Rumsfeld Flees France, Fearing Arrest

[Lt_Ripley]

Rumsfeld Flees France, Fearing Arrest

World News. Posted October 29, 2007.

Anti-torture protesters in France believe that the defense secretary fled over the open border to Germany, where a war crimes case against Rumsfeld was dismissed by a federal court.

Former U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld fled France today fearing arrest over charges of "ordering and authorizing" torture of detainees at both the American-run Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and the U.S. military's detainment facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, unconfirmed reports coming from Paris suggest.

U.S. embassy officials whisked Rumsfeld away yesterday from a breakfast meeting in Paris organized by the Foreign Policy magazine after human rights groups filed a criminal complaint against the man who spearheaded President George W. Bush's "war on terror" for six years.

Under international law, authorities in France are obliged to open an investigation when a complaint is made while the alleged torturer is on French soil.

According to activists in France, who greeted Rumsfeld, shouting "murderer" and "war criminal" at the breakfast meeting venue, U.S. embassy officials remained tight-lipped about the former defense secretary's whereabouts citing "security reasons".

Anti-torture protesters in France believe that the defense secretary fled over the open border to Germany, where a war crimes case against Rumsfeld was dismissed by a federal court. But activists point out that under the Schengen agreement that ended border checkpoints across a large part of the European Union, French law enforcement agents are allowed to cross the border into Germany in pursuit of a fleeing fugitive.

"Rumsfeld must be feeling how Saddam Hussein felt when U.S. forces were hunting him down," activist Tanguy Richard said. "He may never end up being hanged like his old friend, but he must learn that in the civilized world, war crime doesn't pay."

International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) along with the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR), and the French League for Human Rights (LDH) filed the complaint on Thursday after learning that Rumsfeld was scheduled to visit Paris

http://www.alternet.org/story/66425/

[Mars]

The French have become the laughing stock of the world. They are truly turning into an ultra-liberal hippy country. We should charge the government of France with war crimes for their illegal involvment in guerrilia wars in Africa actually, but again they would complain that the evil capitalist americans are ridiculing them again.

I can't wait until we leave NATO and the UN and hear these idiots complain as Russia takes over as another superpower.

Edited November 4, 2007 by Mars

[Bob26003]

I was under the impression that torture is illegal under US law, or at least it was until recently.

[Unlimited]

I was under the impression that torture is illegal under US law, or at least it was until recently.

it's ok if your in the "party"..just do it in the czech republic in a dungeon...like dick says "a good dunks a no brainer for me"...when he's arrested I hope they board him...

[Teslasparkgap]

That must have given him some shock and awe.

America should do what France does and run the Illuminati terrorists out of the USA.

Why was he in America in the first place?

[Mars]

That must have given him some shock and awe.

America should do what France does and run the Illuminati terrorists out of the USA.

Why was he in America in the first place?

The Freemasons were war heros and now they are demonized by Conspiracy Theorists who call them the "Illuminati".

[Bob26003]

Well, apparently the Japanese were prosecuted for water boarding after WW2, so why is this not a talking point?

I have hear no one use this as a rebuttal.....

Seems pretty cut and dry to me.

[stevewinn]

The French have become the laughing stock of the world. They are truly turning into an ultra-liberal hippy country. We should charge the government of France with war crimes for their illegal involvment in guerrilia wars in Africa actually, but again they would complain that the evil capitalist americans are ridiculing them again.

I can't wait until we leave NATO and the UN and hear these idiots complain as Russia takes over as another superpower.

(Bold) Mars you've said a few times about the US should leave NATO, im starting to think you've got a point, we only have to look at Afghanistan, there is hand full of countries fully committed to operations, it seems to me certain countries want to be in NATO for the protection they'd get from fellow NATO members US & UK, someone needs to tell them they cant have it both ways either help with the fighting and fully committed to operations or leave NATO.

No way has Rumsfeld run for the border, the Anti War Brigade are worse than politicians and their a load of sh**, can you see Rumsfeld being arrested for torture claims no way pedro, face it no-ones going to face the music over war crimes, torture or anything,

[Mars]

(Bold) Mars you've said a few times about the US should leave NATO, im starting to think you've got a point, we only have to look at Afghanistan, there is hand full of countries fully committed to operations

I heard that France isn't even technically in NATO's military anymore.

