Spanish Courts eye Prosecution of former GWB officials

[RightIsWrong]

I don't think that anyone has given Harvey the credit that he deserves for his responses in this post.

ProJo, Mugs and JD80, Harvey has very explicitly answered your question on a number of occasions and has pwned you in showing you that he has done just that. He has been consistent in his stance that anyone, including Clinton, Gore and Obama as well as the entire Bush administration need to be investigated and if found guilty of any wrongdoing, be held accountable.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Harvey
One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

Another definition is trying to engage you in an intelligent conversation when it comes to Bush.

The actual source for my quote is Albert Einstein. What's yours?

Three times in this thread, alone, you have tried to divert and distract attention from the question of whether your EX-Traitor In Chief should be prosecuted for his crimes by attempting to shift the focus to an entirely other question of whether Clinton or Gore should be prosecuted for crimes YOU ALLEGE they committed while in office.

Three times in this thread, I replied that Bush and Cheney have publicly ADMITTED they authorized the use of torture on multiple occasions.

Three times, I asked you to provide more than allegations that Clinton or Gore actually committed the crimes of which you accuse them.

Three times, you have FAILED to provide anything other than your weak assertion that "it is very well known" that Clinton and Gore committed the crimes of which you accuse them.

Three times, I answered your question directly that, IF they were indicted, they should face trial, and...

Three times, I asked if you would accept the same for Bush and Cheney, and as always, YOU'RE STILL TOO CHICKENSHIT TO ANSWER THE QUESTION DIRECTLY. :roll:

Einstein's definition of insanity fits you to a tee. :laugh:

Originally posted by: LTC8K6

Some country is bound to want to do the same thing to Obama or Obama's officials for something or other.

Obama cannot allow the precedent to be set, imo.

The precedent was established long ago. After WW II, German war criminals were tried at Nuremberg, and Japanese war criminals were tried by the International Military Tribunal for the Far East. More recently, Slobodan Milosovic and Radovan Karadzic were indicted for their crimes against humanity, including genocide, in Bosnia and Kosovo. Milosovic died awaiting sentence in the Hague. Karadzic avoided capture for years, but he was arrested on July 18, 2008 and is now awaiting trial. There are lots of other examples.

U.S. and international law >> your opinion.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Harvey
One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

Another definition is trying to engage you in an intelligent conversation when it comes to Bush.

The actual source for my quote is Albert Einstein. What's yours?

Three times in this thread, alone, you have tried to divert and distract attention from the question of whether your EX-Traitor In Chief should be prosecuted for his crimes by attempting to shift the focus to an entirely other question of whether Clinton or Gore should be prosecuted for crimes YOU ALLEGE they committed while in office.

Three times in this thread, I replied that Bush and Cheney have publicly ADMITTED they authorized the use of torture on multiple occasions.

Three times, I asked you to provide more than allegations that Clinton or Gore actually committed the crimes of which you accuse them.

Three times, you have FAILED to provide anything other than your weak assertion that "it is very well known" that Clinton and Gore committed the crimes of which you accuse them.

Three times, I answered your question directly that, IF they were indicted, they should face trial, and...

Three times, I asked if you would accept the same for Bush and Cheney, and as always, YOU'RE STILL TOO CHICKENSHIT TO ANSWER THE QUESTION DIRECTLY. :roll:

Einstein's definition of insanity fits you to a tee. :laugh:

Looks to me like it fits both of you.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Harvey

One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

Another definition is trying to engage you in an intelligent conversation when it comes to Bush.

The actual source for my quote is Albert Einstein. What's yours?

Three times in this thread, alone, you have tried to divert and distract attention from the question of whether your EX-Traitor In Chief should be prosecuted for his crimes by attempting to shift the focus to an entirely other question of whether Clinton or Gore should be prosecuted for crimes YOU ALLEGE they committed while in office.

Three times in this thread, I replied that Bush and Cheney have publicly ADMITTED they authorized the use of torture on multiple occasions.

Three times, I asked you to provide more than allegations that Clinton or Gore actually committed the crimes of which you accuse them.

Three times, you have FAILED to provide anything other than your weak assertion that "it is very well known" that Clinton and Gore committed the crimes of which you accuse them.

Three times, I answered your question directly that, IF they were indicted, they should face trial, and...

Three times, I asked if you would accept the same for Bush and Cheney, and as always, YOU'RE STILL TOO CHICKENSHIT TO ANSWER THE QUESTION DIRECTLY. :roll:

Einstein's definition of insanity fits you to a tee. :laugh:

Looks to me like it fits both of you.

Look again. If it were just PJ and other right wingnut liars, I wouldn't waste my time or expect anything but more of the same bullshit from them. However, I don't post for them. I post with and for others because we simply cannot stand silent in the face of their lies and attempts to distract and divert attention from the truth.

What's your excuse?

 

[Lemon law]

Any time someone stands accused of committing some crime, its basically an illogical diversion to point to someone else and say, they may have gotten away with the same thing. And therefore we do not have a perfect world because only the most resent smuck is being prosecuted. Which would only be a valid point if we thought we were living in a perfect world. Otherwise, that diversion argument just grandfathers in on going crime and becomes a statement saying, If Clinton and Gore could do it, GWB&co is perfectly justified in committing more criminal behavior, committing far worse crimes openly, and increasing the volume of the crimes at the same time, based only on the justification that Gore and Clinton may have gotten away with it.

When in reality its really a gambling problem, I can maybe pass on a blind hill, and if nothing is coming in the other lane, I just got away with it, if something is coming, unlucky me, we are both going to have a head on collision. The point is, GWB&co simply did it too many times, and did it so openly and carelessly, that the behavior just can't be ignored.

But as the OP on this thread, its time to go back to the original points I made. At this point in time, the Spanish court may be on the verge of indicting certain ex-GWB&co officials. IF PJ and various other people are unhappy that the Spanish court is not also indicting Gore and Clinton, then they need to take it up with the Spanish court, and not waste thread space here.

And as we look back to the various international war crimes tribunals, when it comes to things like the good German defense, or this crapola diversion that others got away with it in the past, the good German defense may have play in Germany, but an international war crimes tribunal will not waste 5 milliseconds on those type arguments before laughing it out of court.

 

[JSt0rm]

http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/14...-general-execution.jpg


http://farm1.static.flickr.com...2011770_187cdf633b.jpg

This General was executed for having 15 us soldiers executed. What would be the correct punishment for lying your way into a war that kills tens of thousands of civilians and thousands of us soldiers AND breaks international laws?

 

[OCGuy]

There is an international arrest warrant on a real war criminal, and we cant even get him arrested.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200..._ea/ml_sudan_president

Keep dreaming, lefties.

 

[Genx87]

Nothing will come of this.

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
There is an international arrest warrant on a real war criminal, and we cant even get him arrested.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200..._ea/ml_sudan_president

Keep dreaming, lefties.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope, I am not going to give up my dream that the Prez of Sudan will also be caught.

As it is, his days are likely numbered, under a UN warrant, any entity, the USA possibly, may simply have a clandestine mission, fly into Sudan, grab the guys ass, and fly him to court.

And when he wakes up in jail, sees the bars on the windows, he can then ponder the folly of thumbing his nose at international law.

Meanwhile those remaining Sudanese officials can learn that if it happened to their Prez, it can happen to them.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Harvey
What's your excuse?

For what?