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.

 

Red Cross Finds Bush Administration Guilty of War Crimes

page: 3
22
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Harlequin
glad to see the neo-con apologists all over this thread , deriding the source as biased or rubbish - i have noticed an increase in new neo-con members recently ; is it a full moon or something that these rabid dogs come out to play?

Since you used neocon twice in one sentence, let me ask if you even know what a neocon is? I only ask because how do you know that all the older members and newer members are neocons? Are you able to read minds and see if they were once liberal or of the leftist mindset? You do realize that in order to be a neocon, you must have first been a liberal right?




posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 11:44 AM
link   
There are so many problems with this, it's frankly, laughable.


First of all, where is this 'secret report'? Oh right, it's secret, just like all the anonomous sources we read about here on ATS with topics like aliens eating babies and such.

Second, it's funny how this comes to light just as this dudes books is available for sale. Coincidence?? Hmmm.......

Thirdly and most importantly, most of the claims are based on interviewing prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. What do you think they are going to say? Oh, we love it here. No, they will say whatever it takes.

Double down thumbs for the story being obvious propaganda for some retard who wants to sell a book and is trying to further some sort of agenda. Sad and pathetic.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Extralien

Winning or losing a war should make no difference to the fact that crimes are/have been committed and should make no difference on the time or place of arrest and charges made.


You are right it SHOULD not make a difference.. but the Police work for THEM not you... Politicians have the option of resigning when caught with their hand in the cookie jar and somehow that makes it all okay...

So WHO is going to walk into the White House and make the arrests? WHICH agency will walk past the SS (Secret Service
)and take anyone of them into custody?

THEY also have WMD's at their disposal... and many of them are no longer run by men... all automatic... so which group of mercenaries will start the revolution?

Sure we need to do something... but who will be our leader? Who will step up to the plate and say "Enough is enough!!"?

Well we can sit here and discuss that for a few more years....

BTW Since they are just glorified body guards just WHY are they called the SECRET Service anyway?




[edit on 14-7-2008 by zorgon]



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Karlhungis
Now, correct me if I am wrong here... but didn't this administration deem that people who site the constitution are radical homegrown terrorists?



I believe the exact words were...


GOP leaders told Bush that his hardcore push to renew the more onerous provisions of the act could further alienate conservatives still mad at the President from his botched attempt to nominate White House Counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court.

"I don't give a goddamn," Bush retorted. "I'm the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way."

"Mr. President," one aide in the meeting said. "There is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution."

"Stop throwing the Constitution in my face," Bush screamed back. "It's just a goddamned piece of paper!"


www.capitolhillblue.com...

I think this administration is a test to see how far they can push the public and still get away with it... and we elected him twice...

And now look at what we have to deal with in a few months... Obama on one side and McCain who is having citizenship issues on the other...

I feel an Australian vacation coming on....




posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 12:27 PM
link   
I hope they also investigate the ex-Prime Minister Tony Blair as he has been letting the US use Diego Garcia as a Torture Centre and hold him for war crimes.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by RRconservative

Originally posted by mental modulator

Dude RR are you under a rock? I understand you are a conservative which is fine, but these accusations are a serious matter.


On a side note RR you have said more then once that Bush is not a real conservative (neocon) - So is your allegiance purely to the red or the red, white and blue? I am an independent and your attitude is the type that is going to get me to vote for a black man! If Obama does anything at least he will marginalize the social sociopathy that seems to have infected your party!

Why would we not hold our president to a higher standard? He should be behave better then the average man, yet he behaves and dictates policy on par with a common mafia under boss.

Finally media attention does not mean there is a
lack of truth or reality.




So it's not that he is guilty it's the seriousnous of the charges? I've heard that one before. It's part of the drive-by media's tactics.

I have never said Bush is not a real conservative, maybe his dad wasn't, and McCain sure isn't, but I never referred to Bush like that.

