nadinbrzezinski
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-25-10 06:03 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
| 16. It is not about the Pope |
|
it is about a head of state.
They would do that if this was a lawsuit against the President of Ireland.
|
| -Obama admin. backs Vatican’s claim of immunity to sexual abuse lawsuits (ENABLER!) |
babsbunny |
May-25-10 05:21 PM |
#0 |
 -
I only reced this because everyone should see this |
Angry Dragon |
May-25-10 05:27 PM |
#1 |
| -
Ok, now I know I'm done with this administration. Can't stomach this. Decades of abuse and nothing? |
MichiganVote |
May-25-10 05:28 PM |
#2 |
  -
You should read the whole article. It's not as uncomplicated as it seems. |
Maraya1969 |
May-26-10 11:07 PM |
#145 |
| -
Deleted message |
Name removed |
May-25-10 05:42 PM |
#3 |
| -
how many catholics are on the supreme court? |
madrchsod |
May-25-10 05:44 PM |
#4 |
| -
The Court ordered the Solicitor to respond.....read the Interest section of the brief. |
msanthrope |
May-25-10 07:22 PM |
#44 |
| -
Deleted message |
Name removed |
May-25-10 05:46 PM |
#5 |
| -
what a wonderful leader |
RainDog |
May-25-10 05:55 PM |
#6 |
| -
DoublePlusProgressive eom |
ShortnFiery |
May-25-10 05:56 PM |
#7 |
| -
a great man. an inspiring man |
RainDog |
May-25-10 05:58 PM |
#9 |
| -
Where in the brief does he do that? Specifically? |
msanthrope |
May-25-10 07:31 PM |
#50 |
| -
So anyone who doesn't |
nichomachus |
May-26-10 11:39 AM |
#123 |
| -
Right, because asking for proof of an assertion means I 'worship' |
msanthrope |
May-26-10 12:54 PM |
#125 |
| -
Why are you attacking him as a man? It's the his justice department. |
tranche |
May-25-10 10:02 PM |
#99 |
| -
the pope should be tried at the hague |
madrchsod |
May-25-10 05:58 PM |
#8 |
| -
Primacy of the state |
nadinbrzezinski |
May-25-10 05:59 PM |
#10 |
| -
deleted |
redqueen |
May-25-10 06:00 PM |
#12 |
| -
and aren't we lucky to have such an inspiring man leading the way |
RainDog |
May-25-10 06:01 PM |
#13 |
| -
It is not about the Pope |
nadinbrzezinski |
May-25-10 06:03 PM |
#16 |
| -
and this is where this nation jumps the shark, imo |
RainDog |
May-25-10 06:11 PM |
#20 |
| -
Don't forget kidnapping the head of state of Panama and bringing him to |
RC |
May-25-10 07:06 PM |
#37 |
| -
+1 |
Heywood J |
May-26-10 10:17 AM |
#121 |
| -
This is a civil suit |
jberryhill |
May-26-10 06:43 PM |
#138 |
| -
Why are you injecting fact, reason, and logic? Jeebus.... |
msanthrope |
May-26-10 10:51 PM |
#143 |
| -
Why are you injecting fact, reason, and logic? Jeebus.... |
msanthrope |
May-26-10 10:51 PM |
#144 |
| -
Does he also head a church?? |
Angry Dragon |
May-25-10 09:01 PM |
#88 |
| -
yup.. that dawned on me as soon as i posted mine... |
madrchsod |
May-25-10 06:01 PM |
#14 |
| -
Nope, if he did |
nadinbrzezinski |
May-25-10 06:04 PM |
#17 |
| -
nation states that provide cover for pedophiles should be weakened n/t |
RainDog |
May-25-10 06:04 PM |
#18 |
| -
This is what this is about |
nadinbrzezinski |
May-25-10 06:09 PM |
#19 |
| -
they should "face the music." |
RainDog |
May-25-10 06:14 PM |
#21 |
| -
This is NOT JUST about the United States sady |
nadinbrzezinski |
May-25-10 06:17 PM |
#23 |
| -
I would love to see the Pope in Den Hague |
RainDog |
May-25-10 06:21 PM |
#25 |
| -
nadia - do you think the U.S. would have filed such a brief on behalf of Saddam Hussein? n/t |
RainDog |
May-25-10 06:32 PM |
#29 |
| -
You do realize that the Court ordered the US to file, right? |
msanthrope |
May-25-10 07:00 PM |
#35 |
| -
Yep this is one of the treaties at play |
nadinbrzezinski |
May-25-10 08:53 PM |
#82 |
| -
You realize we were the prosecutors by |
nadinbrzezinski |
May-25-10 08:52 PM |
#81 |
| -
Iraq is a designated FSIA exception |
jberryhill |
May-27-10 12:23 AM |
#148 |
| -
The Vatican is a state, and the pope the head of state. It's good being king. |
alfredo |
May-25-10 06:15 PM |
#22 |
| -
Or President or Prime Minister |
nadinbrzezinski |
May-25-10 06:18 PM |
#24 |
| -
Sovereign immunity? |
alfredo |
May-25-10 07:53 PM |
#62 |
| -
Yep |
nadinbrzezinski |
May-25-10 08:51 PM |
#80 |
| -
Kind of like being a CEO of an oil company |
alfredo |
May-25-10 09:29 PM |
#95 |
| -
Not quite the same but functionally yes |
nadinbrzezinski |
May-25-10 09:56 PM |
#97 |
| -
True. Here's a video of the event I mentioned above. |
alfredo |
May-25-10 10:29 PM |
#101 |
| -
I posted a response to this |
Angry Dragon |
May-25-10 09:00 PM |
#85 |
| -
Religious fantasies, totally unprovable - rely solely on "faith" - and are destroying the world |
slay |
May-25-10 06:00 PM |
#11 |
| -
for gosh sakes, the US, a non-religious state, recently killed a million people in iraq & |
Hannah Bell |
May-26-10 02:30 AM |
#113 |
| -
The US may CLAIM not to be a religions state - but we all know USA is run by Christians |
slay |
May-26-10 04:14 PM |
#131 |
| -
I agree and so, it is said, does a guy named Jesus in "My kingdom is not of this world" and churches |
patrice |
May-26-10 05:32 PM |
#135 |
| -
I believe |
slay |
May-26-10 07:18 PM |
#140 |
| -
Me too. The sooner, the better and I'm fortunate enough to be working |
patrice |
May-26-10 08:46 PM |
#142 |
| -
SHAME! |
Odin2005 |
May-25-10 06:01 PM |
#15 |
| -
What chess move is this? |
Starry Messenger |
May-25-10 06:21 PM |
#26 |
| -
it's the one where children remain the pawns of the powerful n/t |
RainDog |
May-25-10 06:47 PM |
#31 |
| -
Ah, the defenders have arrived. |
Starry Messenger |
May-25-10 07:18 PM |
#41 |
| -
Because posts are not required to meet the rule of "constructive criticism" in cases of Republicans |
SemiCharmedQuark |
May-25-10 07:21 PM |
#43 |
| -
How handy n/t |
Starry Messenger |
May-25-10 07:29 PM |
#48 |
| -
Yes, this site "Democratic Underground" is interested in looking at facts regarding Democrats |
SemiCharmedQuark |
May-25-10 07:31 PM |
#49 |
| -
Well SCQ |
Starry Messenger |
May-25-10 07:36 PM |
#53 |
| -
I'm wondering why you haven't responded to misanthropes post about what, specifically, you challenge |
SemiCharmedQuark |
May-25-10 07:39 PM |
#54 |
| -
I have her on ignore. |
Starry Messenger |
May-25-10 07:40 PM |
#55 |
| -
Well then I will ask you. What, specifically, do you dislike about the brief? |
SemiCharmedQuark |
May-25-10 07:44 PM |
#58 |
| -
When was rawstory a Rense loving website? |
Starry Messenger |
May-25-10 07:54 PM |
#66 |
| -
I am talking about DU in general as we were discussing in your last post. |
SemiCharmedQuark |
May-25-10 07:59 PM |
#71 |
| -
Did I rec that thread yesterday? |
Starry Messenger |
May-25-10 08:05 PM |
#74 |
| -
I suppose you're right. I apologize |
SemiCharmedQuark |
May-25-10 08:08 PM |
#76 |
| -
Of course you do--I tend to ask questions you don't wanna answer. n/t |
msanthrope |
May-25-10 07:54 PM |
#65 |
| -
I hope you'll pardon me, but I don't see how going after this sort of thing the way people do around |
patrice |
May-26-10 06:05 PM |
#137 |
| -
Defenders? Merely people who can read a brief. Tell me, what part of said brief |
msanthrope |
May-25-10 07:26 PM |
#46 |
| -
In context, the part quoted in the OP is not what the objection was about by the Solicitor General.. |
FrenchieCat |
May-25-10 06:22 PM |
#27 |
| -
I have read it, and it is disgusting. And yes I actually understand |
saracat |
May-25-10 06:45 PM |
#30 |
| -
What specifically about the brief of the Solicitor General is incorrect? |
msanthrope |
May-25-10 06:54 PM |
#33 |
| -
Interesting. You jumped to the conclusion I meant "boyfriend" I didn't. BF means best friend |
saracat |
May-25-10 07:57 PM |
#69 |
| -
Actually, 'BF' has always meant 'butt-fuck' to me, I was trying to be nice. |
msanthrope |
