NationStates Jolt Archive

hopefully then we can see Bush get beheaded at the UN after hes convicted

national Lawyers Guild: Bush Should Be Prosecuted for War Crimes
The National Lawyers Guild has called for President Bush to be prosecuted for war crimes for approving or for failing to stop the torture of detainees. The Guild also charged that the Bush administration has illegally tried to justify the use of torture by claiming the president has the right to disregard existing laws. In related news, more than 400 legal scholars signed a letter last week to Congress urging them to consider impeaching President Bush.

www.democracynow.org

Well Bush committed no war crimes and its just more liberal slander.

I thought it was all Rumsfeld's fault. Him being the Secretary of Defense and all


ehh...whatever. *shrugs*

I didn't see any Iraqis beheaded so far. Only 2 Americans.

Bush hasn't committed war crimes. I have to agree that its more liberal bush bashing and I'm getting sick of it.

I don't mind opposite opinions when its done in a polite manner, however all i've heard from the opposite side is that Bush is an Idiot and He's a warmonger etc etc etc. Time to stop. Debate civily without resorting to vehement comments against someone.

What's the definition of 'war crimes'?

The fact that the creator of this thread proposed that Bush should be beheaded for "war crimes" make this thread a pointless waste of space. I could be looking at porn instead of wasting my time with idiotic threads.

The entire administration should be tried for war crimes. They have blatantly disregarded all laws for treatment of prisoners, international regulations, as well as registering prisions with the red cross. The worst part is, the White House Legal team has tried to justify this saying that Bush and Rumsfeld are not to be held accountable to these laws. Its simple another case of legal dodgeing for crimes comitted. Just goes to show - in America, if you're rich enough, you can evade anything.

It seems to me like the torture has stopped, but maybe it's just me. How about Michael Moore knowing about the scandal months before it broke but not telling any because he "fears mass media"? I'm lovin' it. How about that you (meaning the general public) have not heard about a single story regarding the commendation of one of your soldiers for bravery and honor, but instead the media swarms all over the 8 reservists that somehow manage to tarnish the name of 1.5 million servicemen? The DoD has awared over 250 medals for heroic action over there; compare to 8 bastards, it seems like a good ratio to me. Furthermore, how is this any different than the stuff you can get online (which is LEGAL in the U.S.?) "Oh my God!(nevermind, you would never say God) they are sticking things in each other's butts over there! " and then you say, "Oh, sure you two go ahead and get married and raise a child that might see you two engaging in homosexual intercourse."

To top it off, I love how Democrats managed to downplay Reagan's defeat over the USSR with a smile. Notice how all pictures of Dems you see who attended the funeral were about to burst with laughter? I'll leave it off there...I don't have a lifetime to write about Dem's inconsistencies.

P.S. This nation wasn't supposed to be a democracy, it was supposed to be a republic. That's a moot point but....the URL of the site should be addressed.

The entire administration should be tried for war crimes. They have blatantly disregarded all laws for treatment of prisoners, international regulations, as well as registering prisions with the red cross. The worst part is, the White House Legal team has tried to justify this saying that Bush and Rumsfeld are not to be held accountable to these laws. Its simple another case of legal dodgeing for crimes comitted. Just goes to show - in America, if you're rich enough, you can evade anything.

Thats why big company CEO's and Martha Stewart and many others are being convicted of things like corruption and what not?

Stupid statement from a stupid person. :roll:

Blabberstania, it all matters what "is" is, right? I mean, if you want to talk about evading justice....hell, Mr.Bush isn't the first to lie to the nation and get away with it - and his case seems a little more unclear than Mr.Clinton. I say we try him for war trials against the Serbian people. Anybody?

Blabberstania, it all matters what "is" is, right? I mean, if you want to talk about evading justice....hell, Mr.Bush isn't the first to lie to the nation and get away with it - and his case seems a little more unclear than Mr.Clinton. I say we try him for war trials against the Serbian people. Anybody?

In the modern age war Crimes are only applied when Muslims or other "minorities" are the victims.

Basically, the left chooses whats a war crime and what's an unfortunate accident.

Great to know you're a supporter of Hammurabi's Code TRA.

hopefully then we can see Bush get beheaded at the UN after hes convicted

I don't know how you can claim that Bush or anyone in the chain of command approved of the prisoner abuse. The abuse took place January 14. TWO days later the military was investigating. A day after that, they reported the scandal to the media. Two months later as the investigation was being completed and the abusers were being punished, the New York Times published the photos the military GAVE them and acted as if some conspiracy was in the works. Any war crimes were promptly investigated and punished.

I don't know how you can claim that Bush or anyone in the chain of command approved of the prisoner abuse. The abuse took place January 14. TWO days later the military was investigating. A day after that, they reported the scandal to the media. Two months later as the investigation was being completed and the abusers were being punished, the New York Times published the photos the military GAVE them and acted as if some conspiracy was in the works. Any war crimes were promptly investigated and punished.because the abuse of the prisoners as a policy came straight from the desk of Donald Rumsfeld

I don't know how you can claim that Bush or anyone in the chain of command approved of the prisoner abuse. The abuse took place January 14. TWO days later the military was investigating. A day after that, they reported the scandal to the media. Two months later as the investigation was being completed and the abusers were being punished, the New York Times published the photos the military GAVE them and acted as if some conspiracy was in the works. Any war crimes were promptly investigated and punished.because the abuse of the prisoners as a policy came straight from the desk of Donald Rumsfeld

It wasn't policy MKULTRA. Once again you have shown yourself to be ill-informed.

double post

Forumns bite!

triple post!

Sorry Forumns did it.

I don't know how you can claim that Bush or anyone in the chain of command approved of the prisoner abuse. The abuse took place January 14. TWO days later the military was investigating. A day after that, they reported the scandal to the media. Two months later as the investigation was being completed and the abusers were being punished, the New York Times published the photos the military GAVE them and acted as if some conspiracy was in the works. Any war crimes were promptly investigated and punished.because the abuse of the prisoners as a policy came straight from the desk of Donald Rumsfeld

It wasn't policy MKULTRA. Once again you have shown yourself to be ill-informed.yeah it was--ashcroft has the papers but wont show them

I don't know how you can claim that Bush or anyone in the chain of command approved of the prisoner abuse. The abuse took place January 14. TWO days later the military was investigating. A day after that, they reported the scandal to the media. Two months later as the investigation was being completed and the abusers were being punished, the New York Times published the photos the military GAVE them and acted as if some conspiracy was in the works. Any war crimes were promptly investigated and punished.because the abuse of the prisoners as a policy came straight from the desk of Donald Rumsfeld

It wasn't policy MKULTRA. Once again you have shown yourself to be ill-informed.yeah it was--ashcroft has the papers but wont show them

I don't know how you can claim that Bush or anyone in the chain of command approved of the prisoner abuse. The abuse took place January 14. TWO days later the military was investigating. A day after that, they reported the scandal to the media. Two months later as the investigation was being completed and the abusers were being punished, the New York Times published the photos the military GAVE them and acted as if some conspiracy was in the works. Any war crimes were promptly investigated and punished.because the abuse of the prisoners as a policy came straight from the desk of Donald Rumsfeld

It wasn't policy MKULTRA. Once again you have shown yourself to be ill-informed.yeah it was--ashcroft has the papers but wont show them

I don't know how you can claim that Bush or anyone in the chain of command approved of the prisoner abuse. The abuse took place January 14. TWO days later the military was investigating. A day after that, they reported the scandal to the media. Two months later as the investigation was being completed and the abusers were being punished, the New York Times published the photos the military GAVE them and acted as if some conspiracy was in the works. Any war crimes were promptly investigated and punished.because the abuse of the prisoners as a policy came straight from the desk of Donald Rumsfeld

It wasn't policy MKULTRA. Once again you have shown yourself to be ill-informed.yeah it was--ashcroft has the papers but wont show them

Sorry MKULTRA. Air America maybe reporting that, but they have anti-republican, anti-bush, anti-ashcraft policy. Bush immediately condemn the prison abuse scandel, as did rumsfield, as did aschroft. Sorry MKULTRA, but I have to question this source. No one in the Military will ever order such things.

I know this is beyond your comprehension but we do have the MORAL AUTHORITY TO DISOBEY IMMORAL ORDERS. If this did come from the top, which this didn't, the soldiers have the authority not to carry them out.

Veiktorya and Dux Mundi, I'm not going to go after you for flaming, even if that's what your doing. Instead, I will refrain from using ad hominim logical falacies and attack the logic itself.

The CEOs of various corporations (Enron, WorldCom etc. . .) are on trial. Congratualtions. Notice how their sentances do, in no way, reflect the severity of their crimes. Some guy in L.A. steals 85 dollars from a convience store, if its his third strike ( a dumb law anyway) he gets a life sentance. The CEOs steal hundreds of millions, ruin their employee's retirment accounts, screw the employees out of money in the stock market and what do they get? Community Service. Ouch.

Martha Stewart got convicted of obscuring justice, which she did, and not theft and insider trading which was her original crime. What was her sentance? Something horridly insignificant. Now do you see the vast inconsistancy in the judicial system.

It seems to be a standard tactic to fall back and blame Clinton for many things. Of course he wasn't perfect, who is. Bombing civilian targets - yes, thats wrong. And yes, he should be accountable for whatever damage he cause. But, do not try to impose a red herring argument. Turning to Clinton for Bush's problems is no solution. Trying to shift the blame is no solution either. Clinton is out of power- get over it. What we have now is from Bush. I'm not even going to go into the idea that Regean single handedly defeated the Soviet Union - thats already been adressed more than enough on this forum.

About the whole Ashcroft thing - he is withholding papers. NPR reported the same thing. Ashcroft stated that he did not need to release papers to the judicial branch because they did not have the authority to do so. That sound ssuspicious enough. A comittee tried to subphoenia for the documents but it was republican controled and so the subphoenia was denied.

What's the definition of 'war crimes'?

Here are the Laws of Armed Conflict (http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/auoy.htm), which define in detail what constitute war crimes.

The germaine law in the most recent casse would be the Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War
Art 3. In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following
provisions:
(1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria. To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:
(a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
(b) taking of hostages;
(c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;
(d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.
(2) The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.
An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict. (http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/y3gctpw.htm)
(bolding mine)

And I would point out that I am a conservative who belives that Bush is culpable in this. The conditions for the abuses in Afghanistan and Iraq stem directly from the conditons in Guantanamo. And those came from Bush.

Yes, since Bush was the warden at Guantany.

Well Bush committed no war crimes and its just more liberal slander.

Not true. High powered Cluster Bombing over civilian areas is defined as Excessive Force and is a war Crime. The UK is already on trial for this exact crime, but the US pulled out of the Court early last year. Har har great timing.

Yes, since Bush was the warden at Guantany.

As the CinC who approved the methods used he didn't need to be the commander.

Well Bush committed no war crimes and its just more liberal slander.

Not true. High powered Cluster Bombing over civilian areas is defined as Excessive Force and is a war Crime. The UK is already on trial for this exact crime, but the US pulled out of the Court early last year. Har har great timing.

We never recognized the World Court anyway dumbass! If Clinton did sign it (which would've been stupid anyway), Congress never ratified it! As such, the World Court has no power of a US Matter.

Britian however, is a signatory. They can be prosecuted there. We can not for the above reason.

Besides, THOSE SOLDIERS ARE ALREADY ON TRIAL in our OWN MILITARY COURTS!!!!

Bush never order this thus, it is more liberal Slant.

We never recognized the World Court anyway dumbass! If Clinton did sign it (which would've been stupid anyway), Congress never ratified it! As such, the World Court has no power of a US Matter.

Britian however, is a signatory. They can be prosecuted there. We can not for the above reason.

Besides, THOSE SOLDIERS ARE ALREADY ON TRIAL in our OWN MILITARY COURTS!!!!

Bush never order this thus, it is more liberal Slant.

We are, however, party to most of the treaties making up the body of international humanitarian law and the laws of warfare. And seeing as the constitution regards treaties as law, Bush is in deep legal doodoo.

We never recognized the World Court anyway dumbass! If Clinton did sign it (which would've been stupid anyway), Congress never ratified it! As such, the World Court has no power of a US Matter.

Britian however, is a signatory. They can be prosecuted there. We can not for the above reason.

Besides, THOSE SOLDIERS ARE ALREADY ON TRIAL in our OWN MILITARY COURTS!!!!

Bush never order this thus, it is more liberal Slant.

We are, however, party to most of the treaties making up the body of international humanitarian law and the laws of warfare. And seeing as the constitution regards treaties as law, Bush is in deep legal doodoo.

Sorry not buying it. Yes we do have treaties regarding it. This is a US matter not a world matter though. We will be taking care of these bastards that did what they did in our own judicial system. We don't need some world body telling how we should prosecute our own soldiers.

We never recognized the World Court anyway dumbass!

You will be DEATed with that kind of talk young lady

We are, however, party to most of the treaties making up the body of international humanitarian law and the laws of warfare. And seeing as the constitution regards treaties as law, Bush is in deep legal doodoo.

Sorry not buying it. Yes we do have treaties regarding it. This is a US matter not a world matter though. We will be taking care of these bastards that did what they did in our own judicial system. We don't need some world body telling how we should prosecute our own soldiers.[/quote]

As long as the prosecutions go up to those responsible, the world community need not be involved....

hopefully then we can see Bush get beheaded at the UN after hes convicted

Ah, when the UN kills someone in a cruel and unusual way it is alright, but when a few MPs torture a few prisoners, it is totaly wrong. I'm glad you support Saudi Arabian justice.

hopefully then we can see Bush get beheaded at the UN after hes convicted

Ah, when the UN kills someone in a cruel and unusual way it is alright, but when a few MPs torture a few prisoners, it is totaly wrong. I'm glad you support Saudi Arabian justice.

Bush hasn't committed war crimes. I have to agree that its more liberal bush bashing and I'm getting sick of it.

I don't mind opposite opinions when its done in a polite manner, however all i've heard from the opposite side is that Bush is an Idiot and He's a warmonger etc etc etc. Time to stop. Debate civily without resorting to vehement comments against someone.

DUDE! What the hell? This is just a statement from the NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD those 400 people know a HELL OF A LOT more than you do about what war crimes consist of. AND this is justa link to sadi statement. You should read things before you go around calling them slander. (btw, Bush is an idiot, cite: www.bushisms.com and a warmonger, cite: www.democracynow.com) Learn to read.

Bush hasn't committed war crimes. I have to agree that its more liberal bush bashing and I'm getting sick of it.

I don't mind opposite opinions when its done in a polite manner, however all i've heard from the opposite side is that Bush is an Idiot and He's a warmonger etc etc etc. Time to stop. Debate civily without resorting to vehement comments against someone.

DUDE! What the hell? This is just a statement from the NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD those 400 people know a HELL OF A LOT more than you do about what war crimes consist of. AND this is justa link to sadi statement. You should read things before you go around calling them slander. (btw, Bush is an idiot, cite: www.bushisms.com and a warmonger, cite: www.democracynow.com) Learn to read.

democracynow.com is highly anti-bush, anti-republic. Ofcourse they're going to say that.

And I'm a dudette not a dude.

We are, however, party to most of the treaties making up the body of international humanitarian law and the laws of warfare. And seeing as the constitution regards treaties as law, Bush is in deep legal doodoo.

Sorry not buying it. Yes we do have treaties regarding it. This is a US matter not a world matter though. We will be taking care of these bastards that did what they did in our own judicial system. We don't need some world body telling how we should prosecute our own soldiers.

As long as the prosecutions go up to those responsible, the world community need not be involved....[/quote]

It is. The investigation is still going on and the prosecutions continue. Just have to let this play out.