[ships-cat]

(Bold) Mars you've said a few times about the US should leave NATO, im starting to think you've got a point, we only have to look at Afghanistan, there is hand full of countries fully committed to operations, it seems to me certain countries want to be in NATO for the protection they'd get from fellow NATO members US & UK.....

Which was - of course - the original purpose of NATO. To forestall the invasion of European countries by Russia by stating "if you attack one of us, you attack all of us. Even then the NATO sphere of geographical operations was tightly defined. For example, if Russia invaded Wales, then NATO would come ot our defence. If Russia attacked British troops in, say, Egypt,then NATO would not be obliged to respond.

You could argue that a NATO is operating WAY beyond it's remit by getting involved in Afghanistan.

Meow Purr.

[stevewinn]

Which was - of course - the original purpose of NATO. To forestall the invasion of European countries by Russia by stating "if you attack one of us, you attack all of us. Even then the NATO sphere of geographical operations was tightly defined. For example, if Russia invaded Wales, then NATO would come ot our defence. If Russia attacked British troops in, say, Egypt,then NATO would not be obliged to respond.

You could argue that a NATO is operating WAY beyond it's remit by getting involved in Afghanistan.

Meow Purr.

Cat, you cant have all the NATO members foreign ministers saying we are fully committed when some countries wont let their troops engage in combat or send only a few hundred troops and some are even thinking of pulling out, the UK is to up troop numbers to 10,000 next year and then upto 12,000 by 2009, trouble is joe public back in NATO members countries want a 7 day war and havent got the resolve to stay the course and get the job done. If NATO fails in Afghanistan because only certain countries are left carrying the can we will start to see the end of NATO.

[questionmark]

Which was - of course - the original purpose of NATO. To forestall the invasion of European countries by Russia by stating "if you attack one of us, you attack all of us. Even then the NATO sphere of geographical operations was tightly defined. For example, if Russia invaded Wales, then NATO would come ot our defence. If Russia attacked British troops in, say, Egypt,then NATO would not be obliged to respond.

You could argue that a NATO is operating WAY beyond it's remit by getting involved in Afghanistan.

Meow Purr.

At least from a British perspective NATO should be dissolved, its original intend was to keep the Americans in, the Russians out and the Germans down (or at least some British Foreign secretary is quoted saying that), it failed in at least two of the goals above. The rest is just to justify SHAPE in Brussels.

But, for the future, it is not only the Donald is in peril of getting arrested if outside the US, so is Dubya, Condoleza and a few more....

The whole situation begs the question: If any third world politician risks getting arrested for crimes he committed in the past while on visit in Europe, why should a first world politician not be arrested?

[ships-cat]

Cat, you cant have all the NATO members foreign ministers saying we are fully committed when some countries wont let their troops engage in combat or send only a few hundred troops and some are even thinking of pulling out, the UK is to up troop numbers to 10,000 next year and then upto 12,000 by 2009, trouble is joe public back in NATO members countries want a 7 day war and havent got the resolve to stay the course and get the job done. If NATO fails in Afghanistan because only certain countries are left carrying the can we will start to see the end of NATO.

Well, that was kind of my point. Perhaps some of the 'wimps' are NOT pulling out because they are cowards, but because they recognise that this should NOT be a NATO mission. They signed up for a mutual-defence pact, and now they are 1000 miles away in Afghanistan ? Where is the national threat that requires such action ?

But, for the future, it is not only the Donald is in peril of getting arrested if outside the US, so is Dubya, Condoleza and a few more....

The whole situation begs the question: If any third world politician risks getting arrested for crimes he committed in the past while on visit in Europe, why should a first world politician not be arrested?

Yup - What's good for the Goose is good for the Gander. And lets not forget Tony whilst we're drawing up lists. No problems there.

I'm amazed that Bob26003 and the Lootenant havn't picked up on this yet.

Meow Purr.

Meow Purr.

[__Kratos__]

Seems pretty cut and dry to me.

Why? The case in Germany was dismissed against him.

[Bob26003]

Why? The case in Germany was dismissed against him.

