It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Proxmire act

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 02:19 PM
link   
This is something im just learning about today. According to this video
www.youtube.com...

Those involved with engaging in war in Iraq and Afghanistan are guilty of violating this act.
The basis is on the fact that it is a war against a religion.

The war on terror is a war against what the government describes as Islamic extremists or Islamic fundamentalists. This is a religion and is considered genocide.

Proxmire Act







posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 01:39 AM
link   
reply to post by robwerden
 


The Proxmire Act was mentioned in a press conference in the UK. where a group announced that after years of trying they had finally gotten the police to seriously investigate the government of Tony Blair for war crimes. The press conference is linked to above. The Q&A period afterward is a little difficult to hear, but the video is definitely worth viewing.

One of the lawyers present states that a serious investigation of the Blair government by police in Britain, leading to charges might encourage those seeking the prosecution of high ranking American war criminals like George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.




[edit on 3-6-2008 by ipsedixit]

[edit on 3-6-2008 by ipsedixit]



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 01:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by robwerden

The war on terror is a war against what the government describes as Islamic extremists or Islamic fundamentalists. This is a religion and is considered genocide.


So if a religious sect attacks the U.S. it is against the law and a war crime to engage this religious sect?

Thank God Harvard Law school professors aren't responsible for our national defense.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 02:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by jamie83
So if a religious sect attacks the U.S. it is against the law and a war crime to engage this religious sect?


It could very well be. I suppose a court would have to determine whether or not the law had been violated. Reading part of the law over I'm surprised that the government has not already been charged with genocide for the Waco massacre and for trying to take the children of those Texas polygamists from them.

www.law.cornell.edu...


(a) Basic Offense.— Whoever, whether in time of peace or in time of war, in a circumstance described in subsection (d) and with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in substantial part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group as such—
(1) kills members of that group;
(2) causes serious bodily injury to members of that group;
(3) causes the permanent impairment of the mental faculties of members of the group through drugs, torture, or similar techniques;
(4) subjects the group to conditions of life that are intended to cause the physical destruction of the group in whole or in part;
(5) imposes measures intended to prevent births within the group; or
(6) transfers by force children of the group to another group;
or attempts to do so, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).
(b) Punishment for Basic Offense.— The punishment for an offense under subsection (a) is—
(1) in the case of an offense under subsection (a)(1), where death results, by death or imprisonment for life and a fine of not more than $1,000,000, or both; and
(2) a fine of not more than $1,000,000 or imprisonment for not more than twenty years, or both, in any other case.


They might get away with the Iraq genocide, at least in US courts because I think it is only against American law for the US government to carry on genocide within the US itself.


(d) Required Circumstance for Offenses.— The circumstance referred to in subsections (a) and (c) is that—
(1) the offense is committed within the United States; or
(2) the alleged offender is a national of the United States (as defined in section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101)).


Oops, my mistake. Section (2) of section (d) quoted above, says that American citizenship on the part of the offender is a requirement for a charge to be laid. I misread it originally and thought that it meant that the victim had to be American.

Maybe Congress could nullify this provision for foreign genocides by temporarily suspending citizenship for military personnel on active duty in a combat zone.

Of course that might leave the temporary non-citizens open to war crimes charges under international law. What a legal nightmare.

Maybe the answer lies in the complete suspension of all law with regard to the activities of the US.

[edit on 3-6-2008 by ipsedixit]



new topics

top topics
 
1

log in

join