should bush and blair stand trial for war crimes? (wmd?????)
2006-09-02 11:47:38 · 33 answers · asked by kevin m 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
the replys stopped very quick,so the answer is yes.are you watching tony blair.gwb???? freedom?????
2006-09-02 12:16:28 · update #1
only 30 people got an opinion? is this censorship?
2006-09-02 12:20:29 · update #2
come on americans?answer the question just yes or no will do!
2006-09-02 12:42:08 · update #3
good one
2006-09-02 11:49:42 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I have no idea what Blair might or might not have done to deserve War Crime Trials, but Dubya certainly does. So did Reagan for the Iran/Contra affair. You would think a nation that would put a president on trial for extra-marital activities would be even more vigorous in their prosecution of of actual crimes against humanity. Sad to say, it seems unlikly to come about.
This will not, however prove this site is not subject to censorship. It will only ensure people like you and I come under the scrutiny of Homeland Security. Bush has already made it clear that his definition of treason is a lack faith in him, and if he could change the militarys oath of loyalty to the constitution to a personal one, a la Hitler circe 1938, he surely would.
2006-09-02 11:53:51 · answer #2 · answered by PtolemyJones 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Illegal war, torturing prisoners, use of illegal weapons . . . YES!
Bush should also stand trial for domestic crimes ranging from violating the constitutional limits on executive power, corruption, and violations of a voting process that he pretends to hold sacred and the American people do hold sacred. Undermining freedom of the press, subjecting us to a constant barrage of propaganda and violating separation of church and state. All this is not to even mention what really happened on 9/11 or borrowing hundreds of billions of dollars to give to his cronies at the expense of all Americans. If he isn't guilty of treason, then the word treason has no meaning.
And all the neo-cons are his accomplices.
How's that for challenging censorship?
2006-09-02 12:25:01 · answer #3 · answered by beast 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, of course, the war they started was illegal and crimes are illegal. I think that instead of starting the war with the lame excuse of having to get rid of Saddam, they should have supported the Iraqi's to do this, not lie to the world about WMD's to get the oil and make Halliburton and similar companies more profitable.
2006-09-02 23:42:14 · answer #4 · answered by Lazy Pete 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Computers have this thing called scan.
You can scan for certain words. They do have very sensitive computers geared to scan certain words.
Like: "I am a terriorist planning an attack." That sets off like 100 bells and whistles. Then they read what you wrote. Adults don't know that terriorists know this and write in code and know what not to say. Only idiot Muslims little kids would write someone on answers. But if they did, yes a red flag or a red scan button goes off. Then someone reads your answers. I am sure that all are not read because there are 40 million answers. To date.
2006-09-02 11:55:14 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The site is subject to censorship, just not for this kind of question. Yahoo! isn't a fascist state- yet.
2006-09-02 11:57:06 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
They should! and they will if god wants it too....
i just cant wait to see the faces of those two animals when their time ends...
they should not only stand trial for war crimes...there are many more things...
I 'll pray for this to happen!
2006-09-02 11:55:38 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes.
Have I shown that this site is not subjected to censorship with this?
Can I get my 2 points?
2006-09-03 03:29:15 · answer #8 · answered by Mubai 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, Bush should stand trail for putting the nation's money into a useless war.
2006-09-02 11:52:54 · answer #9 · answered by adoss138 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Maybe....but would be to hard to get conviction...look at sadam - they are having a hella hard time getting any charges to stick on him!!! But I do think we need a better puppet than the bobble-headed bush boy!
2006-09-02 12:00:34 · answer #10 · answered by budlowsbro420 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ah, but this site IS subjected to censorship!
2006-09-02 11:50:11 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