Grayson
Conspiracy Cafe
- Messages
- 1,117
IPB
Cafe Rules
Member TeamsArcadeLinksPortal HelpSearchMembersCalendar
Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )
> Conspiracy Cafe Home > Cafe Latte > The Election Cafe > Australian Elections
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> To all politicians, AND WHOM IT MAY CONCERN;
Options V
Scott post Jan 17 2007, 05:19 PM
Post #1
On my way to Moes' for a beer
Group Icon
Group: Global Moderator
Posts: 2,132
Joined: 9-July 05
From: The shitter! I'm reading, leave me alone!
Member No.: 90
Gender: Male
I found this page Can Bush be legally held accountable? whilst digging around looking for Aussie intellect. And I wonder of this guy is a bit of a nutter? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wacko.gif)
I must admit that he has a point or two worth noting. He did catch my attention with this:
"Now, I am seeking to have John Howard and his cohorts to be charged for what I view are crimes against humanity, war crimes and numerous other crimes. Section 24AA of the Crimes Act (Commonwealth of Australia) makes it TREACHERY to attack a "friendly" nation. As the Commonwealth of Australia never declared war against the sovereign nation Iraq or Afghanistan for that matter, then they were and remained to be a "friendly" nation."
OK I think ... "Oh Yeah!"
So I dig around and find his (really unorganized) web page and I found this at: http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/
I figure that it is worthy of a post here. I mean .... Why Not?
QUOTE
To all politicians, AND WHOM IT MAY CONCERN; 1-1-2007
Re Australians facing executions, etc.
As a fellow human being I oppose the execution of any person. You cannot pick and choose on this subject. You are either in favour or against executions.
Despite that Australians rejected death sentences we now found that John Howard and his fellow ministers in government permitted the execution of Saddam Hussein.
We must consider that Saddam Hussein, as like the Queen within our constitutional provisions, had constitutional immunity. International laws cannot override constitutional provisions.
Saddam Hussein was not just a prisoner of the US but was apprehended while Iraq was under the armed invasion of Australian-US and British troops as the coalition of the willing. The fact that the US was to hold anyone in custody did not for one of iota alter our responsibilities towards those prisoners. All those of the Coalition of the Willing ultimately are responsible.
In a recent case involving the Dutch Government a US citizen had fled the country having already been found innocent of the murder of his wife but the Federal government sought to have him tried again. Albeit he illegally entered The Netherlands, the Dutch government made clear it could not deport this man back to the USA unless the USA conceded it would not use any death penalty were the to convict this person. The Dutch government citing Human rights provisions. The Netherlands, as like the United Kingdom are subject to the European Union Human Rights Act. This act in fact, albeit unknown to most Australian lawyers, applies also to the Commonwealth of Australia, as I successful argued in my appeal. This was unchallenged and I succeeded in my appeal.
The position of Saddam Hussein was clear, he was a prisoner of the Coalition of the willing and as such John Howard was responsible to ensure that Saddam Hussein would not be executed or for that matter no other person.
We find however that John Howard defied the wishes of the Australian people and allowed Saddam Hussein to be executed.
We find that the Iraqi government in power now execute people under their laws.
What we did was to invade some sovereign country about WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION while killing by mass murder innocent civilians and in the process have jeopardized the lives of Australians who are either waiting on death row or in time may be sentenced to death in other countries.
We have become morally bankrupt by this as no country could take us serious that we oppose the application of a death sentence or for that matter the killing of any Australian where we have shown to condone the killing of Saddam Hussein and others.
I maintain the armed murderous invasion into Afghanistan and Iraq was unconstitutional, but what on earth could be achieved to have Saddam Hussein ignoring his constitutional immunity be sentences by some farce of a court as allegedly crimes against humanity be allowed to be executed.
How on earth could I accept that Saddam Hussein was guilty of anything, where we now how the intelligent services had it so wrong about the WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION? What could be believed what was the truth?
If in time John Howard were to face the Courts and be convicted for breach of Section 24AA of the Crimes Act (Cth) and/or other crimes could we then hold the queen accountable? Surely, no one in his/her right mind could hold the Queen accountable?
