AY we are devoted fans. Amazing!
Some of us have been tracking the interchanges between icj1 and Amnesty Yugoslavia over the years. The current score is AY= 1207 icj1= 0.
My trilogy of posts conclude the review of the recent thesis and "writings" of icj1, the CB of B92.
"Few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums, mate... "
(icj1, 31 August 2016 18:38)
icj1, the CB of B92, opposes his/her own thesis with the following words: "Indeed. "California ballot (propositions) are quite prolific..."
(icj1, 1 September 2016 22:12)
As described in the case analysis below: an abrupt onset of severe clinical schizophrenia plagues icj1, who subsequently denies claim for the words he/she in fact posted.
"It's not icj1 that is claiming it, it's California's constitution.
(icj1, 2 September 2016 15:32)
How and why an inanimate object, such as the California constitution, could post and claim anything on a B92 forum is only apparent in the factually incorrect world, and warped mind, of icj1....the CB of B92.
icj1's factually incorrect denial is further confounded by his/her reference:
"Article 2, Sec. 9(a) of California's Constitution is not an "unscholarly constitutional study"
(icj1, 2 September 2016 19:13)
Fact: Article 2, Sec 9(a) does not contain the wording posted by icj1.
icj1's thesis, self-contradictory defence, foolish claims and feeble denials provide for an infinite harvest of factually incorrect findings. icj1's overt idiocy, and Mengele-based diagnoses that associate a neurological disorder with an ethnic group, are satisfyingly enjoyable to expose.
We'll let's continue our cursory review of the recent thesis and "writings" of icj1, the CB of B92.
"Few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums, mate... "
(icj1, 31 August 2016 18:38)
icj1, the CB of B92, supports his/her. thesis with the following "Indeed. "California ballot (propositions) are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda on a wide variety of topics for residents of CA" except for tax levies."
(icj1, 1 September 2016 22:12)
Sometime between 01-09-2016 22:12 and 02-09-2016 15:32, icj1 suffered irreversible clinical grade amnesia, or had his/her bipolar disorder treated with a radical frontal lobotomy. icj1, the CB of B92, in the plainest "factually incorrect" manner denied claiming the words he/she posted:
"It's not icj1 that is claiming it, it's California's constitution."
(icj1, 2 September 2016 15:32)
icj1's pure idiocy is now confounded by the severest clinical symptoms of numerous psychiatric disorders.
you can't find anything that is factually incorrect with my writings
(icj1, 2 September 2016 19:13)
---
We'll let's briefly review the recent thesis and "writings" of icj1, the CB of B92.
"Few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums, mate... "
(icj1, 31 August 2016 18:38)
Undisputed as factually incorrect by:
"countries such as the US allow states an unlimited number of referenda. "
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 1 September 2016 16:28)
icj1, the CB of B92, then displays symptoms of bipolar disorder (or the characteristics of an ICTY judge) with the following words to support his thesis:
"Indeed, "California ballot proportions (sic) are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda"
(icj1, 1 September 2016 22:12)
Yes, only icj1 (the CB of B92), and ICTY jurists, start a thesis with "Few, if any...allow unlimited referenda" and support their thesis exemplifying a state with unlimited prolific referenda. Pure idiocy.
icj1, the CB of B92, is now claiming that CA ballot propositions are referenda on a wide variety of topics "except for tax levies".
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 2 September 2016 02:12)
It's not icj1 that is claiming it, it's California's constitution. But feel free to contact California to discuss it with them if you disagree lol
(icj1, 2 September 2016 15:32)
Icj1's idiotic rebuttal doesn't even reference an article or an amendment of the California constitution and represents unscholarly constitutional study, in a manner that resembles icj1's practice of Mengele medical science.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 2 September 2016 16:31)
Article 2, Sec. 9(a) of California's Constitution is not an "unscholarly constitutional study" lol. But again, if you disagree with it feel free to contact California :)
----------
And they were/are all referendums consistent with the California constitution..... except of course in the warped, idiotic mind of icj1, the CB of B92.
P.S. CB= Chief Bigot
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 2 September 2016 16:31)
Congratulations for convincing yourself that "they were/are all referendums consistent with the California constitution" as I wrote nowhere that they weren't.
It appears that since you are frustrated that you can't find anything that is factually incorrect with my writings, you have turned your attention to your own incorrect thoughts hahaha
icj1, the CB of B92, is now claiming that CA ballot propositions are referenda on a wide variety of topics "except for tax levies".
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 2 September 2016 02:12)
It's not icj1 that is claiming it, it's California's constitution. But feel free to contact California to discuss it with them if you disagree lol
(icj1, 2 September 2016 15:32)
---
icj1, the CB of B92, and his/her fictitious claims that emenate from his/her warped mind have been exposed as totally false. Icj1's idiotic rebuttal doesn't even reference an article or an amendment of the California constitution and represents unscholarly constitutional study, in a manner that resembles icj1's practice of Mengele medical science.
The laughable part is that our CB, and icj1 clown, continues to ignore the real facts and irrefutable evidence:
CA proposition 30 (Nov 6, 2012) was a referendum on CA sales and income tax increase. It was approved.
CA proposition 55 (2016) is a referndum on tax increases for earners above $250K.
CA propositions 13 (1978), 56 (2016), 218 (1996), 8 (1978), 24 (2010) were all referenda on tax topics.
And they were/are all referendums consistent with the California constitution..... except of course in the warped, idiotic mind of icj1, the CB of B92.
