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.

 

'War criminal!': Ron Paul backers crash Cheney-Rumsfeld reunion

page: 5
39
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 02:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Malcram
It's perfectly legal to shout war criminal,


Also legal to make a fool of yourself telling lies like the above!


monstrousus lethal crimes of Cheney and the rest of Bush's regime?


So which court of law convicted them? - or is it just something a Bush/Cheney hater made up




posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 02:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flighty
reply to post by byteshertz
 


Good points.
I also think a ticket buying attendee would have more legal rights than someone who had gatecrashed and made the comment. I think that could be construed as trespassing.
But having bought the ticket, the person had a legal right to be there and voice his opinion.
Makes sense to me anyway.


The purchase of the ticket grants the holder the right to be present at the time of the event. Unless it specifically states holder can speak blah blah blah, the assumption is the guest speakers are the ones speaking, and may open the floor up for questions / debates at their choosing.

As far as having a right to voice the opinion because they bought tickets.. Its like people who exercise their right to protest in public. The road is considered a public right of way. However, unless you get a permit, any use of that public street in a manner that inteferes with other people who are not part of the protest, is infrinding on their rights to use the area.

Just because you buy a ticket to movie does not mean you can talk back to the screen the entire time.



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 02:18 AM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


The reason for the letters was part of the legal challenges at the time. In the end the Supreme court ruled that any person who engaged in "torture" had qualified immunity.

The WMD comes from wikileaks. I find it funny, like your UN argument, that peple take his word as God, until someting comes out that does support an argument, like no WMD's in IRaq.

I am familiar with the part you posted about torture. All of thie info I linked counters it. I laid my response out from start to finish, referenceing all applicable domestic and UN laws. People ignore the prtion that says if the enemy is not a signatory and engages in behavior that violates the standards, they lose their protections.

That covers executions and... wait for it... torture.

The last part of my argument that everyone else ignores is its irrelevant as to what you can prove on Bush or Cheney. As President and VP they have sovereign immunity - cant sue the king (Thank you England). No laws can be past now that could affect them, either here or at the UN because it would violate the consititutiotns ex post facto provison.

They did not break the law, and acted accordingly given the circumstance.

Exactly the same thing Obama is doing.



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 02:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Awesome. So basically you're saying you can murder tens of thousands of innocent civilians based on complete BS, kidnap and torture people, and you are untouchable, if you are sitting in POTUS admin.

Nice to be the ones who determine what is, and is not legal.

Seems constitutional law professor Jonathon Turley begs to differ with you and them though.
edit on 11-2-2011 by DimensionalDetective because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 02:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Well the cinema is a world of it's own where you have to put up with kids whining, babies crying, people yelling at the screen, crackling chip packets, people slurping on frozen cokes, belching and god knows what else, though rarely all at the same time.
Same goes for concerts. You occasionally get someone who'll boo if a performer hits a bum note (the Whitney Houston concerts copped heaps of this) .....same goes for comedy nights.

HECKLERS are a small part of any crowd where people assemble and where a ticket is purchased and is not a free do, a warning is usually issued first. Removing the heckler is usually the last option.

And this wasn't extended verbal tirade, it was very succinct and to the point.
Storm in a teacup if you ask me.



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 02:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by DimensionalDetective
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Awesome. So basically you're saying you can murder tens of thousands of innocent civilians based on complete BS, kidnap and torture people, and you are untouchable, if you are sitting in POTUS admin.

Nice to be the ones who determine what is, and is not legal.

Seems constitutional law professor Jonathon Turley begs to differ with you and them though.
edit on 11-2-2011 by DimensionalDetective because: (no reason given)


Actually my argument is UN law itself provides the protections of our actions based on their refusal to confomr their tactics to the norm (wearing uniforms, command and control, chain of command, not using cifvivlians etc etc etc).

A treaty such as these are specificallt intended to prevent these actions. They are not meant to be filed 5-10-15-20 years after the fact as an amicus brief.

even moving away form UN law, the ones we are signatoreies to are subject to interpretation by US domestic courts, and this was done, which resulted in the qualified immunity for anyone who participated in "torture".

If a legal ace busts through all of those arguments, the final argument is the actions he took were while he was president and commander in chief during a time of armed conflict - cant sue the king.

As far as your other comments, I respond in the smae manner as those who bitch about the US using nuclear weapons during WWII. Dont bitch at us because you decided to attack us without provocation, and then whine in the end when we beat your ass. We didnt start the fight, but we ended it.

