Under American Law Bush cannot be charged regarding this. The Military Commissions Act specifically covers this. As for the International Court trying him for any of this, the United States is not signatory to the International Court. Specifically so that no American could be brought before it for alleged war crimes.

The whole idea of Bush being charged and tried with anything may be a sentiment felt by many but one that will never happen.

Bull****!

With all respect Karma, this isnt Canada and you have no idea what you are talking about.

bush never broke the law. why dont you go after voter fruad with acorn aand obamma. what did oabama know about the corruption in the governors office in his own state?why dont you see how corrupt barny frank and fanny may or why does rangle get a pass on back taxes and misspending of public funds?

Don't need to be American to read the Act in question nor to read the ACLU's problems with it regarding the total loss of 'Habeas Corpus' or that the President himself decides what constitutes torture and what doesn't.

fa·nat·i·cal (f-nt-kl) KEY

ADJECTIVE:

Possessed with or motivated by excessive, irrational zeal.

Im sorry I wont stop untill criminal charges are made for the crime of the century.

The Canadian PM might be above the law, but here in the US no one is!

The MCA eliminates the constitutional due process right of habeas corpus for detainees at Guantánamo Bay and elsewhere. It allows our government to continue to hold hundreds of prisoners for more than five years without charges.

It also gives any president the power to declare — on his or her own — who is an enemy combatant, decide who should be held indefinitely without being charged with a crime and define what is — and what is not — torture and abuse.


http://www.aclu.org/safefree/detention/commissions.html




US Opposition to the International Criminal Court

The United States government has consistently opposed an international court that could hold US military and political leaders to a uniform global standard of justice. The Clinton administration participated actively in negotiations towards the International Criminal Court treaty, seeking Security Council screening of cases. If adopted, this would have enabled the US to veto any dockets it opposed. When other countries refused to agree to such an unequal standard of justice, the US campaigned to weaken and undermine the court. The Bush administration, coming into office in 2001 as the Court neared implementation, adopted an extremely active opposition. Washington began to negotiate bilateral agreements with other countries, insuring immunity of US nationals from prosecution by the Court. As leverage, Washington threatened termination of economic aid, withdrawal of military assistance, and other painful measures. These exclusionary steps clearly endanger the fledgling Court and may seriously weaken its credibility and effectiveness.


http://www.globalpolicy.org/intljustice/icc/usindex.htm



It will never happen. Bush and the government have effectively seen to that.

Special Prosecutor for Bush War Crimes
Submitted by Bob Fertik on December 18, 2008 - 9:45pm.
19222 of 100000 people have signed this petition.
BackgroundDear Attorney General-Designate Eric Holder,

We the undersigned citizens of the United States hereby formally petition you to appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate and prosecute any and all government officials who have participated in War Crimes.

(Thanks to buhdydharma and the Docudharma community for the petition, and to Edger for the logo.)

Update 1: On 12/20 we received a reply from Mr. Holder:

Enough folks. I hear you.

So out of respect we stopped forwarding each signature individually and will instead give him the list in full before the Senate confirmation hearings.


Petition
Dear Attorney General-Designate Eric Holder,

We the undersigned citizens of the United States hereby formally petition you to appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate and prosecute any and all government officials who have participated in War Crimes.

These crimes are being euphemistically referred to as "abusive interrogation techniques" by such respected figures as Senator John McCain. These are euphemisms for torture. Torture is a War Crime. Waterboarding is a War Crime. The CIA has admitted waterboarding detainees. Recently, Vice President Cheney has brazenly admitted authorizing the program that led to waterboarding, other forms of torture too numerous to list, and ultimately, the deaths by homicide of detainees.

As Major General Antonio Taguba, the Army general who led the investigation into prisoner abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison has stated:

"After years of disclosures by government investigations, media accounts and reports from human rights organizations, there is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes. The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account."


