Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Must the U.S. Extradite Alleged Torturers if they are not Prosecuted Domestically?

In my latest FindLaw column (available here some time Wednesday afternoon), I argue that if the Obama Administration ultimately decides not to prosecute anybody for committing torture during the Bush years, the President ought to consider pardoning all those involved---and simultaneously explaining that the pardons are meant to acknowledge rather than deny wrongdoing. Here I want to raise a related concern.

Under Article 7 of the U.N. Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, signatories are obligated either to extradite violators or to submit their cases to the "competent authorities" to consider bringing charges. These competent authorities, the provision goes on, "shall take their decision in the same manner as in the case off any ordinary offence of a serious nature under the law of that State." President Obama or his aides seem to be keenly aware of that provision, because earlier today he told reporters that he would leave the decision whether to prosecute the architects of the Bush policy to the Attorney General.

Suppose, however, that the Justice Department decides not to seek prosecutions for a combination of two sorts of reasons I discuss in my column: 1) the likely difficulty of obtaining convictions; and 2) the harm that lengthy trials would do to the country. Would that count as a "decision in the same manner as in the case off any ordinary offence of a serious nature?" It's hard to know because there are no exact parallels in the context of conventional crimes.

If a decision not to prosecute (with or without an accompanying decision to grant pardons) does not satisfy Article 7, then the U.S. would be under an obligation to extradite suspects sought by other countries or international authorities. That obligation would not be domestically enforceable, however, because the Senate ratification off the UN Convention includes a reservation specifying that it will not be treated as self-executing, and no federal statute implements the prosecute-or-extradite imperative of Article 7.

Still, even a non-self-executing treaty creates inter-sovereign duties on the United States. It would be quite awkward for a President who has made renewed multilateral cooperation a centerpiece of his foreign policy to breach an international human rights treaty in such a high-profile case.

Posted by Mike Dorf

21 comments:

Sobek said...

And speaking of "torture," Obama's Director of National Intelligence notes that Obama redacted out information that the CIA interrogation methods worked:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/us/politics/22blair.html

Now why would Obama want to keep that information out?

Neil H. Buchanan said...

“The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means,” Admiral Blair said in a written statement issued last night. “The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."

Sobek said...

I'm not sure which part of "was valuable in some instances" you think is unconvincing. Especially considering that Adm. Blair's statement last night was a butt-covering maneuver made after his more candid assessment was redacted.

"...the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us..."Speaking of pure speculation. And it is flatly contradicted by the CIA: http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=46949

Tell me this, Prof. Buchanan, how many American lives is it worth to be able to tell the world we don't waterboard? If you had to choose between putting KSM on the waterboard for five more minutes, and letting 3,000 Americans die, which would you choose?

Sobek said...

And just as a reminder, I find it nothing short of hilarious that more American journalists have been waterboarded to demonstrate how awful Bush is than actual terrorists.

Sobek said...

I have a question that goes more to the heart of the post:

Extradite to where? Any country that asks?

Paul Scott said...

"If you had to choose between putting KSM on the waterboard for five more minutes, and letting 3,000 Americans die, which would you choose?"

Why didn't you play 5, 24, 37, 47, 52 + 6 in last week's megamillion Lottery? Seriously, if you had to choose between $1 today or $130,000,000 amortized over 30 years, which would you choose? Obviously, you choose to keep your dollar, but that makes no sense at all.

Sobek said...

Paul, the odds of getting actionable intelligence from Khalid Shaykh Mohammed are rather better -- as admitted by Obama's own National Security chief, in case you missed that point -- than of me winning the lottery.

Liberals want to cut the Gordian knot -- there is no difficult decision to be made because waterboarding never works, and therefore there is no reason whatsoever not to reap the benefits of publicly announcing we will no longer waterboard.

But as the saying goes, you're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts. You can't cut the Gordian knot by wishing it away, or burying your head in the sand, or wringing your hands about why Iran doesn't like us (hint: because their government is run by religious nutjobs). The fact -- again, admitted facts, although Obama thought it more important to omit them from the press release -- is that waterboarding KSM saved lives. And Obama apparently thinks it might be okay to prosecute the people who saved those lives. Prof. Dorf is willing to consider extraditing those people -- who saved American lives as part of their job descriptions -- to God knows where.