May-25-10 08:16 PM |
#77 |
| -
.The Vatican claims statehood and sovereignty in its entitlement to diplomatic immunity. |
saracat |
May-25-10 08:47 PM |
#79 |
| -
Okay...but what does that have to do with this case? It's not an issue raised. n/t |
msanthrope |
May-25-10 10:03 PM |
#100 |
| -
It is the issue that should have been raised. That is the point. |
saracat |
May-26-10 12:10 AM |
#107 |
| -
Talk to the Plaintiffs, then...the SG can only brief on what's been presented. n/t |
msanthrope |
May-26-10 12:25 AM |
#108 |
| -
Actually, they could have argued against this. Using that as an argument . But they didn't. |
saracat |
May-26-10 12:32 AM |
#109 |
| -
I'm sure that in your world that's true. But in the land where the lawyers live, |
msanthrope |
May-26-10 01:14 AM |
#110 |
| -
Oh please do you seriously think to impress by throwing the Latern Treaty and |
saracat |
May-26-10 01:58 AM |
#112 |
| -
Um, Section1605 (a) (5) of FSIA is the statute in dispute. So my citing of the statute isn't to |
msanthrope |
May-26-10 08:54 AM |
#118 |
| -
I believe I did address this issue and I also stated that perhaps this might not be the case to |
saracat |
May-26-10 02:33 PM |
#129 |
| -
I've encapsulated your legal strategy: |
msanthrope |
May-26-10 04:43 PM |
#132 |
| -
Whatever.We disagree. |
saracat |
May-26-10 07:32 PM |
#141 |
| -
"Whatever." Certainly.....and thank you. n/t |
msanthrope |
May-27-10 12:10 AM |
#147 |
| -
What if it was your child who was raped by this priest? |
freddie mertz |
May-25-10 07:41 PM |
#56 |
| -
What if a lynch mob were at your door because of something you did, |
FrenchieCat |
May-25-10 08:42 PM |
#78 |
| -
What does a lynch mob have to with it? |
freddie mertz |
May-26-10 07:48 AM |
#115 |
| -
I'd still be subject to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act |
treestar |
May-25-10 10:35 PM |
#104 |
| -
Seems the scope of the law is in dispute before the court. |
freddie mertz |
May-26-10 07:50 AM |
#116 |
| -
Deleted sub-thread |
Name removed |
May-25-10 06:28 PM |
#28 |
| -
The Vatican, yes; individuals, no |
Retrograde |
May-25-10 06:51 PM |
#32 |
| -
The brief of the Solicitor doesn't foreclose the finding of no immunity-- |
msanthrope |
May-25-10 06:57 PM |
#34 |
| -
so, you think this would have gone down this way if Saddam was the one facing charges? |
RainDog |
May-25-10 07:00 PM |
#36 |
| -
Yes. See Iraq v. Beaty, which SCOTUS handed down last year. 9-0. |
msanthrope |
May-25-10 07:14 PM |
#38 |
| -
my apologies, then. I detest the pope. n/t |
RainDog |
May-25-10 07:15 PM |
#39 |
| -
So do I. Sometimes, when you argue the law, you end up aiding the despicable. n/t |
msanthrope |
May-25-10 07:20 PM |
#42 |
| -
Thanks for explaining it. |
SemiCharmedQuark |
May-25-10 07:16 PM |
# |
| -
You are welcome. n/t |
msanthrope |
May-25-10 07:28 PM |
#47 |
| -
Many are reading and not commenting |
HughMoran |
May-25-10 08:57 PM |
#84 |
| -
Thank you--I appreciate that. n/t |
msanthrope |
May-25-10 09:27 PM |
#94 |
| -
Accountability under the law is anathema to this administration |
depakid |
May-25-10 07:16 PM |
#40 |
| -
so with breathless fake-ass outrage, you insinuate obama himself defends pedophilia. |
dionysus |
May-25-10 07:35 PM |
#52 |
| -
I think the sense of having no shame belongs to those who protect torturers, banksters, fraudsters |
depakid |
May-25-10 07:47 PM |
#60 |
| -
well, you managed to fit every juvenile cliched keyword into that post for sure. |
dionysus |
May-25-10 07:49 PM |
#61 |
| -
Managed to list as many institutional criminals as I could think of- who've walked away scot free |
depakid |
May-25-10 07:54 PM |
#64 |
| -
i'd like to focus on your blithe insinuation the obama administration is deliberately shielding |
dionysus |
May-25-10 07:56 PM |
#68 |
| -
That's your inference- not any "insinuation" on my part |
