Condi Rice makes narrow escape in Auckland

reply to post by nyk537


Honestly, don't you think disregard of Habeas Corpus, authorization of domestic wiretaps, holding of detainees indefinitely without trial, and torture constitute some sort of crimes?

Military Commissions Act of 2006 turns Habeas Corpus into toilet paper

reply to post by Animal


Perhaps you are just confusing a dislike of Bush with a rabid hate.

It's no secret that people don't like Bush, the approval ratings show as much. The kind of hate described in the OP is not in the majority though.

Mock me all you want, it doesn't change it.

reply to post by Irish M1ck

authorization of domestic wiretaps

You talking about the same wire tap tha Congress and President Elect Obama felt were justified? Justifed because they did give retroactive immunity. If it was a crime then why give immunity. By the way I felt it was a crime by everyone involved, but Congress saw it otherwise.

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
reply to post by nyk537

 

Honestly, don't you think disregard of Habeas Corpus, authorization of domestic wiretaps, holding of detainees indefinitely without trial, and torture constitute some sort of crimes?

Military Commissions Act of 2006 turns Habeas Corpus into toilet paper

You're talking about war criminals - and that situation was resolved when the Supreme Court decided that war criminals deserve the same rights as a U.S. citizen under our Constitution. They will get a fair trial.

On wiretaps - one word - FISA. And Obama voted FOR it, remember?

As for blaming Condoleeza for torture and detainment of prisoners without trial - the burden of proof is on you to show that she signed papers calling for indefinite incarceration or torture or that she personally beat these men and women held.

reply to post by sos37


Agreed.

Until I see some tangible evidence to suggest Rice or others were personally involved in anything that would be considered a "war crime", I'm just going to chalk this up to more Bush bashing.

reply to post by questioningall


Bush bought 100,000 Hectares in, I believe, Paraguay the only non extraditing country down there. And then negotiated a deal for 1500 American troops to be based just outside his property. I believe I posted this news when Bush bought the property in an ATS thread. Anyways Cheney then bought junk loads of land in Peru, which does extradite criminals back to the U.S..

My point is simple, there are many places that dictators and tyrants can go and live out their lives without fear. Look at Idi Amin he died fat and happy in Saudi Arabia, do you think they wouldn't take a Bush? or Cheney? In fact in the movie Blood Diamond the black man says that the rebels only seek power so they can steal truckloads of money and then live in exile in a nice country. He said they do not seek to rule the mess but to get cash and get out...

I believe this is pretty accurate in that there are many places on Earth that one can live in exile and not fear being brought down, therefore none of he Bush people will pay for what they have done and they have all been pardoned already...

reply to post by theindependentjournal


I also find this idea that Bush is so scared of being convicted of war crimes that he's going to live out his life in exile in a foreign country to be ridiculous.

Bush believes the things he has done were what was best for this country, and I seriously doubt the calls for his arrest from a bunch of (pardon me) loonies scares him very much.

reply to post by sos37


Now, I am not blaming Rice per se. Not enough research has really been done on what happened in the administration.

We do know that torture was authorized. We do know that Habeas Corpus was attempted to be suspended.

Now, FISA and Obama - I have been clear that I disagree with that vote of his. However, am I also not correct that the domestic spying was occurring well before FISA was implemented?

reply to post by nyk537


Clearly someone was involved. It happened, so someone did it. Where is the accountability and transparency in this country?

[edit on 25-11-2008 by Irish M1ck]

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
Where is the accountability and transparency in this country?

There isn't much at all. I won't argue that point, and I wont say there haven't been plenty of things I've disagreed fiercely with Bush on.

Lack of transparency and the fact that "something happened" and "someone authorized something" hardly amounts to the long list of war crimes so many people shout about.

Until we see some hard evidence that points the finger at Bush or Cheney or anyone else and proves war crimes were committed, I'll continue to chalk this whole thing up to Bush derangement syndrome.

reply to post by nyk537


Well, I guess that's fair enough. I'm sure it equates with you about how I feel with the people yelling that Obama wasn't born here because they learned how to read a blog.

reply to post by Irish M1ck


It does.

Without proof, these kinds of things are just rants from people who are upset at whoever the target happens to be.

I put no more credibility to the attacks on Obama than I do the attacks on Bush.

Both come from those people who would continue to accuse them of such things even after hard evidence was provided to the contrary.

reply to post by jam321


There is a huge difference in the Kosovo Security operation and The Iraq invasion. Comparing the two events are worlds apart. I would hardly call Kosovo an invasion. Not to mention Clinton di not authorize the torcher and detainment of thousands of people without any trial to which the majority are still being held. Enemy combatant was a term invented by this administration.

Plus the thread is about if Bush could be brought up on War crimes not Clinton....live in the now!



[edit on 11/25/2008 by CaptGizmo]

reply to post by Irish M1ck


There are many presidents who have suspended habeas corpus. Lincoln did it 8 times. FDR did it, and sent Japanese to internment camps. And, so did Bill Clinton.

drknow.newsvine.com...

None of them were charged with war crimes.

[edit on 25-11-2008 by jsobecky]

reply to post by CaptGizmo


I am not comparing the two. I am responding to your source that said and I quote your source

The United Nations charter has a provision which was agreed to by the United States formulated by the United States in fact, after World War II. Its says that from now on, no nation can use armed force without the permission of the U.N. Security Council.

No UN permission for either Clinton or Bush.

Plus the thread is about if Bush could be brought up on War crimes not Clinton....live in the now!

Actually the thread is about Rice, not Bush.

I do live in the now but I also realize that it is history that has gotten us to this point of now.

I'll say it again. If you or anyone else got proof that Rice, Bush or any of the administration has committed a crime, please submit your case to your represenative asking him or her to order an investigation. Their are plenty of represenatives willing to go after Bush and gang. Trying to prove things to ATS members is OK and lively for debate, but proving your case in a courtroom would have more effect. Until then we should remember how we would like to be judged if we were being accused of a crime...

INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.




[edit on 25-11-2008 by jam321]

(c) Definition.— As used in this section the term “war crime” means any conduct—
(1) defined as a grave breach in any of the international conventions signed at Geneva 12 August 1949, or any protocol to such convention to which the United States is a party;
(2) prohibited by Article 23, 25, 27, or 28 of the Annex to the Hague Convention IV, Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, signed 18 October 1907;
(3) which constitutes a violation of common Article 3 of the international conventions signed at Geneva, 12 August 1949, or any protocol to such convention to which the United States is a party and which deals with non-international armed conflict; or
(4) of a person who, in relation to an armed conflict and contrary to the provisions of the Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices as amended at Geneva on 3 May 1996 (Protocol II as amended on 3 May 1996), when the United States is a party to such Protocol, willfully kills or causes serious injury to civilians.

reply to post by CaptGizmo


In other words, TORTURE. Which is what this administration is VERY guilty of. No matter what kind of 'pardon' Bush comes up with it will not remove the criminal actions. I understand the so-called 'partriotism' that some are feeling. They don't want to see any U.S. representative punished for crimes. They think that a U.S. president can do no wrong.

Sorry friends (the ones who still blindly believe this) but this administration has been more corrupt than most. No, not a generational thing either. They have manipulated the people with forged intel documents, lied us into wars and lied to the American people on many occassions. All unforgivable. I don't care about the 'national security' blanket that they hide behind. There comes a point when our true national security is jeopardized with the 'national security' wall that these criminals hide behind.

reply to post by jam321


This has happened. And every time someone brave enough to bring charges before congress they get ridiculed and threatoned. Sorry, but this administration is so corrupt that most charges brought against them are ignored.

They are called nuts and so on and risk their political careers. Hmmmm, now I wonder why many charges don't ever see the light of day? Hmmmm.....

Originally posted by dariousg
I wonder why many charges don't ever see the light of day? Hmmmm.....

It couldn't possibly be because they are bogus charges to begin with could it? That's completely out of the realm of possibility isn't it?

reply to post by nyk537


When they are held accountable, robot. I guess you life has been better since these people took controll of it right? now go watch some TV and have some genetically modified food while you breath the chemical coctail in your air, and go on thinking you are ok.

reply to post by BeyondBelow


I will thank you.

When I read posts like yours, filled with such general fear and paranoia of everyone and everything, I realize just how fine I really am.



Seriously though….robot?

I personally think the biggest crime as of this moment is Barry Barrack Hussein Soetoro Obama has not produced a Long Form Birth Cert.

As for Bush, if you wanted to arrest him for anything he did the last few years, would than would have to arrest alot of high level Democrats in the Senate along with him

This whole thing is rubbish!

Bush-haters are all crazy, just back off and leave him alone its 1 1/2 months or so before he is out of office. I know you will keep blaming him for everything that happens after Jan 20, 2009 just like he blamed for everything that happnd from You not having a job to the Hurricane Katria in New Orleans to waking up sick.

GET OVER IT!

They arent gettin arrested and anyone that tries, shall fall under assault and battery and arrested themselves. If there was crimes committed he would of bee impeached and not even Pelosi was dumb enough for that.