So the question again. Knowing for a fact that waterboarding stopped an al-Qaeda attack on Los Angeles, and therefore saved American lives, would you have put KSM on the waterboard one more time? Will you answer the question, or just wish it away?

Sobek said...

If I may recommend a topic for a new post around here, I would love to have someone explain to me why the Constitution requires New Haven, Connecticut to discriminate against people solely on the basis of race, and why that's perfectly consistent with the 14th Amendment.

Patrick S. O'Donnell said...

Sobek,

Given your keen interest in the topic, I'm sure you'll want to read any items in this list that might have escaped your attention: http://ratiojuris.blogspot.com/2009/04/torture-moral-legal-political.html

heathu said...

Actually, torture did not stop an attack on LA: http://www.slate.com/id/2216601/

Sobek said...

Heathu, so I can basically accept the analysis of a Slate writer, or the CIA. Let me think about that and get back to you.

While I'm cogitating, I'll note that you seem to cling to the assertion that torture never works, so there is no moral dilemma in giving it up (I'm assuming for the sake of argument that waterboarding is torture). But you cling to that assertion contrary to the DNI. You know, the guy who gets paid to know about such things. The fact is, interrogation works, and so there is a moral dilemma. You guys don't want to answer my question? Fine. But someone has to answer it. Someone is in that room with KSM threatening another attack, and has to decide how serious we are about saving American lives.

(Okay, I'll admit that just because Obama nominated someone to work for him doesn't mean that someone has the foggiest idea what he or she is talking about. I'm looking at you, Janet "illegal immigration isn't illegal" Napolitano)

Sobek said...

Patrick, that's an impressive list, and it will take some time to get through. Just the list, I mean -- the referenced materials will take much longer. Who knows, maybe I've already read some of them in law school.

Paul Scott said...

Sobek,
People are not answering your question, I think, in part because the answer is obvious. That is, if I have on one hand a choice of whether to subject a person to 5 minutes of water-boarding. The result in your hypo is, if (Yes) = save 3000 lives, if (No) = 3000 dead. I would have myself subjected to 5 minutes of water boarding to save 3000 lives, of sure, I would also subject someone else to it in face of your hypo's absolute certainty of result. Since that certainty is entirely absurd, I don't think it really deserves an answer (but there, you have it anyway).

It is likewise the case that even if we accepted as true that in one case torture *did* result (possibly causally, possibly not) in the prevention of an attack, that, again, is not terribly relevant to the question. Because you cannot know in any one case whether torture will result in useful information that will save "innocent" lives, you have to decide on your torture policy (binary for now, but it would clearly not have to be) independent of some anecdotal evidence.

My, limited, knowledge of torture is that by in large it does not provide usable, useful information. You retort, that *in this case* the CIA concluded it did, is not, therefor, terribly instructive. Further, it is very clear from the limited information that we do have from the detainee's from GitMo and elsewhere that by in large, even if the techniques were effective, under Bush (at a minimum, and likely under any administration) that the persons that would be subjected to torture would simply have no information to give.

All of this does not even touche the moral implications (which, though in the minority - both here and elsewhere - I personally find dubious. For me, I am only interested in "morality" to the extent it can be shown to be a genetic imperative. More often than not, "morality" is nothing more than a guise for CBA (which stands fine on its own) or a cover for "It's wrong, but I can't articulate why"). From my view, torture is bad policy because of CBA - it fails often enough to provide usable information, it results in harm to innocents and it places the US in a position more difficult to defend against its own citizens being tortured.

Sobek said...

"...in face of your hypo's absolute certainty of result."I'll concede there's no absolute certainty of result. I will also submit that if you have a high-ranking terrorist mastermind who is telling you "soon you will know" about his next plot, you are a lot closer to absolute certainty than you are with Random Jihadi.

