How George Bush Admitted His War Crimes

[cal04]

It was brilliantly deceptive, trumping even his orchestrated dishonesty in leading us to war.

Buried in the 94 pages of the Military Commissions Act of 2006-the "detainee act" or the "torture bill"-the Bush Administration tacitly admits it has committed war crimes.

There is no question war crimes have been committed. Corporal Charles Graner, Private First Class Lyndie England, and several of their teammates are serving time, for mistreating prisoners at the Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad.

At the time these soldiers were tried and sentenced many people felt the culpability must extend above the ranks of enlisted personnel, up some distance into the chain-of-command, perhaps to the top. Many still do.

There are two pairs of dots to be connected. One is a pair of small dots, the other two are huge.

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0930-22.htm

[midnight]

1. There are two pairs of dots to be connected.........

and by "two are huge" do you mean the President and Vice President?

[cui bono]

2. ingeniously obscured???

And it prohibits explicitly the detainees from claiming rights under the Geneva Conventions. Here is the language that does so:

No person may invoke the Geneva Conventions, or any protocols thereto, in any habeas or civil action or proceeding to which the United States, or a current or former officer, employee, member of the Armed Services, or other agent of the United States, is a party, as a source of rights in any court of the United States or its States or territories.

<snip>

The Military Commissions Act of 2006 is retroactive. It shall ".take effect as of November 26, 1997, as if enacted.." Nothing the Bush Administration has done can be called into question.

Why would the Bush people write these several requirements into a law? Only if they are guilty of committing war crimes and know they will face prosecution. Though ingeniously obscured, this is a de facto admission of guilt.


I think it's pretty obvious that the big point of this legislation was to immunize the administration from prosecution of their war crimes. The problem is the MSM isn't reporting it that way. Several indie media outlets however, have been mentioning this for days now.

[tavalon]

5. Aren't retroactive laws prohibited by the constitution?

And so, won't this newly minted law get thrown out on its ass by the Supreme Court?

[many a good man]

3. "created by desperate people terrified of prosecution"

Its a good thing bush doesn't like to travel abroad. Maybe Hugo can "make up" and invite bush, cheney, and rumsfeld to a party in the Venezuelan embassy....

[MissWaverly]

4. Nuremberg decided that argument did not hold water

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.

http://deoxy.org/wc/wc-nurem.htm