The issue is not if I approve or deplore of the killings that were going on in Iraq during the reign of Saddam Hussein, rather that we must at all times establish the innocence or guilt of any person before a Court of law. As the Framers of the Constitution made clear “retrospective” legislation was unacceptable.
Saddam Hussein may or may not have committed crimes, but the appropriate and only way to have established this is not by tyranny but by having pursue the provisions of the Iraqi constitution as was applicable, that the national council was the only body who could order a president to stand trial.
Because Bush, Blair and Howard was eager not just to dispose of Saddam Hussein but to overthrow the entire constitutional system, and now hangings appears to be the order of the day in Iraq, besides the bombings by others, we seem to have achieved that contrary to Australian values that we oppose the death penalty somehow we have shown to the world that the value of a life of a human being really depends upon what the federal government decides.
We have shown to the youth of today in Australia that it is alright to have people killed if you don’t like them for what ever reason regardless if it is unlawful as you just take over their power and do what you want. This is going to haunt us in time to come.
The USA is rife with killings, and no wonder where soldiers are relentlessly killing in Iraq or other countries and then return home having the desire to kill, even if it is one of their own.
This is what we are teaching our youth!
In my view, John Howard should have followed the Dutch Government example and have opposed (as part of the Coalition of the Willing) for anyone held in custody by the Coalition of the Willing to be handed over unless it was conceded they would not be executed.
Likewise the Australian Federal police should be held acting contrary to the interest of Australian community where it cooperate to the apprehension of Australians to face possible death sentence as the Australian government was provided “external powers” to ensure that it would safeguard the well being of Australians abroad.
I am not the one to suggest criminals should get off. I am making clear that we can pursue JUSTICE by making clear to any nation we will not participate unless they guarantee not to apply the death sentence if there is a conviction.
After a 5 year legal battle I succeeded on appeals on 19 July 2006 that constitutionally voting is not compulsory and it cannot be made compulsory and I was therefore entitled not to vote.
All the lawyers burning up monies from Consolidated Revenue in the end were defeated.
What we need is an OFFICE OF THE GUARDIAN, a constitutional council, that advises the Government, the People, the Parliament and the Courts, as to constitutional powers and limitations so that instead of having a 5 year ill fated legal battle the Government has some proper source of information
We might have avoided to have been involved in the murderous invasion into the sovereign nations Afghanistan and Iraq also!
When my neighbours trees caused damage to my motor vehicle I did not attack him but just had it parked elsewhere. When the same trees then caused damage to my sewerage system I did not attack him but simply called him over, explained the problem and that if it was to happen again he could face a huge bill in cost. His response was to have the trees removed! Using the coalition of the willing kind of conduct I could have simply taken pre-emptive action to poison the trees on the boundary line or perhaps simply hit him over the head but I view we must act civilized and in the end the neighbour and myself turned out to be good friend because he liked the easy going way I dealt with matters.
We invaded Iraq for what? Was it to dispose of Saddam Hussain? Was it to dispose of his political party which had nothing to do with our democratic system? Was it to liberate people so they now can be hanged or stoned to death? Was it to destroy their infra structure to cause employment for mainly the Americans?
If we are to attach every country in the world such as Zimbabwe (why not?) because of our dislike to their internal affairs then where are sovereign rights?
Saddam Hussein was executed by the followers of a religious zealot. So what does this say about the kind of JUSTICE that we installed in Iraq?
I just oppose the killing of any human being, not because I may like what was alleged against Saddam Hussein, but I see it that we are no better then bloody murderers if we use the law (under any pretext to be the law) to execute a fellow human being and also too often innocent people have been executed.
In the USA it was commonly known that a expert in DNA would decide the innocence or guilt of the accused pending on which side he was. If he was on the side of the Prosecutor it was guaranteed the accused would be convicted. If he was on the side of the accused, the accused would be cleared. Just after so many were executed it was discovered that this expert was manipulating details pending who he was assisting in the trial. Many innocent people were executed as result, as later testing of DNA samples proved.
Yes, people convicted of hideous crimes were then gladly put to death, just that later they were found to be innocent and the real murderous were free at large! So what was achieved in those cases, not the protection of others as the evil person rather got away with it.
We are no better then any barbaric of stone age, rather we are worse where we end up killing or participating in the killing of another human being not because of the issue of life or death but because it is some misplaced desire by some people in government to wield, no matter how unconstitutional, their powers to decide life and death.