There are alot of people out there with Bush Derangement Syndrome, and the media is all too happy to push their agenda.


RR I have no idea what goes down in Cuba do you? Have you been there, did you get a tour... I sure as hell don't know -- I could not speak to the treatment of these people one way or the other.

Isn't it the way of the USA to be innocent until proven guilty--



So it's not that he is guilty it's the seriousness of the charges? I've heard that one before. It's part of the drive-by media's tactics.


If I would have railed on about how Bush is guilty would you have not said what are the charges.

Seems to me that either way it is flipped you would "cover" for the president, a man you have never met, based on evidence that you are not privy to,,, just because it
is inconvenient for your views???

Well RR I pay taxes and this concerns me as does a lot of things. As I said before,,, now the US is detaining people providing less rights then a POW or a criminal???
Just as before,,, this is exactly what the NAZI's did, THE BOLSHEVIKS, THE BATH PARTY, THE VC, ETC... The creation of a special type of justice without legal proceedings, no rule's, accountability or rights is FASCISM 101.

The logic here is///

" Oh their bad- trust me..."" These animals don't even deserve a trial", "The prisoners crimes are on a need to know basis", why do you ask??? "DO YOU LOVE THEM"

We are in Iraq to create freedom and democracy (per BUSH) ---- Part of IRAQ'S Problem is that the population has no concept of civilized justice. They take their criminals or rivals to the desert and bury em, burn um, chop them up!!!

If these people could just create a working justice system they would not have to be afraid of deadly retribution in the form of rouge justice. The corrupt officials would be punished, laws would have "teeth" and actions would warrant penalties.
The idea of US democracy could take hold - and our troops could come home sooner!

However this is a case of do as I say not as I do!

I suspect Bush could actually do anything and you would support him.
You would defend him regardless of the "crime" or infraction - you would place all the blame on the accusations and the accusers. Once again this is the start of a fascist mind set - you readily pardon and forgive any and all actions by your leader regardless...

I asked before if you held higher allegiance to the RED or the red, white and blue?

With your previous comments as a guide I will make an assumption...



[edit on 14-7-2008 by mental modulator]



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Animal
 


If you actually consider any of this to be true "war crimes" then basically ever wartime president we've had. Pick one.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Animal

Originally posted by deltaboy
reply to post by marg6043
 


When was the last time any U.S. President was charged of warcrimes?


When was the last time we had a president with the list of crimes this one holds?


So-called "war crimes" are pretty much in the eye of the beholder. For example, the japanese (and others) might consider Truman guilty of war crimes for using the atomic bomb. The north vietnamese and their allies (here in the U.S.) might consider Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon guilty of war crimes for their part in the viet nam war. Just because you think it, doesn't make it so.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by Animal

Originally posted by deltaboy
reply to post by marg6043
 


When was the last time any U.S. President was charged of warcrimes?


When was the last time we had a president with the list of crimes this one holds?


So-called "war crimes" are pretty much in the eye of the beholder. For example, the japanese (and others) might consider Truman guilty of war crimes for using the atomic bomb. The north vietnamese and their allies (here in the U.S.) might consider Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon guilty of war crimes for their part in the viet nam war. Just because you think it, doesn't make it so.


Everything is in the eye of the beholder, do what you want everybody!

[edit on 14-7-2008 by mental modulator]



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by jam321
We want to remember because there are people that are out to destroy America because they hate what we represent. We want to remember because those People who died on 9/11 did not asked to be killed. And since you like to look at the cause and fix, tell me what is the cause and what is your solution? I don't coat anything, coating is when you prefer not to remember and act like there is really no entity out there to get us. When in reality there is danger all around. Yes, we are probably to blame for a lot of that danger that confronts us but some of it is based on a difference of ideology. They believe we should live one way and we prefer to live the American way. There is no better way. Hoorah!!!!!!


