What is Digg?147 Comments
- tom500k, on 10/12/2007, -14/+35Fortunately for everyone's sake, the European Union has provisions for dealing with countries trying to escape the Geneva Conventions and to grant immunity to those responsible for torture.
German, like the rest of the EU, is legally obligated to exercise universal jurisdiction against people like Rummy and all other who authorizing torture. The torture victims do not need to be citizens of the EU for arrest warrants to be issued against perpetrators like Rummy.
It is tragic for all that the U.S. has sunk so low that it tortures at the whim of government leaders. Torture makes even more folks willing to commit violence against the U.S. This reality sinks the ticking time bomb defense of torture, particularly when the vast majority of those tortured are guilty only of being in the wrong place. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+20How exactly would they arrest him? I'm not being a smart ass, I'm genuinely curious. Outside of starting another war, how could anyone force the U.S. to extradite a war criminal against our will? We may have broken international law, but we have also ignored the U.N, which indicates how much we really care about international rules/procedures. Who will force us to do anything that we don't want to in our own country?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -10/+24"...and torture is not legal in the U.S.
way to fearmonger."
Why don't you post a link to the entire bill itself, instead of the summarized version which leaves out certain items including giving the president and the administration immunity for any of their actions since 9/11 and also making "torture" undefined and left up to the person in charge?
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:s3930enr.txt
Way to be an uneducated follower of the herd. - wabbiteh, on 10/12/2007, -5/+17FTA: "It's interesting to me that nobody kind of looks at it from the other side, in contrasting the way in which the enemy handles individuals and respect for people," Whitman said.
"Because the enemy does it" is not a valid reason for torture. - CarzorStelatis, on 10/12/2007, -8/+20'Rumsfeld: "But I was just following orders!"' - PatrickFisher
Nuremberg Nazis: we were just following orders
Court: *****
No, that wasn't a Godwins invocation. I just meant that there is clear precedent that 'following orders' does not make one immune to war crimes/torture etc. charges - Nogger, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15Indeed. Realisticly, Rumsfeld does not have to fear prison. Best guess is this civil rights group is after the symbolic value of a investigation / prosecution.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -11/+21@vandread
Then by your argument the military doesn't require an accountable chain of command. - Nydas, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Ive read most of it, and from what I've gathered, it says torture is illegal, but it lets the president define what torture is. So that could mean anything. Now, i am no law expert, so i could be entirely wrong.
- jakebarnes, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13You do realize the people who gave Germany universal jurisdiction in this matter is the law makers in Germany, right? If the US gave their courts universal jurisdiction, you'd all cry murder, and arrogance...
- PatrickFisher, on 10/12/2007, -9/+16I'm afraid war crimes are above the president's jurisdiction.
The president, however, is not above war crimes. - jakebarnes, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9If you are talking about American Jurisprudence, you could not be more wrong.
- realyst, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13You can't use the term "war" but claim all captives aren't "prisoners of war".
You used your military to invade their country and take them down, thus, for better or worse, you've used war tactics. - chadkazulu, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10Germany could simply use a US tactic... bag him, throw him into a van, whisk him away on a chartered flight, shove him in some rat hole in Syria (or somewhere), where he'll be tortured until he confesses his crimes at which point, he'll look forward to a lifetime of prison and sodomy.
Germany will pass a law to retro-actively make legal those actions and erase the records of those responsible. - Qenton, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8They won't because Republicans AND Democrats will raise hell for Germany if they even think of trying it. Yes the Democrats as well, the US doesn't like other countries metering out justest for US citizens, especially for former US government officals, period.
- Nydas, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Can one of you show me specifically where in the document it mentions torture? Obviously it isn't going to make it obvious, but i would like to see where it is specifically.
- ShadySpace, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Are you kidding me? I'm more left-leaning then most, but to even entertain the notion that trade sanctions would be imposed on the US over their refusal to extradite one citizen is ludicrious.
- PatrickFisher, on 10/12/2007, -6/+11"Nuremberg Nazis: we were just following orders
Court: *****" -davidarussell
I congratulate you on picking up the analogy. - loboforestal, on 10/12/2007, -6/+11I think Bush and Cheney will get sent to trial in Germany when Clinton and Albright get sent to Serbia.
- gnorb, on 10/12/2007, -8/+12Technically, yes, although not likely. As much as some would like to see this sort of action succeed, chances are it won't.
- drpeppper, on 10/12/2007, -7/+11Man, when Germany accuses you of warcrimes, thats when you know you ***** up.