What “responsible government” do we have where minister are making blunders after blunders and get away with it, such as the Vivian Alvarez Solon case?
When was a Minister put on trial for allowing Vivian Alvarez solon unconstitutionally being deported?
After all, as I successfully proved in court it was unconstitutionally to have her detained let alone deported.
The Framers of the Constitution made clear that any Minister could be personally sued. Well, it is overdue that John Howard and those supporting him are facing a Court of Justice to be held accountable to allow the killing of an another human being and failing to prove the protection that was required to be given as occupiers of Iraq.
If contemporary views are to be applied to the Constitution, as some judges of the High Court of Australia pursue, then let apply “moral bankruptcy” as to disqualify a Member of Parliament. Who says that “bankrupt” is limited to financial matters, if the High Court of Australia itself uses contemporary views?
In my view any Member of Parliament who support the killing of another human being and the decision of John Howard to allow the execution of Saddam Hussein is morally bankrupt and should not be in the Parliament. They do not represent the electorate as the people have opposed the application of the death penalty.
How many Australians may end up being executed because other nations still imposing the death penalty may simply argue that Australia cannot pick and choose who shall or shall not be executed!
Every nation has the right to apply its criminal justice system in the way it desires provided we do not assist in the process with the execution of anyone.
Like it or not, Saddam Hussein was entitled to the protection of the Australian Government to not to be executed, as this is what Australians are standing for.
We should have opposed the handing over of Saddam Hussein to the Iraqi authorities unless it was guaranteed he would not be executed. After all, the Dutch Government proved that they were able to do so regarding a USA national.
If we have a responsible government, who under deceit and unconstitutionally invaded other sovereign nations we must hold those responsible accountable, as not to do so may in the long run also be harmful for our own security.
If we have a constitutional “responsible government” then no doubt any Member of Parliament who is truly representing the electorate will pursue that the relevant Members of Parliament who failed to act appropriately are being held accountable.
Every time and Australian is executed we can ask ourselves what we could have avoided had we not ourselves be morally bankrupt to allow the execution of others!
I for one could say, being a Grandmaster “constitutionalist” that if the Framers of the Constitution had ever anticipated this kind of conduct they would have never proceeded with federation!
I for one pursue John Howard and his supporters to be charged and face the Courts to be held accountable, the question is will you? With a federal election coming up we might see how many can justify the Australian government ignoring the public opposition to the death penalty and to seek to JUSTIFY why Saddam Hussein who done us no harm was nevertheless allowed by the Australian government to be handed over to be executed.
Let the hanging of Nguyen Tuong Van be a reminder that we failed to secure his right to life!
“PEOPLES POWER reclaim our State and Federal constitutional and other legal rights, and hold politicians & judges accountable!”
MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL®
I must admit that he is on a mission! What do you think?
User is offlineProfile CardPM Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Cary post Jan 17 2007, 06:08 PM
Post #2
Ragin Cajun
Group Icon
Group: Global Moderator
Posts: 11,773
Joined: 7-May 05
From: Baton Rouge, LA
Member No.: 10
Gender: Male
The boy makes a pretty good arguement.
User is offlineProfile CardPM Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dancingwithwolves post Jan 17 2007, 11:47 PM
Post #3
Plotter
Group Icon
Group: Member
Posts: 3
Joined: 11-January 07
Member No.: 1,067
Gender: Male
All power to the man! If only many more would speak as he does.
User is offlineProfile CardPM Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Cary post Jan 18 2007, 12:50 AM
Post #4
Ragin Cajun
Group Icon
Group: Global Moderator
Posts: 11,773
Joined: 7-May 05
From: Baton Rouge, LA
Member No.: 10
Gender: Male
Welcome to CC.net DancingWithWolves. Good to see you posting.
User is offlineProfile CardPM Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sosuemetoo post Jan 18 2007, 01:51 AM
Post #5
Conspiratus Illuminatus
Group Icon
Group: VIP Member
Posts: 6,022
Joined: 7-May 05
Member No.: 49
Gender: Female
Welcome, Dancingwithwolves!
