On Sun, Mar 25, 2007 at 10:47:41PM +0000, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> ..reposting, last try was lost in gmane's auth queue.
>
>
> On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 20:31:03 -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote in
> [🔎] 20070320003103.GJ31767@santiago.connexer.com:
>
> > Reference? Where has President Bush stated that war criminals should
> > not be prosecuted?
>
>
> ..here I should have said "US war criminals", Sissy Boy George decided
> back in October 2001 he wanted to be able to commit war crimes legally.
> Google for "executive orders 2001".
>
Well, let's see. Here is a list of every executive order published in
2001 [0]:
Dec. 29 Executive Order on Succession in the Department of Veterans Affairs
Dec. 29 Executive Order on Succession at the Department of State
Dec. 29 Executive Order on Succession at the Department of Labor
Dec. 29 Executive Order on Succession at the Department of Housing and Urban Development
Dec. 29 Executive Order on Succession at the Department of Health and Human Services
Dec. 29 Executive Order on Succession at the Department of Interior
Dec. 29 Executive Order on Succession at the Department of Commerce
Dec. 29 Executive Order on Succession at Department of Agriculture
Dec. 29 Executive Order: Adjustments of Certain Rates of Pay
Dec. 29 Executive Order on Succession in Department of Treasury
Dec. 28 Executive Orders on Succession in Federal Agencies
Dec. 27 Normal Trade Relations Treatment Executive Order
Dec. 21 Council of Europe in Respect of the Group of States Against Corruption
Dec. 20 Executive Order Establishing An Emergency Board
Dec. 14 Afghanistan Combat Zone Executive Order
Dec. 6 Executive Order for Federal Government Closure on Dec 24
Nov. 28 Executive Order: Creation of the President's Council on Bioethics
Nov. 27 Executive Order Waiver of Dual Compensation Provisions of the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement Act of 1964
Nov. 16 National Emergency Construction Authority Executive Order
Nov. 13 President Issues Military Order
Nov. 9 Citizen Preparedness in War on Terrorism Executive Order
Nov. 1 Presidential Records Act Executive Order
Oct. 22 Executive Order for Dept of Health and Human Services
Oct. 16 Executive Order on Critical Infrastructure Protection
Oct. 12 Educational Excellence for Hispanic Americans Commission
Oct. 8 Executive Order Establishing Office of Homeland Security
Oct. 3 Executive Order on Excellence in Special Education
Oct. 1 Continuance of Federal Advisory Committees
Oct. 1 President Signs PCAST Executive Order
Sept. 24 Executive Order on Terrorist Financing
Sept. 14 President Orders Ready Reserves of Armed Forces to Active Duty
Aug. 17 Executive Order on Export Control Regulations
Jul. 31 Energy Efficient Standby Power Devices
Jul. 2 Executive Order
Jun. 20 President Bush Issues Executive Order Regarding 21st Century Workforce Initiative
Jun. 19 President Bush Issues Executive Order Regarding Community-Based Alternatives for Individuals with Disabilities
Jun. 6 Executive Order: Amendment To Executive Order 13125
Jun. 1 Executive Order
May 29 President's Task Force to Improve Health Care Delivery for Our Nation's Veterans
May 23 Executive Order: Additional Measures with Respect to Prohibiting the Importation of Rough Diamonds from Sierra Leone
May 18 Executive Order: Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
May 18 Executive Order: Actions to Expedite Energy-Related Projects
May 2 Executive Order: President's Commission to Strengthen Social Security
Apr. 30 Executive Order: Establishment of the President's Task Force on Puerto Rico's Status
Apr. 6 Executive Order: Amendment to Executive Order 13202
Apr. 5 Executive Order: Further Amendment to Executive Order 10000
Apr. 4 Executive Order: Termination of Emergency Authority For Certain Export Controls
Mar. 9 Executive Order: Establishing an Emergency Board
Feb. 21 Executive Order on Preservation of Open Competition and Government Neutrality Towards Government Contractors' Labor Relations on Federal and Federally Funded Construction Projects
Feb. 21 Executive Order on Notification of Employee Rights Concerning Payment of Union Dues or Fees
Feb. 21 Executive Order: Revocation of Executive Order on Nondisplacement of Qualified Workers under Certain Contracts
Feb. 21 Executive Order and Presidential Memorandum Concerning Labor-Management Partnerships
Feb. 12 Executive Order on the President's Information Technology Advisory Committee
Jan. 29 Agency Responsibilities with Respect to Faith-Based and Community Initiatives
Jan. 29 Executive Order: Establishment of White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives
Now, I read all the orders relating to anything military. Nothing in
there about war crimes.
> > Where is the evidence that troops are committing war crimes?
>
> ..eh, I did this dance with Slobo's Shills too, 10-15 years back,
> chk your media against the full 4 Geneva Conventions.
>
Would that be the media that refuses to report any positive occurences
(like making neighborhoods safer, building power infrastructure,
building schools, providing medical care, capturing bad guys and so on)?
Because if it is the same media, I won't believe anything they say.
What you fail to understand is that nearly everyone in the military
takes the law *very* seriously. Now, just as in any large organization,
there are a few bad apples. For example, just because someone at the
telephone company sells a list of phone numbers to telemarketers does
not mean that every single employee of the phone company is a criminal.
Same with the military, as 99.9% of the people in uniform are decent,
law abiding and doing their jobs in accordance with the law.
