Tribunal finds Bush, seven others guilty of war crimes

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by Needalight

 

i will be both blunt , rude and also contemptuous - and say :

"so bloody what ?" , followed by - "who cares?" , ending with "what diference will it make?"

the ` Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal " is an unelected , unratified , non-government organisation , whoes ` legal ` mandate was created by itself - and is recognised by no bona-fide agency , court or soverign govt

to put it bluntly a gang of self appoined walts with no powers or authority outside thier own fantasies

who cares what they think ? i certainly dont

No reason for me to post what you already and correctly stated.

Really? The Borneo Post about and activist group pretending to be an International Court with authority over sovereign nations?

......and from a place where the native population engaged in Head Hunting

To put this in perspective here, they have a large population of Muslims, including many extremists and Jihadists. That is likely the source of this and this was for internal consumption.

Not to mention that Headhunting was revived by the Dayak's (native peoples) in the 1990's and as late as 2001. It was used in ethnic violence against migrants even though it was thought to have stopped in the early 20th century.

So we have a group of self appointed people who claim authority over the whole world and are likely radical Islamists, who live in a place where Headhunting was recently revived in the local culture.

You can't make this stuff up.

Thanks for the chuckle OP.

I suppose if this tribunal now has written and recorded verbal evidence, they could take it to the Hague, and let the Hague mull over it. It's basically how the Hague gets it's evidence on other war criminals, and decides if they should be tried. Even the Hague court is an 'Ad hoc' affair, and I would presume that there would need to be some consensus or agreement for the Hague to process a court for trials under 'ICC war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan'

I don't know how they work that out, but there would have to be evidence.

Originally posted by CaptainLJB
reply to post by earthinhabitant

 

Isn't just wearing an American flag pin good enough?
Or one of those yellow ribbon stickers on your car "We Will Never Forget" (so much for forgiving and forgetting and letting bygones be bygones). Gotta keep that HATE alive.
Christians these days get off on walking around with crucifix necklaces and we all know they're truly God's people.

edit on 14-5-2012 by CaptainLJB because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-5-2012 by CaptainLJB because: (no reason given)

Listen pal, I am sorry if I was rude before, but people need to comprehend that capitalism and mainstream religion go together in the same package. Jesus did not preach predatory lending, he did not preach multi-national firms masquarading as the government, he did not preach intolerance of different faiths, he did not preach starting wars to keep the military-industrial complex alive, he did not preach covering up the ufo phenomena.

I have been saying all along that the rich have always controlled the governments and that imperialism has been a way of life since day 1 of our existance. Only through ignorance can the establishment continue. The answer is not communism, but it is neither capitalism.

We need a mixed-economy and spiritualism. I honestly think we have been telepathically communicating with multi-dimensional aliens for some time and all the religons are covering it up. There is barely any difference between the various religions because they are all based on controlling the flow of information and making fanatic zombies out of everyone.

THE wild man of Borneo is alive and flourishing in the 21st century. If the minority Madurese refuse to leave their homes, they will, Dayak head-hunters insisted yesterday, be decapitated......

I just stabbed and slashed and cut off their heads. I don't know how many I killed, but it was at least 10." At the Dayak-owned Rama Hotel, severed heads were stored in the basement and a league table of skulls collected by different clans was notched up on a wall.

Borneo head-hunters revel in murder....

No, this is not a blast from the distant past, this was in 2001.

Sorry, had to post this to put that place into context. A mixture of Islamists, Christians and Headhunters who chop off migrants heads. Yes sir, I want them to form a court with authority over the US.

Originally posted by smurfy
I suppose if this tribunal now has written and recorded verbal evidence, they could take it to the Hague, and let the Hague mull over it. It's basically how the Hague gets it's evidence on other war criminals, and decides if they should be tried. Even the Hague court is an 'Ad hoc' affair, and I would presume that there would need to be some consensus or agreement for the Hague to process a court for trials under 'ICC war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan'

I don't know how they work that out, but there would have to be evidence.

USA does not recognise the international court at the hague. Did they change that policy?

Island Fever

For whatever it may be worth, although the article referenced in the OP was from the Borneo Times, Borneo itself is an island about a thousand miles away from Kuala Lumpur, where the "tribunal" was held.

While a minority share of Borneo is under the sovereignty of Malaysia, the island is culturally distinct from the mainland, in much the same way Hawaii is culturally distinct from the mainland in the U.S. This is especially true of the Dayaks, who are indigenous to Borneo.

In brief, the only headhunters one is likely to find in Kuala Lumpur are corporate recruiters.

Just sayin'

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


OK, I'm listening now. Tell me your solution to all of our problems, because I certainly haven't any.

Do we all throw our money away, join hands, and pray for deliverance?

Or, Do we take the redneck course and start stockpiling guns and ammo in prep for the apocalypse?

Or, something else? A combination of the above?

Do we nuke Korea or maybe the Islam capitol of the world?

reply to post by CaptainLJB


Excercise your rights, one of which is voting responsibly. To vote responsibly means to be properly informed. I have been doing my part on ATS as have many others as well. To the right wing fanatics and corporate shills well I guess I can't help them. You can't fix stupid!

And yes having a gun and plenty of ammo is also a good idea.

Actually, this is interesting. Not because they have any legal powers to seek completion of any sentencing, but because it makes a statement.

