Constitutional Lawyer: Bush 'Ordered War Crimes'

reply to post by oLDWoRLDDiSoRDeR


I love this line...."Btw i don't use "traceable" internet"...I honestly hope you don't believe that!?!

Take it from someone who manages a very large glaobal network...your IP address is very easily traced and obtained.

But hey, we all need that warm fuzzy feeling of anonymity when threatening the POTUS right...good luck on that one man....

[edit on 7-4-2008 by deadbang]

Wouldn't matter if they held war crime trials or not. The Nerumburg trials where a farce. Stalin was trained by the Jesuits and British, Hitler by the British/Jesuits. Bush's Grandfather funded Hitler and may well have been a German spy along with his father. Hmm I wonder if there's a pattern here? Let's see the Vatican was very supportive of the Nazis...

President George W Bush and all who follow and support him will get final judgement for their actions and crimes in life and justice will be served when their immortal souls are bound in Hell for all eternity. The reality of the situation is the fact that if and when George w Bush and cheney do pass away no one on
earth will weep for them. people will cheer,party,and celebrate the fact that they have died. I know I will be having a huge party on the day that Bush and cheney pass away.

There is plenty of American case history that Waterbording is, without a doubt, a War Crime.

Americans were prosecuted for it's use during the Spanish American war.

Japanese were prosecuted for using it on US POWs in WW2.

The list goes on, and theres really no argument that it is indeed torture.

I recommend reading of Naomi Campbells, "The Shock Doctrine". It'll turn your stomach as it opens your eyes.

reply to post by DimensionalDetective


A more accurate statement would be that this lawyer's opinion is that Bush commited war crimes. The reason that Congress hasn't followed up, is that that's not the foregone conclusion and universal consensus of all legal scholars. You can't just pick a single lawyer's opinion because it coincides with your belief, and say that the case is closed.

reply to post by BlueRaja


And yet this is something you constantly do when it suits YOUR needs.

A little hypocritical wouldn't you say?

reply to post by budski


What example are you referring to where I said that the opinion of a single lawyer constituted gospel truth? Even a few lawyers are by no means the be all and end all. It's simply not as cut and dried as some would like to believe.

reply to post by BlueRaja


Lawyers?
Who said anything about lawyers?

I was referring to your propensity for picking a single source that you agree with and then treating it as gospel - simply because it suits you to.

And pointing out that this is more than a tad hypocritical, when you critisize others for doing the same.



[edit on 8/4/2008 by budski]

reply to post by budski


Let me rephrase my question- what example are you referring to me using a single source(uncorroborated) as gospel truth? It seems to me that I point out instances where single sources have info that's significantly different than the majority of sources, but I'm trying to think of a case where the reverse is true. It's especially true when one starts talking about subjective things where opinions are being dealth with rather than hard, empirical facts that can be observed.

reply to post by BlueRaja


Of course you do.

Whatever you think yourself is fine - but I and many others know differently.

And now back to the topic - Yes I believe that Bush was at the very minimum complicit in instigating the US policies in iraq and at the most is guilty of war crimes along with the rest of his cabinet who had any involvement in the illegal occupation, torture of innocents and mass murder of civilians,as well as the wanton destruction of a nation and illegal seizure of their sovereign wealth and resources.

There is no doubt in my (and many others) mind that he should be arrested and tried for his crimes against humanity and the iraqi people in particular.

The irony would be marvelous: shrub shouting from the dock "I don't accept or recognise the authority of this court"

Originally posted by budski
reply to post by BlueRaja

 

Of course you do.

Whatever you think yourself is fine - but I and many others know differently.

And now back to the topic - Yes I believe that Bush was at the very minimum complicit in instigating the US policies in iraq and at the most is guilty of war crimes along with the rest of his cabinet who had any involvement in the illegal occupation, torture of innocents and mass murder of civilians,as well as the wanton destruction of a nation and illegal seizure of their sovereign wealth and resources.

There is no doubt in my (and many others) mind that he should be arrested and tried for his crimes against humanity and the iraqi people in particular.

Could you at least provide a topic that was in discussion, if you're not gonna cite an example?

I understand there's no doubt in your mind(an many others) that he should be arrested. That's my point.

- who decides if the occupation is legal or illegal? The Ba'ath Party? Sadr? Al Qaeda? or the current Iraqi government which was voted on by the majority of the Iraqis.

