The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder - Video!

My friend,

Originally posted by phatpackage
reply to post by Spiro

 

Prosecution? George Bush was a great man who served his country honorably. He did many things for his country and is a credit to all Americans. The world would be much better & more peaceful place if there were more politicians with profound insight & leadership skills possessed George Bush in other countries. Frankly to even mention prosecuting him is treasonous to say the least! I hope he sues all concerned for liable/deformation. A great man should not have to put up with this rubbish!

Please link me to no less than three webpages that Bush was a great man .....then, link me to no less than 100 webpages that says different

Be safe be well,

Spiro

My friend,

Originally posted by rgzing
reply to post by Spiro

 

So I guess Vietnam was justified. JFK, and Johnson did not commit the same crime. A bunch of left wing idiots that do not look in the mirror and see they committed the same crime 3 decades ago.

No, niether war or past presidential move for said wars are/were justified.

The thing is, I started this thread after finding that video [in the OP] because a man put said video together claiming to have enough evidence to try Mr Bush and his war crimes. If and when he ever makes a video to claim evidence of past presidential war crimes, i will post them for sure

Be safe be well

Spiro

reply to post by Spiro

Sorry GWB will never step foot in a courtroom.

This "procescuitor" fails to remember that Sadam was in violation of every U.N Security council resoultion against him from the end of the 91 gulf war. the war in Iraq was not Illegal! Congress authorized it. they we're give all the intelligence we had. they also had the power to question the heads of the intelligence agencies and did so. I love how this guys says Sadam didn't have any weapons of mass destruction. I guess he didn't get the memo. The U.S. knew for decades that Irag had them WE SOLD THEM TO IRAQ! So IF this guy wants to try GWB then he better get a bunch of grand juries ready because he will have to put the ENTIRE CONGRESS on trial as well!

But it won't get that far before he is laughed out of court and he is dis-barred from legal practice.

Also to point out. If Iraq wasn't in violation of U.N security council rsolutions then why did Clinton use Tomahawk cruise missles a few times against Iraq? and why did Clinton Order the airforce and the navy to bomb sites inside Iraq? Oh thats right they were violating U.N. resoultions. But Clinton was to affraid to send troops back into Iraq! Funny how BUsh haters have selective memories!




reply to post by xiphias


Clinton wasn't impeached. he was tried and convited in the house for lying about his affair and all that. But the senate did not vote to impeach him! you might not think there is a difference but there is. to be impeached means he would have been removed from office. and since he served out both his terms in office he wasn't impeached!

reply to post by DrumsRfun


I agree....Bush will never see the inside of any court room now or any other time in the future

reply to post by Mercenary2007

the war in Iraq was not Illegal! Congress authorized it.

There ya go! will never ever happen because what happened was Legal. Iraq got what they legally deserved! Mr Bush is an innocent man being wrongly persecuted!

Why not go for a two-for-one trial? GW Bush started the madness and Obama continued it. All the argument he stated could justly apply to both Presidents. We're still in Iraq despite nothing coming against us from there, and we still didn't catch Bin Laden.

In reality our leadership is not leadership at all (nor presidents), but opportunists for the powerful monied interests intent on keeping war going for profit. Prosecuting GW Bush and Obama really doesn't reach far enough up the ladder. The people pulling their strings should be prosecuted as well. But the OZ-type sleight of hand keeps people from knowing who really rules the planet. Look behind the curtain to see the reality.

reply to post by thepixelpusher

Look behind the curtain to see the reality.

Good point. If one looks very closely you will see it is the muslim extremists who are trying to taint the good image of Mr Bush! You are so right. Look hard & you will see it.

