Rumsfeld: out of office, into trouble?

bg1256

Diabloii.Net Member
Rumsfeld: out of office, into trouble?

Rumsfeld faces German legal test
Donald Rumsfeld
Rumsfeld quit after the US mid-term elections last week
A lawyers' group has asked Germany to sue former US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld over alleged prisoner abuse in Iraq and Guantanamo Bay.

The complaint was filed by the US-based Center for Constitutional Rights on behalf of a Saudi man held in Cuba and 11 Iraqis held in Baghdad.

German law allows the pursuit of cases originating anywhere in the world.

State prosecutors have yet to decide whether to pursue the case. An earlier request for a case in 2004 was dropped.

Michael Ratner, the centre's president, said he felt the case had a better chance of success now because Mr Rumsfeld was no longer in office and could not exert the same degree of "political pressure".

He added that the centre had more evidence than it did in 2004, citing the case of a detained Saudi national, Mohamad al-Qahtani.

"Al-Qahtani was a man who the US alleged is al-Qaeda, who is in Guantanamo. The entire torture log of al-Qahtani over a period of two months was exposed," Mr Ratner told the BBC.
source

I doubt much will come of this, but if the lawyers follow through, it seems like it could be ugly.
 

MinasMorgul

Diabloii.Net Member
Well, the footnote of "Convicted of War Crimes under German Law" can't look good. Of course it beats the rest of your life in a prison.

 

MinasMorgul

Diabloii.Net Member
In This particular case, I don't know. But Germany has in the past convicted people in absentia, mostly for crimes that happened during WWII though.

I'm not familiar with German law.
 

Syxx

Diabloii.Net Member
I see ya'll have eliminated any chance that he might not be guilty, eh?
Hi Borty,

Gitmo exists, Videos of US soldiers doing 'naughty' things to prisoners exist, The US Governemt wanting laws to permit torture and bypass the Geneva Convention exist.

All these things happened under "his watch". Shouldn't he be held accountable ? Isn't that what the saying, "The buck stops here" means ? I think people are getting rather tired of the "Mr Bigs" of this world screwing around and continueously getting away with it.

No one has eliminationed the chance he may be innocent. Many just don't feel that is the case, kind of like OJ ...

Regards
Syxx



 

Bortaz

Banned
Well, I'd have thought all you leftists would have been more keen on the old "innocent until proven guilty in a court of law" thing, but I guess that only applies to child rapists and terrorists.
 

Drosselmeier

Diabloii.Net Member
Well, I'd have thought all you leftists would have been more keen on the old "innocent until proven guilty in a court of law" thing, but I guess that only applies to child rapists and terrorists.
Has he been thrown in jail already? I didn't think so. One day when I have an ocean of time on my hands I'll try to explain the difference between action and belief to you.



 

Syxx

Diabloii.Net Member
Well, I'd have thought all you leftists would have been more keen on the old "innocent until proven guilty in a court of law" thing, but I guess that only applies to child rapists and terrorists.
Hi mate,

Is that they way you do thing in Bortazland ? I don't see anyone else posting in this thread that only rapists and terrorists are "innocent until proven guilty in a court of law" ?

But I am curious as you seem to be defending Rummy. Do you think he has anything to answer for ? What's you opinion of his performance as Secretary of Defence ?

Regards
Syxx
(PS I'm only a partial-lefty, some of my opinions are rather conservative)



 

Dondrei

Diabloii.Net Member
It's hard for me to say whether he's innocent or guilty until I know exactly what the charges are going to be. Sounds to me like they're going to be overly ambitious.
 

Drosselmeier

Diabloii.Net Member
Is that they way you do thing in Bortazland ? I don't see anyone else posting in this thread that only rapists and terrorists are "innocent until proven guilty in a court of law" ?
Bortaz is just posting the standard slander routine used to drag focus away from the issue at hand.

Being critical of the Bush administration = being a liberal = being a terrorist sympathizer/sex crimes supporter.

So, you see, it's not about what Rumsfeld might possibly have done wrong or wether someone who's suspected of a crime should be tried in court. It's about liberals being traitors and perverts.



 

llad12

Diabloii.Net Member
Bortaz is just posting the standard slander routine used to drag focus away from the issue at hand.

Being critical of the Bush administration = being a liberal = being a terrorist sympathizer/sex crimes supporter.

So, you see, it's not about what Rumsfeld might possibly have done wrong or wether someone who's suspected of a crime should be tried in court. It's about liberals being traitors and perverts.
Why Bort wouldn't do that ...

See? Even a pinko commie knows what it means!
OK, maybe he would. :grin:

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

Personally, I think Rumy should have his day in court ... along with Dubya.

CIA acknowledges existence of presidential order authorizing it to detain, interrogate terror suspects overseas

The Raw Story



 

jimmyboy

Diabloii.Net Member
As I recalled, Bush denied Abu prison tortures to the press.

Then the next day while at an oval office meeting, Rummy told Bush that the reports were true to which Bush went nuts, because Bush had to learn of the scandal from the press instead of from his commanders.

This implied that Rummy knew of the activities at Abu and did nothing to stop it. As secretary of defense, Rummy is charged with a duty to stop war crimes. He didn't. And he kept it from Bush, his commander in chief.

So draw your own conclusion.
 
It's a small group of nutjobs that are trying to use German law to prosecute him. Germany stands to lose a lot if they go forward with this. We could very well pull our entire military force out of Germany. Many of us want that to happen anyway. Now is as good a time as any.
 

Bortaz

Banned
My point is that the members of this very forum get all in a huff when it's even implied that terrorists (and we've also had Smeg massacred over child molestors) should be detained without a fair trial, and now they're, to a man, jumping to the conclusion that Rumsfeld is guilty and should be in jail. All you freedom lovers should be railing against this, like you do when it's not someone you hate that's being treated this way. Be consistent.

As far as my opinion of Rumsfeld goes: I think he did a rather ****ty job as SecDef and should have been fired years ago.
 

llad12

Diabloii.Net Member
My point is that the members of this very forum get all in a huff when it's even implied that terrorists (and we've also had Smeg massacred over child molestors) should be detained without a fair trial, and now they're, to a man, jumping to the conclusion that Rumsfeld is guilty and should be in jail.
Well, at the very least, I think the whole lot of 'em should be tarred, feathered, and run out of Washington DC on a rail. :laugh:



 
Top