2009 will set loose these lawsuits

[240 is Back]

This it just the top of the iceberg.  Lawsuits like these were immediately shut down, in the past.  If you sue the Saudis for 911, or any govt agency for it, the lawsuit is deemed 'national securituy' and shut down.

Are there a LOT of people about to file litigation?  We all know that Bush classified more content than any president in history.  Will some of that be revealed and shed some light on what serious BS was going on for the last 8 years?

Bush, 30 Officials, To Be Named In Complaint On Torture To Go To Obama Administration

President Bush and his aides repeatedly ignored warnings that their torture plans were illegal from high State Department officials as well as the nation’s top uniformed legal officers, the Judge Advocates General of the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines, a new published report states.

“These warnings of illegality and immorality given by knowledgeable and experienced (government) persons were ignored by the small group of high Executive officers who were determined that America would torture and abuse its prisoners and who had the decision-making power to secretly require this to be done,” said Lawrence Velvel, chairman of the “Steering Committee of the Justice Robert H. Jackson Conference On Planning For The Prosecution of High Level American War Criminals.” The Steering Committee’s Report was drafted for the entire committee by Chair Velvel, a noted legal education reformer.

The Report anticipates a more extensive, full scale complaint, currently being drafted, that will be presented to the Executive Branch after January 20th, urging prosecution of President Bush and those who aided him.

“Far from American officials and lawyers authorizing or engaging in torture because it was lawful, they authorized and engaged in it because they wanted to (and) kept their actions secret from interested officials for as long as they could lest there be strong opposition to the torture and abuse they were perpetrating,” Velvel said. “They deliberately ignored repeated warnings that the torture and abuse were illegal and could lead to prosecutions, and they ignored these warnings even when they came from high level civilian and military officers.”

A preliminary Report by the Steering Committee seeking Federal prosecution of American officials “who ordered, authorized, approved or committed war crimes,” released January 9th, 2009, says they are guilty of “wholesale” violations of statutes that include Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, the Federal War Crimes Act, the Convention Against Torture, plus numerous other violations of U.S. and international laws.

[headhuntersix]

Never happen as much as the douchebag libs want it to. Obama would open himslef up to all kinds of problems by doing so....further it would about hamstring our efforts to protect ourselves. This is so bad and so dangerous to the defense of this country.

[Al Doggity]

Never happen as much as the douchebag libs want it to. Obama would open himslef up to all kinds of problems by doing so....further it would about hamstring our efforts to protect ourselves. This is so bad and so dangerous to the defense of this country.

Are you sure? 'Cause I could swear you've posted multiple times that- and I'm paraphrasing here- Obama is the new Hitler and his mission is essentially to take down the country.

[headhuntersix]

I have never even remotely said Obama is the "new Hitler" I've said he's a naive Lib, but nothing like that. Obama can't afford to go after Bush. If u want to go after Bush, u'll need to go after Clinton for "Rendition" and on and on and on....forget it. Another Lib douchebag, hate America first,  no mater what happens to the country, ploy.

[shootfighter1]

It would be a waste of time and resources IMO.  We need everything we have to deal with the current economic, international and political crises.

[240 is Back]

I doubt obama will go after bush.

BUT


He can't stop ten thousand lawsuits from popping up in different jurisdictions.  He can allow some to go thru, if they lead to teh release of details that Bush knowingly let 911 happen.  It would almost certainly guarantee a win in 2012, if you think about it.  Would YOU vote for a repub in 2012, if there was major info released showing the entire repub cabinet in 2001 reading 'My Pet Goat' was well aware that thousands would die that day, and did nothing to stop it?

A lot of the mainstream media, even FOX, has flirted with that august 5th memo where bush was warned.  The redacted/blacked out section may contain the same details our allies tell us they also gave us that very same day.  You know - names of 5 of the guys, attack date, the targets, and means of attack.

IF, and it's a big IF, those blacked out paragraphs detail this (and it's likely they would, as that info came from Isr and Ger that very same day), and IF, and I mean IF, that info is released as a result of a lawsuit...

You can bet your ass that Bush will wear a major black eye through history, way bigger than he has today.  And you can bet you'll have a lot more Bush defenders (today) walking the F away fmo the republican party for good.

[Dos Equis]

Are you sure? 'Cause I could swear you've posted multiple times that- and I'm paraphrasing here- Obama is the new Hitler and his mission is essentially to take down the country.

Not true.  He has never called Obama "the new Hitler." 

Regarding the story, I rank this up there with prosecuting Bush for murder because of the war.  Silly. 

