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.

 

Bringing the 'Bush Six' to justice

page: 2
14
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 09:19 AM
link   
I envision and see them all being arrested, and the psuedo laws and bills passed in the last century regarding Federal Reserve and many many abuses of humanity, foreign and abroad being declared crimes against humanity and citizens panels scouring all the documents of the International Bankers, Royal Family, Leaders, you name it for their signatures which would be admissions of guilt like in the Nurmember Trials and all the Nazi documents that they tried to shred.

I want them ALL brought to justice, and I want the path found to the Hidden Hand group behind them, every single one of them who does not turn them selves over to the people, equality, disclosure, redistribution, abolishing banks, real estate, slavery, all of it, who does not seek amnesty and spend their lives in humble pie serving people, brought to justice. I see it. I affirm.

As for the holy war, fundamentalists are a small minority of people. Though Obama is doing what he wants and the mural on the bank showing the blank protest signs, or rather, that THE PEOPLE HAVE NO VOICE, seems to be true, nonetheless people voted for him to end the war! So please, whatukno, dont spread propaganda and lies, about what people want, because that is so far removed from the average person.

By the way true disclosure and bring all the info from the Vatican. We need to get rid of any fanatical groups that would hold up ancient, barbaric scriptures laden with murder and abuses of humanity, and actually try to carry them out. All these scriptures should be considered dangerous in the hands of children, and the mentally unstable. That being said, there is light in them too, but you have to see with Love and Gentleness, and your eye must be filled with Light only, to see that.
edit on 22-1-2011 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 09:39 AM
link   
Ultimately under a "New World Order" many if not most of the existing International Treaties will fall by the way side as new systems are devloped and implemented.

The Governments which one might just as easily say the "Media" is in my humble opinion simply testing the waters here in stories like this touting prosecution and the need for it, to see if people in general, common people, are going to take a forceful stand on the issue.

When it comes to our rights by treaty as common stock, it's important to understand it was the people forcing them on the Powers that Be through primarily the Magna Carter and the concepts that further developed out of that.

Habeus Corpus the most fundamental principle in the Magna Carter which sought to make justice something that was not the arbitrary capricious will of a monarch or all powerful authority, but something that the people would play a hand in formulating through the Rule of Law with protections build in for the people to ensure a fair and ballanced system where the State has to present evidence to an independent non-government body has more or less now been undone and defeated.

Untold numbers of people now languish in prisons and secret prisons, stripped of these basic protections and are detained and tortured without charge or evidence being presented in courts of law, where juries of peers render a verdict on quilt or innocense.

So ultimately no, the Governments of any nation are not going to seek to redress this, because this new developing status quo serves the governments, Who it does not serve is the people.

So in my humble opinion these 'news stories' are very much akin to a rectal thermometer where we are reminded with some degree of discomfort and pain that not all is well with the over all body, while measuring the bodies reaction to this predicament.

The Magna Carter was not a gift from King John to the world, it was won in the blood of those who refused to keep living in an arbitrary system where the State had every right and recourse and the people next to none.

It took powerful and charismatic figures like William Marshall (William the Marshall) combining with concerned responsible people of all walks of life and social/economic positions to force under penalty of death a change in the system, by first defeating King John and then delivering that ultimatum, your life for our additional freedoms and liberties and reasonable gaurantees and a system that gaurantees them.

Right now they are looking (the Powers that Be) to see if such a charismatic figure exists, one that the people will rally around, who will use the people's numbers to thwart the new status quo.

This is not likely to happen, which is why these stories play a dual role of teaching people to sadly accept the existence of a new status quo by speaking of it, in the less than flattering terms that it truly warrants and deserves.

Divided by left/right issues, impoverished by a manipulated economy, and engaged in a slow dance where rights and liberties are being slowly stripped away most people right now are focused on 'survival' and while they welcome the notion of change, the fail to challenge themselves in any significant way that would bring it about.

To the Powers that Be:

The advancements that the people gained through the Magna Carter and subsequent developments were born during a time of tyranny and poverty so great, the people awoke to the fact that the pursuit of near day to day survival no longer had any chance of ensuring their day to day survival.

They were not a recently fat and happy mass coming to terms with recent losses in reoccuring up and down cycles where people experience some good years, and then some bad years, followed by more good years, followed by more bad years and so on and so forth.

They were a people who had hit rock bottom and come to realize that they would never be elevated beyond it if they did not empower themselves.

Time is not really on the Tyrant's side so enjoy the ill gotten gains while you can!



edit on 22/1/11 by ProtoplasmicTraveler because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 10:38 AM
link   
I want to see Obama arrested for allowing Gitmo to be opened, protecting Bush and his cronies now!!



