/ck/ - Food & Cooking

[Anonymous No.15468154]

>OMG I JUST LOOOOOOOVE OFFAL!!!! IT'S SO HECKIN' GOOD WHY DON'T WH*TE FOLKS ENJOY THIS STUFF????? MMMMM ORGANS YUM YUM!!!!
>bologna.....? h-hotdogs.....? HECKIN' GROSSERINO!!!!! DO YOU KNOW WHAT THEY HECKIN' PUT IN THAT STUFF?????? YYIIIIIIIKES!!!!!!!

[Anonymous No.15468160]

Driving drunk and having paramedics scrape your brains off the road with a shovel to own the libs

[Anonymous No.15468176]

Based on what?

[Anonymous No.15468193]

>Driving drunk and having paramedics scrape your brains off the road with a shovel to own the libs

[Anonymous No.15468198]

[Anonymous No.15468209]

Stupid jannies too busy sucking off faggots instead of pruning shit threads.

[Anonymous No.15468227]

>>15468209
>Stupid jannies too busy sucking off faggots instead of pruning shit threads.

[Anonymous No.15468345]

>Meds. Take them.

[Anonymous No.15468364]

these soyjack posts that just quote what you said are incredibly cringe and unoriginal. I remember when 4chan actually had cool original memes instead of this lame shit people spam now

[Anonymous No.15468372]

>>15468364
soyjaks are unironically the only reason i go on the internet

[Anonymous No.15468379]

>>15468364
yeah, like milhouse

[Anonymous No.15468392]

>>15468364
Oh no. Prepared to be soijaked

[Anonymous No.15468418]

>these soyjack posts that just quote what you said are incredibly cringe and unoriginal. I remember when 4chan actually had cool original memes instead of this lame shit people spam now

[Anonymous No.15468431]

>Oh no. Prepared to be soijaked

[Anonymous No.15468449]

>>15468418


>>15468418
>>these soyjack posts that just quote what you said are incredibly cringe and unoriginal. I remember when 4chan actually had cool original memes instead of this lame shit people spam now


>>15468431
>>Oh no. Prepared to be soijaked

[Anonymous No.15468460]

>>15468193
>>15468345
>>15468418
>>15468431
/qa/-core.

>>15468227
>>15468449
Non-/qa/.

[Anonymous No.15468468]

>>15468154
Please go back.

[Anonymous No.15468471]

>>15468372
What a horrible existence

[Anonymous No.15468475]

>>15468460 (You)
>>>15468193 (You)
>>>15468345 (You)
>>>15468418 (You)
>>>15468431 (You)
>/qa/-core.
>
>>>15468227 (You)
>>>15468449 (You)
>Non-/qa/.

[Anonymous No.15468483]

I like soijaks

[Anonymous No.15468486]

imagine wasting most of your beautiful existence on this earth by posting soyjaks on 4channel, burdening other people with your sad pathetic life

this is the destiny of a neckbeard alcoholic

[Anonymous No.15468498]

>>15468486
>imagine wasting most of your beautiful existence on this earth by posting soyjaks on 4channel, burdening other people with your sad pathetic life
>this is the destiny of a neckbeard alcoholic

[Anonymous No.15468502]

>>15468498
>1611576019266.png

[Anonymous No.15468508]

[Anonymous No.15468512]

>>15468508
She looks about as alive as the moderation staff.

[Anonymous No.15468514]

>>15468486
>imagine wasting most of your beautiful existence on this earth by posting on 4channel
ftfy

[Anonymous No.15468516]

>>15468498
these type of people need to be banned permanently, im trying to enjoy a FOOD AND COOKING board...this isnt qa, fuck right off with your inane shitposting you dickhead, NO ONE likes you or thinks this is funny

[Anonymous No.15468524]

>>15468508
too soon

[Anonymous No.15468530]

>>15468516
What are you talking about, soyjaks are the shit!