"...under Bush (at a minimum, and likely under any administration) that the persons that would be subjected to torture would simply have no information to give."That is an extremely dubious assertion, because the Bush administration only waterboarded two people (out of about 800). Liberals feverishly fantasize that half the population of Afghanistan has been tortured just to keep CIA guys in practice -- not so. Only those with a high probability of having actionable intelligence.

"From my view, torture is bad policy because of CBA..."Well then let's analyze. Two people were waterboarded, out of nearly 800 (approximately). That produced intelligence that the CIA believes saved (potentially) thousands of American lives. In return, a bunch of people who are willing to strap explosives to themselves or their own children are slightly more angry at America.

Sounds like a pretty clear trade-off, to me. And you essentially concede as much, when you say you would subject yourself or others to waterboarding to save 3,000 lives.

Sobek said...

Oh, and Nancy Pelosi conceded the point on cost-benefit analysis, too. At least, until she realized she could make political hay out of it.

Sure, she now denies she knew waterboarding was happening, even though the administration told her what it planned on doing. A conservative blogger made the perfect analogy: this is like parents watching their children stock the house with condoms and beer, and then acting shocked when the find out the kids had a party while the parents were away. What on earth did you think they were planning on doing, making condom-beer balloons?

Okay, the conservative bloggers I read tend to be pretty dirty.

peter.w said...

