Disqus - Friends of ton

Re: No Secret Why CIA is Now Romanticizing 'Harsh Interrogation' Techniques

Adriaan de Leeuw — Tue, 15 May 2012 08:32:56 -0000

the Geneva Conventions which the US Supreme Court has ruled ALL US Prisoners at Gitmo are protected by, every one of them, says:
Article 131
No High Contracting Party shall be allowed to absolve itself or any other High Contracting Party of any liability incurred by itself or by another High Contracting Party in respect of breaches referred to in the preceding Article.

notice that a country cannot absolve itself, remembering that the Supreme Court threw Out Bush's Tribunal laws the precedent that Geneva is a superior law as a treaty,

The previous article
Article 130
Grave breaches to which the preceding Article relates shall be those involving any of the following acts, if committed against persons or property protected by the Convention: wilful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments, wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, compelling a prisoner of war to serve in the forces of the hostile Power, or wilfully depriving a prisoner of war of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed in this Convention.

Huge problems here the US government has breached Geneva and is continuing to breach Geneva, and until it prosecutes EVERY President and his executive continue the war crimes by failing to prosecute, finally every country that fights with them and hands prisoners over to them is also in breach of those self same war crimes.

Re: NDAA detention provisions go too far - The Hill's Congress Blog

Adriaan de Leeuw — Thu, 17 May 2012 01:25:17 -0000

Where were all of these Pius Representatives when the Bill went to Congress just a scant few months ago.

The reality is they hoped it would slip in with out notice and fuss, because they really want it, however its an election year and the Public DONT LIKE IT. so oh dear how did this law pass!

At least 60 Senators let it pass debate because it wasnt Philibustered.

Re: Cell Doors ‘Incapable of Locking’ at Giant Afghan Jail

Adriaan de Leeuw — Sun, 20 May 2012 03:09:58 -0000

That and the problem that His Successor Ford Pardoned Nixon, if he didnt and was Prosecuted, its unlikely that Cheney and Co wouldnt have done what they did later, in fact they probably wouldnt have ever got the chance as they would have been Prosecuted as well!

Re: By not lifting sanctions, West and Obama are helping Iran enrich uranium

Adriaan de Leeuw — Mon, 28 May 2012 23:14:56 -0000

America would fail its own Iranian ultimatum, it has political prisoners lots of them, in Guantanamo Bay, there are many that have won the right of the courts to leave but are not allowed because Congress has Forbidden them, plus also those that even if they WERE found not Guilty in a tribunal will not be set free anyway. That is just the beginning! We haven't even talked about Nuclear issues. When one dangles the diplomacy carrot one has to actually be prepared to both negotiate and be prepared to make compromises, the United States fails diplomacy 101, in that it thinks Diplomacy is do as we say or else, I can see the US get a bloody nose out of this, they might win the fight eventually but lose a Carrier or three on the way.

Re: Don't Let John Yoo Talk You Into Domestic Drone Use by Police

Adriaan de Leeuw — Tue, 29 May 2012 02:41:15 -0000

The Difference between the founding fathers and John Yoo is that there would have been a trial, he wouldnt have been tortured, he would have been given due Process, even a lawyer, everything that John Yoo himself would deny a prisoner of, John Yoo along with Bybee, are in fact War Criminals, please please please John Yoo go for a trip to Malaysia, they will be happy to lock you up for ever!

Re: Songs of War - Al Jazeera World - Al Jazeera English

Adriaan de Leeuw — Thu, 31 May 2012 02:38:13 -0000

Not even "accused" that is in fact a legal term after a person has been charged and sufficient evidence has been given to the court to actually send the person to trial, NONE of those prerequisites have been completed! That the majority of persons held havent even been given a Geneva Article 5 hearing to assertain even status is telling, that there is that failure. For the inevitable comments that they are Unlawful combatants all, GW BUSH didnt have a right to make a Presidential determination to make Laws regarding the Prisoners (read Hamdin V Rumsfeld) he also didnt have the ability to make a ruling of status of prisoner either, fixed only slightly by the Supreme Court ruling of said Hamdin V Rumsfeld that the prisoners had at minimum article 3 status!