[Anonymous No.15468536]

>these type of people need to be banned permanently, im trying to enjoy a FOOD AND COOKING board...this isnt qa, fuck right off with your inane shitposting you dickhead, NO ONE likes you or thinks this is funny

[Anonymous No.15468538]

>>15468516
>>>15468498
>these type of people need to be banned permanently, im trying to enjoy a FOOD AND COOKING board...this isnt qa, fuck right off with your inane shitposting you dickhead, NO ONE likes you or thinks this is funny

[Anonymous No.15468541]

>>15468516
>these type of people need to be banned permanently, im trying to enjoy a FOOD AND COOKING board...this isnt qa, fuck right off with your inane shitposting you dickhead, NO ONE likes you or thinks this is funny

[Anonymous No.15468548]

[Anonymous No.15468549]

In the name of the African Union, I would like to greet the members of the General Assembly of the United Nations, and I hope that this meeting will be among the most historic in the history of the world.

In the name of the General Assembly at its sixtyfourth session, presided over by Libya, of the African Union, of one thousand traditional African kingdoms [trans.] and in my own name, I would like to take this opportunity, as President of the African Union, to congratulate our son Obama because he is attending the General Assembly, and we welcome him as his country is hosting this meeting.

This session is taking place in the midst of so many challenges facing us, and the whole world should come together and unite its efforts to defeat the challenges that are our principal common enemy — those of climate change and international crises such as the capitalist economic decline, the food and water crises, desertification, terrorism, immigration, piracy, man-made and natural epidemics and nuclear proliferation. Perhaps influenza H1N1 was a virus created in a laboratory that got out of control, originally being meant as a military weapon. Such challenges also include hypocrisy, poverty, fear, materialism and immorality.

As is known, the United Nations was founded by three or four countries against Germany at the time. The United Nations was formed by the nations that joined together against Germany in the Second World War. Those countries formed a body called the Security Council, made its own countries permanent members and granted them the power of veto.

We were not present at that time. The United Nations was shaped in line with those three countries and wanted us to step into shoes originally designed against Germany. That is the real substance of the United Nations when it was founded over 60 years ago.

[Anonymous No.15468562]

>>15468549
That happened in the absence of some 165 countries, at a ratio of one to eight; that is, one was present and eight were absent. They created the Charter, of which I have a copy. If one reads the Charter of the United Nations, one finds that the Preamble of the Charter differs from its Articles. How did it come into existence? All those who attended the San Francisco Conference in 1945 participated in creating the Preamble, but they left the Articles and internal rules of procedures of the so-called Security Council to experts, specialists and interested countries, which were those countries that had established the Security Council and had united against Germany.

The Preamble is very appealing, and no one objects to it, but all the provisions that follow it completely contradict the Preamble. We reject such provisions, and we will never uphold them; they ended with the Second World War. The Preamble says that all nations, small or large, are equal. Are we equal when it comes to the permanent seats? No, we are not equal.

The Preamble states in writing that all nations are equal whether they are small or large. Do we have the right of veto? Are we equal? The Preamble says that we have equal rights, whether we are large or small.

That is what is stated and what we agreed in the Preamble. So the veto contradicts the Charter. The permanent seats contradict the Charter. We neither accept nor recognize the veto.

[Anonymous No.15468570]

>the jannies

[Anonymous No.15468571]

>>15468548
god I wish that were me

[Anonymous No.15468572]

>>15468562
The Preamble of the Charter states that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest. That is the Preamble that we agreed to and signed, and we joined the United Nations because we wanted the Charter to reflect that. It says that armed force shall only be used in the common interest of all nations, but what has happened since then? Sixty-five wars have broken out since the establishment of the United Nations and the Security Council — 65 since their creation, with millions more victims than in the Second World War. Are those wars, and the aggression and force that were used in those 65 wars, in the common interest of us all? No, they were in the interest of one or three or four countries, but not of all nations.

We will talk about whether those wars were in the interest of one country or of all nations. That flagrantly contradicts the Charter of the United Nations that we signed, and unless we act in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations to which we agreed, we will reject it and not be afraid not to speak diplomatically to anyone. Now we are talking about the future of the United Nations. There should be no hypocrisy or diplomacy because it concerns the important and vital issue of the future of the world. It was hypocrisy that brought about the 65 wars since the establishment of the United Nations.