My solution? Why do those people hate us so much? Find out why, and then work from there? It's so easy to say someone hates you because what you represent...
What is it that we're representing to them that makes them hate us so much? Something has to be causing them anger to be hating us so much, it is not sympathizing with a terrorist to try and understand the root of their hatred and attempt to repair what has been broken. You can't just bomb people until they begin to love you. By doing that all that happens is the continuation of the same cycle. We're the "bigger man" in this situation? Then we should be the bigger man and fix it.

"They" are on the other side of the globe from us. Problem is the American Way involves a foreign policy that fails continuously to remember that the rest of the world is not the same as America, and that people are not just going to bend for America until they break.

And by the way, the "danger that is all around us?"
Life is a very dangerous sport my friend, and it didn't become that way with a plane hitting each tower in New York. A bus could hit me while I'm crossing the street, a motorist could be crazy and try to run me down. That does not give me carte blanche to send in fighter jets and blow up the country that they were manufactured in.


Majority wanted action taken. I will agree that people support the troops, not necessarily the war. I never said everybody was pro-war.


What exactly am I supposed to infer from this then:


All I know is that after 9/11 Americans wanted the blood of those responsible. It wasn't till the anti-war thing started that people started bringing up torture and everything else.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 04:00 PM
link   
The Red Cross report is only the latest confirmation of what has been well known for a while. The document below was compiled over ten years ago for the EU and it refers to "techniques" exported from the U.S and urges the EU to initiate policies to prohibit abuse.

Appraisal of Technologies of Political Control

The fact is, the U.S. has been using a policy of "plausible deniability". They use rhetorical tactics to beg the definition of torture in order to obfuscate the concept among the public at large. Then they deny, deny, deny based on a sippery fish of a definition. Winks and nods all around.

Turley is a true American hero for calling it what it is - B.S.

[edit on 14/7/2008 by kosmicjack]



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by WhatTheory
There are so many problems with this, it's frankly, laughable.


First of all, where is this 'secret report'? Oh right, it's secret, just like all the anonomous sources we read about here on ATS with topics like aliens eating babies and such.

Second, it's funny how this comes to light just as this dudes books is available for sale. Coincidence?? Hmmm.......

Thirdly and most importantly, most of the claims are based on interviewing prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. What do you think they are going to say? Oh, we love it here. No, they will say whatever it takes.

Double down thumbs for the story being obvious propaganda for some retard who wants to sell a book and is trying to further some sort of agenda. Sad and pathetic.


Bingo! Your first paragraph was my exact thought when I read the external quote that started out by saying "In a secret report..." - oh boy, here we go again.

I think you nailed it, WT. This is all just a marketing scam.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 04:08 PM
link   
Since when is the Red Cross a judiciary body capable of finding anybody guilty of anything?



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Unkle Greggo
 


Anybody can find evidence that can find somebody guilty of a criminal act!

They just can't prosecute or sentence anybody for their crime.

That is up to a court system to do.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by niteboy82
 


You make some good points. First, I am not for bombing a country just to get the terrorist. Why should a country suffer due to a few bad apples. Both countries lose too much. They need to go back to the days were they took care of these terrorist with the CIA. I do agree with you that we should talk to Middle East leaders and establish a better understanding between our cultures. I also concede that our foreign policy has failed. A lot of this is due to bombing those countries and our past history of manipulating countries for their resources.

The point I was trying to make in this thread is that some people are chanting for Bush to be tried for war crimes. People seem to forget that 9/11 happened and many Americans wanted action. They also fail to mention that Congress gave the green light for that action. Shouldn't Congress also be held accountable based on that? And what about the people who wanted revenge for 9/11? Shouldn't we be held accountable also for giving the impression that we would support them in their action?

I voted Bush but don't agree with the way he did things. In my view, everything was rushed. There are terrorist in every country and there is no way we can go after all of terrorist in all of those countries. Like when he was threatening war with North Korea. It was totally wrong. Instead of talking war, he should have signed a peace treaty, recognized them, brought our 35,000 troops home, and let the North and South talk it out whether they would reunite or not. The pen is mightier than the sword.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 04:33 PM
link   
Double post --


[edit on 14-7-2008 by mental modulator]



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by sos37

Originally posted by WhatTheory
There are so many problems with this, it's frankly, laughable.


