Graeme Decarie
Well-Known Member
a minor point. I'll accept glory no matter where and how I find it.
TRUMP - Some people think......... How do you feel?
- Thread starter crazyheart
- Start date
Welcome to Wondercafe2!
A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!
He won the presidency but almost as many hated from the get-go as those who elected him. Enough to build a powerful force to manipulate and undermine him. I have never seen so many people refuse to call someone their president in the U.S. before - and that was at the very beginning of his office all the way through. And I have never seen any president have to defend "trumped up" - literally because Trump took charge of the Birther movement - charges of non-citizenship, about his faith and his race before. Trump complains about the media but used it to propel that outrageous farce. Graeme, you should be upset about that. I wonder why you are not. I also can't accept any of your assertions that Trump is the best hope for peace in light of how he's been damaging racial relations and undermining Obama - during his presidency too - which created as well as added to existing roadblocks and distractions to Obama's effectiveness. He's a con-man and a racist. His base are racist - and he is trying to unify the global far-right.
chansen
Had a point all along
- Pronouns
- He/Him/His
CSIS probably accounts for half.
Ritafee
Is Being Human
On Aug. 1, 2014 President Barack Obama stated in a casual manner that “we tortured some folks.” Obama is well aware, torture is a violation of international law. It is prohibited by the Geneva Conventions of 1949, the Convention Against Torture, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, all of which have been signed and ratified by the United States.
Torture is an act that is never permitted @Kimmio .
The Torture Convention not only prohibits torture, it requires that those who plan, authorize and perpetrate the crime be fairly and competently prosecuted.
Failure to turn suspects over to be prosecuted before an appropriate body, such as the International Criminal Court, is itself a violation of the Torture Convention.
As we know, Obama chose to “look forward, not backwards” rather than meet the United States’ legal obligations.
Despite Obama’s decision to block any form of accountability for Bush administration officials for their role in torturing individuals, his administration has been a staunch supporter of international justice for other countries.
Stephen Rapp, Obama’s appointee as U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes, stated “When the most grave and serious crimes are committed and there is no will or capacity to prosecute at the national level, most of the countries in the world have decided, and the United States accepts, that this justice will be delivered in the International Criminal Court.”
The Obama administration voted at the U.N. Security Council to refer Libya and Syria to the ICC.
@Kimmio - Why would Obama immunize the Bush administration against prosecution for committing international crimes while openly supporting the prosecution of others?
Clearly, Obama believes Bush administration officials committed the war crime of torture.
According to Obama, when Bush administration officials were planning and authorizing the torture of individuals in custody of the United States, they “did not know whether more attacks were imminent, and there was enormous pressure on our ... national security teams to try to deal with this.”
President Obama like @Kimmio also warns us “not to feel too sanctimonious in retrospect about the tough job that those folks had. And a lot of those folks were working hard under enormous pressure and are real patriots.”
@Kimmio - Going by the president’s logic, when perpetrated under enormous pressure, egregious criminal behavior is morally justified and those responsible for it ought to be held above the law - this seems to fit with your logic as well.
Some of those who committed the crimes might even be “patriots.”
Yet, his administration has not applied this logic to other countries.
Moammar Gadhafi and Bashar Assad offered numerous explanations and justifications for their actions.
That did not stop the United States from seeking their prosecution.
Prosecuting Bush administration officials for torture would have been politically difficult.
@Kimmio - Are laws meant to be enforced when it is convenient to do so or are laws meant to be objective and applied to all, equally?
Despite the pious calls for justice elsewhere, protecting American officials against prosecution for war crimes is a time-honored tradition in the United States that @Kimmio seems to agree with.
Whether the crimes were committed during WWII, the Korean War, in Vietnam, Iraq or the wider “war on terror,” not a single high-level official has been held accountable for his or her crimes.
Obama’s contribution to U.S. hypocrisy does not end with the sheltering of Bush administration officials.
The Obama administration is suspected of committing a number of crimes of its own, including violations of the Torture Convention.
Despite multiple warnings of systematic torture in Afghan detention facilities, the administration continued to enter detainees into these facilities with full knowledge they could become victims of torture.
Although @Kimmio might argue a relatively lesser crime than directly authorizing these detainees’ torture, the end result is quite the same.
Obama also allowed for the continuing torture of Guantanamo Bay prisoners who are on a hunger strike.
The Obama administration has also violated international humanitarian law (IHL) through its targeted drone strike program.
In its operations in Pakistan and Yemen, the administration has employed methods of attack that violate IHL’s principles of distinction and proportionality.
The principle of distinction requires that attacks distinguish between civilians and combatants, and, when there is doubt, an individual must be presumed to be a civilian.
The principle of proportionality requires that even unintentional loss of innocent life not be excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage gained from launching the attack.