Anyway, thanks for bringing the example of California, because it proves my point that few countries, if any, allow referendums on tax levies. Indeed, "California ballot proportions (sic) are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda on a wide variety of topics for residents of CA.", except for tax levies.
(icj1, 1 September 2016 22:12)
icj1, the CB of B92, is now claiming that CA ballot propositions are referenda on a wide variety of topics "except for tax levies".
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 2 September 2016 02:12)
It's not icj1 that is claiming it, it's California's constitution. But feel free to contact California to discuss it with them if you disagree lol
Anyway, thanks for bringing the example of California, because it proves my point that few countries, if any, allow referendums on tax levies. Indeed, "California ballot proportions (sic) are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda on a wide variety of topics for residents of CA.", except for tax levies.
(icj1, 1 September 2016 22:12)
---
Alas, the potentially encouraging signs of an improvement in icj1's, mental capacity were completely false.
icj1, the CB of B92, is now claiming that CA ballot propositions are referenda on a wide variety of topics "except for tax levies".
icj1, the CB of B92, obviously is incapable of understanding referenda in other countries no better than he/ she is able to understand the idiocy of his/her diagnosis of an entire ethnic group with a neurological disorder.
icj1, in a manner similar to ICTY personnel, can't recognize plain facts and hard evidence and instead conjures fictitious claims in their warped minds.
Facts that are "incoherent" in the warped mind of icj1:
CA proposition 30 (Nov 6, 2012) was a referendum on CA sales and income tax increase. It was approved.
CA proposition 55 (2016) is a referndum on tax increases for earners above $250K.
CA propositions 13 (1978), 56 (2016), 218 (1996), 8 (1978), 24 (2010) and countless other referenda in CA and other states prove the idiocy of icj1's claims.
Anyway, thanks for bringing the example of California, because it proves my point that few countries, if any, allow referendums on tax levies. Indeed, "California ballot proportions (sic) are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda on a wide variety of topics for residents of CA.", except for tax levies.
(icj1, 1 September 2016 22:12)
---
Alas, the potentially encouraging signs of an improvement in icj1's, mental capacity were completely false.
icj1, the CB of B92, is now claiming that CA ballot propositions are referenda on a wide variety of topics "except for tax levies".
icj1, the CB of B92, obviously is incapable of understanding referenda in other countries no better than he/ she is able to understand the idiocy of his/her diagnosis of an entire ethnic group with a neurological disorder.
icj1, in a manner similar to ICTY personnel, can't recognize plain facts and hard evidence and instead conjures fictitious claims in their warped minds.
Facts that are "incoherent" in the warped mind of icj1:
CA proposition 30 (Nov 6, 2012) was a referendum on CA sales and income tax increase. It was approved.
CA proposition 55 (2016) is a referndum on tax increases for earners above $250K.
CA propositions 13 (1978), 56 (2016), 218 (1996), 8 (1978), 24 (2010) and countless other referenda in CA and other states prove the idiocy of icj1's claims.
Nice, you are making progress. I'm very proud of you that after you read my writings you correct your writings to make them a bit more coherent lol
(icj1, 1 September 2016 22:12)
---
icj1, the CB of B92, should realize my writings were only incoherent to the CB of B92. No one other than icj1 claimed incoherence. The struggles that icj1, our CB, has with basic comprehension and simple logic is well documented. Only the warped thinking from icj1 produces Mengele-type associations of ethnicity with medical disorders.
We have a well documented history that icj1, the CB of B92, requires explanation at remedial level.
We're actually encouraged that icj1, the CB of B92, is "proud" to admit he/she understands and recognizes his/her own nonsensical thinking and ignorant posts.
Few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums, mate... For example, would anybody have a doubt on the outcome of a referendum with the question "Should you be required to pay taxes?". Which is why few countries, if any, would allow that referendum...
Come on, these are very simple concepts, you don't need a PhD to understand them. It's common sense :)
(icj1, 31 August 2016 18:38)
California ballot proportions are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda on a wide variety of topics for residents of CA. True non-sense from the warped mind of icj1 to claim that "few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums", when countries such as the US allow states an unlimited number of referenda.
Nice, you are making progress. I'm very proud of you that after you read my writings you correct your writings to make them a bit more coherent lol
Anyway, thanks for bringing the example of California, because it proves my point that few countries, if any, allow referendums on tax levies. Indeed, "California ballot proportions (sic) are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda on a wide variety of topics for residents of CA.", except for tax levies.
Few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums, mate...
Come on, these are very simple concepts, you don't need a PhD to understand them. It's common sense :)
(icj1, 31 August 2016 18:38)
---
icj1, the CB of B92 not only uses his non-sense to label ethnic groups with medical disorders, icj1 is obviously ignorant of Ballot Propositions routinely used by US states to run referendums during rugular voting cycles. California ballot proportions are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda on a wide variety of topics for residents of CA. True non-sense from the warped mind of icj1 to claim that "few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums", when countries such as the US allow states an unlimited number of referenda.
Few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums, mate... For example, would anybody have a doubt on the outcome of a referendum with the question "Should you be required to pay taxes?". Which is why few countries, if any, would allow that referendum...
Same way, few countries, if any, allow referendums about specific court decisions, because the electorate is not a court!
Come on, these are very simple concepts, you don't need a PhD to understand them. It's common sense :)
(icj1, 31 August 2016 18:38)
True non-sense from the warped mind of icj1 to claim that a state like California does not routinely have ballot propositions.