Re: House Republicans add half-billion dollars to Pentagon budget

Adriaan de Leeuw — Sat, 02 Jun 2012 11:13:38 -0000

Sorry the US spends over a trillion dollars a year on Defence, creative accounting is used for little things like paying all Military Pensions out of Treasury, the replacement and upkeep of Nuclear weapons out of Energy, Billions in armaments to other countries from State Department, In fact most of the military costs for Iraq now are paid for out of the State Departments budget. Start adding those to the Pentagons Budget and suddenly the costs almost double!

Re: Why Is Nobody Listening to Jimmy Carter's Searing Critique of America?

Adriaan de Leeuw — Fri, 29 Jun 2012 00:53:36 -0000

Bush was the first President to USE indefinite incarceration both on foreign captured enemy, who still havent received their article 5 hearings to lawfully determine thier status, but he also incarcerated Pdilla for years begore he was charged and ONLY because the US Supreme Court was going to hear Padillas case, it should be noted that Padilla has never been charged of the crimes he was arrested for. Bush was also using UAVs with missiles on them in various countries, using civilians to kill what the US Supreme Court also said were Civilians without due process! That Obama soes this as well is bad but just remember that there is little that Obama has done that Bush didnt do first, Prosecute Bush, make he Precedent, it is MUCH easier to Prosecute a former POTUS than it is to Prosecute a current POTUS but once the Precedent is there the Current POTUS should be easy to prosecute. Send two Presidents to prison and guess what we will suddenly see Presidents act within the law on all matters, and we will also see congress become a lawful place!

Re: The Chasm Between Two Presidential Peace Prize Winners

Adriaan de Leeuw — Sat, 30 Jun 2012 02:36:07 -0000

If he realy wants to redeem himself he should get on a plane to the Hague go to the International Criminal Court and turn himself in for War Crimes, and give full and frank evidence of what he did and what he witnessed, and whilst God may have forgiven your tresspasses, it is time to render unto Caesar, like Christ did and stand trial for your sins, The redemtion will be that maybe your fellow man will demand that the real animals of these tortures Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Yoo and Bybee, will in fact be shown to be the criminals that tehy are!

Re: Patrick Cockburn: How Julian Assange's private life helped conceal the real triumph of WikiLeaks

Adriaan de Leeuw — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 03:51:51 -0000

Rape is a Crime no denial of this fact, However Assange has not been charged, this is an extradition attempt so that he can be further questioned, NOW under British Australian and United States Law one has the right to remain silent, one has the RIGHT to refuse to answer any question put to him! Assange offered the Swedes the right to Question him in Britain, which they could easily do, Britain sends Detectives away to Europe all the time to do such things as Does Australia and the United States, so in effect ther is reasoning that there are nefarious reasons as to Swedens reluctance to do so, there is in effect little real reason to extradite for questioning, especially if he refuses to answer questions, which in his native Australia, Britain and even the United States he has that right. NOW if they had actually charged him, that would be a different matter and I would most happilly drag him on the plane myself, on the basis that, that is the law!

Re: Politics - Conor Friedersdorf - CNN's Bogus Drone-Deaths Graphic - The Atlantic

Adriaan de Leeuw — Sat, 07 Jul 2012 06:45:00 -0000

Since WWII the Geneva Conventions were re-written it is now a War Crime to intentionally target Civilians. Noting that it is also a war crime to target children even if they are 17 years of age. So that silly arguement of Dreden or Hioshima does not add up any more.

Re: Politics - Conor Friedersdorf - CNN's Bogus Drone-Deaths Graphic - The Atlantic

Adriaan de Leeuw — Sat, 07 Jul 2012 06:48:43 -0000

No one less than the Architect of the fire Bombings of Tokyo, General Curtis Le May said that if America was to lose the war he would be prosecuted for War Crimes!

Re: Politics - Conor Friedersdorf - CNN's Bogus Drone-Deaths Graphic - The Atlantic

Adriaan de Leeuw — Sat, 07 Jul 2012 15:58:03 -0000

How about we change it to something closer to home, those in the WTC were in fact Militants the US has female soldiers, and the bulk of the people who died were of Military age, doesnt sound real good now does it!

Wasnt true in the WTC and sure as, isnt true in Pakistan or Afghanistan, another thing that we have to bring to the attention of the world, an attack on the Military is not an act of Terrorism, terrorism is by definition an attack on civilians, by a non military entity or group, now note that the CIA isnt a military organisation it is a civilian organisation, ipso facto the CIA is acting as a Terrorist organisation and the United States must therefore be a Terrorist state!

Re: Politics - Conor Friedersdorf - CNN's Bogus Drone-Deaths Graphic - The Atlantic

Adriaan de Leeuw — Sat, 07 Jul 2012 16:13:15 -0000

Whilst we hear about the attrocities of WWII let me tell you this story, My Father was a child in Utrecht Holland during that War, there was House to House fighting nearby and My Father saw one of his young friends get shot, a boy 7 or 8 years old. He remembers seeing a German Medic and an Allied Medic (American I think) work on the boy get him stabilised, working side by side to save the boy, which they did, these two "ENEMIES" saved the child he was taken from the Battlefield (dont know who by) the two medics left the scene and the fighting continued in ernest.

Sadly, I doubt whether that would happen today, today the Americans would probably wait until rescue came and shoot the rescuers.

Re: Why New Calls for Military Conscription and a National Service Draft Make Neither Moral Nor Economic Sense - Atlantic Mobile

Adriaan de Leeuw — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 12:53:50 -0000

It is simple they need the draft if they are going to attack Iran!!!!!!!!!!

Re: New Evidence That Israel Is Bluffing About Iran

Adriaan de Leeuw — Sat, 18 Aug 2012 00:40:29 -0000

Israel lacks a strategical bombing capability, its tactical bombers lack the range, it has but one egress route, Georgia, effectively if Israel was to attack Iran by air, it wouldno longer have an effective air force, even a half hearted attack by Iranian aircraft and Anti Aircraft weaponry would cause a significant failure of mission, because of the very low fuel reserves to make mission requirements. If the US was to provide tankers for the Israelies then they to would be accused of a Pearl Harbour like attack, Secretive and with out a declaration of War! That would give the Iranians an excuse to target the Fifth fleet at anchor with a barrage of missiles there are only so many standard 4 missiles on board, with Iran having so many more missiles to fire from their home base.

Having the biggest military is only useful if they are there at the precise time they are needed, Iran has a short supply line America the other side of the world. Just remember the logistics problems of iraq MK1 and Iraq Mk2, How long did it take for a build up, AND they had a convenient access point! 6 months wasnt it!

BTW the Syrian troubles are a requirement for an attack on Iran, Syria needs to be taken out of the equation to allow a build up through Turkey, as Syria could be used to attack the US Supply lines!

Re: Australian court’s failure to extradite alleged ex-Nazi raises ire, questions | JTA - Jewish & Israel News

Adriaan de Leeuw — Mon, 20 Aug 2012 05:46:45 -0000

As an Australian, I am deeply saddened by this development, however all is not lost, whilst there was the refusal to extradite on the grounds that the War Crime was not a crime in Hungary at the time of the killings ithe High Court of Australia did say a fresh application on a charge of "Murder" a crime which did exist at the time, was in fact the way to proceed! Law is a pedantic animal one must, make sure one correctly prosecutes a matter, an appeal after the trial may have seen a Criminal get off on a technicality!

Re: Lugar seeks Russian help in dealing with Syria's chemical weapons

Adriaan de Leeuw — Fri, 24 Aug 2012 07:28:39 -0000

If you remember it was Reagan and Bush the Elder that gave AlQaeda and the Taliban their first stingers, and it was Bush the Younger that first said he had the power to kill Americans Abroad, so USA Abroad WHO is confused.

