 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?...
|
|
|
Subject: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Bobert Date: 28 Jan 05 - 10:47 PM Seems that thre Bush administration can't quite break themselves of this little torturin' jones. But like any practicin' addict they try to say the right things like "We're against toture" but then go on and say something to the effect of "Unless it's done on "detainees" in "another country"..;. So we've got a couple of "private jets" escorting "detainees " to foriegne countrys who are being tortured even beyond what we've see in Iraq... Other than the obvious, "like whos gonna prosecute US", what are your thoughts? And, BTW, Donnie Rumsfeld has pulled out of a visit to Germany, where he could, under international law be arrested on sharges of war crimes... And BTW Part 2, this isn't about the war crimes being committed by the insurgents, which are horrifying, but about the US's behavior? Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Amos Date: 28 Jan 05 - 11:09 PM This administration has condoned and authorized torture far beyond the limits of anything we have ever blessed before. Bush has lied about it, blaming it on a few bad apples when the conditions making it possible were set up by his own SECDEF. and oprobably with his knowledge; and he wants to award the man who told him he could do it legally by promoting him to Attorney General. Who ARE these goddamned murderous whores? And what have they done to my nation? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: hilda fish Date: 29 Jan 05 - 03:08 AM When god's on your side how can you do war crimes let alone be exempt? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: robomatic Date: 29 Jan 05 - 06:55 AM You're not totally wrong, but we are not and have never been exempt from war crimes. In fact, I don't know any country half so honest about acknowledging them. This thread is tacit evidence. I'll be more sanguine about your position (after all, it is our own system which exposed, documented, and is punishing already) when other outfits, like the Serbians still in power, Kim Jong Il, Saddam, the Janjawit, Hamas, ETA, Indonesian army, are hauled over the coals as you seem to think we should be. Have a great weekend |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: robomatic Date: 29 Jan 05 - 06:58 AM I apologize for the tandem post. I really should've mentioned the Chinese in Tibet, The Egyptians in Yemen, the Syrians in Lebanon, the rulers of Zaire and Kenya, the junta in Burma - Myanmar, and if you strain a bit, there are a few others more significant than anything you'll find in the Congressional Record. see ya. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: GUEST Date: 29 Jan 05 - 07:14 AM So robo, you're one of the kids who joined in with the other kids beating up the one kid. The fact that others do it is of no account. Are you a civilised nation or not? Do you stand for what you profess you stand for, or do you just profess it? Basically you're saying it's not a crime if I do it, everybody does it, so what. And so we go ever backwards to the Dark Ages |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: mooman Date: 29 Jan 05 - 07:17 AM Nobody who has carried out war crimes should be exempt. As others have indicated also I don't think any particular guilty country or individual needs to be singled out. Peace moo |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Terry Allan Hall Date: 29 Jan 05 - 08:41 AM I'd be happy to see Bu$h and Co. on trial...right beside Saddam and every other war criminal. If America is ever to be, once again, viewed as a shining example to the world, then ALL who commit war crimes should be harshly dealt with...not an exponent of capital punishment, though...putting Dubya, Condoleeza, Rummy, Cheney, etc. on road gangs for 20 years (w/ no chance of early release) sounds fair... If they survive 20 years, let 'em be. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Hrothgar Date: 29 Jan 05 - 08:43 AM The winners are exempt from war crimes charges. Same as getting to write the history of the conflict. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Bobert Date: 29 Jan 05 - 08:51 AM Define winner... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: dianavan Date: 29 Jan 05 - 03:49 PM If the U.S. is ever to regain its status in the international world, the war crimes of its administration of the war in Iraq will not go untried. Otherwise you will be treated with as much respect as Kim Jong Il, Saddam, the Janjawit, Hamas, ETA, Indonesian army and the Chinese in Tibet, The Egyptians in Yemen, the Syrians in Lebanon, the rulers of Zaire and Kenya, the junta in Burma - Myanmar. The only way for the American people to 'save face' is to call the Bush administration on its inhumanity. What kind of government accountability do you want? Will it be O.K. for the U.S. to unilaterally invade other countries? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Bobert Date: 29 Jan 05 - 07:44 PM Hear, hear, d..... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Peace Date: 29 Jan 05 - 08:15 PM The notion that 'war' crimes will be dealt with is a laugh in itself--sardonic and grim; a bad joke. Let's just forget the adjective 'war' and deal with heinous crimes. Idi Amin, Pinochet. Yeah, like they got tried, huh? No, there was no war, per se, but they slaughtered people and then got a neat retirement elsewhere after they were deposed. That is why I have always liked what happened to that piece of garbage who was kidnapped from the house on Garibaldi Street. Yes, kidnapping is a crime, but hey, he went bye bye and I think 'justice' was served. Too bad the world found safe places for the two others I mentioned at the top of this paragraph, huh? Sorry if I sound a bit jaded, but I don't think countries give a damn about 'war crimes' unless it happens to them. Bruce M |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: GUEST,heric Date: 29 Jan 05 - 08:25 PM This is just another instance of Bobert's transparent attempts to shout down and shut out anyone with a contrary opinion, this time those in favor of war crimes; might as well just save one's breath. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: robomatic Date: 29 Jan 05 - 08:35 PM Well, let's get clear on what the war crimes are. Sounds like (some of) you are saying the war itself is a crime? Or are we saving the term for the more heinous acts at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo? Also, do we have a fair world tribunal? Or a kangaroo court of the nations? If you are arguing the war itself is de facto a 'war crime' we're on completely different pages. GUEST, you made me feel like that one kid getting beat on in the playground because you were more accusative of me without establishing any reference of precisely what the crimes of the US are and where they should be tried. I do not believe the Dark Ages are a good goal, and I do not believe we're headed there. A sunny inferno, maybe..... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Bobert Date: 29 Jan 05 - 08:37 PM Well, GUEST, I really thought there would be a line of folks wanted to say things like "Yeah, but what about those who are beheading folks and then putting it on the internet". But, no... That, in itself, is a sad commentary... What, are people taht desentized to violence? No wonder no one cares if the US tortures folks, as long as it isn't ME, of course... The US is on the way down in the marality curve. Way down! No one gives a rip! Wait until they bust down yer friggin' door 'cause they heard you had a plaid shirt in yer closet... That's what happened in Germany and that's what can happen here... Jus' go along with it... It's okay.. Nom it's not o-friggin-kay! No transparency here... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Little Hawk Date: 29 Jan 05 - 08:48 PM To answer the original question... No. Wars always result in war crimes. Usually (if not always) by both sides. War IS a crime. That's one reason why no one should go to war capriciously or unnecessarily, and Mr Bush did. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: dick greenhaus Date: 29 Jan 05 - 10:13 PM I always thought that in order to have war crimes you had to have a war. Do we? With whom? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Little Hawk Date: 29 Jan 05 - 10:15 PM Ask George Bush. He claims to be fighting a war against terror. He intends to "end tyrrany" on this planet... (sigh) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Bobert Date: 29 Jan 05 - 10:20 PM Well, the best thing that George Bush can do to end tyranny on the planet is to commit suicide..... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Sorcha Date: 29 Jan 05 - 10:20 PM 'I was following orders' wasn't good enough for Nuermbug and it's not good enough now. Even my dyed in the wool Bushite/Repub brother is re thinking his stand. Yes, the US should be tried and most probably convicted for ALL this shite. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Amos Date: 30 Jan 05 - 09:49 AM War Crimes are criminal acts in excess of the codes of law governing warfare. Blowing people up in an undeclared war is (I believe) such an act. Mistreating prisoners is certainly such an act. This article discusses misconceptions about crimes of war and the whole site addresses the issue. This site promotes holding the US accountable for war crimes.
