It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Charles Manson Prosecutor Bugliosi Wants Bush Charged With Murder

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 26 2008 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Charles Manson Prosecutor Bugliosi Wants Bush Charged With Murder


www.commondreams.org

“George Bush has gotten away with murder - thousands of murders,” Bugliosi says. “And no one is doing anything about it. The American people can’t let him do this.”

Bugliosi wants one or more of the fifty state attorneys general or one of the nation’s hundreds of district attorneys to step up and prosecute Bush for murder.

“I don’t think it is too unreasonable to believe that at least one prosecutor out there in America - maybe many more - will be courageous enough to say - this is the United States of America. And in America no one is above the law. George Bush has gotten away with murder. No one is doing anything about it. And maybe this book will change that.”

Bugliosi argues that Bush misled the nation into a war that has killed more than 4,000 Americans.

(visit the link for the full news article)



[edit on 26-5-2008 by DimensionalDetective]




posted on May, 26 2008 @ 12:19 PM
link   
Uh-oh...This seems to be a recurring theme as of late...I don't know that any of the AG's will have the cajones to step up to this task, and even if they do, there is the almost entirely corrupted, "croney-fied" supreme court that they will have to go through.

Pretty much everyone knows the atrocities these criminals are responsible for, but they have stacked the decks against all the little people for ever achieving any type of justice or accountability.

Hopefully, at the very least, this guys message wakes up the remaining folks who are STILL thinking this admin and their treason against this nation was in some way "righteous"...


At the center of Bugliosi’s indictment of Bush is a October 7, 2002 speech to the nation in which Bush claims that Saddam Hussein was a great danger to this nation either by attacking us with his weapons of mass destruction, or giving these weapons to some terrorist group.

“The only problem for George Bush - and if he were prosecuted, there is no way he could get around this - is that on October 1, 2002, six days earlier, the CIA sent George Bush its 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, a classified top secret report. Page eight clearly and unequivocally says that Saddam Hussein was not an imminent threat to the security of this country. In fact, the report says that Hussein would only use whatever weapons of mass destruction he had against us if he feared that America was about to attack him.”

“We know that Bush was telling millions upon millions of unsuspecting Americans exactly the opposite of what his own CIA was telling him,” Bugliosi said. “We know that George Bush took this nation to war on a lie. Who is going to pay for all of this? Someone has to pay. And the person who has to pay obviously is directly responsible for all of the death horror and suffering. And that person is George W. Bush.”


^^^Make that 900+ lies...



www.commondreams.org
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 26-5-2008 by DimensionalDetective]



posted on May, 26 2008 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 

I have a good deal of respect for Bugliosi and George Bush has not been a good president. At this moment no one will be a good president. There is to much cronyism at the top levels of our society for anyone no matter how well meaning to be successful. If charges were brought against Bush he would point the finger at the CIA and claim they set him up. He would have an excellent defense.



posted on May, 26 2008 @ 12:46 PM
link   
I have two points to make. First, I REMEMBER TV news telling us about how the UN nuclear weapons inspection was going in Iraq - day by day. They found nothing, then Bush made them go back and search everything - up to and including the Sadam family's underwear drawer. They still found nothing, and so on it went for weeks it seemed. Finally, just a few MINUTES before the expiration of the UN nuclear weapon inspector's time on the inspection expired - Bush ordered them out of Iraq! I felt the reason was so that he could claim the inspection mission was never accomplished ... point is, it was finished and they found nothing and were already packed and ready to go home and make their reports. So, he intentionally STOPPED a report that did not reflect the findings he wanted it to reflect.

Second, Bugliosi must be needing cash or something. His book "Helter Skelter" just got a load of free media advertising (due to the recent re-digging on the Manson site which turned up nothing but normal wild animal remains) and the widely shown picture of the "Helter Skelter" pick-up truck remains. Bugliosi is simply using free media to advertise his books. In this case, his newest book on Bush. Cheap! I think selling his book is more important to him. Is he out there pounding the pavement, trying to recruit his fellow solicitors, attorneys, D.A.s? Or is he just FREE marketing his book?