“Signature” strikes and attacks on first responders and funeral attendees have all failed to distinguish between civilians and combatants.
These assaults have been launched without certainty that those being targeted are combatants. In some cases, strikes have been launched with full knowledge that civilians were present.
These attacks have also violated the spirit of the principle of proportionality.
In order to determine whether an assault is likely to result in excessive loss of innocent life, those planning the attack must first know approximately how many combatants and civilians are located within the vicinity of the planned strike.
Perhaps the next president of the United States will tell the American people that, although hundreds, if not thousands, of innocent people were killed by drones Obama administration officials were under 'enormous pressure' and are 'real patriots' and @Kimmio would agree?
Obama has paid it backward. He has given the Bush administration the gift of immunity.
Unlike paying it forward, Obama’s good deed was not the type of selfless act usually associated with that philosophy.
With all of Obamas' own violations of the torture convention and international humanitarian law, some people think that Obama expects his favor to be repaid by the next inhabitant of the Oval Office ...
Some people think Trump might not be willing to repay that favor - what do you think @Kimmio? Does Trump owe it to Obama to give him immunity?
Torture is an act that is never permitted @Kimmio .
The Torture Convention not only prohibits torture, it requires that those who plan, authorize and perpetrate the crime be fairly and competently prosecuted.
Failure to turn suspects over to be prosecuted before an appropriate body, such as the International Criminal Court, is itself a violation of the Torture Convention.
As we know, Obama chose to “look forward, not backwards” rather than meet the United States’ legal obligations.
Despite Obama’s decision to block any form of accountability for Bush administration officials for their role in torturing individuals, his administration has been a staunch supporter of international justice for other countries.
Stephen Rapp, Obama’s appointee as U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes, stated “When the most grave and serious crimes are committed and there is no will or capacity to prosecute at the national level, most of the countries in the world have decided, and the United States accepts, that this justice will be delivered in the International Criminal Court.”
The Obama administration voted at the U.N. Security Council to refer Libya and Syria to the ICC.
@Kimmio - Why would Obama immunize the Bush administration against prosecution for committing international crimes while openly supporting the prosecution of others?
Clearly, Obama believes Bush administration officials committed the war crime of torture.
According to Obama, when Bush administration officials were planning and authorizing the torture of individuals in custody of the United States, they “did not know whether more attacks were imminent, and there was enormous pressure on our ... national security teams to try to deal with this.”
President Obama like @Kimmio also warns us “not to feel too sanctimonious in retrospect about the tough job that those folks had. And a lot of those folks were working hard under enormous pressure and are real patriots.”
@Kimmio - Going by the president’s logic, when perpetrated under enormous pressure, egregious criminal behavior is morally justified and those responsible for it ought to be held above the law - this seems to fit with your logic as well.
Some of those who committed the crimes might even be “patriots.”
Yet, his administration has not applied this logic to other countries.
Moammar Gadhafi and Bashar Assad offered numerous explanations and justifications for their actions.
That did not stop the United States from seeking their prosecution.
Prosecuting Bush administration officials for torture would have been politically difficult.
@Kimmio - Are laws meant to be enforced when it is convenient to do so or are laws meant to be objective and applied to all, equally?
Despite the pious calls for justice elsewhere, protecting American officials against prosecution for war crimes is a time-honored tradition in the United States that @Kimmio seems to agree with.
Whether the crimes were committed during WWII, the Korean War, in Vietnam, Iraq or the wider “war on terror,” not a single high-level official has been held accountable for his or her crimes.
Obama’s contribution to U.S. hypocrisy does not end with the sheltering of Bush administration officials.
The Obama administration is suspected of committing a number of crimes of its own, including violations of the Torture Convention.
Despite multiple warnings of systematic torture in Afghan detention facilities, the administration continued to enter detainees into these facilities with full knowledge they could become victims of torture.
Although @Kimmio might argue a relatively lesser crime than directly authorizing these detainees’ torture, the end result is quite the same.
Obama also allowed for the continuing torture of Guantanamo Bay prisoners who are on a hunger strike.
The Obama administration has also violated international humanitarian law (IHL) through its targeted drone strike program.
In its operations in Pakistan and Yemen, the administration has employed methods of attack that violate IHL’s principles of distinction and proportionality.
The principle of distinction requires that attacks distinguish between civilians and combatants, and, when there is doubt, an individual must be presumed to be a civilian.
The principle of proportionality requires that even unintentional loss of innocent life not be excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage gained from launching the attack.
“Signature” strikes and attacks on first responders and funeral attendees have all failed to distinguish between civilians and combatants.
These assaults have been launched without certainty that those being targeted are combatants. In some cases, strikes have been launched with full knowledge that civilians were present.
