Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Stop the War! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (5534)	3/30/2003 2:55:09 PM
From: Doug R	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21614

Laz...hello??? Are you in there? geez...this duct tape you're behind must be 3 feet thick. Who says it's illegal? about 99% of the world's lawyers with any experience in international law. The other 1% are still trying on behalf of bush and blair to find one scrap of legal justification.

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (5534)	3/30/2003 3:00:03 PM
From: Doug R	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21614

Earlier this month the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) in Geneva expressed its “deep dismay that a small number of states are poised to launch an outright illegal invasion of Iraq, which amounts to a war of aggression.” According to the ICJ, such “a war waged without a clear mandate from the United Nations Security Council would constitute a flagrant violation of the prohibition of the use of force.” The commission emphasises that Security Council Resolution 1441 does not authorise the use of force. The ICJ standpoint contradicts that of US President Bush, who has continually sought to use this resolution as the basis for war. The ICJ added: “The competency of the Security Council to authorise the use of force is not unlimited. It may only do so to ‘maintain or restore international peace and security.’” The evidence presented by the governments of the United States, the United Kingdom and Spain is “less than convincing,” the ICJ declared. On March 20 the ICJ once again issued a statement and condemned the attack on Iraq as “a great leap backward in the international rule of law.”

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (5534)	3/30/2003 3:05:52 PM
From: Doug R	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21614

Lawyers in the United States, Canada and Britain warned their governments in January that they could be prosecuted for war crimes if military tactics violated humanitarian law. Alternatively, aggrieved states could take the United States and Britain to international courts, complain to the Security Council, or to the U.N. General Assembly, she said. "This decision to wage a just war is based upon an appeal to dangerously subjective standards of morality and the belligerents' conviction that their cause is right. After two world wars, the dangers of this approach are obvious." (With additional reporting by reporters in Geneva, Amsterdam, London, Paris, Johannesburg, Dubai, Beijing, Sydney) middleeastinfo.org

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (5534)	3/30/2003 3:09:12 PM
From: Doug R	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21614

‘US using illegal methods to get Iraq information’ Dharam Shourie (Press Trust of India) New York, February 4: Charging the United States with employing "illegal, immoral and utterly unreliable method" for obtaining information from detainees, a non-governmental rights group has demanded the US should respond to these allegations before it presents evidence on Iraq’s weapons programme and terror links to the UN on Wednesday. "In our work around the world, we have encountered many government officials and ordinary citizens who are now convinced that the united states is employing a method widely condemned as illegal, immoral, and utterly unreliable for obtaining truthful information from detainees," the human rights watch said in a letter to Secretary of State Colin Powell. Recent reports, it said, indicate that at least some of the evidence Powell intends to present was derived from interrogations of detainees held by the United States and its allies in the war against terrorism. In this connection, the watch referred to a Washington Post report which quoted officials of the Bush administration as suggesting that al-Qaeda suspects have been tortured or mistreated in US custody in Afghanistan, and that others have been rendered to countries where the United States knew they would likely be tortured. Since the publication of the report on December 26, it said, no US official has disavowed its assertions or announced any corrective measures. In the letter, the watch asked Powell to declare that any US official guilty of such practices will be held accountable, that the US has no interest in intelligence obtained through torture and other internationally condemned techniques, and that Washington will not turn over detainees to countries where they are likely to receive such treatment. "In his state of the Union address, President (George W) Bush said the Iraqi government is 'evil' because it uses torture," said Kenneth Roth, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch. "But torture is evil no matter who is using it. Secretary Powell should not lose this chance to explicitly renounce the use of torture by the us government and its allies." The letter said that whatever the truth of the allegations reported by the Washington Post, "much of the world now believes the United States is torturing or severely mistreating detainees." "Until this perception is changed, your presentation to the Security Council—to the extent it relies on detainee interrogations—will not inspire the confidence and trust you are seeking," it warned. expressindia.com