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 11:59 AM
link   
I am curious to find if ALL leaders of ALL nations will be tried for torture.

If you have additional information (ie list of the other leaders to be tried for torture), I will be more than happy to read it. Otherwise, this smells only of liberal witch hunt.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 12:01 PM
link   
Remember last weeks thead. Switzerland wants to arrest Bush

These are the six in the OP thread.

They are: 1Alberto Gonzales, a former White House counsel and attorney general; 2David Addington, former vice-president3 Dick Cheney's chief of staff; 4Douglas Feith, who was under-secretary of defence; William Haynes, formerly the Pentagon's general counsel; and 5John Yoo and 6Jay Bybee, who were both senior justice department legal advisers.
edit on 22-1-2011 by TribeOfManyColours because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 01:05 PM
link   
Those pointing fingers and talking about Obama have a point, but only up to a degree.

We are talking about a complaint filed against specific persons. Does a complaint against someone accused of a crime must include the names of everyone we might think is guilty of the same crime as well? No. You deal with things on a case-by-case basis.

This particular complaint, as far as I understand it, is related to persons that developed or helped implement the policies of “extraordinary rendition.” Was Obama the chief executive when that happen? No.

I personally believe Obama might be liable for, namely, continuing some practices at Guantanamo and for using and expanding the drone operations without a clear and well-founded legal basis.

Obama not being named in this complaint does not preclude him from being named in the future. So stop hiding behind partisan nonsense and accusations to justify the actions of these Bush administration officials, and to distract from the current case and complaint at hand here, which actually has a lot of merit.


edit on 22-1-2011 by aptness because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by DonnaLynn
 




I am curious to find if ALL leaders of ALL nations will be tried for torture.


That is a good point as there have been other nations partaking in the practices of torture. I am not aware if their legislative bodies have approved of actions that go against the 1949 Geneva Convention and 1984 United Nations Convention Against Torture or have just failed to respond to these practices undertaken. The program of extraordinary rendition is US sanctioned, yet goes against international law. If there are other nations with similar laws then there is a good case to take it to the International Crime Court to resolve these matters. I would like to hear about them as well.

edit on 22-1-2011 by kwakakev because: spelling 'them'



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by DonnaLynn
I am curious to find if ALL leaders of ALL nations will be tried for torture.

If you have additional information (ie list of the other leaders to be tried for torture), I will be more than happy to read it. Otherwise, this smells only of liberal witch hunt.


It is not a liberal witch hunt...the bush aministration worked outside the remit of international law. There is a responsibilty to united nations and the geneva convention. There have in the past been other leaders tried under international law it is nothing new...

kx



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by purplemer

Originally posted by DonnaLynn
I am curious to find if ALL leaders of ALL nations will be tried for torture.

If you have additional information (ie list of the other leaders to be tried for torture), I will be more than happy to read it. Otherwise, this smells only of liberal witch hunt.


It is not a liberal witch hunt...the bush aministration worked outside the remit of international law. There is a responsibilty to united nations and the geneva convention. There have in the past been other leaders tried under international law it is nothing new...

kx


It is rare to see an international leader charged except in cases where the political system of governance that they were empowered through was first smashed through invasion or revolution.

Whether it's Germany and Japan in World War II, the Serbian leadership, Saddam Hussein, or Charles Taylor it first requires usually dismanteling their entire system of governance and or state.

In other words when it serves 'victors' in a violent process of regime change.

In this case Obama has inherited this systems of laws, and is domestically ensuring no prosecutions take place, or any changes to the law for that matter.

With military bases in 153 nations around the world, a Space Based Defense System and a Nuclear Umbrella and the greatest force projection of any nation on earth, as well as the de facto leader of the Western Coalition Governments that often band together in collective police actions, the likelihood of any American Official being prosecuted while the United States itself enjoys this preminent position is slim to none.

Even domestically whether it's Richard Nixon or Scooter Libby, top administration officials charged with crimes in America are typically pardoned by the President.

Since there has been no change in policy or a repeal of Bush era laws, trying to paint this issue as a liberal or conservative thing is simply a divisive distratction from the real issue at hand.


edit on 22/1/11 by ProtoplasmicTraveler because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 

thank you for your very informative reply. A star is all i can give... I guess in some cases the sword may be mightier than the pen...

kx



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 

thank you for your very informative reply. A star is all i can give... I guess in some cases the sword may be mightier than the pen...

kx


It might seem that way at a glance but ultimately all systems of governance are based on ideals and ideas born through words and pens.

So instead of now listening to a group of writers who enjoy the favor of a group of bureaucrats, who enjoy the favor of a group of politicians, who enjoy the favor of a group of industrialists and bankers that hate Jews with a passion, through a violent process of supplanting them, you may now listen to a group of writers who enjoy the favor of a group of bureaucrats who enjoy the favor of a group of politicians, who enjoy the favor of a group of industrialists and bankers that love Jews with a passion.