The Washington Post recently summarized the Senate Armed Services Committee Report on detainee treatment thusly:

A bipartisan panel of senators has concluded that former defense secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and other top Bush administration officials bear direct responsibility for the harsh treatment of detainees at Guantanamo Bay, and that their decisions led to more serious abuses in Iraq and elsewhere.


We the undersigned citizens demand a full and thorough investigation immediately upon your taking office. This investigation should be pursued no matter where it may lead and no matter what the political implications may be. To this end, we remind you that you work not on behalf of or for the President or the Congress, but for the People of the United States of America and for Justice itself.

The United States is a representative democracy. The actions of our government officials are done in the name of its citizens. War Crimes have been committed in our name. Torture has been done in our name. The only way to clear our name of War Crimes is to repudiate them through the aggressive prosecution of each and every person involved to the full extent of the law through the appointment of a Special Prosecutor.


Go sign the petition,,

http://www.democrats.com/special-prosecutor-for-bush-war-crimes

Advocates of a Special Prosecutor for Bush Seek an Answer From Obama
By Michael Falcone
With few exceptions the transition period has been a model of presidential goodwill and cooperation. Apparently, the curious users who have been submitting questions on President-elect Barack Obama’s Web site, Change.gov, didn’t get the memo.

In fact, the number one submission on the popular “Open for Questions” portion of the site might seem more than a little impolitic to the current, and soon to be former, occupant of the White House.

“Will you appoint a Special Prosecutor — ideally Patrick Fitzgerald — to independently investigate the gravest crimes of the Bush Administration, including torture and warrantless wiretapping,” wrote Bob Fertik of New York, who runs the Web site, Democrats.com

Though the Obama team has promised to answer some of the top questions as early as this week, they have not said whether they will respond to Mr. Fertik’s, which has received more than 22,000 votes since the second round of the question-and-answer feature began on Dec. 30.

The site logged more than 1.5 million votes for 20,000-plus questions as of Wednesday. The second highest-ranked submission, which is about oversight of the nation’s banking industry, is several thousand of votes behind the query about a special prosecutor.

Mr. Fertik’s question has been pushed to the top, in part, by a coalition of liberal bloggers, including a writer for the Web site, Daily Kos, who have “endorsed” it and encouraged their readers to vote for it on Change.gov.

On his own site, Mr. Fertik pointed out that during his presidential campaign Mr. Obama left the door open to a special prosecutor.

“What I would want to do is to have my Justice Department and my Attorney General immediately review the information that’s already there and to find out are there inquiries that need to be pursued,” Mr. Obama told a Philadelphia journalist last April. But he went on to emphasize the difference between what he called “really dumb policies and policies that rise to the level of criminal activity.”

The Obama transition team rolled out the “Open for Questions” feature in December, and it’s part of their effort to give users a chance to interact with the incoming administration. Transition officials responded to some of first-round questions last month, including on the president-elect’s position on stem cell research and legalizing marijuana.

No word yet on whether they’ll have an answer for Mr. Fertik.

But a clue to their potential response might come from the mouth of Vice President-elect Joe Biden who told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos recently that he would not rule in or rule out a Justice Department inquiry into the role of top Bush administration officials in cases of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay and other facilities.

“The questions of whether or not a criminal act has been committed or a very, very, very bad judgment has been engaged in is something the Justice Department decides,” Mr. Biden sa

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/07/advocates-of-a-special-prosecutor-for-bush-seek-an-answer-from-obama/

You are far from alone on this subject Madman!!

Update 1: On 12/20 we received a reply from Mr. Holder:

Enough folks. I hear you.

So out of respect we stopped forwarding each signature individually and will instead give him the list in full before the Senate confirmation hearings.


Sign the petition!!

Our Gov is accountable to the people.
The laws Bush made to defend himself against us will soon be made mute.

Again,
You have no idea what you are talking about.
This is our country, not Canada, and this is an Internal affair. Its no ones business but Americans!!!