Many argue that the statute of limitations on Bush and Cheney’s crimes of lying us into the Iraq war and torture have all run … so it is too late to prosecute them. In a just world people like Cheney and Bush should be prosecuted
The United States government has consistently opposed an international court that could hold US military and political leaders to a uniform global standard of justice.
The Republic of Nicaragua v. The United States of America was a 1986 case of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in which the ICJ ruled in favor of Nicaragua and against the United States and awarded reparations to Nicaragua. The ICJ held that the U.S. had violated international law by supporting the Contras in their rebellion against the Nicaraguan government and by mining Nicaragua’s harbors.
The United States refused to participate in the proceedings after the Court rejected its argument that the ICJ lacked jurisdiction to hear the case. The U.S. later blocked enforcement of the judgment by the United Nations Security Council and thereby prevented Nicaragua from obtaining any actual compensation.
The Clinton administration participated actively in negotiations towards the International Criminal Court treaty, seeking Security Council screening of cases. If adopted, this would have enabled the US to veto any dockets it opposed. When other countries refused to agree to such an unequal standard of justice, the US campaigned to weaken and undermine the court.
The Bush administration, coming into office in 2001 as the Court neared implementation, adopted an extremely active opposition. Washington began to negotiate bilateral agreements with other countries, insuring immunity of US nationals from prosecution by the Court. As leverage, Washington threatened termination of economic aid, withdrawal of military assistance, and other painful measures.
The American Service-Members’ Protection Act (ASPA, Title 2 of Pub.L. 107–206, H.R. 4775, 116 Stat. 820, enacted August 2, 2002) is a United States federal law that aims “to protect United States military personnel and other elected and appointed officials of the United States government against criminal prosecution by an international criminal court to which the United States is not party.”
Introduced by US Senator Jesse Helms (R-NC) and Representative Tom DeLay (R-TX) it was an amendment to the 2002 Supplemental Appropriations Act for Further Recovery From and Response to Terrorist Attacks on the United States (H.R. 4775). The bill was signed into law by George W. Bush on August 2, 2002.
ASPA authorizes the President to use “all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any US or allied personnel being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court”. This authorization has led the act to be nicknamed The Hague Invasion Act, because the freeing of U.S. citizens by force might be possible only through an invasion of The Hague, Netherlands, the seat of several international criminal courts and of the Dutch government.
The Act prohibits federal, state and local governments and agencies (including courts and law enforcement agencies) from assisting the Court. For example, it prohibits the extradition of any person from the United States to the Court; it prohibits the transfer of classified national security information and law enforcement information to the Court; and it prohibits agents of the Court from conducting investigations in the United States.
The Act also prohibits U.S. military aid to countries that are party to the Court. However, exceptions are allowed for aid to NATO members, major non-NATO allies, Taiwan, and countries which have entered into “Article 98 agreements”, agreeing not to hand over U.S. nationals to the Court. The President may waive this prohibition if he determines that to do so is “important to the national interest of the United States”.
The Obama administration has so far made greater efforts to engage with the Court. It is participating with the Court’s governing bodies and it is providing support for the Court’s ongoing prosecutions. Washington, however, has no intention to join the ICC, due to its concern about possible charges against US nationals.
Yes, not necesarrily because he negotiated the release of a US soldier, but because he caused civilian deaths caused by drone strikes, continued the war on Afghanistan, went to war against Libya and Syria etc etc etc. Cheney and Bush should get prosecuted for going to war on false pretenses and be sentence their verdict.
International War Crimes Tribunal United States War Crimes Against Iraq Initial Complaint – Charging: George Bush, J. Danforth Quayle, James Baker, Richard Cheney, William Webster, Colin Powell, Norman Schwarzkopf and Others to be named with Crimes Against Peace, War Crimes, Crimes Against Humanity and Other Criminal Acts and High Crimes in Violation of the Charter of the United Nations, International Law, the Constitution of the United States and Laws made in Pursuance Thereof.
These charges have been prepared prior to the first hearing of the Commission of Inquiry by its staff. They are based on direct and circumstantial evidence from public and private documents; official statements and admissions by the persons charged and others; eyewitness accounts; Commission investigations and witness interviews in Iraq, the Middle East and elsewhere during and after the bombing; photographs and video tape; expert analyses; commentary and interviews; media coverage, published reports and accounts gathered between December 1990 and May l991.
The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder is a 2008 book by former prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi. It argues that George W. Bush took the United States into the invasion of Iraq under false pretenses and should be tried for murder for the deaths of American soldiers in Iraq.
On August 28, word leaked out that Archbishop Desmond Tutu had pulled out of an international summit in South Africa because he refused to share a platform with the “morally indefensible” former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair. Days later, Tutu published an opinion article in The Observer explaining his position.
The Iraq war “has destabilized and polarized the world to a greater extent than any other conflict in history,” wrote Tutu, who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1984 and the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2009.
Tutu also commented that “in a consistent world, those responsible for this suffering and loss of life should be treading the same path as some of their African and Asian peers who have been made to answer for their actions in the Hague.”
Former US president George Bush and his former counterpart Tony Blair were found guilty of war crimes by the The Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal which held a four day hearing in the Malaysia.
Dick Cheney was “president for all practical purposes” during George W. Bush’s first term in office and “fears being tried as a war criminal,” according to Colin Powell’s chief of staff during his time as secretary of state.
A United Nations investigator has demanded that the US publish classified documents regarding the CIA’s human rights violations under former President George W. Bush, with hopes that the documents will lead to the prosecution of public officials.
Documents about the CIA’s program of rendition and secret detention of suspected terrorists have remained classified, even though President Obama’s administration has publicly condemned the use of these “enhanced interrogation techniques”. The US has not prosecuted any of its agents for human rights violations.
UN investigator Ben Emmerson, the UN special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights while countering terrorism, said that the classified documents protect the names of individuals who are responsible for serious human rights violations.
“Despite this clear repudiation of the unlawful actions carried out by the Bush-era CIA, many of the facts remain classified, and no public official has so far been brought to justice in the United States,” Emmerson said in a report to the UN Human Rights Council, according to Reuters.
International War Crimes Tribunal
American Service-Members’ Protection Act
The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder
It’s NOT Too Late to Try Bush, Cheney and Obama for War Crimes Washington’s Blog
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld war criminals verdict Enforcement Phase begins
Bush Administration Convicted of War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity
UN demands prosecution of Bush-era CIA crimes
U.N. Complaint Over Failure to Prosecute George W. Bush
Hillary Clinton
-
In her upcoming book, Hard Choices, Hillary Clinton completely admits that she made a mistake by voting for the Iraq War in 2002. Hilary Clinton is well aware of that she, the Bushes and their war administration has destroyed a country and its people.
In 2008 on Meet the Press, Hillary Clinton defended her 2002 vote for the Iraq war resolution, saying that she “thought it was a vote to put inspectors back in” so Saddam Hussein could not go unchecked. She insisted that she and others were “told by the White House personally” that this was the purpose of the resolution, and cited President Bush’s assurances to defend her position.
Moderator Tim Russert pointed out that the title of the resolution was the “Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002.” Clinton responded saying, “We can have this Jesuitical argument about what exactly was meant. But when Chuck Hagel, who helped to draft the resolution said, ‘It was not a vote for war,’ What I was told directly by the White House in response to my question, ‘If you are given this authority, will you put the inspectors in and permit them to finish their job,’ I was told that’s exactly what we intended to do.”
Hillary Rodham Clinton, in her strongest language yet about her 2002 Senate vote to authorize military action in Iraq, writes in her forthcoming memoir that “I still got it wrong,” CBS News reported Thursday afternoon.
In “Hard Choices,” Clinton, a former secretary of state and former U.S. senator who is exploring a 2016 presidential campaign, writes: “[M]any Senators came to wish they had voted against the resolution. I was one of them. As the war dragged on, with every letter I sent to a family in New York who had lost a son or daughter, a father or mother, my mistake become (sic) more painful.”
Clinton continues, “I thought I had acted in good faith and made the best decision I could with the information I had. And I wasn’t alone in getting it wrong. But I still got it wrong. Plain and simple.”
Hillary Clinton: My Iraq war vote was ‘wrong’
Hillary Clinton Defends 2002 Iraq War Vote On Meet The Press
Hillary Clinton on Iraq vote: ‘I still got it wrong. Plain and simple’
Hillary Clinton on War & Peace – On The Issues
Filed under: Uncategorized