Re: Why Are We Turning Our Backs on the Constitution?

Adriaan de Leeuw — Thu, 30 Aug 2012 08:31:55 -0000

When the Justices both heard and ruled on Hamdin V Rumsfeld there were a number of comments that didnt make it into the Public Arena, well not as they should have been reported any way, in the Arguement phase there was a comment made by the US Attorney and one of the Justices (I will let you actually look for it and read it yourself as there much other information there not put out into the Public Domain) made comment back " War What war we are not at war" note that specificity, here we have an Associate Justice of the US Supreme Court telling the US Attorney from the bench Of the United States Supreme Court, that the US was not at War, effectively the AUMF is not a declaration of War and as such means that the President (Bush at the time but it equally applies to Obama) constitutionally does not have WAR POWERS, the country is legally not at war, still isnt!
Now we all know that Hamdin V Rumsfeld threw out President Bush's illegally made laws for his first Military tribunal system, and the reasoning for that was that they were a breach of the Geneva Conventions Common Article 3 to be precise! That ruling did more than that the Justices said they had rights, those rights were given to them by a treaty ratified under the Constitution of the United States, The Geneva Conventions, Now there is a Hierarchy of law in the United States and it is Governed by the Constitution not the President and not the Congress not even by the Courts although they are supposed to uphold the constituiton in their rulings. First there is the Constitution, then there are laws of treaty they are in effect equal to the constitution itself, they require a Super Majority to pass. The Geneva conventions are also not only a treaty ranked law but they are a congressional law, they according to the Geneva Conventions need to be both! One of the Articles of that treaty make it a War Crime to badly "treat" a Prisoner , note I didnt say Torture, just badly treat, alas I could go on!
So the Constitution has ratified that the Prisoners have rights even CONSTITUTIONAL rights at law in US Courts and Tribunals EVEN illegal ones, as showed by the Hamdin as well as Boumediene v. Bush, Now as the Justices have already ruled several times that they have at least the rights of an Common Article III Civilian under Geneva we have serious problem in that Geneva has a number of Articles relating to Prisoners and their treatment.
Article 99

No prisoner of war may be tried or sentenced for an act
which is not forbidden by the law of the Detaining Power or by international
law, in force at the time the said act was committed.

No moral or physical coercion may be exerted on a
prisoner of war in order to induce him to admit himself guilty of the act of
which he is accused.

No prisoner of war may be convicted without having had
an opportunity to present his defence and the assistance of a qualified advocate
or counsel.
On that basis The laws written in 2005 are Post facto laws and a breach of both Geneva and The US Constitutions seperately, It is also unlawful under Geneva to offer a Plea Bargain, That the prisoner cannot actually present his evidence without gag is also a breach of Geneva and the Constituiton of the United States.
it gets better though!
Article 129

The High Contracting Parties undertake to enact any
legislation necessary to provide effective penal sanctions for persons
committing, or ordering to be committed, any of the grave breaches of the
present Convention defined in the following Article.

Each High Contracting Party shall be under the
obligation to search for persons alleged to have committed, or to have ordered
to be committed, such grave breaches, and shall bring such persons, regardless
of their nationality, before its own courts. It may
also, if it prefers, and in accordance with the provisions of its own
legislation, hand such persons over for trial to another High Contracting Party
concerned, provided such High Contracting Party has made out a prima facie
case.

Each High Contracting Party shall take measures
necessary for the suppression of all acts contrary to the provisions of the
present Convention other than the grave breaches defined in the following
Article.

In all circumstances, the accused persons shall benefit
by safeguards of proper trial and defence, which shall not be less favourable
than those provided by Article 105 and those following of the present
Convention.

Article 130

Grave breaches to which the preceding Article relates
shall be those involving any of the following acts, if committed against persons
or property protected by the Convention: wilful killing, torture or inhuman
treatment, including biological experiments, wilfully causing great suffering or
serious injury to body or health, compelling a prisoner of war to serve in the
forces of the hostile Power, or wilfully depriving a prisoner of war of the
rights of fair and regular trial prescribed in this Convention.