P.S. CB= Chief Bigot
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 1 September 2016 07:17)
I claimed nowhere "that a state like California does not routinely have ballot propositions". But, I'm glad that you convinced yourself that it is true non-sense from your warped mind to claim that a state like California does not routinely have ballot propositions :)
Bosnia is Bosnia. Serbia is Serbia. It is always about the land and the traditions and heritage that grow from the land that define its identity. A minority in one is a majority in the other and vice versa. Ultimately what is good for one must be good for all. Protect all irrespective of the numbers and cultural differentiation. The human rights of those who live upon that land, not competing nationalist constructs and exclusivity, is paramount for all; the right to safety, the right to life, the right to free expression and thought, the right to shelter and the right not to be discriminated against, the right to learn and respect another's beliefs, the right to liberty, the right to a fair trial, the right to marry who you love and start a family. Where you are born is a geographical reality, how you live your life is ultimately a political reality. Politics must honour the land and the people who live upon it, all else is folly and perpetual conflict.
Check your facts. Factman and icj1, the CB of B92, write total non-sense.
Some US states routinely hold referenda on a wide variety of topics, including referenda on statutory holidays. In fact, proposition 301 was a referendum held in Arizona on November 6th, 1990 asking voters whether they accept or reject Martin Luther King Jr. Day as a state holiday. The proposition was rejected in the vote.
FREE SRPSKA!
(gg, 31 August 2016 19:49) It's free like BS Serb Krajina to leave for Serbia. Croatia is so peaceful now soon for Bosnia when the idiot https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xy0MJgnW6v4 Serbs leave. The Serb fascist keep returning to the scene of horrendous crimes they committed in Bosnia no shame.
Technically joining RS is not a problem. You give them Serbian passports and arrange their voting like for the rest of the Serbs abroad. It will de facto make the region part of mainland Serbia. And it will have no consequences on the Shqiptar front I think because in fact the Whites’ leaders in Albania and Kosovo do not want to be united. Neither is the United Shaitan interested in such a development. Only Serbs consolidate the Whites.
Few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums, mate...
Come on, these are very simple concepts, you don't need a PhD to understand them. It's common sense :)
(icj1, 31 August 2016 18:38)
---
icj1, the CB of B92 not only uses his non-sense to label ethnic groups with medical disorders, icj1 is obviously ignorant of Ballot Propositions routinely used by US states to run referendums during rugular voting cycles. California ballot proportions are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda on a wide variety of topics for residents of CA. True non-sense from the warped mind of icj1 to claim that a state like California does not routinely have ballot propositions.
Come on, these are very simple concepts, you don't need a PhD to understand them. It's common sense :)
(icj1, 31 August 2016 18:38)
---
Truly laughable that icj1, the CB of B92 refers to common sense. icj1's nonsensical diagnosis of an entire ethnic group with a neurological disorder epitomizes the lack of any sense emanating from icj1's warped mind.
New World order.
Banning a vote doesn't change the thinking of people.
The central political contradiction of Bosnia continues.
You can bring a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.
Legislating minutae ensures that Bosnia will not survive.
Why afraid of a vote of the people?
(factman, 31 August 2016 15:54)
Few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums, mate... For example, would anybody have a doubt on the outcome of a referendum with the question "Should you be required to pay taxes?". Which is why few countries, if any, would allow that referendum...
Same way, few countries, if any, allow referendums about specific court decisions, because the electorate is not a court!
Come on, these are very simple concepts, you don't need a PhD to understand them. It's common sense :)
New World order.
Banning a vote doesn't change the thinking of people.
The central political contradiction of Bosnia continues.
You can bring a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.
Legislating minutae ensures that Bosnia will not survive.
Why afraid of a vote of the people?
(factman, 31 August 2016 15:54)
Few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums, mate... For example, would anybody have a doubt on the outcome of a referendum with the question "Should you be required to pay taxes?". Which is why few countries, if any, would allow that referendum...
Same way, few countries, if any, allow referendums about specific court decisions, because the electorate is not a court!
Come on, these are very simple concepts, you don't need a PhD to understand them. It's common sense :)
Come on, these are very simple concepts, you don't need a PhD to understand them. It's common sense :)
(icj1, 31 August 2016 18:38)
---
Truly laughable that icj1, the CB of B92 refers to common sense. icj1's nonsensical diagnosis of an entire ethnic group with a neurological disorder epitomizes the lack of any sense emanating from icj1's warped mind.
Few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums, mate...
Come on, these are very simple concepts, you don't need a PhD to understand them. It's common sense :)
(icj1, 31 August 2016 18:38)
---
icj1, the CB of B92 not only uses his non-sense to label ethnic groups with medical disorders, icj1 is obviously ignorant of Ballot Propositions routinely used by US states to run referendums during rugular voting cycles. California ballot proportions are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda on a wide variety of topics for residents of CA. True non-sense from the warped mind of icj1 to claim that a state like California does not routinely have ballot propositions.
Check your facts. Factman and icj1, the CB of B92, write total non-sense.
Some US states routinely hold referenda on a wide variety of topics, including referenda on statutory holidays. In fact, proposition 301 was a referendum held in Arizona on November 6th, 1990 asking voters whether they accept or reject Martin Luther King Jr. Day as a state holiday. The proposition was rejected in the vote.
Few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums, mate...
