This admin. doesn't ALLOW itself to be put on trial.
What a copout! - it's only accusations! And that's all it's ever likely to be because this administration with the help of its corrupt and partisan congressional majority simply refuses to allow any independent inquiry into its crooked dealings. Let's not pretend that we actually have a balance of power in the federal govt. sufficient to allow normal due process to occur. So go on with your just accusations simpering - try these crimes in an international court and see how long they stay that way.
They haven't been brought to trial yet....(sm)
because a) some of them would be innocent and would have to be set free, and b) Bush obviously had no plan for those who would be found guilty. Actually, about half of them haven't even been charged yet, much less had a trial. I honestly think the whole point of Gitmo is torture. I think that Bush actually thought it was a viable means for gaining information, which has been proven to be incorrect. Basically, the longer they can keep them there, the longer they can torture.
Bush and Saddam Should Both Stand Trial Bush and Saddam Should Both Stand Trial, Says Nuremberg Prosecutor
SAN FRANCISCO, Aug 25 (OneWorld) - A chief prosecutor of Nazi war crimes at Nuremberg has said George W. Bush should be tried for war crimes along with Saddam Hussein. Benjamin Ferenccz, who secured convictions for 22 Nazi officers for their work in orchestrating the death squads that killed more than 1 million people, told OneWorld both Bush and Saddam should be tried for starting aggressive wars--Saddam for his 1990 attack on Kuwait and Bush for his 2003 invasion of Iraq.
Nuremberg declared that aggressive war is the supreme international crime, the 87-year-old Ferenccz told OneWorld from his home in New York. He said the United Nations charter, which was written after the carnage of World War II, contains a provision that no nation can use armed force without the permission of the UN Security Council.
Ferenccz said that after Nuremberg the international community realized that every war results in violations by both sides, meaning the primary objective should be preventing any war from occurring in the first place.
He said the atrocities of the Iraq war--from the Abu Ghraib prison scandal and the massacre of dozens of civilians by U.S. forces in Haditha to the high number of civilian casualties caused by insurgent car bombs--were highly predictable at the start of the war.
Which wars should be prosecuted? Every war will lead to attacks on civilians, he said. Crimes against humanity, destruction beyond the needs of military necessity, rape of civilians, plunder--that always happens in wartime. So my answer personally, after working for 60 years on this problem and [as someone] who hates to see all these young people get killed no matter what their nationality, is that you've got to stop using warfare as a means of settling your disputes.
Ferenccz believes the most important development toward that end would be the effective implementation of the International Criminal Court (ICC), which is located in the Hague, Netherlands.
The court was established in 2002 and has been ratified by more than 100 countries. It is currently being used to adjudicate cases stemming from conflict in Darfur, Sudan and civil wars in Uganda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
But on May 6, 2002--less than a year before the invasion of Iraq--the Bush administration withdrew the United States' signature on the treaty and began pressuring other countries to approve bilateral agreements requiring them not to surrender U.S. nationals to the ICC.
Three months later, George W. Bush signed a new law prohibiting any U.S. cooperation with the International Criminal Court. The law went so far as to include a provision authorizing the president to use all means necessary and appropriate, including a military invasion of the Netherlands, to free U.S. personnel detained or imprisoned by the ICC.
That's too bad, according to Ferenccz. If the United States showed more of an interest in building an international justice system, they could have put Saddam Hussein on trial for his 1990 invasion of Kuwait.
The United Nations authorized the first Gulf War and authorized all nations to take whatever steps necessary to keep peace in the area, he said. They could have stretched that a bit by seizing the person for causing the harm. Of course, they didn't do that and ever since then I've been bemoaning the fact that we didn't have an International Criminal Court at that time.
Ferenccz is glad that Saddam Hussein is now on trial.
Kurdish authorities put the number even higher, saying 182,000 Kurdish civilians were killed in a matter of months.
Everyone agrees innumerable villages were bombed and some were gassed. The surviving residents were rounded up, taken to detention centers, and eventually executed at remote sites, sometimes by being stripped and shot in the back so they would fall naked into trenches.
In his defense, Saddam Hussein has disputed the extent of the killings and maintained they were justified because he was fighting a counter-insurgency operation against Kurdish separatists allied with Iran. When asked to enter a plea, the former president said that would require volumes of books.
Ferenccz said whatever Saddam's reasons, nothing can justify the mass killing of innocents.
The offenses attributable to ex-President Hussein since he came to power range from the supreme international crime of aggression to a wide variety of crimes against humanity, he wrote after Saddam was ousted in 2003. A fair trial will achieve many goals. The victims would find some satisfaction in knowing that their victimizer was called to account and could no longer be immune from punishment for his evil deeds. Wounds can begin to heal. The historical facts can be confirmed beyond doubt. Similar crimes by other dictators might be discouraged or deterred in future. The process of justice through law, on which the safety of humankind depends, would be reinforced.
trial date set for muzzammil hassan
The "moderate Muslim" who beheaded his wife right here in New York because she served him with with divorce papers and an order of protection. And it's only second degree murder????
The President wants the detention center closed within a year. Now the search is on to find new places to hold detainees while they await trial.
One of the places under consideration is Fort Bragg. It's not hard to image the base being considered a possibly site to relocate Gitmo detainees. In the past, Bragg has sent PAO teams and military police units to the detention center in Cuba.
North Carolina congressman David Price says the center should have been shut down long ago.
"it's just unacceptable to have that facility remaining open with people detained indefinitely with no resolution of their cases, no rights at all to even know what they're accused of," he offered.
But Price isn't sure that Bragg should be a serious consideration.
"It will have to be a very high security facility and my understanding of Fort Bragg is there is nothing like the kind of facility that would be required, but I don't know. I'm not going to presume what facilities will be chosen," he said.
Price is right. Right now, soldiers awaiting trial at Fort Bragg on a variety of charges are held in the Cumberland County detention center. Folks who live in Fayetteville have mixed views about bringing suspected terrorists to the community.
"That can be kind of scary actually... having that type of element here in our homeland and where we live," Offered resident Marco Clark.
"Well, we've got to put them some place and in that case Fort Bragg wouldn't be a bad idea," said David McCune.
Military leaders have a year to figure out where they're going to put the detainees. Sources say Camp Pendleton, Charleston Naval Base, and Fort Leavenworth might be better choices than Fort Bragg. Leavenworth may be the number one choice because it's the military's only maximum security prison.
We'll discuss that crime when Bush et al are done with their trial.
nm
Investigation
Why did conservatives think it so important to pursue a private personal situation with President Bill Clinton back in the late 1990s instead of pursuing terrorists? We knew back then about bin Laden, we knew back then of terrorists wanting to harm Americans. So, pray tell, why was it so important back then to turn this country into a laughing stock for the world and persecute a person for a private matter instead of focusing totally on terrorists? Tieing up the presidents hands and holding down the government and wasting millions so that nothing else was done? Well, I personally think lying to the American people and causing thousands of deaths because of the lies and spending billions of American tax dollars is important and needs investigating and boy oh boy will the truth be known when this happens. and thank you dear Lord, thank you for answering my prayers.
no investigation
into Pelosi's allegations that the CIA lied? How can they do that? That's giving her (and anyone else) carte blanche to say and do anything with no consequences. I generally am not in any way partisan, but in this case the Democrats just gave themselves a big black mark in my book by blocking this. Either way, the issue has to be resolved. Either Congress is lying or the CIA lied. We deserve to know which. The American people need to demand an answer. To me, Dems blocking the investigation makes them definitely look guilty.
Interesting trial story - warning, kind of racy
This woman, Phyllis, is a friend and former
co-employee of a very good friend of mine. My friend went to her trial on
Monday. We'd been following this for the past year. I was surprised
they found here guilty so easily, but I guess rules are rules. Now
remember, Phyllis is a retired teacher from Fox Valley Technical
College and her description was that the guard kept touching her breasts and
crotch over and over like she was enjoying it. Now bear in mind that this
guard was investigating the privates of a 62-year-old gray-haired retired
schoolteacher from Appleton at the Appleton, Wisconsin airport - a very
small airport. Wondered what you all thought --- as for me I'm
undecided. I see this made the national headlines.
Woman Convicted of Groping Screener
GREEN BAY, Wis. (AP) - A woman who was upset over
being searched bodily at an airport was convicted Tuesday of assaulting a
security screener by grabbing the federal officer's breasts.