So, waterboarding is torture when the Japanese do it, but not when we do it?

[Bob26003]

Seems to me that water boarding is illegal under both International and US law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_boarding#World_War_II

Legality

International law

All countries that are signatory to the UN Convention Against Torture have agreed they are subjected to the explicit prohibition on torture under any condition, and as such there exists no legal exception under this treaty. (The treaty states, No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.) Additionally, signatories of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights also agreed to its Article 5, which states, No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

United States

* In 1947, the United States prosecuted a Japanese military officer, Yukio Asano, for carrying out a form of waterboarding on a U.S. civilian during World War II. Yukio Asano received a sentence of 15 years of hard labor.[45] The charges of Violation of the Laws and Customs of War against Asano also included "beating using hands, fists, club; kicking; burning using cigarettes; strapping on a stretcher head downward."[46]

* In its 2005 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, the U.S. Department of State formally recognized "submersion of the head in water" as torture in its examination of Tunisia's poor human rights record, [47] and critics of waterboarding draw parallels between the two techniques, citing the similar usage of water on the subject.

* On September 6, 2006, the United States Department of Defense released a revised Army Field Manual entitled Human Intelligence Collector Operations that prohibits the use of waterboarding by U.S. military personnel. The department adopted the manual amid widespread criticism of U.S. handling of prisoners in the War on Terrorism, and prohibits other practices in addition to waterboarding. The revised manual applies only to U.S. military personnel, and as such does not apply to the practices of the CIA.[48] However, under international law, violators of the laws of war are criminally liable under the command responsibility, and could still be prosecuted for war crimes.[49]

[questionmark]

Why? The case in Germany was dismissed against him.

It was not dismissed, but Kay Nehm, then State Prosecutor, refused to work on a case that will not lead to a court case and probable conviction... that is not quite the same.

[Bob26003]

What did Cheney say?

"Nothing wrong with a little dunk"? or something equally psychotic.

[Waspie_Dwarf]

From now on can we please keep this thread on topic. No further attempts to hijack this thread will be tolerated. The off topic posts have been deleted.

A reminder of some of the terms of service of this site which all members agree to abide by when they join (yes, even you Mars).

2. Post content

Please read and understand the following before posting:

2h. Agenda posting: Do not use the forum to promote an agenda. This often involves the starting of threads or making posts which appear to be legitimate in nature but which are aimed at surreptitiously promoting some political view, religious belief or to attack or criticise other members, beliefs or views in an underhand manor which detracts from unbiased and fair discussion.

3. Behaviour

Any of the following constitutes unacceptable behaviour:

3j. Thread derailment: Do not derail or 'hijack' threads with posts that are either off-topic or designed to draw attention away from what is being discussed. If you'd like to discuss something different either start a new thread or find another existing thread which better suits the area you wish to discuss.

Thank you for your cooperation.

[AROCES]

Rumsfeld Flees France, Fearing Arrest

World News. Posted October 29, 2007.

Former U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld fled France today fearing arrest over charges of "ordering and authorizing" torture of detainees at both the American-run Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and the U.S. military's detainment facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, unconfirmed reports coming from Paris suggest.

The usual, call it WORLD NEWS when it's nothing but a tabloid item.

Edited November 5, 2007 by AROCES

[Ugly1]

I wonder what the reaction would be from the American public if one of our major players such as Dubya, or Cheney got arrested in another country. At first I felt kind of p***ed off about the situation, but jeez, Dubya could be gone tomorrow if he was arrested in France! Too bad the French aren't willing to put up a fight for anything, so we would have Dubya back on day 2.

Edited November 5, 2007 by Ugly1

[Raptor Witness]

I was under the impression that torture is illegal under US law, or at least it was until recently.

Listen, this Devil has gotten away with murder by the hundred's of thousands, and I doubt he will ever pay for his war crimes. We treated the people of Iraq like they were garbage, to be thrown away. I see little difference in allowing the murder of hundred's of thousands, and genocide in a gas chamber. Forget the torture of a handful, that's small potatoes.

[Unlimited]

Listen, this Devil has gotten away with murder by the hundred's of thousands, and I doubt he will ever pay for his war crimes.

I believe in hell....so I feel safe that these guys are gonna pay double...