Remarks With Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti Before Their Meeting

Secretary Kerry: February 2013 » Remarks With Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti Before Their Meeting

Remarks With Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti Before Their Meeting

Remarks

John Kerry
Secretary of State

Palazzo Chigi

Rome, Italy

February 28, 2013

Share on facebookShare on twitter

---

PRIME MINISTER MONTI: (Via interpreter) It’s a great pleasure to welcome today in Palazzo Chigi the Secretary of State of the United States of America John Kerry. And I would like to seize this opportunity before holding our talks shortly to express my deepest gratitude for his commitment in holding the great international conference on Syria, which took place today at the Foreign Affairs Ministry.
I would like to thank the Secretary of State for expressing his words of confidence on the future of Italy which he said today at the close of the conference at the Foreign Affairs Ministry at the press conference. The political and moral support of a great democracy such as the United States represents an important acknowledgment vis-à-vis a strong democracy, if you allow me to use the words by the Secretary of State Kerry, a strong democracy which no doubt is Italy.
In a short while, we will address, or rather delve into, a number of bilateral issues, namely the joint commitment in the crisis area Syria, Afghanistan, and the Horn of Africa, areas in which Italy is continuing to play its part, both on the military side and on the diplomatic side.
We will also address the state of the global economy, which will represent another opportunity to address the joint support to the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership Initiative between EU and the U.S. to kick-start substantially the transatlantic economic relations with a view to providing an important stimulus for the growth of our respective economies. And our talk today will be sort of a follow-up of the many talks that I had in this one year and few months with President Barack Obama, opportunities that we had to exchange our views on Italy-U.S. and Italy in the Eurozone. And it is also thanks to the conversations that we’ve had with President Obama that we have then developed a number of actions within the EU which have helped us to overcome the crisis in the Eurozone. And it is with this spirit of friendship and commitment that I would like to welcome you today.
SECRETARY KERRY: Well, Mr. Prime Minister, thank you for the spirito di amicizia. I appreciate that very, very much. It’s an honor to be here. And we are so grateful to you and your country and your Foreign Minister Giulio Terzi, who did a terrific job today of hosting this important conference, and we thank you for that.
Mr. Prime Minister, this is obviously a very historic moment in Italy. You’ve just had elections, democracy at its fullest, and democracy everywhere today is robust and always interesting. But make no mistake, Mr. Prime Minister; we in the United States congratulate Italy on the energy of its elections. And we are very confident that the strength of Italy as a strong country as a transitioning economy and looking towards the future with our transatlantic trade partnership that you’ve talked about, is going to remain a strong partner not only in the European community but in the – with the United States. We’re confident of that.
It’s also an historic day because today is the day that for the first time in 600 years, His Holiness the Pope Benedict has departed the Vatican to fly to Castel Gandolfo and go into retirement. And so I know that President Obama joins me and all Americans in wishing him well in that special moment, and we thank him for his leadership and for his outspokenness on many issues.
Let me also say, Mr. Prime Minister, that President Obama and the American people are deeply grateful to you for your leadership in these last years. You’ve made difficult choices in a difficult time, and we are very, very grateful to you for your partnership in so many ways – Afghanistan, Libya, counterterrorism, the economy, the Euro – all of these are the difficult choices that we in public life face today. And we are very, very grateful to you as a country and as a partner in these endeavors.
So as I thank you for that friendship, I also look forward to our conversation now. And thank you for a very warm welcome here in the palace. I appreciate it.
PRIME MINISTER MONTI: Thank you very much.

Why Are Some Liberals Freaking Out Over What Happened at the Supreme Court on Wednesday? We Explain Feb. 28, 2013 8:31am Mytheos Holt

Why Are Some Liberals Freaking Out Over What Happened at the Supreme Court on Wednesday? We Explain
Feb. 28, 2013 8:31am Mytheos Holt



On Wednesday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on a question not touched for nearly 50 years – namely, the question of whether parts of the landmark Voting Rights Act (VRA) of 1965 still stand the test of constitutionality, and specifically a section that has long plagued states’ rights advocates.

Unfortunately for liberals, who view the VRA as one of their landmark legislative achievements, the answer to that question may well be “no,” as many court analysts seem to have viewed the oral arguments in the case as either an unadulterated disaster for the government, or at least as a strong sign that a majority of the court is willing to consider striking down at least part of the act.