These attacks have also violated the spirit of the principle of proportionality.
In order to determine whether an assault is likely to result in excessive loss of innocent life, those planning the attack must first know approximately how many combatants and civilians are located within the vicinity of the planned strike.
Perhaps the next president of the United States will tell the American people that, although hundreds, if not thousands, of innocent people were killed by drones Obama administration officials were under 'enormous pressure' and are 'real patriots' and @Kimmio would agree?
Obama has paid it backward. He has given the Bush administration the gift of immunity.
Unlike paying it forward, Obama’s good deed was not the type of selfless act usually associated with that philosophy.
With all of Obamas' own violations of the torture convention and international humanitarian law, some people think that Obama expects his favor to be repaid by the next inhabitant of the Oval Office ...
Some people think Trump might not be willing to repay that favor - what do you think @Kimmio? Does Trump owe it to Obama to give him immunity?
Last edited by a moderator:
Do mind not tagging me so many times in one post?
Really, I don't think you or Graeme or any of us would make a better POTUS the way the world is, and that's the truth.
And, effective leaders don't order mass executions of their OWN citizens. And they protect their own countries from those who wish to harm them. And they protect their liberties like free speech. If not you would not be living comfortably, free to have your opinion. You have what you have because you were born into and a product of that which you criticize. We are better off because of it, and in a globalized world where we are all connected in real time - I do think the western way of life is better than living in a place where authoritarian despots shoot and kill and gas their own people and torture them for minor infractions. Yes, I want wars stopped, but what you are saying is hypocritical and unjustly judgmental.
Really, I don't think you or Graeme or any of us would make a better POTUS the way the world is, and that's the truth.
And, effective leaders don't order mass executions of their OWN citizens. And they protect their own countries from those who wish to harm them. And they protect their liberties like free speech. If not you would not be living comfortably, free to have your opinion. You have what you have because you were born into and a product of that which you criticize. We are better off because of it, and in a globalized world where we are all connected in real time - I do think the western way of life is better than living in a place where authoritarian despots shoot and kill and gas their own people and torture them for minor infractions. Yes, I want wars stopped, but what you are saying is hypocritical and unjustly judgmental.
Last edited:
Graeme Decarie
Well-Known Member
Kimmio - the U.S. does not have free speech. That ended a long time ago with domestic gestapo spying on everyone.
Obama has not been protecting the U.S. He couldn't because nobody has been attacking it. Far more people in the land of the free are killed by their own police than by jihadists. - usually about 1200 a year.
In addition, Obama has, and uses, the right to put people in jail with no charge and no trial.
As for racism, what do you think it is that makes it possible for Obama to kill hundreds of thousands, maybe a million, without causing questions from the American people? Do you seriously think Obama would bomb Britain or France in that way?
All Empires build their abuses on racism - thus the Belgian horror in Congo, the American crushing of South America, the British exploitation of India and China - and of native peoples in Canada.
Obama has not been protecting the U.S. He couldn't because nobody has been attacking it. Far more people in the land of the free are killed by their own police than by jihadists. - usually about 1200 a year.
In addition, Obama has, and uses, the right to put people in jail with no charge and no trial.
As for racism, what do you think it is that makes it possible for Obama to kill hundreds of thousands, maybe a million, without causing questions from the American people? Do you seriously think Obama would bomb Britain or France in that way?
All Empires build their abuses on racism - thus the Belgian horror in Congo, the American crushing of South America, the British exploitation of India and China - and of native peoples in Canada.
I don't think Obama was directly responsible for a lot of what happened. He was lied to, also. And there was a racist campaign against him for his outstretched hand remarks, remember? He's certainly not responsible for what happened before he came to office.
On that note....a musical interlude.
On that note....a musical interlude.
Last edited:
Delightful Life
M&M, Cascadian Lovers
- Pronouns
- She/Her/Her
Graeme Decarie
Well-Known Member
Thank you. I have an old love for Gilbert and Sullivan really well done. I think I've seen everything they did. Montreal used to have a superb GandS company, conducted by a man who had been a conductor for D'Oily Carte. Alas! This is the first GandS I have seen in some years. Here in Moncton, the height of musical taste is somebody who plays guitar while singing through his nose.
Graeme Decarie
Well-Known Member
Holy mackerel. I've noticed a banner at the top of the screen. It's wondercafe2 wishing me a happy birthday.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Adam Kokesh is not a peaceful activist. Do you have a bridge you want to sell me? (Kokesh is not that bridge)
Graeme Decarie
Well-Known Member
I was thinking about the charge that Trump is racist. I'm sure he is. So is Clinton. So are we all. We should have learned that at the time of the My Lai Massacre when an American lieutenant led his men into a village that had no guerrillas, no weapons. They methodically murdered every living thing in that village from adults to children to babies to dogs. It was done almost as a sport.