The Preamble also states that if armed force is used, it must be a United Nations force — thus, military intervention by the United Nations, with the joint agreement of the United Nations, not one or two or three countries using armed force. The entire United Nations will decide to go to war to maintain international peace and security. Since the establishment of the United Nations in 1945, if there is an act of aggression by one country against another, the entire United Nations should deter and stop that act.

[Anonymous No.15468579]

>>15468572
If a country, Libya for instance, were to exhibit aggression against France, then the entire Organization would respond because France is a sovereign State Member of the United Nations and we all share the collective responsibility to protect the sovereignty of all nations. However, 65 aggressive wars have taken place without any United Nations action to prevent them. Eight other massive, fierce wars, whose victims number some 2 million, have been waged by Member States that enjoy veto powers. Those countries that would have us believe they seek to maintain the sovereignty and independence of peoples actually use aggressive force against peoples. While we would like to believe that these countries want to work for peace and security in the world and protect peoples, they have instead resorted to aggressive wars and hostile behaviour. Enjoying the veto they granted themselves as permanent members of the Security Council, they have initiated wars that have claimed millions of victims.

The principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of States is enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. No country, therefore, has the right to interfere in the affairs of any Government, be it democratic or dictatorial, socialist or capitalist, reactionary or progressive. This is the responsibility of each society; it is an internal matter for the people of the country concerned. The senators of Rome once appointed their leader, Julius Caesar, as dictator because it was good for Rome at that time. No one can say of Rome at that time that it gave Caesar the veto. The veto is not mentioned in the Charter.

[Anonymous No.15468585]

>>15468579
We joined the United Nations because we thought we were equals, only to find that one country can object to all the decisions we make. Who gave the permanent members their status in the Security Council? Four of them granted this status to themselves. The only country that we in this Assembly elected to permanent member status in the Security Council is China. This was done democratically, but the other seats were imposed upon us undemocratically through a dictatorial procedure carried out against our will, and we should not accept it.

The Security Council reform we need is not an increase in the number of members, which would only make things worse. To use a common expression, if you add more water, you get more mud. It would add insult to injury. It would make things worse simply by adding more large countries to those that already enjoy membership of the Council. It would merely perpetuate the proliferation of super-Powers. We therefore reject the addition of any more permanent seats. The solution is not to have more permanent seats, which would be very dangerous. Adding more super-Powers would crush the peoples of small, vulnerable and third world countries, which are coming together in what has been called the Group of 100 — 100 small countries banding together in a forum that one member has called the Forum of Small States. These countries would be crushed by superPowers were additional large countries to be granted membership in the Security Council. This door must be closed; we reject it strongly and categorically.

[Anonymous No.15468586]

the absolute state of /ck/

wow this place has gone to shit

[Anonymous No.15468599]

>>15468585
Adding more seats to the Security Council would increase poverty, injustice and tension at the world level, as well as great competition between certain countries such as Italy, Germany, Indonesia, India, Pakistan, the Philippines, Japan, Brazil, Nigeria, Argentina, Algeria, Libya, Egypt, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, South Africa, Tanzania, Turkey, Iran, Greece and Ukraine. All these countries would seek a seat on the Security Council, making its membership almost as large as that of the General Assembly and resulting in an impractical competition.

What solution can there be? The solution is for the General Assembly to adopt a binding resolution under the leadership of Mr. Treki based on the majority will of Assembly members and taking into account the considerations of no other body. The solution is to close Security Council membership to the admission of further States. This item is on the agenda of the General Assembly during the present session presided over by Mr. Treki. Membership through unions and the transference of mandates should supersede other proposals. We should focus on the achievement of democracy based on the equality of Member States. There should be equality among Member States and the powers and mandates of the Security Council should be transferred to the General Assembly.

>>15468586
this is a gaddafi board now cunt

[Anonymous No.15468608]

>>15468599
Membership should be for unions, not for States. Increasing the number of States Members would give the right to allcountries to a seat, in accordance with the spirit of the Preamble of the Charter. No country could deny a seat in the Council to Italy, for instance, if a seat were given to Germany. For the sake of argument, Italy might say that Germany was an aggressive country and was defeated in the Second World War. If we gave India a seat, Pakistan would say that it, too, is a nuclear country and deserves a seat, and those two countries are at war. This would be a dangerous situation. If we gave a seat to Japan, then we should have to give one to Indonesia, the largest Muslim country in the world. Then Turkey, Iran and Ukraine would make the same claim. What could we say to Argentina or Brazil? Libya deserves a seat for its efforts in the service of world security by discarding its weapons of mass destruction programme.

Then South Africa, Tanzania and Ukraine would demand the same. All of these countries are important. The door to Security Council membership should be closed. This approach is a falsehood, a trick that has been exposed. If we want to reform the United Nations, bringing in more super-Powers is not the way. The solution is to foster democracy at the level of the general congress of the world, the General Assembly, to which the powers of the Security Council should be transferred. The Security Council would become merely an instrument for implementing the decisions taken by the General Assembly, which would be the parliament, the legislative assembly, of the world.

[Anonymous No.15468616]

JUDEN
U
D
E
N

[Anonymous No.15468623]

>>15468608
This Assembly is our democratic forum and the Security Council should be responsible before it; we should not accept the current situation. These are the legislators of the Members of the United Nations, and their resolutions should be binding. It is said that the General Assembly should do whatever the Security Council recommends. On the contrary, the Security Council should do whatever the General Assembly decides. This is the United Nations, the Assembly that includes 192 countries. It is not the Security Council, which includes only 15 of the Member States. How can we be happy about global peace and security if the whole world is controlled by only five countries?

We are 192 nations and countries, and we are like Speakers’ Corner in London’s Hyde Park. We just speak and nobody implements our decisions. We are mere decoration, without any real substance. We are Speakers’ Corner, no more, no less. We just make speeches and then disappear. This is who you are right now. Once the Security Council becomes only an executive body for resolutions adopted by the General Assembly, there will be no competition for membership of the Council. Once the Security Council becomes a tool to implement General Assembly resolutions, there will be no need for any competition. The Security Council should, quite simply, represent all nations. In accordance with the proposal submitted to the General Assembly, there would be permanent seats on the Security Council for all unions and groups of countries. The 27 countries of the European Union should have a permanent seat on the Security Council. The countries of the African Union should have a permanent seat on the Security Council.

[Anonymous No.15468639]

>>15468623
The Latin American and ASEAN countries should have permanent seats. The Russian Federation and the United States of America are already permanent members of the Security Council. The Southern African Development Community (SADC), once it is fully established, should have a permanent seat. The 22 countries of the Arab League should have a permanent seat. The 57 countries of the Islamic Conference should have a permanent seat. The 118 countries of the Non-Aligned Movement should have a permanent seat. Then there is the G-100; perhaps the small countries should also have a permanent seat. Countries not included in the unions that I have mentioned could perhaps be assigned a permanent seat, to be occupied by them in rotation every six or twelve months.

I am thinking of countries like Japan and Australia that are outside such organizations as ASEAN or like the Russian Federation that is not a member of the European or Latin American or African unions. This would be a solution for them if the General Assembly votes in favour of it. The issue is a vitally important one. As has already been mentioned, the General Assembly is the Congress and Parliament of the world, the leader of the world. We are the nations, and anyone outside this General Assembly will not be recognized. The President of the Assembly, Mr. Ali Abdussalam Treki, and Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon will produce the legal draft and set up the necessary committees to submit this proposal to a vote: that from now on, the Security Council will be made up of unions of nations.

[Anonymous No.15468939]

Dudes janny is gonna FLIP when xe gets back and sees all this, you guys better clean this up pronto!

[Anonymous No.15468968]

>>15468548
Love a nice sissy clitty, me

[Anonymous No.15468975]

>>15468570
How is the production value so high?

[Anonymous No.15469018]

>>15468154

I am Pennsylvania German, our entire food culture is anchored to the tradition of mincing and frying offal for consumption.

[Anonymous No.15469089]

>>15468975
snuff is on high demand and saudi arabia needs the money