And to add to the Left’s consternation, Justice Antonin Scalia, known for his strongly worded opinions, attacked the motives behind reauthorizing the supposed touchstone of racial equality for being motivated by Congressional cynicism about race in an impromptu speech. Here’s Scalia’s statement from the transcript of the oral argument (emphasis added):

Well, maybe it was making that judgment, Mr. Verrilli. But that’s — that’s a problem that I have. This Court doesn’t like to get involved in — in racial questions such as this one. It’s something that can be left — left to Congress. The problem here, however, is suggested by the comment I made earlier, that the initial enactment of this legislation in a — in a time when the need for it was so much more abundantly clear was — in the Senate, there — it was double-digits against it. And that was only a 5-year term.

Then, it is reenacted 5 years later, again for a 5-year term. Double-digits against it in the Senate. Then it was reenacted for 7 years. Single digits against it. Then enacted for 25 years, 8 Senate votes against it. And this last enactment, not a single vote in the Senate against it. And the House is pretty much the same. Now, I don’t think that’s attributable to the fact that it is so much clearer now that we need this. I think it is attributable, very likely attributable, to a phenomenon that is called perpetuation of racial entitlement. It’s been written about. Whenever a society adopts racial entitlements, it is very difficult to get out of them through the normal political processes.

I don’t think there is anything to be gained by any Senator to vote against continuation of this act. And I am fairly confident it will be reenacted in perpetuity unless — unless a court can say it does not comport with the Constitution. You have to show, when you are treating different States differently, that there’s a good reason for it.

That’s the — that’s the concern that those of us who — who have some questions about this statute have. It’s — it’s a concern that this is not the kind of a question you can leave to Congress. There are certain districts in the House that are black districts by law just about now. And even the Virginia Senators, they have no interest in voting against this. The State government is not their government, and they are going to lose — they are going to lose votes if they do not reenact the Voting Rights Act. Even the name of it is wonderful: The Voting Rights Act. Who is going to vote against that in the future?

This statement touched off a furious reaction from the liberal corner of the blogosphere and commentariat, and understandably so, given that Scalia more or less took a cleaver to one of their most treasured sacred cows. Apparently there were gasps even within the Court chamber when Scalia made his comment about “racial entitlement,” and Justice Sonia Sotomayor furiously challenged Bert Rein, the attorney arguing for striking down the act (and by extension, Scalia) afterwards:

JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Do you think that the right to vote is a racial entitlement in Section 5?

MR. REIN: No. The Fifteenth Amendment protects the right of all to vote and -­

JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: I asked a different question. Do you think Section 5 was voted for because it was a racial entitlement?

MR. REIN: Well, Congress -­

JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Do you think there was no basis to find that -­

MR. REIN: — was reacting — may I say Congress was reacting in 1964 to a problem of race discrimination which it thought was prevalent in certain jurisdictions. So to that extent, as the intervenor said, yes, it was intended to protect those who had been discriminated against. If I might say, I think that Justice Breyer -­

JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Do you think that racial discrimination in voting has ended, that there is none anywhere?

Readers might understandably wonder what prompted this outburst, and also, just what on earth the case was about in the first place. As such, we’ve put together the following handy explanation for the fireworks.



What Is at Stake

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was originally passed to allow the Federal government to stop nine states (almost entirely Southern states) from practicing voter suppression against racial minorities in the South. Moreover, when Congress originally passed the law, they acknowledged that banning only particular suppression tactics would be ineffective, given that these same states would just come up with new, more subtle ways of suppressing votes once the more explicit ones were banned. So as part of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, they included a controversial provision in Section 5 called “preclearance.” From section 5:

Whenever a State or political subdivision with respect to which the prohibitions set forth in section 4(a) are in effect shall enact or seek to administer any voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure with respect to voting different from that in force or effect on November 1, 1964, such State or subdivision may institute an action in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia for a declaratory judgment that such qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure does not have the purpose and will not have the effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race or color, and unless and until the court enters such judgment no person shall be denied the right to vote for failure to comply with such qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure: Provided, That such qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure may be enforced without such proceeding if the qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure has been submitted by the chief legal officer or other appropriate official of such State or subdivision to the Attorney General and the Attorney General has not interposed an objection within sixty days after such submission, except that neither the Attorney General’s failure to object nor a declaratory judgment entered under this section shall bar a subsequent action to enjoin enforcement of such qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure. Any action under this section shall be heard and determined by a court of three judges in accordance with the provisions of section 2284 of title 28 of the United States Code and any appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court.

In other words, any time one of the states (or any of the counties within those states) covered wanted to implement a new set of voting laws, they would have to get the Federal government to sign off on those laws before they could be implemented. Needless to say, this provision has prompted outrage from states’ rights advocates, and has been the subject of constitutional controversy for some time.

