Author: abramicus

CHINA CONTINUES TO PATROL DIAOYU ISLANDS IN 2013 - HAPPY NEW YEAR!   [Copy link] 中文

Rank: 1

Post time 2013-1-15 08:17:14 |Display all floors
Liking the falkland island to diaoyu island ? did we see chinese (govt) garrison or presence in the diaoyu? FYI, Falklands was already garrisoned by Brits in there for long...stop claiming it your ancient map that tells you that you own it...so lmao...

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 2

Post time 2013-1-16 01:52:11 |Display all floors
This post was edited by st_jb at 2013-1-16 02:43
abramicus Post time: 2013-1-3 18:03
China won the showdown using a propeller plane against a squadron of Japanese F-15 fighter jets, rig ...
Truth is accompanied by courage.  Falsehood always resorts to force.

This is true as well in the claims of China on Spratly islands, mischief reef and kalayaan reef, all of which are within the EEZ of the Philippines. China, to to boast its claim to these group of islands, in all  cases, resorted to the use of force to asserts its sovereignty. This is also true in the disputed islands involving Vietnam. China always resorts to force.

Yes. I Agree to your statement that "truth is accompanied by courage. Falsehood always resorts to force."

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2013-1-16 11:00:48 |Display all floors
This post was edited by abramicus at 2013-1-16 11:02

"st"-jb, we do not need to repeat which country tried to arrest the fishermen and take their vessel at Huangyan island by force.  You use your learning to lie, and do not deserve to call yourself a "st".  That name, in itself is a lie.  Where you lack force, you try to persuade others to use force on your behalf to support your false claims.  Is that a saint's behavior?

It does not take a genius to know which country has the better historical claim to Huangyan or the Spratly's, but you insist against the plain truth.  You appeal to an UNCLOS that has no jurisdiction, in the hope of legitimizing your weaker claim, and in the hope that you can manipulate the system in order to deliver an unjust conclusion in your favor.  You appeal to the US to defend you in your mistake.

Do not let the colonial mentality get the better of you.  It is better to stand up like a man and accept the truth, than to hide behind the shield of falsehood, and wield the spear of dishonesty, in order to win something you know is not really yours.  You are cheating no one but your own conscience and integrity.  Is it worth less than the purported oil and gas underneath Huangyan and Spratly islands?  Maybe?  Don't cheapen your own self.  Stand with the truth and we will stand with you.  Stand with dishonesty and envy, and you will stand alone.  Honesty is the best policy.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2013-3-27 09:09:11 |Display all floors
iamwatchingyou Post time: 2013-3-26 20:10
Where is the "great" abramicus?

st_jb sends his warmth regards to you..

st_jb? Then what is this.... A double account? Is that even allowed?

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2013-3-27 12:08:01 |Display all floors
How about a triple account, aka Changamullah, hehehe, who was exposed as a fake Chinese national.  Now the rest of the circus is here, and so are its many clowns.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2013-3-27 12:56:35 |Display all floors
This post was edited by abramicus at 2013-3-27 12:59

What happened to the case filed by the Philippines against China through the ITLOS?  Ignored, because it was not worth the paper it was printed on?  Resorting to saintly ad hominems, tsk, tsk.  

Is that what the priests taught you?


Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2013-4-2 10:33:40 |Display all floors
This post was edited by abramicus at 2013-4-2 11:35

HERE LIES THE CLOWNS OR THE CLOWNS LIE HERE -- THE RUBUTTAL TO THE LIES OF THE PHILIPPINE APOLOGISTS WHO INSIST ON DRAGGING CHINA TO A TRIBUNAL THAT HAS NO LEGAL JURISDICTION OVER ITS SOVEREIGNTY AT ALL -- NOTHING COMES FROM NOTHING, NOTHING EVER WILL.

The following is a post by Abramicus earlier in this forum:

THE FACTS STRAIGHT FROM THE UNCLOS THAT COMPLETELY REFUTE THE PHILIPPINE DEMAND FOR ITLOS ARBITRATION:

The Philippines has no basis for mandating ITLOS arbitration over the sovereignty of China over Huangyan, and cannot find proof for it, using excerpts only that omit the exceptions to their quotes.  The UNCLOS excludes matters of sovereignty from mandatory arbitration by ITLOS.  China was following the rules of UNCLOS, but the Philippines was the one trying to circumvent it, by casting aspersions on China for exercsing its RIGHT under UNCLOS to reject the Philippine demand for ITLOS arbitration.

The passage from the UNCLOS that the Philippines dares not quote is as follows:

Article 298

Optional exceptions to applicability of section 2

1. When signing, ratifying or acceding to this Convention or at any time thereafter, a State may, without prejudice to the obligations arising under section 1, declare in writing that it does not accept any one or more of the procedures provided for in section 2 with respect to one or more of the following categories of disputes:

(a) (i) disputes concerning the interpretation or application of articles 15, 74 and 83 relating to sea boundary delimitations, or those involving historic bays or titles, provided that a State having made such a declaration shall, when such a dispute arises subsequent to the entry into force of this Convention and where no agreement within a reasonable period of time is reached in negotiations between the parties, at the request of any party to the dispute, accept submission of the matter to conciliation under Annex V, section 2; and provided further that any dispute that necessarily involves the concurrent consideration of any unsettled dispute concerning sovereignty or other rights over continental or insular land territory shall be excluded from such submission;

(ii) after the conciliation commission has presented its report, which shall state the reasons on which it is based, the parties shall negotiate an agreement on the basis of that report; if these negotiations do not result in an agreement, the parties shall, by mutual consent, submit the question to one of the procedures provided for in section 2, unless the parties otherwise agree;

(iii) this subparagraph does not apply to any sea boundary dispute finally settled by an arrangement between the parties, or to any such dispute which is to be settled in accordance with a bilateral or multilateral agreement binding upon those parties;

(b) disputes concerning military activities, including military activities by government vessels and aircraft engaged in non-commercial service, and disputes concerning law enforcement activities in regard to the exercise of sovereign rights or jurisdiction excluded from the jurisdiction of a court or tribunal under article 297, paragraph 2 or 3;

(c) disputes in respect of which the Security Council of the United Nations is exercising the functions assigned to it by the Charter of the United Nations, unless the Security Council decides to remove the matter from its agenda or calls upon the parties to settle it by the means provided for in this Convention.

2. A State Party which has made a declaration under paragraph 1 may at any time withdraw it, or agree to submit a dispute excluded by such declaration to any procedure specified in this Convention.

3. A State Party which has made a declaration under paragraph 1 shall not be entitled to submit any dispute falling within the excepted category of disputes to any procedure in this Convention as against another State Party, without the consent of that party.

4. If one of the States Parties has made a declaration under paragraph 1(a), any other State Party may submit any dispute falling within an excepted category against the declarant party to the procedure specified in such declaration.

5. A new declaration, or the withdrawal of a declaration, does not in any way affect proceedings pending before a court or tribunal in accordance with this article, unless the parties otherwise agree.

6. Declarations and notices of withdrawal of declarations under this article shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall transmit copies thereof to the States Parties.

It is the Philippine government and its apologists who seem not to have read the UNCLOS after all . . .


Use magic tools Report

You can't reply post until you log in Log in | register

BACK TO THE TOP
Contact us:Tel: (86)010-84883548, Email: blog@chinadaily.com.cn
Blog announcement:| We reserve the right, and you authorize us, to use content, including words, photos and videos, which you provide to our blog
platform, for non-profit purposes on China Daily media, comprising newspaper, website, iPad and other social media accounts.