Come on, these are very simple concepts, you don't need a PhD to understand them. It's common sense :)
(icj1, 31 August 2016 18:38)
---
icj1, the CB of B92 not only uses his non-sense to label ethnic groups with medical disorders, icj1 is obviously ignorant of Ballot Propositions routinely used by US states to run referendums during rugular voting cycles. California ballot proportions are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda on a wide variety of topics for residents of CA. True non-sense from the warped mind of icj1 to claim that "few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums", when countries such as the US allow states an unlimited number of referenda.
icj1, the CB of B92, is now claiming that CA ballot propositions are referenda on a wide variety of topics "except for tax levies".
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 2 September 2016 02:12)
It's not icj1 that is claiming it, it's California's constitution. But feel free to contact California to discuss it with them if you disagree lol
(icj1, 2 September 2016 15:32)
---
icj1, the CB of B92, and his/her fictitious claims that emenate from his/her warped mind have been exposed as totally false. Icj1's idiotic rebuttal doesn't even reference an article or an amendment of the California constitution and represents unscholarly constitutional study, in a manner that resembles icj1's practice of Mengele medical science.
The laughable part is that our CB, and icj1 clown, continues to ignore the real facts and irrefutable evidence:
CA proposition 30 (Nov 6, 2012) was a referendum on CA sales and income tax increase. It was approved.
CA proposition 55 (2016) is a referndum on tax increases for earners above $250K.
CA propositions 13 (1978), 56 (2016), 218 (1996), 8 (1978), 24 (2010) were all referenda on tax topics.
And they were/are all referendums consistent with the California constitution..... except of course in the warped, idiotic mind of icj1, the CB of B92.
Anyway, thanks for bringing the example of California, because it proves my point that few countries, if any, allow referendums on tax levies. Indeed, "California ballot proportions (sic) are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda on a wide variety of topics for residents of CA.", except for tax levies.
(icj1, 1 September 2016 22:12)
---
Alas, the potentially encouraging signs of an improvement in icj1's, mental capacity were completely false.
icj1, the CB of B92, is now claiming that CA ballot propositions are referenda on a wide variety of topics "except for tax levies".
icj1, the CB of B92, obviously is incapable of understanding referenda in other countries no better than he/ she is able to understand the idiocy of his/her diagnosis of an entire ethnic group with a neurological disorder.
icj1, in a manner similar to ICTY personnel, can't recognize plain facts and hard evidence and instead conjures fictitious claims in their warped minds.
Facts that are "incoherent" in the warped mind of icj1:
CA proposition 30 (Nov 6, 2012) was a referendum on CA sales and income tax increase. It was approved.
CA proposition 55 (2016) is a referndum on tax increases for earners above $250K.
CA propositions 13 (1978), 56 (2016), 218 (1996), 8 (1978), 24 (2010) and countless other referenda in CA and other states prove the idiocy of icj1's claims.
Anyway, thanks for bringing the example of California, because it proves my point that few countries, if any, allow referendums on tax levies. Indeed, "California ballot proportions (sic) are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda on a wide variety of topics for residents of CA.", except for tax levies.
(icj1, 1 September 2016 22:12)
---
Alas, the potentially encouraging signs of an improvement in icj1's, mental capacity were completely false.
icj1, the CB of B92, is now claiming that CA ballot propositions are referenda on a wide variety of topics "except for tax levies".
icj1, the CB of B92, obviously is incapable of understanding referenda in other countries no better than he/ she is able to understand the idiocy of his/her diagnosis of an entire ethnic group with a neurological disorder.
icj1, in a manner similar to ICTY personnel, can't recognize plain facts and hard evidence and instead conjures fictitious claims in their warped minds.
Facts that are "incoherent" in the warped mind of icj1:
CA proposition 30 (Nov 6, 2012) was a referendum on CA sales and income tax increase. It was approved.
CA proposition 55 (2016) is a referndum on tax increases for earners above $250K.
CA propositions 13 (1978), 56 (2016), 218 (1996), 8 (1978), 24 (2010) and countless other referenda in CA and other states prove the idiocy of icj1's claims.
My trilogy of posts conclude the review of the recent thesis and "writings" of icj1, the CB of B92.
"Few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums, mate... "
(icj1, 31 August 2016 18:38)
icj1, the CB of B92, opposes his/her own thesis with the following words: "Indeed. "California ballot (propositions) are quite prolific..."
(icj1, 1 September 2016 22:12)
As described in the case analysis below: an abrupt onset of severe clinical schizophrenia plagues icj1, who subsequently denies claim for the words he/she in fact posted.
"It's not icj1 that is claiming it, it's California's constitution.
(icj1, 2 September 2016 15:32)
How and why an inanimate object, such as the California constitution, could post and claim anything on a B92 forum is only apparent in the factually incorrect world, and warped mind, of icj1....the CB of B92.
icj1's factually incorrect denial is further confounded by his/her reference:
"Article 2, Sec. 9(a) of California's Constitution is not an "unscholarly constitutional study"
(icj1, 2 September 2016 19:13)
Fact: Article 2, Sec 9(a) does not contain the wording posted by icj1.
icj1's thesis, self-contradictory defence, foolish claims and feeble denials provide for an infinite harvest of factually incorrect findings. icj1's overt idiocy, and Mengele-based diagnoses that associate a neurological disorder with an ethnic group, are satisfyingly enjoyable to expose.