Which brings us to this particular case, in which Shelby County, Alabama, sued to have Section 5 overturned, claiming that its method for deciding which states would be subject to preclearance was badly out of date (as it still relied on a calculus used at the time of the law’s original passage), and that the law itself exceeded Congress’s authority, given the absence of the same extraordinary conditions that existed in 1965. A vote by the Supreme Court to strike down Section 5 would thus make preclearance either unconstitutional entirely, or force Congress to pass a new form of it, which would be much harder and more messy in the present climate.



So What’s Alll the Fuss About?

Essentially, striking down preclearance would allow states a much freer hand in terms of cracking down on certain forms of voter fraud, or to redraw their Congressional districts such that districts that formerly were designed to be “safe” and keep specific minority members of Congress in power could suddenly become competitive. This would threaten many “safe” Democratic seats, and would also act as a symbol that the Court believes the racial tensions of the 60′s are a thing of the past. In other words, it would be a nightmare for the portion of the Left that focuses on identity politics.

In this context, the frenzied reaction to Justice Scalia’s remarks makes even more sense, given that Scalia declined to even accept the idea that those voting for the VRA in the present day had noble motives. Rather, he attacked supporters of the VRA for cynicism and also used the phrase “racial entitlement,” which makes those who see racism as an enduring fact of American society see red because it suggest their concerns are not valid.

More to the point, Sotomayor’s valiant rearguard action notwithstanding, the liberal Justices mostly spent their time trying to get the argument against the VRA dismissed not by defending the VRA, but rather by arguing that Shelby County had no standing to sue, which some may see as an implicit concession that the VRA’s preclearance measures are not worth defending.

Adding to this problem, in the process of making their argument, those same Justices said things that are likely to offend conservative residents of the South, and especially of Alabama:

JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: May I ask you a question? Assuming I accept your premise, and there’s some question about that, that some portions of the South have changed, your county pretty much hasn’t.

MR. REIN: Well, I -­

JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: In — in the period we’re talking about, it has many more discriminating -­240 discriminatory voting laws that were blocked by Section 5 objections. There were numerous remedied by Section 2 litigation. You may be the wrong party bringing this.

MR. REIN: Well, this is an on-face challenge, and might I say, Justice Sotomayor -­

JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: But that’s the standard. And why would we vote in favor of a county whose record is the epitome of what caused the passage of this law to start with?[...]

JUSTICE KAGAN: But think about this State that you’re representing, it’s about a quarter black, but Alabama has no black statewide elected officials. [...] If you use the number of Section 5 enforcement actions, Alabama would again be the number two State on the list. I mean, you’re objecting to a formula, but under any formula that Congress could devise, it would capture Alabama.

No doubt, many residents of Alabama would object to the idea that their state is the second most racist in the country and still unavoidably has to be policed by the Federal government. And indeed, the argument from both sides during the case played on ideas that at least some people in the country would find offensive. These were eschewed by the court’s swing vote, Justice Kennedy, who sent mild signals that he was favoring overturning preclearance.

Still, both liberals assuming the worst and conservatives feeling optimistic should be wary of over-confidence about their predictions. Oral arguments are an infamously poor predictor of what will happen in a case when the Court rules. For instance, in HHS v. Florida (also known as the Obamacare case), oral arguments went terribly for the government, yet they ended up winning the case.

The Voting Rights Act is not dead yet.

A letter from the West Point graduate. Please, help me reach as many members of the U.S. military as possible. Please, help me organize meetings with members of the U.S. military, sheriffs department, national guard, oath keepers Posted on | February 20, 2013 | 9 Comments Reference for Dr. Orly Taitz Robert Hill 9:54 PM (3 hours ago) to kathryn.rexrode, me, cyndee_hill Dear Ms. Rexrode, I am a West Point graduate and spent 14 years in service to my Country to include combat in Vietnam. Along with millions of other citizens, I have witnessed the complete breakdown of the rule of law regarding the eligibility of Barack Obama to be the President of the United States and about crimes that he has personally committed. He is the chief law enforcement officer in the Country and his Attorney General controls the FBI. Neither are about to investigate these issues. The Supreme Court is cowering in fear of something or refuses to get involved in something they may call “politics”. Since when are crimes called politics? Dr. Orly Taitz, a true American hero, has tirelessly been shouting on the deaf ears of those who have sworn to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Now, only the House of Representative can investigate and begin impeachment proceedings to remove a usurper from the highest office in the land. Please, for the love of our Country, bring these issues to the attention of the members of the House Judiciary Committee. Do this by introducing Dr. Taitz to the Committee as she is the most knowledgeable on all these issues. She, a naturalized citizen from Russia, is the greatest patriot I have ever witnessed. The most egregious crimes in the history of our great nation are being committed under our watch and we must do whatever is necessary to save our Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic. Sincerely, Robert J. Hill, III USMA 1965

