The Prowler
Site Supporter
- Reaction score
- 4,372
- Location
- Canada
Look at poor Holliday react when he gets challenged on a point!!
Hahahahaha!!!!!
Murder on the High Seas
- Thread starter Holy Holliday !
- Start date
Look at poor Holliday react when he gets challenged on a point!!
Hahahahaha!!!!!
The Prowler
Site Supporter
- Reaction score
- 4,372
- Location
- Canada
Oh oh.
Holliday just made a big mistake.
When I "floor my C8" at "the change of a light", I am breaking the law in about 1 second.
In which case it would be appropriate to lawfully punish me.
Similarly.....
When narco-terrorists transport narcotics, it is appropriate to lawfully punish them.
Imagine arguing and giving an analogy that supports the other side of the argument......Hahahaha!!!!!
- Reaction score
- 2,944
- Location
- Chicagoland
Sure, Trust Fund Boy. Tell us how you helped mommy cultivate her bromeliads in the greenhouse of the estate you grew up on?
OP
OP
Holy Holliday !
Regular Member
- Reaction score
- 51
- Location
- The Big Tent
Exactly, stupid. Habeas Corpus. Noooow you're getting the idea.
OP
OP
Holy Holliday !
Regular Member
- Reaction score
- 51
- Location
- The Big Tent
Reggie, do you harbor these same resentments toward a silver spooner like Donald P Trump?
.The "P" is for he likes em young....reeeeeal young.
Seamajor
Site Supporter
- Reaction score
- 5,728
Yep my garden down there was truly beautiful. Sadly Mom only visited one time for a few days. Your ignorant assumptions prove what a broke jealous fool you are
The Prowler
Site Supporter
- Reaction score
- 4,372
- Location
- Canada
See, I spoon fed something to Holliday and he still blew it.
You cannot demonstrate that the US intelligence does not have proof that there are narco-terrorists on the boats as I covered here:
So you need to provide references to The Law that states that these attacks on narco-terrorists are unlawful.
If you cannot do that, then you have nothing.
OP
OP
Holy Holliday !
Regular Member
- Reaction score
- 51
- Location
- The Big Tent
The Prowler
Site Supporter
- Reaction score
- 4,372
- Location
- Canada
I clicked on that link and it says:
"Under international law, it is
unlawful to intentionally kill people on the high seas without showing proof of unlawful activity, except in very narrow, specific circumstances"
Holliday says "English is hardzzz!!!!!"
Hahahahaha!!!!!
OP
OP
Holy Holliday !
Regular Member
- Reaction score
- 51
- Location
- The Big Tent
...and what does you research show are those very narrow specific circumstance? Be precise.
. You see, the core question is do you condone a government of what is a country founded on moral laws murdering people outside their jurisdiction w/o providing any evidence of wrongdoing, and are you so oblivious to the potential consequence of setting such a precedent?
I know you have already forfeited the point, but are exercising your troll options like a good retard.
Since you are too chicken to answer the other direct and relevant questions you've been asked, why not try to tackle this one.
PS: btw, the recent boat sunk was not even headed to the US, but hey - small detail there. It looked suspicious.
The Prowler
Site Supporter
- Reaction score
- 4,372
- Location
- Canada
You are the person who is doing the research....and failing to prove your point.
OP
OP
Holy Holliday !
Regular Member
- Reaction score
- 51
- Location
- The Big Tent
No - it's you who needs to show that wanton murder on the high seas is legal (I was only helping you get started), but beyond that I have asked you if you think it is moral even if it was legal to kill someone on suspicion of wrongdoing. Personally, I don't think murderers, thieves, rapists, embezzlers etc are particularly good people but we in the advances societies of the world (the civilized nations) give them their day in court.
You think there was sound evidence that the boat was carrying illicit drugs bound for the US when it was headed to Africa, show your evidence.
PS: let me guess, they are the government, they know, they are well intentioned.
. What a sucker you are, and why suddenly is big non-transparent government good and trustworthy?
Get your story straight, please.
The Prowler
Site Supporter
- Reaction score
- 4,372
- Location
- Canada
Not the way it works.
When you are crying "It is illegal!!!" then the burden of proof is on you to prove that it is illegal!!!
For a guy who is lecturing on following the principles of law, you sure say some stupid things!!!!
Just admit defeat, you idiot.
- Reaction score
- 2,944
- Location
- Chicagoland
What resentments? I'm not a Vermin Filth Leftist Democrat, so envy isn't a problem for me.
I can see the orphan manacles on one of those back walls.
OP
OP
Holy Holliday !