User is offlineProfile CardPM Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dancingwithwolves post Jan 18 2007, 11:42 AM
Post #6
Plotter
Group Icon
Group: Member
Posts: 3
Joined: 11-January 07
Member No.: 1,067
Gender: Male
Thank you both.
I have a lot to read on here.
User is offlineProfile CardPM Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
coolmoeel post Oct 18 2007, 03:11 AM
Post #7
Plotter
Group Icon
Group: Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 15-October 07
Member No.: 4,167
Gender: Male
hey this may be late but i am new to this web site but i think that john Howard is doing a good job improving relations with America the world's most powerful government and all the things he does is for the best interest of Australia. I live in Australia and even tho it looks like he doesn't know what hes doing and hes just sniffing George bush's anus. I think he does, going to war was a correct decision for our country since can benefit both with relationship with world power and further strengthen Australian economically. and btw i know what ur thinking ppl r dying and injustice are going on so we can live better but it goes on all the time and if it was going to happen anyways we just tag along for the ride. i know i sound cold hearted and evil but going to war was in the best interest of Australia.
User is offlineProfile CardPM Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Scott post Oct 18 2007, 03:52 AM
Post #8
On my way to Moes' for a beer
Group Icon
Group: Global Moderator
Posts: 2,132
Joined: 9-July 05
From: The shitter! I'm reading, leave me alone!
Member No.: 90
Gender: Male
LOL! I bet that I know who you are.
The eel is a bit of a givaway isn't it MG?
Welcome to the site.
Stay and enlighten us with thuy wit! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)
User is offlineProfile CardPM Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
coolmoeel post Oct 18 2007, 10:19 AM
Post #9
Plotter
Group Icon
Group: Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 15-October 07
Member No.: 4,167
Gender: Male
QUOTE(Scott @ Oct 17 2007, 08:52 PM) *
LOL! I bet that I know who you are.
The eel is a bit of a givaway isn't it MG?
Welcome to the site.
Stay and enlighten us with thuy wit! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)
huh wat do u mean eel is a bit of a giveaway MG? are u implying that i am politician
eel is my name
This post has been edited by coolmoeel: Oct 18 2007, 10:26 AM
User is offlineProfile CardPM Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Scott post Oct 18 2007, 11:23 PM
Post #10
On my way to Moes' for a beer
Group Icon
Group: Global Moderator
Posts: 2,132
Joined: 9-July 05
From: The shitter! I'm reading, leave me alone!
Member No.: 90
Gender: Male
QUOTE(coolmoeel @ Oct 18 2007, 08:19 PM) *
huh wat do u mean eel is a bit of a giveaway MG? are u implying that i am politician
eel is my name
No not at all, I may well be wrong anyway.
User is offlineProfile CardPM Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
coolmoeel post Today, 02:45 AM
Post #11
Plotter
Group Icon
Group: Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 15-October 07
Member No.: 4,167
Gender: Male
nah im am one of john howard's boys so u better not run ur mouth at my homo johny or we ride to ur house and pop slugs in ur tummy. me and mr howard keep it locked down and we ride 2gether so dont cross us.
lol but btw which politician would go by the name of eel?
QUOTE(Scott @ Oct 18 2007, 04:23 PM) *
No not at all, I may well be wrong anyway.
This post has been edited by coolmoeel: Today, 02:48 AM
User is offlineProfile CardPM Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Scott post Today, 03:14 AM
Post #12
On my way to Moes' for a beer
Group Icon
Group: Global Moderator
Posts: 2,132
Joined: 9-July 05
From: The shitter! I'm reading, leave me alone!
Member No.: 90
Gender: Male
QUOTE(coolmoeel @ Oct 23 2007, 12:45 PM) *
nah im am one of john howard's boys so u better not run ur mouth at my homo johny or we ride to ur house and pop slugs in ur tummy. me and mr howard keep it locked down and we ride 2gether so dont cross us.
lol but btw which politician would go by the name of eel?
I actually thought that you were a friend of mine who is rather right winged!
User is offlineProfile CardPM Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
« Next Oldest · Australian Elections · Next Newest »
Enter Keywords
Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
|---- Australian Elections
Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )
> Conspiracy Cafe Home > Cafe Latte > The Election Cafe > Australian Elections
- Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd October 2007 - 07:24 AM
Free Top Site
Invision Power Board v2.1.7 © 2007 IPS, Inc.
