Lars Sundling

When I was young, I knew everything - Now I am much wiser!

[Lars Sundling @LarsSundling]

@MrWinMarshall @WallStreetApes Fantastic brilliant interview.

[Lars Sundling @LarsSundling]

@informeren Jeg er en moden herre på 65 år. Min søde underbo mener jeg bør dæmpe mine højlydte sexaktiviteter om morgenen. Jeg har flere gange forsøgt at forklare hende, at jeg blot forsøger at få mine strømper på!

[Lars Sundling @LarsSundling]

@ebbreaking Såvidt jeg har forstået var der ikke vold eller trusler om vold involveret. I så fald er det vel et tyveri og ikke et røveri?

[Lars Sundling @LarsSundling]

@Johan_Gillman Stark orderbok = Many useless letters of intents!

[Lars Sundling @LarsSundling]

@informeren Jeg ville blot have skrevet:
Et større antal egyptere kan risikere deres tildelte danske statsborgerskab....

[Dr. Brian L. Cox @BrianCox_RLTW]

I write as a current professor of international law & retired US Army judge advocate with experience advising commanders in combat.

1) It doesn't matter that @gbsumudflotilla is (now, was) on the High Seas & not in @Israel's 12 mile territorial sea. Vessels are subject to capture outside neutral waters if they are breaching or attempting to breach a blockade. Source: San Remo Manual (SRM) ¶ 146 (pic 1, yellow highlight).

2) Maritime security measures conducted during peacetime are beyond the scope of SRM since the manual addresses international law applicable to armed conflicts at sea. So, it doesn't matter how long @Israel has enforced a naval blockade. The current armed conflict was initiated by #Hamas on October 7, 2023 - and rules reflected in the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea have applied since then. Additionally, @CIJ_ICJ does not have unilateral authority to establish int'l law - whether through advisory opinions or otherwise. Therefore it doesn't matter what ICJ "found illegal" in advisory opinions.

3) There is no provision in SRM requiring a blockade to be a "short term measure." By definition, blockades can be enforced for the duration of the armed conflict - no matter how long the armed conflict may last. Source: SRM ¶¶ 93-94 (pic 2).

4) In any event, SRM rules DO NOT "explicitly state that humanitarian supplies may not be blockaded." There are rules addressing that conduct, but these rules are subject to other conditions & restrictions. As such, there is no outright ban on blockading "humanitarian supplies." Source: SRM ¶¶ 102-04 (pic 3).

5) It doesn't matter what the "UN Commission of Inquiry has already determined." Like ICJ advisory opinions, no UN CoI has unilateral authority to establish int'l law. Substantive merits of this report are beyond the scope of this post, but for a brief discussion see @Aizenberg55's observations here (https://t.co/XZdMLvtL9a) & here (https://t.co/XTV4mFkcGZ). The claim that the "blockade is plainly a part of the machinery of such genocide" is just as anecdotal & authoritative as the UN CoI report Craig Murray cites here for support.

For reasons 1 to 5 nothing in Craig Murray's post constitutes a legitimate articulation or analysis of int'l law.

Then, as one might imagine, the remaining "so what" points unravel from there.

6) Attack on a vessel attempting to breach a naval blockade is just an attack on that vessel - not "on the flag state of the vessel attacked."

7) Detaining a vessel & its crew for breaching or attempting to breach a blockade is not an act "of illegal possession of vessels or abduction of crew on the High Seas." For neutral vessels breaching or attempting to breach a blockade, capturing the vessel is exercised by taking such vessel as prize for adjudication. Source: SRM ¶ 146 (back to pic 1, blue highlight).

8) So Metropolitan Police and DPP have NO obligation to, well...do anything at all.

Here's the thing. Given the extensive #legaldisinformation presented in Craig Murray's post, it's troubling how much it's circulated on @X even now < 24 hours since publication. My guess is that reflects 3 related factors: 1) his seemingly impressive claim of personal authority at the outset; 2) most ppl who don't specialize in int'l law don't know any better even when they read complete rubbish such as Craig Murray's analysis; and 3) part of the reason many ppl don't know any better is they want to be duped because they want to find some seemingly legit excuse to hate 🇮🇱 (+ Zionists as proxy for 🇮🇱 + Jews as proxy for Zionists).

But these rampant misrepresentations of int'l law serve only 2 purposes: 1) support strategic objectives of terrorists like Hamas; 2) encourage hate & violence directed against Jews.