A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: dick greenhaus Date: 30 Jan 05 - 02:16 PM I never suggested that they weren't crimes--I'm just not sure about the "war" part. Can yopu have a war against one ploitical factor in a country unless that factor controls the actions of that country? We had a war--against Iraq--when we invaded. But sinece "mission accomplished" what war exists? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: dianavan Date: 30 Jan 05 - 02:19 PM heric - What do you mean? "...those in favor of war crimes;" I don't know too many people in favour of war crimes, do you? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Peter K (Fionn) Date: 30 Jan 05 - 02:20 PM Amos, I assume the Ramsey Clark quote was in reference to Bush Senior's Iraq adventure? Nuremburg's an interesting one, Sorcha - the first attempt to legitimise the prosecution of war criminals under the banner of some kind of international authority. Naturally it still raised concerns about "victors' justice" but the US addressed that concern with an assurance that such a tribunal would equally hear cases brought against US personnel if any were ever suspected of war crimes. Why did the US resile from that, and agree to support an International Criminal Court only on condition that it would have no jurisdiction over US personnel? Why does the US fund the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, which is eager to prosecute suspected war criminals when they are Serbs but not when they are Croats - unless it is to do with the fact that America buttressed and supported the fascistic Franjo Tudjman's regime in Croatia throughout the 1990s? Would not an international tribunal have been the right place to try those CIA personnel and their overlords, up to and including Kissinger, for their roles in the murder of Allende in Chile and the overthrow of his democratic government? Of course, Kissinger could answer to some other charges too, while he was there. America cites "international law" when convenient and places itself above it when that suits its interests better. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: GUEST,heric Date: 30 Jan 05 - 02:27 PM I was just teasing Bobert but it didn't fly. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: DougR Date: 30 Jan 05 - 03:05 PM Blowing people up in an undeclaired war is a war crime? Ah, Amos has spoken so it must be! No war crimes have been committed, Bobert, so no, you should not be rewarded with a pound of Bush's flesh (Amos either!) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Little Hawk Date: 30 Jan 05 - 04:08 PM Many, many war crimes have been committed. The first one was the act of launching the war. Refer to Hitler's quite similar attack on Poland in 1939 for pointers on how that works... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Bobert Date: 30 Jan 05 - 05:44 PM I don't want a pound of flesh, Dougie. Hey, oif he's just quit and in doing so tell people he was quitting because he's tired of Donnie Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney running the show, that would be fine, too... By exposing them, they would certainly be impeaced and recalled respecrively... That would do fir starters... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: dianavan Date: 30 Jan 05 - 07:17 PM Maybe not war crimes in the strictest sense but the Bush administration has defied the rule of law and indeed, international law by denying suspected terrorists access to the courts while subjecting them to the harshest of prison conditions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: CarolC Date: 30 Jan 05 - 11:07 PM I got it, heric. And I laughed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Bobert Date: 30 Jan 05 - 11:17 PM No, Bush and his buddies have violated international law. They are torturing people as we speak and their jsutification? These are not POW's but detainees!!! Can you believe that??? Well, when it comes down to the brass tacks that is their position. Yeah, Bush says "We don't condone torture" but that only applies to the folks he and his chums aren't torturing??? Go figure??? But typical Bushite mis-speak (lies) to cover up their anti-human policies... It's friggin' torture and everyone, willing to admit it or not, knows it!!! If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.... You know the rest... Thre US is torturing people every friggin' day and as you read this you can take it to the bank that somewhere yer tax dollars are being spent this very minute torturing someone... Hey, if yer fine with that, just say so but don't pussyfoot around it like you have convinced yerselves this ain't happening. IT'S HAPPENING.... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: CarolC Date: 30 Jan 05 - 11:30 PM I think this part of Amos' second link deserves to be posted for those who prefer not to open links. The first sentence refers to a photograph that is at the top of the page in the link. Not recommended for those with weak stomachs... "Incinerated body of an Iraqi soldier on the "Highway of Death," a name the press has given to the road from Mutlaa, Kuwait, to Basra, Iraq. U.S. planes immobilized the convoy by disabling vehicles at its front and rear, then bombing and straffing the resulting traffic jam for hours. More than 2,000 vehicles and tens of thousands of charred and dismembered bodies littered the sixty miles of highway. The clear rapid incineration of the human being [pictured above] suggests the use of napalm, phosphorus, or other incindiary bombs. These are anti-personnel weapons outlawed under the 1977 Geneva Protocols. This massive attack occurred after Saddam Hussein announced a complete troop withdrawl from Kuwait in compliance with UN Resolution 660. Such a massacre of withdrawing Iraqi soldiers