Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

Hope they bring charges against him for war crimes.

Posted By: (sm) on 2008-12-15
In Reply to: Speaking of shoes, I'd (NOT) like to walk... - Marmann

I wonder if there is any member of the GOP who is able to accept these realities and own up to just a fraction of this despicable behavior? His inevitable legacy as the worst US President of all time does not even begin to address the justice he deserves.


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

We don't bring it up to dismiss Bush, we bring it up...
to show that your criticism holds no water.  It's not a political thing, it's a human thing.  People have shortcomings.  Now, if you want to have a statute of limitations on this thing, then I guess Bush is off the table as it's been about 20 years since his last drink, believe it or not (I know that's your next reply, that he still drinks, which you have no proof of so don't even try it).
What were the charges?

and let's press charges
someone who kills someone who is pregnant for a double homocide but WAIT A MINUTE...... that is not an actual life...
Murder charges for 3 U.S. soldiers..sm
I have mixed feelings about this y'all. There is no doubt in my mind that mental issues are involved given the situation. However, they could have just been following orders. Or, worse just murdered the Iraqis on their own volition and threatened a fellow soldier.

Definitely worth the investigation, which sends the message that we (the US) does not tolerate this type behavior from our soldiers.

---------------------------------
Murder charges for 3 U.S. soldiers
They are accused of killing 3 Iraqis

Julian E. Barnes, Los Angeles Times

Tuesday, June 20, 2006
(06-20) 04:00 PDT Washington -- Three U.S. soldiers have been charged with the premeditated murder of three Iraqi detainees as well as with threatening the life of a fellow soldier who they feared would challenge their accounts of the deaths, military officials said Monday.

The three Americans were identified as staff Sgt. Raymond L. Girouard, Spc. William B. Hunsaker and Pfc. Corey R. Clagett, all members of the 3rd Brigade of the 101st Airborne Division. They were charged with shooting the detainees May 9 during a military operation near Thar Thar Canal in Salahuddin province north of Baghdad.

A murder conviction in the military carries the possibility of the death penalty. The accused soldiers are being held in Kuwait, a Pentagon official said. No personal information was available Monday about the soldiers.

The latest charges come as the military is conducting a separate investigation of the killing of 24 civilians in Haditha in November. Military investigators are examining possible murder charges against a group of Marines for those deaths. In addition, seven other marines and a Navy corpsman are being held in the brig at Camp Pendleton (San Diego County) in connection with the death of an Iraqi man in another town, Hamandiya. Since the start of the Iraq war, the military has brought criminal charges against at least 20 other service members in deaths of Iraqis.

Military officials first mentioned the Salahuddin investigation in a brief news release June 16. But details of how the three soldiers shot the men, near the Muthana Chemical Complex, have remained sketchy. The military has not said why the three Iraqis were being detained.

In addition to murder, the soldiers were charged with conspiracy and with threatening another soldier. Military officials said the accused initially reported they shot the detainees while they were trying to flee.

But that account was contradicted by a junior soldier who saw the shooting. Defense Department charge sheets released Monday identify the object of the threats as Bradley Mason, an Army private first class. The legal papers do not specify whether Mason is the soldier who witnessed the killings.

The accused soldiers are charged with threatening to kill Mason on May 29, as the group was traveling from its own operating base to Camp Speicher, near Tikrit, where the Criminal Investigation Division has an office.

You better not say anything, or I swear I will kill you, Girouard allegedly told Mason, according to charge sheets.

Girouard is accused of threatening to kill Mason six different times in the weeks after the detainees died. Hunsaker is accused of threatening Mason four times, and Clagett twice.

They face a hearing to determine if there is enough evidence for a court-martial. The first proceeding, known as an Article 32 hearing, is likely several weeks away, a military officer said.

The military has not executed anyone since April 1961, but nine people are on death row, including a sergeant in the 101st Airborne who killed two officers and wounded 14 soldiers in Kuwait in March 2003.
No offense taken. The charges she made sm
are based on the evidence, which is overwhelming. Popular Mechanics definitely did not debunk it. I think it shattered her belief system, just like it did mine.
Bush and rape charges....
He was never charged. A very mentally ill woman filed a lawsuit. I outlined it above. The one against Reagan was never a charge either....was in that Kitty Kelley rag of a book. Never substantiated.
Read the transcript of the charges

I know, I know, it's Fox News that most of you don't believe, but this is the whole transcript, 78 pages long. Hope you all are speed readers.


 


http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/rrb_-jh_FINAL_complaint_cover_and_aff.pdf


What about the charges and mysterious death of this woman...sm
Do you not find anything fishy here???

Never heard of rape charges against Reagan or GW. sm
Also, Kaye Summersby, Ike's *supposed* mistress said that they were very close but never consummated anything. 
10 federal employees and 1 w/ criminal charges
over improper relationships between interior dept officials who oversee offshore drilling and oil executives...............Big oil? Offshore drilling? Run afoul of the law?Nahhhhh
Why Bush should be tried for war crimes....(sm)

A very good case I think.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/#28740622


Yup, probably a byproduct of his war crimes!
x
they should be prosecuted for war crimes

Are they above the law and above reproach? 


911 widow charges Bush in RICO suit.sm
911 Victim Ellen Mariani Open Letter To The POTUS
Thursday, 27 November 2003
Press Release: Ellen Mariani Lawsuit
=======================================
Open Letter To The President Of The United States

Mr. Bush,

This ''open letter'' is coming from my heart. I want you to know that I am neither a Republican nor a Democrat and that this is not an attempt to ''bash the Government''.

You Mr. Bush should be held responsible and liable for any and all acts that were committed to aid in any cover up of the tragic events of September 11, 2001. As President you have a duty to protect the American people. On September 11th you did not instruct your staff to issue a nationwide emergency warning/alert to advise us of the attack on America. We had to receive the news of the attacks via the news networks.

In the months leading up to the attacks you were repeatedly advised of a possible attack on American soil. During your daily intelligence briefings you were given information that had been uncovered that the very real possibility existed that certain undesirable elements would use commercial aircraft to destroy certain target buildings. You never warned the American people of this possible threat. Who were you protecting?

When you took no responsibility towards protecting the general public from the possibility of attack, you were certainly not upholding the oath you spoke when you took office. In that oath you pledged to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America.

On the morning of the attack, you and members of your staff were fully aware of the unfolding events yet you chose to continue on to the Emma E. Booker Elementary School to proceed with a scheduled event and photo op. While our nation was under attack you did not appear to blink an eye or shed a tear. You continued on as if everything was business as usual.

In the days following the attacks all air traffic was grounded and Americans, including myself, were stranded wherever they had been when the flight ban was imposed. I was stranded at Midway Airport in Chicago, unable to continue on to California for my daughter's wedding. Imagine my surprise when I later found out that during this no fly period a number of people were flown out of the country on a 747 with Arabic lettering on the fuselage. None of these people were interviewed or questioned by any local, State or Federal agencies. Why were they allowed to leave and who exactly was on that flight. We know for a fact that some of the people on the flight were members of (or related to) the royal family of Saudi Arabia and members of the Bin Laden family. Were these people allowed to leave because of the long-standing relationships that your family has with both families?

It is my belief that you intentionally allowed 9/11 to happen to gather public support for a war on terrorism. These wars, in Afghanistan and Iraq, have not accomplished what you stated were your goals. Why have you not captured Osama Bin Laden? Where are Saddam's weapons of mass destruction? All that has happened is a bill that is passed before Congress for 87 billion dollars to rebuild what you ordered blown to bits. As an American who lost a loved one in the war on terror I do pray and support our troops who were sent to Afghanistan and Iraq by you. These troops have and will continue to die for your lies. As an American I can make this statement as it appears that associates of your family may stand to prosper from the rebuilding of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Mr. Bush the time has come for you to stop your control over us. Stop blocking the release of certain evidence and documents that were discovered by the 9/11 Investigation Commission if you have nothing to hide proving you did not fail to act and prevent the attacks of 9/11. Your reason for not releasing this material is that it is a matter of national security. When in fact I believe that it is your personal credibility/security that you are concerned with. You do not want the public to know the full extent of your responsibility and involvement.

After 9/11 the Patriot Act and Homeland Security Act were passed. Both of these allow the government to tap your telephone, search your home, and seize whatever they feel they need to do on a whim. They can do this without a judge's review or a warrant. I feel that this is in direct conflict with our rights as stated in the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

We the families of 9/11 victims need to have answers to the following questions:

1. Why were 29 pages of the 9/11committee report personally censored at your request?

2. Where are the black boxes from Flight 11 and Flight 175?

3. Where are the voice recorders from Flight 11 and Flight 175?

4. Why can't we gain access to the complete air traffic control records for Flight 11 and Flight 175?

5. Where are the airport surveillance tapes that show the passengers boarding the doomed flights?

6. When will complete passenger lists for all of the flights be released?

7. Why did your brother Jeb (the Governor of Florida) go to the offices of the Hoffman Aviation School and order that flight records and files be removed? These files were then put on a C130 government cargo plane and flown out of the country. Where were they taken and who ordered it done?

It has been over two years since hundreds of our lost loved ones remains have still yet to be identified and their remains placed in a landfill at Fresh Kill. We want our heroes brought back and given a public and proud resting place where we all can pay our respects and honor them. These innocent people never had a chance as they were taken from us on that sad September Day.

In the court of public opinion Mr. Bush, your lies are being uncovered each day. My husband, all of the other victims and their families and our nation as a whole, has been victimized by your failed leadership prior to and after 9/11!

I will prove this in a court of law!

Ellen M. Mariani ###


And especially used for those who show no remorse for these crimes.

B Clinton was not impeached for sex crimes
To say he was impeached for "sex crimes" does the justice system a dishonor and is completely false. It also implies that he didn't do anything wrong and he was just impeached for having an affair (it tries to make it sound like he did nothing wrong and everyone was after him).
For all those who have forgotten, he was impeached for perjury, obstruction of justice, and abuse of power.
First there was travelgate, next was Vince Foster being shot then investigators being denied access to Foster's office however Clinton's aides entered within hours after he was shot and documents were removed. Then there was James & Susan McDougal, failed loans, alleged legal activities at Madison Guarantee, Webb Hubbell, Vernon Jordan, Paula Jones, Monica Lewinsky (which led to his lies) oh yes, and when asked why he had the affair he said "because I could" (not because I love her or even because I care for her or even because she's hot - no, "because I could?"). Then his lies led to Hillary lying and AL Gore lying. Then Bill lying more "That depends on what the meaning of is is", etc, etc. There were 11 impeachable offenses against Bill Clinton. That is Eleven of them. So to just say he was impeached for sex crimes is a false statement and does a disservice to the judicial system. This was one of the worst presidents (imo) and he was disgraced the office of president. Richard Nixon did not even have as many articles to be impeached for. The worst offense however was that he was not removed from office.
Petition for Bush War Crimes
We the undersigned citizens of the United States hereby formally petition you to appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate and prosecute any and all government officials who have participated in War Crimes.

These crimes are being euphemistically referred to as "abusive interrogation techniques" by such respected figures as Senator John McCain. These are euphemisms for torture. Torture is a War Crime. Waterboarding is a War Crime. The CIA has admitted waterboarding detainees. Recently, Vice President Cheney has brazenly admitted authorizing the program that led to waterboarding, other forms of torture too numerous to list, and ultimately, the deaths by homicide of detainees.

As Major General Antonio Taguba, the Army general who led the investigation into prisoner abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison has stated:

"After years of disclosures by government investigations, media accounts and reports from human rights organizations, there is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes. The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account."

The Washington Post recently summarized the Senate Armed Services Committee Report on detainee treatment thusly:

A bipartisan panel of senators has concluded that former defense secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and other top Bush administration officials bear direct responsibility for the harsh treatment of detainees at Guantanamo Bay, and that their decisions led to more serious abuses in Iraq and elsewhere.

We the undersigned citizens demand a full and thorough investigation immediately upon your taking office. This investigation should be pursued no matter where it may lead and no matter what the political implications may be. To this end, we remind you that you work not on behalf of or for the President or the Congress, but for the People of the United States of America and for Justice itself.

The United States is a representative democracy. The actions of our government officials are done in the name of its citizens. War Crimes have been committed in our name. Torture has been done in our name. The only way to clear our name of War Crimes is to repudiate them through the aggressive prosecution of each and every person involved to the full extent of the law through the appointment of a Special Prosecutor.


Yes, BASH BUSH - he should be tried for war crimes!!
He put us in this mess - the SOB should be tried for treason, corruption and war crimes. Oh wait, he probably has a layer of insulation between him and Scooter Libby. Huh.
"War crimes will be prosecuted"...(sm)

Guess who said that? 


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/#30464632


HATE CRIMES BILL......

The Hate Crimes Bill S.909 (HR1913) will make 30 sexual orientations federally-protected.   Now, since so many think that ONLY has to do with "protection" of homosexuals, then you are fooling yourself.  It's time you get involved in your country.  Now read this carefully and for those that think Obama is such a saint, tell me why he would support this bill..... Please read ALL before you start bashing!!  Sad to think our president would approve of such perversion....


Among those sexual orientations being protected by S.909 (and HR1913) are these:

Apotemnophilia - sexual arousal associated with the stump(s) of an Amputee
Asphyxophilia - sexual gratification derived from activities that involve oxygen deprivation through hanging, strangulation, or other means
Autogynephilia - the sexual arousal of a man by his own perception of himself as a woman or dressed as a woman
Bisexual - the capacity to feel erotic attraction toward, or to engage in sexual interaction with, both males and females
Coprophilia - sexual arousal associated with feces
Exhibitionism - the act of exposing one’s genitals to an unwilling observer to obtain sexual gratification
Fetishism/Sexual Fetishism - obtaining sexual excitement primarily or exclusively from an inanimate object or a particular part of the body
Frotteurism - approaching an unknown woman from the rear and pressing or rubbing the penis against her buttocks
Heterosexuality - the universal norm of sexuality with those of the opposite sex
Homosexual/Gay/Lesbian - people who form sexual relationships primarily or exclusively with members of their own gender
Gender Identity Disorder - a strong and persistent cross-gender identification, which is the desire to be, or the insistence that one is, or the other sex, "along with" persistent discomfort about one’s assigned sex or a sense of the inappropriateness in the gender role of that sex
Gerontosexuality - distinct preference for sexual relationships primarily or exclusively with an elderly partner
Incest - sex with a sibling or parent
Kleptophilia - obtaining sexual excitement from stealing
Klismaphilia - erotic pleasure derived from enemas
Necrophilia - sexual arousal and/or activity with a corpse
Partialism - A fetish in which a person is sexually attracted to a specific body part exclusive of the person
Pedophilia - Sexual activity with a prepubescent child (generally age 13 years or younger). The individual with pedophilia must be age 16 years or older and at least 5 years older than the child. For individuals in late adolescence with pedophilia, no precise age difference is specified, and clinical judgment must be used; both the sexual maturity of the child and the age difference must be taken into account; the adult may be sexually attracted to opposite sex, same sex, or prefer either
Prostitution - the act or practice of offering sexual stimulation or intercourse for money
Sexual Masochism - obtaining sexual gratification by being subjected to pain or humiliation
Sexual Sadism - the intentional infliction of pain or humiliation on another person in order to achieve sexual excitement
Telephone Scatalogia - sexual arousal associated with making or receiving obscene phone calls
Toucherism - characterized by a strong desire to touch the breast or genitals of an unknown woman without her consent; often occurs in conjunction with other paraphilia
Transgenderism - an umbrella term referring to and/or covering transvestitism, drag queen/king, and transsexualism
Transsexual - a person whose gender identity is different from his or her anatomical gender
Transvestite - a person who is sexually stimulated or gratified by wearing the clothes of the other gender
Transvestic Fetishism - intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving cross-dressing
Urophilia - sexual arousal associated with urine
Voyeurism - obtaining sexual arousal by observing people without their consent when they are undressed or engaged in sexual activity
Zoophilia/Bestiality - engaging in sexual activity with animals

To protect a "sexual orientation" under S.909 (and HR1913) - while leaving that term undefined -- is to protect this whole range of bizarre sexual behaviors. It is to normalize by federal law what are still considered to be mental disorders (paraphilias) by the American Psychiatric Association.



     



     


    Hate crimes bill
    I haven't had time to read your link yet but just wanted to interject an opinion from someone effected by the bill. I have seen state level hate crime legislation in action. What I've seen happen is that a capital crime is reduced, basically, to a crime of passion offense and punished as a 2nd degree offense instead of capital murder (big difference between 12-20 and life). For this reason, I've been totally against the hate crimes bill. While gay hysteria exists in crimes against us, I don't think it should be able to be used as a defense in order to get reduced sentences. Friends have tried to explain that the hate crimes bills were created to try to prevent that from happening but I have not seen that. Perhaps I'm missing something.
    Probably both. See posts above about hate crimes

    //


    Germany seek charges against Rumsfeld for prison abuse sm

    Friday, Nov. 10, 2006
    Exclusive: Charges Sought Against Rumsfeld Over Prison Abuse
    A lawsuit in Germany will seek a criminal prosecution of the outgoing Defense Secretary and other U.S. officials for their alleged role in abuses at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo


    Just days after his resignation, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is about to face more repercussions for his involvement in the troubled wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. New legal documents, to be filed next week with Germany's top prosecutor, will seek a criminal investigation and prosecution of Rumsfeld, along with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, former CIA director George Tenet and other senior U.S. civilian and military officers, for their alleged roles in abuses committed at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison and at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

    The plaintiffs in the case include 11 Iraqis who were prisoners at Abu Ghraib, as well as Mohammad al-Qahtani, a Saudi held at Guantanamo, whom the U.S. has identified as the so-called 20th hijacker and a would-be participant in the 9/11 hijackings. As TIME first reported in June 2005, Qahtani underwent a special interrogation plan, personally approved by Rumsfeld, which the U.S. says produced valuable intelligence. But to obtain it, according to the log of his interrogation and government reports, Qahtani was subjected to forced nudity, sexual humiliation, religious humiliation, prolonged stress positions, sleep deprivation and other controversial interrogation techniques.

    Lawyers for the plaintiffs say that one of the witnesses who will testify on their behalf is former Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, the one-time commander of all U.S. military prisons in Iraq. Karpinski — who the lawyers say will be in Germany next week to publicly address her accusations in the case — has issued a written statement to accompany the legal filing, which says, in part: It was clear the knowledge and responsibility [for what happened at Abu Ghraib] goes all the way to the top of the chain of command to the Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld .

    A spokesperson for the Pentagon told TIME there would be no comment since the case has not yet been filed.

    Along with Rumsfeld, Gonzales and Tenet, the other defendants in the case are Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence Stephen Cambone; former assistant attorney general Jay Bybee; former deputy assisant attorney general John Yoo; General Counsel for the Department of Defense William James Haynes II; and David S. Addington, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff. Senior military officers named in the filing are General Ricardo Sanchez, the former top Army official in Iraq; Gen. Geoffrey Miller, the former commander of Guantanamo; senior Iraq commander, Major General Walter Wojdakowski; and Col. Thomas Pappas, the one-time head of military intelligence at Abu Ghraib.

    Germany was chosen for the court filing because German law provides universal jurisdiction allowing for the prosecution of war crimes and related offenses that take place anywhere in the world. Indeed, a similar, but narrower, legal action was brought in Germany in 2004, which also sought the prosecution of Rumsfeld. The case provoked an angry response from Pentagon, and Rumsfeld himself was reportedly upset. Rumsfeld's spokesman at the time, Lawrence DiRita, called the case a a big, big problem. U.S. officials made clear the case could adversely impact U.S.-Germany relations, and Rumsfeld indicated he would not attend a major security conference in Munich, where he was scheduled to be the keynote speaker, unless Germany disposed of the case. The day before the conference, a German prosecutor announced he would not pursue the matter, saying there was no indication that U.S. authorities and courts would not deal with allegations in the complaint.

    In bringing the new case, however, the plaintiffs argue that circumstances have changed in two important ways. Rumsfeld's resignation, they say, means that the former Defense Secretary will lose the legal immunity usually accorded high government officials. Moreover, the plaintiffs argue that the German prosecutor's reasoning for rejecting the previous case — that U.S. authorities were dealing with the issue — has been proven wrong.

    The utter and complete failure of U.S. authorities to take any action to investigate high-level involvement in the torture program could not be clearer, says Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, a U.S.-based non-profit helping to bring the legal action in Germany. He also notes that the Military Commissions Act, a law passed by Congress earlier this year, effectively blocks prosecution in the U.S. of those involved in detention and interrogation abuses of foreigners held abroad in American custody going to back to Sept. 11, 2001. As a result, Ratner contends, the legal arguments underlying the German prosecutor's previous inaction no longer hold up.

    Whatever the legal merits of the case, it is the latest example of efforts in Western Europe by critics of U.S. tactics in the war on terror to call those involved to account in court. In Germany, investigations are under way in parliament concerning cooperation between the CIA and German intelligence on rendition — the kidnapping of suspected terrorists and their removal to third countries for interrogation. Other legal inquiries involving rendition are under way in both Italy and Spain.

    U.S. officials have long feared that legal proceedings against war criminals could be used to settle political scores. In 1998, for example, former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet — whose military coup was supported by the Nixon administration — was arrested in the U.K. and held for 16 months in an extradition battle led by a Spanish magistrate seeking to charge him with war crimes. He was ultimately released and returned to Chile. More recently, a Belgian court tried to bring charges against then Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon for alleged crimes against Palestinians.

    For its part, the Bush Administration has rejected adherence to the International Criminal Court (ICC) on grounds that it could be used to unjustly prosecute U.S. officials. The ICC is the first permanent tribunal established to prosecute war crimes, genocide and other crimes against humanity.


    Abuse of Power charges stick to Palin like glue.

    So, what goes around comes around.  After a hard week out on that campaign trail attacking Obama right, left and center, seems Sarah has a character issue of her own now to deal with.  Oops!   


    Baby daddy's mommy arrested on drug charges

    I heard today Palin is responding to Levi's charges
    by throwing the dirt back at him. I say that is how every woman her age should behave, right? Tit for tat.
    If Bush, etc were not guilty, why do they need a War Crimes Act protection? sm
    Why would you need to seek protection if your not ALREADY sure you are guilty?

    They must be scared. Could charges be just around the corner? I am going to assume it isn't just about authorizing humiliating and degrading treatment of detainees, this also about 911/false-flag ops, Wanta's fund and many other charges they are soon to face.


    Bush's Answer? Change the War Crimes Act!

    August 29, 2006


    Retroactive Laws Invoked to Protect Administration Officials from War Crimes Prosecution


    Bush Turns His Terror War on the Homeland


    By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS


    When I was a kid John Wayne war movies gave us the message that America was the good guy, the white hat that fought the villain.
    Alas, today the US and its last remaining non-coerced ally, Israel, are almost universally regarded as the bad guys over whom John Wayne would triumph. Today the US and Israel are seen throughout the world as war criminal states.


    On August 23 the BBC reported that Amnesty International has brought war crimes charges against Israel for deliberately targeting civilians and civilian infrastructure as an integral part of Israel's strategy in its recent invasion of Lebanon.


    Israel claims that its aggression was self-defense to dislodge Hezbollah from southern Lebanon. Yet, Israel bombed residential communities all over Lebanon, even Christian communities in the north in which no Hezbollah could possibly have been present.


    United Nations spokesman Jean Fabre reported that Israel's attack on civilian infrastructure annihilated Lebanon's development: Fifteen years of work have been wiped out in a month.


    Israel maintains that this massive destruction was unintended collateral damage.


    President Bush maintains that Israel has a right to protect itself by destroying Lebanon.


    Bush blocked the attempt to stop Israel's aggression and is, thereby, equally responsible for the war crimes. Indeed, a number of reports claim that Bush instigated the Israeli aggression against Lebanon.


    Bush has other war crime problems. Benjamin Ferenccz, a chief prosecutor of Nazi war crimes at Nuremberg, recently said that President Bush should be tried as a war criminal side by side with Saddam Hussein for starting aggressive wars, Hussein for his 1990 invasion of Kuwait and Bush for his 2003 invasion of Iraq.


    Under the Nuremberg standard, Bush is definitely a war criminal. The US Supreme Court also exposed Bush to war crime charges under both the US War Crimes Act of 1996 and the Geneva Conventions when the Court ruled in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld against the Bush administration's military tribunals and inhumane treatment of detainees.


    President Bush and his Attorney General agree that under existing laws and treaties Bush is a war criminal together with many members of his government. To make his war crimes legal after the fact, Bush has instructed the Justice (sic) Department to draft changes to the War Crimes Act and to US treaty obligations under the Geneva Conventions.


    One of Bush's changes would deny protection of the Geneva Conventions to anyone in any American court.


    Bush's other change would protect from prosecution any US government official or military personnel guilty of violating Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. Article 3 prohibits at any time and in any place whatsoever outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment. As civil libertarian Nat Hentoff observes, this change would also undo Senator John McCain's amendment against torture.


    Eugene Fidell, president of the National Institute of Military Justice says that Bush's changes immunize past crimes.


    Under the US Constitution and US legal tradition, retroactive law is impermissible. What do Americans think of their President's attempts to immunize himself, his government, CIA operatives, military personnel and civilian contractors from war crimes?


    Apparently, the self-righteous morally superior American Christian public could care less. The Republican controlled House and Senate, which long ago traded integrity for power, are working to pass Bush's changes prior to the mid-term elections in the event the Republicans fail to steal three elections in a row and Democrats win control of the House or Senate.


    Meanwhile, the illegal war in Iraq, based entirely on Bush administration lies, grinds on, murdering and maiming ever more people. According to the latest administration estimate, the pointless killing will go on for another 10-15 years.


    Trouble is, there are no US troops to carry on the war. The lack of cannon fodder forces the Bush administration to resort to ever more desperate measures. The latest is the involuntary recall of thousands of Marines from the inactive reserves to active duty. Many attentive people regard this desperate measure as a sign that the military draft will be reinstated.


    According to President Bush, the US will lose the war on terror unless the US succeeds in defeating the Iraqi terrorists by establishing democracy in Iraq. Of course, insurgents resisting occupation are not terrorists, and there were no insurgents or terrorists in Iraq until Bush invaded.


    Bush's unjustified invasion of Iraq and his support for Israeli aggression have done more to create terrorism in the Muslim world than Osama bin Laden could hope for. The longer Bush occupies Iraq and the more he tries to extend US/Israeli hegemony in the Middle East, the more terrorism the world will suffer.


    Bush and the Zionist/neocon ideology that holds him captive are the greatest 21st century threats to peace and stability. The neoconized Bush regime invented the war on terror, lost it, and now is bringing terror home to the American people.


    Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at: paulcraigroberts@yahoo.com


    OBAMA has already put in motion AND END TO BUSH'S WAR CRIMES sm
    Bush committed war crimes and Obama on day one of his presidency has already put in place measures to stop the crimes. Be proud because these are issues that affect human rights for all of us.
    Read up, do your research, see what Amnesty International says... be PROUD now instead of ashamed to be an American! We are on the road to recovery, albeit a long road but at least Obama has us on track.
    So glad we have people against hate crimes now
    and anyone who thinks they can do as the KKK did years ago will have other repercussions. People are not putting up with that crap anymore- I know you might have some "groups" who talk big but as far as the hate crimes done in the past such as lynchings, beatings, etc. and people afraid to take action and turning their heads- those hateful, terrible things that over ran our country in the past are just that, things of the past.
    Bristol's future MIL arrested on 6 counts of felony drug charges.
    Palins can't seem to catch a break this past week. 
    Bush's war crimes are being corrected by the Wonderful BARACK!!!
    Republicans recoil at the thought of us preserving human rights around the world.

    I haven't reviewed the Hate Crimes bill....... sm
    but I believe it is a load of horse manure. Murder, rape, etc., are hateful crimes and should be punished to the full extent of the law regardless of a victim's sexual orientation. A human being is a human being.

    However, I believe that this bill pertains to more than just murder. It apparently protects persons with various sexual orientation from being spoken against in any way. A good example would be the thread below concerning gay marriage. Heterosexuals would or could be prosecuted for speaking out against same sex marriage. Preachers could be prosecuted for teaching what the Bible says in church if it speaks against a protected group's characteristics. At least, that is my understanding of the bill.

    The fact that Obama is standing, pen in hand, ready to sign this bill speaks volumes about him and his agenda. If passed, I shudder to think what will become of America. Prostitutes on every corner, flashers running loose in the parks where our children play, pedophiles allowed in schools and daycare where young children could fall prey to their lasciviousness.

    But, hey, it does also protect heterosexuals! LOL
    Obama is letting them drop charges against terrorists for this horrible sick crime???

    What orifice did you pull this out of?


    Federal Grand Jury Digging Deep into Bush Crimes
    PRESIDENT INDICTEDFEDERAL GRAND JURY DIGGING DEEP INTO BUSH CRIMES
    By Greg SzymanskiA federal whistleblower close to the Chicago federal grand jury probe into perjury and obstruction charges against President Bush and others said indictments of top officials were handed down this week. A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office of the Northern District of Illinois, however, refused to confirm or deny the source’s account.

    “We are not talking about any aspect of this case, and our office is not commenting on anything regarding the investigation at this time,” said Randall Sanborn from the office of U.S. federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, the attorney conducting the grand jury probe into whether Bush and others in his administration violated federal law in a number of sensitive areas, including leaking the name of a CIA operative to the media.

    In December 2003, Fitzgerald was named special counsel to investigate the alleged disclosure of Valerie Plame’s name to several mainstream columnists, but the present grand jury probe has expanded to include widereaching allegations of criminal activity as new information has surfaced.

    Although the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Chicago is staying silent, it is well known that Fitzgerald is digging deep into an assortment of serious improprieties among many Bush administration figures, based, in part, on subpoenaed testimony provided by former Secretary of State Colin Powell.

    According to whistleblower Tom Heneghen, who recently reported on truthradio.com, Powell testified before the citizen grand jury that Bush had taken the United States to war based on lies, which is a capital crime involving treason under the U.S. Code. “Regarding the Powell testimony, there is no comment,” said Sanborn.

    However, sources close to the federal grade jury probe also allegedly told Heneghen a host of administration figures under Bush were indicted, including Vice President Richard Cheney, Chief of Staff Andrew Card, Cheney Chief of Staff I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, former Attorney General John Ashcroft, imprisoned New York Times reporter Judith Miller and former Cheney advisor Mary Matalin. Heneghen, unavailable for comment, also allegedly told sources White House advisor Karl Rove was indicted for perjury in a major document shredding operation cover-up.

    In recent weeks, there has been much controversy over Fitzgerald’s wide-reaching probe, which is extending far beyond the Bush administration to include what some have called “a wholesale cleansing” of a crimeladen White House and Congress.

    Fitzgerald’s investigation is said to be also centered on members of the 9-11 Commission, members on both sides of the aisle in the House and Senate and also select high-powered members of the media.

    Needless to say, administration officials are “fighting mad” with Fitzgerald. Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts is trying to derail Fitzgerald’s probe by calling him to testify before the Senate regarding his true motives behind the investigation.

    Political observers are now wondering whether administration-friendly Republican legislators, some under investigation themselves, are conspiring like President Nixon did in Watergate with Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox in an attempt to shield the Bush administration from prosecution.

    In late July, reports about the recent bomb scare in the subway under the congressional offices at the Dirksen Building—coincidently near where Fitzgerald was holding his grand jury hearings—raised questions as to whether government operatives were sending the zealous prosecutor a “warning message” that he was entering dangerous waters with his investigation.

    The bomb scare was reported to local police late Monday afternoon, July 18, causing the subway to be evacuated for approximately 45 minutes while bomb sniffing dogs and SWAT team members searched for what was reported to be “a suspicious package” left on one of the subway cars.

    Fitzgerald began serving as the U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Illinois in September 2001. He was initially appointed on an interim basis by former Attorney General Ashcroft before being nominated by Bush.

    The Senate confirmed his nomination by unanimous consent in October 2001. In December 2003, he was named special counsel to investigate the Plame case. Based on the testimony of ABC sources in late July, it appears that at least two close associates of Rove testified before the grand jury. One was Susan Ralston, a longtime associate of Rove and considered to be his right hand.

    The other was “Izzy” Hernandez, regarded as Rove’s left hand and now a top official in the Commerce Department.(Issue #33, August 15, 2005)

    poor black men in jail for drug crimes while his wife steals from a medical charity. nm
    nm
    Good for Joe! I hope so. And I hope he sues...
    the governor of the state of Ohio from now to next week. He should. They BIG time violated his civil rights. If this situation was reversed and he was a Dem who had asked McCain a question and a state had had him investigated, the ACLU would be all over this like ugly on an ape. Liberals only care about other liberals...they could care LESS what happens to conservatives. But yeah, they are all about civil liberties. Geez. Pull the other leg awhile.
    good grief, forget the clothes, the woman charges everthing to Alaska, plane tickets, hotel rooms, l
    x
    To bring in an oil well........ sm
    takes about 10 to 14 days, depending on the area being drilled.  This is for a land rig, not an off-shore rig.  I live in a very oil and gas rich area of the country and I see them going up and coming down in a matter of days. 
    You know better than to bring
    the Big JC into conversations on this board.  Liberal nut jobs will start screaming about how church and government should be separate and how dare we force our religion on them.  Next we will go into staying out of women's uteruses and allow the murder of unborn children but OMG.....don't even think about shooting wolves in Alaska as a predator control program because that is just horrible!!! 
    McCain made tougher laws for drug crimes. It's not just rich and special treatment he is putting
    nm
    Other addicted Americans aren't putting people in jail or ripping apart families for drug crimes.
    nm
    Ill go there this weekend and bring
    you back some posts. I just went there once and could not stomach it. I havent checked out the Dem underground board yet.
    sally bring your

    post regarding Mccain's lack of support for troops up the top.  It is highly relevant and I think it is buried in the muck and name-calling below.


     


    Bring on the Miracle Gro. lol. nm
    nm
    Don't bring a bat to a gunfight.
    /
    Aaah, you want to bring it up here....okay
    You seemed to have lived a very privileged life but
    my family wasn't privileged. We did for ourselves and never felt we were better than others as your family did. We didn't use others to do our work for us. My father, mother, grandfather and grandmother worked side by side with blacks, doing the same jobs they did in factories, in the fields, you name it. I was never raised to believe I was better than others as you were. You obviusly didn't despise your family's racism too much. You still used your nanny, maids, whatever you want to call them and I'm sure you didn't wait on yourself hand and foot. So please don't sit there and sound all sanctimonious about your life. I actually lived life growing up and knew what it was to not be raised to think I was better than everyone else. I never looked at black people as someone who should "do our work" for us as you did. Perhaps you would know best about prejudice, bigotry and racism, since you were so established in a family that did. What I do know is the black people that lived close to us, and there were many, worked side by side with my family members, all being paid the same and all sweating through the summer sun working until dark to plant crops and harvest them together. My family picked cotton out in the blazing summer heat side by side with blacks as well. Did yours? Of course not.

    So, until YOU'VE actually lived and worked for REAL with those you want to keep down and feel so sorry for, you need to learn to keep your mouth shut.

    Nobody needs your kind trying to sound so self righteous when all you're really trying to do is ease your mind and your guilt.

    Don't make that my issue.
    You sound like a self-righteous hypocrit.


    For Obama also to bring in that Rev?
    "Black will not be asked to sit in back.... brown will be asked to stick around.... and WHITE will embrace what is right".     --I am already hearing from friends who are so disappointed in that. Why do that?  That does not unite anyone....only ticks off white people who have never been racists, but may be assumed to be simply for being white. Obama should have NEVER allowed this kind of statement. I do not treat any color differently than myself. I have a Chinese friend, a black friend, a Mexican friend. When we have all come so far, to dig up the past in this way is not good. I have even experienced reverse racism when trying to get a job, yet I just deal with it. If Obama is a uniter, he needs to stop this reminder of race and act as if we are all the same color.
    I bring the popcorn!!
    Oh, the mental picture I get from that one!!
    if in doubt..bring up an old GT post
    MT, I have never posted on the conservative board..because the responses would boil my blood.  I dont know what post you are talking about..However, reading these posts this morning, one of your conservative *friends* posted about hoarding to American Woman, how she hoards information and then blasts away with old information from old posts..I have to tell ya, I laughed at that post cause, OMG, you guys, from the conservative board, have done nothing but bring up old posts that either I have posted or have been attributed to me, over and over and over and over and over and over..**If it doubt with nothing to say, bring up an old GT post**,
    I figured that'd bring out the first-graders:)
    Nice to know I'm not yet over-estimating the self-flagellating opposition.