A federal jury heard the case against retired
teacher Phyllis Dintenfass, who also allegedly shoved the screener during the
search at the Outagamie County Regional Airport in Appleton in September 2004.
Dintenfass, 62, faces up to a year in federal prison
and $100,000 in fines. The judge set sentencing for Nov. 1.
12px>On Monday, Transportation Security Administration screening supervisor
Anita Gostisha testified that Dintenfass activated metal detectors at a
checkpoint, and she heard Dintenfass say she thought the problem was bobby pins
and barrettes in her hair.
Gostisha said she took the woman to another
screening area, where she used a handheld wand. Gostisha said she was following
protocol when she also performed a ``limited pat-down search.''
Gostisha said she was using the back of her hands to
search the area underneath Dintenfass' breasts when the woman lashed out at her.
``She said `How would you like it if I did that to
you?' and slammed me against the wall,'' Gostisha testified. ``She came at me
and grabbed my breasts and squeezed them.''
Distenfass claimed she acted in self-defense.
``I said, 'What are you doing? No one's done that to
me before,''' she said. ``And she kept going ... for what felt like an
interminably long time.''
Dintenfass denied shoving Gostisha, but admitted
putting her hands on the agent's breasts.
``I was mortified that I had done that,'' she said.
``I was reacting to what felt like an absolute invasion of my body.''
U.S. Attorney Steven Biskupic said TSA officers
perform a vital service and are entitled to protection from assault.
What do you think about the investigation into Roberts' SM
adoptions?
You're right there....... FBI investigation
If it were McCain you better believe the FBI would start an investigation but with all his involvement with corrupt organizations and terrorists groups, the FBI will not look into him at this point. They are waiting to see how this election turns out. No, he wouldn't pass an FBI investigation. There are many that have been in or done far less than him that haven't.
really, remember the OJ trial and the riots, Rodney King, etc. This is a larger scale
s
Individual independent investigation
I agree it is important to look at raw facts and draw conclusions for yourself. So much of what we see and hear out of the mainstream media is slanted to one side or the other. I believe it is very important for one to get info from independent sources in order to draw enlightened conclusions. I think it's naive at best to trust solely the mainstream media and even partisan sources exclusively for your news. Things can be spun so many different ways. This is one area where we agree.
I said I prefer to wait for the investigation and
Letting an official process play itself out is what open-minded, objective people do before they make judgments.
News on the hacker investigation
Update: FBI serves search warrant against UT student in Palin case Becky Simmons Updated: 9/22/2008 5:40:46 AM Posted: 9/18/2008 4:53:06 PM
The FBI is stepping up its investigation into the possibility that a University of Tennessee student hacked into the personal e-mail of Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin.
A person who identified himself as a witness tells 10 News that agents with the FBI served a federal search warrant at the Fort Sanders residence of David Kernell early Sunday morning. Kernell lives in the Commons apartment complex at 1115 Highland Ave.
David Kernell is the son of Mike Kernell, a Democratic state representative from Memphis.
A Department of Justice spokesperson confirmed there has been "investigatory activity" in Knoxville regarding the Palin case, but she said there are no publicly available search warrants, and no charges have been filed.
A separate law enforcement source confirmed to 10 News that a search warrant was served on Kernell's apartment.
According to the witness, several agents arrived at The Commons of Knoxville around midnight.
They presented their badges upon entering Kernell's apartment, where several students were having a party, and took down their names.
The witness tells us they asked him and those who did not live in the unit to go outside. He believes the investigators took about 1.5 to 2 hours taking pictures of everything inside the apartment.
Witnesses say Kernell and his friends fled the apartment when the FBI agents arrived.
Kernell's three roommates were also subpoenaed, and must testify this week in Chattanooga, according to the witness.
Knoxville blogger and WBIR contributor Terry Frank has posted what she says are images from Kernell's Facebook page.
Numerous web sites say someone going by the name "Rubico" has admitted to hacking Palin's email. According to www.wired.com, "Rubico" made the claim in an internet posting. This person said it was easy to access Palin's yahoo account by using information like her zip code and birthdate. Various people on the internet have quickly associated Rubico with David Kernell.
