47 thoughts on “War Criminal Makeovers

1 2
  • Annie

    Larry:”Right, the old “Tim Osman.” “Tim Osman” is entirely the product of the imagination of a creepy meth cooker who is now serving time in a California prison. That guy (can’t remember his name) was present for the handover of the Iranian hostages in 1980 (so he claims). He’s discovered a limitless source of free energy (so he claims). Come to think of it – he claims a lot of crazy things!

    FAIL. COMPLETE FAIL.”

    Well Larry, you certainly failed to mention the name of the ‘creepy meth cooker’…

    See this document:

    http://preview.tinyurl.com/pnwp8r & read this article:

    http://preview.tinyurl.com/ac5j4 for more on Tim Osman’s visit to the US.

    When you remember the name of the methman, please let us know…

  • dreoilin

    “dreoilin, so far, you’ve got the best arguments against my positions!”

    Posted by: Larry at 9:33 PM

    I have made no arguments regarding 9/11. Which made your comment (now deleted) about me being a “stupid 9/11 truther” even sillier than your normal level of pap.

    You asked why I brought up Haiti? Use your head. It’s the biggest disaster the world has seen in donkeys’ years. The biggest disaster UN teams have faced since the UN was founded. The most horrible and heartbreaking spectacle happening in front of our eyes on the News. What more would you require for me to bring up a subject.

    You have the gall to suggest I brought it up to strike at your self-important country. You are self-obsessed and selfish, Larry, as are so many of your compatriots. I hope you didn’t take Rush Limbaugh’s advice: “Don’t donate towards Haiti. You’ve paid your US income tax already”.

  • tony_opmoc

    The Rule of Law Has Been Lost

    informationclearinghouse.info/article24444.htm

    Extract

    The greatest human achievement is the subordination of government to law. This was an English achievement that required eight centuries of struggle, beginning in the ninth century when King Alfred the Great codified the common law, moving forward with the Magna Carta in the thirteenth century and culminating with the Glorious Revolution in the late seventeenth century.

    The success of this long struggle made law a shield of the people. As an English colony, America inherited this unique achievement that made English speaking peoples the most free in the world.

    In the first decade of the twenty-first century, this achievement was lost in the United States and, perhaps, in England as well.

    As Lawrence Stratton and I show in our book, The Tyranny of Good Intentions (2000), the protective features of law in the U.S. were eroded in the twentieth century by prosecutorial abuse and by setting aside law in order to better pursue criminals. By the time of our second edition (2008), law as a shield of the people no longer existed. Respect for the Constitution and rule of law had given way to executive branch claims that during time of war government is not constrained by law or Constitution.

    Government lawyers told President Bush that he did not have to obey the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which prohibits the government from spying on citizens without a warrant, thus destroying the right to privacy. The U.S. Department of Justice ruled that the President did not have to obey U.S. law prohibiting torture or the Geneva Conventions. Habeas corpus protection, a Constitutional right, was stripped from U.S. citizens. Medieval dungeons, torture, and the windowless cells of Stalin’s Lubyanka Prison reappeared under American government auspices.

    The American people’s elected representatives in Congress endorsed the executive branch’s overthrow of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Law schools and bar associations were essentially silent in the face of this overthrow of mankind’s greatest achievement. Some parts of the federal judiciary voted with the executive branch; other parts made a feeble resistance. Today in the name of “the war on terror,” the executive branch does whatever it wants. There is no accountability.

    The First Amendment has been abridged and may soon be criminalized. Protests against, and criticisms of, the U.S. government’s illegal invasions of Muslim countries and war crimes against civilian populations have been construed by executive branch officials as “giving aid and comfort to the enemy.” As American citizens have been imprisoned for giving aid to Muslim charities that the executive branch has decreed, without proof in a court of law, to be under the control of “terrorists,” any form of opposition to the government’s wars and criminal actions can also be construed as aiding terrorists and be cause for arrest and indefinite detention.

    One Obama appointee, Harvard law professor Cass Sunstein, advocates that the U.S. government create a cadre of covert agents to infiltrate anti-war groups and groups opposed to U.S.government policies in order to provoke them into actions or statements for which they can be discredited and even arrested.

    Sunstein defines those who criticize the government’s increasingly lawless behavior as “extremists,” which, to the general public, sounds much like “terrorists.” In essence, Sunstein wants to generalize the F.B.I.’s practice of infiltrating dissidents and organizing them around a “terrorist plot” in order to arrest them. That this proposal comes from a Harvard Law School professor demonstrates the collapse of respect for law among American law professors themselves, ranging from John Yoo at Berkeley, the advocate of torture, to Sunstein at Harvard, a totalitarian who advocates war on the First Amendment.

    The U.S. Department of State has taken up Sunstein’s idea. Last month Eva Golinger reported in the Swiss newspaper, Zeit-Fragen, that the State Department plans to organize youth in “Twitter Revolutions” to destabilize countries and bring about regime change in order to achieve more American puppet states, such as the ones in Egypt, Jordan, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Canada, Mexico, Columbia, Ukraine, Georgia, the Baltic states, Britain, and Western and Eastern Europe.