A letter from the West Point graduate. Please, help me reach as many members of the U.S. military as possible. Please, help me organize meetings with members of the U.S. military, sheriffs department, national guard, oath keepers

Posted on | February 20, 2013 | 9 Comments

Reference for Dr. Orly Taitz 

 

Robert Hill	9:54 PM (3 hours ago)
to kathryn.rexrode, me, cyndee_hill

 

Dear Ms. Rexrode, I am a West Point graduate and spent 14 years in service to my Country to include combat in Vietnam.
Along with millions of other citizens, I have witnessed the complete breakdown of the rule of law regarding the eligibility of Barack Obama to be the President of the United States and about crimes that he has personally committed. He is the chief law enforcement officer in the Country and his Attorney General controls the FBI. Neither are about to investigate these issues. The Supreme Court is cowering in fear of something or refuses to get involved in something they may call “politics”. Since when are crimes called politics?
Dr. Orly Taitz, a true American hero, has tirelessly been shouting on the deaf ears of those who have sworn to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Now, only the House of Representative can investigate and begin impeachment proceedings to remove a usurper from the highest office in the land.
Please, for the love of our Country, bring these issues to the attention of the members of the House Judiciary Committee. Do this by introducing Dr. Taitz to the Committee as she is the most knowledgeable on all these issues. She, a naturalized citizen from Russia, is the greatest patriot I have ever witnessed.
The most egregious crimes in the history of our great nation are being committed under our watch and we must do whatever is necessary to save our Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic.
Sincerely,
Robert J. Hill, III
USMA 1965

From a Colonel of the the US Air Force to the Judicial committee demanding immediate investigation of Obama’s forged and stolen IDs Posted on | February 19, 2013 | 22 Comments Richard Brewer 5:16 PM (2 minutes ago) to Kathryn.Rexrode Ms. Rexrode Please pass this message to Chairman Goodlatte: Sir, I am a 26 year military veteran (retired) and not prone to rush judgments. I have looked at in detail the documentation that Attorney Orly Taitz has accumulated regarding President Obama’s eligibility to serve in that office. I have watched with increasing alarm as those in our government and particularly our judiciary at various levels have chosen to ignore the evidence and instead attack the messenger or resort to technicalities to avoid doing their job. I am more concerned now about the future of our country than I have ever been. The media of course is so biased as to be not even worthy of listening to. Letters I have written to my representatives have resulted in just boilerplate replies none of which confront the issues. It is way past time to address this concern head-on and quit worrying that others will call us “birthers” or other stupid things. I prefer they call me a “truther” because that is what I am after. Only YOU can get to the truth. We 300+ million citizens rely on YOU 500+ government representatives (Exec, Congress, SC) to do what is right. Please investigate at once the processes used by the administrators and the justices themselves to review this case (Noonan et al). What has apparently happened so far is frightening. We all took an oath to support and defend our constitution. Those who do not do so or who believe it is their job to ignore and change our constitution should do the honorable thing and immediately resign. As Gen MacArthur said ” a million ghosts” will rise up shouting “Duty Honor Country”. You must look at every shred of evidence regarding President Obama’s SSN, his Selective Service Registration, his student status, and the other issues raised by Ms. Taitz (who has nothing to gain from this and has been subjected to cruel and vile ridicule) and the experts involved. I could care less what his grades were. My opinion is he should be proud to show his accomplishments at college as an example to all our children of what can be done if we work hard. But he seals his up so no one can see. Why? Time will eventually tell us but I do not believe we can wait long. The future of our children is at stake. The Supreme Court must be investigated now. Thank you, Richard Brewer, COL (Ret) USAF San Antonio TX

From a Colonel of the the US Air Force to the Judicial committee demanding immediate investigation of Obama’s forged and stolen IDs

