Quote:
Originally Posted by klipkap
So tell me - is there agreement by the democratic forces on this forum as to what is more important?:
1) Is it what the non-voting authors on UNSC 242 said they meant when they drafted the resolutions? ...
.... or ....
2) Is it what the majority of voting members said they understood from the documented text when they actually voted on the resolution?
Because if there isn't, then the planet has spent a monstrous amount of nervous energy, taxpayer's money, Middle East blood (Jews and Palestinians), and jeopardy of world peace to find out that the supposedly clear principle of voting, a critical underpinning of the democratic process, is in fact totally irrelevant.
If this is so, can I request a time-out so that I may say a last-ditch prayer for our planet.
|
I would suggest you familiarize yourself with a little liberal concept called "tyranny of the majority". I might suggest you seek to understand one very common logical fallacy -- a fallacy called "argumentum ad populum".
Just because a majority of people can express an opinion, such opinions are not necessarily valid. It is quite true that representatives of various non democratic states have enough muscle to seek to punish Jews wherever they can, but why you would place such unquestioning trust in such representatives is anybody's guess. The fact you do not even consider the source is quite evident, but for anybody else reading this thread, I might ask them to do so.
Certainly, the Libyas, Irans, Cubas and Venezuelas of the world have political clout within the auspices of the U.N., but why defer to their opinion on ANY subject without so much as a singe question as to what they seek to accomplish?