Regular Member
- Reaction score
- 51
- Location
- The Big Tent
You are welcome to spend the next week discovering why murder is illegal.
. What do you not understand about the definition of murder?
You do understand the difference between murder, homicide, killing, right?
In law, murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with "malice aforethought," meaning intent to kill, cause serious harm, or extreme recklessness, distinguishing it from manslaughter (unlawful killing without malice). It's categorized into degrees (First, Second) based on premeditation, deliberation, or the circumstances (like felony murder), with First Degree requiring planned intent and Second Degree involving intent but lacking premeditation. Key elements are unlawful killing, a human victim, causation, and malice, with variations in statutes (like US Code § 1111) defining specifics.
- Reaction score
- 2,944
- Location
- Chicagoland
He can't. His Betters at OccupyDemocrats have ordered him to take the side of Venezuelan Drug runners and illegal alien criminals.
OP
OP
Holy Holliday !
Regular Member
- Reaction score
- 51
- Location
- The Big Tent
I can see the envy in Reggie's post.
OP
OP
Holy Holliday !
Regular Member
- Reaction score
- 51
- Location
- The Big Tent
Reggie, you know I am not a playbook anything (which is what it means to be anti-LibiCon), unlike you who are a playbook MAGAtard.
.Stop being silly, eat your meal on wheels and take a nap..
- Reaction score
- 2,944
- Location
- Chicagoland
You can't see the orphan manacles? Put on your glasses, old man.
Sure, you're not a playbook Leftist Shitbag in spite of a near 20 year poasting history of shilling for every single America-hating Democrat piece of garbage filth to ever run in any election over all those years.
Got it.
OP
OP
Holy Holliday !
Regular Member
- Reaction score
- 51
- Location
- The Big Tent
Really, just consider my positions on immigration, islamists, transgenderism in sports, metooism, any form of cancel culture etc etc.
. In the last general election didn't you vote for a Republican? Sure you did, because you betters told you to.
I did not vote although when I do it is ordinarily either a write-in or third party.
No, Reggie, it's you who are playbook doing exactly what your Repooplickin betters tell you to do and say.
- Reaction score
- 2,944
- Location
- Chicagoland
No. Sorry. I must have missed all those. Except maybe the Jihadi one.
I have never cast a ballot for a vile and disgusting Democrat Leftist in any election ever in my whole life, and I never needed a Better to tell me not to.
Then shut your fucken pie hole, you got no say.
OP
OP
Holy Holliday !
Regular Member
- Reaction score
- 51
- Location
- The Big Tent
You may want to stop dozing off pay attention Reggie. If nothing else you should know my position on immigration which I've written on more than any other subject (and more than anyone else) going all the way back to BY.
No, you cast it for vile and disgusting rightist filth just like your betters tell you to.
Yeah, I do. My say is I'm so fucking disgusted with the process I boycotted it.
The Prowler
Site Supporter
- Reaction score
- 4,372
- Location
- Canada
OP
OP
Holy Holliday !
Regular Member
- Reaction score
- 51
- Location
- The Big Tent
White Flag accepted.
The Prowler
Site Supporter
- Reaction score
- 4,372
- Location
- Canada
OP
OP
Holy Holliday !
Regular Member
- Reaction score
- 51
- Location
- The Big Tent
The Prowler
Site Supporter
- Reaction score
- 4,372
- Location
- Canada
Check this out.
Holliday, when challenged to provide a reference to The Law that the USA is breaking by killing narco-terrorists, posts the flaw in his argument.
I knew the poor guy is not bright enough to figure it out on his own, so I used a big bold font to help him.
And he totally missed it.
Hahahaha!!!!
Holliday, when challenged to provide a reference to The Law that the USA is breaking by killing narco-terrorists, posts the flaw in his argument.
I knew the poor guy is not bright enough to figure it out on his own, so I used a big bold font to help him.
And he totally missed it.
Hahahaha!!!!
OP
OP
Holy Holliday !
Regular Member
- Reaction score
- 51
- Location
- The Big Tent
Yes, it is a fundamental principle of international law that it is unlawful to intentionally kill people on the high seas without legal justification. The only narrow exceptions generally involve legitimate self-defense against an imminent threat to life or explicit authorization from the UN Security Council.
Key Principles of International Law
Unlawful Actions
Actions such as destroying a vessel or killing its crew based solely on suspicion of illicit activities (e.g., drug trafficking) without evidence of an imminent threat are considered violations of international law, potentially amounting to extrajudicial killings. Even within an armed conflict, killing survivors or those who are no longer actively participating in hostilities (hors de combat) is a war crime.