Posted on | February 19, 2013 | 22 Comments

Richard Brewer	5:16 PM (2 minutes ago)
to Kathryn.Rexrode

Ms. Rexrode

Please pass this message to Chairman Goodlatte: Sir, I am a 26 year military veteran (retired) and not prone to rush judgments. I have looked at in detail the documentation  that Attorney Orly Taitz has accumulated regarding President Obama’s eligibility to serve in that office. I have watched with increasing alarm as those in our government and particularly our judiciary at various levels have chosen to ignore the evidence and instead attack the messenger or resort to technicalities to avoid doing their job. I am more concerned now about the future of our country than I have ever been. The media of course is so biased as to be not even worthy of listening to. Letters I have written to my representatives have resulted in just boilerplate replies none of which confront the issues. It is way past time to address this concern head-on and quit worrying that others will call us “birthers” or other stupid things. I prefer they call me a “truther” because that is what I am after. Only YOU can get to the truth. We 300+ million citizens rely on YOU 500+ government representatives (Exec, Congress, SC) to do what is right.

Please investigate at once the processes used by the administrators and the justices themselves to review this case (Noonan et al). What has apparently happened so far is frightening. We all took an oath to support and defend our constitution. Those who do not do so or who believe it is their job to ignore and change our constitution should do the honorable thing and immediately resign. As Gen MacArthur said ” a million ghosts” will rise up shouting “Duty Honor Country”.

You must look at every shred of evidence regarding President Obama’s SSN, his Selective Service Registration, his student status, and the other issues raised by Ms. Taitz (who has nothing to gain from this and has been subjected to cruel and vile ridicule) and the experts involved. I could care less what his grades were. My opinion is he should be proud to show his accomplishments at college as an example to all our children of what can be done if we work hard. But he seals his up so no one can see. Why? Time will eventually tell us but I do not believe we can wait long. The future of our children is at stake. The Supreme Court must be investigated now.

Thank you,

Richard Brewer, COL (Ret) USAF

San Antonio TX

White House official Lany Davis confirms that he got a similar threat as Woodward. We believe that a number of judges overseeing ObamaForgeryGate cases were threatened too Posted on | February 28, 2013 | 2 Comments http://www.wmal.com/common/page.php?pt=WMAL+EXCLUSIVE%3A+Woodward%27s+Not+Alone+-+Fmr.+Clinton+Aide+Davis+Says+He+Received+White+House+Threat&id=8924&is_corp=0

White House official Lany Davis confirms that he got a similar threat as Woodward. We believe that a number of judges overseeing ObamaForgeryGate cases were threatened too

Posted on | February 28, 2013 | 2 Comments

http://www.wmal.com/common/page.php?pt=WMAL+EXCLUSIVE%3A+Woodward%27s+Not+Alone+-+Fmr.+Clinton+Aide+Davis+Says+He+Received+White+House+Threat&id=8924&is_corp=0