    The First Amendment is being closed down. Its place is being taken by propaganda in behalf of whatever government does. As Stratton and I wrote in the second edition of our book documenting the destruction of law in the United States:

    “Never in its history have the American people faced such danger to their constitutional protections as they face today from those in the government who hold the reins of power and from elements of the legal profession and the federal judiciary that support ‘energy in the executive.’ An assertive executive backed by an aggressive U.S. Department of Justice (sic) and unobstructed by a supine Congress and an intimidated corporate media has demonstrated an ability to ignore statutory law and public opinion. The precedents that have been set during the opening years of the twenty-first century bode ill for the future of American liberty.”

    Similar assaults on the rule of law can be observed in England. However, the British have not completely given up on accountable government. The Chilcot Inquiry is looking into how Britain was deceived into participating in the illegal U.S. invasion of Iraq. President Obama, of course, has blocked any inquiry into how the U.S. was deceived into attacking Iraq in violation of law.

    Much damning information has come out about Blair’s deception of the British government and people. Sir David Manning, foreign policy advisor to Blair, told the Chilcot Inquiry that Blair had promised Bush support for the invasion almost a year in advance. Blair had told his country that it was a last minute call based on proof of Iraq’s possession of weapons of mass destruction.

    Sir William Patey told the inquiry that President Bush began talking about invading Iraq six or seven months prior to September 11, 2001. A devastating official memo has come to light from Lord Goldsmith, Prime Minister Blair’s top law official, advising Blair that an invasion of Iraq would be in breach of international law.

    Now a secret and personal letter to Prime Minister Blair from his Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw, has surfaced. In the letter, the Foreign Secretary warned the Prime Minister that his case for military invasion of Iraq was of dubious legality and was likely as false as the argument that removing Saddam Hussein would bring Iraqis a better life.

    Blair himself must now testify. He has the reputation, whether deserved or not, as one of the slickest liars in the world. But some accountability seems to be heading his way. The Sunday Times (London) reported on January 17 that the latest poll indicates that 52 percent of the British people believe that Blair deliberately misled his country in order to take Britain to war for the Americans. About one quarter of the British people think Blair should be put on trial as a war criminal.

    Unlike the U.S., which takes care to keep the government unaccountable to law, Britain is a member of the International Criminal Court, so Blair does stand some risk of being held accountable for the war crimes of President George W. Bush’s regime and the U.S. Congress.

    In contrast, insouciant Americans are content for their government to behave illegally. A majority supports torture despite its illegality, and a McClatchy-Ipsos poll found that 51 percent of Americans agree that “it is necessary to give up some civil liberties in order to make the country safe from terrorism.”

    As our Founding Fathers warned, fools who give up liberty for security will have neither.

  • Larry from St. Louis

    Annie,

    So do you believe EVERYTHING Mr. Riconosciuto claims?

    BBBBWWWWAAAAAAHHHHHHHAAAAAAHHHHHHAAAAAAA!

  • Larry from St. Louis

    dreoilin, you were using Haiti as an opportunity to slam the U.S.

    Are you seriously claiming that you’re not reflexively anti-American? Of course you are.

    You write:

    “I hope you didn’t take Rush Limbaugh’s advice: “Don’t donate towards Haiti. You’ve paid your US income tax already”.”

    Well, now, that’s just a silly false dichotomy isn’t it? I was an Obama voter, so that pretty much disqualifies me from having any sort of connection from Rush Limbaugh.

    The only person who has a connection to the “don’t donate” position is Craig Murray. He’s gone on the Alex Jones radio show. Alex Jones is a crazy right-wing radio host – certainly more crazy than Rush Limbaugh. Today, Alex Jones was telling his listeners not to donate to the International Red Cross, because the money would go to “gun grabbers” and “land grabbers.”

    One hopes that Craig Murray doesn’t once again go on that radio show.

  • MJ

    One hopes that Larry, in a quieter moment perhaps, grasps the point of dreoilin’s excellent post.

  • The Blair lies

    If anyone wants to understand where Larry’s coming from, you could do worse than read “Lies and the Lying Liars who tell them”.

    They really do make it all up, and then when they’re caught out as they always are, they just parse and lie their way out of it again, or invent straw men to detract from the issue at hand.

    Read it and see:

    http://www.amazon.com/Lies-Lying-Liars-Tell-Them/dp/0525947647

    The original neo-con artist called them noble lies, but they’re just common or garden evil lies from people of no other ability than making a buck for themselves.

  • Larry from St. Louis

    what a simplistic book

    and don’t you know that Al Franken thinks of you 911 conspiracy types as nutjobs?

  • glenn

    “The Blair lies” – That Al Franken guy (who has become a senator since writing it) is quite an entertaining fellow. I’ve got his “The truth with jokes” which is well worth a read. He used to have a fairly passable radio show too. You’re spot on about these liars though, it’s just layer after layer of lies. Expose some lies, they’ll come out with a bunch more. Expose those, and they’ll revert back to the original lies, with ridicule, profanity and personal insult the whole while. Pretty much sums up the act of ol’ Larry “wide stance” boy here!

  • Larry from St. Louis

    Glenn, I met Al Franken when he was campaigning in Minnesota! Even though I made it clear that I wasn’t a MN voter, he was kind enough to chat with me. I congratulated him on being an Air America radio host who absolutely did not entertain dumb 911 conspiracies. He told me you idiots made his life difficult at times.

  • Richard Robinson

    “They’ve all got it infamy!”

    I was half expecting to be told it should be ‘in for me’, and all. I’m not sure I ever even heard the original. I didn’t go trawling the net for transcripts, either; pedants need feeding too 🙂

1 2

Comments are closed.