All IRaq had to do was comply with UN resolutions. Out of curisotiy, dont you think that 13 years is more than enough time for Iraq to comply? Dont you think that after 13 years the UN would reach down their pants, find their testicles, and say well sh#t sheriff, we are taking voer your country since you wont comply.

In the course of everything that has occured in the last 5 -10 years, their have always been doorways for the Taliban, Al Queida and Iraq to walk through, even using other countries as intermediaries. They opted not to and that is their choice.

But when you can build an item in your backyard that can be snuck into my backyard, what you do is very much my business.

We acted as a last resort.

How much time is too much time to get your act together and comply with INTERNATIONAL RESOLUTIONS?

Seriously.. whats the time limit?



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 03:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 





I'll pit my 10 years of being a Police Officer against your lack of knowledge about your rights and the law any day of the week and twince on sundays.


Every time you open your mouth about "the law" you make me laugh. How about I put up my years of law study and years of legal practice up against your years of "policing"?

Let me help you out here because not only are you making a fool of yourself you are making the dept. that trained you look like imbeciles. To top that off you and your buddies reputations for being brutish thugs out on the street have given my profession a bad rap as well! I've had to wade though so much crap over the years to protect peaceful people that "law enforcement" has abused it would make you sick.

When you talk about the current subject matter you are confusing the LAW with what is called a LEGAL SYSTEM. They are different, very different. If you don't know this then it would be fair to use the term gross incompetence, and in your line of work we call that FRAUD. I'd love so much to have my day in court with you, I'd strip that bond you have so fast it would make your badge spin.

-Lightrule



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 03:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by DimensionalDetective
I have a feeling we may be seeing a LOT more of this though, and likely MUCH worse, especially if these criminals try traveling abroad...


Sweet!! I love it when people want to hold others accountible for their actions outside of a courtroom, being their own judge jury and heckler, while breaking the law themselves..

Awesome!!

/end sarcasm

Whats the point of going after a person on the belief they broke the law, only to ignore the very laws themselves they claim to hold dear?

Dont look now but when the supporters point their fingers at cheney, they need to realize that there are 3 fingers pointing directly back at them.
edit on 10-2-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-2-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)


You would have a point if any court in our judicial system would actually hold these war criminals accountable. By his own admission, Cheney admitted to endorsing torture and that he wasn't too concerned about not finding WMDs -- their ONLY excuse for the war.

Our system only hold's accountable, people who rip you off on an oil change, or hold up a convenience store -- not the systemic crooks who decide to charge 40% compounded interest on a credit card "because they can."

Cheney is a scumbag -- we know it, he knows it. And using the "system" -- well, that's just a fantasy. The system works for people like Cheney who offshore money and profit on weapons deals.



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 04:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Lightrule
 


Actually nevermind., I just saw you are from Canada.

If I want to learn how to beat a black kid down, I will call Austin Texas. If I want to learn how to punt kick a guy in the face while he is on his knees in the middle of the road, I will contact the RCMP. If I ever need to sue my dry cleaners because they shrank my plaid shirt while trying to get the maple syrup stain out, you will be my first call.

I am assuming this is the part of our conversation where we hurl stereotypes back and forth right? Because I have never met you, you have never met me, yet you refer to me as a thug. I guess it could be a cultural thing with the thug comment. I guess anyone who knows how to do their job in a professional manner while being able to defend themselves from other people attacking while being within the confines of the law, would appear as a thug to Canadians.

I know you guys arent use to defending yourselves, but thats ok. Just remeber to look in the mirror in the mornings and repeat it - Your smart enough, your good enough, and dog gone it, people like you..

If I need help on how to correctly enforce our laws, work within our municipal and circuit courts to ensure a positive outcome, or need feedback on the way I perform my job, I will defer to the people who know what they are doing. Which is to say my fellow officers, my PA and Muini PA, our PP / Juvi officers and through positive outreach within our community.

But thanks anyways...

Welcome to the conversation though
Its aboot time we have another northern neighbor inferirority complex hissy fit in the threads eh.

God Save the Queen

EDIT to add - Sorry I forgot
EDIT à ajouter - désolé j'ai oublié

En fait nevermind., j'ai juste vu que vous êtes le Canada.

Si je veux apprendre comment battre un enfant noir vers le bas, j'appellerai Austin le Texas. Si je veux apprendre comment donner un coup de volée le coup-de-pied un type dans le visage tandis qu'il est sur ses genoux au milieu de la route, j'entrerai en contact avec le RCMP. Si je dois jamais poursuivre mes nettoyeurs à sec parce qu'ils ont rétréci ma chemise de plaid tout en essayant d'obtenir la tache de sirop d'érable dehors, vous serez mon premier appel.