- where's the evidence of mass murder of Iraqi civilians by US forces?

- what illegal seizures have been made of sovereign wealth and resources, and who is the one accusing us? The Iraqis at large, or anti war westerners?

- how many innocents(or guilty parties for that matter) have been tortured exactly, under Bush's policies?

- what are Bush's crimes against humanity, that don't involve the Iraqi people, since according to you he's committed them?

Do you see a pattern here- lot's of opinion, but a bit light on hard facts(that are provable).

Originally posted by DimensionalDetective


Honestly, I just don't understand this anymore...I'm left scratching my head in disbelief how our country could become so lawless, and how no one is held accountable. I feel like I'm living in the midieval times with a ruthless royalty decimating and abusing the peons.

The worst part is this criminal Congress is completely complicit and actually aiding and abetting the admin in these crimes against humanity...And make no mistake, THEY ARE GUILTY OF WAR CRIMES!

Disgusting to no end.

rawstory.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

You see, Money makes people Funny....Even Pelosi is gone crazy, she wanted to prostitute Bush & Cheney and now, after she got her bag of gold, she told the Old Folks at the Congress, that Bush Impeachment is now "Under the Table" what that actually means in street lingo, is that get lost you losers, go home to mummy. Goodbye to Impeachment. Justice Delayed is Justice Denied

HAS ANYONE HEARD OF THE G.I. REVOLT FROM THE VIETNAM WAR? IF NOT, IT BASICALLY WAS AN AMAZING COLLABORATION OF TROOPS ALL OVER VIETNAM TO JUST LAY DOWN THEIR ARMS AND REFUSED TO FIGHT, BECAUSE THEY REALIZED THAT WHAT THEY WERE DOING WAS WRONG. HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE OUR TROOPS TO WAKE UP AND REALIZE WHAT THEY ARE DOING IS WRONG? IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN IT, DOWNLOAD THE MOVIE. IT'S A DOCUMENTARY THAT SHOWS THAT EVEN TRAINED KILLERS CAN HAVE A CONSCIENCE. IF THEY REFUSE TO FIGHT, THE WAR IS OVER. PERIOD.

reply to post by Believer2012


The problem with your plan is that 99 percent of the servicemen don't believe what they're doing is wrong, so you'd never have mass mutiny occur.

reply to post by BlueRaja

- who decides if the occupation is legal or illegal? The Ba'ath Party? Sadr? Al Qaeda? or the current Iraqi government which was voted on by the majority of the Iraqis.

Did the coalition have a UN mandate to invade another sovereign nation?
No
Do you think that UN and international law applies only to other countries and that the US is exmpt for some reason?

- where's the evidence of mass murder of Iraqi civilians by US forces?

The John Hopkins Institute report, The Lancet Report, eyewitness testimony and even IBC, and that's before we even get to the disgracefull cover up of the haditha massacre - there are in all likelihood many other similar events which have gone unreported.

- what illegal seizures have been made of sovereign wealth and resources, and who is the one accusing us? The Iraqis at large, or anti war westerners?

rawstory.com...
enough said - when did it become US oil???

- how many innocents(or guilty parties for that matter) have been tortured exactly, under Bush's policies?

www.globalpolicy.org... Try this link and then we'll see if you can continue to skirt the issue - you can harp on about exact numbers all you want, that doesn't change the fact that the US has engaged in the torture of prisoners.
And before you ask who decides what constitutes torture, read the link and the outrage expressed by civilised nations the world over.

It happened and it continues to happen.

Therefore the people who ordered it are as guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity as saddam was.

- what are Bush's crimes against humanity, that don't involve the Iraqi people, since according to you he's committed them?

Try this link for a start - we can move on to many others if you want - but I've proved my point.
www.motherearth.org...

and this one
www.bushcommission.org...

Do you see a pattern here- lot's of opinion, but a bit light on hard facts(that are provable).

The only pattern I see is one of denial by those who want to support this despot at any cost.

I also see again from you a complete lack of facts and opinion only, like;
Who decides what is torture
The figures are subjective
We don't bomb civilian area's
We're not to blame for the insurgency.

etc etc

You come out with the same tired old arguments every time, refusing to believe any evidence and leaning heavily on the opinion of shrub to form your argument.