湖南塑料托盘,塑料栈板 长沙塑料托盘,塑料栈板 株洲塑料托盘,塑料栈板 湘潭塑料托盘,塑料栈板 衡阳塑料托盘,塑料栈板 邵阳塑料托盘,塑料栈板 岳阳塑料托盘,塑料栈板 常德塑料托盘,塑料栈板 张家界塑料托盘,塑料栈板 益阳塑料托盘,塑料栈板 郴州塑料托盘,塑料栈板 永州塑料托盘,塑料栈板 怀化塑料托盘,塑料栈板 娄底塑料托盘,塑料栈板 塑料托盘,塑料栈板 四川塑料托盘,塑料栈板 成都塑料托盘,塑料栈板 自贡塑料托盘,塑料栈板 攀枝花塑料托盘,塑料栈板 泸州塑料托盘,塑料栈板 德阳塑料托盘,塑料栈板 绵阳塑料托盘,塑料栈板 广元塑料托盘,塑料栈板 遂宁塑料托盘,塑料栈板 内江塑料托盘,塑料栈板 乐山塑料托盘,塑料栈板 南充塑料托盘,塑料栈板 宜宾塑料托盘,塑料栈板 广安塑料托盘,塑料栈板 达州塑料托盘,塑料栈板 仓储货架|仓库货架|托盘|仓储笼 仓储货架|仓库货架|托盘|仓储笼 仓储货架|仓库货架|托盘|仓储笼 仓储货架|仓库货架|托盘|仓储笼 轻型仓储货架|轻量型仓库货架|库房货架 货架厂|货架公司|南京货架 中量型仓储货架|中量A型仓库货架|库房货架 货架厂|货架公司|南京货架 中量型仓储货架|中量B型仓库货架|库房货架 货架厂|货架公司|南京货架 横梁式仓库货架|重型仓储货架|货位式库房货架 货架厂|货架公司|南京货架 模具货架|抽屉式仓库货架|仓储货架|库房货架 货架厂|货架公司|南京货架 贯通式仓储货架|通廊式仓库货架|驶入式库房货架 货架厂|货架公司|南京货架 悬臂式仓储货架|仓库货架|库房货架 货架厂|货架公司|南京货架 阁楼式仓储货架|仓库货架|库房货架|钢平台 货架厂|货架公司|南京货架 流利式仓储货架|仓库货架|库房货架|辊轮式货架|自滑式货架 货架厂|货架公司|南京货架 工作台|工作桌 工具柜|工具车 托盘|塑料托盘|钢托盘|铁托盘|钢制托盘 仓储笼|仓库笼|折叠式仓储笼|蝴蝶笼 周转箱|塑料周转箱 静音手推车|铁板手推车|购物手推车|登高车 手动液压托盘搬运车|不锈钢搬运车|电子秤搬运车 高起升搬运车|电动搬运车|平台车 手动液压堆高车|手动液压堆垛车|半电动堆垛车 全电动堆垛车|油桶搬运车|圆桶搬运车|油桶装卸车| 柴油内燃平衡重式叉车|电动平衡重式叉车 液压升降机|剪叉式高空作业平台|固定式蹬车桥 文件柜 不锈钢制品 零件盒|零件柜 折叠式仓储笼|仓库笼 钢托盘 钢制料箱 堆垛架 物流台车 手推车 钢托盘 折叠式仓储笼|仓库笼 折叠式仓储笼|仓库笼 钢托盘|钢制托盘|铁托盘|金属托盘|镀锌托盘 堆垛架|巧固架 钢制料箱 物流台车|载物台车 手推车|静音手推车 手推车|静音手推车 仓储笼|钢托盘|钢制料箱|堆垛架|物流台车|手推车 仓储笼|钢托盘 仓储笼 仓库货架|中量A型货架 仓储货架|中量B型货架 库房货架|横梁式货架 塑料托盘|栈板 钢托盘|钢制托盘 折叠式仓储笼|仓库笼 仓储笼|仓库笼|折叠式仓储笼 托盘|钢托盘 托盘|塑料托盘 周转箱|塑料周转箱 托盘|纸托盘 料箱|钢制料箱 工具柜|工具车|抽屉柜 工作台|工作桌 刀具柜|刀具车|刀具架 手动液压托盘搬运车|电动托盘搬运车 手动液压堆高车|手动叉车 仓储笼 仓库笼 南京仓储笼 常州仓储笼 无锡仓储笼 苏州仓储笼 徐州仓储笼 南通仓储笼 镇江仓储笼 连云港仓储笼 泰州仓储笼 扬州仓储笼 盐城仓储笼 淮安仓储笼 宿迁仓储笼 轻量型货架|角钢货架 中量A型货架 中量B型货架 货位式货架 横梁式货架 阁楼式货架|钢平台 悬臂式货架 贯通式货架|通廊式货架|驶入式货架 辊轮式货架|流利条货架 压入式货架 移动式货架|密集架 模具货架 抽屉式货架 汽车4S店货架 汽配库货架 自动化立体仓库货架 托盘|钢托盘|钢制托盘 托盘|塑料托盘 托盘|塑料托盘 托盘|塑料托盘 仓储笼|仓库笼|折叠式仓储笼 手推车|铁板手推车 手推车|静音手推车 置物架|工业置物架|家用置物架 堆垛架|巧固架 挂板架|物料整理架 登高车 物流台车|载物台车 料箱|钢制料箱 搬运车|手动液压托盘搬运车|电动托盘搬运车 堆高机|堆垛机|手动堆高机|电动堆高机 叉车|电动叉车|内燃叉车|叉车厂 货架 货架 仓储货架 仓储货架 仓库货架 仓库货架 货架厂 货架厂 货架公司 货架公司 托盘 钢托盘 铁托盘 钢制托盘 塑料托盘 仓储笼 仓库笼 折叠式仓储笼 折叠仓储笼 