Accused Somali war criminal found working as DC airport security guard

[homersapien 12,353]

Homer - opinion pieces aren't" news stories ".

Apparently - but not surprisingly - you don't know the difference between news and opinion. This is from the first link I posted:

A former judge at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) said former US Vice PresidentDick Cheney should - and eventually will - stand trial for war crimes for his role in the Iraq War.

"Some of us have long thought that Cheney and a number of CIA agents who did what they did in those so-called black holes should appear before the International Criminal Court" (ICC) - Thomas Buergenthal said in an interview with Newsweek.

Buergenthal, 81, served as a judge at the ICJ - the main judicial arm of the United Nations - for 10 years before retiring in 2010.The ICJ, unlike the ICC, has no jurisdiction to try individuals accused of war crimes or crimes against humanity. As the ICJ is not a criminal court, it does not have a prosecutor able to initiate such proceedings.

© Wikipedia

Former International Court of Justice judge Thomas Buergenthal

Buergenthal was born in the former Czechoslovakia and survived the Auschwitz concentration camp as a boy. He is now a US citizen and a professor of law at George Washington University in Washington, DC. "We (in the United States) could have tried them ourselves," Buergenthal said of Cheney and others. "I voted for Obama, but I think he made a great mistake when he decided not to instigate legal proceedings against some of these people. I think - yes - that it will happen."

1) Not much fact in that "article". Plenty of opinion though.

2) Didn't Congress vote on the Iraq War? Are they guilty of war crimes as well?

BTW, I think the war was a mistake in hindsight. But mainly because as a country we don't have the stomach to finish what we choice to start.

1) How so? Can you please point out the errors or misstatements?

2) No, they are guilty of - and morally responsible for - agreeing to what Cheney was pushing. Besides, on a practical level, no one has leveled charges against all who were complicit.

[Guest NC1406]

Homer - opinion pieces aren't" news stories ".

Apparently - but not surprisingly - you don't know the difference between news and opinion. This is from the first link I posted:

A former judge at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) said former US Vice PresidentDick Cheney should - and eventually will - stand trial for war crimes for his role in the Iraq War.

"Some of us have long thought that Cheney and a number of CIA agents who did what they did in those so-called black holes should appear before the International Criminal Court" (ICC) - Thomas Buergenthal said in an interview with Newsweek.

Buergenthal, 81, served as a judge at the ICJ - the main judicial arm of the United Nations - for 10 years before retiring in 2010.The ICJ, unlike the ICC, has no jurisdiction to try individuals accused of war crimes or crimes against humanity. As the ICJ is not a criminal court, it does not have a prosecutor able to initiate such proceedings.

© Wikipedia

Former International Court of Justice judge Thomas Buergenthal

Buergenthal was born in the former Czechoslovakia and survived the Auschwitz concentration camp as a boy. He is now a US citizen and a professor of law at George Washington University in Washington, DC. "We (in the United States) could have tried them ourselves," Buergenthal said of Cheney and others. "I voted for Obama, but I think he made a great mistake when he decided not to instigate legal proceedings against some of these people. I think - yes - that it will happen."

1) Not much fact in that "article". Plenty of opinion though.

2) Didn't Congress vote on the Iraq War? Are they guilty of war crimes as well?

BTW, I think the war was a mistake in hindsight. But mainly because as a country we don't have the stomach to finish what we choice to start.

1) How so? Can you please point out the errors or misstatements?

2) No, they are guilty of - and morally responsible for - agreeing to what Cheney was pushing. Besides, on a practical level, no one has leveled charges against all who were complicit.

I don't see any errors or misstatements, just no facts. The article I read said Cheney should be charged but really gave no facts for why that should occur. All the facts presented were building the resume of Buergenthal. Personally not impressed with the resume. Goes on to say Obama should have investigated.

On a practical level the investigation should include all:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution

[AURaptor 1,137]

If Cheney goes, so does Hillary. And all the Dems . Bill included.

[homersapien 12,353]

If Cheney goes, so does Hillary. And all the Dems . Bill included.

You really don't see the difference, do you?

[AURaptor 1,137]

If Cheney goes, so does Hillary. And all the Dems . Bill included.

You really don't see the difference, do you?

Neither did Democrats -

[homersapien 12,353]

Good grief.

I suppose if everyone is responsible then no one is, huh? The whole idea of invading Iraq just spontaneously appeared.... :-\

[cooltigger21 0]

Good grief.

I suppose if everyone is responsible then no one is, huh? The whole idea of invading Iraq just spontaneously appeared.... :-\

We went in based on the intelligence we had at the time, which did not differ from what the Clinton administration had. Disagree with the decision to go if you want to. That's a legitimate debate to have. Calling that disagreement criminal is another matter entirely.

[AURaptor 1,137]

Good grief.