As a member of the International Criminal Bar Panel I am tentatively scheduled to participate in this meeting and will discuss possibility of an International tribunal prosecuting the usurper of the U.S. Presidency Barry Soebarkah, aka Barry Soetoro, aka Harry Bounel, aka Barry (Barack) Obama and his accomplices Posted on | February 28, 2013 | 2 Comments Press Release Law Offices of Dr. Orly Taitz, ESq 29839 Santa Margarita, ste 100 Rancho santa Margarita, Ca 92688 ph. 949-683-5411 fax 949-766-7603 OrlyTaitzESQ.com orly.taitz@gmail.com Attorney Orly Taitz is tentatively scheduled to participate in the International Criminal Bar meeting in Victoria, BC, Canada, where she will bring to the attention of the international jurisprudence an iverwhelming amount of evidence of the usurpation of the U.S. Presidency by a citizen of Indonesia Barry Soebarkah, aka Barry Soetoro, aka Harrison Bounel, aka Barack Obama who is using forged and stolen ID. She will discuss a possibility of convening an international tribunal and trying Soebarkah (Obama) for the usurpation of the U.S. Presidency and deprivation of the civil rights of the 315 million American citizens by Soebarkah and his accomplices in the U.S. Department of Justice, US judiciary, U.S. Congress and various U.S. and state governmental agencies. Donations from supporters to cover the cost of the travel to the conference are appreciated and can be given through her website OrlyTaitzESQ.com End of Press Release Dear members of the ICB, Next July in Victoria, B.C., Canada, it will be held a 3 day Forum “Training Workshop for International Tribunals and the ICC”. Royal Roads University in partnership with the International Criminal Bar, the International Criminal Defence Attorneys Association, the National Association of Criminal Defence Lawyers and The Hague University of Applied Science, is offering a three day training workshop on international criminal law and procedure in Victoria, B.C., Canada. The forum will address substantive law, advocacy skills, novel approaches, procedural and ethical dilemmas for lawyers engaged in international criminal matters and practice before the ad hoc International Tribunals and the International Criminal Court (ICC). Presentantions will be in English by distinguished criminal practitioners from Canada, the United States and Europe. The forum will also provide a unique opportunity to meet lawyers and experts in this highly specialised field. The sessions are designed to encourage a dialogue around critical international criminal law issues and to help equip lawyers to practice criminal law nationally and internationally. Lawyers who practice international criminal law are faced with novel challenges; an understanding of the procedure, law and unique advocacy issues is crucial to participate in this cutting edge legal environment. Similar training sessions have been successfully conducted in Senegal, Morocco, The Hague, Montreal and in 2006 at Royal Roads. Kind regards, Chers membres du BPI, Le prochain mois de Juillet à Victoria, B.C., Canada, il aura lieu un Forum de 3 jours de durée«Formation pour les Tribunaux pénaux internationaux et la CPI». L’Université “Royal Roads” en partenariat avec le Barreau Pénal International, l’Association “International Criminal Defence Attorneys”, “National Association of Criminal Defence Lawyers” et l’Université de La Haye des Sciences Appliqués, offrent un Séminaire de formation de trois jours sur droit et procédure pénale internationale à Victoria, B.C., Canada. Ce Séminaire va traiter quelques matières, droit substantif, compétences de plaidoyer, de nouvelles approches, des questions de procédure et étique pour les avocats qui exercent la défense devant les Tribunaux Internationaux ad hoc et la Cour Pénale Internationale (CPI). Les haut-parleurs, qui sont des importants praticiens du Canada, États Unis et Europe, feront leur présentation en Anglais. Le Séminaire donne l’opportunité unique de rencontrer des avocats et des experts dans ce domaine spécialisé. Les sessions cherchent un dialogue sur des questions à propos du droit pénal international et pour aider aux avocats et leurs équipes pour pratique le droit pénal national et international. Les avocats qui travaillent dans le domaine du droit pénal international font face à nouveaux défis; une compréhension de la procédure, loi et autres questions sont importantes pour participer dans ce domaine légal. Il y a eu d’autres Séminaires similaires à Sénégal, Maroc, La Haye, Montréal et en 2006 à Royal Roads. Très cordialement, —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————– Queridos miembros del CAPI, El próximo mes de Julio tendrá lugar en Victoria, B.C., Canadá, un Foro de 3 días de duración“Formación para los Tribunales Penales Internacionales y la CPI”. La Universidad Royal Roads con la colaboración del Colegio de Abogados Penal Internacional (CAPI), la Asociación “International Criminal Defence Attorneys”, la“National Association of Criminal Defence Lawyers” y la Universidad de Ciencias Aplicadas de la Haya, ofrecen un taller de formación en Derecho Penal Internacional y Procedimiento de tres días en Victoria, B.C., Canadá. El foro abordará cuestiones de derecho sustantivo, habilidades para abogados, nuevos enfoques, cuestiones procesales y éticas para abogados involucrados en Derecho Penal Internacional, así como prácticas ante los Tribunales Internacionales ad hoc y la Corte Penal Internacional (CPI). Las presentaciones serán en inglés por distinguidos abogados penalistas de Canadá, Estados Unidos y Europa. El foro también proporcionará una oportunidad única para conocer abogados y expertos en este campo sumamente especializado. Las sesiones están diseñadas para estimular un diálogo entorno a problemas del Derecho Penal Internacional y para ayudar a los equipos de abogados para practicar Derecho Penal nacional e internacional. Los abogados que ejercen el Derecho Penal Internacional se enfrentan a nuevos retos; una comprensión del procedimiento, derecho y problemáticas legales únicas es crucial para participar en este innovador ambiente legal. Seminarios similares han sido exitosamente llevados a cabo en Senegal, Marruecos, La Haya, Montreal y en 2006 en Royal Roads. Cordialmente, Laura Vericat Figarola Barreau Penal International International Criminal Bar Colegio de Abogados Penal Intenacional Coordinator of Secretariat lauravericat@bpi-icb.com Address: Avenida Diagonal 529 1º2ª 08029 Barcelona, Spain

As a member of the International Criminal Bar Panel I am tentatively scheduled to participate in this meeting and will discuss possibility of an International tribunal prosecuting the usurper of the U.S. Presidency Barry Soebarkah, aka Barry Soetoro, aka Harry Bounel, aka Barry (Barack) Obama and his accomplices