Cafe Rules
Member TeamsArcadeLinksPortal HelpSearchMembersCalendar
Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )
> Conspiracy Cafe Home > Cafe Latte > The Election Cafe > Australian Elections
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> To all politicians, AND WHOM IT MAY CONCERN;
Options V
Scott post Jan 17 2007, 05:19 PM
Post #1
On my way to Moes' for a beer
Group Icon
Group: Global Moderator
Posts: 2,132
Joined: 9-July 05
From: The shitter! I'm reading, leave me alone!
Member No.: 90
Gender: Male
I found this page Can Bush be legally held accountable? whilst digging around looking for Aussie intellect. And I wonder of this guy is a bit of a nutter? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wacko.gif)
I must admit that he has a point or two worth noting. He did catch my attention with this:
"Now, I am seeking to have John Howard and his cohorts to be charged for what I view are crimes against humanity, war crimes and numerous other crimes. Section 24AA of the Crimes Act (Commonwealth of Australia) makes it TREACHERY to attack a "friendly" nation. As the Commonwealth of Australia never declared war against the sovereign nation Iraq or Afghanistan for that matter, then they were and remained to be a "friendly" nation."
OK I think ... "Oh Yeah!"
So I dig around and find his (really unorganized) web page and I found this at: http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/
I figure that it is worthy of a post here. I mean .... Why Not?
QUOTE
To all politicians, AND WHOM IT MAY CONCERN; 1-1-2007
Re Australians facing executions, etc.
As a fellow human being I oppose the execution of any person. You cannot pick and choose on this subject. You are either in favour or against executions.
Despite that Australians rejected death sentences we now found that John Howard and his fellow ministers in government permitted the execution of Saddam Hussein.
We must consider that Saddam Hussein, as like the Queen within our constitutional provisions, had constitutional immunity. International laws cannot override constitutional provisions.
Saddam Hussein was not just a prisoner of the US but was apprehended while Iraq was under the armed invasion of Australian-US and British troops as the coalition of the willing. The fact that the US was to hold anyone in custody did not for one of iota alter our responsibilities towards those prisoners. All those of the Coalition of the Willing ultimately are responsible.
In a recent case involving the Dutch Government a US citizen had fled the country having already been found innocent of the murder of his wife but the Federal government sought to have him tried again. Albeit he illegally entered The Netherlands, the Dutch government made clear it could not deport this man back to the USA unless the USA conceded it would not use any death penalty were the to convict this person. The Dutch government citing Human rights provisions. The Netherlands, as like the United Kingdom are subject to the European Union Human Rights Act. This act in fact, albeit unknown to most Australian lawyers, applies also to the Commonwealth of Australia, as I successful argued in my appeal. This was unchallenged and I succeeded in my appeal.
The position of Saddam Hussein was clear, he was a prisoner of the Coalition of the willing and as such John Howard was responsible to ensure that Saddam Hussein would not be executed or for that matter no other person.
We find however that John Howard defied the wishes of the Australian people and allowed Saddam Hussein to be executed.
We find that the Iraqi government in power now execute people under their laws.
What we did was to invade some sovereign country about WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION while killing by mass murder innocent civilians and in the process have jeopardized the lives of Australians who are either waiting on death row or in time may be sentenced to death in other countries.
We have become morally bankrupt by this as no country could take us serious that we oppose the application of a death sentence or for that matter the killing of any Australian where we have shown to condone the killing of Saddam Hussein and others.
I maintain the armed murderous invasion into Afghanistan and Iraq was unconstitutional, but what on earth could be achieved to have Saddam Hussein ignoring his constitutional immunity be sentences by some farce of a court as allegedly crimes against humanity be allowed to be executed.
How on earth could I accept that Saddam Hussein was guilty of anything, where we now how the intelligent services had it so wrong about the WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION? What could be believed what was the truth?
If in time John Howard were to face the Courts and be convicted for breach of Section 24AA of the Crimes Act (Cth) and/or other crimes could we then hold the queen accountable? Surely, no one in his/her right mind could hold the Queen accountable?
The issue is not if I approve or deplore of the killings that were going on in Iraq during the reign of Saddam Hussein, rather that we must at all times establish the innocence or guilt of any person before a Court of law. As the Framers of the Constitution made clear “retrospective” legislation was unacceptable.
