War Crimes Proven: "Rights Not Judicially Enforceable"

[pat_k]

A very interesting phrase was omitted from the final draft of Bush's War

The phrase in itself proves the intent to commit a war crime with malice aforethought.

The phrase: "RIGHTS NOT JUDICIALLY ENFORCEABLE.".

The phrase itself demonstrates a recognition that rights actually existed, and the intent to violate those rights through non-enforcement.

Yes. It is just that simple.

Case Closed on the newly inaugurated War Criminal Nation.

http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/nkk/documents/MilitaryCommissions.pdf"">Original -- See page 79

As Passed http://thomas.loc.gov">S. 3930 -- See Sec. 7(a)

If they are Rights they Cannot be Unenforceable.

Are you outraged?? If you are, don't keep it to yourself!!

http://voiceoutrage.com">voiceoutrage.com

[thedeanpeople]

1. K&R

[tbyg52]

3. Hi thedeanpeople!

Welcome to DU! :hi:

[pat_k]

5. Thx!

[hootinholler]

4. Hey BUFF!

:hi: How all y'all been?

-Hoot

[pat_k]

7. Hey Hoot!

I created thedeanpeople login to post announcements for the organization. Day-to-day, I post as pat_k (as a rule, won't shamelessly kick "nyself" as I did today).

Anyway, we've been good (and busy!). Fighting on!!

[tbyg52]

9. BTW, thanks for the link....

...in the thread I followed you from, regarding "belief people." Explains a lot. You might want to start a thread with that one.

[pat_k]

10. Have put it out there periodically -- usually in reponses

. . . had some interesting exchanges on the topic back in June. In case you're interested, here's a link. (this one is sort of "mid-discussion" but provides a follow on from the Salon post).

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2681291&mesg_id=2682633

[tbyg52]

2. This is PROOF

That they either knew exactly what they were doing, or are too stupid/lazy to be in the Senate. The clause is almost the same, except that the version that was passed is more specific.

The big difference is in the heading--removing the one that was potentially explosive. You can't tell me at least *some* of them didn't know exactly what they were doing.

Original version, with potentionaly explosive heading:
(b) RIGHTS NOT JUDICIALLY ENFORCEABLE.— 7
(1) IN GENERAL.—No person in any habeas 8
action or any other action may invoke the Geneva 9
Conventions or any protocols thereto as a source of 10
rights, whether directly or indirectly, for any pur- 11
pose in any court of the United States or its States 12
or territories. 13

Version that was passed, heading defanged, clause beefed up:
SEC. 7. TREATY OBLIGATIONS NOT ESTABLISHING 8
GROUNDS FOR CERTAIN CLAIMS. 9
(a) IN GENERAL.—No person may invoke the Geneva 10
Conventions, or any protocols thereto, in any habeas or 11
civil action or proceeding to which the United States, or 12
a current or former officer, employee, member of the 13
Armed Forces, or other agent of the United States, is a 14
party, as a source of rights in any court of the United 15
States or its States or territories. 16

[rman]

6. kick

[bananas]

8. k&r nt