[edit on 26-5-2008 by Trexter Ziam]



posted on May, 26 2008 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by eradown
 


I went back and reread your article and saw the part about Bush being told by the CIA that Saddam was no a threat. The republicans and the CIA at the time had a hate relationship. The problem is that both parties are ridiculously corrupt. Punishing Bush will change nothing. The corruption does not flow from one it flows from many.



posted on May, 26 2008 @ 12:53 PM
link   
Some have said that punishing Bush will solve nothing. But I think that holding him accountable will send a clear message that the American people won't tolerate this garbage anymore or ever again.



posted on May, 26 2008 @ 12:55 PM
link   
Bugliosi can bluster and spout off all he wants...He may want Bush to be tried for murder but he knows legally that this is a ridiculous statement.

He only comes out to grab attention when he has a new book to plug. So, does he?

And yes he does, how convenient LOL.

[edit on 26-5-2008 by LateApexer313]



posted on May, 26 2008 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


Ah, Bugliosi was always a ham.
But still, I do kind of feel sorry for him. There's a certain class of pathetic spectacle (let examples come to mind) of like somebody who's old, haven't been thought of much in the immanent media mind flux lately, then they come forward and double the splash of their last chunks of celebrity credibility by aligning themselves with "whatever all the kids are into lately".
The proof that Vincent falls under this scenario is the following thought experiment:
Ask yourself this - are more people who read the article going to say
(1): " Wow, does Vincent really think that? Must be something to it?"
or are more people going to say
(2): " Vincent who ? "



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 09:26 PM
link   
About time,don't let him get away,smoke em out,smoke em out,we are going to smoke him out,By his own words so let it be done,then we can get the rest.
Good luck!



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 09:39 PM
link   
I think he should be charged with something. Not sure what.

Many here would agree that the courts take fancy at setting precedents and examples of public figures when they do wrong. I think it's a bold idea to make an example of Mr. Bush. What a great way to let future Presidents know that they do have a responsibility to the people.

It's one thing to be a failed President, but it's a whole other ballpark when you begin to intentionally lie and mislead the general public.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 05:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Sublime620
 


Leo Bugliosi is like "Jeremiah" preaching in the wildnerness. Leo you rain down some "Helter Skelter," on W's ass, and the entire NWO, Illuminati, and Evil Sect that he represents.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 05:50 PM
link   
George Bush should,and must be made an example of.He is the "decider", so all blame falls on his wimpy shoulders.
I also believe that Dick Cheney,Condoleeza Rice and Donald Rumsfeld should be held accountable as accomplices.

Will it happen?Not a bloody chance.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 06:03 PM
link   
As far as intelligence documents go, ol' dubya doesn't have what you'd call a good record.

Think hans blix and Dr David Kelly.

Think about the recent NIE which said Iran hadn't had a nuclear weapons programme since 2003.

What doesn't fit his agenda, he ignores.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 04:01 PM
link   
For those here who believe a prosecution of a former president unlikely, or impossible even, as proposed by Mr. Bugliosi in his new work, Presidential Pardons, whether self-administered or done by a succeeding president, do not apply to charges of ‘murder’, federal or state, nor do ’statutes of limitation’ or ‘double jeopardy’, with regard to them.

Each charge made in behest of those having standing (i.e. any complaining families of allegedly unlawfully killed soldiers), and taken up by prosecutors, federal or state, would EACH BE SEPARATE ACTIONS, evolved in separate venues, from any others.

Potentially, then, THOUSANDS of such prosecutions of this wretched, insolent human person, could be brought forward.

Also, as to the question of the applicability of 'international law' outside of the US, warrants and subpoenas very much DO have tangible, lawful effect. Once snatched-up on an outstanding warrant issued by the ICC after his departure from office with it's peculiar sovereignty protections, our own home-grown Caligula, WOULD-BE-THEIRS!

Interesting to note, is the fact that the country where our present Chief Magistrate has bought thousands of acres of land, in South America, has NO EXTRADITION TREATY nor MLATs with the US!!!

Yet MORE “coincidence”, this inquiring, rhetoricizing mind wonders?

James (II)



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 05:22 PM
link   
Honestly, this is a guy who locked a man up (Charles Manson) for murder when manson didn't actually kill anyone himself. Manson is crazier than a bat turd and should be locked away in a loony bin with no key because he's dangerous, but he killed nobody. Same thing here. Bush killed nobody... the onus of investigating and ensuring the sanctity of any evidence was solidly upon the shoulders of a Congress that almost unanimously voted in favor of going into Iraq. If I handed you a note that said "I love you and can't wait to be with you again" and told you that I saw your wife hand it to a strange man on the street wouldn't you first at the very least inspect the note to see if the handwriting looked like your wife's, then do some investigating such as speaking with her and her firends before making a trip to the divorce lawyer's office? Congress didn't even both to go to the lawyer, they just grabbed a kitchen knife and pulled an OJ Simpson and when it didn't work they and their supporters on the liberal side of the aisle have made a crusade out of trying to distract everyone from their incompetence and laziness by tagging the ENTIRE mess on Bush.

As I've said before many times here, I had no problem with us bombing the hell out of Iraq and removing Hussein, regardless of the presence of evidence, lack of evidence, or legitimacy of evidence. I do, however, have a huge problem with our "representatives" shirking their responsibillity in the matter, which is equal if not greater than Bush's as they are the safety net instilled by the Founding fathers and they miserably failed. I also have a huge issue with any ignorant American who continues this charade by attacking the administration while not even addressing the fact that the ENTIRETY of government, Democrats and Republicans, are equally to blame. If you're in favor of prosecuting Bush for war crimes and murders, then you better clear up a fairly sizeable number of courthouses because if you don't also prosecute every single member of Congress for voting in favor of the war then you are a hypocrite.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 05:46 PM
link   
I believe they could get him for just taking an oath to protect and defend the constituion, when in fact, he has chopped it to bits. Same thing about having a Federal Reserve bank, the constitution clearly states that there is to be no private banking in this country, but look how our congress and president run to the Federal Reserve and beg them to bail out our housing market. Yea, that`s good, take an oath to defend the constitution, then turn around and ignore it like it doesn`t exist. Nice, good job Washington, way to go. The idiots



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 06:18 PM
link   
Interest dichotomy, on the one hand, I have NO doubt that this entire piece is a shameless plug for his book, on the other hand I couldn't care less.

If it get more people to hear the non-sanitized version of events, I applaud it's presence. It is true, we have a criminal somewhere in the picture, I can say this because the deplorable state of the nation (in context please) in regards to the Iraq 'war'.

We could enumerate the ham-handed sloppy execution of the invasion as a true Clausewitzian expression, with endless abuse and profiteering. The out-dated notion that war is a 'tool' at the disposal of the state, a philosophy that brought us at the very least, the horrors of WWI. Now we see that the 9/10 announcement of the DoD's trillion dollar funds needed to be repaid by the public, in blood. None of their kids are on the wall, facing fire, are they?

Our state was embodied in the direction and leadership of the Chief Executive Officer, but the authority wielded was, and is, provided by our self-proclaimed representatives. I will never agree that their purposes are crossed. Republican, Democrat, in the end, they are the same because they are all nothing, they are an image we bought at the polls, a pretty face, a witty retort, something clever, but empty. They all share the failure and they all had better, some day, reconcile themselves to the fact.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 07:08 PM
link   
Why punish these fools when our own constitution allows us to kill them? That may set the rest of the ones who we don't shoot, into straighting up thier act. Think od the tax money it would waste to prosicute any of these fools. 20$ of bullets should do nicely.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 08:18 PM
link   
reply to post by burdman30ott6
 

Hello Burdman,
I do agree with you that congress has shirked their responsibility. However, I would like to point out, "the decider" and his cabinet were responsible for presenting a case for war with Iraq to congress and the american public.

In other words just like Charlie Manson was responsible for the Tate LaBianca murders George is "responsible" for the Iraq war. The Decider convinced congress that our nation was threatened by Iraq. He lied and that is why he should be tried for war crimes.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 08:47 PM
link   
Under Buglliosi warped view, every President from George Washington to George Bush could be brought up on murder charges.

Bush Derangement Syndrome rears its ugly head again.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join