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.

 

Turley: Obama 'Accessory' To War Crimes if No Prosecution!

page: 3
22
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Obama will not act. He won't! Why would he? He didn't run for the office because of altruism or because he wanted to do the right things for the country, he ran because he wanted the power. Just look at how he treated that reporter in the basement when the reporter had the "audacity" to push for an answer to his question. He glared at him as if to say.. "How dare you question ME." If he wasn't conceited when he was elected, his conceit has certainly been empowered by all of his worshipers since. Any degradation to the power of the office of president will degrade HIS OWN power. Mark my words.. he won't act on this!



ky

posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 09:44 AM
link   
You all keep fishing. If war crimes were committed then Bush and Cheney would have been brought up months ago. They have nothing, therefore there will be nothing. Sorry to disappoint the Bush haters out there. Everything, and I mean everything Bush did is protected under the Constitution. There will never ever ever never ever be a prosicution for war crimes.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by RRconservative
Bush Derangement Syndrome at its finest.

Since when is liberating 50 million people a war crime? Since when is keeping America safe from terrorists a war crime?


If Lord Obama wants to discontinue the actions that kept us safe for 7+ years...he has that option...he will also have to answer for his decisions...and his decisions alone. Bush did his job to protect Americans from enemies, foreign and domestic, as stated in the oath of office, and in the Constitution....Will Obama?


I agree with you. Let me put it this way.

Who here agrees with the electric chair for death? I do.

I could also care less on how they go about doing the death penalty. If you are a criminal and have the charges of something that intense, then I could care less for a person.

Same goes internationally. If you are a terrorist or have some sort of connections with a group and wouldn't speak up you have no sympathy from me.

G.W.B has messed this country up in many ways on the home front, but the way he has handled the war is one thing I like.

Now, presidents need to keep THEIR citizens safe. No I am not saying bomb every foreigner as in the end that would not make us to safe...but helping our current and future safety is what presidents should do (and many other things). I also do not suggest throwing away liberties for safety because safety can be easily obtained with much liberty.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:00 AM
link   
So many people rushing to call Prof. Jonathan Turley an idiot, and for what? For speaking his mind and wanting the law of the land to be upheld?

Yes, incredibly stupid of him! Let's hope this 'stupidity' isn't contagious. We wouldn't want people defending and fighting for the laws of the land, now would we?

Go back to sleep America.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


I think it will be interesting to see how long the obamaphiles give their 'messiah' to do something about Bush, and then either turn on obama (preferred action) or start making excuses for him (likely action) when obama fails to do anything.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:31 AM
link   
Clinton gets a hummer and is put on trial.

Nixon resigns in the face of impeachment and trials for Watergate.

And Bush...well...someone explain to me why we aren't having a trial again?



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by ky
You all keep fishing. If war crimes were committed then Bush and Cheney would have been brought up months ago. They have nothing, therefore there will be nothing. Sorry to disappoint the Bush haters out there. Everything, and I mean everything Bush did is protected under the Constitution. There will never ever ever never ever be a prosicution for war crimes.


It's all as plain as day. Have you not been paying attention or is it your job to stand on the corner and shout "nothing to see here?"



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 11:39 AM
link   
This would kinda fit the trend of things,those responsible for the crimes will get away laughing but he who tries to do something about it well take the blame and punishment.
It says everything you need to know about the state of the law in the apparent lawfull countries of the world.
Nixon was duely punished for his crimes and they were of a much lesser extent than what happened here so i expect with my whole heart for the criminals to be punished.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 11:53 AM
link   
Well in Turleys way of thinking then he is an accessory to War crimes as well along with every person in this nation and the UK along with all of the other countries that were involved in the Iraq invasion. I did not see him storming up to the White House gates screaming for the prosecution of the Bush administration. Not to mention we all let them get away with it.His argument is a mute point and seems like more of a early attack on Obama at the starting gate. However if the Obama administration does not investigate the Bush administration he would be in violation of his duties as Commander and Chief in my opinion.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptGizmo
I did not see him storming up to the White House gates screaming for the prosecution of the Bush administration.


I think you didn't pay much attention then, because Prof. Turley has been for a while now speaking out against the Bush Adminstration's crimes.



Not to mention we all let them get away with it.


What else can he do than to point and speak out against these things based on the laws? He has no authority to do anything personally other than to sue the Government.

And for the record, he has. Multiple times.


Some of Turley’s most notable non-academic work is his representation of the Area 51 workers at a secret air base in Nevada; the nuclear couriers at Oak Ridge, Tennessee; the Rocky Flats grand jury in Colorado; Dr. Eric Foretich, the husband in the famous Elizabeth Morgan custody controversy. He challenged Black Bag Operations authorized under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) in espionage cases against former CIA officer Harold Nicholson; and four former United States Attorneys General during the Clinton impeachment litigation. He has also represented defendants in terrorism cases including Dr. Ali Al-Timimi (the alleged head of the Virginia Jihad/Paintball conspiracy) and Dr. Sami Al-Arian (alleged to be a Hamas leader). He also represented Larry Hanauer, a House Intelligence Committee staff member falsely accused of leaking classified information to the New York Times and David Faulk, a whistleblower who revealed abuses at NSA's Fort Gordon surveillance programs. He is also lead counsel in the litigation over the mass arrests at the World Bank/IMF protests in Washington. He testified on the Clinton impeachment as one of the constitutional experts on the standards and merits of the case. The conceptual thread running through many of the cases taken on by Turley is that they involve claims of Executive Privilege and national security exceptions to fundamental constitutional rights.


You can read more about him on his wikipedia page.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 12:16 PM
link   
Murdering of Innocent Iraq/Afgani civilians by the Insurgent Fighters is WAR CRIMES than too

Capturing and Beheading Americans which people seem to over look is against the Geneva Convention thus a War Crime

If you wanna arrest people for War Crimes

You would honestly have to arrest everyone that voted for the war Republican and Democrat that includes Kerry,Bush,Clinton, Pelosi etc etc etc and Obama for War Crimes, he is the current President still in two wars he said he would end.

You would have to arrest officials and PM from other nations involved in the war thus far

Arrest all foreign and insuregent fighters who fought against the forces and beheaded people.

Osama Bin Laden for Conspiracey of War Crimes and War Crimes against Iraq,Afganistan, United States and Europe

GET OVER IT HONESTLY! No one should be arrested for this rubbish its war
people die in war, WAR has happend since the beginning of Human time study it.


ky

posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 12:28 PM
link   

It's all as plain as day. Have you not been paying attention or is it your job to stand on the corner and shout "nothing to see here?"


Like I said, if it were that "plain as day" then there already would have been a conviction. All any of us really know is what the liberal media wants to tell us. After 7+ years of liberal media Bush hating its easy for sheeple to start believing every edited misquote fed to them. And with the aggressive stance Bush took to the terrorists he was not standing on the corner saying, "nothing to see here" he was saying "WATCH THIS AND LEARN". America will not be jacked with. We are not about to bow down. Blank with us and prepare to get Blanked with. That is what Bush was shouting. And guess what, we haven't been attacked since 911. You do remember 911, right?

[edit on 28-1-2009 by ky]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 12:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Res Ipsa
 


DimensionalDetective: Thanks for a very poignant post

Res Ipsa - I concur


Empathise, just for a moment…

Obama was bequeathed a legacy that would challenge the very best.

On January 20, he was given his well-earned presidency, along with the reality that he was accepting the mantle of leadership of a country that had been spiraling out of control for much of the previous eight years.

Bereft of any sensical economic, military, and environmental leadership, the Bush presidency left Obama a legacy of tattered global relations, made more acute by the unraveling of a global economy, which still has a long way to fall. Overshadowing all of this is of course the question of whether we can rein in escalating global warming, whilst at the same time reconstructing a viable economy.

Barack Hussein Obama has come to the podium at a time where people are increasingly looking for a ‘saviour’ – someone to lead them out of the enveloping darkness. Whether he is the “messiah” or not doesn’t matter. What matters is that we have a leader that can unite a country – and a world - that has become increasingly divided over the last eight years.

The people of the ‘Great Republic’ don’t need anymore divisiveness. And we can all be assured that no one is more aware of this than Obama.

That is why he won’t push the question of presidential transgressions more than he is at the moment. To do so would be counterproductive.

While Obama is genuine in his desire to demonstrate that the rule of law applies equally to all, he is acutely aware of the much bigger issues confronting not only America, but the entire planet.

The task in front of our new President is unprecedented and more formidable than most could comprehend. A show-trial – no matter how just and satiating it may be for many – is not what this country needs at the moment.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by KonigKaos
GET OVER IT HONESTLY! No one should be arrested for this rubbish its war
people die in war, WAR has happend since the beginning of Human time study it.


