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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (168124)	8/3/2005 1:53:59 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Respond to of 281500

Conspiracy to Commit War >> Facts? Yes. That the Niger document was a forgery is a fact. Do you have a problem with that? >> I am very concerned that such a powerful case was built around what turned out to be a hoax. Obviously the Bush admin is not. Otherwise, they would have paused, thought about what they were doing, and conducted a full investigation into the matter. The fact that they did not so, is very telling. >> I do not find all the allegations against Cheney by your dog pack to be credible...for flaming rhetoric. LOL! All that and "flaming rhetoric" in the same sentence. Since you seem to be so reluctant to educate yourself, let me help you through with the definition of conspiracy: CONSPIRACY - 18 U.S.C. 371 makes it a separate Federal crime or offense for anyone to conspire or agree with someone else to do something which, if actually carried out, would amount to another Federal crime or offense. So, under this law, a 'conspiracy' is an agreement or a kind of 'partnership' in criminal purposes in which each member becomes the agent or partner of every other member. In order to establish a conspiracy offense it is not necessary for the Government to prove that all of the people named in the indictment were members of the scheme; or that those who were members had entered into any formal type of agreement; or that the members had planned together all of the details of the scheme or the 'overt acts' that the indictment charges would be carried out in an effort to commit the intended crime. Also, because the essence of a conspiracy offense is the making of the agreement itself (followed by the commission of any overt act), it is not necessary for the Government to prove that the conspirators actually succeeded in accomplishing their unlawful plan. What the evidence in the case must show beyond a reasonable doubt is: First: That two or more persons, in some way or manner, came to a mutual understanding to try to accomplish a common and unlawful plan, as charged in the indictment; Second: That the person wilfully became a member of such conspiracy; Third: That one of the conspirators during the existence of the conspiracy knowingly committed at least one of the methods (or 'overt acts') described in the indictment; and Fourth: That such 'overt act' was knowingly committed at or about the time alleged in an effort to carry out or accomplish some object of the conspiracy. An 'overt act' is any transaction or event, even one which may be entirely innocent when considered alone, but which is knowingly committed by a conspirator in an effort to accomplish some object of the conspiracy. A person may become a member of a conspiracy without knowing all of the details of the unlawful scheme, and without knowing who all of the other members are. So, if a person has an understanding of the unlawful nature of a plan and knowingly and wilfully joins in that plan on one occasion, that is sufficient to convict him for conspiracy even though he did not participate before, and even though he played only a minor part... lectlaw.com Therefore, CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT WAR between "uninformed" sources, the neoconian media, and big corporations meets the correct legal definition. The fact that members of this cabal and their associates had previously stated their desire to invade Iraq and the fact that they as a group have materially profited from this war, and the fact that some of them have wilfully mislead the public (as per example documented by the House document on the matter) and that other members of this group used those misleading quotes to push their agenda, and that at no time any semblance of even handedness was demonstrated as for example in the lack of investigation for Niger forged documents, THEN AS A MATTER OF LAW, COLLECTIVELY THESE ACTIONS MAY BE TERMED A CONSPIRACY. >> This issue is huge to me. I would like very much to see a full accounting of it. Yes. It is a huge issue to me too...let me know if you ever find something...I am not holding my breath, though. Sun Tzu