Constitutional Lawyer: Bush 'Ordered War Crimes'

Constitutional Lawyer: Bush 'Ordered War Crimes'

rawstory.com

For constitutional lawyer Jonathan Turley, the latest memo should be more than enough reason for Congress to begin some serious investigations, but hesitance to really dig into Bush-authorized "war crimes" have precluded them from doing so, he says.

"It is really amazing because Congress -- including the Democrats -- have avoided any type of investigation into torture because they do not want to deal with the fact that the president ordered war crimes," Turley told MSNBC's Keith Olbermann Thursday night. "But evidence keeps on coming out.... What you get from this is this was a premeditated and carefully orchestrated torture program. Not torture, but a torture program."

(visit the link for the full news article)

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)

Being that I'm a future lawyer to be this caught my eye.
(First I just need to ask how credible this source is )
Second if this is indeed very credible, then other lawyers should jump on or at least hope to jump on to get this raving lunatic out of the office. We should have impeached him a long time ago, yet he is still in the cushy chair (Which should be mine! )

Anyway back onto the topic. There is no dening that there have been war crimes through out bush's berserker moment (The point in which we ran into Iraq guns ablaze without so much as a concrete plan that didn't shift every few seconds.) There would be no doubt in my mind that Bush would try and torture those that go against him, I don't know just a feeling I get from seeing the guy on TV.

Edit --
Star+Flag

[edit on 4-4-2008 by Leviatano]

We might as wel face facts, Bush and his cohorts will never be tried for their crimes. NEVER.

War Crimes are a significant charge in that the body that must prosecute it has to be universally empowered to do so. I'm sure many know of the neocon-driven resistance to the applicability of international war crimes to virtually any activity promoted, engaged in, or supported by this administration.

As of this moment, by decree and practice, the US administration retains the exclusive right to 'force extradition' based on unilateral charges of war crimes. The legal precedent came about very recently (in the last few decades) and was first implemented with Manuel Noriega of Panama.

They have declared this type of rendition 'extraordinary' but have refuted ANY nations authority to exercise it except their own, of course.

But even so, in what court would you trust to try the case justly and free from 'partisan' influences? And I don't mean the trite floor show we call American politics; by partisan I mean disinterested in considering the 'consequences' of the 'consequences'? Justice was meant to be applied universally without regard for ... " If we say he's guilty such and such will happen" ... he either is guilty or not.

Most everyone who follows the news and activities of this administration knows that the only case for innocence that can be made would be to redefine the offense. No earnest prosecutor would allow that to happen. Remember the now infamous Clinton quote "That depends in what your definition of 'is' is." Or, how about another famous lawyer's comment "I'm not prepared to call water boarding torture." - Oh please How can intelligent adults sit in a room and contend that there is an uncertainty about whether inspiring mortal fear in someone is torture?

[edit on 4-4-2008 by Maxmars]

Isn't a "constitutional lawyer" a "terrorist lawyer" per the FBI, since anyone who quotes or refers to the constitution is now a terrorist threat?

I also think that it is pretty obvious that Bush has broken the law regarding torture, but I think the only chance of him facing charges would be from some sort of international trial. I don't think that the UN would ever muster up the nerve to try and take the PotUS to trial, for fear of losing all of the American support.

Nationally, they won't face charges because the people responsible for trying them would be just as complicit in their crimes and they wouldn't want that to get out.

*snip*



[edit on 4-4-2008 by oLDWoRLDDiSoRDeR]

[edit on 4/8/08 by niteboy82]

Very important stuff

But you know, what is unfortunately missing from these debates is that apart from war crimes and crimes against humanity, Bush along with ex PMs HOWARD and BLAIR are guilty of even more supreme crimes.

The HIGHEST CRIMES in fact, in the body of international Law.

Namely CRIMES AGAINST THE PEACE


see more about this here



NUREMBERG PRINCIPLES

Principle VI

The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:

(a) Crimes against peace:

(i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;

(ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).

(b) War Crimes:

Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation of slave labor or for any other purpose of the civilian population of or in occupied territory; murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the Seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.

(c) Crimes against humanity:

Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.

Principle VII

Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth in Principle VI is a crime under international law.



Oh yes and DimensionalDetective is absolutely right there are a long list of people that fall under Principle VII

May be this would explain the "complicity" of congress

Originally posted by oLDWoRLDDiSoRDeR
*snip*

[edit on 4-4-2008 by oLDWoRLDDiSoRDeR]

That has got to be, without a doubt, the scariest post I have ever read.

Staff Edit - Removed inappropriate content from quote.

[edit on 4/8/08 by niteboy82]

reply to post by Maxmars


Took me like 20 minutes of editing to find the right phrase to get it to write out right . Amazing (to me anyway) how it hold its power even if you don't see the message.

It may just make my sig line. Feel free to use it if you like.

[edit on 4-4-2008 by oLDWoRLDDiSoRDeR]

reply to post by thepresidentsbrain


We didn't wage a war of aggression though, we were on a mission to spread freedom right? Spreading freedom one bomb at a time.

reply to post by Karlhungis


Democracy by Death

Liberation by lives extenguished


Fortunately, 80% of the population has finally awoken from their slumber to realize what a gigantic load of crap that was. This was ENTIRELY about serving these filth-bags special-interests. The endless lies have been exposed a million times over.

reply to post by DimensionalDetective


Flagged and Stars!

Again, DD you find topics i love...

Sickening hypocricy; Bush enjoys inflicting it on others, while he rejects
any notion of anyone inflicting it on him! Beyond ignorance; DENIAL!!!

U.S. Seeks Exemption from War Crimes Court

oLDWoRLD: Boldly entertaining!!!

reply to post by Karlhungis


Good Question!


The president's real goal in Iraq

So the information is out there, why haven't we done anything. That will always be the question that pounds at the back of my mind.

Originally posted by Leviatano
So the information is out there, why haven't we done anything. That will always be the question that pounds at the back of my mind.

That is a GREAT question

For most of us perhaps it is that we can't live with the truth

Others are scared.... a person looses their job ... bombs go off in London ....a Judge mysteriously changes his mind.....a lawyer disappears....an activist is found dead....a politician is a found with a hooker ... a scientist commits suicide .... someone wins a lottery .... terrorists blow up a night club in Bali ....Britney Spears exposes her breasts ....someone threatens to bomb Pakistan into the stone age ...someone is an enemy combatant .... an UN official is having an affair... an innocent man is shot nearly a dozen times in the head on a London train...

reply to post by thepresidentsbrain


I can see why those things might be scary to some people, but I guess I still hold to the fact that when push comes to shove people would grow a stronger spine and retaliate or do something to show that they still have control.

hehe Britney spears...She is part of the truth movement now . Anyway I'm still wondering, if people just marched down washington's capital would people then wake up or would they go back to there dream-like states? And if we did march on the capital would it turn into china when people were fired upon for resisting?

Originally posted by oLDWoRLDDiSoRDeR
*snip*

[edit on 4-4-2008 by oLDWoRLDDiSoRDeR]

I don't find that humorous. Murder is what you are proposing and that is not cute or funny. I hope you and those who starred your post are just silly children playing games.

Is proposing the assassination of the President in line with ATS T&C

*Staff Edit - Removed Inappropriate Material From Quote*

[edit on 4/8/08 by niteboy82]

Originally posted by Leviatano
reply to post by thepresidentsbrain

 

I can see why those things might be scary to some people, but I guess I still hold to the fact that when push comes to shove people would grow a stronger spine and retaliate or do something to show that they still have control.

hehe Britney spears...She is part of the truth movement now

. Anyway I'm still wondering, if people just marched down washington's capital would people then wake up or would they go back to there dream-like states? And if we did march on the capital would it turn into china when people were fired upon for resisting?

Two things;

1) Britney is part of the truth movement? really? I didn't know that!

2) I recall when President Bush last was installed as president, huge crowds in DC were waiting as his motorcade came through they began cursing, throwing eggs and yelling all sorts of nastiness. Yet I never saw any of it on the news, the only live footage I ever saw was in that Moore film about 9-11, and than a short clip in some canceled BBS show.

I don't think marching will ever be as effective as it was during the civil rights movement or Viet Nam era. The media can pretty much render it invisible to the public - and then the only place you hear or read about it is in the promotional material distributed by those who organize it - at which point it's called 'fringe'. Once your fringe, you might as well be a conspiracy kook for all the respect it will get you.

Originally posted by Blaine91555
I don't find that humorous. Murder is what you are proposing and that is not cute or funny. I hope you and those who starred your post are just silly children playing games.

Is proposing the assassination of the President in line with ATS T&C

Somehow, regardless if the fact that I found the artifact of the post very - imaginative - I must confess that your point is undeniably correct. We really shouldn't go there.

However, to take the 'lawyerly' way out - no one mentioned anything about targets so your reference to the President is an inference drawn - not an implication made. (sorry I couldn't resist)

*Staff Edit - Removed Inappropriate material from quote*

[edit on 4/8/08 by niteboy82]