FBI's investigation of anti-war activists sparks protests

You never never wish to talk to the FBI if you are or might be a target of an investigation.

Even if you are not guilty of anything they can whip up a charge of lying to them which happen to be a serious crime all by itself.

Talking open up a whole other avenue to try to charge you with some crime if they are out to get you.

Sounds an awful lot like the Gestapo.

You could not tell the Gestapo to go away you are not talking to them!!!!

Sounds to me like the fact that he's Saudi-born, even if of Greek descent, may have something to do with the FBI wanting to actully talk to him. If it was anti-war activist Amy Finklestein, they might well put her under surveillance but probably wouldn't be all that interested in a face-to-face.

There's really no difference.

Oh so there is not differences between an agency that can take you away and torture you to death at their whim and an outfit that have to operate under the limits of the laws and the civil courts?

Your anti-Americanism is showing my friend.

For your attacks to be effective in any case, you should try not to look that silly.

Plenty of things are wrong in the US and with the FBI however, neither relate to Nazis Germany of the 1930s or 1940s.

Illegal rendition.

Not of US citizens on US soil and not by the FBI!

You do need to be careful if you are a Canadian citizen passing through the US however. Never too late for them to see the light and change their minds from the error they make by not joining us in 1776.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, unless we want to rape and pillage a country or illegally imprison some folks, or break international law, or torture, rape and murder, then we hold these truths to be easily set aside because we are a greedy, rapacious lot which doesn't give a flying **** about the vast majority of Americans. We just want to grab as much as we can before people smarten up. In the case of the average American, that'll be eons.

First so call international laws is a joke until and if there is a working and powerful world government.

Until that day no international court will be allow to tried an American Citizen for so call war crimes.

Second every government of every nation in the world will do what it needed to do to protect it own.

I live in the real world, not some fantasy world and on that scale the US is far better then most of the nations that had exist in the history of this sad planet.

It wasn't a joke when it was instituted, largely, by Americans. It was touted as thee way that civilized countries should act. Again, this illustrates the hypocrisy that is so much the USA.



This is no different than, Nobody's gonna touch one of my fellow mobsters. Again, the stunning hypocrisy that is the USA, not to mention you, Bill.

You don't live in the real world. That's absolute nonsense. You Americans live in the most phantasmagorical bubble the world has ever seen. The level of delusion on the part of most Americans is schizophrenic.

Well when you right you are right there was a lot of men in our military after WW2 who feel we should had just line up the worst of the German and Japanese monsters and just put bullets into the back of their heads instead of setting up courts to try them on so call crimes against humanities with show trials.

The Russians would had been overjoy to take on that task at least in regard to the Germans without a need for show trials.

Second note I am not a student of the war crimes trials however somehow I had a feeling that setting them up have a taste of Churchill more then Truman.

Sorry Churchill was my kind of guy after all just shoot the Basterds.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Trials

British War Cabinet documents, released on 2 January 2006, have shown that as early as December 1944, the Cabinet had discussed their policy for the punishment of the leading Nazis if captured. British Prime Minister Winston Churchill had then advocated a policy of summary execution in some circumstances, with the use of an Act of Attainder to circumvent legal obstacles, being dissuaded from this only by talks with US leaders later in the war. In late 1943, during the Tripartite Dinner Meeting at the Tehran Conference, the Soviet leader, Joseph Stalin, proposed executing 50,000–100,000 German staff officers. US President Franklin D. Roosevelt, joked that perhaps 49,000 would do. Churchill denounced the idea of "the cold blooded execution of soldiers who fought for their country." However, he also stated that war criminals must pay for their crimes and that in accordance with the Moscow Document which he himself had written, they should be tried at the places where the crimes were committed. Churchill was vigorously opposed to executions "for political purposes."[1][2] According to the minutes of a Roosevelt-Stalin meeting during the Yalta Conference, in February 4, 1945, at the Livadia Palace, President Roosevelt "said that he had been very much struck by the extent of German destruction in the Crimea and therefore he was more bloodthirsty in regard to the Germans than he had been a year ago, and he hoped that Marshal Stalin would again propose a toast to the execution of 50,000 officers of the German Army."[3]

US Treasury Secretary, Henry Morgenthau, Jr., suggested a plan for the total denazification of Germany[citation needed]; this was known as the Morgenthau Plan. The plan advocated the forced de-industrialisation of Germany. Roosevelt initially supported this plan, and managed to convince Churchill to support it in a less drastic form. Later, details were leaked to the public, generating widespread protest[clarification needed]. Roosevelt, seeing strong public disapproval, abandoned the plan, but did not proceed to adopt support for another position on the matter. The demise of the Morgenthau Plan created the need for an alternative method of dealing with the Nazi leadership. The plan for the "Trial of European War Criminals" was drafted by Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson and the War Department. Following Roosevelt's death in April 1945, the new president, Harry S. Truman, gave strong approval for a judicial process.[citation needed] After a series of negotiations between Britain, the US, Soviet Union and France, details of the trial were worked out. The trials were set to commence on 20 November 1945, in the Bavarian city of Nuremberg.

[edit] Creation of the courts

Sir David Maxwell Fyfe (at lectern, left) and an unknown prosecutorOn January 14, 1942, representatives from the nine occupied countries met in London to draft the Inter-Allied Resolution on German War Crimes. At the meetings in Tehran (1943), Yalta (1945) and Potsdam (1945), the three major wartime powers, the United Kingdom, United States, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics agreed on the format of punishment for those responsible for war crimes during World War II. France was also awarded a place on the tribunal.

The legal basis for the trial was established by the London Charter, issued on August 8, 1945, which restricted the trial to "punishment of the major war criminals of the European Axis countries." Some 200 German war crimes defendants were tried at Nuremberg, and 1,600 others were tried under the traditional channels of military justice. The legal basis for the jurisdiction of the court was that defined by the Instrument of Surrender of Germany. Political authority for Germany had been transferred to the Allied Control Council which, having sovereign power over Germany, could choose to punish violations of international law and the laws of war. Because the court was limited to violations of the laws of war, it did not have jurisdiction over crimes that took place before the outbreak of war on September 3, 1939.

[edit] Location

Well, 35 people isn't much of a war protest. Sounds like a he said / they said for the time being. I'd rather the FBI be ahead of potential problems rather than waiting too long. One of the 9/11 hijackers had lived here for a bit.

His Saudi Arabian background might be a tip or it might be profiling. Then again, look at Dys. He lived in Saudi Arabia for a good while and he doesn't like anyone. Coincidence?

i'll keep an ear out for follow up. At the moment I'm inclined towards being glad the FBI is doing their job. They don't seem to have overstepped yet.

Sounds like the 1960s all over again.

Who are these collective "we" that you keep referring to, JTT? That abstract entity we call 'the Government'? The FBI, who are no more than minions of that Government? If so, then we must collectively indict ourselves because in this country the government governs by the consent of those governed.

hoo-boy... holy invite, batman

I really have no idea what this "news story" is. Doesn't make sense to me other than typical McClatchy news filler.

One would have to guess that 'we' refers to Americans, Merry. Does this come from the New Zealand D of I?



What you are suggesting is that the citizens are responsible for the numerous war crimes, instances of mass murder, the torture, the rapes, the terrorism committed by the government.

If you had a brother who was a serial killer and only you knew, what would you do, Merry? If your father were alive and he was a rapist and only you knew, what would you do?

If you had a sister and she tortured and then murdered people and only you knew, what would you do?