Saddam Hussein may or may not have committed crimes, but the appropriate and only way to have established this is not by tyranny but by having pursue the provisions of the Iraqi constitution as was applicable, that the national council was the only body who could order a president to stand trial.
Because Bush, Blair and Howard was eager not just to dispose of Saddam Hussein but to overthrow the entire constitutional system, and now hangings appears to be the order of the day in Iraq, besides the bombings by others, we seem to have achieved that contrary to Australian values that we oppose the death penalty somehow we have shown to the world that the value of a life of a human being really depends upon what the federal government decides.
We have shown to the youth of today in Australia that it is alright to have people killed if you don’t like them for what ever reason regardless if it is unlawful as you just take over their power and do what you want. This is going to haunt us in time to come.
The USA is rife with killings, and no wonder where soldiers are relentlessly killing in Iraq or other countries and then return home having the desire to kill, even if it is one of their own.
This is what we are teaching our youth!
In my view, John Howard should have followed the Dutch Government example and have opposed (as part of the Coalition of the Willing) for anyone held in custody by the Coalition of the Willing to be handed over unless it was conceded they would not be executed.
Likewise the Australian Federal police should be held acting contrary to the interest of Australian community where it cooperate to the apprehension of Australians to face possible death sentence as the Australian government was provided “external powers” to ensure that it would safeguard the well being of Australians abroad.
I am not the one to suggest criminals should get off. I am making clear that we can pursue JUSTICE by making clear to any nation we will not participate unless they guarantee not to apply the death sentence if there is a conviction.
After a 5 year legal battle I succeeded on appeals on 19 July 2006 that constitutionally voting is not compulsory and it cannot be made compulsory and I was therefore entitled not to vote.
All the lawyers burning up monies from Consolidated Revenue in the end were defeated.
What we need is an OFFICE OF THE GUARDIAN, a constitutional council, that advises the Government, the People, the Parliament and the Courts, as to constitutional powers and limitations so that instead of having a 5 year ill fated legal battle the Government has some proper source of information
We might have avoided to have been involved in the murderous invasion into the sovereign nations Afghanistan and Iraq also!
When my neighbours trees caused damage to my motor vehicle I did not attack him but just had it parked elsewhere. When the same trees then caused damage to my sewerage system I did not attack him but simply called him over, explained the problem and that if it was to happen again he could face a huge bill in cost. His response was to have the trees removed! Using the coalition of the willing kind of conduct I could have simply taken pre-emptive action to poison the trees on the boundary line or perhaps simply hit him over the head but I view we must act civilized and in the end the neighbour and myself turned out to be good friend because he liked the easy going way I dealt with matters.
We invaded Iraq for what? Was it to dispose of Saddam Hussain? Was it to dispose of his political party which had nothing to do with our democratic system? Was it to liberate people so they now can be hanged or stoned to death? Was it to destroy their infra structure to cause employment for mainly the Americans?
If we are to attach every country in the world such as Zimbabwe (why not?) because of our dislike to their internal affairs then where are sovereign rights?
Saddam Hussein was executed by the followers of a religious zealot. So what does this say about the kind of JUSTICE that we installed in Iraq?
I just oppose the killing of any human being, not because I may like what was alleged against Saddam Hussein, but I see it that we are no better then bloody murderers if we use the law (under any pretext to be the law) to execute a fellow human being and also too often innocent people have been executed.
In the USA it was commonly known that a expert in DNA would decide the innocence or guilt of the accused pending on which side he was. If he was on the side of the Prosecutor it was guaranteed the accused would be convicted. If he was on the side of the accused, the accused would be cleared. Just after so many were executed it was discovered that this expert was manipulating details pending who he was assisting in the trial. Many innocent people were executed as result, as later testing of DNA samples proved.
Yes, people convicted of hideous crimes were then gladly put to death, just that later they were found to be innocent and the real murderous were free at large! So what was achieved in those cases, not the protection of others as the evil person rather got away with it.
We are no better then any barbaric of stone age, rather we are worse where we end up killing or participating in the killing of another human being not because of the issue of life or death but because it is some misplaced desire by some people in government to wield, no matter how unconstitutional, their powers to decide life and death.
