Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
Statute of Limitations? And did they really act without knowledge of certain Congressional merrily May 2014 #1
No statute of limitations on war crimes or crimes against humanity gratuitous May 2014 #8
We have intervened on behalf of Buscho with other nations, after deciding domestically to look only merrily May 2014 #9
All good points gratuitous May 2014 #13
Apparently, Democrats with principles have become an object of ridicule to "pragmatic" Democrats. merrily May 2014 #15
about just the comment "Too bad I can't unknow something once I know it." Leme May 2014 #18
True, we were scammed, it seems. During the Bush years we were led to believe that sabrina 1 May 2014 #24
Even without holding them accountable, I could have lived with it, if merrily May 2014 #25
Here you go: Heywood J May 2014 #31
they don't even trust our medical providers. Leme May 2014 #17
No longer do what? No longer seek information while giving vaccinations? merrily May 2014 #26
just telling you what I think they said Leme May 2014 #27
Oh, I see. I didn't think that there had been any doubt that they had done it. merrily May 2014 #28
File under No Shit. NuclearDem May 2014 #2
Big K&R! This is the criminal who John Kerry and crew should be focusing on quinnox May 2014 #3
+100 million G_j May 2014 #4
Well yeah, but there's a big power difference there. JoeyT May 2014 #12
Fight back? Or line your pockets? merrily May 2014 #16
We've come to learn that well. pacalo May 2014 #23
Impeachment is off the table: Pelosi. Need to look forward and not back: Obama neverforget May 2014 #5
Did Pelosi articulate a valid reason for taking impeachment "off the table"? Martin Eden May 2014 #7
Of course, why Obama wants to get along with a man he campaigned so hard against in 2008, merrily May 2014 #10
* 'unsigned' the US from the ICC right after stealing office, has President Obama resigned to it? If Mnemosyne May 2014 #6
No. delta17 May 2014 #55
I was afraid of that. A damn shame. nt Mnemosyne May 2014 #58
1998: PNAC wanted a "new Pearl Harbor". 2000: Got themselves installed. 2001: MIHOP/LIHOP. nt ChisolmTrailDem May 2014 #11
Reformer expans over the years. DhhD May 2014 #57
K&R!!!!!!!!!!! burrowowl May 2014 #14
Duh Solly Mack May 2014 #19
I know right? G_j May 2014 #29
You're right, of course. Solly Mack May 2014 #42
somehow G_j May 2014 #44
It is a topic that many avoid. Solly Mack May 2014 #47
If we don't take responsibility for grievous wrongs (in this case, war crimes) all else rings hollow G_j May 2014 #62
Kicked and recommended for water being wet and fire being hot. Uncle Joe May 2014 #20
Right. We heard you the first time, but it bears repeating because a lot of people were in denial. Hekate May 2014 #21
"Would (charging them with war crimes) be useful?" pacalo May 2014 #22
We also need to ask our own government if they are harboring futitives Major Nikon May 2014 #30
Bush crimes started with the theft of the 2000 election. Enthusiast May 2014 #32
+1000 noiretextatique May 2014 #38
Duh! malaise May 2014 #33
War crimes? Election theft? Oh, crazy DU CTers, this is all just so much woo. Gidney N Cloyd May 2014 #34
+1000. Was just about to post that there's always a contingent bullwinkle428 May 2014 #35
From 2012: New NSA docs contradict 9/11 claims Octafish May 2014 #36
Interesting how the usual suspects never reply in these kind of threads. nt. Rex May 2014 #43
Cowards. Octafish May 2014 #45
Hopefully they are all over at the New Site, having their never ending arguments Rex May 2014 #46
Give em a break. They got some fresh Snowden or Greenwald threads to swarm. nm rhett o rick May 2014 #49
Well as long as we talk about GG/Snowden and NOT the NSA spying on every person in America. Rex May 2014 #51
It's a bit harder I suppose, to attack the messenger here (Clarke) nt G_j May 2014 #60
Love this guy. Would follow him anywhere, the real deal. joanbarnes May 2014 #37
It doesn't matter what you think now.... AnneD May 2014 #39
Shocking, I tell you, shocking indepat May 2014 #40
You Liberals will post anything to change the subject. sellitman May 2014 #41
I thought the current distraction was Snowden. nm rhett o rick May 2014 #50
You don't say, Mr. Clarke! sakabatou May 2014 #48
It would be productive. obxhead May 2014 #52
they see it as leadership, not war crimes SleeplessinSoCal May 2014 #53
An American patriot Faygo Kid May 2014 #54
MUST. blkmusclmachine May 2014 #56
Rec'd for truth and justice, although neither matter to current government Corruption Inc May 2014 #59
Some? Hissyspit May 2014 #61
Now if we can only get the Attorney General to listen Jake2413 May 2014 #63
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Former Counterterrorism C...»Reply #53