Posted on | February 28, 2013 | 2 Comments

Press Release
Law Offices of Dr. Orly Taitz, ESq
29839 Santa Margarita, ste 100
Rancho santa Margarita, Ca 92688
ph. 949-683-5411 fax 949-766-7603
OrlyTaitzESQ.com
 orly.taitz@gmail.com
Attorney Orly Taitz is tentatively scheduled to participate in the International Criminal Bar meeting in Victoria, BC, Canada, where she will bring to the attention of the international jurisprudence an iverwhelming amount of evidence of the usurpation of the U.S. Presidency by a citizen of Indonesia Barry Soebarkah, aka Barry Soetoro, aka Harrison Bounel, aka Barack Obama  who is using forged and stolen ID.
She will discuss a possibility of convening an international tribunal and trying Soebarkah (Obama) for the usurpation of the U.S. Presidency and deprivation of the civil rights of the 315 million American citizens by Soebarkah and his accomplices in the U.S. Department of Justice, US judiciary, U.S. Congress and various U.S. and state governmental agencies. Donations from supporters to cover the cost of the travel to the conference are appreciated and can be given through her website OrlyTaitzESQ.com
End of Press Release 

Dear members of the ICB,

Next July in Victoria, B.C., Canada, it will be held a 3 day Forum “Training Workshop for International Tribunals and the ICC”.

Royal Roads University in partnership with the International Criminal Bar, the International Criminal Defence Attorneys Association, the National Association of Criminal Defence Lawyers and The Hague University of Applied Science, is offering a three day training workshop on international criminal law and procedure in Victoria, B.C., Canada.
The forum will address substantive law, advocacy skills, novel approaches, procedural and ethical dilemmas for lawyers engaged in international criminal matters and practice before the ad hoc International Tribunals and the International Criminal Court (ICC). Presentantions will be in English by distinguished criminal practitioners from Canada, the United States and Europe. The forum will also provide a unique opportunity to meet lawyers and experts in this highly specialised field. The sessions are designed to encourage a dialogue around critical international criminal law issues and to help equip lawyers to practice criminal law nationally and internationally. Lawyers who practice international criminal law are faced with novel challenges; an understanding of the procedure, law and unique advocacy issues is crucial to participate in this cutting edge legal environment. Similar training sessions have been successfully conducted in Senegal, Morocco, The Hague, Montreal and in 2006 at Royal Roads.

Kind regards,

Chers membres du BPI,

Le prochain mois de Juillet à Victoria, B.C., Canada, il aura lieu un Forum de 3 jours de durée«Formation pour les Tribunaux pénaux internationaux et la CPI».

L’Université “Royal Roads” en partenariat avec le Barreau Pénal International, l’Association “International Criminal Defence Attorneys”, “National Association of Criminal Defence Lawyers” et l’Université de La Haye des Sciences Appliqués, offrent un Séminaire de formation de trois jours sur droit et procédure pénale internationale à Victoria, B.C., Canada.
Ce Séminaire va traiter quelques matières, droit substantif, compétences de plaidoyer, de nouvelles approches, des questions de procédure et étique pour les avocats qui exercent la défense devant les Tribunaux Internationaux ad hoc et la Cour Pénale Internationale (CPI). Les haut-parleurs, qui sont des importants praticiens du Canada, États Unis et Europe, feront leur présentation en Anglais. Le Séminaire donne l’opportunité unique de rencontrer des avocats et des experts dans ce domaine spécialisé. Les sessions cherchent un dialogue sur des questions à propos du droit pénal international et pour aider aux avocats et leurs équipes pour pratique le droit pénal national et international. Les avocats qui travaillent dans le domaine du droit pénal international font face à nouveaux défis; une compréhension de la procédure, loi et autres questions sont importantes pour participer dans ce domaine légal. Il y a eu d’autres Séminaires similaires à Sénégal, Maroc, La Haye, Montréal et en 2006 à Royal Roads.

Très cordialement,

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Queridos miembros del CAPI,

El próximo mes de Julio tendrá lugar en Victoria, B.C., Canadá, un Foro de 3 días de duración“Formación para los Tribunales Penales Internacionales y la CPI”.

