CIA Destroys/Hides Evidence Of Wrongdoing - Harman Warns against - Merged

[red states rule]

you and watersportsboy are both acknowledged traitors. you both care ZERO about the constitution of the united states.

you both are worthless pieces of shit.

and you are another warm and fuzzy liberal

Funny how you demand peopee debate with you,, then you turn around and issue death threats when folks disagree with you - as well as the usual insults

[retiredman]

and you are another warm and fuzzy liberal

Funny how you demand peopee debate with you,, then you turn around and issue death threats when folks disagree with you - as well as the usual insults

I issued no death threats. I merely stated that I believe that domestic enemies of the constitution should be shot. you have clearly and unambiguously stated that you believe that article VI of the u.s. constitution should be pissed upon.

connect the dots.

[red states rule]

I issued no death threats. I merely stated that I believe that domestic enemies of the constitution should be shot. you have clearly and unambiguously stated that you believe that article VI of the u.s. constitution should be pissed upon.

connect the dots.

Yea right, you issued no death threats - only saying I should be shot. More word games from you - no shocker on that

[retiredman]

Yea right, you issued no death threats - only saying I should be shot. More word games from you - no shocker on that

do you think that america's enemies should be shot?

[red states rule]

do you think that america's enemies should be shot?

NO, I do not think you should be shot - just put in a padded room under strict Doctors care

[retiredman]

NO, I do not think you should be shot - just put in a padded room under strict Doctors care

nice dodge. I am not the one advocating pissing on the constitution. that would be you.

[actsnoblemartin]

i went for a walk.

here is the text if anybody cares, im starting to read it, and will render my analysis as soon as possible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Conv...gainst_Torture

http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/39/a39r046.htm

here is my source.

http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=the...F-8&fr=hp-psdt

[red states rule]

nice dodge. I am not the one advocating pissing on the constitution. that would be you.

The terrorists thank you for your support, while the troops wish you would shut your blowhole

[retiredman]

The terrorists thank you for your support, while the troops wish you would shut your blowhole

how the fuck would you know what the troops wish? you are a cowardly traitorous pussy who has never been NEAR a uniform.... and you advocate pissing on the very document all those troops have sworn to support and defend!

[red states rule]

how the fuck would you know what the troops wish? you are a cowardly traitorous pussy who has never been NEAR a uniform.... and you advocate pissing on the very document all those troops have sworn to support and defend!

When I post many of the reactions of the troops about you and your party you dismiss them as "cut and paste"

They hold you and your party in very low esteem - and at election time

[actsnoblemartin]

A few things, the united states did sign the treaty, and in 2004 ratified the treaty but....

here is the interesting part: can anybody translate this from lawyer into english?

Recent history

Since 2004, the Convention has received new attention in the world press because of the stress and duress interrogation techniques used on detainees by United States military personnel, most notably at the Abu Ghraib prison and Bagram prison. The United States ratified the Convention, but lodged a declaration that "... nothing in this Convention requires or authorizes legislation, or other action, by the United States of America prohibited by the Constitution of the United States as interpreted by the United States."[2] The reason for this is that the United States Government lacks constitutional authority to enter into any treaty that violates any civil rights or other provisions within the Constitution of the United States.[3] Torture is illegal within the United States and is illegal if practised by American military personnel anywhere at any time.[4][5]

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Conv...gainst_Torture

and optional protocol:

The Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, adopted by the General Assembly on 18 December 2002 and in force since 22 June 2006, provides for the establishment of "a system of regular visits undertaken by independent international and national bodies to places where people are deprived of their liberty, in order to prevent torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment," to be overseen by a Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment ("Subcommittee on Prevention").

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Conv...gainst_Torture

[red states rule]

A few things, the united states did sign the treaty, and in 2004 ratified the treaty but....

here is the interesting part: can anybody translate this from lawyer into english?

Since 2004, the Convention has received new attention in the world press because of the stress and duress interrogation techniques used on detainees by United States military personnel, most notably at the Abu Ghraib prison and Bagram prison. The United States ratified the Convention, but lodged a declaration that "... nothing in this Convention requires or authorizes legislation, or other action, by the United States of America prohibited by the Constitution of the United States as interpreted by the United States."[2] The reason for this is that the United States Government lacks constitutional authority to enter into any treaty that violates any civil rights or other provisions within the Constitution of the United States.[3] Torture is illegal within the United States and is illegal if practised by American military personnel anywhere at any time.[4][5]

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Conv...gainst_Torture

For the Useless Nation to lecture the US on human rights is a joke. Look who they have sitting on their Human Rights Council

[actsnoblemartin]

Personal analysis.

#1 The united states is a sovereign nation, and its first reponsibility is to protect its citizens.

#2 The United States has a moral and ethical right to do whatever is neccesary to protect their citizens

#3 I believe torture is neccesary (in certain cases), to obtain information that can and has saved lifes.

#4 I believe the u.s. has a right to modify or dis-continue any treaty without cause or reason, if it in the u.s. best interests of the country, its citizens or its strategic interests

#5 Laws are not meant to be strictly enforced, but to be interpreted and every situation judged differently

[actsnoblemartin]

As stated in my analysis, the u.n. is not a country and has it has been shown over and over again are biased, immoral, and shown antagonistic malice toward the u.s. and israel. It has never been a fair broker, it is the nevil chamberlin, signing people to useless treaties that they could never enforce and then asking america to pay for it, it has a long track record or dishonesty, treachery, and un-even handed topics.

I believe it has no legal or moral authority to enforce any law or resolution let alone lecture anybody on how to act.

They are cowardly beauracrats

The

For the Useless Nation to lecture the US on human rights is a joke. Look who they have sitting on their Human Rights Council

[Gadget (fmr Marine)]

The US is not beholden to other jurisdictions that are to place the US in an inferior position, otherwise our Constitution would be as valuable as butt wipe.............

Since treaties are compacts between/among " the powers of the earth" of "separate and equal station" as stipulated in the Declaration of Independence, treaties may not be consummated with other than sovereign nations.

Consequently, for at least these two reasons --- 1) because the U.S. Senate in 1945 ratified the United Nations (UN) Charter as a treaty and the UN is not a sovereign nation, and 2) because membership in the UN makes the U.S. inferior to the UN --- U.S. "membership" in the United Nations is unconstitutional, FORBIDDEN, and thus declared null and void. Ditto for the World Court and the nebulous entanglements of the New World Order.

From: http://aapsonline.org/jpands/hacienda/article4.html