If a court finds someone guilty of war crimes, they can influence the government and force pressure for sanctions on those individuals.

If other countries follow, it limits and restricts the freedoms of those convicted. Banking, travel, family and business can all be affected.

Personally, while I would love to see Bush, Cheney, Rice and Blair all tried for war crimes (and openly lying to their own damned citizens!) I would gladly see them facing sanctions from countries all over the world. It's a start!

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by CaptainLJB

 

Excercise your rights, one of which is voting responsibly. To vote responsibly means to be properly informed. I have been doing my part on ATS as have many others as well. To the right wing fanatics and corporate shills well I guess I can't help them. You can't fix stupid!

And yes having a gun and plenty of ammo is also a good idea.

Good answer, but it's what I've been doing all along (except for the gun & ammo bit--I'd probably shoot myself in the foot! I'm saving my cash anyway for basic necessities in life). On here, one-third of the people will tell me not to vote for the Republican candidate (rightly so, I figure, like we need a Dominionist president for the eradication of separation of Church and State), one third of the people would tell me not to vote for the Democratic candidate (Obama being the Antichrist in their opinion, out to destroy the American family with his "secular socialist" followers, or so it goes, while all the old Southerners secretly despise any Black guy in the White House), and the remaining one-third say they're both Evil members of the Illuminati/Bilderbergers/NWO/Whatever and neither should be voted for (these are the David Icke groupies, who think they're alien extradimensional shapeshifting lizards in fine suits). So what am I supposed to do, go into the booth and post up a Third option for guys to vote for ("Captain LJB for President," Really! I wouldn't even vote for Me! I've already got people around here taking virtual pot-shot at me, and I don't wanna be another JFK with the real deal smashing my skull open!). So you could say that whatever I do, I'm screwed. Maybe "EarthCitizen07 for President"? Nah...but you might get more votes than me. Either one would get torn down by the time I return to my car in the lot.

Originally posted by CaptainLJB
On here, one-third of the people will tell me not to vote for the Republican candidate (rightly so, I figure, like we need a Dominionist president for the eradication of separation of Church and State), one third of the people would tell me not to vote for the Democratic candidate (Obama being the Antichrist in their opinion, out to destroy the American family with his "secular socialist" followers, or so it goes, while all the old Southerners secretly despise any Black guy in the White House), and the remaining one-third say they're both Evil members of the Illuminati/Bilderbergers/NWO/Whatever and neither should be voted for (these are the David Icke groupies, who think they're alien extradimensional shapeshifting lizards in fine suits). So what am I supposed to do, .....

Why would you rely on what people tell you on here as a decision making tool for how to exercise your vote??????

What you should do is make up your mind which candidate you think is the best (of a bad bunch perhaps) and vote (or note vote) accordingly as a conscious adult choice!!

Stop avoiding your responsibilities!

I recap from my earlier post:

Despit my disapointment in the lack of frustration people display from this, I appreciate that a Kuala Lumpur box-social of Western-Nobodies will have about as much impact as the "Occupy Wall Street" movement did.

Australians all let us rejoyce...

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Hey, I'm only making small talk! I'm understandably curious how others view this subject matter. How they would vote and why they would vote--and generally speaking what motivates them.

Ultimately I'll make up my own mind (in actuality, I've already made up my mind years ago, believe it or not) but I am curious what other people on here think. I think that's why I'm here, don't ya think?

If anything, I think it might be fun to smoke out the paranoid nuts and bring them out into the open for all to enjoy!

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by smurfy
I suppose if this tribunal now has written and recorded verbal evidence, they could take it to the Hague, and let the Hague mull over it. It's basically how the Hague gets it's evidence on other war criminals, and decides if they should be tried. Even the Hague court is an 'Ad hoc' affair, and I would presume that there would need to be some consensus or agreement for the Hague to process a court for trials under 'ICC war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan'

I don't know how they work that out, but there would have to be evidence.

USA does not recognise the international court at the hague. Did they change that policy?

The USA is a signee, via the Clinton administration, but it was not ratified by the Bush administration, who said outright that they didn't wanna join, no surprises there. Obama is trying to re-establish dialogue. The fact that the USA is not a participant, is neither here nor there regarding any evidence, since this is a criminal court, with the possibilty of trial in absentia, (that happened with President Milosevic) Extradition might be possible as there is a treaty in place between USA and most european countries, including Holland, but that is a dirty area.

reply to post by CaptainLJB


From my experience people tend to vote for only the big parties and then they hit the boards crying and kicking away like 5 year olds. Such and such is worse, NO he is worse, no you don't know what you are talking about...."decorum and manners" fine.

Isn't it much easier to just vote for a smaller party and be done with it?

Or if you DO vote for a big party...then at least don't complain...it IS hypocritical!

Not accusing you personally of anything. Just general observations!

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


That's the whole point. Voting for the little guy when you know the little guy's not going to pull in squat votes. It's virtually the same thing as not voting at all. Probably the only advantage to not voting at all is that your chances for being called for jury duty are nil.

reply to post by CaptainLJB


They don't pull in squat because everyone thinks precisely in that brainwashed manner. You worry about you and others worry about others. Sooner or later personal responsibility becomes group responsibility and that can effect change.

reply to post by AlchemicalMonocular


Rimshot!

Well played AlchemicalMonocular!
(golf clap)