You could try opening your eyes and actually reading about what really goes on instead of blustering and obfuscating and trying to make people see what can't be seen - that shrub is anything except a criminal adventurer, so desperate for daddy's approval that he killed the man who tried to assasinate hin at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives.

[edit on 10/4/2008 by budski]

Originally posted by budski
A- Did the coalition have a UN mandate to invade another sovereign nation?
No
Do you think that UN and international law applies only to other countries and that the US is exmpt for some reason?


B-The John Hopkins Institute report, The Lancet Report, eyewitness testimony and even IBC, and that's before we even get to the disgracefull cover up of the haditha massacre - there are in all likelihood many other similar events which have gone unreported.



C-rawstory.com...
enough said - when did it become US oil???




D- www.globalpolicy.org... Try this link and then we'll see if you can continue to skirt the issue - you can harp on about exact numbers all you want, that doesn't change the fact that the US has engaged in the torture of prisoners.
And before you ask who decides what constitutes torture, read the link and the outrage expressed by civilised nations the world over.

It happened and it continues to happen.

Therefore the people who ordered it are as guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity as saddam was.



[edit on 10/4/2008 by budski]

A- Saddam's violations of the ceasefire agreements of Desert Storm were enough by themselves, and it's pretty weak saying that UN1441 didn't give authorization because it wasn't specific enough as to what measures would be considered okay to use. Furthermore, there's no such thing as International law. There are treaties which countries agree to, but no international organization has the right to supercede a sovereign nation's governmental authority. The only time a nation would be subjected to an international court was if they'd been defeated in war, and had no choice.

B- So you're saying that 2 reports out of many are the end of the story with regards to accuracy? Eye witness reports? that's laughable. Who's eyewitness reports suggest that 600k-1.4million have been killed by the US? You keep beating that dead horse. The vast majority of guesses put the figure of 80-150k casualties, which includes insurgent deaths, and doesn't include who killed them. It would also appear that the Haditha "massacre" wasn't such a case of wrong doing as some would have you believe. Of course because the US military lies, and the insurgents would never try to make us look bad, it must have happened just like they said.

C- you keep beating the horse about the US stealing Iraqi oil too. Exactly how much oil has the US taken against the Iraqi wishes?

D- you speculate on the occurrence and frequency that you think torture occurs, that is authorized by US policy based upon aberrant events like Abu Grahaib. Is there any evidence that more than 3 individuals have actually been waterboarded, or do you just assume that to be SOP? All these civilians, etc.. that have expressed outrage- I suppose they have some hard evidence too, or just what they've read online?



You seem perfectly willing to accept anything at face value if it portrays the US, US military, Bush, etc.. in a bad light, but anything that is counter to that, must be propaganda and disinfo, or blind patriotism.

Oh dear - more opinion and no facts.

Do what you preach and back up what you say with facts, and not just your opinion.

I suspect you take this approach because you have NO facts to even begin to back up your case - just the same tired old nonsense with no supporting evidence and zero credibility.

You go right ahead and believe exactly what you want - keep your eyes and ears closed and live happily forever in shrub-land where war is good and mystically approved by no-one in particular, where torture is condoned and where the killing of innocents is just a fact of war, where theft is rampant and where military contractors get rich on the public teat, where war crimes are excused, where the constitution is trampled on and where civil liberties take a back seat to the ambition of the few.

I hope it's nice and sunny there.

I'm done with this puerile obfuscation - you offer nothing and expect everything.
Sorry but it doesn't work like that.

As the old saying goes - put up or shut up.

[edit on 10/4/2008 by budski]

As for the Friends of the Earth site- that's pretty comical, with such violations as-

failure to agree to the Kyoto treaty?
abolishment of the ABM treaty with the Soviet Union(which no longer exists)
non-existent violations of the Geneva Convention, etc....which we've had multi-page discussions about already.

You see, most of the claims on there do not enjoy a universal consensus amongst legal scholars, or even a majority consensus. Just because one's opponents disagree with you doesn't mean that there opinion is any more valid.

reply to post by budski


You're perfectly happy to accept your opinion as fact.

reply to post by BlueRaja


Actually I've posted many links, many times to support everything I say - you haven't.

So either give us some evidence to support your view or bow out gracefully.