The first group needed writers and orators to swing people and then institutions to it’s ideals, the second group needed writers and orators to swing people and then institutions to it’s ideals and promoting the notion that the first group is just not acceptable to the second group, ergo the only solution is to destroy the power of the first entrenched group, to supplant it with the power of the entrenching second group.

Groups who will always through the pen formulate, promote and codify its ideas and ideals through the pen in stories, history and laws as a societal construct.

History will display it simply becomes about which group is then mightier in inspiring its cadres and legions and supporters through words, written by writers, spoken by orators.

History will show that ultimately the only way someone might be able to defend their ideas and notions in which they live by is through an armed violent process against those who would prefer to supplant them with their own written group think they would like to codify in its stead.

So whether you are being extolled to praise and worship Saddam Hussein and the Baath Party and the Revolutionary Guards as champions of justice and the truth and a ideal way of life, or to revile those and praise George Bush, and George Washington, and Halliburton as the givers of liberty, justice and an electrical grid that doesn’t brown out 4 times a day, all becomes about the pen, writers to promote it as a virtue, writers to codify it into law, writers to create the bureaucratic forms that will ensure and demand your participation in the new system.

The pen will always remain mightier than the sword because ideas and ideals which they broadcast will always be more powerful than weapons.

Weapons are simply your best physical as opposed to intellectual defense against imposition, or your best avenue for physical imposition on those not predisposed to share such ideals.

Ideals that start with a thought and then are written down with a pen.

Which came first, the gun, or the idea that gave birth to them?



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 04:13 PM
link   
good point... maybe it works both ways round then... sometimes words can be wepons and wepons can be used to comminicate.. like the chicken and the egg..

kx



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 


Interesting development. I remember there were charges made at an international court too - what happened there? Anybody know?

S&F



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 




With military bases in 153 nations around the world, a Space Based Defense System and a Nuclear Umbrella and the greatest force projection of any nation on earth, as well as the de facto leader of the Western Coalition Governments that often band together in collective police actions, the likelihood of any American Official being prosecuted while the United States itself enjoys this preminent position is slim to none.


I would be surprised if America decides to declare war over a court case. The MAD policy will ensure we all die if that is the case. I acknowledge that gaining the support to innate proceedings is difficult against a 1st world nation, generally they have been better behaved in the past. On this issue the Western Coalition is divided with a large amount of public disgust at the policy of extraordinary rendition. It is expected that the delaying and pressure tactics used by some US political forces will be continued to be employed to prevent and hamper any investigations.



Even domestically whether it's Richard Nixon or Scooter Libby, top administration officials charged with crimes in America are typically pardoned by the President.


The International Criminal Court only interviens on the most serious of crimes. www.icc-cpi.int...



The International Criminal Court (ICC) is an independent, permanent court that tries persons accused of the most serious crimes of international concern, namely genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. The ICC is based on a treaty, joined by 114 countries. The ICC is a court of last resort. It will not act if a case is investigated or prosecuted by a national judicial system unless the national proceedings are not genuine, for example if formal proceedings were undertaken solely to shield a person from criminal responsibility. In addition, the ICC only tries those accused of the gravest crimes. In all of its activities, the ICC observes the highest standards of fairness and due process. The jurisdiction and functioning of the ICC are governed by the Rome Statute.


Extraordinary rendition has opened a black hole in the legal system. People are tortured, killed, left stateless and in a legal limbo without trial. This has been legislated by a nation while disregarding international law. This nation has been unable to act and resolve the many legal issues created. It is up to the international community to help reinstate the system of law and justice to an acceptable standard.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 06:11 PM
link   
reply to post by kwakakev
 


Part of what is driving the continued controversy on 'rendition' is that the foreign nationals who have been abducted and kidnapped and tortured in this process, had some basic protections through their own governments that failed to adequately ensure them.

As you pointed out, first world powers aren't likely to go to war over individual court cases.

Yet much to the chagrin of a number of nations who have had their nationals kidnapped in U.S. led or sponsored rendition incidents, because their nation of citizenship failed to, or refused to, or otherwise did not attempt to use dipomatic and or military means to free them, they themselves as nations have become subject to lawsuits pursuant to their individual charters and constitutions with their citizens.

So some of them are having to pay big settlements now for failing to ensure their citizens recieved due processes and protections that are supposed to be afforded to them and gauranteed by their nation of origin.

In many cases their nation of origin is a coalition partner with the U.S. in Afghanistan or Iraq and or the broader War on Terror so clearly diplomatic channels were/are open. It's just a abject default of de jure principles (concerning law) in favor of de facto principles (concerning fact and practice).