La Universidad Royal Roads con la colaboración del Colegio de Abogados Penal Internacional (CAPI), la Asociación “International Criminal Defence Attorneys”, la“National Association of Criminal Defence Lawyers” y la Universidad de Ciencias Aplicadas de la Haya, ofrecen un taller de formación en Derecho Penal Internacional y Procedimiento de tres días en Victoria, B.C., Canadá.
El foro abordará cuestiones de derecho sustantivo, habilidades para abogados, nuevos enfoques, cuestiones procesales y éticas para abogados involucrados en Derecho Penal Internacional, así como prácticas ante los Tribunales Internacionales ad hoc y la Corte Penal Internacional (CPI). Las presentaciones serán en inglés por distinguidos abogados penalistas de Canadá, Estados Unidos y Europa.
El foro también proporcionará una oportunidad única para conocer abogados y expertos en este campo sumamente especializado. Las sesiones están diseñadas para estimular un diálogo entorno a problemas del Derecho Penal Internacional y para ayudar a los equipos de abogados para practicar Derecho Penal nacional e internacional.
Los abogados que ejercen el Derecho Penal Internacional se enfrentan a nuevos retos; una comprensión del procedimiento, derecho y problemáticas legales únicas es crucial para participar en este innovador ambiente legal.
Seminarios similares han sido exitosamente llevados a cabo en Senegal, Marruecos, La Haya, Montreal y en 2006 en Royal Roads.

Cordialmente,




Laura Vericat Figarola
Barreau Penal International
International Criminal Bar
Colegio de Abogados Penal Intenacional
Coordinator of Secretariat
lauravericat@bpi-icb.com
Address: Avenida Diagonal 529 1º2ª
08029 Barcelona, Spain

Obama’s CIA Nominee John Brennan Personally Involved In Changing Susan Rice’s Benghazi Talking Points… February 28, 2013 President Obama’s pick to head the CIA was involved in crafting controversial talking points about last year’s attack in Benghazi, Republicans said Tuesday after viewing intelligence documents. Lawmakers had vowed to block John Brennan’s nomination unless they got to see internal communications about how to describe the attack that killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans. Several said the email chain of several pages, which they’d been seeking for months, doesn’t change how they plan to vote either way. “Brennan was involved,” Senate Intelligence Committee Vice-Chairman Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) said after the briefing. “It’s pretty obvious what happened.” “At the end of the day it should have been pretty easy to determine who made the changes and what changes were made.” He described an “extensive, bureaucratic and frankly unnecessary process” that led to the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations publicly linking the attack to a peaceful protest gone awry. Republicans have accused the White House of twisting the talking points to avoid harming Obama’s national security reputation ahead of the November elections. Continue via The Hill... - See more at: http://redflagnews.com/headlines/obamas-cia-nominee-john-brennan-personally-involved-in-changing-susan-rices-benghazi-talking-points?utm_content=Latest+Tea+Party+News%2C+Current+Events%2C+Breaking+News%2C+Politics%2C+Opinion&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=RFN#sthash.XyaL6UK4.dpuf undefined Obama’s CIA Nominee John Brennan Personally Involved In Changing Susan Rice’s Benghazi Talking Point undefined redflagnews.com President Obama’s pick to head the CIA was involved in crafting controversial talking points about last year’s attack in Benghazi, Republicans said Tuesday after viewing intelligence documents. Lawmakers

Obama’s CIA Nominee John Brennan Personally Involved In Changing Susan Rice’s Benghazi Talking Points…

February 28, 2013

President Obama’s pick to head the CIA was involved in crafting controversial talking points about last year’s attack in Benghazi, Republicans said Tuesday after viewing intelligence documents.

Lawmakers had vowed to block John Brennan’s nomination unless they got to see internal communications about how to describe the attack that killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans. Several said the email chain of several pages, which they’d been seeking for months, doesn’t change how they plan to vote either way.

“Brennan was involved,” Senate Intelligence Committee Vice-Chairman Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) said after the briefing. “It’s pretty obvious what happened.”

“At the end of the day it should have been pretty easy to determine who made the changes and what changes were made.”

He described an “extensive, bureaucratic and frankly unnecessary process” that led to the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations publicly linking the attack to a peaceful protest gone awry. Republicans have accused the White House of twisting the talking points to avoid harming Obama’s national security reputation ahead of the November elections. Continue via The Hill...
- See more at: http://redflagnews.com/headlines/obamas-cia-nominee-john-brennan-personally-involved-in-changing-susan-rices-benghazi-talking-points?utm_content=Latest+Tea+Party+News%2C+Current+Events%2C+Breaking+News%2C+Politics%2C+Opinion&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=RFN#sthash.XyaL6UK4.dpuf

undefined

Obama’s CIA Nominee John Brennan Personally Involved In Changing Susan Rice’s Benghazi Talking Point

undefined

redflagnews.com

President Obama’s pick to head the CIA was involved in crafting controversial talking points about last year’s attack in Benghazi, Republicans said Tuesday after viewing intelligence documents. Lawmakers