Hey David,

it's ok to take your bat and ball but mate you've left your dummy behind.

To imajulianutter

Indeed I have left my dummy behind ... you.

Have you signed the petition yet? Click here to do so ...

http://www.change.org/petitions/unesco-review-palestines-unconstitutional-membership

..on the other hand I forgot - you can't. It requires you to put in your real name and address.

Enjoy my bat and ball.

I await with considerable interest the responce from the appropriate UNESCO representative detailing the legality or otherwise of the vote taken. I despair for those who have lost the valuable and life saving resources available through UNESCO. I continue to seek an opinion piece from a Palestinian representative justifying this particular approach to enjoining with the world community at the cost to those losing the services of UNESCO.
To muse on the cricket analogy above, perhaps the way to win the game is to 'play the ball, not the man'?

Only brainless morons can be conned into signing petitions that have as their aim the deliberate harm to others.

Keith Kennelly

ECM 570 Royal Esplanade Manly

Brisbane.

Now show you really have let go of your bat and ball and answer some of my many questions.

'... to we Westerners the ends never justify the means. As a western trained lawyer you should know that.

Why don't you apply that principle?'

"We Westerners never attempt to punish those who haven't earned punishment.

Why punish 'Hundreds of millions of people in third world countries (who)stand to suffer as these (UNESCO) programs (in literacy, gender equality and clean water) are curtailed or abandoned'"

'Why wouldn't you punish those countries who voted to include Palestine in UNESCO?'

Since you've never ever attempted to answer any of my many questions and on this sole occassion have only responded by way of a personal attack on my courage, integrity and intellectual ability, I'll take that as plainly indicative of your lack of decency and that you are unwilling to accept any degree of criticism or in this case to be in the least at all self-critical.

How clever you've shown yourself to have been.

To Keith Kennelly(alias imajulianutter)

Firstly I appreciate your outing yourself by removing your anonymity. This should be a standard requirement for all on line sites.

Secondly - you are entitled to your views as I am to mine - and we are each free to disagree with each other after reasoned and rational debate based on fact - not generalistions made without substantiation.

Thirdly - I find your idea of "We Westerners" to be morally offensive and exhibiting notions of superiority that are best left in the sewers. For that reason I don't intend to respond to that part of your post.

Fourthly - your claim - that my petition has the deliberate aim to harm others - is denied.

The petition was started because of UNESCO's refusal to consider my detailed claim that its admission of Palestine as UNESCO's 195th State was unlawful.

That claim was made on 1 December and it was not until 31 December that UNESCO said it did not intend to comment on my claim.

That UNESCO could be so dismissive in a situation where so many people around the world were affected by that decision to admit Palestine - was insulting and arrogant in my opinion.

UNESCO's decision has had serious implications for the lives of scores of millions of people around the world that cannot be ignored and somehow need to be addressed.

UNESCO is not effectively doing this - although it is the flagship for this global community in many areas affecting their daily lives.

Its feeble attempts to set up an Emergency Fund and to lobby America to change its domestic laws have had minimal effect in the last three months.

As I have stated repeatedly on OLO - I believe UNESCO should not be above the law and should not be seen to be above the law.

Whilst UNESCO continues to adopt its current position of sitting on its heels and doing nothing to clarify the legality of its decision - I will continue to highlight its irresponsible stance.

Firstly
an apology is owed, an expression of appreciation is not an apology for calling into question my courage, integrity and intellectual ability ... it's an example of using cowardly weasel words to deny and fudge.

Secondly
‘...- you are entitled to your views as I am to mine - and we are each free to disagree with each other after reasoned and rational debate based on fact - not generalistions made without substantiation.’
It's accepted, and embodied in our laws, and right across the western free world that we are all entitled to our own views and are free to disagree and debate ... without qualification. Your adoption of the qualification ‘after reasoned and rational debate based on fact’ indicates you think that somehow views must be based on someone’s ideas of what is rational and reasoned and of what is fact. That smacks of an attempt at censorship.
Which leads me to ask: How specifically do you want to determine what is rational and sane and what are fact?
Great caution is needed in that sphere. There is a whole body of western work, thought and discussion, in many diverse fields from Psychology through Religion to the Law, on those notions. I doubt you’d be able to answer my question sufficiently to justify your statement, which was clearly indicative of a need for censorship and the control of thought, expression and discussion. (and the anti-thesis of everything western).

Thirdly
‘ - your claim - that my petition has the deliberate aim to harm others - is denied.’
It is irrational to deny my claim when you yourself say

‘If that application is successful then 22% of UNESCO's budget will be immediately reinstated for the benefit of scores of people world wide - both to improve as well prolong their lives...’

I simply ask: Why do you think the Palestinians won’t be hurt by a reversal of UNESCO’s decision?

All your legalistic jargonising is mere weasel words in an attempt to smokescreen and fudge the fact you are trying to deny a whole people international acceptance of their nationhood.