George Bush and Other's To Face War Crime Charges on Augest 26th 2004

www.japantimes.co.jp...

Here is an article talking about the indictment. I guess he was charged along with his administration for war crimes in afghanistan. I'm not sure where the actual text of the indictment is, I found it once before, but I don't feel like looking right now. Feel free to find it on google.

Anyways, Iraq and Afghanistan were not a war on race. In fact, one of the principle reasons in Iraq was to liberate the people. But when you make the country dangerous for its citizens with tactics such as land mines and high air contest of heavy metals it has the reverse effect of the purpose.

EDIT: Please note that I am not against the war in Afghanistan (on the assumption that al qaeda was plentiful there and osama with his team were there too), but I am against the way in which war was conducted. One of our rules SHOULD be to minimize civilian casualties.

[edit on 19-8-2004 by Jamuhn]

I think also that the bombings in Afghanistan were some what justify because US going after Al-queda and bin-ladden, but the true is that the civilian casualties in that country not necessarily were tied to bin-ladden.

US used indiscriminate power going after bin-ladden, and as usual the lost of lives not link to bin-ladden were the result of this used of power.

That article is about a citizens tribunal, the same thing that started this thread.

It holds no legal standing. The group involved holds no legal authority.

I didn't say it did skibum. That is why I brought it up because its related to the topic that started this thread....

Civilization is nice, but let's not over do it. The fact is that war makes the world go 'round.

Hahah, if you ever saw a real war you would not say that.

Originally posted by marg6043
I like this idea of war crimes against administrations; they should be hold accountable for their mistakes when it causes others to loose their lives.

Even if it does not end on anything the public should be made aware that is people out there very unhappy with the results of war.

Yes and we should also be able to recall our leaders like in California. Give me a break. The stakes of international relations are higher than your average township or city, and sometimes people get hurt. If every time an administration made a bad judgement call and lives were lost, it were indicted and brought before some sort of kangaroo court it would wreck the democratic process. The idea of a popular vote would lose meaning as every action taken by an elected official becomes subject to some individual bodies idea of morality. On top of that administrations would become impotent to pull the trigger at times when it mattered most.

These charges are as ludicrous as the people who filed them..

Originally posted by Jamuhn
www.japantimes.co.jp...

This is not a real tribunal or an official japanese court or any sort of court. Its a bunch of civilians with no authority who got together and found the administration guilty. When you made that comment, you should've noted that it was an unofficial, non-authoratative, group of private individuals. I had gotten the impression that the japanese governement had charged bush from your previous staetment.

[edit on 19-8-2004 by Nygdan]

Oh, sorry about that, I didn't know any other way to phrase it except for indictment. Well, it seems you got the gist of it by reading the article.

People this is not about a real court we all know that is about raising awareness of what is going in the world and the consequences of the actions of world leaders like US.

This consequences affect not only the parties involved and the victims that result from this actions but the relations of US and us as a superpower in the world it affect us the citizens of this country also.

And then you ask yourself why we have been targeted well there is your answer because the actions of our administrations not one administration but all of them over the years.


[edit on 20-8-2004 by marg6043]

"People this is not about a real court we all now that is about raising awareness of what is going in the world and the consequences of the actions of world leaders like US."

Then the thread title should say "kangaroo court meets to denouce George Bush" instead of sensationalizing it with "War Crimes"

Originally posted by Jamuhn
www.japantimes.co.jp...

Here is an article talking about the indictment. I guess he was charged along with his administration for war crimes in afghanistan. I'm not sure where the actual text of the indictment is, I found it once before, but I don't feel like looking right now. Feel free to find it on google.

There are several sealed indictments against bush part of this one is the sealed grand jury that dick cheney testifed agaisnt bush to a closed door meeting at congress that got bush indicted.

Also Just so people know the N.Y. Bar Association is charging bush with war crime's too

I have some of the document's of the indictments

Stay Tuned if you know what I mean'

"hint hint war pictures ring a bell"

Falcon

i would just like to say that war or combat shouldn't be used to further a nations interests it should only be used to defend the people of a nation and for the greater good of the majority. Fighting wars over oil is wrong. I think people who believe it is okay have either something wrong with them or have forgotten the sacrifices our forfathers made in the bloodiest wars mankind has ever had so that we could have a safer world and we should only use violence as a last resort.

The whole Halliburton-Cheney-Afghanistan and the Bush's in general have made me lose my confidence in the good of America.

Does anyone have any articles on Cheney's connections to Israel?? something that has serious facts and that is not about jew bashing please .

thanks,
drfunk

drfunk, I found this links if you want to check.



wwww.usenet-replayer.com...



www.dangerouscitizen.com...



www.greatdreams.com...



www.counterpunch.org...



electronicintifada.net...

Originally posted by falcon
There are several sealed indictments against bush part of this one is the sealed grand jury that dick cheney testifed agaisnt bush to a closed door meeting at congress that got bush indicted.

Part of what one? The japanese article referenced? That has nothing to do with any grand jury indictments.

Also Just so people know the N.Y. Bar Association is charging bush with war crime's too

Where, in what court? Do you have any proof to back this up? Or are some people associated with NYBA considering doing it?

There are several sealed indictments against bush part of this one is the sealed grand jury that dick cheney testifed agaisnt bush to a closed door meeting at congress that got bush indicted.

some links or other supporting evidence would be nice

[edit on 20-8-2004 by Skibum]

having read this whole thread now, I am a little surprised as to how quickly people start legitimising war and generally making out that it is all just frequent bouts of geopolitical jolly-hockeysticks. Slowly approaching my thirties, I am greatly aware that mine is one of the first generations of Europeans that has not been totally effected by the plaque of war. The psychologivcal/political/economic makeup of Europe over the last 60 years is wholly as a result of having lived through the worst war of history. Its very easy for many Americans to say 'well we fought there as saved your asses.. we know what its all about', but aside from the tragic loss of life of US soldiers (every human murder is a tragedy) the US done pretty well out of the whole thing.. where by the whole of Europe was totally decimated. As a rather distinct 'cradle of war' (ohh me really have like a bit of war over the last 1000 yrs), Europe has finally over the last 100odd years learned that if possible, war should be avoided at all costs, lest we start butchering our neighbours again. Even Soviet Russia's geopolitical paranoia and seeminly irrational arms stockpiling was deemed necessary with the hugh human losses of WW2 borne in mind. Ask people who live.. or have lived through wars wether 'civilisation' can be taken a bit 'overdone' and they would probably look at you like you were mad. Civilisation doesnt need war... war often needs to be met with war. If it becomes necessary.. it doesnt suddenly become good.. or right.

As for Bush.. well the Americans rarely honour/sign-up-to any international law/convention which might challange their actions/interests.. so I doubt it'll mean Sh*t.

[edit on 20-8-2004 by Qoelet]

This administration is GUILTY of war crimes. They are not above the law and should be held accountable. Anyone who fails to acknowledge this is willfully blinde, deaf and dumb. And guess what else, they'd turn on you in a heartbeat, too, if it served their purposes. Don't kid yourselves.

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
This administration is GUILTY of war crimes. They are not above the law and should be held accountable. Anyone who fails to acknowledge this is willfully blinde, deaf and dumb. And guess what else, they'd turn on you in a heartbeat, too, if it served their purposes. Don't kid yourselves.

In order to be guilty of warcrimes, the administration has to have perpetrated war crimes. civilians were killed by american weapons, but they were not targetted, and thus that is not a war crime. Prisoners were abused, but not at the administrations orders, and this a war crime was commited but they did not instigate it. Not to say that the administration is blameless there; they had been informed that such things were going on but didn't investigate. However, that too is not a war crime. There is also reportedly looting going on, that also is a war crime. In both cases the perpetrators are being sought out and punished.

So what war crimes are you talking about?

Originally posted by Nygdan
So what war crimes are you talking about?

The most glaring, obviously, is the culture and policies (from the top to bottom) that led to the atrocities at Abu Ghraib. And trust me, don't think for a minute you're getting the full story about what's really going on over there. At least not from any mainstream outlet.

This just made me think of something...

When a detective interrogates a suspect, he always knows there is much more to the story than what is being told.

So as a suspect admits faults, the detective knows that the real story is even worse than the suspect(s) is/are trying to make it out to be.

Just a thought about professional truth seekers.