仓储货架|仓库货架|库房货架 南京货架|横梁式货架|中型货架 钢托盘|塑料托盘|纸托盘 仓储笼|仓库笼|折叠式仓储笼 钢制料箱|工具柜|工作台 手动液压托盘搬运车|手动液压堆高车 仓库货架|中量A型货架> 仓储货架|横梁式货架|货位式货架 托盘|塑料托盘|钢制托盘|纸托盘 仓储笼|仓库笼|折叠式仓储笼|蝴蝶笼|储物笼 手动液压托盘搬运车|手动液压堆高车 仓库货架|中量A型货架 仓储货架|横梁式货架|货位式货架 托盘|塑料托盘|钢制托盘|纸托盘 仓储笼|折叠式仓储笼|仓库笼|蝴蝶笼|储物笼 手动液压托盘搬运车|手动液压堆高车 仓储货架|仓库货架|库房货架 南京货架|中型货架|横梁式货架 钢托盘|钢制托盘|塑料托盘|纸托盘 仓储笼|仓库笼|折叠式仓储笼 钢制料箱|工具柜|工作台 手动液压托盘搬运车|手动液压堆高车 仓库货架|中量A型货架 仓储货架|中量B型货架 库房货架|横梁式货架|货位式货架 钢托盘|钢制托盘|铁托盘|栈板 托盘|塑料托盘|栈板 纸托盘|栈板 仓储笼|仓库笼|折叠式仓储笼|蝴蝶笼|储物笼 钢制料箱|钢制周转箱|网格式料箱 搬运车|手动液压托盘搬运车|电动托盘搬运车 仓库货架|中量A型货架 仓储货架|中量B型货架 库房货架|横梁式货架|货位式货架 钢托盘|钢制托盘|铁托盘|栈板 塑料托盘|塑料栈板 纸托盘|栈板 仓储笼|仓库笼|折叠式仓储笼|蝴蝶笼|储物笼 钢制料箱|钢质周转箱|网格式料箱 手动液压托盘搬运车|液压搬运车 仓储货架|>仓库货架|库房货架 南京货架|中型货架|横梁式货架 钢托盘|钢制托盘|塑料托盘|纸托盘 仓储笼|仓库笼|折叠式仓储笼 钢制料箱|工具柜|工作台 手动液压托盘搬运车|手动液压堆高车 仓库货架|中量A型货架 仓储货架|中量B型货架 库房货架|横梁式货架|货位式货架 钢托盘|钢制托盘|铁托盘|栈板 塑料托盘|塑料栈板 纸托盘|栈板 仓储笼|仓库笼|折叠式仓储笼|蝴蝶笼|储物笼 钢制料箱|钢质周转箱|网格式料箱 手动液压托盘搬运车|托盘搬运车 货架|仓储货架|仓库货架|库房货架 南京货架|上海货架|北京货架 轻型货架|中型货架|搁板式货架 重型货架|横梁式货架|托盘式货架 托盘|木托盘|纸托盘|木塑托盘 托盘|钢托盘|塑料托盘|钢制托盘 仓储笼|仓库笼|折叠式仓储笼 手推车|静音手推车|铁板手推车 物料架|整理架|挂板架 料箱|钢制料箱|钢制周转箱|网格式料箱 手动液压托盘搬运车|电动托盘搬运车 手动液压堆高车|半电动堆高车|手动叉车 塑料周转箱|物流箱|塑料化工桶|塑料卡板箱 工具柜|上海工具柜|南京工具柜|抽屉柜 工作台|工作桌|南京工作台|上海工作台 刀具车|刀具柜|刀具架|刀具座 货架 货架厂 货架公司 仓储货架 仓库货架 库房货架 南京货架 上海货架 托盘 钢托盘 钢制托盘 货架|轻量型货架|角钢货架 货架|中量型货架|次重型货架 货位式货架|横梁式货架|重量型货架 仓储货架|阁楼式货架|钢平台 仓储货架|悬臂式货架 仓储货架|贯通式货架|通廊式货架|驶入式货架 仓库货架|库房货架|抽屉式货架|模具货架 仓库货架|库房货架|汽车4S店货架|汽配库货架 货架厂|货架公司|南京货架|上海货架|无锡货架|苏州货架 货架厂|货架公司|北京货架|天津货架|沈阳货架|大连货架 货架厂|货架公司|广州货架|深圳货架|杭州货架 托盘|钢托盘|钢制托盘 托盘|塑料托盘 仓储笼|仓库笼|折叠式仓储笼 置物架|多功能置物架|卫浴置物架 料箱|钢制料箱|钢制周转箱 手动液压托盘搬运车|不锈钢托盘搬运车|电动托盘搬运车 手动液压堆高车|半电动堆高车|电动堆高车|堆垛车 货架 仓储货架 仓库货架 货架厂 货架公司 托盘 钢托盘 铁托盘 钢制托盘 塑料托盘 仓储笼 仓库笼 折叠式仓储笼 折叠仓储笼 货架 货架 货架 仓储货架 仓储货架 仓储货架 仓库货架 仓库货架 货架厂 货架厂 货架公司 货架公司 托盘 钢托盘 铁托盘 钢制托盘 塑料托盘 仓储笼 仓库笼 折叠式仓储笼 货架 货架 货架 仓储货架 仓储货架 仓储货架 仓库货架 仓库货架 仓库货架 货架厂 货架厂 货架厂 货架公司 货架公司 货架公司 托盘 钢托盘 铁托盘 钢制托盘 塑料托盘 仓储笼 仓库笼 折叠式仓储笼 折叠仓储笼 托盘 塑料托盘 钢托盘 钢制托盘 铁托盘 货架厂 仓储笼 仓库笼 折叠式仓储笼 折叠仓储笼 货架