violates the Geneva Convention of 1949, common article 3, which outlaws the killing of soldiers who "are out of combat." There are, in addition, strong indications that many of those killed were Palestinian and Kuwaiti civilians trying to escape the impending seige of Kuwait City and the return of Kuwaiti armed forces. No attempt was made by U.S. military command to distinguish between military personnel and civilians on the "highway of death." The whole intent of international law with regard to war is to prevent just this sort of indescriminate and excessive use of force." (bolded and italicized emphasis mine) If this is true, the GHW Bush administration is most certainly guilty of war crimes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Little Hawk Date: 30 Jan 05 - 11:58 PM Like I said, all wars involve war crimes, usually (if not always) by both sides. Bit in the case of the Gulf War and the more recent Iraq War the USA has committed immense war crimes, particularly in light of the fact that the more recent Iraq war was launched under false pretences, pre-emptively, on a country that had done nothing to the USA and a country which posed no real danger to the USA. It ranks alongside Hitler's attacks on Poland, Denmark, Norway, Holland, Belgium, Yugoslavia, Luxembourg, Greece, and Russia...in the annals of totally unprovoked pre-emptive aggression, launched for only these reasons: territorial, political, and material gains for the invading forces. That is aggression, illegal aggression, an action taken against the explicit will of the U.N. and most of the international community, and an action that IS, in itself, a war crime. Unfortunately, no one in the World has the necessary clout and sheer brute military power to arrest and try the perpetrators of that crime...Mr Bush and his cabinet and Mr Blair and his cabinet. No one had the clout to arrest Hitler and Mussolini in '39-41 either. Iraq is not the end of this incredible mess...it is more like the beginning of it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Peace Date: 31 Jan 05 - 12:02 AM Party politics aside, I do wonder whether the continuing American presence in Iraq will be an election issue in 2008. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: DougR Date: 31 Jan 05 - 05:29 PM If they are still there, it probably will be brucie. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Bobert Date: 31 Jan 05 - 06:50 PM Aww, that's easy to say now, Dougie... BTW, how do you feel about your country violating Genava Convention international law? Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Richard Bridge Date: 31 Jan 05 - 07:17 PM Thank you Fionn |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: GUEST,Com Seangan Date: 31 Jan 05 - 07:23 PM Of course the US should be exempt from War Crimes. The US has said so. And even Ghadaffi has said "In Western Justice, only the vanquished are guilty of war crimes". Is he right or is he wrong ?????? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Peace Date: 31 Jan 05 - 07:30 PM The losers don't seem to write too many of the rules or the history books. It has ever been thus. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Once Famous Date: 31 Jan 05 - 09:10 PM What's that I hear? Is it the Hague ready to expound about war crimes? No, it's Bobert blowing a fart, that's all. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: dianavan Date: 31 Jan 05 - 10:00 PM If Kissinger can get away with it, why not Bush? Kissinger has set the tone and everyone that came after has known that they are exempt from punishment as long as they have enough money and power. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Stu Date: 01 Feb 05 - 04:56 AM The US is exempt from war crimes. It does what it wants because it has got more guns than anyone else and nobody can 'kick their ass'. Interestingly, the US has also exempted itself from the Geneva Convention and the Kyoto Protocol too. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Wolfgang Date: 01 Feb 05 - 01:45 PM Nobody who has carried out war crimes should be exempt. (Mooman) I agree completely. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: freda underhill Date: 11 Dec 05 - 07:38 AM extracts from the Observer..full article here: MI6 and CIA 'sent student to Morocco to be tortured' An Ethiopian claims that his confession to al-Qaeda bomb plot was signed after beatings, reports David Rose in New York Sunday December 11, 2005; The Observer An Ethiopian student who lived in London claims that he was brutally tortured with the involvement of British and US intelligence agencies. Binyam Mohammed, 27, says he spent nearly three years in the CIA's network of 'black sites'. In Morocco he claims he underwent the strappado torture of being hung for hours from his wrists, and scalpel cuts to his chest and penis and that a CIA officer was a regular interrogator. ... The Observer has obtained fresh details of his case which was first publicised last summer. ..Initially interrogated by Pakistani and British officials, he told Stafford Smith: 'The British checked out my story and said they knew I was a nobody. They said they would tell the Americans.' He was questioned by the FBI and began to hear accusations of terror involvement. He says he also met two MI6 officers. One told him he would be tortured in an Arab country. The interrogations intensified and he says he was taken to Islamabad; then, in July 2002, on a CIA flight to Morocco. His description of the process matches independent reports. Masked officers wore black. They stripped him, subjected him to a full body search and shackled him to his seat wearing a nappy. In Morocco he was told he had plotted with Padilla and had dinner in Pakistan with Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the planner of 9/11, and other al-Qaeda chiefs. 