Protestantism

» pink101 - I'm curious

In response to I'm curious posted by Migisi:

.
War crimes are based on international law.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Brian Tubbs - International Law

In response to I'm curious posted by Migisi:

Okay, let's agree that George W. Bush is accountable to the Constitution and all laws and treaties duly passed and/or ratified under said Constitution. I cite Article VI, Section 2...

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the land...

Therefore, Bush is NOT accountable to ANY international law that is passed OUTSIDE OF "the authority of the United States," but he IS accountable to all international laws that were duly ratified by the US Senate and are in accordance with the US Constitution.

» Brian Tubbs - Lincoln

In response to I'm curious posted by Migisi:

Now, I've asked this before, but I never got a good answer, so I'll ask it again....

Abraham Lincoln broke the law. He clearly usurped the Congress and was in clear violation of the United States Constitution, when he suspended habeus corpus. Just about every legal scholar (then and now) agrees. Even the US Supreme Court, at that time, agreed.

But Lincoln got away with it. He was not impeached. Should he have been?

If you say "No," why not?

» pink101 - International Law

In response to International Law posted by BrianTubbs:

.
To quote German Nazis, "Therefore, Hitler is NOT accountable to ANY international law that is passed OUTSIDE OF "the authority of Germany," but he IS accountable to all international laws that were duly ratified by the the Third Reich and are in accordance with the supreme laws of Germany."
.
Nice move, Brian.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Migisi - Lincoln

.
He was not impeached. Should he have been?
.
Yes. He should've been impeached. Just like Bush should've been when he nullified all but one of the Bill of Rights. And many cities, counties, and states have filed petitions for Bush and Cheney's impeachment, declaring and listing their crimes.
.
Even back in Lincoln's time:
.
Look up the Supreme Court ruling for "Ex Parte Milligan". The Supreme Court found Lincoln's order authorizing trial by a military tribunal of Lambdin P. Milligan unconstitutional! Milligan was an Indiana lawyer accused of stirring up support for the Confederacy. The Court ruled that civilians must be tried in civilian courts, even during time of war.
.
Bush's actions involving civilian arrests, abductions (to Gitmo and 'secret' prisons abroad), longterm imprisonment without charges filed, no 'speedy' trials, denying 'detainees' the right to attorneys, condoning TORTURE, and trial by military tribunal ... every bit is unconstitutional. It was in Lincoln's time. It is today.
.
Bush did NOT "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States" (Art.2, Section 1), nor did he "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed" (Art. 2, Section 3).

-- posted by Migisi

» Migisi - International Law

In response to International Law posted by pink101:
.
Quoting from:
.
How Bush's grandfather helped Hitler's rise to power
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep...
.
".....But the new documents, many of which were only declassified last year, show that even after America had entered the war and when there was already significant information about the Nazis' plans and policies, he [Prescott Bush] worked for and profited from companies closely involved with the very German businesses that financed Hitler's rise to power. It has also been suggested that the money he made from these dealings helped to establish the Bush family fortune and set up its political dynasty.
.....
"The two Holocaust survivors suing the US government and the Bush family for a total of $40bn in compensation claim both [Prescott Bush and Averill Harriman] materially benefited from Auschwitz slave labour during the second world war.
.
"Kurt Julius Goldstein, 87, and Peter Gingold, 85, began a class action in America in 2001, but the case was thrown out by Judge Rosemary Collier on the grounds that the government cannot be held liable under the principle of "state sovereignty".
.
"Jan Lissmann, one of the lawyers for the survivors, said: "President Bush withdrew President Bill Clinton's signature from the treaty [that founded the court] not only to protect Americans, but also to protect himself and his family."
......
"You can't blame Bush for what his grandfather did any more than you can blame Jack Kennedy for what his father did - bought Nazi stocks - but what is important is the cover-up, how it could have gone on so successfully for half a century, and does that have implications for us today?" he said. [quoting John Loftus, former US attorney who prosecuted Nazi war criminals in the 70s.]
......
"More than 60 years after Prescott Bush came briefly under scrutiny at the time of a faraway war, his grandson is facing a different kind of scrutiny but one underpinned by the same perception that, for some people, war can be a profitable business."

-- posted by Migisi

» pink101 - International Law

In response to International Law posted by Migisi:

.
Important points that are pushed aside as bull roar by well meaning people like Brian.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Brian Tubbs - Hitler

In response to International Law posted by pink101:

How did I know you would go for the "Hitler" cheap shot, Pink? You're too predictable.

There are several problems with this. The biggest problem is your point doesn't fit. Adolf Hitler rose to power amidst the collapse of the German constitutional order - something to which he very directly contributed. Hitler broke GERMAN laws in his rise to power and his expansion of power. And then...

Hitler broke international treaties - such as the Versailles Treaty - while in power. Treaties that had been approved within the parameters of Germany's Constitution.

The second problem is that the United States and most western (at least) nations recognize (implicitly and sometimes explicitly) the "Laws of Nature," which are binding upon all of humanity. The U.S. Constitution takes that into account, but does so in a way that guards U.S. sovereignty. And that's the slippery slope we need to guard against.

So, please don't pull the Hitler card out.

» Brian Tubbs - Consistency

In response to Lincoln posted by Migisi:

Okay, Migisi, I appreciate your consistency. Let me take it a step further...

What is the bar for impeachment? The Constitution speaks of "high crimes and misdemeanors." In your view, what does that mean?

Does a President have to transgress the Constitution in order to be impeached? What if he or she simply transgresses a law or a treaty UNDER the Constitution? Would that be enough for impeachment? If so, does it have to be a criminal violation? Can it be a misdemeanor violation? At what point do you impeach a President?

» pink101 - Hitler

In response to Hitler posted by BrianTubbs:

.
So, please don't pull the Hitler card out.
.
Why not? Is it taboo--a breach of my First Amendment Rights?
.
Here a snipit from a very interesting site.
.
"Through these companies, Skull and Bones provided financial backing to Adolf Hitler because the society then followed a Nazi-and now follows a neo-Nazi-doctrine. At least a dozen Bonesmen have been linked to the Federal Reserve, including the first chairman of the New York Federal Reserve. Skull and Bones members control the wealth of the Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Ford families."
.
You can read the entire article at this link: .
.
http://www.government-propaganda.com/sku...
.
There very definitely IS a connection between the Bush family and the Skull and Bones secret society at Yale.
.

-- posted by pink101