Je suppose que c'est la partie de notre conversation où nous lançons des stéréotypes dans les deux sens bien ? Puisque je ne vous ai jamais rencontré, vous ne m'avez jamais rencontré, pourtant vous vous référez à moi en tant que gangster. Je devine que ce pourrait être une chose culturelle avec le commentaire de gangster. Je devine n'importe qui qui sait réaliser leur travail d'une façon professionnelle tout en pouvant se défendre d'autres personnes attaquant tandis qu'être dans les confins de la loi, apparaîtrait en tant que gangster aux Canadiens.

Je vous connais utilisation arent de types à se défendre, mais c'est correcte. Rappelez-vous juste de regarder dans le miroir les matins et de le répéter - votre assez futé, votre bon assez, et chien allé lui, les gens comme vous.

Si j'ai besoin de l'aide sur la façon dont imposer correctement nos lois, travailler au sein de notre municipal et tribunaux de district pour assurer des résultats positifs, ou la rétroaction du besoin sur le chemin que j'effectue mon travail, je reporterai aux personnes qui savent ce qu'elles font. Ce qui est de dire mes dirigeants semblables, ma PA et PA de Muini, nos pp/dirigeants de Juvi et par l'outreach positif au sein de notre communauté.

Mais mercis de toute façon…

Bienvenue à la conversation cependant
vers le haut de : Son temps d'aboot nous avons un autre ajustement hissy complexe d'inferirority voisin nordique dans les fils hein.

Dieu sauvent la reine
edit on 11-2-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 04:06 AM
link   
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 


Dont blame me.. I am just a moronic cop thug who doesnt know the law. I refer you to our lawyer buddy who just graced us with his Omnipotence.

Please fill us in oh wise shaman as to how everyone else screws up your legal system.

We are all ears.



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 04:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 


Dont blame me.. I am just a moronic cop thug who doesnt know the law. I refer you to our lawyer buddy who just graced us with his Omnipotence.

Please fill us in oh wise shaman as to how everyone else screws up your legal system.

We are all ears.


>> Sounds like you've got a pretty provincial concept of "justice." Busting some kid who robbed a convenience store or smoked pot, might "feel good", but you'd have to do that a few billion times to have the same amount of "good" for the common man of busting one guy like Dick Cheney. Seriously; lot's more death, lot's more money. But the really big crooks in this country go by the name of Chase, or GM. Did you know Wachovia had billions in transactions without receipts with Mexico? They had to sell out to Wells Fargo because they got caught, and weren't TOO BIG TO FAIL. Though, I haven't heard of anyone going to prison. If you spend a few hundred on some drugs --- you go to prison. But a few Billion, and you go to a new office.

>> Well, Banks rigged a system where they could use bundled "credit default swaps" -- insurance on mortgages to act as "deposits." They then leveraged these "deposits" 10, 20 perhaps 40 times the original value and "bet them" in a non-regulated market. The "bet's" got bundled with more insurance -- and the "bond rating's companies" also found that "consulting" made more money than accurately rating bonds -- so any of their customer's got AAA ratings on this "junk". The whole ponzi scheme, ended up being over $1.4 Quadrillion in fantasy money --- and they nearly bankrupted the world. This wasn't just one rogue banker -- this was systemic fraud. Hank Paulson and Bernanke and many other's from Goldman Sachs --- well, the are co-conspirators and they got paid millions for the "service."

>> We invaded two nations to steal resources. Our leaders committed war crimes and war profiteering.

>> BP and other oil companies have actually "slept with the regulators." If I dumped some oil on a sand berm -- I'd be fined $20,000 or more per incident. By this yardstick, with over 3 million square miles covered, BP owes at least $2 trillion in damages if not willful endangerment and 3rd degree murder.

>> Lobbyists from Coal, Lobbyists from Big Pharma -- and what have you, have become regulators and regulators have taken "consulting jobs" as pay-offs for their good blessings on the industry. The EPA, FDA, and many other initialed regulators who are supposed to protect the public interest, are more often than not, covering up for the industry they regulate.

>> We have over a hundred documented incidents of Election fraud, and no proof that electronic voting was not designed to be rigged, or can ever be verified.


>>>> I mean, that's just a quick tour off the top of my head. Our system is absolutely broken for "controlling" anyone with wealth in this nation. We've got multinationals now who make money off of sending jobs overseas, paying for elections right now -- and these are among our "boards of trade."

Sound's to me that we've got people who have broken our system, and we've got people who long ago should have seen a trial -- and yet they keep walking around, putting up mock "award shows" for their psychopathic robber baron buddies.

I am not going to be violent -- I'd rather get video of them planning something. But, I always think of "jury nullification" -- if anyone did do something about people like Cheney. Cheney made treason legal, and profited from destroying this nation and risking our security and killing other people. He is no better than the millions who are dead to feed his greed. He deserves his day in court -- but I won't hold my breathe.



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 04:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


People ignore the prtion that says if the enemy is not a signatory and engages in behavior that violates the standards, they lose their protections.

>> You know, you sound like you are trying to get under everyone's skin. You make fun of some Canadian Lawyer, and then you hide behind "clauses" and bogus legal arguments. Papers written by oily sleaze-bags to cover their rears.

Some poor Taxi Driver in Iraq, or a guy who looked at a thug the wrong way in Afghanistan got rounded up, and sent into the hand's of US troops. They don't even KNOW what the heck an "Al Qaeda" is, and I can guarantee you, not 1 in 10 in Afghanistan even know what excuse got us in their country. It's not like you are sitting in a cave somewhere and VOTED on flying planes into buildings.

Afghanistan isn't much of a state -- it's had a succession of foreign invaders tearing through the country every decade or so.

The concept that you can be herding a goat one day, and then someone in a suit, calls you an "enemy non-combatant" or whatever weasel word you prefer, and then someone has electrodes on your genitals, or is "pretending" to rape your kids, or is water-boarding you -- you know, and it's all LEGAL, because there are cowards who have no sense of honor, or shame, who hide behind pieces of paper.

I'd say, that that simple Goat Herder or Taxi cab driver, would just think you are evil, and not really parse these details.

And I'd say; that not standing up for something we believe in, and "debating" such things -- well, sounds like the weak-kneed excuses that the BAD GUYS tell themselves. I keep hearing from people who call themselves Patriots, about "American Exceptionalism" -- and everything that makes America a great country; Equal Treatment under the Law, treat all people equal, Justice and a fair trial, the right to vote -- these all seem to be catch phrases -- but people like that, aren't any better than the people you call "enemies."

We convicted people at Nuremberg for LESS than what the Bush administration and NOW the Obama administration tacitly approve of. The only difference is the numbers of people disappeared, held without trial, or tortured.

>> I also suspect, that a lot of these people are merely lab rats for Pharmaceutical companies or "fun time" for sadists. I certainly have never heard proof of any "security" we gained from these crimes, nor what good it does the people in our nation.

But regardless -- I cannot stomach "winning" this way, or starting wars to HELP our economy. I'd rather be a nation whose economy has trouble, than a wealthy nation of Pigs.



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 05:11 AM
link   
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 


Actually I am huge believer in 2nd, 3rd and 4th chances along with alternate forms of punishment. My goal is not to go bust as many people as I can for stats. My goal is to work with the community to help improve it where we can. I have stopped people for DWI and have provided them a ride back to their house and released them into the custody of their parents.

Its confused a few parents, and I tell them that he made teheir kid made a mistake, luckily no one was killed because of it and because of thier age I am not going to file any charges. I ave made more inroads in that manner along with just talking to them about the law, right and wrong ways to do things and ask questions, etc.

Contrary to my thug persona some think I have I would prefer to go into work and be visible, and needed only as a last resort. Communities are not suppose to be war zones, and we certainly are not suppose to behave in a manner that creates an us vs them mentality. The moment that sets in communication breaks down, trust goes away, and problems start.

Every situation is unique into itself... Everyone I come in contact with has their own baggage that affects whats going on. If we dont take any of that into context, whats the point?

When people complain to me about writing them a ticket, I let them vent. I then suggest that if they dont care for the law, then they should go to the city council meetings and see if other people are having the same issues with it.. We have had laws removed, modified etc by doing that, and in the end it makes people happy.



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 05:15 AM
link   
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 


Ok you have me completely confused now. Are you responding to me or someone else? Some of the stuff you have posted, I have never said.

As far as the Canadian comment goes, its in response to his post to me, which did not start off nice. That would be the moronic thug comment I made, which came from our Canadian lawyer poster.

I have not problem showing respect to others. Its earned though, both ways,. If someone is gonna take a few shots at me, I am gonna return the favor, and then challenge them to actually engage in the topic, which is what I did.