So some of these nations have a lot of egg on their face with their citizens not only because of the lack of protection from U.S. led and sponsored rendition, but the ultimate cost to those nation's treasuries when they are tasked to compensate those who have undergone rendition and the state abdicated its responsibility to see that they were treated accorded to all conventions and treaties between sovereign parties.

So in essence it's all an exercise in lip service to assuage and console people, while of course there is no enforcement mechanism that is going to see a rendition team descend on Crawford Texas to apprehend and transport George Bush by force to some foreign country where he must then be held to account for the violations of International Law and Conventions and Treaties.

In short it would have been much simpler for the other nations to protest hard and vigorously at the time of rendition as opposed to waiting for years when their citizen(s) are finally released and returned to their nation of origin.

While judiaciaries sometimes like to feign a degree of unenforcable independence from their host governments the truth is that America's gun boat diplomacy makes it hard for even a trusted and valued partner to disagree or even agree to disagree.

It should be noted that the pretext for these gross violations of human rights, international treaties and conventions is a pervasive atmosphere of fear promoted by the government(s) involved in the War on Terror were in essence they are conspiring to persuade people to accept de facto rule and actions as opposed to dejure rule by the traditional rule of law.

Ironic as always that giving into one's fears and abandoning principles of fair governance when they are needed the most, in a time of crisis, leads yet again to tyranny in the land.

That of course remains as much on the citizens at large who succumb to those entreaties as it does the governments who conspire to manipulate them to that end.

Thanks.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 06:50 PM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 


Ok... but are other leaders of other nations also being tried for torture? You didn't answer the question.

Further more, will Obama also be tried?



posted on Jan, 23 2011 @ 01:08 AM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


It is good to hear that some of the nations involved in this practice have been held accountable. I expect it may not have been easy for them to refuse an offer by the US during times of war, but that is besides the point.

One thing I have found very concerning was an introduction for a new bill by Senator John MaCain S.3081 - Enemy Belligerent, Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010. www.opencongress.org... . Passage of this bill would have expanded the term enemy combatant and expanded the use of rendition. Thankfully there has been a lot of opposition to this bill since it was first proposed.


reply to post by DonnaLynn
 




are other leaders of other nations also being tried for torture?




The international criminal court has received complaints about alleged crimes in at least 139 countries but, as of March 2010, the Prosecutor has opened investigations into just five situations: Uganda, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Central African Republic, Darfur and Kenya.


en.wikipedia.org...



will Obama also be tried?


No, he was not involved in the implementation of rendition. As for any future crimes and charges he has his responsibilities just like everyone else.
edit on 23-1-2011 by kwakakev because: added extra space



posted on Jan, 23 2011 @ 09:42 AM
link   
reply to post by aptness
 

I don't disagree with trying Bush and his ilk for their crimes against humanity. But why stop there? Are there not others also responsible? Where was Congress during all of this? The Supreme Court has essentially nullified the Constitution and we will watch Obama continue Nazi style laws with the upcoming extension of the so-called Patriot Act. And folks, that is only in America! Are there not other countries who's governments are also complicit? Heads of multi-national corporations? Lobbyists? We have been betrayed by those who would lead us and yet many here want to criticize me for pointing out that the guilt extends well beyond Bush and his sick cronies!? Whatever!




posted on Jan, 23 2011 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by DonnaLynn
 


yes people from other countries have been tried....
US government has breach the Geneva Convention and Universal Declaration of human rights in Guantanamo bay.
Those that did should be held to account..
I somehow doubt that obama will be tried although he also is now implicit in the workings of Guantanamo bay
and the illegal torture of human beings...

kx
edit on 23-1-2011 by purplemer because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2011 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by kozmo
I don't disagree with trying Bush and his ilk for their crimes against humanity. But why stop there?
Nothing in my post suggests that it “should stop there.” On the contrary, my post makes clear that nothing precludes, for example, Obama for being prosecuted in the future, and I even specified what I think Obama is liable for. Are you sure you read my post?


Are there not others also responsible? Where was Congress during all of this? The Supreme Court has essentially nullified the Constitution and we will watch Obama continue Nazi style laws with the upcoming extension of the so-called Patriot Act. And folks, that is only in America! Are there not other countries who's governments are also complicit? Heads of multi-national corporations? Lobbyists?
So when everything in the world is finally perfect, every criminal is in jail, then we can prosecute Bush and Company. Got it!


We have been betrayed by those who would lead us and yet many here want to criticize me for pointing out that the guilt extends well beyond Bush and his sick cronies!? Whatever!
You can get off your cross now.




top topics



 
14
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join