StoneMtn Posted November 29, 2004 Report Share Posted November 29, 2004 Dear Friend, George W. Bush has been accused of committing the most serious war crimes and we are outraged that our government has invited him here on a state visit. We have written to the Prime Minister demanding that Bush be declared persona non grata and that the invitation be rescinded. We have written to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration pointing out that war criminals are legally inadmissible in Canada. We are demanding that the Attorney General open an investigation into the war crimes of Bush and other members of his administration so that the next time they try to enter Canada they do so at their own risk. We have urgently asked for meetings with all of these people or their representatives. We have received no response except to acknowledge receipt of our letters. There is little more we can do -- little, but not nothing. Unlike almost all other crimes, no proceedings can be taken under the Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act (section 9(3)) without the personal consent in writing of the Attorney General, Irwin Cotler, who, like his colleagues is stonewalling us. HOWEVER, nobody’s consent is required to lay charges under the torture provisions of the Canadian Criminal Code (section 269.1). True, the Attorney General’s consent is required for the prosecution of a non-citizen within 8 days of the laying of charges, but we can cross that bridge when we come to it. In the meantime the charges would stand. To that end, LAW has prepared charges against Bush for being a party to torture at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and at the U.S. Naval Base Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. We will be emailing them and posting them on Monday on our website www.lawyersagainstthewar.org, along with a brief of evidence and the procedures to be taken to formally charge Bush with torture (as a party through counselling, aiding and abetting). We think it would be appropriate if Canadians all across the country welcomed the President by visiting their local justice of the peace and swearing out an information against him. LAW respects international law and has no desire to violate it, so it is important to note that laying an information would not in any way violate Bush’s immunity as a visiting head of state, because no process would be issued unless the Attorney General’s consent was obtained within eight days and a hearing was held and. But this is not a purely symbolic act. Most criminal proceedings start just this way. Furthermore, there is no risk at all to an informant who reads our material or any other material and concludes in good faith that there are reasonable grounds to believe that Bush has been a party to torture and then swears and information to that effect before a justice. So please download our material, read it and, if you agree that Bush has been a party to torture, please follow the instructions and visit your local justice of the peace when Bush arrives and before he leaves Canada. Don’t be discouraged if your information is rejected. Although Justices of the Peace are bound to accept any reasonable information, Justices are likely to be wary of charging the President of the United States. If you cannot find the material right away, please be patient. We will make it available as soon as we can. Yours truly, Michael Mandel and Gail Davidson Lawyers Against the War Tel: +1 604 738-0338 Fax: +1 604 736-1175 Email: law@portal.ca Website: www.lawyersagainstthewar.org Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AD Posted November 29, 2004 Report Share Posted November 29, 2004 This is a bit far-fetched, but I wish anyone luch who wants to take on such a monumental task... And on another note, the woman who's been doing all the talking for this LAW group, Amy Bartholomew, was my Human Rights Law professor at Carleton. She is one smart, smart, funny lady. AD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jared Posted November 29, 2004 Report Share Posted November 29, 2004 lets just hang him! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoneMtn Posted November 29, 2004 Author Report Share Posted November 29, 2004 This is a bit far-fetchedInteresting legal opinion. It appears, however, that your opinion differs with that of Michael Mandel and Gail Davidson . [color:"purple"]I wonder whose legal opinion I should consider the more informed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AD Posted November 29, 2004 Report Share Posted November 29, 2004 well let's just see if he gets charged with war crimes tomorrow then... I'm definitely not as informed on the law as the LAW group, I just wonder how plausible their plan is. Damn critical thinking... ad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purple foot Posted November 29, 2004 Report Share Posted November 29, 2004 i don't think AD had a legal opinion, he was just wishing all the lawyers good "luch." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoneMtn Posted November 29, 2004 Author Report Share Posted November 29, 2004 I don't mean to come down on AD. AD has a point. This is not a "slam dunk". Charging "W." with war crimes is certainly a radical idea. I just tend to get my back up when people make comments that are only likely to discourage people from taking action, when others are trying to get people to do so. I don't mean to offend AD, however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AD Posted November 29, 2004 Report Share Posted November 29, 2004 i don't think AD had a legal opinion, he was just wishing all the lawyers good "luch." Indeed, it's a mix of 'Luck' and 'Lunch'. Everyone's so verbose these days, let's shorten things up people... :: AD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AD Posted November 29, 2004 Report Share Posted November 29, 2004 I don't mean to come down on AD. AD has a point. This is not a "slam dunk". Charging "W." with war crimes is certainly a radical idea. I just tend to get my back up when people make comments that are only likely to discourage people from taking action, when others are trying to get people to do so. I don't mean to offend AD, however. No offense taken at all... It's certainly a creative idea, we need more of that. And the people presenting it are definitely smart, tactical and, well, smart... Who knows, maybe something will come of it. Not trying to discourage anyone from going to their local judge, I'd just like to see if any judge has the gall to lay charges (or whatever it is judges do in these situations.. there's my legal background for ya :: ) AD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoneMtn Posted November 30, 2004 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Group to charge US with war crimes Monday 29 November 2004 10:16 PM GMT Defence chief Donald Rumsfeld has been named in the case A US advocacy group is preparing to launch a war crimes case in Germany against senior US administration officials for their alleged role in the torture of Iraqi detainees at Abu Ghraib prison. "German law in this area is leading the world," Peter Weiss, vice-president of the New York-based Centre for Constitutional Rights (CCR), a human rights group, was quoted as saying in Frankfurter Rundschau newspaper on Tuesday. CCR says German law allows war criminals to be investigated wherever they may be living. The case, which will be filed at Germany's Federal Prosecutors Office, will charge Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld, former CIA chief George Tenet and eight other officials. According to Jen Nessel, head of communications and publications at CCR, the group is to present details of its case at several news conferences starting at 1700 GMT on Tuesday. Abu Ghraib abuses Fallout from the abuses at Abu Ghraib have continued to resonate in the US and elsewhere since US media first published graphic photographs of Iraqi detainees in various stages of sexual abuse and torture. US Staff-Sergeant Ivan Frederick ® got eight years for abuses Several trials of US soldiers are ongoing, the latest conviction resulting in an eight-year sentence for US Staff Sergeant Ivan "Chip" Frederick for sexually and physically torturing Iraqi detainees at Abu Ghraib. At a court martial near Baghdad airport, Judge Colonel James Pohl also sentenced the army reservist on Thursday to a reduction in rank to private, forfeiture of pay and a dishonourable discharge. It was the toughest sentence in three convictions to date related to degrading abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison. Aljazeera + Agencies You can find this article at: http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/B7E0170C-9DF9-4923-ABD4-322FF41A1E1D.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tickler Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 our Country would be fu©ked! I like the idea, but consequences would be bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoneMtn Posted November 30, 2004 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Well, Tickler, I hate to break the bad news to you, but we crazy British Columbians have gone ahead...Re: In the Matter of the Information filed in the Provincial Court of British Columbia Vancouver Registry under registry # 128960-1 Against George Walker Bush pursuant to the Criminal Code of CanadaAn information was accepted for filing today by the Provincial Court of British Columbia Vancouver Registry under registry # 128960-1 charging George Walker Bush with counselling, aiding and abetting the commission of torture by persons know and unknown being members of US Armed Forces against persons known and unknown being detainees at the Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay prisons. The Attorney General' consent, within 8 days, is necessary before any process can issue. Lawyers Against the WarTel: +1 604 738-0338Fax: +1 604 736-1175Email: law@portal.caWebsite: www.lawyersagainstthewar.org Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snarfmaster C Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 right on StoneMtn good on ya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoneMtn Posted November 30, 2004 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 I can't take the credit. I am merely a member of L.A.W. and pass on the good news. The true credit goes to the "brass" at L.A.W., Gail Davidson and Michael Mandel. It was Gail Davidson, herself, who filed the Information for the BC Provincial Court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now