- dagonweb, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9"This is an exercise in futility."
No it isn't If Rumsfeld is found guilty, by a respectable court this is by no means a frivolous matter. It will be widely publicized, discussed, levelheaded people will look up with surprise, nod and contemplate the matter in a new light. It may embolden a few attorneys in the US to determine if a case can brought inside the US, using the material the Germans collected. And it will bring out in the open, the truth.
I understand that all americans will just itch to dismiss Germany as being merely another one of "the countries" in "old europe", some kind of erratic leftist banana republic overrun with anti-american former communists with a grudge. But that doesn't make it true. Germany is still a significant entity to recon with. If the US screws up with this situation it can screw up bigtime in the eyes of Europe. - taotehue, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6@jar
from the article: "Former U.S. Army Brigadier General Janis Karpinski, who ran the Abu Ghraib prison at the time photographs depicting the abuse of prisoners were widely published, said she was willing to testify against her former boss Rumsfeld."
&
"The CCR argues it has new evidence and Rumsfeld's resignation means he has no immunity."
also, on the Geneva thing, it is known that some of the detainees were just civilians in the wrong place at the worn time. Geneva may not cover "Enemy Combatants" so musicman does have a slight point there, but it is still against the international law to torture innocent civilians with your military. - antoniojvr, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8I hope they also filed charges against the people that are beheading civilians, journalists, and soldiers. But I doubt it.
- Paroparo, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9Protip: Commanding officers have a large degree of responsibility over what their subordinates do. They SHOULD be keeping a close eye on them. Rummy would be in trouble, even if he did not order all of this *****.
- dagonweb, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6It's simple
Germany instituted a law that considers torture absolutely inacceptable, even if it happens outside its borders, and even if it involves non-germans as victims or perpetrators. That is like saying: "the US will never condone nuclear terrorism, even if it happens outside its borders, and even if it involves non-germans as victims or perpetrators" or Iran saying "Iran will never accept blatant humiliation of the Koran and the Prophet, even if it happens outside its borders, and even if it involves non-germans as victims or perpetrators".
Why germany instituted this law is beyond discussion and has solid historical reasons.
I am sure many german politicians won't be happy with the situation, but they will cope with it, don't obfuscate it away or be untrue to their principles. You can't expect of any country to first institute a serious law and then not apply it when it would be inconvenient.
Either Germany has or hasn't have a realistic, honest, independant legal system...
Either the US will or will not cooperate with the legal proceedings in Germany...
So whatever happens, this situation will be dragged into the public domain, a lot of sensitive facts will come out, people will be humbled, Rumsfeld reputation will be seriously damaged even if he isn't convicted...
...and if he is convicted and has to serve prison time he merely has to make sure he doesn't travel to countries which extradite to Germany. That will cut down in his travels abroad by what, 50%? Whatever the case, if he is convicted his reputation is destroyed, Germany is severely embarrassed and will probably suffer a boycott by ringwing / nationalist / army loyal elements in the US and ***** will splatter on the reputation of the US in general.
It is just the way it is. - VolatileWhimsy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Majority of the misinformation ironically comes from our own (America) papers....
Yup I completely support everything that is going on.. I completely support not putting up wtih morons *****, like sawing someone's head off with a rusty matchette...
shooting teachers cause the mean are intimadated by women learning.. - MacGeekGuy, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7Thank you! I was just thinking that myself. It simply shouldn't make a difference what the other guy does. What are we just trying to be - the slightly better guys? We should have a set of standards all our own, superior even to the best that we set out to live up to originally and completely untainted by what anyone else does. That statement was very telling.
- tsf5000, on 10/12/2007, -13/+16Lock him up and see how he likes being waterboarded.
- mutatron, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I really don't like Rumsfeld or anybody currently in this administration, but this is just grandstanding. Nothing will come of it and nothing should come of it. It's war, what do people expect?
Or maybe it's just because I've been reading about Julius Caesar's subjugation of the Gauls. - VolatileWhimsy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Give me a frigging break...
Seriously is there anything we can do about the people that are so narrow minded and focused only on their warped sense of depravity? Can we at least sterilize them so they can't breed?
But seriously comparatively what has happened to prisoners in this war is a frigging picnic... Leave the man alone..
Hell no, not the group that is wanting to do the bitching, it is NOT the german gov you dork.. - taotehue, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@Volatile
yeah, they called the trial of Nazi War Crimes the Nuremberg Trials:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Trials
so that already happened.