depakid |
May-25-10 08:04 PM |
#73 |
| -
your post would indicate you agreed with the notion |
dionysus |
May-25-10 08:07 PM |
#75 |
| -
Were they supposed to ignore a Court order and not reply? |
msanthrope |
May-25-10 08:00 PM |
#72 |
| -
What's the law? |
treestar |
May-25-10 10:34 PM |
#103 |
| -
IF the perp is acting alone. If the perp is part of an organized group, |
closeupready |
May-26-10 08:56 AM |
#119 |
| -
dupe |
depakid |
May-25-10 07:23 PM |
#45 |
| -
Then let us declare war on them, invade them, and hold them accountable. |
TexasObserver |
May-25-10 07:31 PM |
#51 |
| -
As a "bitter" ex-Catholic, I could sign up for that. |
freddie mertz |
May-25-10 07:42 PM |
#57 |
| -
As a recovering depressed - former Catholic, I've got your back. |
ShortnFiery |
May-25-10 07:53 PM |
#63 |
| -
We could overthrow the old hierarchy and replace it with human beings. |
freddie mertz |
May-25-10 07:54 PM |
#67 |
| -
I like the idea of making it a museum/amusement park. |
TexasObserver |
May-25-10 07:58 PM |
#70 |
| -
awful |
Liberal_in_LA |
May-25-10 07:46 PM |
#59 |
| -
read |
HughMoran |
May-25-10 08:56 PM |
#83 |
| -
I think folks got exhausted of reading after election 2008....... |
FrenchieCat |
May-25-10 09:01 PM |
#87 |
| -
Just skimming the thread and reading salient posts is all that's needed too |
HughMoran |
May-25-10 09:05 PM |
#89 |
| -
Why bother to read, when one can scream. |
FrenchieCat |
May-25-10 09:16 PM |
#92 |
| -
It's a blatant bow to unbridled power. |
burnsei sensei |
May-25-10 09:01 PM |
#86 |
| -
The legalities argued had nothing to do with the priest, |
FrenchieCat |
May-25-10 09:05 PM |
#90 |
| -
So it's like a statute of limitations. |
burnsei sensei |
May-25-10 09:20 PM |
#93 |
| -
I believe that it is the Job of the Solicitor General to point out when |
FrenchieCat |
May-25-10 09:31 PM |
#96 |
| -
Unrec for ignorance of the law. |
Luminous Animal |
May-25-10 09:07 PM |
#91 |
| -
Whose ignorance of what law? |
inna |
May-27-10 12:01 AM |
#146 |
| -
I think this is a classic case where the United States should start treating the Vatican as a... |
Cleobulus |
May-25-10 10:02 PM |
#98 |
| -
Sad to say. I tend to agree. We should at least threaten them with sanctions.nt. |
freddie mertz |
May-26-10 07:52 AM |
#117 |
| -
I guess it would be too dull to discuss the Foreign Sovereign Immunities act |
treestar |
May-25-10 10:33 PM |
#102 |
| -
In that case (if we count the Vatican a country) can the Priests be tried for crimes against |
JCMach1 |
May-26-10 12:06 AM |
#105 |
| -
Christ, I'd settle for someone reading the fucking brief. |
msanthrope |
May-26-10 01:29 AM |
#111 |
| -
School us |
Mushroom |
May-26-10 05:36 PM |
#136 |
| -
People here are intentionally obscuring the actual legal issue in contention |
jberryhill |
May-26-10 05:10 PM |
#133 |
| -
Yuck. Just yuck, |
krabigirl |
May-26-10 12:07 AM |
#106 |
| -
Holy shit. |
BlueIris |
May-26-10 02:51 AM |
#114 |
| -
What part of the brief do you find offensive? |
msanthrope |
May-26-10 08:58 AM |
#120 |
| -
Hey |
femrap |
May-26-10 11:28 AM |
#122 |
| -
Admistrative power will always support each other. It is a given. |
robinblue |
May-26-10 12:49 PM |
#124 |
| -
"Legality" is a pitiful absolution (nt) |
whatchamacallit |
May-26-10 01:54 PM |
#126 |
| -
One term Obama |
Hawkowl |
May-26-10 02:22 PM |
#127 |
| -
No, he will be re-elected. The GOP is in such disarray... and liberals have no where to go |
liberation |
May-26-10 05:31 PM |
#134 |
| -
Why did the Ninth Circuit court of appeals allow the lawsuit to proceed? |
Better Believe It |
May-26-10 02:24 PM |
#128 |
| -
Wow. Every day brings something new. |
inna |
May-26-10 03:15 PM |
#130 |
| -
I would remove my Obama sticker from my car over this. |
harry_pothead |
May-26-10 06:46 PM |
#139 |
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread