DOJ wants Bush, senior cabinet members exempt from Iraq War trial

page: 1
26
<<   2 >>

log in

join
+7 more 
posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 09:56 PM
link   
Wait what? Bush and friends being held accountable for the false war in Iraq but then Holder and friends block it? What the deuce?

rt.com...


The United States Department of Justice has requested that former President George W. Bush and the highest figures in his administration receive full exemption from being tried for the Iraq War, which the DoJ says was in line with international law.

Apart from Bush, the names listed in the paper the DoJ filed on Tuesday are former Vice President Richard Cheney, former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, retired four-star General Colin Powell, former Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice and former Deputy Secretary of Defense and President of the World Bank, Paul Wolfowitz.


What's going on here? Iraq War trial? How did I miss this?


Sundus Saleh, an Iraqi single mother of three who became a refugee, filed a complaint in March in the San Francisco federal court, claiming that the war in her country can be judged as a ‘crime of aggression’, according to the same legal standards that the Nuremberg Tribunal used for convicting Nazi war criminals of World War II.

Saleh is the lead plaintiff in this class action lawsuit.


Ah class action lawsuit. I see, I see.

Why an Iraqi Single Mom Is Suing George W. Bush for War Crimes


Sundus Shaker Saleh, an Iraqi single mother of three, has not forgotten. The violence and chaos that engulfed Iraq following the U.S.-led invasion of 2003 had tragic consequences for her family and ultimately forced her to flee her homeland for an uncertain future. She has left Iraq, but she is determined to make sure the world hears her story and that someone is held accountable.

Saleh is the lead plaintiff in a class action lawsuit targeting six key members of the Bush Administration: George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, and Paul Wolfowitz. In Saleh v. Bush, she alleges that the Iraq War was not conducted in self-defense, did not have the appropriate authorization by the United Nations, and therefore constituted a “crime of aggression” under international law—a designation first set down in the Nuremberg Trials after World War II. The aim of the suit is simple: to achieve justice for Iraqis, and to show that no one, not even the president of the United States, is above the law.


As much as I would love for these criminals to be brought to some kind of justice there's no way the current criminals are gonna allow a single mother to take their cronies down.


The case is being brought to trail by Inder Comar of Comar Law, a firm based in San Francisco. The majority of cases Comar takes involve providing legal support to private companies, primarily for the tech industry. He is measured and deliberate, perhaps not the long haired, vaguely out-of-touch wearer of hemp suits some might picture when imagining a human rights lawyer pushing for prosecution of U.S. government officials.

This summer, Saleh met with Comar at her home in Amman, Jordan, to discuss the upcoming trial.

Saleh related her story through a translator to Comar, who had traveled halfway around the world to hear her story firsthand. Saleh was a gracious host, according to Comar, pointing out the paintings she'd crafted and beaming over her children. She was warm, open, and quick to laugh. Her story, however, was rife with darkness.

Prior to the arrival of U.S. forces, Saleh said, Iraq was safe. People slept with their doors open at night. There were no militias, no checkpoints, no threats. All of that came to a halt following the U.S.-led invasion. Airstrikes damaged or destroyed vital infrastructure including highways, bridges, and wastewater treatment facilities. Diseases like typhus became commonplace. The swift collapse of a functioning government created an environment ripe for internecine warfare. Saleh’s twin brothers were both shot by militia members, and she no longer felt safe in her own home. So in 2005, Saleh fled Iraq. She was not alone. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, over 2 million people left the country, and over 2.7 million were internally displaced, including up to 40 percent of the Iraqi middle class.


What's this? Iraqi's slept with their doors unlocked? Those days are long gone because thanks to America and Co. Iraq has become a terrorist hell hole with over 3,000 Iraqi's killed in just the past few months and countless injured. The terrorists, you know them, Al Qaeda & friends, aren't stopping and their murderous rampages are only getting worse. So no wonder this woman fled to Jordan because Iraq is no place for anyone to live in at the moment.

USA! USA! USA!

edit on 28-8-2013 by Swills because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 10:13 PM
link   
You go girl! They need to add Douglas Feith to that list; it was his office of special plans that concocted all the "bad" (er,lies) intelligence the Bush administration used to start the war on Iraq. Frustrated that the CIA couldn't come up with any ties to Al Qaeda Cheney and Rumsfeld gave Feith the honors of creating the propaganda necessary to begin the hostilities (remember the yellowcake incident, the ice cream "chemical weapons" truck, the Prague meeting etc.).

Nothing like creating facts to fit an agenda. I hope she wins. Our Nation is impoverished, Iraq is still ruined, hundreds of thousands dead and wounded all because of Neocon warhawk agendas created by men who never fought in combat

Surely someone is responsible for this, if I so much as bump another persons car and bend their bumper I'm held to account. Start wars, kill people and spend a country in to oblivion and nobody is held to account? Is this really the world we live in?.

Eta: As taxpayers can we get in on the suit under extortion under false premises?
edit on 28-8-2013 by Asktheanimals because: added comment
edit on 28-8-2013 by Asktheanimals because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 10:20 PM
link   
Regardless what we thought of Saddam Hussein, the country was stable until we arrived. It is now chaos thanks to US intervention in order to vindicate Bush senior.

May this lady have the strength to follow through.

And why is Holder trying to stop it? Hoping a future adm. will absolve him and Obama?



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 10:37 PM
link   
Well there ya go, one rule for us, and no rules for them


How much more blatant can it get?

All eyes on this lady, she's gonna need people watching her back!



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 10:44 PM
link   
Seeing as how we are still in the war in those countries, and are actively pursuing new ones, can we add the current administration to the lawsuit? They are doing the same things they should suffer the same fate. It would be cheaper than having a separate trial in a couple of years.

Kinda like a two-fer....



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 11:00 PM
link   
It is a shame that they dance free still. Little George was allowed to give closed door and sealed testimony during the investigation after 911, too.

Remember this? Painful to watch, even now.




posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 11:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Swills
 


To be frank, I'm surprised she's the first. Invasion under the boastful impersonal title of Shock and Awe turned my stomach at the time and it still does. I wish her well and success, but I do hope someone's watching her back and the backs of her kids.



posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 04:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by liveandlearn
Regardless what we thought of Saddam Hussein, the country was stable until we arrived. It is now chaos thanks to US intervention in order to vindicate Bush senior.

May this lady have the strength to follow through.

And why is Holder trying to stop it? Hoping a future adm. will absolve him and Obama?


I would love to see them stand for war crimes, but it has to come from a court where the US has no jurisdiction. If one administration allows the previous administration to stand trial, things get really degenerate really quickly. Each new president would seek to prosecute the previous one as revenge politics. With the partisan divide being what it is in this country an act like this could outright spark civil war at worst and put an end to any bipartisian measure (or anything else... no one wants to be prosecuted) at best.

It makes me sick, but this is a courtroom they can't be held accountable in for the good of the country.



posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 05:23 AM
link   
Sadly...I feel these "gentlemen" in question are and will be above any law...as long as they live. It is also true...that the current administration won't allow any of them to stand trial. Could be too dangerous for the current puppets.

It's cases like these that expose how corrupted and flawed the system really is. The little man would get prosecuted for stealing a loaf of bread...these mongols can get away with mass murder...just like that.

All I can say to this woman...Good luck..she's gonna need a effing miracle...



posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 07:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Aazadan
 


It makes me sick, but this is a courtroom they can't be held accountable in for the good of the country.

No need for one wrist to slap the other. Thats why the Hauge exists. To give a fair hearing outside the reach of any "Jurist-My-Diction".

International Court of Justice



posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 08:16 AM
link   
People don't need exemptions from trials or legal process unless everyone involved knows the legal system poses a direct threat to them, personally.

Why would Bush fear the light of day and public values being brought to shine on his war time actions? I'm sure Darth Vader wants his little free pass too.... After all, Vice Evil can't stand trial while Pappa Smurf walks away to have a smurfy day. (Cheney would sell his own family....and then send them C.O.D. to save a few bucks)
edit on 29-8-2013 by wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 08:47 AM
link   
So,
leave it up to a single mother to teach these policy makers the error in their ways?

How can the DOJ use the term 'justice' and yet fail to apply it accordingly?



posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 08:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swills
Wait what? Bush and friends being held accountable for the false war in Iraq but then Holder and friends block it? What the deuce?


It's very simple. Holder and the Obama administration will let the previous administration off the hook for just about anything ... BECAUSE ... they want the same treatment from the administration that will follow them. Holder and the Obama administration will expect that the Christie administration let them off the hook for crimes the Obama administration has perp'd. And then Christie will expect the same from whoever follows him. It's the same old back room political deals that have gone on for centuries.

Hows that hope and change coming?
Same ol' same ol' ...



posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 09:18 AM
link   
I say block the entire lawsuit. Being that this is a civil case involving government employees and their on the job actions, any money paid out to the plaintiff(s) would come out of the taxpayer's pockets. This could get astronomically expensive to litigate and any judgements levied against any of the defendants could very well bankrupt the USA.



posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Swills
 


Sounds to me like this lady needs to file her case in a court where the U.S. Dept. of Justice has no jurisdiction.

She needs to take this to the International Court of Justice or what's commonly known as The World Court. I'm confident she'd win there and even if this court doesn't have the authority to enter the U.S. and make an arrest and/or impose penalties, a negative ruling from them would go a long way towards preventing these culprits from leaving the U.S.. They would have to be very careful where they went in the future for fear of being arrested and punished in a foreign land.

Wouldn't it be a refreshing blast of fresh air if those responsible were actually held accountable for their actions?



posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by LeatherNLace
 



I say block the entire lawsuit. Being that this is a civil case involving government employees and their on the job actions, any money paid out to the plaintiff(s) would come out of the taxpayer's pockets. This could get astronomically expensive to litigate and any judgements levied against any of the defendants could very well bankrupt the USA.


Bankrupt us? We are already spending way more than we are taking in in tax revenue. Plus, every time Bernanke pumps Federal Reserve fiat currency into the system that is just MORE money that we owe......sorry, but the US is already bankrupt!

Besides, liquidate the assets of these families and there will be plenty of money to go around....



posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by seeker1963
reply to post by LeatherNLace
 



I say block the entire lawsuit. Being that this is a civil case involving government employees and their on the job actions, any money paid out to the plaintiff(s) would come out of the taxpayer's pockets. This could get astronomically expensive to litigate and any judgements levied against any of the defendants could very well bankrupt the USA.


Bankrupt us? We are already spending way more than we are taking in in tax revenue. Plus, every time Bernanke pumps Federal Reserve fiat currency into the system that is just MORE money that we owe......sorry, but the US is already bankrupt!

Besides, liquidate the assets of these families and there will be plenty of money to go around....


It was more of a tongue in cheek comment about bankruptcy. However, if you believe that the US is already bankrupt, then you need to brush up on the definition....the US has plenty of assets that could be liquidated to pay off debt if necessary. Owe ungodly amounts of money? Yes. Bankrupt? Not even close.


ETA:

US government's $128-Trillion stockpile: business.time.com...

And then there is the 2.62 million square Kilometers of land owned by the Federal govt...roughly 30% of the US total land mass.

I'm fairly certain that the US is nowhere near bankrupt.
edit on 29-8-2013 by LeatherNLace because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Swills
 

So the Department of "Justice" is trying to block justice...

Can we just scrap the entire federal government already?

From one criminal regime to the next...

Obama wins the right to invoke “State Secrets” to protect Bush crimes.

George W. Bush Defends PRISM: 'I Put That Program In Place To Protect The Country'.

edit on 29-8-2013 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 12:57 PM
link   
This is exactly the reason you don't go around the world and stick your nose into their business. This is why countries have civil wars. If they don't like who's leading them, they can change it! Can you imagine if 30% of America wanted to change our Government and laws, and asked for foreign aid from other countries who also didn't like the way things are going in America? Can you imagine Russia sending us tanks, airplanes and weapons to help those 30% to topple the Government? First of all they would have NO business helping us militarily in ANY way and second,..... it would completely split the country, only creating more chaos and violence. People on both sides would lose families either by "rebel" hands (accidentally or not) or by Government retaliatory actions and more hate would rise with more people having personal vendettas against this side or that side. In all the chaos you just know that new groups would form that would start fighting the other groups for control.

These politicians SHOULD be punished! They caused so much death and chaos in these middle eastern countries, all because they just HAD to meddle for their own personal benefit. I doubt very much that the citizens of the U.S. benefited in any way from this. All it did is make us feel hated and terrorized and we lost a lot of personal freedoms. Punish them I say. Do it quickly and throw in the Obama administration as well.



posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Swills
 


Will they go after everyone in congress who voted to go to war? Or those who voted to fund the military?





new topics
 
26
<<   2 >>

log in

join