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.
Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old. To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database I'm surprised more of the right-wing MT's haven't brought
all of us, and our careers. (HAVING a career, vs having that career 100% offshored). This is one of the major issues my vote is hinging on this year, because unless we have SOME hope of companies not being given free rein, and in fact INCENTIVES for doing what they're doing, before long MT in America will DRY UP, because none of us will be able to afford any longer to work for what they pay, simply because they can get away with it.
Having a candidate in office who is for reining in this offshoring incentive may not solve the problem, and in fact nothing at all might happen. But if the winning candidate is FOR taxing heavily the MTSOs and other companies whose greed has ruined a good, respectable profession in America, then at least I can get up in the morning the day after the election with some shred of HOPE. If a pro-big-company profits, pro-offshoring candidate wins, there may be no other choice for many of us than to leave the U.S. in search of work.
Did he have a trial
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.
I should have said Lunsford *investigation*, not trial...sm
I don't think that crumb cake has had his trial yet.
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.
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.
Why the heck can't BLACKS be just plain AMERICANS like the rest of us???? I don't see myself going around saying I'm Irish-Native American-American. Let's let the racist crap go, shall we?
And by the way, I DID answer you. Sorry it wasn't quick enough to suit you.
VOTING FOR LOU DOBBS!!!!
He has brought it up
along with all the other questionable associations Obama has, but no answers have been given. Obama said that he did not agree with the things Wright said, but that was really all the explanation he gave and he refused to answer any other questions about it. I would like to hear answers about that, too, but I just don't see it happening - he's too much of a friend of the media to have to answer to anything.
Brought To You By......
http://www.google.com/search?q=Once+upon+a+time%2C+on+a+farm+in+Washington+DC%2C+there+was+a+little+red+hen+who+scratched+about+the+barnyard+until+she+uncovered+quite+a+few+grains+of+wheat.&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
smokers and I was just trying to explain how I can love and care for someone but hate what they do....so I used my father and his smoking.
As for smoking....it is too a sin. Technically anything that we take into our body that harms it is sinful. Our bodies are supposed to be temples to God. That is why for so many years ear piercing was bad and some people still consider tattoes bad.
the word should be *brought*
my fingers have a mind of their own...
The OP brought up her concerns....
I brought up mine. I find mine more concerning than hers. And I don't understand why Democrats accept certain behavior in their own and lamblast the other side for the same perceived weaknesses. Why is that?
I have brought it up earlier on here but
O lovers immediately jumped on the Palin bandwagon again. They are so worried about Palin being a "heartbeat away from possibly being president" but they couldn't care less than Biden may very well be just a heartbeat away....period!
They seem to think Obama will live forever, even though both his parents died young AND he was a heavy smoker, drugger, and drinker.
They seem to have no concern about that.
You Obama supporters always say "give me fact give me proof" and then when someone does you get mad.
I never said Mccain didn't say that, just saying it isn't a very good argument because THEY BOTH have said it.
I brought up Russia............sm
because it was an example of basically an exact opposite from what America is. You seem to want to live completely opposite than Americans have lived for the 150 (give or take) years before Madelyn Murray O'Hare started raising Cain (no pun intended) about prayer in schools, etc. While I realize atheists did exist prior to her time, for the most part, they pretty much "lived and let live" much as Christians did with respect to co-existing with them. That is more what I would call "tolerance" rather than getting all up in arms because God's name appears on the currency that puts a roof over your head, food on your table and clothes on your back.
As to the issue of Christian gays and lesbians, I really feel that is a subject more for the Faith forum and would happily discuss it with you there sometime as I have opinions on that as well. (are you surprised? LOL)
Marriage is a union between a man and a woman period. Unless you are married to a woman, then of course I feel your marriage is valid and certainly not worthless. You are really stretching the limits of common sense on this subject with your suppositions.
Your next to last statement is absolutely correct. There is only one way for true Christianity and that is based solely on the teachings in the Bible. People who do not believe the Bible do see it as divisive and intolerant, but like Paul said "the preaching of the cross is foolishness to those who do not believe." Again, another fascinating subject for the Faith forum, but I would state that it is not Christians who seek to divide this nation but unbelievers who do because of their unbelief.
With all that said, JtBB, I will say this. I find you a very interesting person and really enjoy debating issues with you and hope you realize that just because our opinions clash some, okay most, of the time does not mean that I don't like you. :o)
This pearl of wisdom is brought to you by
someone who proved herself ridiculous 500 posts ago....
I, for one, am glad this topic was brought up
You NEVER hear about this on the news. For most people, hearing about how much children are suffering would take the fire out of their battle cry real fast. I agree that a bullet shot by a 15 year old kills just as readily as one fired by an adult. But how do you blame a child for acting out in the only way it knows how? These kids do not know any other way. You cannot, however, go to these kids and tell them that the way they know is WRONG, you have to show the child there are other ways to do things and let THEM decide. Again, shoving ideals and religions down their throats will only make the situation worse.