Originally posted by Mercenary2007
Clinton wasn't impeached. he was tried and convited in the house for lying about his affair and all that. But the senate did not vote to impeach him! you might not think there is a difference but there is. to be impeached means he would have been removed from office. and since he served out both his terms in office he wasn't impeached!

edit on 11/16/2010 by Mercenary2007 because: (no reason given)

Same difference. He was targeted, he lied, and then he was skewered. Every man (and woman) involved in his trial would have done the same thing. Hypocrisy if you ask me. Did it need to be done? Yes. Did he need to be targeted? Depends on who you ask.

reply to post by Spiro


I think this is absolute BS to be honest. If you are going to prosecute Bush for all those lives lost in Iraq, you have to also prosecute every living president for any lives lost under their administration. As well as every member of congress who authorized those military actions, all military generals, commanders, soldiers, etc. Bush was given false intelligence, and made decisions based on the information he was given. Congress authorized action, the Secretary of Defense set it in motion, the generals ordered the missions, the commanders led those missions, captains followed out the orders with their men, soldiers did what they were told. All on congress's authority. The truth didn't come out until later. That is not Bush's fault. Quit grasping at straws and trying to find ways to blame Bush for stuff that isn't his fault.

Originally posted by phatpackage
reply to post by thepixelpusher

 

Look behind the curtain to see the reality.

Good point. If one looks very closely you will see it is the muslim extremists who are trying to taint the good image of Mr Bush! You are so right. Look hard & you will see it.

You didn't pull back the curtain far enough to see Bush, Obama, and their puppetmasters standing next to the muslim extremists. It's a big game with lots of bad people involved.

Oh please, we are powerless against the Bush Cabal.


He will never face a trial.

My friend,

Originally posted by dalepmay
reply to post by Spiro

 

I think this is absolute BS to be honest. If you are going to prosecute Bush for all those lives lost in Iraq, you have to also prosecute every living president for any lives lost under their administration. As well as every member of congress who authorized those military actions, all military generals, commanders, soldiers, etc.

Absolutely

Lets start with Bush first....

Be safe be well

Spiro

Originally posted by andy1033
The way i see it, a leader is a representation of your country.

He or she represents your psyche, so you people in america really do have some bad leaders.

What does that say about your society as a whole.

edit on 11/15/2010 by andy1033 because: (no reason given)

It is unfortunately in this case but I feel you are correct. We not only have bad leaders but our voting system is corrupt and our media news sources are owned and controlled by this same corruption.

What does this say about the American society? It says that we are both ignorant and lazy and yes, I also take offense to this statement but it is true. Most of the population are ignorant to what is really happening and those few that do know fall into despair. Many go straight from denial to despair. I really can't blame them because this problem is totally insane yet I wish to keep my eyes open and look for positive answers. The upholding of democracy and justice is a great positive start in my opinion and therefore I support the OP.

reply to post by Mercenary2007

I love how this guys says Sadam didn't have any weapons of mass destruction. I guess he didn't get the memo.

A memo? Did you get this memo and if you did can you show us?

Yes we sold Iraq weapons but the term "of mass destruction" is quite ambiguous don't you think. We did not sell him nuclear weapons yet this is the idea behind the original statement. I know that this comparison is false but this is what was being sold to the American public and congress, i.e. a mushroom shaped cloud. Remember?

There is controversy in your statements and I don't really know what is true and what was made up but I do know one thing. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and was no immediate threat to America. We had much bigger problems at that time (remember 9/11?) yet for some reason we chose to invade and occupy Iraq. There are most definitely some problems here with this story. For one, what ever happened with Osama Bin Laden?

So IF this guy wants to try GWB then he better get a bunch of grand juries ready because he will have to put the ENTIRE CONGRESS on trial as well!

So be it! Do you think it would be better to ignore justice and hope for the best? Maybe you think the problem goes away if we simply ignore it.

yeah lets trash Bush, the ONLY president that had the STONES to go after the enemy, took the fight back home to them...I dont care what ANYONE SAYS, these extremists caused 9/11, not the govt

Originally posted by HomerinNC
yeah lets trash Bush, the ONLY president that had the STONES to go after the enemy, took the fight back home to them...I dont care what ANYONE SAYS, these extremists caused 9/11, not the govt

Apparently Bush didn't have the "Stones" to go after the enemy. Bin Laden and his cohorts were never attacked head on in Tora Bora and there is testimony that the troops were not allowed to go in to get Bin Laden before he escaped into the mountains. In fact they were told not to attack his group despite having them nearly surrounded. Bush just used the wars to line his friends pockets with military contracts, lined up control of the oil, and settle a score with Daddy's old friend Saddam. Bush said he'd get Bin Laden "Dead or Alive"...he'd smoke 'em out. Bush was an EPIC FAIL on GOING AFTER THE ENEMY. The enemy is still out there, and very much alive.

I wish this guy every success. Bush & Co have flouted the law for too long.

Good luck

Originally posted by DrumsRfun

Originally posted by Spiro
My friends of ATS,
It wont be long before yer man Bush will be standing in a court of law, along with the rest of his cronies ....grrrr

Its NEVER going to happen.
Be prepared to use the

an awful lot in the future.
These people are untouchable.
He will not be arrested or tried...watch and see.

Well then why is that Vince guy trying to do this? Why is he trying to find a prosecutor? Why doesn't he prosecute Bush himself?

Isn't Vince a man of the world? Doesn't he know that the Bush's control everything at the top level? Doesn't he know that any prosecutor or judge who tries to prosecute Bush would be taken out? He seems naive.

Why doesn't a lone nut assassin just take out Bush? Why do they only take out good people?

See the thread about it here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by dalepmay
reply to post by Spiro

 

I think this is absolute BS to be honest. If you are going to prosecute Bush for all those lives lost in Iraq, you have to also prosecute every living president for any lives lost under their administration. As well as every member of congress who authorized those military actions, all military generals, commanders, soldiers, etc. Bush was given false intelligence, and made decisions based on the information he was given. Congress authorized action, the Secretary of Defense set it in motion, the generals ordered the missions, the commanders led those missions, captains followed out the orders with their men, soldiers did what they were told. All on congress's authority. The truth didn't come out until later. That is not Bush's fault. Quit grasping at straws and trying to find ways to blame Bush for stuff that isn't his fault.

You are badly misinformed. Bush KNOWINGLY lied and started a war on false pretenses. Vince has plenty of evidence in his book. Here is a summary of it from the video in the OP:

www.youtube.com...

Vincent Bugliosi is an American attorney and author, best known for prosecuting Charles Manson and other defendants accused of the Tate-LaBianca murders. His most recent book is "The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder."

Vincent spoke before a Tent State University / Alliance for Real Democracy event held at Cuernavaca Park in Denver, Colorado during DNC.

The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder is a 2008 book by former prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi. It argues that George W. Bush took the United States into the invasion of Iraq under false pretenses and should be tried for murder for the deaths of American soldiers in Iraq when he leaves office in 2009. The book was virtually ignored by the mainstream media but still sold over 130,000 copies within its first three months of release.

Bugliosi argues that Bush intentionally misled Congress and the American people about the evidence that he said mandated going into Iraq and overthrowing Saddam Hussein. Therefore, Bugliosi argues, the deaths of over 4,000 American soldiers and 100,000 Iraqi civilians since hostilities began (as of spring 2008) amount to murder. He further states that any of the 50 state attorneys general, as well as any district attorney in the United States, has ample grounds to indict Bush for the murder of any soldier or soldiers who live in their state or county. Bugliosi says that if he were prosecuting the case, he would seek imposition of the death penalty, and that impeachment alone would be "a joke", considering the magnitude of Bush's alleged crimes.

The strongest evidence against Bush, Bugliosi says, is a speech on October 7, 2002 claiming that Iraq posed an imminent threat to the security of the United States and was capable of attacking America at any time with his stockpile of weapons of mass destruction. However, a National Intelligence Estimate of less than a week earlier stated that while Iraq did have WMD capability, it had no plans to use it except in self-defense. Moreover, according to Bugliosi, the president and his administration edited the "White Paper", or declassified version of the NIE released to Congress and the public, in a way that made the Iraqi threat seem more ominous than it actually was. In addition, Bugliosi says that the Manning Memo shows that, far from making serious efforts to avoid war, Bush considered the possibility of provoking Saddam into starting a war by sending U2 reconnaissance aircraft, falsely painted in UN colors, on flights over Iraq along with fighter escorts. He also argues that Bush pressured intelligence agencies to find proof that Saddam somehow helped al-Qaeda plan the 9-11 attacks.

I was a hell of a lot better off in 2008 than I was in 2000...can't say the same for 1992 to 1999, and sure the hell can't say that now from 2008 to 2012...

I got no issues with Bush...