Technically joining RS is not a problem. You give them Serbian passports and arrange their voting like for the rest of the Serbs abroad. It will de facto make the region part of mainland Serbia. And it will have no consequences on the Shqiptar front I think because in fact the Whites’ leaders in Albania and Kosovo do not want to be united. Neither is the United Shaitan interested in such a development. Only Serbs consolidate the Whites.
Few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums, mate... For example, would anybody have a doubt on the outcome of a referendum with the question "Should you be required to pay taxes?". Which is why few countries, if any, would allow that referendum...
Same way, few countries, if any, allow referendums about specific court decisions, because the electorate is not a court!
Come on, these are very simple concepts, you don't need a PhD to understand them. It's common sense :)
(icj1, 31 August 2016 18:38)
True non-sense from the warped mind of icj1 to claim that a state like California does not routinely have ballot propositions.
P.S. CB= Chief Bigot
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 1 September 2016 07:17)
I claimed nowhere "that a state like California does not routinely have ballot propositions". But, I'm glad that you convinced yourself that it is true non-sense from your warped mind to claim that a state like California does not routinely have ballot propositions :)
Nice, you are making progress. I'm very proud of you that after you read my writings you correct your writings to make them a bit more coherent lol
(icj1, 1 September 2016 22:12)
---
icj1, the CB of B92, should realize my writings were only incoherent to the CB of B92. No one other than icj1 claimed incoherence. The struggles that icj1, our CB, has with basic comprehension and simple logic is well documented. Only the warped thinking from icj1 produces Mengele-type associations of ethnicity with medical disorders.
We have a well documented history that icj1, the CB of B92, requires explanation at remedial level.
We're actually encouraged that icj1, the CB of B92, is "proud" to admit he/she understands and recognizes his/her own nonsensical thinking and ignorant posts.
AY we are devoted fans. Amazing!
Some of us have been tracking the interchanges between icj1 and Amnesty Yugoslavia over the years. The current score is AY= 1207 icj1= 0.
FREE SRPSKA!
(gg, 31 August 2016 19:49) It's free like BS Serb Krajina to leave for Serbia. Croatia is so peaceful now soon for Bosnia when the idiot https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xy0MJgnW6v4 Serbs leave. The Serb fascist keep returning to the scene of horrendous crimes they committed in Bosnia no shame.
Bosnia is Bosnia. Serbia is Serbia. It is always about the land and the traditions and heritage that grow from the land that define its identity. A minority in one is a majority in the other and vice versa. Ultimately what is good for one must be good for all. Protect all irrespective of the numbers and cultural differentiation. The human rights of those who live upon that land, not competing nationalist constructs and exclusivity, is paramount for all; the right to safety, the right to life, the right to free expression and thought, the right to shelter and the right not to be discriminated against, the right to learn and respect another's beliefs, the right to liberty, the right to a fair trial, the right to marry who you love and start a family. Where you are born is a geographical reality, how you live your life is ultimately a political reality. Politics must honour the land and the people who live upon it, all else is folly and perpetual conflict.
Few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums, mate... For example, would anybody have a doubt on the outcome of a referendum with the question "Should you be required to pay taxes?". Which is why few countries, if any, would allow that referendum...
Come on, these are very simple concepts, you don't need a PhD to understand them. It's common sense :)
(icj1, 31 August 2016 18:38)
California ballot proportions are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda on a wide variety of topics for residents of CA. True non-sense from the warped mind of icj1 to claim that "few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums", when countries such as the US allow states an unlimited number of referenda.
Nice, you are making progress. I'm very proud of you that after you read my writings you correct your writings to make them a bit more coherent lol
Anyway, thanks for bringing the example of California, because it proves my point that few countries, if any, allow referendums on tax levies. Indeed, "California ballot proportions (sic) are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda on a wide variety of topics for residents of CA.", except for tax levies.
you can't find anything that is factually incorrect with my writings
(icj1, 2 September 2016 19:13)
---
We'll let's briefly review the recent thesis and "writings" of icj1, the CB of B92.
"Few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums, mate... "
(icj1, 31 August 2016 18:38)
Undisputed as factually incorrect by:
"countries such as the US allow states an unlimited number of referenda. "
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 1 September 2016 16:28)
icj1, the CB of B92, then displays symptoms of bipolar disorder (or the characteristics of an ICTY judge) with the following words to support his thesis:
"Indeed, "California ballot proportions (sic) are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda"
(icj1, 1 September 2016 22:12)
Yes, only icj1 (the CB of B92), and ICTY jurists, start a thesis with "Few, if any...allow unlimited referenda" and support their thesis exemplifying a state with unlimited prolific referenda. Pure idiocy.
Anyway, thanks for bringing the example of California, because it proves my point that few countries, if any, allow referendums on tax levies. Indeed, "California ballot proportions (sic) are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda on a wide variety of topics for residents of CA.", except for tax levies.
(icj1, 1 September 2016 22:12)
icj1, the CB of B92, is now claiming that CA ballot propositions are referenda on a wide variety of topics "except for tax levies".
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 2 September 2016 02:12)
It's not icj1 that is claiming it, it's California's constitution. But feel free to contact California to discuss it with them if you disagree lol
icj1, the CB of B92, is now claiming that CA ballot propositions are referenda on a wide variety of topics "except for tax levies".