Article 131

No High Contracting Party shall be allowed to absolve
itself or any other High Contracting Party of any liability incurred by itself
or by another High Contracting Party in respect of breaches referred to in the
preceding Article.
This explicitely says that it is a WAR CRIME to make laws excusing a war crime, and without doubt GW Bush signed into law is most definitely a breach of Article 131, the interogation methods are grave breaches of Articles 99,130, remembering that already the Highest Court in America has ruled the President and his Executive could not just make up laws as he saw fit and we have for decades have upheld ratified treaty law as if it was part of the Constitution!

Re: Why Are We Turning Our Backs on the Constitution?

Adriaan de Leeuw — Thu, 30 Aug 2012 08:35:53 -0000

I forgot to add that in the Minority Judgement of Hamdin there is comment from one of the Justices, (forgotten Which one) that said George W Bush is probably aWar Criminal, such strong words from a Justice in an actual Judgement minority or not is a strong indictment that a criminal act has been committed! Furthermore it should be enactaed upon!

Re: Shunning Evil: Tutu Sets Example in Call for Blair and Bush Indictments

Adriaan de Leeuw — Tue, 04 Sep 2012 00:22:29 -0000

Please Archbishop Tutu dont forget there was a third party to the coalition of the willing, he too went into Iraq and sent Australian troops in way before the Invasion on reccy missions. John Howard the Australian Prime minister of the time, should be indicted along side the other two as well!

Re: No Accountability for Torturers

Adriaan de Leeuw — Tue, 04 Sep 2012 01:57:32 -0000

I wonder what a current Sureme Court Judge would say if this was quoted to him in an appeal on such a matter!
“If certain acts of violation of treaties are crimes, they are crimes whether the United States does them or whether Germany does them, and we are not prepared to lay down a rule of criminal conduct against others which we would not be willing to have invoked against us.”

Justice Robert Jackson, US SUPREME Court who served as the chief prosecutor in the Nuremberg trials.
It is a shame and an indictment on how far America has strayed from a country of laws, when we are now making direct comparissons of it, to one of the planets vilest regimes ever!

Re: Monastery torched in apparent price tag attack | JTA - Jewish & Israel News

Adriaan de Leeuw — Tue, 04 Sep 2012 10:11:44 -0000

Such attacks on Christian sites in Israel does not do the Jewish cause any good, the days when such attacks on the Diaspora by Christians in the Western World, not going uninvestigated are gone, and the West expects Israel to investigate and find the culprits! As for the comment that "Jesus is a monkey", regardless of whether one thinks that he was the messiah or not, he was first and always will be a Jew, the fools that claim he was a monkey are in fact denegating a Jew!

Re: U.S. envoy to Libya killed over anti-Muslim movie by American-Israeli filmmaker | JTA - Jewish & Israel News

Adriaan de Leeuw — Wed, 12 Sep 2012 10:08:11 -0000

Sam Bacile has a lot to answer for, he rattled a cage and a US Ambassador has died because of it as well as Embassy staff! He knew damned well that it would create such a situation, he yelled fire in a crowded theatre! I Pray that the Jewish communities do not suffer from his stupidity!

Re: Jews in the Bible Belt’s small towns face curiosity, ignorance | JTA - Jewish & Israel News

Adriaan de Leeuw — Thu, 13 Sep 2012 01:52:30 -0000

Jesus was prosecuted under Roman Law for a Roman Crime by a Roman Governor, taken to be crucified by Roman Guards, Nailed to the cross by Roman Guards had a sign erected above his head saying King of the Jews (hardly what Jews would do) and finally speared to death by Roman Soldiers.
As for the Ultra Orthodox they spit on little Jewish Girls going to school and Israeli Soldiers and in fact anybody they think is less religious than they are! Sad but true! Religious Extremism any religion is an anathma to civilised society!