Author Topic: Federal Judge rules about Gitmo (Read 938 times)

Lizking · « **Reply #45 on:** February 01, 2005, 05:31:06 PM »

Show me that in national media, please Patrone.

patrone · « **Reply #46 on:** February 01, 2005, 05:32:35 PM »

Would German Media do?

Lizking · « **Reply #47 on:** February 01, 2005, 05:35:23 PM »

So long as it is national German media.

patrone · « **Reply #48 on:** February 01, 2005, 05:39:40 PM »

Well, here it is, Lizking. Now, there is one thing being accused and actully being guilty and convicted.

Rumsfield

Lizking · « **Reply #49 on:** February 01, 2005, 05:45:07 PM »

I am sorry, I thought that you meant an action by the Government of Germany or an international court, or some other reasonable body. These guys are a joke:

http://www.ccr-ny.org/v2/home.asp

And, as the article states, they are making assumptions of why he is not attending. Could be that he is a tad busy right now.

"Rumsfeld has excused himself from the high-profile talks on international defense policy claiming prior commitments. However, some have speculated that his decision not to attend the meeting was influenced by a complaint filed against him by a New York-based human rights group, the Center for Constitutional Rights. "

In other news, some have speculated that life exists on Mars.

patrone · « **Reply #50 on:** February 01, 2005, 05:58:51 PM »

Assumed or speculations, yes, I agree. But the Fact stil reads that The case has been accepted by the German federal court of Justice.
Asking you Lizking, do you see a difference between USA Federal Court of Justice and German Federal Court of Justice?
If this Federal Court of German have ruled it has the Juristicion to take Rumsfield to Court, you dont think they will?

Think a little about what a "no" answer would mean, before answering.

Lizking · « **Reply #51 on:** February 01, 2005, 06:03:14 PM »

Let me ask you this, Patrone. Does the fact that they did not file the case in the US tell you anything, even though they are a US organisation and Rumsfeld is a US citizen?

Lizking · « **Reply #52 on:** February 01, 2005, 06:05:32 PM »

Again, I assumed you meant that an international organisation had filed a suit with an international court.

patrone · « **Reply #53 on:** February 01, 2005, 06:25:34 PM »

Acts agains humanity and warcrimes can be filed in any country and the same person can be convicted for exactly the same Crime in for ex. USA, the in Germany, and then in France, and then in Sweden, UK, etc, etc. there is not limit on how many sentences.

As it is a crime against Humanity, it is in the interest of Humanity that the Crime is put under a trail.

If the US Federal Court have ruled it has no Juristiction in this case, it can not bring it up. This does not mean it is not a valid case, only that the US Federal Court can not handle it.

Germany have extreme Laws on just this: Crimes against humanity and warcrimes , due to the aftermath of WWII and the Nurnberg trails.
Letting one case go, will mean all cases need to go...........

International Court of Law is where Countrys are put under trail against breaking international law as stated in UN charta and international treatys.

The international wartribual of Haag, is where the complaint for this kind of crimes should be filed.
But as USA Goverment deny its Juristiction on handeling warcrimes/crimes against humanity conducted by US citizens, this is not possible either.

USA could say that German Federal Court does´nt have the Juristicion as well. But that will mean a whole lot of complications to a lot of verdicts against WWII convicted warcriminals and also to the presence of US personal on German territory.

Leaves only one option in the end, does´nt it?

Lizking · « **Reply #54 on:** February 01, 2005, 07:02:19 PM »

No, actually it makes no sense, Patrone. To exercise the right to try someone assumes that you have jurisdiction over that person (and corporations are considered persons in this context). Germany has no jurisdiction over a private citizen of the US, unless an infraction was commited inside German territorial boundries.

In other words, it has no meaning outside of the intardnet.

patrone · « **Reply #55 on:** February 01, 2005, 07:13:03 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Lizking
No, actually it makes no sense, Patrone. To exercise the right to try someone assumes that you have jurisdiction over that person (and corporations are considered persons in this context). Germany has no jurisdiction over a private citizen of the US, unless an infraction was commited inside German territorial boundries.

In other words, it has no meaning outside of the intardnet.

The German Federal Court has Juristiction to bring anyone to its courts, even a US citizen, for warcrimes and crimes against humanity, sorry, even if you do not like that, its a fact.

And the speculations about Rumsfield choosing not to enter Germany, might not be so wild after all.

Lizking · « **Reply #56 on:** February 01, 2005, 07:17:32 PM »

What the German court says it can do, and what it has actual power to do are 2 different things.

Raider179 · « **Reply #57 on:** February 01, 2005, 07:18:40 PM »

I hear rummy has some info on WMD in germany. you guys better watch what you say about him. lol

patrone · « **Reply #58 on:** February 01, 2005, 07:23:22 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Raider179
I hear rummy has some info on WMD in germany. you guys better watch what you say about him. lol

As I said in another post, I have tons and tons again off that stuff just about 20 min from my house. Its not under survalliance and more or less "free for all". Grenades, bombs, Artillery shells you name it man.

Now, what are you gonna do about that?

Raider179 · « **Reply #59 on:** February 01, 2005, 07:45:06 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by patrone
As I said in another post, I have tons and tons again off that stuff just about 20 min from my house. Its not under survalliance and more or less "free for all". Grenades, bombs, Artillery shells you name it man.

Now, what are you gonna do about that?

We might do something if your leader started using it on his own people, then again maybe not. lmao