US Supreme Court declares inmates have no constitutional right to ‘painless death’


02-04-19 07:58:00,

The Supreme Court has declared prisoners have no constitutional right to a “painless death,” allowing the execution of a convicted murderer to go forward despite his protestations that lethal injection would cause him to suffer.

Reversing a 2018 decision, the court ruled that death-row prisoner Russell Bucklew’s constitutional protections from “cruel and unusual punishment” did not exempt him from pain and that he’d failed to present sufficient evidence that his preferred method of execution, the gas chamber, was less painful or that it could be “readily implemented.”

The Eighth Amendment does not guarantee a prisoner a painless death,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in the court’s majority opinion, “something that, of course, isn’t guaranteed to many people, including most victims of capital crimes.” The court was split along party lines, with five conservatives backing the ruling and four liberals dissenting.

Read more

Did Trump just suggest the death penalty for drug dealers? Twitter freaks out

Bucklew sat on death row for 23 years filing one appeal after another, a fact Gorsuch mentioned in his opinion, which referenced the convicted killer “secur[ing] delay through lawsuit after lawsuit.” His latest appeal did not contest his guilt or even seek to avoid execution, but sought a stay over the constitutionality of execution by lethal injection of pentobarbital – which Bucklew’s lawyer argued would rupture tumors in the man’s face, neck, throat, and head caused by cavernous hemangioma, a rare medical condition, and therefore constitute cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment.

Gorsuch and the other conservative justices were unduly “dismissive” in assuming Bucklew’s appeals were meant as a delaying tactic, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in her dissenting opinion. While the court stayed his execution in 2018, two justices have retired since then and been replaced with Trump appointees Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh.

Bucklew was convicted of shooting and killing Michael Sanders, the live-in boyfriend of Bucklew’s ex-girlfriend Stephanie Ray, kidnapping and raping Ray, shooting at Sanders’ young son, and wounding a police officer – in 1996. By 2008, he had exhausted his appeals, as well as federal and state habeas corpus challenges. Since then, repeated lawsuits have kept him out of the execution chamber.

 » Lees verder

The Supreme Court and US-Israel Dual Citizenship – Global Research


22-03-19 01:33:00,

As AIPAC preps for its annual policy conference entitled “Connected for Good” with an expected attendance of 20,000 committed Zionists,  its most zealous Zionist Congressional supporters will also likely be in attendance; that is, those who have signed the loyalty oath as well as those who retain dual citizenship to Israel and are thereby entitled to AIPAC campaign support.  

There is always more to the story when it comes to AIPAC and how it has been allowed to circumvent and or manipulate US law as it continues to function unfettered by legal requirements that every other foreign country must adhere to.  To take a critical eye to AIPAC should not be construed as anti-semitic as AIPAC can take credit for motivating and finagling the US into wars in the Middle East at a cost of $4 trillion from the American taxpayer.

With allegedly hundreds of members of Congress and Federal government employees with dual US-Israel citizenship, what has been missing since the Supreme Court’s 1967 decision is scrutiny of the unintended consequences of that decision as it has affected American foreign policy.

To date, there may be no way to confirm which, if any, Members of Congress have dual citizenship with Israel although the informed rumor mill claims that to be the case. In a 2015 interview with Sen. Bernie Sanders, Diane Rehm, claiming to have a list, unequivocally stated that you have dual citizenship with Israel” to which Sanders responded just as unequivocally “No. I am an American.”  It is essential for Members to be forthcoming about their citizenship since real or imagined conflicts of interest can only result in misguided speculation and further alienation.

If the Russians had ever inserted itself into American politics as intimately as the Israelis have, both political parties would be loony-tunes but especially the Dems who appear to have more of a fondness for Zionism.  Clearly no other country has taken advantage of the US largesse as Israel has with its hustle of $233 billion (as of 2014) in foreign aid since 1948 including $38 billion in ‘military assistance’ in 2016 plus other unaccounted-for military projects over the years.  

 » Lees verder

Hoe cateraar Supreme de NAVO een oor aannaaide

Hoe cateraar Supreme de NAVO een oor aannaaide

23-06-18 09:55:00,

De NAVO-landen schakelden cateraar Supreme in om hun troepen in Afghanistan van voedsel en brandstof te voorzien. Supreme schroefde de kosten daarvan flink op, en zodoende ook zijn eigen winsten. De VS kreeg uiteindelijk een schadevergoeding, Nederland weigerde een deel van de rekening te betalen – reden voor Supreme om een zaak tegen Defensie aan te spannen. Rik Delhaas schreef een reconstructie, en constateert dat Supreme politici een oor heeft aangenaaid.

Dit stuk in 1 minuut

  • De NAVO stelt dat cateraar Supreme gefraudeerd heeft bij voedsel- en brandstofleveringen voor de troepen in Afghanistan. De VS heeft via de rechter inmiddels ruim 400 miljoen  van het bedrijf teruggekregen.

  • Supreme manipuleerde op allerlei manieren de prijzen en de kosten om de winstmarge zo groot mogelijk te maken. Via een eigen tussenhandelaar weet Supreme de winst zelfs op te drijven tot ruim 30 procent.

  • Tussentijds worden de contracten met Supreme mondeling aangepast en uitgebreid; die wijzigingen worden niet vastgelegd. Supreme krijgt zo miljarden extra omzet.

  • Nederland heeft mogelijk 35 miljoen dollar teveel betaald;  aanzienlijk meer dan de 2,8 miljoen euro die Defensie van het bedrijf terug kreeg.

  • Via de constructie met private contractors werd het aantal gewonden en slachtoffers van de missie zwaar geflatteerd.

Lees verder

Moederbedrijf Supreme Group BV betaalde de VS een schikking van bijna 400 miljoen dollar, wegens fraude bij de levering van proviand aan Amerikaanse troepen in Afghanistan. Tot 2015 leverde Supreme ook brandstof aan NAVO-troepen in Afghanistan, liefst 4,6 miljard liter.

Over die leveranties is een dispuut, dat straks voor de rechtbank in Maastricht wordt uitgevochten. Supreme beweert dat er nog brandstofrekeningen ter waarde van 432 miljoen dollar openstaan; de NAVO claimt dat er zeker 700 miljoen dollar teveel is betaald, en wil dat geld terug. De zaak dient in Maastricht, omdat het operationele hoofdkwartier van de NAVO, verantwoordelijk voor de ISAF-missie, in het nabijgelegen Brunssum is gevestigd. Toenmalig minister Jeanine Hennis van Defensie liet indertijd weten dat ook Nederland partij is in deze zaak, maar wilde niet bekendmaken om welk bedrag het gaat.

Dat zijn niet de enige zaken waarin Supreme verwikkeld is. De Afghaanse overheid zegt dat zij nog honderden miljoenen dollars aan achterstallige belastingen krijgt van buitenlandse private military contractors,

 » Lees verder