It is unbelievably important that we leave these kids with the a better impression of America. They are the future of the Middle East and if there is ever going to be peace, those kids are the key.
No bigger than the backlash JM brought down
nm
You brought up some good issues
I don't like unessessary (sp?) bashing of anyone. That is disturbing to me hearing about the comments she made on the radio show. On one hand she'll say she's a Christian and on the other hand she will laugh at the expense of hurting others feelings.
As for what the candidates say during campaigning....it's happening on both sides. I don't like it. I don't like it when it happens to Obama, McCain, Biden or Palin. I think they are all doing the best job they know how to get elected.
With that said, everyone seemed to focus on Palins speech and how she took shots at Obama/Biden, but when I listened to their speeches last week during the DNC they were doing the same thing to Palin and McCain. Then the media made me totally nauseaus(especially MSNBC). They were laughing at what Obama, Biden, Michelle, and other speakers were saying, but when the republicans said something the media said it was appalling, they're attacking, etc, etc etc. Everyone is saying things about the other side. Some of it may not be funny and a lot of it may not be true but I guess seeing as its an election I can understand why they are doing it.
The constituents who brought her their concerns...
does freedom not extend to them also? They don't have a right to at least ask about the books? Which is what they did...and she took their concerns to the city council, which is her job as mayor. Why do you seek to curtail others' freedom in the name of freedom? They did not get what they wanted, but they certainly should have the freedom to ask and be heard. Isn't that exactly what you are saying we must protect??
glad you brought up Gorelick
She's a real dandy, dontcha know.
Another one of the NAGS, carefully hidden away until "time."
I read the link you provided. Good article. DH reads AOL. I won't read Fox or MSBNC or the others that have an agenda. I think she's a very smart woman and at least she understands the economics we are facing.
I do care about what she says and does in her state. I do hope we see more of her and am sure she has learned a lot because of the campaign. DH & I were saying that when she was running that if McCaina and she lost we would think about moving to Alaska to have her as our governor. However, winter is settling in up there and it's just a bit too cold for us (we would absolutely freeze).
Thanks again for the link - you restored my confidence in you. HA HA
I agree, we MUST purchase these things under law or under terms of a mortgage agreement.
But the premiums we pay are in line with what we're insuring. For example, we're not forced to pay the same premium for a two-bedroom home that a multimillionaire would pay for a 56-room mansion. We're not forced to pay the same premium for a 1980 Chevy that a multimillionaire would pay for a Rolls Royce.
That distinction doesn't hold true with medical "insurance," and that's partly where the problem lies.
I agree, we MUST purchase these things under law or under terms of a mortgage agreement.
But the premiums we pay are in line with what we're insuring. For example, we're not forced to pay the same premium for a two-bedroom home that a multimillionaire would pay for a 56-room mansion. We're not forced to pay the same premium for a 1980 Chevy that a multimillionaire would pay for a Rolls Royce.
That distinction doesn't hold true with medical "insurance," and that's partly where the problem lies.
It was beautiful and summed all the things that are in my heart that worry me and that I was too clunk-headed to write so eloquently.
I hope some little bit of it penetrated the conservative psyches on the other board to maybe bring us all a little closer together in our caring and concern for what's happening in our world.
Our party's not the 1 who brought nation to its knees.
nm
HA HA HA - had to laught at the picture that brought to mind
ya know people there sure is a lot more to a relationship than just sex. Companionship, trust, admiration, being happy every single day of your life, going out and doing things together that you both enjoy doing, the list goes on and on and on. My belief is that the creator put a man and woman togther to have a child (but luckily now a days childless couples whether it be man/woman, woman/woman or man/man can have a child). I'll take someone I can relate to, laugh with, cry with, work with, etc no matter what gender they are. So if you want to have kids by all means the number #1 way to go is sex, but if you want to spend the rest of your life together no matter what gender you are I believe in marriage.
So true - also, are these the same people who brought us the last 8 years?
and they want another free pass? I suspect the people supporting McCain were also all diehard Bush supporters. It would be interesting to see how they defend both who as per some are supposed to be on opposite sides now. how does that work now...
as far as democrats being represented, in all honesty I think they just probably move on because there is no debate, but trust me they are out there. it just gets tiresome being called names and being brow-beaten...
whenever I speak up (I am an independent) I usually get the attacks on myself personally, you know, I am naive, or like those people who think they are being so coy but are actually calling you stupid, or worse.
pretty soon we will have to change USA to DSA, the divided states of america.
not a tolerance from the right and too much separatism...
My late Mother, who was Pres. of the County RNC (with 6 kids, mind you), used to tell us kids, "you just wait." Boy, was she ever right. I was going to fund-raisers for Goldwater in grade school, so that gives you an idea how old I am (51).
Anyway, Mother had these stickers s she'd put on letters saying "America is a Republic, not a Democracy."
