100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: War Crimes | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
So what is your collation between a one time Tomahawk strike based on faulty information and a multi year war that places thousands of US soldiers in harms way? I mean do you think that they are somehow of equal value? Do you think that Clinton had to go around and drum up support for this strike? If he did not then how much intelligence could he lie to the American people about? I think he did this strike without discussing it with the people because it was covert. So he could not have lied to us, if he did not tell us, or the un, or Europe. Bush on the other hand just lied about it all. He wanted a war with Iraq and he was going to have one no mater what it took. So he lied to the people, to the UN, to Europe, etc.. If one steals $1000 or $10,000, its still larceny. If you use a gun its armed robbery. Both Clinton and Bush ordered military action against a soveriegn nation. In the case of Iraq & the Sudan it was about WMD's. So one gets a pass and the other doesn't? I can only assume you can't read. No one cares if Bush used faulty info. It is that he lied his way into war. He was going to go to war before he had any intelligence. That is the problem l Oh, I can read. And I would appreciate if you would keep a civil tongue. But back to the point, if Bill Clinton can justify military action based on faulty intelligence you would prosecute Bush for doing likewise? and you believe it was an aspirin factory? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Findings of International War Crimes Tribunal re: George Bush, J. Danforth Quayle, James Baker, Richard Cheney,
William Webster, Colin Powell, Norman Schwarzkopf and Others to be named http://deoxy.org/wc/wc-preface.htm .................................... US War Crimes, An International Vow of Silence by Ghali Hassan www.globalresearch.ca 10 June 2005 The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/HAS506B.html ..................................... WAR CRIMES LAW APPLIES TO U.S. TOO By Walter J. Rockler. Walter J. Rockler A Washington lawyer, Rockler was a prosecutor at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trial http://www.zmag.org/CrisesCurEvts/nurletter.htm .................................. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
so nothing from the International Court of Justice yet huh...
 oh and that International War Crime Tribunal...it is not a judicial body .. "The Russell Tribunal, also known as the International War Crimes Tribunal or Russell-Sartre Tribunal, was a public body organized by British philosopher Bertrand Russell and hosted by French philosopher and playwright Jean-Paul Sartre." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bill Clinton got more action. I didn't ask about sex crimes... there were no sex crimes either. president Clinton and monica were both consenting adults. The only "crime" around the entire fiasco was when President Clinton perjured himself in court about the whole thing. Was it wrong for them to have an affair? In my eyes yes it was. Was it illegal? no. morals folks, are not laws. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So what is your collation between a one time Tomahawk strike based on faulty information and a multi year war that places thousands of US soldiers in harms way? I mean do you think that they are somehow of equal value? Do you think that Clinton had to go around and drum up support for this strike? If he did not then how much intelligence could he lie to the American people about? I think he did this strike without discussing it with the people because it was covert. So he could not have lied to us, if he did not tell us, or the un, or Europe. Bush on the other hand just lied about it all. He wanted a war with Iraq and he was going to have one no mater what it took. So he lied to the people, to the UN, to Europe, etc.. not once did President Bush lie. This pisses me off bigger than anything. President Bush followed the information he was given by his cabinet members. Yes I think he was aching for a reason to go to war, but he still used information gathered by his cabinet that appeared to be true at the time. And don't give me any bull about his being a part of the false information to begin with as there is no evidence to that statement. When it came out that documents had been falsified, and information was false, President Bush ordered an internal review and fired PUBLICLY those that were the cause of it. There is nothing to suggest that there is evidence against President Bush for covering up bad information, or making scapegoats out of others to save himself. Absolutely no evidence, just hearsay and angry words from ignorant citizens. Yes ignorant, because you are not fully educated on the matter, as I am not fully educated either. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So what is your collation between a one time Tomahawk strike based on faulty information and a multi year war that places thousands of US soldiers in harms way? I mean do you think that they are somehow of equal value? Do you think that Clinton had to go around and drum up support for this strike? If he did not then how much intelligence could he lie to the American people about? I think he did this strike without discussing it with the people because it was covert. So he could not have lied to us, if he did not tell us, or the un, or Europe. Bush on the other hand just lied about it all. He wanted a war with Iraq and he was going to have one no mater what it took. So he lied to the people, to the UN, to Europe, etc.. If one steals $1000 or $10,000, its still larceny. If you use a gun its armed robbery. Both Clinton and Bush ordered military action against a soveriegn nation. In the case of Iraq & the Sudan it was about WMD's. So one gets a pass and the other doesn't? I can only assume you can't read. No one cares if Bush used faulty info. It is that he lied his way into war. He was going to go to war before he had any intelligence. That is the problem l Oh, I can read. And I would appreciate if you would keep a civil tongue. But back to the point, if Bill Clinton can justify military action based on faulty intelligence you would prosecute Bush for doing likewise? I have answered this question 2 times now. Since you have not got it I can only assume that you can't read. I state very clearly that no one cares that his intelligence is faulty. We are saying that he wanted to go to war with Iraq. Then 9/11 happened and he went to war with Iraq. The way he did that was by lying to everyone. Please explain how President Bush (jr) lied t the american public. He used current information from that time that proved to eb false in the end, yes. But HE did not lie about it. When the information was first given it was considered reliable and factual. When it turned out to be wrong, or at least not accurate, president Bush publicly stated it had been wrong and publicly fired those responsible. So, againplease tell me how President Bush (jr) lied to go to war. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinton went in off intelligence gathered at the time, he layed off as soon as that intelligence failed. Bush has continued the war effort even after knowing full well the intelligence was flawed, yes Presidnet Clinton backed off after the initial strike when information proved to be wrong. President Bush was unable to do so, because of the difference in scale. President Clinton used a missile strike. President Bush used an invasion Force. The one is clearly eaiser to stop than the other, with less repurcussions. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
no one cares that his intelligence is faulty. We are saying that he wanted to go to war with Iraq. you imply that you speak for everyone....please curtail your arrogance because you sure don't speak for me....  His intelligence level is questionable and the war in Iraq is illegal, there is no way around it. please explain, in your view why is the war in Iraq illegal? is it because of how war was declared? Is it because inofrmation proved to be wrong? Or is it just because you dont liek the idea of us being in Iraq, so it has to be illegal? president Bush used the Presidents legal power to declare an immediate response due to intelligence gathered. He then approached Congress, as he was required to do, in order to petition for the war to be authorized. CONGRESS AGREED WITH HIS ASSESMENTS ADN CONSENTED TO THE WAR. Everthing was done by the letter. just because the information proved to be wrng does not mean the war was illegally started. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So you want to prosecute GW for lying. Yeah, take that to the world court, prosecute a politician for lying. Supposedly that is what they impeached Clinton for LYING, right??? They tried to impeach President Clinton for perjury which, yes is lying. the differance here is that President Clinton was under oath in a court of law when he lied, thus perjury. perjury is illegal. Lying is not. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
karmafury
on
Tue 02/19/08 07:40 AM
|
|
oh and that International War Crime Tribunal...it is not a judicial body .. "The Russell Tribunal, also known as the International War Crimes Tribunal or Russell-Sartre Tribunal, was a public body organized by British philosopher Bertrand Russell and hosted by French philosopher and playwright Jean-Paul Sartre." Tell that to Slobodan Milošević and the others indicted for War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity. Here's more from an a former U.S. A.G. WAR CRIMES A Report on United States War Crimes Against Iraq to the Commission of Inquiry for the International War Crimes Tribunal by Ramsey Clark and Others http://deoxy.org/wc/warcrime.htm Ramsey Clark served as U.S. Attorney General in the administration of Lyndon Johnson. He is the convener of the Commission of Inquiry and a human rights lawyer of world-wide respect. This report was given in New York, May 11, 1991. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell that to Slobodan Milošević and the others indicted for War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity. Here's more from an a former U.S. A.G. WAR CRIMES A Report on United States War Crimes Against Iraq to the Commission of Inquiry for the International War Crimes Tribunal by Ramsey Clark and Others http://deoxy.org/wc/warcrime.htm Ramsey Clark served as U.S. Attorney General in the administration of Lyndon Johnson. He is the convener of the Commission of Inquiry and a human rights lawyer of world-wide respect. This report was given in New York, May 11, 1991. excuse me but your incorrect and I already informed you what the International War Crimes Tribunal is so I don't know why you think you can change it into something else... Slobodan Milošević was tried by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia or ICTY, is a body of the United Nations (UN) established to prosecute serious crimes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ramsey Clark, the same secretary of defense that gave us Viet Nam, now there's a comforting thought
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
adj4u
on
Tue 02/19/08 09:29 AM
|
|
Ramsey Clark, the same secretary of defense that gave us Viet Nam, now there's a comforting thought i think he was attorney general thomas gates was secretary of defense for eisenhower in 59 the beginning of vietnam for the united states after mceroy resigned McNamara is the one that ran the bulk of the veitnam fiasco till he resigned in 68 and nixion appointed melvin laird when he became prz |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I read that Ramsay Clarke claimed these nice people Slobodan Milosevic, Saddam Hussein and Rwandan torturers as anti-imperialist heroes...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I read that Ramsay Clarke claimed these nice people Slobodan Milosevic, Saddam Hussein and Rwandan torturers as anti-imperialist heroes... The former U.S. attorney general has become the tool of left-wing cultists who defend Slobodan Milosevic, Saddam Hussein and Rwandan torturers as anti-imperialist heroes. http://www.salon.com/news/feature/1999/06/21/clark/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think Ramsey Clark Is a good name to remember, and keep a close eye on him. May be a really good eye on him.
 I wonder if he supports Israel above the US?? I think He should bear our attention.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So what is your collation between a one time Tomahawk strike based on faulty information and a multi year war that places thousands of US soldiers in harms way? I mean do you think that they are somehow of equal value? Do you think that Clinton had to go around and drum up support for this strike? If he did not then how much intelligence could he lie to the American people about? I think he did this strike without discussing it with the people because it was covert. So he could not have lied to us, if he did not tell us, or the un, or Europe. Bush on the other hand just lied about it all. He wanted a war with Iraq and he was going to have one no mater what it took. So he lied to the people, to the UN, to Europe, etc.. I couldnt get past this one in the thread so if someone else chopped it up already then I apologize.... I will take it easier than I normally would Just have one word for you on this..... KOSOVO, Remember we were going to Kosovo to help stop the genocide, the ethnic cleansing.... He came on the TV (he being willy slickster) and said- we will have our boys home by christmas (of that year) well girly men we are still there and not a damn one of you hypocrits even dare to bring that crap up, 15 years later. But its cool, I know how the lib mind thinks, only bring up something if it promotes an agenda, or can be used in someway to minipulate opinions and truth. billions of dollars spent in both places, lives lost in both places, oh well Im done- peace out home slice doc |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Doc:
'girly men' I love that. Have not heard it for a long time. Thank you. Lindyy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