What “responsible government” do we have where minister are making blunders after blunders and get away with it, such as the Vivian Alvarez Solon case?
When was a Minister put on trial for allowing Vivian Alvarez solon unconstitutionally being deported?
After all, as I successfully proved in court it was unconstitutionally to have her detained let alone deported.
The Framers of the Constitution made clear that any Minister could be personally sued. Well, it is overdue that John Howard and those supporting him are facing a Court of Justice to be held accountable to allow the killing of an another human being and failing to prove the protection that was required to be given as occupiers of Iraq.
If contemporary views are to be applied to the Constitution, as some judges of the High Court of Australia pursue, then let apply “moral bankruptcy” as to disqualify a Member of Parliament. Who says that “bankrupt” is limited to financial matters, if the High Court of Australia itself uses contemporary views?
In my view any Member of Parliament who support the killing of another human being and the decision of John Howard to allow the execution of Saddam Hussein is morally bankrupt and should not be in the Parliament. They do not represent the electorate as the people have opposed the application of the death penalty.
How many Australians may end up being executed because other nations still imposing the death penalty may simply argue that Australia cannot pick and choose who shall or shall not be executed!
Every nation has the right to apply its criminal justice system in the way it desires provided we do not assist in the process with the execution of anyone.
Like it or not, Saddam Hussein was entitled to the protection of the Australian Government to not to be executed, as this is what Australians are standing for.
We should have opposed the handing over of Saddam Hussein to the Iraqi authorities unless it was guaranteed he would not be executed. After all, the Dutch Government proved that they were able to do so regarding a USA national.
If we have a responsible government, who under deceit and unconstitutionally invaded other sovereign nations we must hold those responsible accountable, as not to do so may in the long run also be harmful for our own security.
If we have a constitutional “responsible government” then no doubt any Member of Parliament who is truly representing the electorate will pursue that the relevant Members of Parliament who failed to act appropriately are being held accountable.
Every time and Australian is executed we can ask ourselves what we could have avoided had we not ourselves be morally bankrupt to allow the execution of others!
I for one could say, being a Grandmaster “constitutionalist” that if the Framers of the Constitution had ever anticipated this kind of conduct they would have never proceeded with federation!
I for one pursue John Howard and his supporters to be charged and face the Courts to be held accountable, the question is will you? With a federal election coming up we might see how many can justify the Australian government ignoring the public opposition to the death penalty and to seek to JUSTIFY why Saddam Hussein who done us no harm was nevertheless allowed by the Australian government to be handed over to be executed.
Let the hanging of Nguyen Tuong Van be a reminder that we failed to secure his right to life!
“PEOPLES POWER reclaim our State and Federal constitutional and other legal rights, and hold politicians & judges accountable!”
MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL®
I must admit that he is on a mission! What do you think?
User is offlineProfile CardPM Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Cary post Jan 17 2007, 06:08 PM
Post #2
Ragin Cajun
Group Icon
Group: Global Moderator
Posts: 11,773
Joined: 7-May 05
From: Baton Rouge, LA
Member No.: 10
Gender: Male
The boy makes a pretty good arguement.
User is offlineProfile CardPM Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dancingwithwolves post Jan 17 2007, 11:47 PM
Post #3
Plotter
Group Icon
Group: Member
Posts: 3
Joined: 11-January 07
Member No.: 1,067
Gender: Male
All power to the man! If only many more would speak as he does.
User is offlineProfile CardPM Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Cary post Jan 18 2007, 12:50 AM
Post #4
Ragin Cajun
Group Icon
Group: Global Moderator
Posts: 11,773
Joined: 7-May 05
From: Baton Rouge, LA
Member No.: 10
Gender: Male
Welcome to CC.net DancingWithWolves. Good to see you posting.
User is offlineProfile CardPM Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sosuemetoo post Jan 18 2007, 01:51 AM
Post #5
Conspiratus Illuminatus
Group Icon
Group: VIP Member
Posts: 6,022
Joined: 7-May 05
Member No.: 49
Gender: Female
Welcome, Dancingwithwolves!
User is offlineProfile CardPM Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dancingwithwolves post Jan 18 2007, 11:42 AM
Post #6
Plotter
Group Icon
Group: Member
Posts: 3
Joined: 11-January 07
Member No.: 1,067
Gender: Male
Thank you both.