As far as Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld, simply calling them war criminals or torturers does what exactly? It doe not make them guilty, nor do it it bring them to justice. People argue there are laws / treaties / international laws in place, yet no one takes any steps to actually start the process.

If they hate those 3 that much, then take action and see where it goes. If all people are going to do is just continually complain, and hurl insults at speaking engagements, then dont bother me because its a waste of time. What is hurling insults going to do?

It reminds me of the coach trying to give a pep talk to one of his players. At the end the coach asks him, are you apathetic, or are you just lazy?

The player responds, I dont know, and I dont really care.

Accusing people of war crimes is a serious charge, and warrants action beyond yelling at them. Does that make sense?

As far as the laws go? I have no idea what you are referring to when you say oily..

edit on 11-2-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-2-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 05:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by vermonster
Ron Paul for President in 2012.

No Electronic Voting Machines.

Paper ballots only.

Dicky Cheney/Rumsfeld rot in your self created hell. Mr Trump, you too.

Code pink, I love you.

peace


s&f



You just summed up my argument..

Thank you.


A repeat of the hanging chad fiasco? No thanks



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 05:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by DimensionalDetective
I have a feeling we may be seeing a LOT more of this though, and likely MUCH worse, especially if these criminals try traveling abroad...


Sweet!! I love it when people want to hold others accountible for their actions outside of a courtroom, being their own judge jury and heckler, while breaking the law themselves..

Awesome!!

/end sarcasm

Whats the point of going after a person on the belief they broke the law, only to ignore the very laws themselves they claim to hold dear?

Dont look now but when the supporters point their fingers at cheney, they need to realize that there are 3 fingers pointing directly back at them.
edit on 10-2-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-2-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)


Maybe people don't give a flying you know what about laws? It's about justice. Justice exists outside of a pro-Establishment court room.

Nobody is mad at him for breaking the law. Nobody is threatening to kill people for smoking weed or driving 10 mph over the speed limit. It's not a matter of law. That's where you make your main mistake.

There's no hypocrisy because nobody cares what laws he did or didn't break. People care what he did. Only idiots use the law as a guideline for what's right and wrong. Most people can think for themselves.

Laws are irrelevant, therefore your argument is bunk.



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 05:47 AM
link   
reply to post by NadaCambia
 


Not really... What I find humerous in all of this is the back and forth with the laws of this and that, the acusations against Bush, the counter arguments.

The argument people want to make, but for some reason cant find it within them, is to say laws do not matter, its not what we are.

We are better than this, and as such we dont need a law that says we cant torture anyone, because thats not what what we are.

We dont need a law on universal extradition, because ethics and personal responsibility in decision making couple with logic would tell us if a grave error has been made, then we should face the music because we are owning the outcome, and not because we were forced to.

No one wants to make those arguments... They go to political events and hural names at people.

That right there is the reasons the laws dont work. Its hard to wrap a mentality of a 6 year old around complex issues.

So here we are instead.. going back and forth, arguing about whatever the Canadian dude term is because it matters to him, accomplishing nothing.

Yup.. life is a banquet.



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 05:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by DimensionalDetective
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Act against WHAT?

Brother, TELL ME you are not still asleep enough to believe the fairy tale of endless lies these criminals told to FORCE us into the Iraq invasion. I can't BELIEVE you are even BEGINNING to defend these parthologically lieing, torture approving, mass-murdering criminals. And yes---Obama is EVERY bit as guilty for CONTINUING on these crimes against humanity. And yes---They ALL should be held accountable. This ain't partisan BS from my end---We went into Iraq based on NOTHING but LIES, and we have DEVASTATED their country and MURDERED tens of thousands of innocent people on nothing but these peoples LIES.


Ignore him. His entire post count on here is one big appeal-to-authority fallacy.

He ignores objective facts and embraces claims made without evidence by the Establishment. Some people you can't reason with. You're either a marshmallow soft hippy liberal or a terrorist supporting moslem. Or both.



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 05:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Flighty
 



Haha!!.....
Can you imagine the fights that would break out if opposing teams fans couldn't boo and hiss and carry on against the home team when they score after paying for the privilege... It makes me laugh just imaging the result of them trying on that one ..


You're equating a sporting match with drunken louts in the audience with this?

I weep for our youth.:shk:



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 05:59 AM
link   
reply to post by NadaCambia
 


Lol Dimension knows what I am about.. Actually you would know also if you actually tried to communicate instead of the typical hurling insults and ignoring those who have a different view point.

But whatever works for you...



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join