Enough. Don't be fooled by "experts" like Craig Murray who don't actually know what they're talking about when it comes to int'l law.

I hope you find this helpful, and thank you for your attention to this matter.

[Arnaud Bertrand @RnaudBertrand]

Fascinating geopolitical analysis by Emmanuel Todd, one of the very few great French intellectuals we have left. I added English subtitles for you.

He believes - as I do - that, fundamentally the US is accepting what he calls "defeat" against not only Russia but China as well, and that Trump is effectively trying - clumsily - to manage this defeat and to adapt the US to multipolarity.

He says that the US's defeat in Ukraine isn't like Afghanistan or Iraq but that it represents what he calls "America's first major strategic defeat of its history."

In the war, he says Russia has become "the shield of all the rest of the world who can't stand US guardianship of global finance [and] the exploitation of the working populations in the rest of the world by Westerners."

As he puts it, Russia has demonstrated "that they were able to face the whole West," and with the rise of BRICS financial systems, this represents nothing less than "the end of the American imperium" - a defeat Trump must now manage.

With regards to China he says that the US have in fact "given up" trying to contain them because the balance of power now makes it impossible. He points to "Chinese naval production that will soon make the US Navy a dwarf navy", "US aircraft carriers [that] are irrelevant facing hypersonic missiles" and the fact that China managed to "put the Americans under embargo" for rare earth exports.

Arguments that undoubtedly will sound very familiar to my readers because I make the same ones in my articles (like this one: https://t.co/VlLUGrAVAR), which I know Todd reads because, full disclosure, we know each others 😊

In this picture, Todd characterizes (quite rightly) Europeans as "crazy, we are dealing with crazy people" who think they can act as winners and impose conditions despite being the biggest losers of the war.

He is particularly virulent against the media and the general intellectual climate in Europe, speaking of a "process of intellectual and moral degeneration" where "all notions of truth, of honor, of reflection" are being lost.

He says that the end of the US's global hegemony doesn't mean they won't relinquish control of what they still do control, specifically Europeans 😢

I'll let you watch the whole video for more, including his excellent analogy between Trump and former French 4th Republic President Henri Queuille: quite out-of-the-box comparison but actually not bad!

This is part of a longer video (https://t.co/LUZTAss2Ca).

They actually have an English version of the video here: https://t.co/IM61n8A5kI dubbed with AI if you prefer to watch it in English.

[Lars Sundling @LarsSundling]

@GBNEWS Who cares!?

[Lars Sundling @LarsSundling]

@NetZeroWatch EU has no other choice! And now China will buy all the cheep gas that EU once had from Russia. Good luck EU, paying 2-3 times more for LNG from US!

[Lars Sundling @LarsSundling]

@RightScopee 👍

[Ann Sheridan One of the 80% 🇬🇧🇺🇦🇬🇧🇮🇱🇬🇧 @bernerlap]

Absolutely brilliant

[Lars Sundling @LarsSundling]

@informeren Sagde spøgelsesbilisten!

[Lars Sundling @LarsSundling]

@MVSJPoliti Linket virker ikke!

[Lars Sundling @LarsSundling]

@informeren Så er det sikkert også en kæmpe misforståelse, at børn af rygere har en større sandsynlighed for selv at blive rygere end børn fra ikke-ryger forældre! Det samme med alkohol, narkotika og andre sociale og fysiske adfærdsmønstre!?

[Lars Sundling @LarsSundling]

@MBrgger Dunning-Kruger effekten for fuld udblæsning!

[Lars Sundling @LarsSundling]

@MBrgger Måske ikke sympati, men så dog medlidenhed! Min underbo som er 80+ har nu solgt sin bil og kommer ikke til at køre mere, han kom i forvirring til at køre op på cykelstien, da han skulle dreje og var efterfølgende ulykkelig over situationen, ingen kom til skade! Empati, please!

[Lars Sundling @LarsSundling]

@ntvde Schrecken, Angst und Panik!

[Lars Sundling @LarsSundling]

@TomJensen1966 Helt enig, men du får nok mange protester fra liberale tågehoveder der sidder på Starbucks og protesterer via deres Apple produkter!

[Lars Sundling @LarsSundling]

@mejlhedetv2 Meget fin, subjektiv og biased analyse!

[Lars Sundling @LarsSundling]

@Alex_Oloyede2 Same thing as in Berlin early 1945!