First of all, where is this 'secret report'? Oh right, it's secret, just like all the anonomous sources we read about here on ATS with topics like aliens eating babies and such.

Second, it's funny how this comes to light just as this dudes books is available for sale. Coincidence?? Hmmm.......

Thirdly and most importantly, most of the claims are based on interviewing prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. What do you think they are going to say? Oh, we love it here. No, they will say whatever it takes.

Double down thumbs for the story being obvious propaganda for some retard who wants to sell a book and is trying to further some sort of agenda. Sad and pathetic.


Bingo! Your first paragraph was my exact thought when I read the external quote that started out by saying "In a secret report..." - oh boy, here we go again.

I think you nailed it, WT. This is all just a marketing scam.


So this "secret report" means that the accusations are completely false, %100 , based on the "evidence" being in a "secret report"??? That is hardly logical...

I'm just saying you guys should consider better arguments- your current argument is about the same logic as this...

The logic of a liberal who figures all the terrorist at GITMO are innocent because the charges and the accusations are "secret".

Doubt does not = true or false

Its not so black and white - I've heard plenty of intelligent arguments from the two of you - but this point boarders on ignorant.

A kin to "everything beyond the sky is blue because the sky itself is blue"!

You can not take one point and logically extrapolate a conclusion based on one assumption while remaining logical. Either your argument is poor or the merits of being the mouthpiece for a particular ideology supersedes the need for intelligent discussion?

I suspect the second in this case -- If I am wrong sorry.

Argue the meat not the seasonings!



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Keyhole
reply to post by Unkle Greggo
 


Anybody can find evidence that can find somebody guilty of a criminal act!

They just can't prosecute or sentence anybody for their crime.

That is up to a court system to do.


So the title of the thread must just be that "propaganda" stuff I hear of so often around here.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by mental modulator
So this "secret report" means that the accusations are completely false, %100 , based on the "evidence" being in a "secret report"??? That is hardly logical...

I'm just saying you guys should consider better arguments- your current argument is about the same logic as this...

The logic of a liberal who figures all the terrorist at GITMO are innocent because the charges and the accusations are "secret".

No, what is NOT logical is your argument because apparently you did not read the entire post and only picked one little part out in a lame attempt to make a point. It was more than just the 'secret report' aspect. For your benefit I will repeat myself:

First of all, where is this 'secret report'? Oh right, it's secret, just like all the anonomous sources we read about here on ATS with topics like aliens eating babies and such.

Second, it's funny how this comes to light just as this dudes books is available for sale. Coincidence?? Hmmm.......

Thirdly and most importantly, most of the claims are based on interviewing prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. What do you think they are going to say? Oh, we love it here. No, they will say whatever it takes.

Double down thumbs for the story being obvious propaganda for some retard who wants to sell a book and is trying to further some sort of agenda. Sad and pathetic.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Unkle Greggo
Since when is the Red Cross a judiciary body capable of finding anybody guilty of anything?


What does that matter??? So you are also saying that the alleged criminality does not matter because the reporting body is not a judicial body?

So you would not be guilty of a hit and run accident if a civilian is the one who witnesses the event???

The civilian is not a judicial body- tough crap!!!

I guess that means that you didn't commit a crime - in fact you did not even hit the alleged car because a civilian was the witness to the accident.

Non logic --- Give us some logic and we all can have a real conversation!

Not this mouthpiece off competitive event...

Next I will give us all a list of War crimes first reported on by the red cross ---

Will you take the side of the president of IRAN on WWII because the red cross is not a judicial entity? Guess who first raised the issues of German activities?

I guess nothing is provable unless John Roberts is not there to confirm.




top topics



 
22
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join