Stupid should hurt. As much as ya'll scream and whine it must.
Everytime you end up with egg on your face. It's really hilarious to sit back and watch liberals have a victory party before there's even any court hearings or before the political chips can fall. Oh the chips are going to fall, but I doubt they'll be where you want them to be.
Please don't bring this up again - brought up a lot of unhappy posters about this post
This was one topic that I took such a big offense to. I'm not voting for Obama, so you would think that I would be happy to "chime in", but when ever you start bringing the similarities in names between a known horrible horrible terrorist that committed horrendous crimes against the american people and start linking the name to an american running for president it sure stirs up a hornets nest. I know you are not comparing the two people together (OBL and Barack & Joe) but when you (or others) try to say oh what a coincidence, the first thing that comes to my mind is that deep down you are saying - hey everone Barack Obama and Joe Biden's name are so similar to Osama Bin Laden there must be a connection.
I was deeply offended the last time this was posted and still am. Would it be okay if this topic didn't come up again? Thanks.
1) Jobs (and our medical records) brought back from
3) The rich & big corporations pay their fair share.
4) Bring more honesty into the healthcare/HMO industry.
5) Address ILLEGAL immigration... it's out of hand.
6) Incentives for those who come up with clean & viable alternatives to oil & gasoline.
you did hear correctly and glad you finally brought it up
I'm so tired of hearing about poor Hillary. She did have people bused in from other states to vote (who weren't from that state). I know it because I was watching it on the news (CNN of all stations). Reporters were seeing out of state vehicles and other stuff.
For all the Hillary supporters take a look at just part of her resume:
1. Firing and prosecuting the White House Travel Office employees so she could enrich her friends.
2. Breaking the law on her cattle futures deals as she engaged in insider trading.
3. Having Bill pardon convicted Puerto Rican terrorists to get votes for Hillary in New York.
4. A record of shenanigans in the Whitewater deal which sent the Governor of Arkansas and numerous other people to jail.
5. Trying to reverse the American Revolution with her health care plan (would have given the Labor Department the authority to raise taxes on workers with NO approval from Congress and no limit would have been placed on the tax hikes either.)
6. Her health care task force was fined $250,000 for meeting in secret and violating government opens meetings laws.
That's the whole point. Bush acts like a dictator in complete privacy. Of course nobody can name names because this president thinks he can spy on whoever he wants without ever telling the person.
The sooner they impeach him, the safer this country will be.
No I haven't
but I'll try to remember to check it out.
At church last week our preacher had just gotten up to preach and he had just told us to turn to a Bible verse. So we all looked down to turn to the verse and when we looked up he was gone. Apparently he had stepped through the side door to go get a drink of water. Of course he came back out two minutes later, but someone made the joke that the rapture had come and he was the only one taken. It was pretty funny. Of course if it had really happened we'd have all of been with him (well hopefully, as I'm sure you know there are people in church who aren't really Christians!)
No, I haven't but
I'm seriously considering it...on a local level, of course, where I'm qualified. If I were younger............
I haven't seen that but I have seen others
There are just some very strange people in this country who think nothing of putting themselves on youtube giving their opinions (no matter what the subject). In today's world I would never ever put my face out for all to see stating my opinion. On this board is one thing (and even then I'm always concerned about what I post and who is watching it), but sometimes it's best to keep ones feelings to oneselves, especially if it is negative. The thought police are out there and you just never know what will come back at you for the worst.
I haven't seen her lately
When the election was going on (still when Hillary was running against Obama) and even shortly after the primaries ended I really enjoyed her. I thought she was level headed and brought out some good discussions and issues, but then towards the end of the election (maybe a couple weeks before 11/4) I found her starting to become opinionated and she jumped down someones throat about something that I thought she was clearly wrong on. She just became irritating and got under my skin a bit. I also really used to like Keith Olberman, but his coverage of the election was so unfair and between Keith and Rachel I just found them opinionated and not reporting facts and stuff so I kind of lost interest. Maybe I should try watching them again. It's funny about Hannity and Colmes. I cannot stand Hannity. He's just too uppity and goody two shoes and even D Morris would tell him stop focusing on certain issues and report on the other important ones and he doesn't listen. He annoys the you know what out of me. But Colmes...this guy is a crack up. I used to not be able to stand him. Now I enjoy listening to him. I don't agree with a lot of what he says, but I'll listen. I can take him a lot more than the others because he doesn't gloat about the O winning whereas the others do.
So I'll have to catch her show again and see if she's gotten better. Thanks for reminding me about her.
I'll tell you...if Bush is able to pardon himself....I think there is going to be a huge uproar. Mind as well just let the criminals decide what punishment they should get.
I haven't seen that.........sm
and don't know when it was made, but you can bet your bottom dollar that at the time it was made, that statement was probably meant to be comic relief. The average US citizen would have laughed at such a statement prior to this presidential election.
marks the location of current message within thread