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 2 September 2016 02:12)
It's not icj1 that is claiming it, it's California's constitution. But feel free to contact California to discuss it with them if you disagree lol
(icj1, 2 September 2016 15:32)
Icj1's idiotic rebuttal doesn't even reference an article or an amendment of the California constitution and represents unscholarly constitutional study, in a manner that resembles icj1's practice of Mengele medical science.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 2 September 2016 16:31)
Article 2, Sec. 9(a) of California's Constitution is not an "unscholarly constitutional study" lol. But again, if you disagree with it feel free to contact California :)
----------
And they were/are all referendums consistent with the California constitution..... except of course in the warped, idiotic mind of icj1, the CB of B92.
P.S. CB= Chief Bigot
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 2 September 2016 16:31)
Congratulations for convincing yourself that "they were/are all referendums consistent with the California constitution" as I wrote nowhere that they weren't.
It appears that since you are frustrated that you can't find anything that is factually incorrect with my writings, you have turned your attention to your own incorrect thoughts hahaha
We'll let's continue our cursory review of the recent thesis and "writings" of icj1, the CB of B92.
"Few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums, mate... "
(icj1, 31 August 2016 18:38)
icj1, the CB of B92, supports his/her. thesis with the following "Indeed. "California ballot (propositions) are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda on a wide variety of topics for residents of CA" except for tax levies."
(icj1, 1 September 2016 22:12)
Sometime between 01-09-2016 22:12 and 02-09-2016 15:32, icj1 suffered irreversible clinical grade amnesia, or had his/her bipolar disorder treated with a radical frontal lobotomy. icj1, the CB of B92, in the plainest "factually incorrect" manner denied claiming the words he/she posted:
"It's not icj1 that is claiming it, it's California's constitution."
(icj1, 2 September 2016 15:32)
icj1's pure idiocy is now confounded by the severest clinical symptoms of numerous psychiatric disorders.
New World order.
Banning a vote doesn't change the thinking of people.
The central political contradiction of Bosnia continues.
You can bring a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.
Legislating minutae ensures that Bosnia will not survive.
Why afraid of a vote of the people?
(factman, 31 August 2016 15:54)
Few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums, mate... For example, would anybody have a doubt on the outcome of a referendum with the question "Should you be required to pay taxes?". Which is why few countries, if any, would allow that referendum...
Same way, few countries, if any, allow referendums about specific court decisions, because the electorate is not a court!
Come on, these are very simple concepts, you don't need a PhD to understand them. It's common sense :)
Few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums, mate... For example, would anybody have a doubt on the outcome of a referendum with the question "Should you be required to pay taxes?". Which is why few countries, if any, would allow that referendum...
Same way, few countries, if any, allow referendums about specific court decisions, because the electorate is not a court!
Come on, these are very simple concepts, you don't need a PhD to understand them. It's common sense :)
(icj1, 31 August 2016 18:38)
True non-sense from the warped mind of icj1 to claim that a state like California does not routinely have ballot propositions.
P.S. CB= Chief Bigot
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 1 September 2016 07:17)
I claimed nowhere "that a state like California does not routinely have ballot propositions". But, I'm glad that you convinced yourself that it is true non-sense from your warped mind to claim that a state like California does not routinely have ballot propositions :)
Few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums, mate... For example, would anybody have a doubt on the outcome of a referendum with the question "Should you be required to pay taxes?". Which is why few countries, if any, would allow that referendum...
Come on, these are very simple concepts, you don't need a PhD to understand them. It's common sense :)
(icj1, 31 August 2016 18:38)
California ballot proportions are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda on a wide variety of topics for residents of CA. True non-sense from the warped mind of icj1 to claim that "few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums", when countries such as the US allow states an unlimited number of referenda.
Nice, you are making progress. I'm very proud of you that after you read my writings you correct your writings to make them a bit more coherent lol
Anyway, thanks for bringing the example of California, because it proves my point that few countries, if any, allow referendums on tax levies. Indeed, "California ballot proportions (sic) are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda on a wide variety of topics for residents of CA.", except for tax levies.
FREE SRPSKA!
(gg, 31 August 2016 19:49) It's free like BS Serb Krajina to leave for Serbia. Croatia is so peaceful now soon for Bosnia when the idiot https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xy0MJgnW6v4 Serbs leave. The Serb fascist keep returning to the scene of horrendous crimes they committed in Bosnia no shame.
Few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums, mate...
Come on, these are very simple concepts, you don't need a PhD to understand them. It's common sense :)
(icj1, 31 August 2016 18:38)
---
icj1, the CB of B92 not only uses his non-sense to label ethnic groups with medical disorders, icj1 is obviously ignorant of Ballot Propositions routinely used by US states to run referendums during rugular voting cycles. California ballot proportions are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda on a wide variety of topics for residents of CA. True non-sense from the warped mind of icj1 to claim that "few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums", when countries such as the US allow states an unlimited number of referenda.
Come on, these are very simple concepts, you don't need a PhD to understand them. It's common sense :)
(icj1, 31 August 2016 18:38)
---
Truly laughable that icj1, the CB of B92 refers to common sense. icj1's nonsensical diagnosis of an entire ethnic group with a neurological disorder epitomizes the lack of any sense emanating from icj1's warped mind.
Few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums, mate...
Come on, these are very simple concepts, you don't need a PhD to understand them. It's common sense :)
(icj1, 31 August 2016 18:38)
---
icj1, the CB of B92 not only uses his non-sense to label ethnic groups with medical disorders, icj1 is obviously ignorant of Ballot Propositions routinely used by US states to run referendums during rugular voting cycles. California ballot proportions are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda on a wide variety of topics for residents of CA. True non-sense from the warped mind of icj1 to claim that a state like California does not routinely have ballot propositions.