> > Well, there is the whole thing about lawful combatants being required to
> > wear a distinguishable uniform with distinctive insignia.
>
> ..one of these suffices, both together are preferred, and you deny the
> "Let's roll!"-people aboard flight UA93 their lawful KIA status, when
> they "took up arms against the invading enemy."
>
Umm, they were acting in self-defense. Big difference. Of course, your
continued ranting only serves to reinforce that you are either just
intent on stirring the pot, or that you really don't get it.
> > Again, engaing in combat while not in uniform == automatically not
> > lawful combatant.
>
> ..you deny the "Let's roll!"-people aboard flight UA93 their lawful KIA
> status, when they "took up arms against the invading enemy."
>
Ibid.
> > Well, in this case, no matter what the US does, they are wrong. Kill
> > them on sight (they are not lawful combatants) and
>
> > there is public outcry.
>
> ..is irrelevant, as lawful occupant you have to educate them on their
> rights under Article 144 in the 4'th Convention:
> http://www.themissing.cicr.org/IHL.nsf/WebPrint/380-600166-ART?
> OpenDocument
> http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/WebPrint/380-600166-COM?OpenDocument
> http://www.icrc.org/IHL.nsf/WebPrint/380-600166-ART?OpenDocument
>
The High Contracting Parties undertake, in time of peace as in time
of war, to disseminate the text of the present Convention as widely
as possible in their respective countries, and, in particular, to
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
include the study thereof in their programmes of military and, if
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
possible, civil instruction, so that the principles thereof may
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
become known to the entire population.
I don't know about civil instruction, but the military certainly teaches
about the GCs.
Any civilian, military, police or other authorities, who in time of
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
war assume responsibilities in respect of protected persons, must
possess the text of the Convention and be specially instructed as to
its provisions.
Yup. Military police and lawyers receive extra training on the GCs.
Having never been a police or a lawyer, however, I can't say whether
they carry the text with them, but I imagine that they do.
>
> > Take them prisoner and the there is public outcry. What other
> > options are there?
>
> ..full compliance to the full 4 Geneva Conventions.
> Would have allowed a fully lawful hanging of Saddam.
What do you mean would have? It did? He was hanged. Tried by the
Iraqis. Remember? There were a couple of news reports about it.
> Will allow a fully lawful hanging of W and his entire regime,
See, first you have to prove that he was involved in war crimes, which
you have not.
> Which is precisely why Sissy Boy George tries to destroy
> the US War Crimes Act and the Conventions, NATO and the US.
>
You keep making this claim, but you can't provide evidence to that
effect.
> ..taking action on full compliance to the full 4 Geneva Conventions,
> is how peace negotiations with Muslims, become _credible_.
>
Actually, there is absolutely no way that peace negotiations with *any*
Muslim extremitsts can have *any* credibility whatsoever. It's like a
lamb negotiating with a wolf about where to eat lunch.
> > Cite? The New Testament tells Christians to pray for their enemies,
> > unless your translation mistranslates "pray" as "kill".
> >
> > I do know that there is at least one instance in the Old Testament where
> > the Israelite were commanded to wipe out an entire people. Is that what
> > you are referring to?
>
> ..aye. POW's too have a specific mention.
Where?
> > What makes you think that I am an anti-Semite and more generally that
> > anyone in full compliance with the Bible is an anti-Semite?
>
> ..you say you're ok with making Jew Semites and Jew non-Semites suppress
> Christian and Muslim Semites in Palestine and the Middle East in full
> compliance with the Bible and in violation to both Sharia and the full 4
> Geneva Conventions.
>
More of this nonsense, huh?
> > You remember your history incorrectly. The muslims conquered Jerusalem
> > in AD 638. The First Crusade besieged Jerusalem in 1099. So, the
> > muslims were making war against the Jews and Christians for 461 years
> > before the start of the First Crusade. Care to revise your statement?
>
> ..irrelevant, your sophisticated Slobo-style shill dance proves you fully
> understand the "_if_" concept.
>
What are you talking about?
> >>
> > This argument always gets trotted out.
>
> ..me being comfortable with converting to Islam is "This argument always
> gets trotted out" how? Or are you arguing "the Nazis never gassed the
> Jews"???
>
No. The argument to which I was referring was with regard to the
violent way in which Christianity has been spread. That way is not at
all in compliance with the Bible.
> > What glimmer of hope could you/we offer that prevent them from wanting
> > to exterminate Christianity or Judaism?
>
>
> ..full compliance to the full 4 Geneva Conventions, as in arrest and try
> and jail or hang our own war criminals first, airlift out the Jews, then
> disengage and offer peace negotiations and a fair deal.
>
Wow. You are even more naive than I though.
> ..the fact is, white christian EUropeans (yanks 'n dixies 'n Jews
> included) has _NEVER_ tried truthfully offering non-whites or Muslims,
> Hindus etc a fair deal. So, I think it is worth a try, even if your
> Regime has a problem with it, it is however supposed to be replaced with
> an Administration on Jan 20'th 2009 or as soon as the USA Complies.
>
A fair deal? To the people who within 30 years of coming into existence
as a group went about conquering lands which had rightfully belonged to
the Jews for thousands of years? Oh yeah, they are most deserving.
Perhaps they are ones who need to give the rest of the world a "fair
deal."
Regards,
-Roberto
[0] http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/orders/
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature