posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 05:31 PM
Lots of the replies are lmao replies, which are reasonable, imo, but let's look at what you said seriously for a minute.
In order to prosecute someone you have to show a law has been broken. There is no statute that says anyone MUST disclose the presence of aliens, but
even then, let's just say, for the sake of argument, that somehow there is. Let's work from there.
The first thing you have to prove is that aliens exist (on Earth). How exactly, are you going to do that? The people who claim there are aliens on
earth fall into two major categories. The first category are those people who may very well NOT be lying, but their stories are usually anecdotal.
Though they may be sincere, there's no real proof that what they are claiming is true. You can't really use them as reliable witnesses.
The second group of people tend to be either downright charlatans or nutcases. The Exopolitics movement, for example, has no real proof. They just
rant at the government, often claiming disclosure is just around the corner. It never is, and their protests amount to a bona fide Cargo Cult. many of
them have been caught lying. Whether it is Mothra, the angelic light being, an alien kept in a refrigerator, or models strung by strings, the
credibility of these people is near zero. You can't use them as witnesses either.
Just to cover the bases, I am personally not anti-alien. I would not be at all surprised if aliens were here. I can't prove it, and believing
something MIGHT be true is a far cry from proving beyond a reasonable doubt that it IS true.
So even if you had a law that made "not telling" a crime, you don't have any reliable witnesses, and you still don't have a prosecutor who would
file charges. But hey! We're so far from reality now that we may as well continue. So let's have a trial!
But Bush gets a defense, right? And what do you think his defense is going to do with the "witnesses" that are trotted forward. My guess is:
"mincemeat." Those witnesses would be so beat-up by the time a competent attorney got done with them that they would crawl away from the witness
stand in tatters.
Next you'd have to have an un-biased jury be unanimous for conviction. This jury would not be composed of ATS UFO Forum members, but the general
public. And they would not convict him.
So, in conclusion, the fantasy of trying Bush for not telling what he knows about UFOs fails at every level you care to examine it. There is no law
that says he has to disclose. You don't know that he knows anything anyway. The witnesses to for the prosecution are ill-prepared by reputation or
experience to testify, and a jury would never convict.
So the answer is, "No."