I suppose if everyone is responsible then no one is, huh? The whole idea of invading Iraq just spontaneously appeared.... :-\

We went in based on the intelligence we had at the time, which did not differ from what the Clinton administration had. Disagree with the decision to go if you want to. That's a legitimate debate to have. Calling that disagreement criminal is another matter entirely.

Exactly. As the video shows, Dems , well after Bush was even elected, had the same damn intel, used exactly the same talking points, and yet they are expected to skate free and clear, while Bush and Cheney are the " war criminals " ? Horse hockey. The about face by the Dems was 100% political, and didn't have 1 damn thing to do with intel. They stopped supporting this country as soon as things got rough over in Iraq, and then tried to play the " Bush lied ! " card, just to get voters over to their side.

[homersapien 12,353]

Good grief.

I suppose if everyone is responsible then no one is, huh? The whole idea of invading Iraq just spontaneously appeared.... :-\

We went in based on the intelligence we had at the time, which did not differ from what the Clinton administration had. Disagree with the decision to go if you want to. That's a legitimate debate to have. Calling that disagreement criminal is another matter entirely.

BS. We invaded on the intelligence that Cheney told the CIA to produce. "Slam dunk" my ass.

[AURaptor 1,137]

Good grief.

I suppose if everyone is responsible then no one is, huh? The whole idea of invading Iraq just spontaneously appeared.... :-\

We went in based on the intelligence we had at the time, which did not differ from what the Clinton administration had. Disagree with the decision to go if you want to. That's a legitimate debate to have. Calling that disagreement criminal is another matter entirely.

BS. We invaded on the intelligence that Cheney told the CIA to produce. "Slam dunk" my ass.

You have no proof, what so ever of any of that homer. And even after the 'slam dunk' assurance, Bush was STILL reluctant to invade.

Now go back to your sippy cup and yell at some passing cars.

[homersapien 12,353]

Good grief.

I suppose if everyone is responsible then no one is, huh? The whole idea of invading Iraq just spontaneously appeared.... :-\

We went in based on the intelligence we had at the time, which did not differ from what the Clinton administration had. Disagree with the decision to go if you want to. That's a legitimate debate to have. Calling that disagreement criminal is another matter entirely.

BS. We invaded on the intelligence that Cheney told the CIA to produce. "Slam dunk" my ass.

You have no proof, what so ever of any of that homer. And even after the 'slam dunk' assurance, Bush was STILL reluctant to invade.

Now go back to your sippy cup and yell at some passing cars.

It was Dick Cheney, more than any other official, who set the terms for the post-9/11 world we all share.

....... it would not be the first time that Cheney’s voice, isolated or not, had carried the day. The vice president lobbied the president directly and then made his case to a National Security Council meeting in June 2007: “I argued in front of the group and in front of the President…. I thought I was rather eloquent…. The President said, ‘All right, how many people agree with the Vice President?’ And nobody put their hand up.”

The days had passed when Bush would ignore the hands and choose Cheney’s path anyway. There would be no return to the glorious “authority and influence we had back in ’03.”....

...... And yet we live still in Cheney’s world. All around us are the consequences of those decisions: in Fallujah, Iraq, where Al Qaeda-allied jihadis who were nowhere to be found in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq have just again seized control; in Syria, where Iraqi jihadists play a prominent part in the rebellion against the Assad regime; in Afghanistan, where the Taliban, largely ignored after 2002 in the rush to turn American attention to Saddam Hussein, are resurgent. And then there is the other side of the “war on terror,” the darker story that Cheney, five days after the September 11 attacks, was able to describe so precisely for the country during an interview on Meet the Press:

We also have to work, though, sort of the dark side, if you will. We’ve got to spend time in the shadows in the intelligence world. A lot of what needs to be done here will have to be done quietly, without any discussion, using sources and methods that are available to our intelligence agencies…. That’s the world these folks operate in, and so it’s going to be vital for us to use any means at our disposal, basically, to achieve our objective.

The day after Cheney made these comments President Bush signed a secret document that, according to longtime CIA counsel John Rizzo

was the most comprehensive, most ambitious, most aggressive, and most risky Finding or MON [Memorandum of Notification] I was ever involved in. One short paragraph authorized the capture and detention of Al Qaeda terrorists, another authorized taking lethal action against them. The language was simple and stark…. We had filled the entire covert-action tool kit, including tools we had never before used.

http://www.thenation...sident-history/

---------------------------------

You'd have to be a complete fool to believe Cheney wasn't leading Bush around by the nose. I suppose you would say that Bush was Cheney's "bitch".

[AURaptor 1,137]

Fanciful story writing, not much else.

[homersapien 12,353]

Fanciful story writing, not much else.

Hey, it's not my problem you are too dumb to see the truth. All I can do is present it.

[AURaptor 1,137]

Fanciful story writing, not much else.

Hey, it's not my problem you are too dumb to see the truth. All I can do is present it.

You wouldn't know truth if you drank it from a bottle.