'I've never met anyone like these people,' Mohammed told Stafford Smith. 'How could I? I speak no Arabic... I never heard Padilla's name until they told me.' During almost 18 months of regular beatings in Morocco, Mohammed says he frequently met a blonde woman in her thirties who told him she was Canadian. The US intelligence officer told The Observer this was an 'amateurish' CIA cover. 'The only Americans who historically pretended to be Canadian were backpackers travelling in Europe during the Vietnam war. Apart from the moral issues, what disturbs me is that, as an attempt to create plausible deniability, this is so damn transparent.' According to Mohammed, he was threatened with electrocution and rape. On one occasion, he was handcuffed when three men entered his cell wearing black masks. 'That day I ceased really knowing I was alive. One stood on each of my shoulders and a third punched me in the stomach. It seemed to go on for hours. I was meant to stand, but I was in so much pain I'd fall to my knees. They'd pull me back up and hit me again. They'd kick me in the thighs as I got up. I could see the hands that were hitting me... like the hands of someone who'd worked as a mechanic or chopped with an axe.' Later he was confronted with details of his London life - such as the name of his kickboxing teacher - and met a Moroccan calling himself Marwan, who ordered him to be hung by his wrists. 'They hit me in the chest, the stomach, and they knocked my feet from under me. I have a shoulder pain to this day from the wrenching as my arms were almost pulled out of their sockets.' Another time, he told Stafford Smith: 'They took a scalpel to my right chest. It was only a small cut. Then they cut my left chest. One of them took my penis in his hand and began to make cuts. He did it once, and they stood still for maybe a minute watching. I was in agony, crying, trying desperately to suppress myself, but I was screaming... They must have done this 20 to 30 times in maybe two hours. There was blood all over.' In September he was taken to Guantanamo Bay where he has been charged with involvement in al-Qaeda plots and faces trial there by military commission. Stafford Smith said: 'I am unaware of any evidence against him other than that extracted under torture.' The Foreign Office, the Moroccan Embassy and the CIA refused to comment yesterday. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 11 Dec 05 - 07:48 AM Look up 'Kotb' - his epiphany into the benefits of terrorism came AFTER he was tortured, and did the even greater epiphanies of some of his followers: that not only the islamic political leaders, but the populace as well who did not support them, were no longer to be considered muslims and thus could be murdered for the greater good of Islamic State Creation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 11 Dec 05 - 07:51 AM Oh, BTW, forgot to add - the torture was carried out by CIA trained people - "Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: GUEST Date: 11 Dec 05 - 08:01 AM Surely no one can be surprised that the US are torturing internees, this has been going on in every so-called civilised country for countless years, the British were and are masters at this black art. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 11 Dec 05 - 08:11 AM ... but only the US is clever enough to use Spanish Inquisition methods, then deem them to be 'not torture', in secret prisons in foreign lands, which it can them claim are not subject to US jurisdiction. Interesting too, how a US serviceman can commit a crime on foreign soil, then be spirited back to 'US soil on foreign land' so that he can be protected - but then is allegedly not under US legal jurisdiction? Have your cake and eat it too! Funny how Americans I have met on Aussie soil seem to THINK they are still in the USA, no matter where in the world they are... "Do unto others" - it will only make US citizens bigger targets. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Greg F. Date: 11 Dec 05 - 12:53 PM Missing the big picture here, folks- the U.S. feels that its exempt, period. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: CarolC Date: 11 Dec 05 - 02:34 PM If they're just looking for confessions (as they appear to be doing), rather than the truth, then what, really, is their agenda? I can think of no other than they need someone to pin something on. Now why would they need to do that? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Should US Be Exempt from War Crimes?... From: Barry Finn Date: 11 Dec 05 - 03:04 PM Hey Bobert, to you original question. None should be exempt from war crimes. Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought that some of our present administration is subject to arrest for war crimes if they set foot on certain foreign soils? What an irony if Asscoat & Rumsfulled were kidnapped by non hostial government agents to stand trial in an international court. Fireworks, embrassment & a lot of smooooth & fast talk would be the order for the day. Think how would the world respond to that and what would be the American reaction? As we've recently (& not so recently) been accused of sending prisoners to foriegn soils to be tortured (which is against the Geneava Convention) the US would still be held guily for the resulting torture. The question should be rephrased as why isn't those involved not being brought to trial here in the US & in the World Court? I'm not talking about trying the few low lifes that were 'just following orders' & it doesn't matter that we don't recognize the World Court, Saddman doesn't recognize our courts? It's to sad that our biggest statement to the world is that we hold our selves to be the foremost in setting double standards. Barry |