Technically joining RS is not a problem. You give them Serbian passports and arrange their voting like for the rest of the Serbs abroad. It will de facto make the region part of mainland Serbia. And it will have no consequences on the Shqiptar front I think because in fact the Whites’ leaders in Albania and Kosovo do not want to be united. Neither is the United Shaitan interested in such a development. Only Serbs consolidate the Whites.
Nice, you are making progress. I'm very proud of you that after you read my writings you correct your writings to make them a bit more coherent lol
(icj1, 1 September 2016 22:12)
---
icj1, the CB of B92, should realize my writings were only incoherent to the CB of B92. No one other than icj1 claimed incoherence. The struggles that icj1, our CB, has with basic comprehension and simple logic is well documented. Only the warped thinking from icj1 produces Mengele-type associations of ethnicity with medical disorders.
We have a well documented history that icj1, the CB of B92, requires explanation at remedial level.
We're actually encouraged that icj1, the CB of B92, is "proud" to admit he/she understands and recognizes his/her own nonsensical thinking and ignorant posts.
Anyway, thanks for bringing the example of California, because it proves my point that few countries, if any, allow referendums on tax levies. Indeed, "California ballot proportions (sic) are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda on a wide variety of topics for residents of CA.", except for tax levies.
(icj1, 1 September 2016 22:12)
icj1, the CB of B92, is now claiming that CA ballot propositions are referenda on a wide variety of topics "except for tax levies".
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 2 September 2016 02:12)
It's not icj1 that is claiming it, it's California's constitution. But feel free to contact California to discuss it with them if you disagree lol
you can't find anything that is factually incorrect with my writings
(icj1, 2 September 2016 19:13)
---
We'll let's briefly review the recent thesis and "writings" of icj1, the CB of B92.
"Few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums, mate... "
(icj1, 31 August 2016 18:38)
Undisputed as factually incorrect by:
"countries such as the US allow states an unlimited number of referenda. "
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 1 September 2016 16:28)
icj1, the CB of B92, then displays symptoms of bipolar disorder (or the characteristics of an ICTY judge) with the following words to support his thesis:
"Indeed, "California ballot proportions (sic) are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda"
(icj1, 1 September 2016 22:12)
Yes, only icj1 (the CB of B92), and ICTY jurists, start a thesis with "Few, if any...allow unlimited referenda" and support their thesis exemplifying a state with unlimited prolific referenda. Pure idiocy.
My trilogy of posts conclude the review of the recent thesis and "writings" of icj1, the CB of B92.
"Few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums, mate... "
(icj1, 31 August 2016 18:38)
icj1, the CB of B92, opposes his/her own thesis with the following words: "Indeed. "California ballot (propositions) are quite prolific..."
(icj1, 1 September 2016 22:12)
As described in the case analysis below: an abrupt onset of severe clinical schizophrenia plagues icj1, who subsequently denies claim for the words he/she in fact posted.
"It's not icj1 that is claiming it, it's California's constitution.
(icj1, 2 September 2016 15:32)
How and why an inanimate object, such as the California constitution, could post and claim anything on a B92 forum is only apparent in the factually incorrect world, and warped mind, of icj1....the CB of B92.
icj1's factually incorrect denial is further confounded by his/her reference:
"Article 2, Sec. 9(a) of California's Constitution is not an "unscholarly constitutional study"
(icj1, 2 September 2016 19:13)
Fact: Article 2, Sec 9(a) does not contain the wording posted by icj1.
icj1's thesis, self-contradictory defence, foolish claims and feeble denials provide for an infinite harvest of factually incorrect findings. icj1's overt idiocy, and Mengele-based diagnoses that associate a neurological disorder with an ethnic group, are satisfyingly enjoyable to expose.
AY we are devoted fans. Amazing!
Some of us have been tracking the interchanges between icj1 and Amnesty Yugoslavia over the years. The current score is AY= 1207 icj1= 0.
Bosnia is Bosnia. Serbia is Serbia. It is always about the land and the traditions and heritage that grow from the land that define its identity. A minority in one is a majority in the other and vice versa. Ultimately what is good for one must be good for all. Protect all irrespective of the numbers and cultural differentiation. The human rights of those who live upon that land, not competing nationalist constructs and exclusivity, is paramount for all; the right to safety, the right to life, the right to free expression and thought, the right to shelter and the right not to be discriminated against, the right to learn and respect another's beliefs, the right to liberty, the right to a fair trial, the right to marry who you love and start a family. Where you are born is a geographical reality, how you live your life is ultimately a political reality. Politics must honour the land and the people who live upon it, all else is folly and perpetual conflict.
Anyway, thanks for bringing the example of California, because it proves my point that few countries, if any, allow referendums on tax levies. Indeed, "California ballot proportions (sic) are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda on a wide variety of topics for residents of CA.", except for tax levies.
(icj1, 1 September 2016 22:12)
---
Alas, the potentially encouraging signs of an improvement in icj1's, mental capacity were completely false.
icj1, the CB of B92, is now claiming that CA ballot propositions are referenda on a wide variety of topics "except for tax levies".
icj1, the CB of B92, obviously is incapable of understanding referenda in other countries no better than he/ she is able to understand the idiocy of his/her diagnosis of an entire ethnic group with a neurological disorder.
icj1, in a manner similar to ICTY personnel, can't recognize plain facts and hard evidence and instead conjures fictitious claims in their warped minds.
