The U.S. Is Required To Bring George W Bush & Donald Rumsfeld Before A Court! U.N. War Crimes, page 9
Pages: <<  6    7    8    9    10    11  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 34 times


reply posted on 28-1-2009 @ 11:05 AM by lunarminer
reply to post by BlueRaja


You said, "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."

Thank you for your acknowledgement. I notice that the hate Bush crowd has simply gone on ranting about non-existant treaties, international laws that they don't understand, and false accusations, and inuendo. They have completely ignored our points, mine and yours, they can't refute these points and so they simply ignore them.


reply posted on 28-1-2009 @ 11:08 AM by lunarminer
reply to post by skeptic_al


For the same reasons that they attacked our embassies in Africa and attacked the USS Cole.

They are fanatics and they consider the US to be the "Great Satan".

Trying to figure out the motivations of terrorists is kind of like trying to assess the sanity of someone who is insane.


reply posted on 28-1-2009 @ 01:00 PM by BlueRaja
Originally posted by skeptic_al
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







Because we're the greatest threat to the advancement of their agendas, along with some key allies.



reply posted on 28-1-2009 @ 04:14 PM by rapinbatsisaltherage
reply to post by sos37


Obligatory? Don't make me laugh!


You make me laugh a lot sos. I was saying it is most likely not obligatory. I question your motives since you obviously don't realize what I was saying or took me out of context.

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


I don't ignore Congress; I think they are just as responsible for certain acts, when it comes to others though the facts lead back to the president and his cronies, not congress. We still live in a world where facts and evidence are important right?

Oh wait, why I am asking this of the guy who thought a pixilated face on the internet is a reliable source, long as it tells me what I want to hear. How’s that for bad motives?



[edit on 28-1-2009 by rapinbatsisaltherage]


reply posted on 28-1-2009 @ 04:39 PM by Logarock
Originally posted by midnightbrigade
reply to post by pieman


Wow....actually there were many marches against the reports of torture and the perception of illegal jailing. Lots of complaints. That didn't stop it. Don't call everyone spineless. People tried.

Didn't get anything done, that's true, but people tried.

The only thing else that could be done is a violent overthrow of the government. Is that what you're advocating?



I don't condone torture. Water boarding human time bombs that do not recognize international borders and apparently answer to no government, that wantonly target innocent civilians abroad, and may have information about up coming events, isn't torture.

One of the aims of the Bush administration was to communicate a level of willingness that the terrorist understand. We didn't cut any heads off or execute captured military personnel if that what you could call them.

I mean hell man, a guy that would park a car bomb in a crowded market place killing women and children? Go Hell Raiser on his ass. These guys are cold blooded killers that recognize no law but their own.


reply posted on 28-1-2009 @ 05:06 PM by Keyhole
Originally posted by centurion1211
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.



I'm with you there, they shouldn't do the crime if they weren't ready to do the time.


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.



We signed on the dotted line at the Geneva Convention, that means that the laws laid out in the Geneva Convention became the laws of the USA!

Whatever country signed on that dotted line should adhere to the laws that were laid out in the document.

A lot of criminals aren't tried or convicted for their crimes, that doesn't make it right!

Whenever the law has been broken and the courts have enough evidence, ALL who broke the laws that they agreed to follow should be prosecuted!

If your not guilty, there shouldn't be anything to worry about! (unless your in Gitmo)


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.



If a crime was committed, it's only over if the statute of limitations has run out.


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]


I always look at the present and the future, but it is always the past that got you to where you are today, so it's always good to look at the past.

[edit on 1/28/2009 by Keyhole]


reply posted on 28-1-2009 @ 05:28 PM by skeptic_al
Originally posted by lunarminer
reply to post by skeptic_al


For the same reasons that they attacked our embassies in Africa and attacked the USS Cole.

They are fanatics and they consider the US to be the "Great Satan".

Trying to figure out the motivations of terrorists is kind of like trying to assess the sanity of someone who is insane.


I do believe, you belive all the bull-plop GWB has dishing out over
the years.

If you look at the history of Yousef, the truth will set you free.
His Resons could not be more explicit. But Americans just took
him as madman because all he wanted to do was blow blow stuff
up. And I reckon, half of America love to blow stuff up.



reply posted on 28-1-2009 @ 09:42 PM by Lightworth
reply to post by Keyhole


You missed the "new system" part. Seriously, REALLY new. I'm looking at it within the context of revealing and learning presently unrevealed science (such as that we're positively not alone in the universe) that will take people's minds off the pathological need to crap on criminals.


reply posted on 28-1-2009 @ 09:50 PM by lunarminer
reply to post by skeptic_al


The Embassy bombings, the USS Cole, and the first WTC attack, all happened under Bill Clinton.

So what was that you were saying about George Bush?

Nice try, no cigar, move along now.


reply posted on 28-1-2009 @ 10:00 PM by Absum!
Originally posted by Logarock
Originally posted by midnightbrigade
reply to post by pieman


I don't condone torture. Water boarding human time bombs that do not recognize international borders and apparently answer to no government, that wantonly target innocent civilians abroad, and may have information about up coming events, isn't torture.

One of the aims of the Bush administration was to communicate a level of willingness that the terrorist understand. We didn't cut any heads off or execute captured military personnel if that what you could call them.


Maybe those that want to ignore these inhumane and illegal actions can answer this.

What is the punishment for Al-Qaida solders that water board US soldiers?

The reason we don't torture is because we don't want our boys tortured.


reply posted on 28-1-2009 @ 10:03 PM by zappafan1
reply to post by questioningall


If a treaty does not conform to America's Constitution, then it null and void, and there is no mandate that we follow it. That goes for ALL treaties signed by America.


reply posted on 28-1-2009 @ 10:06 PM by zappafan1
reply to post by Keyhole


The Geneva convention also describes those who do not fall under it's protections/mandates. That includes terrorists and enemy combatants.



reply posted on 28-1-2009 @ 11:19 PM by The Bald Champion
Originally posted by lunar-miner
reply to post by Blue-Raja


You said, "This is a good point. We know 3 Al Qaeda members were water-boarded, and we know there have been examples of mistreatment(i.e. Abu Ghraib), where the perpetrators have been discharged and convicted."

Thank you for your acknowledgment. I notice that the hate Bush crowd has simply gone on ranting about non-existant treaties, international laws that they don't understand, and false accusations, and innuendo. They have completely ignored our points, mine and yours, they can't refute these points and so they simply ignore them.



You sound like an employee

What non existent treaties?
What do you understand of international law?


Charter of the United Nations
Signed June 26, 1945; came into force October 24, 1945

Article 2 paragraph 3
All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.

Article 2 paragraph 4
All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

Article 51
Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defense shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

Article 92
The International Court of Justice shall be the principal judicial organ of the United Nations. It shall function in accordance with the annexed Statute, which is based upon the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice and forms and integral part of the present Charter.

Article 93 paragraph 1
All Members of the United Nations are ipso facto parties to the Statute of the International Court of Justice.

Article 96 paragraph 1
The General Assembly or the Security Council may request the International Court of Justice to give an advisory opinion on any legal question.[ex/]

The above pertains to the below...


United States Constitution
Adopted September 17, 1787

Article VI Clause II
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.[ex/]

Just the constitution though...


reply posted on 29-1-2009 @ 01:24 AM by skeptic_al
Originally posted by lunarminer
reply to post by skeptic_al


The Embassy bombings, the USS Cole, and the first WTC attack, all happened under Bill Clinton.

So what was that you were saying about George Bush?

Nice try, no cigar, move along now.


my point exactly, they were only interested in hurting yhe US.
It was your war, always has been, that your governments started
decades ago.
George Bush was more of a Salesman trying sell a worn out,
smelliy pair of tennis shoes as New ones. And he conned Uk,Aus into help
fight your governments fake war on terror.
But not without destroying the reputation of colin powel by being the perfect patsy.

Raygun, Clinton, Bush(s) an now Obama. Were all interfering,
manipulating other coutries policies, politics and way of life
It was your way or the highway attitude.
That burned an aweful lot of bridges.


reply posted on 29-1-2009 @ 08:04 AM by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by FlyersFan


i hate to say it, but the USA has been withholding payments owed to the UN for quite awhile..
Pages: <<  6    7    8    9    10    11  >>    ^^TOP^^