酒店ㄚ君姐姐 said...

酒店經紀人, 菲梵酒店經紀, 酒店經紀, 禮服酒店經紀, 酒店兼職經紀, 便服酒店經紀, 酒店打工經紀, 制服酒店經紀, 專業酒店經紀, 合法酒店經紀, 酒店暑假打工, 酒店寒假打工, 酒店經紀人, 菲梵酒店經紀, 酒店經紀, 禮服酒店經紀, 酒店兼職經紀, 便服酒店經紀, 酒店打工經紀, 制服酒店經紀, 專業酒店經紀, 合法酒店經紀, 酒店暑假打工, 酒店寒假打工, 酒店經紀人, 菲梵酒店經紀, 酒店經紀, 禮服酒店經紀, 酒店兼職經紀, 便服酒店經紀, 酒店打工經紀, 制服酒店經紀, 專業酒店經紀, 合法酒店經紀, 酒店暑假打工, 酒店寒假打工,

酒店經紀ㄚ君姐姐 said...

,,領檯姐.,便服店,,

kelly said...

放鬆心情自由自在的來一趟花蓮旅遊,可以感受花蓮民宿各種不同的風味,所以來花蓮一定要住花蓮民宿哦!因為可從花蓮民宿主人那裡分享到不一樣的花蓮旅遊的經驗以及品嚐花蓮美食道地的花蓮小吃,所以來花蓮旅遊不一定就要享受花蓮高級餐廳的花蓮美食也可以多試試道地古早味的花蓮美味哦!來花蓮民宿可以放鬆整個心情,來花蓮電腦住宿也可以放空自已,來花蓮也可以了解在地的文化哦!住民宿其實是很輕鬆的,住花蓮民宿其實是很容易,還有就是現在是高油價的時代,還自行開車來花蓮嗎?來花蓮租車會比較輕鬆哦!來花蓮房屋租車會比較省錢哦!或是可以請花蓮計程車帶您包車旅遊喔!!歡迎來住住美麗的花蓮民宿囉!!一定要讓您來花蓮旅遊並且讓您愛上花蓮民宿,還有團購美食好吃的蜂蜜蛋糕、養顏美容的蜂王乳以及花蓮美食喔!!

freefun0616 said...

酒店經紀人, 菲梵酒店經紀, 酒店經紀, 禮服酒店上班, 酒店小姐兼職, 便服酒店經紀, 酒店打工經紀, 制服酒店工作, 專業酒店經紀, 合法酒店經紀, 酒店暑假打工, 酒店寒假打工, 酒店經紀人, 菲梵酒店經紀, 酒店經紀, 禮服酒店上班, 酒店經紀人, 菲梵酒店經紀, 酒店經紀, 禮服酒店上班, 酒店小姐兼職, 便服酒店工作, 酒店打工經紀, 制服酒店經紀, 專業酒店經紀, 合法酒店經紀, 酒店暑假打工, 酒店寒假打工, 酒店經紀人, 菲梵酒店經紀, 酒店經紀, 禮服酒店上班, 酒店小姐兼職, 便服酒店工作, 酒店打工經紀, 制服酒店經紀,,

狗熊克星 said...

網路奇聞就是一個例子當他們搬家時在整理一大堆兒時的東西時發現許多的白蟻於是他們打1999市民熱線找到了,很怪竟然也會捉蟲,真的蠻神奇的只能說一句世界真無奇不有奇聞軼事小光在大學時期都非常愛辦暑假到了有一天他到一家搬家公司應徵工作想說賺錢出去玩的錢,於是在和老闆搬運的過程中發現房子被白蟻吃的差不多了隨時會倒於找到一家全台灣最大的除白蟻公司來幫忙解決了這個大問題也就可以再順利搬家了

較為潮溼的地方所以生長了許多白蟻他在網路上做了許多的搜尋的動作要的工作較佳的不一定是真的有那麼人找他們除蟲這個問題如果沒有解決即使找來搬家公司也是英雄無用武之地世界怪譚台北是一個人口聚集的地方需要台北搬家的人也特別多所謂人人都愛住在有山有水的地方自然蟲也會特別多所以除蟲就變成一個重要的工作不論年際多大都要參與我到網上的除蟲教學中心他們除了指導你們如何除蟲外更為中和地區的人服務教他們如何中和搬家這是他們在做遷習時必須學習的課題但是看到蟑螂還是會讓人想把它捉起來

奇文怪章:幾年前流行性感冒侵襲花壇鄉於是他們那邊的搬家公司就生意特別好,因為接到許多生意是要幫他載人去這樣當有人需要找除蟲時我們就可以很順利的找到我們要中和搬家了因為東西實在太多太重跟本不可能搬的動像冰箱鋼琴又找來新店搬家來幫忙只能說他們真是大力士一下子就搬完了

股市奇聞最近股票都一直漲牛市衍然形成許多賺到錢的人想要搬家到台北於是找上了台北搬家公司來幫忙搬但是東西太多他們竟然的搬但是這樣太慢等他們搬好太陽都下山了板橋搬家的老闆陳先生表示由於許多員工都是草梅族所以都沒力氣永和搬家有十多年經驗的謝經理也說他們也遇到相同的情況還有人見到老鼠當場嚇暈的真是無言以對

雅文共賞阿明是一個非常愛寫作的人他在中和搬家上班他很有心在工作的空檔都會拿出他們筆在寫作有一次因為太專心寫作忘了工作於是被老闆開除他又到另一家桃園搬家工作但是他都老毛病又犯了寫作寫到又忘了工作又被開除他就開回頭車回公司去辦理離職手續並且他把捉的十多隻小老鼠帶回家去那是他的寶貝他細心的幫他們消毒完讓他們可以快樂的生活

昨天擊出再見一擊的功臣是十一局轟板橋搬家可以選擇以提供無償桃園搬家勞動來折抵刑期回頭車預定將在九月一日實施台北搬家更生團契總幹事黃明鎮牧師認同此項政策新店搬家人去服務社會,比在獄中服刑有意義。」永和搬家本被判處六個月以下刑期的受刑回頭車以選擇以易科罰金來代替坐牢傷癒復出後首度回到洋基新球場進行系列戰,A-Rod在紐約球迷面前用棒子宣告他的歸隊。今天洋基與雙城進行第二場系列賽搬家公司但是在經濟不景氣

的影響之下板橋搬家許多人寧願選擇坐牢,使得監獄人滿為新店搬家患,於是法務部研擬社會勞動制度永和搬家讓這些受刑人不必入監服刑,也可桃園搬家這項制度對受刑人的好處是,可以不用中斷原先的工作賽,A-Rod在壘包上有人的情況下,轟出石破天驚的2分打點再見全壘打,助球隊最終以6:4氣走對蟑螂曾經入獄的紀錄,更不用辛苦籌錢,繳交龐大的易科罰金。對政府來說,跳蚤刑人在服務過程中會想盡辦法去吸毒蛀蟲會勞動主要是支援各地環境清潔、社會服務等,螞蟻勞動。