Is it sad that the "only" hope for justice relies on the possibility of foreign courts to mete out justice? It makes me ashamed to be an "American". We authored these ideas.
Ellen
· 1 year ago
A couple of points here. First. Bush has never respected the rule of law. Even before he became president. The law means nothing to him because he's never had to face any consequences for ANYTHING. Also, remember Pinochet!
Thomas
· 1 year ago
Their crime was to kill a half MILLION totally innocent Childern, Women and men based on LIES that their LIE facrory created.....The Iraqi's became the BushCo NeoCons Tootsies, ala Rwanda....... They make Manson look like the circus freak he is AND put them in with the lykes of Hiitler and Stalin and the other greedy monsters throughout history........ In America No one is above the law, not even the president, as the Republicans showed whey they impeached Clinton
jsbar
· 1 year ago
What about the half million Iraqi children that were killed by sanctions and Albright proclaimed "it was worth it" during the the Clinton administration?
-bwg
· 1 year ago
If President Bush were to pre-emptively pardon accused war criminals, then wouldn't the new administration would be obliged to extradict them to be tried before a competent international authority?
Romira
· 1 year ago
Bush and his gang of criminals are as guilty of murder, torture and abuse as any other thug or Nazi. Its a disgusting display of American exceptionalism at work when it is even debated by legal and other scholars in the States as to what should and should not be done to them in this regard.
Bush is a war criminal by any standard one wishes to use, pure and simple. He and his murderous thugs have caused massive devastation on innocent people. Will someone tell me why they are being treated with such deference by so many?
But wait a minute, Bush and his thugs did not do anything wrong since their legal advisers told them that what they were doing was legal under the circumstances, even though they broke umpteenth diffirent national and international laws: Also, in that case, the Nazi generals and war criminals should have also been spared since, after all, they were just following orders like good soldiers should.
What a crock of bull. PROSECUTE those war criminals and come clean America!
thedeanpeople
· 1 year ago
There's still plenty of time to impeach. Yes, really.
All it would take is for impeachophobes like Nadler to get off his (formerly) fat ass and ACT. All this whining does not fulfill his Geneva-covered duty as a US Gov't Official to report and ACT to stop ongoing torture and other violations. Not to mention that silly little oath of office.
The reality is that the ONLY moral, patriotic option: Impeachment For Torture -- is still easily doable.
And unless a majority of House members or 40 Senators wish to publicly proclaim themselves war criminals by defying our treaty obligations (and US Federal Law) in defense of the indefensible, it can be over in less than a week. (There's literally no need for "investigating" or "discussing" - all in on the public record.)
All we need are up or down votes in both bodies -- from all those Geneva-Covered Gov't Officials in Congress. Who are all, btw, currently in the status of Nuremberg defendants -- who have been treating atrocities like political business as usual. So it may not just be the regime on the bus to the Hague. Aiding and abetting after-the-fact has consequences too.
But go on. Prattle on about your pardon paranoia and the groupthink that "all is well" because we've all agreed that "something must be done -- at some later time -- (always) by somebody else.".
The rest of us will just live with the fact that "fear of the divisiveness monster" -- and other forms of baseless paranoia -- have rendered us now a War Criminal Nation. And begin the generations-long process of living down Our National Shame as the "Good Germans" have had to before us.
--
Cerita dewasa
· 1 month ago
All we need are up or down votes in both bodies -- from all those Geneva-Covered Gov't Officials in Congress. Who are all, btw, currently in the status of Nuremberg defendants -- who have been treating atrocities like political business as usual. So it may not just be the regime on the bus to the Hague. Aiding and abetting after-the-fact has consequences too.
B McDonnell
· 1 year ago
Germany in 1924, Japan in 1936 went down the imperial impunity road: Hitler of his violent attempt to take power; naval officers of assassinations in Japan- including of a Prime Minister. In both cases lenient and sympathetic courts let perpetrators of awful crimes off with a slap on the hand, and the criminals didn't go away. Both countries slipped down the slope to dictatorship and disaster as a result.
If the authors of torture don't go to jail now they will be back.
David Swanson
· 1 year ago
Imagine that you took your family to the White House for a Christmas tree lighting ceremony, and you were all standing in the front row as the president made some brief remarks, you and your spouse and your two children, a little girl and a little boy. And imagine that after talking for a few minutes the president turned to his chief of staff, handed him a knife, and said "Would you mind grabbing that little girl out of the front row and bringing her up here and slitting her throat?" And imagine that the chief of staff did just that, as you and others screamed and fought with various aides and secret service officers. And then someone shouted "Arrest him!" while pointing at the chief of staff. But the president held up a piece of paper and declared: "I'm pardoning him right now!" And all the shouting suddenly stopped. People murmured to each other: "Oh, well, if he's pardoned he's pardoned." And the president stood and smiled, paused for a while, and then turned to the chief of staff and said "It covers torturing the little boy too."
Would you say "Enough!" Even if you'd been to law school? Or would you still declare the pardon power to be "unlimited"? Would it take more than this to awaken an ounce of humanity or independent thought from deep within your brain?
Not to worry. What we are dealing with is far more than this. We are dealing with the gruesome sadistic torture and murder of thousands of people. We're dealing with a war that's left over 1.2 million dead, 4 million displaced, millions more without decent water, food, or shelter. We're dealing with people kidnapped, kept in outdoor cages for years without any indication of reason to hope, prisoner suicides, prisoner torture, people hung from their wrists until they passed out or died, people shocked with electricity, beaten with sticks, or given the water torture. Your little daughter is only one person, but imagine if she were thousands, and that they were all tortured, raped, and murdered, every single one. And then tell me that the pardon power is "unlimited." Tell me that the Supreme Court of the United States has no possible choice other than to conclude that the pardon power is "unlimited." Can you tell me that and show your face in public? I dare you.
Do you believe large crimes are less important than small ones, crimes against Muslims are less important than crimes against Christians, crimes against foreigners are less important than crimes against Americans? Do you believe those things? Think about it before you answer. Now tell me if the pardon power is unlimited. Tell me if it makes sense for human rights groups to declare that the pardon power is unlimited and to then ask a man like George W. Bush, his arms drenched in blood up to the shoulders, to please not abuse his unlimited power. Is that a smart thing to do? Is it a conscionable thing to do? Is it something we can do and not become complicit in crime?
Foto Cewek Bugil
· 1 month ago
Would you say "Enough!" Even if you'd been to law school? Or would you still declare the pardon power to be "unlimited"? Would it take more than this to awaken an ounce of humanity or independent thought from deep within your brain?
Andrew P
· 1 year ago
Push can and should consider issuing a preemptive pardon to all DOD and CIA employees and contractors who tortured enemy prisoners under orders. It should not apply to any rouge actions. And, such a pardon will not induce anyone to talk. However, there is a downside to being pardoned, that Bush must also consider. Pardons do not exempt anyone from extradition, but they do have the effect of eliminating 5th ammendment claims. The Supreme Court has ruled that the possibility of foreign prosecution is irrelevant. If someone has immunity, they MUST testify. Something to think about.
gunsmoke
· 1 year ago
Andrew P: the only "rouge actions" I know of consist of women putting rouge on their cheeks with a powder puff.
GrassRoots
· 1 year ago
Hold them ALL accountable...NOW! If Congress fails to act, they are complicit, and the RULE OF LAW, and the REPUBLIC will be DOA when the new administration takes power.
Hawaiianstyle
· 1 year ago
I have no doubt that the President will issue a blanket pardon. The important question is how does the legal community respond?
What will be the response if he pardons himself, which he will do if he pardons others?
Tom
· 1 year ago
If this SOB gives a blanket pardon to the torturers, then he should forfeit Secret Service protection and be made to sweat and look over his shoulder the rest of his days.
the lion
· 1 year ago
The very act of the President of the United States pardoning anybody for torture is in actuality a serious WAR CRIME.
The United States Supreme Court gave the Prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay the status as Article 3 Prisoners hence they are protected persons under the Geneva Conventions which is a Treaty that was ratified by the Senate which makes it United States law.
Schedule 3 of the Geneva Conventions (protections of prisoners) states at
Article 131
No High Contracting Party shall be allowed to absolve itself or any other High Contracting Party of any liability incurred by itself or by another High Contracting Party in respect of breaches referred to in the preceding Article.
The Preceding article below states that it is a Grave breach that a Protected Prisoner is subjected to torture, article 3 Prisoners ARE protected prisoners according to the United States Supreme Court in Hamdin V Rumsfeld.
Article 130
Grave breaches to which the preceding Article relates shall be those involving any of the following acts, if committed against persons or property protected by the Convention: wilful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments, wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, compelling a prisoner of war to serve in the forces of the hostile Power, or wilfully depriving a prisoner of war of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed in this Convention.
Furthermore it is the Responsibility of EVERY other country that is a signatory of the Geneva Conventions to search out and capture and bring to trial any person who has committed such acts of torture
Article 129
The High Contracting Parties undertake to enact any legislation necessary to provide effective penal sanctions for persons committing, or ordering to be committed, any of the grave breaches of the present Convention defined in the following Article.
Each High Contracting Party shall be under the obligation to search for persons alleged to have committed, or to have ordered to be committed, such grave breaches, and shall bring such persons, regardless of their nationality, before its own courts. It may also, if it prefers, and in accordance with the provisions of its own legislation, hand such persons over for trial to another High Contracting Party concerned, provided such High Contracting Party has made out a prima facie case.
Each High Contracting Party shall take measures necessary for the suppression of all acts contrary to the provisions of the present Convention other than the grave breaches defined in the following Article.
In all circumstances, the accused persons shall benefit by safeguards of proper trial and defence, which shall not be less favourable than those provided by Article 105 and those following of the present Convention.
It is the responsibility of EVERY government in the World to Arrest these people and bring them to Justice wouldnt it be better for the United States to do this themselves
Lastly what would we have said if Hitler or Admiral Donitz have said days before the Second World War that he pardoned all the the Nazis who may have committed a Crime during the Second World War?
Somehow I do not think the Allies or as they were also known The United Nations would have allowed that to happen.
All Comments
Bush is a war criminal by any standard one wishes to use, pure and simple. He and his murderous thugs have caused massive devastation on innocent people. Will someone tell me why they are being treated with such deference by so many?
But wait a minute, Bush and his thugs did not do anything wrong since their legal advisers told them that what they were doing was legal under the circumstances, even though they broke umpteenth diffirent national and international laws: Also, in that case, the Nazi generals and war criminals should have also been spared since, after all, they were just following orders like good soldiers should.
What a crock of bull. PROSECUTE those war criminals and come clean America!
All it would take is for impeachophobes like Nadler to get off his (formerly) fat ass and ACT. All this whining does not fulfill his Geneva-covered duty as a US Gov't Official to report and ACT to stop ongoing torture and other violations. Not to mention that silly little oath of office.
The reality is that the ONLY moral, patriotic option: Impeachment For Torture -- is still easily doable.
And unless a majority of House members or 40 Senators wish to publicly proclaim themselves war criminals by defying our treaty obligations (and US Federal Law) in defense of the indefensible, it can be over in less than a week. (There's literally no need for "investigating" or "discussing" - all in on the public record.)
All we need are up or down votes in both bodies -- from all those Geneva-Covered Gov't Officials in Congress. Who are all, btw, currently in the status of Nuremberg defendants -- who have been treating atrocities like political business as usual. So it may not just be the regime on the bus to the Hague. Aiding and abetting after-the-fact has consequences too.
But go on. Prattle on about your pardon paranoia and the groupthink that "all is well" because we've all agreed that "something must be done -- at some later time -- (always) by somebody else.".
The rest of us will just live with the fact that "fear of the divisiveness monster" -- and other forms of baseless paranoia -- have rendered us now a War Criminal Nation. And begin the generations-long process of living down Our National Shame as the "Good Germans" have had to before us.
--
If the authors of torture don't go to jail now they will be back.
Would you say "Enough!" Even if you'd been to law school? Or would you still declare the pardon power to be "unlimited"? Would it take more than this to awaken an ounce of humanity or independent thought from deep within your brain?
Not to worry. What we are dealing with is far more than this. We are dealing with the gruesome sadistic torture and murder of thousands of people. We're dealing with a war that's left over 1.2 million dead, 4 million displaced, millions more without decent water, food, or shelter. We're dealing with people kidnapped, kept in outdoor cages for years without any indication of reason to hope, prisoner suicides, prisoner torture, people hung from their wrists until they passed out or died, people shocked with electricity, beaten with sticks, or given the water torture. Your little daughter is only one person, but imagine if she were thousands, and that they were all tortured, raped, and murdered, every single one. And then tell me that the pardon power is "unlimited." Tell me that the Supreme Court of the United States has no possible choice other than to conclude that the pardon power is "unlimited." Can you tell me that and show your face in public? I dare you.
Do you believe large crimes are less important than small ones, crimes against Muslims are less important than crimes against Christians, crimes against foreigners are less important than crimes against Americans? Do you believe those things? Think about it before you answer. Now tell me if the pardon power is unlimited. Tell me if it makes sense for human rights groups to declare that the pardon power is unlimited and to then ask a man like George W. Bush, his arms drenched in blood up to the shoulders, to please not abuse his unlimited power. Is that a smart thing to do? Is it a conscionable thing to do? Is it something we can do and not become complicit in crime?
What will be the response if he pardons himself, which he will do if he pardons others?
The United States Supreme Court gave the Prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay the status as Article 3 Prisoners hence they are protected persons under the Geneva Conventions which is a Treaty that was ratified by the Senate which makes it United States law.
Schedule 3 of the Geneva Conventions (protections of prisoners) states at
Article 131
No High Contracting Party shall be allowed to absolve itself or any other High Contracting Party of any liability incurred by itself or by another High Contracting Party in respect of breaches referred to in the preceding Article.
The Preceding article below states that it is a Grave breach that a Protected Prisoner is subjected to torture, article 3 Prisoners ARE protected prisoners according to the United States Supreme Court in Hamdin V Rumsfeld.
Article 130
Grave breaches to which the preceding Article relates shall be those involving any of the following acts, if committed against persons or property protected by the Convention: wilful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments, wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, compelling a prisoner of war to serve in the forces of the hostile Power, or wilfully depriving a prisoner of war of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed in this Convention.
Furthermore it is the Responsibility of EVERY other country that is a signatory of the Geneva Conventions to search out and capture and bring to trial any person who has committed such acts of torture
Article 129
The High Contracting Parties undertake to enact any legislation necessary to provide effective penal sanctions for persons committing, or ordering to be committed, any of the grave breaches of the present Convention defined in the following Article.
Each High Contracting Party shall be under the obligation to search for persons alleged to have committed, or to have ordered to be committed, such grave breaches, and shall bring such persons, regardless of their nationality, before its own courts. It may also, if it prefers, and in accordance with the provisions of its own legislation, hand such persons over for trial to another High Contracting Party concerned, provided such High Contracting Party has made out a prima facie case.
Each High Contracting Party shall take measures necessary for the suppression of all acts contrary to the provisions of the present Convention other than the grave breaches defined in the following Article.
In all circumstances, the accused persons shall benefit by safeguards of proper trial and defence, which shall not be less favourable than those provided by Article 105 and those following of the present Convention.
It is the responsibility of EVERY government in the World to Arrest these people and bring them to Justice wouldnt it be better for the United States to do this themselves
Lastly what would we have said if Hitler or Admiral Donitz have said days before the Second World War that he pardoned all the the Nazis who may have committed a Crime during the Second World War?
Somehow I do not think the Allies or as they were also known The United Nations would have allowed that to happen.
It should not be allowed to happen now.