I have a lot to read on here.
User is offlineProfile CardPM Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
coolmoeel post Oct 18 2007, 03:11 AM
Post #7
Plotter
Group Icon
Group: Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 15-October 07
Member No.: 4,167
Gender: Male
hey this may be late but i am new to this web site but i think that john Howard is doing a good job improving relations with America the world's most powerful government and all the things he does is for the best interest of Australia. I live in Australia and even tho it looks like he doesn't know what hes doing and hes just sniffing George bush's anus. I think he does, going to war was a correct decision for our country since can benefit both with relationship with world power and further strengthen Australian economically. and btw i know what ur thinking ppl r dying and injustice are going on so we can live better but it goes on all the time and if it was going to happen anyways we just tag along for the ride. i know i sound cold hearted and evil but going to war was in the best interest of Australia.
User is offlineProfile CardPM Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Scott post Oct 18 2007, 03:52 AM
Post #8
On my way to Moes' for a beer
Group Icon
Group: Global Moderator
Posts: 2,132
Joined: 9-July 05
From: The shitter! I'm reading, leave me alone!
Member No.: 90
Gender: Male
LOL! I bet that I know who you are.
The eel is a bit of a givaway isn't it MG?
Welcome to the site.
Stay and enlighten us with thuy wit! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)
User is offlineProfile CardPM Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
coolmoeel post Oct 18 2007, 10:19 AM
Post #9
Plotter
Group Icon
Group: Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 15-October 07
Member No.: 4,167
Gender: Male
QUOTE(Scott @ Oct 17 2007, 08:52 PM) *
LOL! I bet that I know who you are.
The eel is a bit of a givaway isn't it MG?
Welcome to the site.
Stay and enlighten us with thuy wit! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)
huh wat do u mean eel is a bit of a giveaway MG? are u implying that i am politician
eel is my name
This post has been edited by coolmoeel: Oct 18 2007, 10:26 AM
User is offlineProfile CardPM Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Scott post Oct 18 2007, 11:23 PM
Post #10
On my way to Moes' for a beer
Group Icon
Group: Global Moderator
Posts: 2,132
Joined: 9-July 05
From: The shitter! I'm reading, leave me alone!
Member No.: 90
Gender: Male
QUOTE(coolmoeel @ Oct 18 2007, 08:19 PM) *
huh wat do u mean eel is a bit of a giveaway MG? are u implying that i am politician
eel is my name
No not at all, I may well be wrong anyway.
User is offlineProfile CardPM Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
coolmoeel post Today, 02:45 AM
Post #11
Plotter
Group Icon
Group: Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 15-October 07
Member No.: 4,167
Gender: Male
nah im am one of john howard's boys so u better not run ur mouth at my homo johny or we ride to ur house and pop slugs in ur tummy. me and mr howard keep it locked down and we ride 2gether so dont cross us.
lol but btw which politician would go by the name of eel?
QUOTE(Scott @ Oct 18 2007, 04:23 PM) *
No not at all, I may well be wrong anyway.
This post has been edited by coolmoeel: Today, 02:48 AM
User is offlineProfile CardPM Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Scott post Today, 03:14 AM
Post #12
On my way to Moes' for a beer
Group Icon
Group: Global Moderator
Posts: 2,132
Joined: 9-July 05
From: The shitter! I'm reading, leave me alone!
Member No.: 90
Gender: Male
QUOTE(coolmoeel @ Oct 23 2007, 12:45 PM) *
nah im am one of john howard's boys so u better not run ur mouth at my homo johny or we ride to ur house and pop slugs in ur tummy. me and mr howard keep it locked down and we ride 2gether so dont cross us.
lol but btw which politician would go by the name of eel?
I actually thought that you were a friend of mine who is rather right winged!
User is offlineProfile CardPM Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
« Next Oldest · Australian Elections · Next Newest »
Enter Keywords
Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
|---- Australian Elections
Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )
> Conspiracy Cafe Home > Cafe Latte > The Election Cafe > Australian Elections
- Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd October 2007 - 07:24 AM
Free Top Site
Invision Power Board v2.1.7 © 2007 IPS, Inc.
Last edited by a moderator:
