy of the handlers. And don't developed a crutch mentality on these handouts.

The handsome reserves did not come about by accident, did not come about yesterday. It was carefully accumulated over the last few decades by the sweat and tears of the pioneering generations and the younger seniors of the country. Thanks to the wisdom and thrift of the pioneering leaders that have left us, for planting the trees, and the seniors for helping to put in the fertilisers, and the fruits are hanging all over to be picked. The reserves were meant for a rainy day and we had some rainy days and some of the reserves came in handy when needed.

There are some questions that people may be wondering about the reserves. Who were the people behind the creation of this wealth? Who were the main contributors to this wealth? And who should be the beneficiaries of this wealth? The answers may seem obvious, the main contributors of the nation's reserves must be the main beneficiaries of the wealth they contributed and helped to create. Is this so? Caveat, most of the deserving pioneering leaders and contributors would not be around to benefit from it.

Who do you think are the real beneficiaries of the nation's reserves? One big beneficiary is the fund managers or people in charge of the reserves. They are paid handsomely, very handsomely. For the fund managers, they are in a way mercenaries, hired to grow the reserves. If they are doing a good job, made good returns, no one shall begrudged how much they are being paid as long as they could give a positive return after their compensation. This is the basic formula and reason to pay the fund managers well. If they are not performing, giving lesser returns than expected, or even making losses, it would be better to put the reserves in high yield deposits than paying for losses or meagre returns from the fund managers.

Who else are benefiting from the nation's reserves? Who else are being paid excessively because there is a mountain of money there to pay them the millions they are asking? Some even take it for granted that they deserved or are entitled to be paid in the millions. If this mountain of money is not there, could they still be expecting to be paid in the millions? Oops, there is always the taxes and hikes to make up. The entitlement mentality is deeply entrenched in the system when the supply of funds to pay in the millions is unstoppable.

Who else are benefiting from the reserves? Are foreigners, ie PRs or so called locals, and new citizens also benefiting from the reserves accumulated over decades by the earlier generations of the citizens? Should PRs or locals that are non citizens be benefiting from our nation's reserves? Should new citizens that have yet to contribute to the nation's reserves be entitled to handouts from the nation's reserves like the citizens that contributed to it over their life time? Being generous to the non deserving is being cruel to the main contributors of the reserves, as it would bite into their share of the reserves.

And the big question, are the main contributors of the nation's reserves fairly rewarded for their contributions, or they are only given a pittance? Is it fair for the seniors that contributed to the nation's reserves to expect a decent dividend from the nation's reserves, yes, expecting it to be their ATM in their retirement when others are feasting from the nation's reserves like a god given right?

What do you think? Who is the most deserving to benefit from the nation's reserves? And are they getting their fair share or seen as a burden, not deserving beggars?

Israel in defiance against the United Nation and the people of the world

 

28 sec, Israeli representative at the UN tore off a UN Resolution condemning Israel for war crimes and crimes against humanity. He even told the UN to fuck off.

Who is behind the Israelis for them to be so arrogant in front of the countries of the whole world? Without the Americans, would the 6m Israelis dare to behave like they are above the law, that no one would dare to take them to task for war crimes and crimes against humanity?

The more Nethanyahu and his gang, and Blinken and the White House continue to support and flame the genocide of the Palestinians, the more it would anger the people of the world and the more would the Americans and the Israelis be isolated from the international community, particularly the Arab and Muslim communities. Oops, the Americans would claim the international community is behind them. When asked who are the international community, they would uh, uh, pretending that the whole world is behind them when it was only their European allies and semi colonies in Asia, ie with American bases in the land of these colonies to control and rule them.

The people of the world are not dumb and lack of conscience and do not know what is genocide and who are behind the slaughtering of the Palestinians. The culprits in Washington can keep on lying, pretending, but their actions to block the call for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, the continuous supply of arms to Israel, the non stop attacks against the Houthis, the non condemnation of the genocide, said it all.

Without the treacherous and complicit Americans, the 6m Jews did not have a chance to take on the Arab and Muslim world, even with a few Arab and Muslim states on their side.

Blinken - If you are not at the table, you on the menu

 This quote by Blinken is very revealing on the American devious mindset and policies towards the rest of the world. The Empire treats almost every state as an item in its menu, to be served and eaten. The big question is, are you at the table?

Who are the countries at the table? Some countries, especially American allies, presumed that they are at the table. Countries in Aukus, in the Quad, G7, would also presume, conceitedly that they must be at the table and are safe. Who really are at the table?

When a country is at the table, it may be like being invited to a feast. This is one way of looking at the meaning of being 'at the table'. Or the Emperor issuing out orders. Another way of looking at it is to look at the intent or purpose of the table. At the table is not simply just a dinner table. At the table could mean the negotiating table, where American interests are being discussed and negotiated, or how the world is going to be divided. 

From this perspective, many American allies and crony states are not at the table. When the Americans are at the negotiating table, the allies and crony states are often not invited. So far, there is only one other party at the negotiating table, ie China. At the table there are only two negotiating parties, the USA and China. At the table, they would decide their vital national interests and what they would do to protect their national interests, who would be the scapegoat or sacrificial lamb, who would be dispensed with, to be traded between the two superpowers. At the table, the Americans and the other party would decide the fate of smaller states and world affairs, how the world should be carved out.

This is the American meaning of being at the table, or being in the menu. The rest of the world is in the American menu, America First. The Americans need not invite their allies or cronies to the table. They will negotiate with China and inform their allies and cronies on the outcome.

For those American allies and cronies that think they are at the table or at least not on the menu, this might be a rude shock. They are just an item in the menu. Remember Taiwan, once American's closest ally aka ROC, was an item on the menu when Nixon negotiated with Mao. ROC was sold for China to be on the American side against the Soviet Union. Ukraine is about to be traded for peace in Europe.