Amnesty: prosecute Bush for admitted waterboarding

[cory777]

Source: Reuters

LONDON (Reuters) - The United States must prosecute former President George W. Bush for torture if his admission in a memoir that he authorized waterboarding holds true, rights group Amnesty International said on Wednesday.

In "Decision Points," published this week, Bush defended his decision to authorize waterboarding, a form of simulated drowning condemned by some as torture.

Bush said the practice was limited to three detainees and led to intelligence breakthroughs that thwarted attacks and saved lives. He told NBC in an interview to publicize the book that his legal adviser had told him it did "not fall within the anti-torture act."

Amnesty International's Senior Director Claudio Cordone said in a statement: "Under international law, anyone involved in torture must be brought to justice, and that does not exclude former President George W. Bush.

Read more: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/reuters/101110/us/politics_us_usa_bush_amnesty

---

Uncensored Alternative News http://activistnews.blogspot.com/

[Kingofalldems]

1. K and R

[sweetapogee]

25. reality people

I'm beginning to think that the calls for prosecution of shrub are rooted in the pukes. They, the pukish party are planning, have been planning for the past 2 years to investigate our POTUS and his staff/supporters and what better way to side track everyone but to go off on a tangent thinking that bush (or any other ex-president) will be hauled into court foreign or domestic. There is no way bush or any other president of the US (in office or out) is ever going to be tried in a court.

If it were possible to put bush into a court, the current congress would have made moves to do so. By the same hand, the pukes will stop once they achieve their goals with President Obama, which will be getting him out of office. Seriously, think about it, does anyone think that the government will install secret service and a security detail in a jail cell somewhere?

ON EDIT: Sorry, I put this in the wrong place, I intended to add my comments to the root OP. Let me say one other thing, I think shrub in poking fun at us with his book because he knows nothing will ever come of it, except to make us look silly.

[daleanime]

33. Reality?

for the next two years at least, the Obamas are going under the magnifying glass, whither we do the right thing by B*sh or not.


Would not be surprised to see the Pres required to have a piss test before State of the Union speechs.:hurts:


So there's no reason not to do what right.

[sweetapogee]

42. there may be no reason

not to do what is right, except in this case there is maybe no practical reason to do what is right, unless you think that having smirk bushco taunting us for the next two years is somehow beneficial to us.

And your "doing what is right" meme doesn't explain the lack of action from congressional dems. This can only mean 1 of 2 things, one, the dems know that the chimpster cannot be successfully prosecuted or two, taking bush down will result in taking some of us down in the process.

Everything in Washington is done for a political reason, be it action or inaction. The inaction is starting to speak to me. Food for thought....

[daleanime]

66. Well, we both agree that the continued inaction....

says tons about our political system.:banghead:

[Lord Magus]

69. Congress has no role in putting criminals on trial.

And having Bush put on trial for the crimes he's so obviously guilty of would be an end unto itself.

[molly77]

47. sweetapogee

You are so right. Bush has always poked fun at US. He reminds me of a kid who never got any attention except the negative kind. And he just can't stop even though he supposedly grew up.

[proReality]

54. Oh, but the dream of him being renditioned...

I can hope, can't I?

[24601]

68. Sure, as long as you're establishing rendition as your standard of

for everyone.

[Lord Magus]

70. The idea of presidents being immune to prosecution is antithetical to our system of law and justice.

Our nation was built on the premise that no one is above the law. The idea that someone who committed some of the worst crimes in our nation's history can't be prosecuted because he's an ex-president is an obscenity. It's very possible to put Bush on trial, and given that he's confessed to his crimes it shouldn't be hard to convict him either. The problem is that the decision has been made not to do so.

[ixion]

2. "condemned by some"

BS. It's torture and everyone knows it. The people who say it isn't are lying, pure and simple.

Now off to the Hague with you, Little Boots.

[Lord Magus]

12. I remember FAIR covering that a while ago.

IIRC they found that before the Bush waterboarding story broke, there was never an instance of the American news media reporting it as anything other than torture. But once our own government started using it, it suddenly became disputed whether it's torture.

[onehandle]

3. Lotsa luck. nt

[Poll_Blind]

4. Maybe the next president will do something. n/t

PB

[cstanleytech]

9. The cynic in me doubts that any US president will authorize the

prosecution of any former united states president, after all obeying the law it seems doesnt apply to those in power.

[ProudDad]

39. pResident Palin? Not likely... (n/t)

[lefty2000]

44. My money is on Jeb n/t

[ProudDad]

45. Or Mitt...the Mormons are taking over...

They've already taken over in Arizona...

They have Socialism within the church and they sure as hell don't want to be forced to pay for Socialism for Gentiles...

[Capt. America]

50. No way. A Bush wont be elected dog catcher for at least 10 years.

[ProudDad]

75. That's what we said about Poppy...

:evilgrin:

It only took the sheeple 8 years to forget...

They've apparently forgotten in just 2 this time...

[rhett o rick]

63. My money also. The Bush Crime Dynasty isnt dead. nm

[pokercat999]

52. Now that's funny on several levels. nt

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[The Backlash Cometh]

6. You all did hear that he blamed it on the lawyers, right?

He said he asked a lawyer and the lawyer said it was acceptable. Bush shrugged and said, hey, he wasn't the lawyer and went on the lawyer's opinion.

It's Gonzalez who should have been reprimanded, because Bush has plausible deniability.

[wtmusic]

7. That's never been a legit excuse. nt

[Lord Magus]

13. Doesn't work that way.

When you commit a crime, you can't just say "I was told it was legal" and get off scot-free.

Well, not unless you're a member of the Bush administration, because Democrats are too spineless to prosecute them even for crimes they openly admit to. Too petrified of the prospect that they'd be accused of seeking political revenge to actually enforce the rule of law.

[The Backlash Cometh]

16. If you can find how the law works on this matter, please PM me.

I would love it if what you say is true.

[24601]

77. I believe the OPR opinions in question were in 2002, long before

Gonzales was AG.

[defendandprotect]

8. Democrats certainly aren't moving to prosecute any war crimes by Bush....

neither is the MIC -- they're planning their next war!!

Until someone has the power to bring these war criminals to justice ....

I can only trust he'll be accorded the same scorn as Pinochet and Kissinger!!

[sce56]

10. The USA Put Japanese soldiers to death for water boarding American POW's in WWII!

Why not Commander AWOL?



Look the day it comes out 30-40% off what a cheap ass book!

[dflprincess]

17. He claims lawyers told him it waterboarding was legal

though I imagine he cherry picked his legal advice the way he did intelligence before he invaded Iraq.

I don't understand how the DOJ can continue to ignore this when he openly admits being a criminal

[Enthusiast]

22. This DOJ can

pick and chose just like the previous one did.

[pokercat999]

53. This DOJ is a sick joke. nt

[wpelb]

34. Not hard to cherry pick legal advice

Find two or three lawyers and ask them an opinion about anything, and you will get at least two opinions. All Bush, Cheney, et al. have to do is get a few lawyers to testify that THEY didn't think waterboarding was torture (maybe psychologically stressful, but no obvious lasting physical effects, or something similar), and they skate. The lawyers might then be taken to task, but since when is giving a legal opinion a crime?

[dflprincess]

48. I don't see how they can rationalize that opinion in anywat

As Sce56 pointed out above, the U.S. executed Japanese for waterboarding. Bush & his lawyers might have problems explaining how they ignored a precedent established by the U.S.

[Lord Magus]

71. Since when is giving a legal opinion a crime?

When the "legal opinion" is a (flimsy) pretext for advising your client to commit what you know to be a crime. At that point, you're not his lawyer, you're his accomplice.

[ArcticFox]

36. Is that a photoshop, or is it really filed under "true crime?"

[markmyword]

11. War Criminals

Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Gonzalez, Yoo, Bybee, and the
rest of the Bush Administration who lied about WMD and allowed
torture, (which is ILLEGAL), MUST be held accountable for what
they've done.

They are War Criminals and should be tried in the Hague like
all other war criminals. Since the justice department under
Eric Holder, has no plans to prosecute these war criminals,
then they should be turned over to the international courts.

We can not go forward, as President Obama wants us to do,
until we as a people, have ALL of our citizens  abide by the
rule of law and that includes an American president by the
name of George W. Bush.

[Lord Magus]

14. We hanged Nazis at Nuremberg for those crimes.

Crimes against humanity and waging a war of aggression. Bush and his accomplices should face the same punishment. Or lethal injection if we want to use the current standard in methods of execution.

[Lionel Mandrake]

49. Waging a war of aggression

was indeed one of the major crimes for which Nazis were prosecuted at Nuremberg. This was classified as a crime against peace. Hitler and his accomplices did it in Czechoslovakia, Poland, and the USSR. The Nazis were at peace with each of these nations when they invaded it.

W. and his accomplices did the same thing in Iraq. Even if there had been "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq, that would not be a valid defense against the charge of waging a war of aggression.

[Mira]

20. Breaking into tears of rage and frustration. Your words echo all I feel. n/t

[Blacksheep214]

15. There can be no statute of limitations on torture

or war crimes as our Jewish friends have shown the last remaining Nazis.

America has executed Japanese for the same offenses.

Get a rope!

[Gamey]

18. Get a hetero blow job then people will pay attention

[bluesmail]

19. That would make him the scapegoat. Doesn't everybody want the people

pulling his strings?

[grahamhgreen]

21. If you go after him, he will give up the goods on the whole lot.

[Celtic Raven]

37. You're right, he's the weak link

He'd roll over on all of them in a heartbeat.

[Violet_Crumble]

23. Kudos to Amnesty International n/t

[dipsydoodle]

24. If he was Commander in Chief

then can Article 32, Conspiracy to Conceal a Crime , be used against him ?

[AsahinaKimi]

26. I have given up hope that

Bush and company will every face any charges in my lifetime. Too much corruption in Washington DC. Money is passed under the table and the rich and powerful get a pass.

[mallard]

30. Re: bush said ...

Article:

"Bush said the practice was limited to three detainees and led to intelligence breakthroughs that thwarted attacks and saved lives."


At least he's consistent when it comes to telling the truth! In his Texas Rangers glory 'coming out' media review, he throws in a couple new whopper lies ... like it was for old time's sake.

[Solly Mack]

27. k/r

[City Lights]

28. K&R, but don't hold your breath, Amnesty.

The US will do nothing of the sort.

[Evasporque]

29. Tea Party /GOP to propose adding W face to Mt. Rushmore...nt

[guyton]

31. Obama owns this

The most serious failing of the current administration is it's refusal to enforce the law and bring these war criminals to trial.

Not only in the name of justice, but to try and prevent it from happening again.

Failure to do so guarantees that it will happen again. And then how do we look at ourselves in the mirror?

Yes Mr. President, I am looking forward.

[Uncle Joe]

32. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, cory.

[Voice for Peace]

35. It seems very simple. If Bush was justified, who isn't?

It must happen! Internationally speaking.

[ProudDad]

38. But then you'd have to prosecute Obama for rendition... (n/t)

[davidwparker]

40. "does not exclude former President George W. Bush"

With the increasing irrelevance of the United States to the world, maybe when we are a second or third world country, there will be prosecutions for our criminals internationally.

[ProudDad]

41. I wonder how many waterboarding sessions this little prick could survive

before he rolled over on cheney, et al...

That is, if he was in the loop (which I doubt)...

[sally cat]

55. Survive? Isn't it 100% fatal?

[ProudDad]

76. Nope...

September 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed 'waterboarded 183 times'

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6130165.ece

And they learned nothing;

Waterboarding "Success Stories": Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and Library Tower
http://waterboarding.org/success_story

"Khalid Shaikh Mohammed was captured in Rawalpindi, Pakistan on March 1, 2003 — after the plot was discovered, after the plot was "derailed", after the pilot of the plane was captured. Khaled Sheikh Mohammed could not have "provided valuable information and saved lives" when all aspects of the plot were well-known and the attack had been foiled prior to his capture."

Coercive interrogation is extremely effective at obtaining confessions. Evidence obtained from coercive interrogation is highly dubious and must be corroborated with reliable sources. The claims of interrogators who coerce their prisoners should be treated with as much skepticism as the claims of the prisoners themselves."

Although bush is such a wuss he'd probably actually reveal whatever he may remember...if he was included in the loop...which he probably rarely was...

[KansDem]

43. Kickaroo and Recommendo!!!

The sooner, the better!!!...:woohoo:

[Ignis]

46. Here's a BIG K&R for Amnesty for not "keeping their powder dry."

Unlike some spineless politicians here in the US who will remain unnamed.

:argh:

[Blue Owl]

51. But that might give Democrats momentum and make the GOP look bad

(sounds like a WIN/WIN to me)

[ElsewheresDaughter]

56. HELLO NANCY!!!! Can we put it back on the table now?!?

[Creative]

57. Yawn...

If I were going to prosecute Bush for anything, it would be for being so damn dim-witted.

The folks at Amnesty should stop wasting their time.

[Independent_Liberal]

60. They aren't wasting their time.

People should keep calling for prosecution, regardless of what happens. Personally, I'll fight for the rest of my life if I have to. They said blacks would never be able to choose where to sit on busses. They said women would never be able to vote. They said we'd never get rid of slavery. I consider this another one of those battles.

[Creative]

61. Trust me, they are wasting their time, and you are wasting yours as well.

It will NEVER happen.

On the other hand, wise people knew that we'd get rid of slavery and that blacks would be able to choose where to sit on busses. Heck, Jefferson threw down the gauntlet against slavery during Declaration Convention, even though he knew it was a lost cause. That was a worthy cause.

Eventually, you too, will realize that this is a waste of time.

[Independent_Liberal]

62. No, I'm not wasting my time and neither are they.

I'm not going to argue with anybody. This IS a worthy cause. I don't care what you or anybody else says.

[cyr330]

58. It's NOT going to happen.

The Obama Administration is too interested in playing nice and playing footsy with the repigs.

[indimuse]

59. KNR! n/t

[Mosaic]

64. War Criminals MUST be Punished

End of story.

[lovuian]

65. Bush believed in the Death Penalty...Waterboarding gets

the death penalty in International Law

[sweetapogee]

67. two weeks ago

there was a national rally to restore sanity. It must not have served it's intended purpose because what sane rational person really thinks that a former US President of any stipe will be taken before any tribunal style court? This is impossible and it will not happen outside of the context of an sucessful armed revolution.

Meanwhile, back at the farm, the house republican soon to be majority has sent one message with clarity (as the chimpster would say) and that is this, the pukes intend to investigate the living h*ll out of the President. So, instead of focusing on that, we instead prove our commitment to sanity by insisting that what is left of our caucus push for something that will never happen.

The only best way for us to regain the political high ground is to do what everyone wants and that is to fix the economy. This is what the pukes are going to make their priority for 2012. With unemployment offically at 9.5%, it will have to drop to about 7.5% in the next 12 months or we will be toast come Nov 2012. While there may be some reasons to think the economy is improving, the fact that some rather large states like CA are on the brink of fiscal meltdown and we now have a house of represenatives that are not going to rubberstamp any bailout of that state because it is run by dems. This should be our great concern but instead we are wagging our tails with this fantasy about seeing bush in court.

Ask yourself this question, how many indies or pukes are really going to be impressed with a dem politician and vote for him/her because they made unsucessfull attempts to put bush in a court environment for something that resulted in a bad guy giving up bad guy plans that were ment to harm good US citizens? A bitter pill, yes but there is no crying in politics. We must move on to more productive fields or fade off into the sunset.

just one opinion. I call it as I see it.

[Lord Magus]

72. Rule of law means no one is immune from prosecution for their crimes.

The idea that being a former president should carry such immunity is the definition of insanity.

You can pretend that it would be an unsuccessful attempt, but the reality is that the only reason Bush hasn't already been tried (and given how he brags about his crimes, most likely convicted) is that Obama and Holder have made the mistake of deciding not to prosecute him.

[sweetapogee]

73. I'm not

debating right and wrong with you or any one else. I'm looking at what can actually be accomplished. The best that can be accomplished at this point is to embarrass george w. bush. If you think embarrassing ex-president bush is worth all the trouble, then by all means have at it. I don't share your beliefs and this has nothing to do with rule of law. The time to act was past when bush left the WH 2 years ago and the best result that we could have expected back then would be for us to get him kicked out of office with the resulting puke party turmoil. Had there been anything that could be done to bush in 2008-2009, the dems would have done it and probably we would not now be headed to minority status in the house next year.

Moving ahead, the republicans are going to show us how it is done. They will investigate the President, starting with the low hanging fruit of his staff. Little by little and for maximum political advantage they will creep higher and higher to the President, just nipping at his heals and thus remove his ability to rule. With that goes the ability of the democratic party to keep itself intact and win the next election. The pukes will use the dems to fight among ourselves and reserve the high moral road for themselves. In the meantime, the pukes will craft an agenda that they will say addresses the troubles with the economy, which is the ONLY thing that we should consume ourselves with for the next two years. And this strategy will work because we are being side tracked into thinking that there is a chance of seeing ex-president george bush frog marched, hoping this neuters the puke party.

We want to win a battle that has already been decided, our enemy is looking to win the war. My prediction is that the biggest challenges to the dems for 2012 will come from the dems, why? because we have tunnel vision.

For what is is worth, a sobering look at the election returns in my state of PA where one of my senators will be running for re-election in 2012, Bob Casey Jr. Casey, like his father before him ran as a "pro-life" moderate. And yet, toomey ran just this year as a fiscal conservative and won. Does anyone here think that toomeys victory will not be considered in Caseys votes for the next two years? If anyone here thinks Casey Jr. is a confirmed progressive vote next term, please send some of your bong hits my way.

Another observation, If president Obama is either forced to resign due to scandal or is beat in a primary, then there is zero, zero, zero chance of us keeping the WH in 2012. We cannot let this happen, so we must focus on what is before us, not that which is behind us.

[Lord Magus]

74. You're making connections that don't exist.

Prosecuting Bush (which could be done easily and has nothing to do with Congress) is completely independent from the bullshit investigations Repukes will launch. And continuing the mistake of declining to prosecute him (which, given his oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, it's Obama's duty to do) will not help in fighting back against the Repuke witch hunt.

BTW:
"If president Obama is either forced to resign due to scandal or is beat in a primary, then there is zero, zero, zero chance of us keeping the WH in 2012."

If you want to talk about totally implausible scenarios...if the sun turned into a black hole today, there'd be zero, zero, zero chance of us surviving. That's just as likely than Obama being forced to resign due to scandal or being beat in a primary, despite it being physically impossible.