Clerics who encourage the rape of women as punishment should be held trial. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9You've been lied to killinger777
Just because our executive branch *says* the MCA doesn't do something does not make it true. They are lying. Read it for yourself. If you can't figure it out on your own (because of the length and legal jargon, read this:
http://digg.com/political_opinion/Problems_Concerning_the_Military_Commissions_Act_of_2006 - aratika, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Changing the world one lonely digg at a time...you hate Bush...you hate Cheney..you hate Rumsfeld...you hate grownups.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8"The president, however, is not above war crimes."
He is now because of the Military Commissions Act, which most people honestly have no clue what it's even about. In terms of being tried for crimes, they have immunity since this act will:
* Narrow the scope of the War Crimes Act by not expressly criminalizing acts that constitute "outrages upon personal dignity, particularly humiliating and degrading treatment" banned under Article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions.
* Prohibit the US courts from using "foreign or international law" to inform their decisions in relation to the War Crimes Act. The President has the authority to "interpret the meaning and application of the Geneva Conventions."
* Endorse the administration’s "war paradigm"—under which the USA has selectively applied the laws of war and rejected international human rights law.
Which are now HUGE loopholes that can be used by anyone circumventing a trial. "But to me, that wasn't torture," is all they need to say. - niczar, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5''kk next we file same charges against all the german people for the nazi era, they participated.. kkgo!
Sounds stupid doesn't it...''
It doesn't sound stupid, it sounds very much like the Nürnberg trials. Germany subsequently tried and sentenced many german war criminals. - taotehue, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@floppy
while very improbable, a massive food shortage in the USA may be an issue in ten years.
don't forget the Great Depression or the Dust Bowl. Stranger things have happened. - root1657, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Interesting tidbit here.... the US military sends persons who have a high likely-hood of being POWs during war through a school to prepare them for the experience. Among those are pilot. GWB was a military pilot. One of the old favorites at that school is the water-board (yep, we use it on our own, how bad could it really be). So, there is a reasonable degree of likely-hood that the president has experienced the water-board first hand, back in the day.
- jake8689, on 10/12/2007, -8/+10It does if he gives the order oh and he did
- Nydas, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Bush may be the boss, but i think Bush probably doesn't know to much about it, if anything at all.. Hes more of a puppet, rather then the one giving the orders. Bush may not be the smartest man, but he isnt an evil man like many make him out to be. and i just dont see him giving an order like that.
However, I wouldn't put it past Rummy to give those orders though. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8Again, even if he's convicted, there's NO WAY the USA will extradite him. This is an exercise in futility.
- dagonweb, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5"I'd let myself be waterboarded for $100. "
DEAL - I only need basic waterboarding techniques, some low intrusive restraints, music of my choice and sleep deprivation. Let me disallow you 48 hours of sleep and 3 hours of waterboarding and I'll pay you 200. You will be surprised what I can make you do. You want my email adress for arrangements? I won't hit you, strangle you or anothing, just forceful language, sensory stimulation, some restrains, a sack and a lot of water. - krached, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5@appetite
Those opposed to waterboarding would say that Rumsfeld should be subject to that form of interrogation until he admits to being a war criminal. Would that admission be enough to convict him?
But I think these kinds of actions reduce the credibility of the commissions and show that Clinton and Bush are correct in their opposition, that they would be used for political purposes. If this group is so concerned about human rights, then why was there nothing filed against Saddam or his sons? I don't support the was, but they were evil bastards. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -9/+11@jake8689
He didn't give an order for Abu Graihb, that's one of the stupidest things I've heard today. - niczar, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5"Therefore Germany has no jurisdiction in this matter."
It has jurisdiction, because it says it has. That's all it takes.
It's not futile. Rumsfeld won't be able to travel to any place that has certain treaties with Germany. That probably include most of the EU, at least the Schengen zone (Germany, France, Belgium, Netherlands etc).
Rumsfeld will be just like his buddy Pinochet. - tsf5000, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5If it were that easy to tolerate, they wouldn't use it.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2But digg will bury you for speaking the truth of the matter
- root1657, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Maybe the US should pass a law to declare universal jurisdiction over any court that has universal jurisdiction over any American, so that the actions of that court could still be reviewed under appeal to the USSC. Wouldn't that be fun!
- dagonweb, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4"Maybe economic sanctions lol."
That in't a laughing matter with the debt the US has to the rest of the world. Maybe in a decade the US will need food aid. -
Show 51 - 100 of 144 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is