War crimes are not exclusive to the military and are often perpetrated through command from the political top down. Many Nazis were prosecuted following WWII that never pulled a trigger or gassed an individual, yet sent orders and directives aimed at genocide, torture and or illegal mass executions. FULL ARTICLE
|
 |
25 comments ↓
If criminals like Bush and Cheney aren’t prosecuted, doesn’t that just give the green light to future (and current) presidents to do the same or worse?
Precedents are part of the American fabric once they are set they become tradition or custom and the Bush criminals have set a new low for public servants. And we may see more crime in our name under some other future executive that will say it is legal because the Bush bunch were allowed this leeway. Unless they are prosecuted we have a new low in precedent…
I thought this was worth repeating:
“As the Teflon president and his gang of NeoCons rides away into the sunset, laughing and back-slapping about the shaft they slammed into the gut of America, those of us that see their crimes, cringe in our American souls. ”
You know, this isn’t the first post I’ve seen on pressing for charges against the former president. I’m curious on what the holdup is? Why are there so many blogs stating to press charges and no one is pressing charges? Can’t any individual or group press a charge or file a complaint in a federal court? If these people believe in it so much, then why don’t they just do it?
Ben, have you ever tried to file charges against a President? Who would listen to you? I mean, in reality, what would be the process, in your mind?
Actually Ben is on target, several groups are pursuing Bush prosecution such as Massachusetts law school Dean Lawrence Velvel. He will chair a Steering Committee to pursue the prosecution for war crimes of President Bush and culpable high-ranking aides after they leave office Jan. 20th in other words Now…
Per Dave’s Question, I’ve never filed charges against anyone. All I know is that anyone or any group can if they really want to. To me, there are talkers and doers. These sites seem to be full of talkers, but no one is following through with the actions. Honestly, I’d love to see him charged. I just find it hard to believe that with all the activists on these sites, that they can’t get together and put together a concerted effort (of time, money, and knowledge) to get it accomplished. Good to hear that there is at least one person at UMass going forward. Wish there was more… He can’t do it alone…
Barker, you are on target. Prosecution is of the utmost importance. Can we make it happen? Probably no. But I do think there is a way to force the hand of the Republicans who are the most visible in their efforts to defend their leader for the past eight years.
Surely most of you know what I have been advocating. Shunning the Republican Party out of existence. I do think this is the very best approach that an ordinary citizen like me can do. No one can stop me from doing it, it doesn’t cost a thing, and the result, I think, if the majority of people would join in, would be tremendous. It would show the World that the people of America have a conscious and it would put the Democratic Party on notice that protecting your own, when criminal activity is occurring, is itself a crime. A crime committed by immoral people. A crime that moral people won’t put up with.
Here’s my question – if anyone can simply file charges against the former president, and it’s just so easy, why isn’t Velvel filing the charges already? Why is he just “working” on it?
And Ben, if you believe it to be so easy and so necessary, why aren’t you doing it?
Cliff I like the shunning of the Republicans, great idea. Not sure we could get enough shunning people to shun them as many die hard Republicans think Bush is great. Thats the 27% approval rating he left with. Yet surely many people see the devastation of the economy he left behind.
Dave, it takes time to gather exploratory evidence and they only started recently, although others besides Velvel are also pursuing this avenue, if enough people work on it perhaps it may happen.
“Famed Prosecutor” Vincent Bugliosi made the case (and quite detailed, too) in his recent book, The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder. The question, though, I think is quite simple – how does an ordinary citizen file charges….what’s the process?
Per Dave’s comment. I never said it was easy. Hey, I’m just a student that works retail part-time to pay for school. I’m not a lawyer. I don’t have the time and basically broke.
But, I would think that you activist people as a group – could AND SHOULD – use your connections to pool money together, find like-minded lawyer(s), law firm(s), or non-profit group(s), that knows how to file complaints, and has knowledge in this process in particular, and just get it done!
Hey, I’d be willing to pitch in some bucks – whatever little I can. Pool us all together and we’d have some dough to play with.
Per Michael’s comment, sounds like there is some type of blueprint out there. How about organizing and acting on it?
The ACLU files complaints in federal court all the time, for example. There has to be some organizing effort other than just yippin’ about it. Otherwise, we’re just blowing steam and this will never happen… If you know of one – or want to start one – I’m in!
Worst of all – all of the upcoming presidents currently think they have free reign and never have to worry about doing bad things. Doing something now, on something so darn obvious, would set a huge precedent. We gotta do something…
I’m just saying… We shouldn’t be complaining if we aren’t willing to do anything ourselves.
Good article…and speaking of the ACLU…why is it they will fight me tooth and nail to keep me from praying ( if i chose to do so) to a God, and spend untold funds in that effort but when we, the peoples rights to justice as in this case of war crimes goes…they get “selectively deaf” or should i be naked with a check say for 200,00.00 grand in my teeth…? think that might help ?
To think that a branch of the government is going to punish another branch of the government – even former members – is completely delusional.
That would require the current holders of power to admit that the previous ones exercised powers that were against the law……and by doing so they’d take these powers away from themselves.
How many politicians and bureaucrats do we have in DC that actually want to reduce their own power? Ron Paul…..and……..hmmmmmm …no one else!
Wow Spoon, so you think Obama and all the other future presidents want to have the power to torture, create secret prisons, drop habeas corpus, and lose billions of cash in the desert, plus give weapons to the enemy and kill indiscriminately? Or perhaps you think they want to hold the power to start wars without sound reason? If you think that sir, I guess in your eyes we are all crap each and every human being. And perhaps it is that sort of power we all seek hey?
I think Spoonerite actually has a bit of a point on this. We have to recognize that there’s always going to be “evil” people out there that want to take advantage of others, or rise to positions that allow them to dominate other people.
As long as government offers a nice, safe place for people who lust for power – then they’re going to continue gravitating towards it.
So, while I do believe the type who is interested in having “the power to torture, create secret prisons, drop habeas corpus, and lose billions of cash in the desert, plus give weapons to the enemy and kill indiscriminately” are in a tiny minority in society, it’s just those people who want to be politicians. They’re not interested in desk jobs, or being homemakers, or anything. Those that want power and look to abuse it are drawn to positions in life where they can achieve those things.
It seems to be the natural state of things, in my opinion.
Without ranting on forever on this, I’ll sum it up by saying that there are some good people who have a drive to get in to these positions, but it’s dangerous to allow too much power in the hands of too few people whether they’re good or not. Why? Because eventually the “bad” ones will get in and use that power against you.
This is why prosecution against people like Bush and Cheney is an absolute must. I don’t expect it to happen from the inside, but I hope it will. And, if anyone could explain the process for a citizen to file charges, I’d really be interested in knowing…..
Of course there are people like that, Bush is one…
My point was to show that we must punish and reveal the crimes.
In the above definition by Mr Spoon there are no public servants just sleazy wannabees and power hungry maniacs.
True it takes ego to be a leader but this is base and sick to want the power to be like Hitler.
And the entire point of the piece was to expose the need to punish those that seize such illegal power.
Mr. Spoon claims it will not be done because the leaders want to retain said power. I say it will not be done because the leadership does not want to face the problem. Which is it, they are certainly not the same thing.
Did we allow the Nazis to keep Hitler’s power?
Did the Germans that followed him want the rights to kill Jews again?
No, because humans understand that some powers must be curtailed. If his point was the one Michael mentions {the same as the articles points out} than why say it will never happen due to love of power?
He says it will not happen from ignoring it or apathy, as the piece indicates, but because they want to retain this ugly power. The article maintained it was lack of concern or avoiding the truth that these culprits will not be prosecuted.
But just as Hitler lost that ugly power and the next leaders understood this was a power they cannot hold; it died on the vine with Hitler.
Yet to suggest that Obama and our future leaders will not bring Bush to justice due to their desire to retain illegal powers, because they want the same power?
I say if that is true than Obama is as bad as Bush.
Which is not reality so far.
That attitude takes the human element of justice away in a mountains of greed too big to get over, and all is lost.
If it is ignorance and avoidance as the reason we will not prosecute than it makes sense.
But to desire power of murder and torture and so on means the human being is too base to ever civilize and we are through as the dominate species.
Now that is an ugly scenario.
Mr Barker is right there are some powers they can covet others are for no one to own and should be dealt with either outside or inside.
What I’ll agree with you on, Mr Barker, is this:
“to suggest that Obama and our future leaders will not bring Bush to justice due to their desire to retain illegal powers, because they want the same power?
I say if that is true than Obama is as bad as Bush.”
On the economy, I believe he’s as bad, or worse. More debt, more inflation, and more consumption is what caused our problems – more of the same won’t fix them.
On war, he’s shifting the focus from one war to the other – to me, he’s equally bad. On the drug war, I think he’s better, and the jury it still out on Guantanamo and torture.
Mickey Z, however, thinks there’s some bad signs on that too in his recent article here.
Overall, if he’s better, it’s not much – a murderer is a murderer in my book. The killing still goes on. Pakistan, Iraq, Afghanistan….when will it end Mr Obama????
What I’m saying is not as “awful” as it might seem. In fact, it’s pretty simple.
As long as there’s potential to use all kinds of power, the few people in society who want to abuse that power are going to be attracted to those positions in life.
It’s a tiny minority of people, but they gravitate to places where they can get away with their evil deeds. What better place to do this than in the US government?
Well it seems Mr Spoonrite that there are powers that they are willing to let go. Today they announced that there will no longer be the designation of Enemy combatants. With that term in vogue Bush had the power to arrest any one any where in the world with out warrant. Now Mr Obama has given up that so called power for the good of the nation. Sorry sir but some powers must be relinquished and the truly honest men know that. Not all politicitians are power hungry to the point of absurdity like Bush was.
The calling of the Gitmo detainees “Enemy Combatants” was an outright lie and everyone connected with Gitmo or the Bush Administration in general should know that. At least everyone in the Senate and those who watched the C-Span hearing on detainees at Gitmo definitely know it.
I watched the hearing , then went to the 37 page Senate Report and read it to make sure that what I heard was what was in the report. It was.
In that 37 page report was the fact that less than 3% of the sum total of all the people who ever went thru Gitmo were captured on the battlefield. Ninety three percent came to Gitmo by way of being sold to the U S Army for the bounty offered.
So 97% of the people who went thru Gitmo were not ememy combatants. That was just a ruse that the Bush Administration used to keep them there because if they ever got to have a fair court hearing 99% of them would be found not guilty and the Bush bunch knew this, and they knew the howl that would be raised once the word got out.
Yup, Mernie – the designation is gone. Bush used a lot of nice rhetoric in his early years. Well, not a lot, but there was some here and there. But like the old crooks, these new ones throw a bone out to their supporters here and there – hoping that no one will notice. But, thanks to the internet, people do.
It doesn’t appear that the ACLU or the Center for Constitutional Rights are too happy about what’s really going on in Guantanamo. Here’s a little from an article in today’s IPS News:
The Centre for Constitutional Rights, which has provided lawyers to defend many Guantanamo prisoners, said the Obama administration has “adopted almost the same standard the Bush administration used to detain people without charge.”
It called the government’s position “a case of old wine in new bottles,” adding, “It is still unlawful to hold people indefinitely without charge. The men who have been held for more than seven years by our government must be charged or released.”
Anthony Romero, head of the American Civil Liberties Union, said he found it “deeply troubling that the Justice Department continues to use an overly broad interpretation of the laws of war that would permit military detention of individuals who were picked up far from an actual battlefield or who didn’t engage in hostilities against the United States.”
I’ll believe the “change” when I see it. But, I don’t expect to.
I noticed on the news this afternoon that a “Secret” Red Cross report had been released that described some of the “enhanced interrogation tactics” used. Said they amounted to torture. It left room for interpretation of the tactics as harsh – but …….
But there was nary a mention of the documented cases ( over 100 ) of people being tortured to death. You can find a list on the Internet. You can see interviews with some soldiers who admit that they tortured a detainee to death ( Taxi to the Dark Side ), and you can google Manadel Al Jamaidi and see the infamous pictures of the female soldier smiling standing over a body at Abu Gahrib. The body in the photo is the body of Jamaidi, one of two detainees tortured to death by Navy Seals and their Mercenary helpers on the 4th of November 2003.
The media cleans up the data about torture and I have to think it is on purpose.
It could be years before we see more reports – from the Obama administration, too. I don’t want to wait. I trust CCR and the ACLU far more than any president – that’s what they’re there for!
Leave a Comment