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.

 

The U.S. Is Required To Bring George W Bush & Donald Rumsfeld Before A Court! U.N. War Crimes

page: 8
34
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 12:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by questioningall
Exclusive interview on CNN - Manfred Nowak - UN's special Rep on Torture.

He says that the U.S. is required to bring Bush and Rumsfield to trial, due to the treaty that Reagan signed with the other countries of the world.
He says there is direct and absolute evidence to make a case specifically against Donald Rumsfield.


"He" is not an International Tribunal. The U.S. is Not subject to any International Tribunal; we are a sovereign nation and beholden to no other country or assemblage of them.

The is an International Climate Court being formed right now; an International Court of Justice already exists. There are other similar "judicial" bodies that have no jurisdiction over the U.S., its' Executives or citizens.

Should our soldiers stop by the Hague on their way back from the Middle East? Africa? S. Korea?

Are you willing to submit to a Somali warlord's/UN Delegate's determination that your lack of support violates "International Law?" Al-Qaeda's? China's determination that you owe "carbon credits" for your CO2 contributions?

ATS really needs to at least make sure threads are honestly labelled.
"The U.S. Is Required ... ." is false and misleading!




posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 01:12 AM
link   
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 


If you were not refering to the al-Qaeda terrorists who were waterboarded then what are you refering to? From all accounts that I have read, waterboarding was only used on al-Qaeda.

If you are refering to humiliation that those in Abu Grab were subjected to? I think that it is clear that those actions were not authorized and those who conducted them have already faced a Court Marshal. No further punishment is permissable under our Constitution. It's a matter of Double Jeopardy.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 01:16 AM
link   
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 


You said, "And yet, there are people now rationalizing the NEED for the torture. Why then, were they trying to hide it if this were such a noble search for justice?

I feel bad for anyone who went from "we would never do that" to " we only did it to really bad people."

I first read about waterboarding in 2003. If the government was trying to hide it, then they did a poor job. As for me, my opinion has not changed since I first heard about it. I also have not read anywhere, that anyone other than the 3 al-Qaeda members were waterboarded. If you have information that someone else was waterboarded then please post it.

If you are refering to something else, then by all means share that information as well.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 02:35 AM
link   
Why do I get the image of Bush viewing this thread saying, "dance monkeys, dance"?

No matter what you think of Bush it’d be nice for people to address the OP without acting like what it proposes is ludicrous. It is definitely not ludicrous. Charging them with war crimes may not be obligatory but it is doable, and appropriate. Whether they’ll actually be held responsible for their actions is a whole other issue. Just because something should happen doesn’t mean it will, and even when it does you don’t always get the results you’re hoping for.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 03:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
America pays 1/4 of the UN bills.
The UN is in New York - an American City.

You all can stop drooling. IT WILL NOT HAPPEN.




The UN has always had problems with members refusing to pay the assessment levied upon them under the United Nations Charter. But the most significant refusal in recent times has been that of the U.S. For a number of years, the U.S. Congress refused to authorize payment of the U.S. dues, in order to force UN compliance with U.S. wishes, as well as a reduction in the U.S. assessment


en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 03:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Animal

Originally posted by sos37

So you're saying that if we stopped supporting Israel by some chance that Al Qaida would leave the U.S. alone? I don't buy that for a minute! It would be one excuse after another to hate us, but what it boils down to is that we're not exclusively Muslim. While some Muslims are fine with that, the extremists aren't and they want to see us dead.


So your response is for the USA to become extremist and see to it that we make THEM all dead?


Oh, yeah, way to put words in my mouth. At no time did I ever advocate violence against Muslims, contrary to what you would like to believe. However I am not going to go soft on Muslim extremists who want to see our country destroyed. It's a simple enough concept without you twisting it to try to fit your own distorted view.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 03:55 AM
link   
who ?..............what ..............

never heard of this person before , or the treaty

why is that ? i keep my eye on the news , and i know that stat sanctioned torture has been going on for years in 10`s of countries

but never a peep from this guy before - or any trials

me thinks that its just a postuering fool attempting to get his 15 seconds of fame



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 03:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage
Why do I get the image of Bush viewing this thread saying, "dance monkeys, dance"?

No matter what you think of Bush it’d be nice for people to address the OP without acting like what it proposes is ludicrous. It is definitely not ludicrous. Charging them with war crimes may not be obligatory but it is doable, and appropriate. Whether they’ll actually be held responsible for their actions is a whole other issue. Just because something should happen doesn’t mean it will, and even when it does you don’t always get the results you’re hoping for.


Obligatory? Don't make me laugh! Who exactly is obliged to charge Bush with war crimes? The U.S.? Iraq?

I question your motives if you believe this is an appropriate course of action. You seem to want to pin the blame on one man like all the other sheep on here who cry foul, yet you ignore the fact that the hands of Congress is just as dirtied on the same grounds.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 04:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by lunarminer
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 



They are terrorists and conducted terroristic acts, so they are not eligible for
humanitarian treatment in my opinion.


You were right the 11/9 terrorists were terrorists, butt.......

Have you worked out why these terrorists, were only interested
attacking the USofA. This was before Afghanistan, Iraq
and Iran. So why would they pick on Umerica?


Some other helpful hints:
The Bali,Spain,London bombings had nothing to do 11/9 or El-Queda



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 08:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Keyhole

Originally posted by centurion1211

I believe in setting precedents and in 'slippery slopes'. You do this to one leader and how long before any and every group with a real or imagined axe to grind files charges against obama and/or any other world leader.

Think about it. I mean really think about what you'd be setting all world leaders up for in your zeal to nail Bush.



So, what your saying is that, no matter what any leader of any country does, they should never have to answer to ANYBODY for crimes they may have committed or ordered during their reign as leader?

That's ridiculous!

Never mind the "get out of jail free" card, you are saying that leaders of countries should not have to adhere to ANY laws anywhere, and would never even need a "get out of jail free" card!

All the other world leaders have nothing to worry about unless they broke a law/committed a crime, or ordered a law to be broken!

If they couldn't do their jobs as leaders without breaking laws, they should have resigned!

Despite what a lot of people say, laws weren't made to be broken, especially by our leaders who should be held to a higher standard!

[edit on 1/27/2009 by Keyhole]


No, I say let's round up ALL the world leaders that have ever done anything against any other country or peoples and let's start with them. We can start with iran's Ahmadinejad, since he was in on the embassy takeover - a violation of international law.

Since no one is calling for the rest of the world's leaders to be tried for any of their crimes, I maintain that this is simply a new manifestation of the same old tedious Bush witch hunt that we've been subjected to for years.

No different than when Hannity brings up Clinton and Whitewater for what seems like the 4000th time.
It's over.
Time to find something new and more important to occupy your mind and your time.

Ever considered turning around to see what's happening right in front of you, instead of remaining mired in the past?

[edit on 1/28/2009 by centurion1211]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 08:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by lunarminer
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 




I first read about waterboarding in 2003. If the government was trying to hide it, then they did a poor job. As for me, my opinion has not changed since I first heard about it. I also have not read anywhere, that anyone other than the 3 al-Qaeda members were waterboarded. If you have information that someone else was waterboarded then please post it.

If you are refering to something else, then by all means share that information as well.



This is a good point. We know 3 Al Qaeda members were waterboarded, and we know there have been examples of mistreatment(i.e. Abu Ghraib), where the perpetrators have been discharged and convicted. I'd love to see some proof that torture was routine, and a matter of policy at any other time/location. Everyone loves to assume that every detainee is being paraded around and humiliated, and treated harshly on a daily basis. There just isn't any evidence that this is the case, and their whole case against Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld, requires this to have been the situation. They have an unnatural desire to believe the worst allegations to be true, and then some, because in their minds, Bush is worse than Hitler and Stalin, so it must be true.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 09:47 AM
link   
reply to post by questioningall
 


What a joke, I wish these people would just go away... I thought the bush hater syndrome would go away when Obama got in office but I guess not, they got thier president and now he isnt doing what they want so their going crazy pulling at everystring they can. I reall feel sorry for these people that have no life and nothing but hatered to live for.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:17 AM
link   
Absolutely ! Without a Doubt they should be Tried....However

the result would be that we would spend God knows how much, the

Republicans would get them off someway, and we would spend TONS OF

BUCKS for nothing..........Leave a Dead Dog Lye, and go forward.......G



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by ludaChris

Originally posted by questioningall

You have to watch the video, it IS against the law in the U.S., due to the fact that Reagan signed a treaty, that makes it International law and U.S. law.



Well, not so fast, as much as I would like to see those two brought to justice for their crimes. The President doesn't have the constitutional authority to enter into ANY agreements with other nations. They do it anyways because they can get away with it. But I bet if they did try to bring them to trial under this treaty, they'd head for cover under the constitution like they love it all the sudden.

Treaties Plain and Simple

[edit on 1/27/2009 by ludaChris]


That was what I was trying to say; Treaties are a big deal and we ARE subject to them -- otherwise, no country would trust the treaty, right? We get into wars because of treaties. If a country loses credibility on a treaty, then it is a HUGE foreign relations nightmare.

But Bush was creating treaties in everything but name without congress -- and he spit on SALT and Non proliferation treaties. Most other nations are probably convinced that his admin gave A Q Kahn the nuclear secrets that Pakistan proliferates and it was out in the open we helped Iran. I say this off the top of my head, but I'm sure I could find a dozen treaties we've broken, and backdoor ones we've entered into.

That SOB was a cancer in so many ways. I would give a thousand bucks to a lawyer to bring charges against him and tell my grandchildren I was proud to do it. I don't have a thousand bucks to spare, by the way.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:36 AM
link   
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 


You said it perfectly. The one thing I do not understand, is the people that stand behind Bush no matter what. He committed war crimes, it is obvious, he lied over and over to all of us about things, and when the absolute evidence was presented, he would finally admit the truth.

Yet, people still see him as "moral", the man had NO morals, look at what he did.

We have to bring him to trial - due to the treaty, otherwise as I have stated before, all other countries can ignore any treaties we have signed with them.

What is it, that people don't get...... NO ONE is above the law! Including past presidents.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Srvyr1969
 
I can't belive that at this late date that people still think that a "President" can commit ilegal acts, and expect to get away with it!!...torture, is mild to the deaths of over 3000 inocent people in 911.We have very honerable, and decorated military types, that are willing to put their careers on the line, and testify as to things that they have knowlege about concerning 911.Maybe now that that monster(BUSH) and company, are out of office, these people will be able to bring this type of information to light for the world to see. We know what happened, we just don't want to deal with the horror, and responsibility of what this man and his elite bunch did!!!my only living prayer is that this man is brought to justice for all of his crimes!! G Leclare Canada



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:43 AM
link   
From the evidence that i have seen, George W. Bush and his administration used 911 as a rumor so we can get into Iraq. The whole thing was staged and our people bought it. Hell i even bought it, he is responsible for millions of peoples lives. Not only did we lose lots of soldiers but also all the innocent civilians in iraq were affected. We should have never been over there in the first place. Bush should be in jail and who ever helped him should be to.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage
Why do I get the image of Bush viewing this thread saying, "dance monkeys, dance"?



A little off topic but, here's that "philosophical" video to put us humans back into perspective.

What We Are - Dance Monkey, Dance



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:54 AM
link   
Just food for thought..

By this reasoning should North Korea's dictator be tried for starving his people. Surely that is torture.

Shouldn't Mugabe from Zimbabwe also be on trial for torture and murder.

Shouldn't the President of Iran be on trial for murdering gay people. (If you get caught being gay in Iran they hang you.) Surely that would be torture.

Shouldn't the leaders of Hamas be on trial for using human shields and targeting innocent people.

But the reality is that the UN has no power to actually do anything. It is a paper tiger.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by questioningall
 


You said "What is it, that people don't get...... NO ONE is above the law! Including past presidents."

Well let me explain it to you. Some of us actually know what the law says and we have pointed it out very clearly. For instance, I posted about the international courts that exist and what our obligations are.

I also posted about waterboarding and other than 3 al-Qaeda terrorists there are no others cases that I can find where it was applied.

Abu Graib, did occure but those who humiliated prisoners have already been dealt with under our own laws. So, there is no case here.

The facts are that there is no evidence of sanctioned torture. If there is no evidence then there is no case against President Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, etc.

The law is the law and it is not something that you can bend based on your own emotions and/or politics.



new topics

top topics



 
34
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join