Yes people die in war, but war has rules too didn't you know? And there are treaties the United States has signed that prohibits certain actions and mistreatment of prisoners.

No one forced the United States to sign those treaties, or to pass those laws, they did because it's internationally understood that certain things are not to be done, even in war.


After Japan surrendered, the United States organized and participated in the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, generally called the Tokyo War Crimes Trials. Leading members of Japan's military and government elite were charged, among their many other crimes, with torturing Allied military personnel and civilians. The principal proof upon which their torture convictions were based was conduct that we would now call waterboarding.

As a result of such accounts, a number of Japanese prison-camp officers and guards were convicted of torture that clearly violated the laws of war. They were not the only defendants convicted in such cases. As far back as the U.S. occupation of the Philippines after the 1898 Spanish-American War, U.S. soldiers were court-martialed for using the "water cure" to question Filipino guerrillas. - source



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I agree, too. What can I say? I don't know if Obama is going to see it that way, though. It's a little strange thinking about Obama being an accessory when we've just been through 8 years of a criminal administration and nothing was done about it...

I love Jonathan Turley.


This goes to all.

Can you point to each and every Law that President Bush and his administration broke? I would like the Law's as they appear on the books and all evidences that you have regarding the allegation of Law Breaking by the Bush Administration. I do not want hearsay or circumstantial evidence. No links to "This is what this alphabet news agency said" or "This was on this blog". I want personal accounts of personal research that prove any law was actually broken. International Laws must have been ratified and Allowed by the Constitution of the United States to be considered.

Thank You.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by arcnaver
This goes to all.

Can you point to each and every Law that President Bush and his administration broke? I would like the Law's as they appear on the books and all evidences that you have regarding the allegation of Law Breaking by the Bush Administration. I do not want hearsay or circumstantial evidence. No links to "This is what this alphabet news agency said" or "This was on this blog".


The first one that comes to mind is the War Crimes Act of 1996 (original text)


To amend title 18, United States Code, to carry out the international obligations of the United States under the Geneva Conventions to provide criminal penalties for certain war crimes. ...

Sec. 2401. War crimes

`(a) OFFENSE- Whoever, whether inside or outside the United States, commits a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions, in any of the circumstances described in subsection (b), shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both, and if death results to the victim, shall also be subject to the penalty of death.




International Laws must have been ratified and Allowed by the Constitution of the United States to be considered.


The Geneva Conventions were signed by the US in 1949 and ratified in 1955, as it's displayed here.

The United States also signed the United Nations Convention Against Torture (original text) in 1988 and ratified it in 1994, as it's displayed here.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 02:02 PM
link   
What about Henry Kissinger? You might as well start with all the presidents who broke international law as well if you want to get Bush.

He's still alive right?

[edit on 28/1/09 by MacDonagh]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


This "Constitutional Law" Prof ought to look into a new career.

There is nothing in the Constitution that sets guidelines for interrogation of Prisoners of War. Essentially, the guy is going off his own fanatical political beliefs, and nothing actually set as "law".

Seeing as the President as Commander and Chief over the US Armed Forces, HE and HE alone sets the guidelines for interrogation of POW's. No one else. ESPECIALLY if it is NOT on AMERICAN SOIL. TO NON AMERICANS. DURING WAR.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by converge
 


The Geneva Convention does NOT apply to any of the conflicts we a currently involved in. There is not a standing army that we have been in contact with that bothers to adhere to those tenents and hence we cannot be considered to be responsible for adhereing to those rules. They wear no uniforms, they represent no country, they do not use conventional weapons, they specificaly target civilians. When in a guerilla war, the laws of warfare cannot be used to persecute those that understand the difference and fight to protect their own using unconventional tactics!

Zindo

[edit on 1/28/2009 by ZindoDoone]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Seeing as the President as Commander and Chief over the US Armed Forces, HE and HE alone sets the guidelines for interrogation of POW's. No one else. ESPECIALLY if it is NOT on AMERICAN SOIL. TO NON AMERICANS. DURING WAR.


That's not what the War Crimes Act of 1996 says...


(a) OFFENSE- Whoever, whether inside or outside the United States, commits a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions, in any of the circumstances described in subsection (b), shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both, and if death results to the victim, shall also be subject to the penalty of death.

(b) CIRCUMSTANCES- The circumstances referred to in subsection (a) are that the person committing such breach or the victim of such breach is a member of the armed forces of the United States or a national of the United States (as defined in section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act).



new topics




 
22
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join