I read excerpts from his statement and he claims to have personally interviewed some of the victims. He may have exaggerated or embellished his role but I can’t imagine a man of his character and reputation lying to make himself appear more credible It’s just not in his nature....lol...
Yeah, there's no telling if he really raped any kids. And assuming that he didn't, I'm sure that, other than that Iraq fiasco in which 500,000 kids died, he was a really, really great guy.
He was super special. Now he's dead. *checks watch* It's been a day or two, anyone give a shit anymore? No? Well I guess maybe he wasn't Jesus Christ or anything.
So much has been made of his Thousand Points of Light speech during the 1988 Republican National Convention
Can you explain to me how anyone in the audience's asses didn't fall off sitting through a thousand point speech? They must be gods! Sorry couldn't resist
I don't think he went over them one by one. It was a phrase referring to community organizations and promoting volunteerism and public service--good things. But not a substitute for government involvement in redressing social problems..
Uh huh . . . In evaluating the extent to which President Bush and other American leaders committed war crimes, it would be useful to examine the results of a War Crimes Tribunal organized by Ramsey Clark and the International Action Center. The Commission of Inquiry for the International War Crimes Tribunal, the outgrowth of the Coalition to Stop U.S. Intervention in the Middle East, formed by a group of American activists during the war. Nineteen criminal charges were laid against President Bush and other members of his administration. The purpose of the commission was to conduct exhaustive research into all the facts related to the charges. It traveled around the world to hold hearings and called on expert witnesses to provide evidence about the war. Tribunal members reviewed the testimony of the hearings, documents from UN agencies, documents of governments, and materials from private organizations and institutions. The International War Crimes Tribunal first met on February 27, 1992 to consider the evidence and to determine the guilt or innocence of those charged with 19 crimes. The 22 judges on the War Crimes Tribunal represented 18 nations and were from diverse backgrounds. The judges included: * Lord Tony Gifford, Britain. Human rights lawyer. * Deborah Jackson, U.S. First vice president of the American Association of Jurists. * Michael Ratner, U.S. Attorney and former director of the Center for Constitutional rights, past president of the National Lawyers Guild. * P.S. Poti, India, former Chief Justice of the Gujarat High Court. In 1989 elected president of the All-India Lawyers Union. * Aisha Nyerere, Tanzania, Resident Magistrate of the High Court in Arusha, Tanzania. * Dr. Haluk Gerger, Turkey, Founding member of the Turkish Human Rights Association and professor of political science. Some of the nineteen charges documented against George Bush, James Baker, Cohn Powell, Dick Cheney, and others were that: The United States engaged in a pattern of conduct beginning in or before 1989 intended to lead Iraq into provocations justifying U.S. military action against Iraq and permanent U.S. military domination of the Gulf. * President Bush ordered the destruction of facilities essential to civilian life and economic productivity throughout Iraq. * The United States intentionally bombed and destroyed civilian life, commercial and business districts, schools, hospitals, mosques, churches, shelters, residential areas, historical sites, private vehicles and civilian government offices. * The United States deliberately bombed indiscriminately throughout Iraq. * The United States used prohibited weapons capable of mass destruction and inflicted indiscriminate death and unnecessary suffering against both military and civilian targets. Following are the findings of the War Crimes Tribunal: The Members of the International War Crimes Tribunal finds each of the named accused guilty on the basis of the evidence against them and that each of the nineteen separate crimes alleged in the Initial attached hereto, has been established to have been committed beyond a reasonable doubt. Although the War Crimes Tribunal did not have legitimacy as an international court, it did define the crimes committed by President Bush and the aforementioned members of his administration who did violate the UN Charter, Geneva Conventions, and the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide. President George H W Bush Senior and the first Iraq War (1991) excerpted from the book Lying for Empire How to Commit War Crimes With A Straight Face by David Model ______________________________________________________________________________ Sure he was.
I'm a relativist. In comparison with the incumbent, he put country first and governed on behalf of all Americans, not just his base. Those are endangered qualities in the country today. BTW, didn't Saddam invade Kuwait?As for Ramsey Clark Ramsey Clark, the war criminal's best friend http://tenc.net/ramsey/ramsey4.htm
He was, as most humans are, a flawed human being. I disagreed with his politics, but seems he was a humble man, actually. Brave enough to fly in combat. And one that truly loved his family. The family certainly has the money and privilege to enjoy whatever the world has to offer those for whom life has been easier than most. Politics is a dirty business on many levels and when one rises to the top or nearly so--they're compromised to some extent. To what extent, we lowly drones usually don't know . And more to the point, "we"can't do much about any of it simply because it all,IMO, goes on as it always has here and elsewhere---this era and all others. ---above our pay grade, as it were. The system is rigged ( you know what I mean or not) and he played the system well. I don't think that ANY president and those he has chosen for office will be able to top the results of our past election. What is that saying--"things fall apart--the center will not hold." Yeats.
Your body count is more than double high end estimates of total civilian casualties. Beth Osborne Daponte (Middle East Eye (April 8, 2015). Do you just make this stuff up?
So your argument against the accusations against Bush is that Ramsey Clark is a bad guy? Hmmm. What about the judges who reviewed the testimony of the hearings, documents from UN agencies, documents of governments, and materials from private organizations and institutions? You've got a lot of discrediting to do. And since you've decided to mention it, why did Saddam invade Kuwait? This exchange should prove highly enlightening. But first you should probably explain why you deem the destruction of civilian infrastructure that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of children as something that's not a war crime.
I forgot to mention another thing I liked about Bush. He stood up to the NRA and the gun nuts. Your hundreds of thousands of children is a bogus figure. Saddam decided to invade Kuwait because he thought he could, in violation of longstanding international law, just as he got away with gassing the Kurds. When Iraq invaded Kuwait, the United Nations Security Council immediately condemned Iraq in ten resolutions charging a variety of war crimes. The Coalition targeted specific military objects in populated areas, which the law of war permits; at no time were civilian areas as such targeted. The Government of Iraq purposely used both Iraqi and Kuwaiti civilian populations and civilian objects as shields for military objects, thereby making them fair game. It is arguable that the administration's intent was the destruction of Iraq's offensive capability, which I think was justifiable in light of the danger it posed to us and its neighbors. The fact that the U.S. did not take advantage of its victory to occupy Iraq indicates Bush's restraint in pursing the war.