And not a word appeared in our news media - though reporters and media knew well about the story.
It was only thought the long struggle of one report that the story reached the news. And it took months to get there.
That was a war crime. It fact, it was a hanging crime. The Lieutenant's penalty? He was discharged from the army.
That sort of thing happens every day in war, and it's done by us just a frequently as it's done by ISIS. But we don't here about it on our side. There are incidents that reporters picked up in Iraq and Afghanistan and Syria and Yemen. But we never see them in most of our news media. There have been numerous cases of rape, of rape combined with murder, of deliberate massacre of civilians, of the bombing of civilians - by our side. How many of them have you read about?
How may do we care about?
It's a story that's as old as empires. All those foreigners are inferior to us, so it's okay if we murder them. But if one of them kills one of us or - horrors - and if the one who does it uses a sword to do it, this is unspeakable. They are evil. Our side never is.
Bush and Obama are both responsible for million of deaths of civilans, at least hundreds of thousands of them chjildren.
And we really don't give a damn.
But one child, scuffed and dirty is propped on chair photographed, and it viral as we brand all Muslims and Russians as evil.
(In fact, we don't even know how he got hurt or who did it. And we won't even see the pictures of the hundreds of thousands of chldren murdered by us.
We are all of us, racists.
Our racism even extends to social class. Billionaires have been soaking up the world's wealth at a tremendous rate. Their doing it my not paying taxes, by getting trade deals that give them advantage, by exploiting people all over the world, including in the U.S. and Canada. Read much about it?
Of course not. They're a superior race.
And not a word appeared in our news media - though reporters and media knew well about the story.
It was only thought the long struggle of one report that the story reached the news. And it took months to get there.
That was a war crime. It fact, it was a hanging crime. The Lieutenant's penalty? He was discharged from the army.
That sort of thing happens every day in war, and it's done by us just a frequently as it's done by ISIS. But we don't here about it on our side. There are incidents that reporters picked up in Iraq and Afghanistan and Syria and Yemen. But we never see them in most of our news media. There have been numerous cases of rape, of rape combined with murder, of deliberate massacre of civilians, of the bombing of civilians - by our side. How many of them have you read about?
How may do we care about?
It's a story that's as old as empires. All those foreigners are inferior to us, so it's okay if we murder them. But if one of them kills one of us or - horrors - and if the one who does it uses a sword to do it, this is unspeakable. They are evil. Our side never is.
Bush and Obama are both responsible for million of deaths of civilans, at least hundreds of thousands of them chjildren.
And we really don't give a damn.
But one child, scuffed and dirty is propped on chair photographed, and it viral as we brand all Muslims and Russians as evil.
(In fact, we don't even know how he got hurt or who did it. And we won't even see the pictures of the hundreds of thousands of chldren murdered by us.
We are all of us, racists.
Our racism even extends to social class. Billionaires have been soaking up the world's wealth at a tremendous rate. Their doing it my not paying taxes, by getting trade deals that give them advantage, by exploiting people all over the world, including in the U.S. and Canada. Read much about it?
Of course not. They're a superior race.
To a degree, we all are. Anyone who says they're not racist, is most likely racist. Trump says it all the time. He says it after he's called out for saying things like "Mexicans are rapists". There's no question Trump is racist. He pushed the Birther conspiracy quite spectacularly - did you know people were so taken by that conspiracy, because it has since been thoroughly debunked, they actually believe that Obama was set up by a big fraud the day he was born 50 whatever years ago, to fake his birth certificate? Trump was part of pushing the birther movement with his entertainment media savvy. And he has really rallied up the interest of the white supremacists and is using far right Nigel Lafarge to campaign. And I have seen photos of t-shirts and posters, anti-Obama, so offensive I don't think I can post here. These are Trump's base!
Where is proof of the high numbers of kids' deaths you cite, that Obama is responsible for?
Again, the generals call the shots.
Yes, billionaires exploit people in poor countries and that is racist and we do hear about it but not enough.
Where is proof of the high numbers of kids' deaths you cite, that Obama is responsible for?
Again, the generals call the shots.
Yes, billionaires exploit people in poor countries and that is racist and we do hear about it but not enough.
Ritafee
Is Being Human
You, as a free, beautiful, independent human being with inalienable rights, own yourself! You can do what you want with your own body and the product of your labor. All human interactions should be free of force and coercion, and we are free to exercise our rights, limited only by respect for the rights of others. Governments rely on force and force is a poor substitute for persuasion. When you learned "don't hit" and "don't steal" and "don't kill" it wasn't "unless you work for the government". Governments frighten us into thinking we need them, but we are moving past the statist paradigm and rendering them obsolete. - Adam Kokesh