[240 is Back]

Regarding the story, I rank this up there with prosecuting Bush for murder because of the war.  Silly. 

What are your thoughts on a scenario in which Obama issues pardons to Bush, Cheney, & Rummy for War Crimes?

[Dos Equis]

What are your thoughts on a scenario in which Obama issues pardons to Bush, Cheney, & Rummy for War Crimes?

They didn't commit war crimes so they don't need pardons.  If Obama is foolish enough to issue pardons where no crime has been committed, it would be a colossal political mistake and expend a great deal of the political capital he currently has.     

[240 is Back]

They didn't commit war crimes so they don't need pardons.  If Obama is foolish enough to issue pardons where no crime has been committed, it would be a colossal political mistake and expend a great deal of the political capital he currently has.    

Could be.  Would Bush & Company accept them?  To accept them would mean history views them as guilty - don't you have to admit some sort of culpability to accept a pardon?

On the other hand, to deny them could get sticky too.  Does Obama, behind in 2011, decide to allow some prosecutions to stir up his base?  He doesn't have to do anything - he can just not stop things.  Imagine all the torture experts who coudl write a book and earn a million bucks.  Imagine the many scenarios which could be a catalyst.


Bush went on TV yesterday and admitted he personally helped decide which torture means would be used on KSM.  That's an admission of torture.  It goes against Geneva, which makes it a war crime right?  I"m all for it in this case, I'd do it myself for a free lunch.  But he did admit to doing something which is illegal by Geneva.

[Dos Equis]

Could be.  Would Bush & Company accept them?  To accept them would mean history views them as guilty - don't you have to admit some sort of culpability to accept a pardon?

On the other hand, to deny them could get sticky too.  Does Obama, behind in 2011, decide to allow some prosecutions to stir up his base?  He doesn't have to do anything - he can just not stop things.  Imagine all the torture experts who coudl write a book and earn a million bucks.  Imagine the many scenarios which could be a catalyst.


Bush went on TV yesterday and admitted he personally helped decide which torture means would be used on KSM.  That's an admission of torture.  It goes against Geneva, which makes it a war crime right?  I"m all for it in this case, I'd do it myself for a free lunch.  But he did admit to doing something which is illegal by Geneva.

What specifically did Bush say about admitting torture?  Link? 

[240 is Back]

What specifically did Bush say about admitting torture?  Link? 

FOX News:
In an interview with Brit Hume that aired today on Fox News Sunday, President Bush admitted that he personally authorized the torture of 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. He said he personally asked “what tools” were available to use on him, and sought legal approval for waterboarding him:

BUSH: One such person who gave us information was Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. … And I’m in the Oval Office and I am told that we have captured Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the professionals believe he has information necessary to secure the country. So I ask what tools are available for us to find information from him and they gave me a list of tools, and I said are these tools deemed to be legal? And so we got legal opinions before any decision was made.

[240 is Back]

nothing from that press conference - he went into more detail there.  It was Jan 12, bush's last.  anyone have transcript?

[shootfighter1]

Lets be specific 240.  You call into question the waterboarding technique that was used on a terrorist.  According to the definition I read, waterboarding is not illegal and is not classified as torture.  It is a controversial interrogation technique though.

Anyway, in the technical sense, there was no illegal torture committed.

[Dos Equis]

BUSH: One such person who gave us information was Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. … And I’m in the Oval Office and I am told that we have captured Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the professionals believe he has information necessary to secure the country. So I ask what tools are available for us to find information from him and they gave me a list of tools, and I said are these tools deemed to be legal? And so we got legal opinions before any decision was made.

Doesn't sound like an admission that he broke the law to me.  He actually confirmed that he followed the law. 

[tonymctones]

him going after bush would pretty much secure the 2012 election for the republicans. There are so much more important things on the table right now and more than likely for some time to come to even worry about it.

[Al Doggity]

Not true.  He has never called Obama "the new Hitler." 

 

I was paraphrasing, but what was he implying when he posted pics of fascist dictators followed by  campaign posters of Obama in several different threads?

And I agree that it's unlikely he'll  go after Bush... if only for the appearance of unity.

[Dos Equis]

I was paraphrasing, but what was he implying when he posted pics of fascist dictators followed by  campaign posters of Obama in several different threads?

And I agree that it's unlikely he'll  go after Bush... if only for the appearance of unity.

You were paraphrasing his alleged comments about Hitler?  Pretty harsh (and inaccurate) paraphrase.  I don't know what posts you're talking about or in what context they were posted, but I'm sure it had nothing to do with Hitler (express or implied). 

I assume Obama is too smart to commit political suicide so early in his campaign.

[bigdumbbell]

I was paraphrasing, but what was he implying when he posted pics of fascist dictators followed by  campaign posters of Obama in several different threads?

And I agree that it's unlikely he'll  go after Bush... if only for the appearance of unity.

if it happens the executive won't start it but he knows how to pardon

[Al Doggity]

You were paraphrasing his alleged comments about Hitler?  Pretty harsh (and inaccurate) paraphrase.  I don't know what posts you're talking about or in what context they were posted, but I'm sure it had nothing to do with Hitler (express or implied). 

I assume Obama is too smart to commit political suicide so early in his campaign.

If you don't know what comments I'm talking about then you're hardly in a position to call them inaccurate. 

[Dos Equis]

If you don't know what comments I'm talking about then you're hardly in a position to call them inaccurate. 

lol.  What?  You were asking about pictures that have nothing to do with your contention that HH6 compared Obama to Hitler. 

I'm in a position to say the following statement is false, because I've never read HH6 say anything remotely close to this:

Are you sure? 'Cause I could swear you've posted multiple times that- and I'm paraphrasing here- Obama is the new Hitler and his mission is essentially to take down the country.

Where are the "multiple" posts in which HH6 compared Obama to Hitler?  Prove it.  If you can't, it's a pretty irresponsible allegation.   

[headhuntersix]

Typical lib douchebagery. Conservatives generally don't compare American presidents to Adolf Hitler, we leave that to defeatist lib douchebags like urself. I don't remember a Con comparing anybody to Hitler ever, maybe some worthless arab or African dictator, but I think Cons have a better grasp of history.

[Al Doggity]

No, there were most certainly comparisons between Obama and Hitler made on this board by conservatives.There were multiple allegations that he wanted to turn the country socialist... just like the Nazi party.

I distinctly remember a poster repeatedly posting propagandist posters of Mussolini and Hitler, followed by Obama's red and blue campaign poster, usually without any additional text. I remember one post in particular in which someone made another dubious comparison to Hitler and the aforementioned poster pulled out his routine. Maybe I'm wrong about the poster's identity, it's possible that it wasn't HH6, which is why my original post was in the form of a question. I took a look through posts made around election day and, unfortunately, attachments aren't viewable in search mode and I'm not going to spend any significant amount of time looking for the posts. I'm pretty sure those posts were made by hh6, but even if they weren't he did, without question, make several posts in the early part of last year in which he accused Obama of being a covert Muslim and questioned his loyalty to America. These are the separate posts that I paraphrased and was referring.


And there's nothing irresponsible about it. This is an anonymous message board and he's made statements and allegations that were more inflammatory. If he thinks the post was inaccurate, he simply has to post as much.

[Dos Equis]

No, there were most certainly comparisons between Obama and Hitler made on this board by conservatives.There were multiple allegations that he wanted to turn the country socialist... just like the Nazi party.

I distinctly remember a poster repeatedly posting propagandist posters of Mussolini and Hitler, followed by Obama's red and blue campaign poster, usually without any additional text. I remember one post in particular in which someone made another dubious comparison to Hitler and the aforementioned poster pulled out his routine. Maybe I'm wrong about the poster's identity, it's possible that it wasn't HH6, which is why my original post was in the form of a question. I took a look through posts made around election day and, unfortunately, attachments aren't viewable in search mode and I'm not going to spend any significant amount of time looking for the posts. I'm pretty sure those posts were made by hh6, but even if they weren't he did, without question, make several posts in the early part of last year in which he accused Obama of being a covert Muslim and questioned his loyalty to America. These are the separate posts that I paraphrased and was referring.


And there's nothing irresponsible about it. This is an anonymous message board and he's made statements and allegations that were more inflammatory. If he thinks the post was inaccurate, he simply has to post as much.

Are you kidding??  You accused HH6 of repeatedly comparing Obama to Hitler.  If you made a mistake just say that.  It is absolutely irresponsible to accuse someone of repeatedly comparing Obama to Hitler, if the statement is false or can't be proved.  Accusing Obama of being a "covert Muslim," isn't in the same universe as a "Hitler" comparison.   

[tonymctones]

Are you kidding??  You accused HH6 of repeatedly comparing Obama to Hitler.  If you made a mistake just say that.  It is absolutely irresponsible to accuse someone of repeatedly comparing Obama to Hitler, if the statement is false or can't be proved.  Accusing Obama of being a "covert Muslim," isn't in the same universe as a "Hitler" comparison.   

in doggity's defense there where pics on here floating around portraying obama as a hitler or in comparison to hitler...I dont know who posted them but they where on here.