Facts that are "incoherent" in the warped mind of icj1:
CA proposition 30 (Nov 6, 2012) was a referendum on CA sales and income tax increase. It was approved.
CA proposition 55 (2016) is a referndum on tax increases for earners above $250K.
CA propositions 13 (1978), 56 (2016), 218 (1996), 8 (1978), 24 (2010) and countless other referenda in CA and other states prove the idiocy of icj1's claims.
Anyway, thanks for bringing the example of California, because it proves my point that few countries, if any, allow referendums on tax levies. Indeed, "California ballot proportions (sic) are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda on a wide variety of topics for residents of CA.", except for tax levies.
(icj1, 1 September 2016 22:12)
---
Alas, the potentially encouraging signs of an improvement in icj1's, mental capacity were completely false.
icj1, the CB of B92, is now claiming that CA ballot propositions are referenda on a wide variety of topics "except for tax levies".
icj1, the CB of B92, obviously is incapable of understanding referenda in other countries no better than he/ she is able to understand the idiocy of his/her diagnosis of an entire ethnic group with a neurological disorder.
icj1, in a manner similar to ICTY personnel, can't recognize plain facts and hard evidence and instead conjures fictitious claims in their warped minds.
Facts that are "incoherent" in the warped mind of icj1:
CA proposition 30 (Nov 6, 2012) was a referendum on CA sales and income tax increase. It was approved.
CA proposition 55 (2016) is a referndum on tax increases for earners above $250K.
CA propositions 13 (1978), 56 (2016), 218 (1996), 8 (1978), 24 (2010) and countless other referenda in CA and other states prove the idiocy of icj1's claims.
icj1, the CB of B92, is now claiming that CA ballot propositions are referenda on a wide variety of topics "except for tax levies".
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 2 September 2016 02:12)
It's not icj1 that is claiming it, it's California's constitution. But feel free to contact California to discuss it with them if you disagree lol
(icj1, 2 September 2016 15:32)
---
icj1, the CB of B92, and his/her fictitious claims that emenate from his/her warped mind have been exposed as totally false. Icj1's idiotic rebuttal doesn't even reference an article or an amendment of the California constitution and represents unscholarly constitutional study, in a manner that resembles icj1's practice of Mengele medical science.
The laughable part is that our CB, and icj1 clown, continues to ignore the real facts and irrefutable evidence:
CA proposition 30 (Nov 6, 2012) was a referendum on CA sales and income tax increase. It was approved.
CA proposition 55 (2016) is a referndum on tax increases for earners above $250K.
CA propositions 13 (1978), 56 (2016), 218 (1996), 8 (1978), 24 (2010) were all referenda on tax topics.
And they were/are all referendums consistent with the California constitution..... except of course in the warped, idiotic mind of icj1, the CB of B92.
icj1, the CB of B92, is now claiming that CA ballot propositions are referenda on a wide variety of topics "except for tax levies".
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 2 September 2016 02:12)
It's not icj1 that is claiming it, it's California's constitution. But feel free to contact California to discuss it with them if you disagree lol
(icj1, 2 September 2016 15:32)
Icj1's idiotic rebuttal doesn't even reference an article or an amendment of the California constitution and represents unscholarly constitutional study, in a manner that resembles icj1's practice of Mengele medical science.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 2 September 2016 16:31)
Article 2, Sec. 9(a) of California's Constitution is not an "unscholarly constitutional study" lol. But again, if you disagree with it feel free to contact California :)
----------
And they were/are all referendums consistent with the California constitution..... except of course in the warped, idiotic mind of icj1, the CB of B92.
P.S. CB= Chief Bigot
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 2 September 2016 16:31)
Congratulations for convincing yourself that "they were/are all referendums consistent with the California constitution" as I wrote nowhere that they weren't.
It appears that since you are frustrated that you can't find anything that is factually incorrect with my writings, you have turned your attention to your own incorrect thoughts hahaha
We'll let's continue our cursory review of the recent thesis and "writings" of icj1, the CB of B92.
"Few countries, if any, allow unlimited referendums, mate... "
(icj1, 31 August 2016 18:38)
icj1, the CB of B92, supports his/her. thesis with the following "Indeed. "California ballot (propositions) are quite prolific and are a regular process for referenda on a wide variety of topics for residents of CA" except for tax levies."
(icj1, 1 September 2016 22:12)
Sometime between 01-09-2016 22:12 and 02-09-2016 15:32, icj1 suffered irreversible clinical grade amnesia, or had his/her bipolar disorder treated with a radical frontal lobotomy. icj1, the CB of B92, in the plainest "factually incorrect" manner denied claiming the words he/she posted:
"It's not icj1 that is claiming it, it's California's constitution."
(icj1, 2 September 2016 15:32)
icj1's pure idiocy is now confounded by the severest clinical symptoms of numerous psychiatric disorders.
Check your facts. Factman and icj1, the CB of B92, write total non-sense.
Some US states routinely hold referenda on a wide variety of topics, including referenda on statutory holidays. In fact, proposition 301 was a referendum held in Arizona on November 6th, 1990 asking voters whether they accept or reject Martin Luther King Jr. Day as a state holiday. The proposition was rejected in the vote.
IMAGE SOURCE
27 Komentari
Sortiraj po: