Sunday, July 13, 2008
Federal laws state that ‘…whoever commits a war crime’ resulting in death to its victim can be put to death. It does not make an exception for whomever occupies the office of President. This is serious stuff but so too are the deaths of some 4000 US personnel as well as the total number of Iraqi deaths as a result of this war of aggression, a figure estimated at some 1.3 million people.
The vast majority of those deaths were of innocent civilians, family members, tradespeople, store keepers –not men well-armed against a high tech invader/aggressor! This is serious enough to require that those responsible be tried for war crimes, and, when found guilty, punished to the extent and the letter of the law.
This is not a case that would baffle Sherlock Holmes. Among many complicit co-conspirators, one name stands out, the name of the person whose name is on the order to commence battle. It was George W. Bush who ordered the commencement of war. This act has already proven to be among the most horrific war crimes since those of Adolph Hitler or Pol Pot.
(a) Offense.— Whoever, whether inside or outside the United States, commits a war crime, in any of the circumstances described in subsection (b), shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both, and if death results to the victim, shall also be subject to the penalty of death. —TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 118 > § 2441 § 2441. War crimes
I have called for the prosecution of George Bush for ‘war crimes’ since it became clear that the US attack and invasion of Afghanistan was all about natural gas and pipelines. Before creating this blog, I had long posted those view on NPR’s now defunct “How’s Bush Doing” discussion forum as well as the likewise defunct “The Opinion”. Recently, our lonely voices are joined by distinguished experts, jurists, attorneys and specialists in international law. Adding considerable weight in this area are the opinions of a Nuremberg chief prosecutor who states that there is a case for trying Bush for the ‘supreme crime against humanity, an illegal war of aggression against a sovereign nation.’
The extent to which American exceptionalism is embedded in the national psyche is awesome to behold.
While the United States is a country like any other, its citizens no more special than any others on the planet, Americans still react with surprise at the suggestion that their country could be held responsible for something as heinous as a war crime.
From the massacre of more than 100,000 people in the Philippines to the first nuclear attack ever at Hiroshima to the unprovoked invasion of Baghdad, US-sponsored violence doesn’t feel as wrong and worthy of prosecution in internationally sanctioned criminal courts as the gory, blood-soaked atrocities of Congo, Darfur, Rwanda, and most certainly not the Nazis — most certainly not. Howard Zinn recently described this as our “inability to think outside the boundaries of nationalism. We are penned in by the arrogant idea that this country is the center of the universe, exceptionally virtuous, admirable, superior.”
Bush’s war against Iraq was begun upon a series of deliberate frauds. Earlier, Bush had targeted Afghanistan where the US would defend –not freedom –but the interests of US oil barons, primarily a consortium of US oil companies which had planned to build the Centgas Trans-Afghan linking Turkmenistan’s abundant gas reserves with markets in Pakistan. The Group was led by Unocal of California and Delta Oil Company of Saudi Arabia. Members of the Taliban actually met with Unocal officials at offices in Sugarland, TX, a Houston suburb, famously primarily as the home district of Tom DeLay who had introduced measure that would absolve Bush of the very war crimes that he most certainly had already planned to commit. [See: How Bush Helped Establish a Corporate ‘New World Order’; US ‘planned attack on Taliban’ [Before 911]; Dick Cheney Made Millions with Saddam Hussein ] Not only is the war against Iraq a war crime prosecutable in US Courts for the violations it represents under the above cited US Codes, Title 18 [op cit], but also in US Federal Courts for the ‘mass murder’ of some 4,000 US armed forces personnel that have died upon this evil fraud. According to Bugliosi, the penalty is death! The measure exempting US troops from ‘war crimes’ was introduced by Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX) as an amendment to H.R. 1646, The Foreign Relations Authorization Act of 2001, on May 8, 2001. It passed the House 282-137 on May 10 and introduced as S. 857 in the Senate on May 9 by Senators Jesse Helms (R-NC), Zell Miller (D-GA), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), John Warner (R-VA), Trent Lott (R-MS), Richard Shelby (R-AL), and Frank Murkowski (R-AK) –the usual suspects!
The bill authorized Bush “…to use all means (including the provision of legal assistance) necessary to bring about the release of covered US persons and covered allied persons held captive by or on behalf of the Court [International Criminal Court, ICC, in the Hague]. Some highlights:
- The President is authorized to invade The Hague. Specifically, the bill empowers Bush to use all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release from captivity of US or Allied personnel detained or imprisoned against their will by or on behalf of the Court.
- No US governmental entity –including State or local governments and court of any US jurisdiction –may cooperate with the ICC in arrests, extraditions, searches and seizures, taking of evidence, seizure of assets, or similar matters.
- No ICC agent may conduct any investigation in the US.
- No classified national security information can be transferred directly or indirectly to the ICC or to countries Party to the Rome Statute.
- These provisions are in addition to existing US law (the 2000-2001 Foreign Relations Authorization Act) which prohibits any US funds going to the ICC once it has been established unless the Senate has given its advice and consent to the Rome Treaty.
This measure was introduced before 911 in anticipation of a ‘War on Terrorism’ that only those with guilty foreknowledge could have anticipated, a ‘war’ that would include US aggression against Afghanistan and Iraq. Certainly no one but Bush, Dick Cheney, Tom Delay, the Project for the New American Century and high level members of the Bush administration could have anticipated the improbable series of events leading to the American quagmire in Iraq. Certainly, they are not ‘psychic’ despite a mantra repeated ad nauseam post 911: “No one could have foreseen….”! In fact, only the Bush administration ‘foresaw’ 911 in such detail, that they planned in advance to make legal the very laws they have in fact violated in the post-911 world. What incredible coincidences! What war crimes were Bush and his junta planning even then that would require they be immunized from the prosecution of their intended crimes?How does a man of no charisma, little talent and less intelligence get himself into a position in which he rules the world? Typically it is always done the Adolph Hitler way –a phony terrorist attack, a homegrown version of the Reichstag Fire. In Bush’s case 911! [See: Bush’s Conspiracy to Create an American Police State: Part I, Police States Begin With False Flag Attacks note: if all you have to refute this is a stupid label that you picked up somewhere, spare me! I will delete it! This blog deals in verifiable facts and/or meaningful statements. Labels –the staple of right wing, pro-Bush propaganda gets trashed where it belongs! ] Well…hold on to your sorry ass, Mr. Bush! The people have the power to restore the Constitution, an essential outcome which begins with the removal of George W. Bush as ‘President’! The second step is the subject of this article: the several prosecutions of George W. Bush in federal courts for mass murder and in world courts for war crimes, crimes against the peace and crimes against humanity.
Principle I Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefor and liable to punishment.Principle II The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes a crime under international law does not relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under international law.Principle III The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible Government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law.Principle IV The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.Principle VAny person charged with a crime under international law has the right to a fair trial on the facts and law.Principle VlThe crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under; international law:
- Crimes against peace:
- Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
- Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).
- War crimes:
Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave-labor or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or ill treatment of prisoners of war, of persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.
- Crimes against humanity:
Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhuman acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.
Principle VII Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth in Principles VI is a crime under international law.–Principles of the Nuremberg Tribunal
An October 2006 poll by New York Times and CBS News indicated that some 84 percent of Americans don’t believe George W. Bush is telling the truth about what he knew prior to the attacks of 911. In the same year, Zogby reported that 45 percent of Americans support an investigation of George W. Bush by an International Tribunal. Such a tribunal should re-investigate whether officials of the US government allowed or consciously and deliberately helped or facilitated the attacks.
In the same year, 911truth.org commissioned Zogby which found that about half the population of New York believes that members of the Bush administration ‘knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act.” 911 was, therefore, a deliberate act of mass murder perpetrated upon the American people by the man who presumes the office of ‘dictator’. Since that is the title he prefers to ‘president’, then I suggest we stoo calling him “President Bush’. He is merely Bush or, more properly, Mass Murderer Bush, if you must attach a title.Additional resources
Karl Rove defies Congressional subpoena, refuses to testify. That puts him in danger of a contempt of Congress citation, if Democrats can actually find a pair between them. Good luck with that.
Israel hints at pre-emptive attack on Iran. Let’s see, Israel carries out war games to practice bombing runs on Iran, and the “news” media calls it “defensive,” but when Iran responds with missile tests to show it can defend itself from such an attack, it’s called “provocative.” Now that’s what I call Demonic.
Book reveals that Bush lied about never seeing Red Cross report on torture. […] Let me know if evidence turns up that he’s ever told the truth!
It worked for Hitler. FBI planning to “profile” muslims. What they need to do is profile Republicans! US military defends marriage by murdering entire wedding party of 47 people. Get married, go to jail. Wisconsin to arrest same sex couples who get married in California?
- Bush’s Conspiracy to Create an American Police State: Part I, Police States Begin With False Flag Attacks
- Bush’s Conspiracy to Create an American Police State: Part II, Police States Begin With False Flag Attacks
- Bush’s Conspiracy to Create an American Police State: Part III, In Fascist Dictatorships Telling the truth becomes a crime
- Bush’s Conspiracy to Create an American Police State: Part IV, the state forces an ‘existential’ choice
- Bush’s Conspiracy to Create an American Police State: Part V, Public Opinion Becomes Irrelevant
- Bush’s Conspiracy to Create an American Police State: Part VI, The government places itself above the law
- Bush’s Conspiracy to Create an American Police State: Part VII, The Government Denies ‘Due Process of Law’
- Bush’s Conspiracy to Create an American Police State Part VIII: Atrocities are justified with lies, myths or propaganda