Previous StoryThe son of state Rep. Mike Kernell has been contacted by authorities in connection with a probe into the hacking of personal e-mail of vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, Kernell confirmed on Thursday.
Kernell, a Memphis Democrat, said his 20-year-old son David had been contacted by authorities investigating the hacking of Palin's personal email account.
The FBI and the Secret Service started a formal investigation on Wednesday into the hacking.
David Kernell is a student at the University of Tennessee-Knoxville. Mike Kernell said he spoke to his son on Thursday, as he does on a regular basis.
Kernell otherwise declined to comment, or discuss his son's whereabouts and whether he was in custody.
Reports that Palin's e-mail had been hacked bounced across blogs and into the news on Thursday.
O is not under investigation for voter fraud
First of all, "voter fraud" is a bit hard to prove BEFORE the election. ACORN has been targeted by right-wingers for the past 38 years, since the day of its inception. While I do not condone it, this comes as no surprise that poverty-stricken workers who are paid by the signature and have quotas would turn in falsified statements. Barack Obama did not tell them to do that.
Nobody is swallowing anything, including your deluded ramblings. Those soup kitchen patrons, rock concert audiences and homeless are American voters with much more human dignity than you are able to display. We do not live under a Nazi fascist system. Their votes are equal to yours.
The kind of hatred you hold says a lot about you. You have a flock mentality. Original thought or ideas are beyond our grasp. It takes a lot of energy to harbor that kind of hate. Your life will be cursed until you let that go, and your campaign will be doomed to failure if you give Americans so little credit as to think that anyone in their right mind would want to join you and subscribe to such trash.
Even Keith Obermann doesn't think this is right and I haven't agreed with him in about 2 months. Luckily the secret service or FBI is investigating this house. Not a hate crime? Right! As KO says "It's not the spirit of Halloween, it's the spirit of hate".
All living human beings should not be made into a "display like this" no matter who they are. I just posted this message because a new update is that the FBI or secret service is investigation.
Maybe they should also investigate that lady who put "death" standing behind Obama as a display too.
Congressman Jim Leach (R, Iowa) has informed Congresswoman Barbara Lee (D, California) that he will co-sponsor her Resolution of Inquiry into Bush Administration communications with the U.K. about Iraq at the time of the Downing Street Memos. Leach is the first Republican member of Congress to publicly support a demand for an inquiry into the Bush Administration's pre-war claims. The 131 congress members who have signed Congressman John Conyers' letter to the President about the Downing Street Memo are all Democrats. The 11 Senators who have asked the Senate Intelligence Committee to do the investigation it committed to in February 2004 but never did are all Democrats.
The Resolution, H. Res. 375, is a privileged resolution which must be brought to a vote in the House International Relations Committee by September 16th, or Lee is permitted to demand a vote of the full House. Fifty-two Democrats, including Lee, have co-sponsored the Resolution. Leach is the first Republican to join them, and he is a member of the International Relations Committee..
The International Relations Committee has 27 Republican members and 23 Democratic members. Thus far 10 of the Democrats have co-sponsored the Resolution. If the other 13 vote for it as well, then along with Leach, one more Republican vote will be needed for a tie, or two more for passage.
Leach has questioned Bush's war policies for years and was one of five Republicans in May to vote for Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey's amendment requiring an exit strategy. Another of those five, Congressman Ron Paul of Texas, also serves on the International Relations Committee.
Congressman Leach has broken the silence of the Republican Party on the Downing Street Minutes, said John Bonifaz, Co-Founder of the After Downing Street Coalition. His willingness to co-sponsor Congresswoman Barbara Lee's Resolution of Inquiry is bound to make the White House nervous. It is not possible for the President to paint this demand for documents as coming solely from his opponents. This is a demand for the truth. Did the president deliberately deceive and mislead the United States Congress and the American people about the basis for going to war against Iraq? We as a people -- from Crawford to Des Moines to Washington, DC, regardless of our political persuasion, deserve to know the answer to that basic question.
Congress returns to Washington from its summer break on September 6, said David Swanson, Co-Founder of the After Downing Street Coalition. The first 10 days will test the Democrats' ability to stand together and challenge the Bush Administration, as well as Republicans' willingness to break ranks on an issue where public opinion has diverged widely from White House policy.
marks the location of current message within thread