Any nation whose citizen is a victim or perpetrator, or the flag state of the vessel, can assert jurisdiction and prosecute the individuals involved in an unlawful killing on the high seas.
What I very narrowly, specifically wrote was that murder was illegal.
Prowler won't answer the question again. Prowler never answers direct questions because he is too unintelligent to do so.
Murder is not lawful in international waters.
. The End
Key Principles of International Law
- Sovereignty and Jurisdiction: Vessels on the high seas are under the exclusive jurisdiction of their flag state (the country where they are registered). Other nations cannot interfere without specific legal justification, such as well-founded suspicions of piracy or slave trafficking, or if the vessel is stateless.
- Use of Force: International law, particularly international human rights law (IHRL), strictly governs the use of lethal force in law enforcement operations. Lethal force is only permissible when it is strictly unavoidable to protect life from an imminent threat of death or serious injury.
- Absence of Armed Conflict: In the absence of an international or non-international armed conflict, actions are considered law enforcement matters, not acts of war. Premeditated killing outside of an armed conflict is considered murder and subject to prosecution under national and international laws.
- Due Process: Suspected criminals have a right to due process and should be apprehended and prosecuted through legal channels, rather than being subject to summary execution.
Unlawful Actions
Actions such as destroying a vessel or killing its crew based solely on suspicion of illicit activities (e.g., drug trafficking) without evidence of an imminent threat are considered violations of international law, potentially amounting to extrajudicial killings. Even within an armed conflict, killing survivors or those who are no longer actively participating in hostilities (hors de combat) is a war crime.
Any nation whose citizen is a victim or perpetrator, or the flag state of the vessel, can assert jurisdiction and prosecute the individuals involved in an unlawful killing on the high seas.
...and here for the second time I ask that the poster of this quote define those very narrow, specific circumstance are (and show the specific and narrow link with the quote in context), and also once again if he understands the distinction between murder and to kill.
What I very narrowly, specifically wrote was that murder was illegal.
Prowler won't answer the question again. Prowler never answers direct questions because he is too unintelligent to do so.
Murder is not lawful in international waters.
. The End
Last edited:
OP
OP
Holy Holliday !
Regular Member
- Reaction score
- 51
- Location
- The Big Tent
Prowler does not understand the distinction between murder and "killing". He has also not provided a link to his quote about narrow specific circumstance.
.. However just as entertainment:
The U.S. government's recent military strikes on suspected drug smuggling vessels in international waters, which have resulted in numerous deaths, are considered by independent UN experts and human rights organizations to be in violation of international human rights law, the international law of the sea, and potentially U.S. domestic law.
Key laws and principles that experts argue are being violated include:
International Law
U.S. Domestic Law
.. However just as entertainment:
The U.S. government's recent military strikes on suspected drug smuggling vessels in international waters, which have resulted in numerous deaths, are considered by independent UN experts and human rights organizations to be in violation of international human rights law, the international law of the sea, and potentially U.S. domestic law.
Key laws and principles that experts argue are being violated include:
International Law
- Right to Life: Under international law, the use of lethal force is only permitted in personal self-defense or defense of others against an imminent threat to life. Since the individuals on the boats are generally considered criminal suspects (civilians) rather than combatants in an armed conflict, they should be arrested and prosecuted, not summarily killed.
- International Law of the Sea (UNCLOS): This framework does not authorize unprovoked attacks on ships. While states have the right to stop, board, and search stateless vessels or those of other nations (with consent of the flag state) on the high seas under specific conditions (e.g., to suppress piracy or drug trafficking as per the 1988 UN Drug Convention), this is primarily for law enforcement purposes, and the use of force should be a last resort to effect an arrest, not for lethal strikes.
- Prohibition of Extrajudicial Executions: The deliberate killing of criminal suspects without any legal process or trial is a grave violation of human rights and amounts to extrajudicial killings.
- Law of Armed Conflict (if applicable): The U.S. administration has attempted to frame the actions as part of a war against "narco-terrorists". However, most experts argue that no such legally recognized armed conflict exists. Even if it were considered an armed conflict, the killing of incapacitated survivors who are "out of the fight" is considered a war crime.
U.S. Domestic Law
- Lack of Congressional Authorization: The U.S. Constitution grants Congress the sole power to declare war and authorize the use of force. Congress has not authorized military force against the drug cartels, meaning the actions lack a clear domestic legal basis.
- Federal Criminal Law: The intentional killing of another person without legal authority would be considered murder under U.S. criminal law.
- Due Process: Suspected criminals are entitled to due process under U.S. law, which includes the right to arrest, trial, and legal safeguards.
Similar threads
