Yes, he is.
The following are the crimes he has committed and would be impeached on:
1. Violating the United Nations Charter by launching an illegal "War of Aggression" against Iraq without cause, using fraud to sell the war to Congress and the public, misusing government funds to begin bombing without Congressional authorization, and subjecting our military personnel to unnecessary harm, debilitating injuries, and deaths.
2. Violating U.S. and international law by authorizing the torture of thousands of captives, resulting in dozens of deaths, and keeping prisoners hidden from the International Committee of the Red Cross.
3. Violating the Constitution by arbitrarily detaining Americans, legal residents, and non-Americans, without due process, without charge, and without access to counsel.
4. Violating the Geneva Conventions by targeting civilians, journalists, hospitals, and ambulances, and using illegal weapons, including white phosphorous, depleted uranium, and a new type of napalm.
5. Violating U.S. law and the Constitution through widespread wiretapping of the phone calls and emails of Americans without a warrant.
6. Violating the Constitution by using "signing statements" to defy hundreds of laws passed by Congress.
7. Violating U.S. and state law by obstructing honest elections in 2000, 2002, 2004, and 2006.
8. Violating U.S. law by using paid propaganda and disinformation, selectively and misleadingly leaking classified information, and exposing the identity of a covert CIA operative working on sensitive WMD proliferation for political retribution.
9. Subverting the Constitution and abusing Presidential power by asserting a "Unitary Executive Theory" giving unlimited powers to the President, by obstructing efforts by Congress and the Courts to review and restrict Presidential actions, and by promoting and signing legislation negating the Bill of Rights and the Writ of Habeas Corpus.
10. Gross negligence in failing to assist New Orleans residents after Hurricane Katrina, in ignoring urgent warnings of an Al Qaeda attack prior to Sept. 11, 2001, and in increasing air pollution causing global warming.
So, to answer your question, the man is without doubt a war criminal, and I would like to hear any repubs argue against any of the above points of criminal acts committed by bush.
Excellent question, and have a Happy New Year,
Darryl S.
2006-12-29 10:45:24
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
7⤊
3⤋
The Terrorists that bombed the worldwide commerce midsection and the Pentagon are conflict criminals. For some reason human beings nonetheless hate on Bush even nonetheless he stored the unemployment under 6% and each on condition that Obama took place of work it incredibly is been increasing. How ought to it incredibly is trees fault if his total 2 words had a greater effectual financial gadget than Obamas time in? Bush wasn't appropriate...yet rattling i could extremely have him than Obama. I style of choose Hilary Beat him. a minimum of she helps our troops and does no longer decrease as many reward as Obama has. Us protection rigidity families are suffering right here!
2016-10-06 04:33:20
·
answer #2
·
answered by alia 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I dont think GW has been in the CZ enough to commit a war crime. Maybe if you are so sure your president is a war criminal, you should renounce your citizenship, pack your crap, and split. Plenty of countries out there need more morons. Maybe you could go save darfur with your ignorant ideas and big mouth.
Are you aware that ALL THIS is done to keep people like YOU as equal citizens, and that men and women that you will never meet are fighting, dying, and killing so that you have the freedom to ridicule them and the president for defending that right? Imagine what kind of world you will have to live in when the Muslims dictate what you will wear, when they take away education for women, when they take all rights from women. My God you are ignorant of the world and the evil that people do.
2006-12-29 10:36:39
·
answer #3
·
answered by readsomething 2
·
2⤊
3⤋
There are many people in the world who believe that he has and is committing war crimes. Others believe that he is acting in self defense of our country. I believe that the war on terrorism is a just fight and needs to be fought -- the Iraq war is unjust and many thousands of people are dead and maimed as a result.
2006-12-29 10:41:58
·
answer #4
·
answered by pilot 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
Criminal Record Search Database : http://www.SearchVerifyInfo.com/Support
2015-10-02 00:18:50
·
answer #5
·
answered by Sandy 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Under the Geneva Convention and the Nuremberg Protocol planning a war is a war crime, bombing civilian infrastructure such as power plants, water treatment facilities etc. are war crimes.
Indictments are being drawn up in several countries. Shortly, Bush, like Kissinger, will not be able to travel to a number of countries because he will be arrested as soon as his feet hit the ground.
2006-12-29 10:37:45
·
answer #6
·
answered by bettysdad 5
·
4⤊
2⤋
two things that have to be shown. where he was in direct act of commiting a crime and what the law of the UNITED STATES is that that act has broken. anyone that says he is cant tell you either of these. they will give you a nice article they copied and pasted from a website but nothing that satisfies those two criteria. Rhetoric and hate cant remove a US president from office no matter how much these hate mongers want it to
because another country thinks he is wrong has no barring on US government and policy. no matter how much these leftists think we should be governed by the world court we are not and will not be.
2006-12-29 10:41:02
·
answer #7
·
answered by CaptainObvious 7
·
1⤊
3⤋
Bush has met all the qualifications of a criminal. If he was leader of another country, America will be biting at the bit.
2006-12-29 11:36:59
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
If you go by the standards outlined in our own laws that define war crimes, then he is a war criminal.
He has ordered violations of several articles of the Geneva conventions including:
"- Article 13: Humane treatment required; No reprisals allowed
- Article 14: Respect for persons and honor; No gender discrimination
- Article 16: No discrimination based on race, nationality, religious belief or political opinions
- Article 17: No physical or mental torture; No coercion to obtain information; Prisoners who decline to provide information may not be threatened, insulted or exposed to unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment
- Article 18: Clothing, articles of personal use, to remain with prisoners
- Article 20: Evacuation or transfer to be under same conditions as afforded Detaining Power
- Article 21: Internment in camp allowed; Close confinement prohibited
- Article 22: Internment in penitentiaries prohibited; Every guarantee of hygiene and healthfulness required
- Article 25: Condition of quarters must be as favorable for POWs as for the forces of the Detaining Power; Accommodations for habits and customs of POWs required; Protection from dampness, adequate heat and lighting required
- Article 26: Food must be in sufficient quantity, quality and variety to maintain good health and weight
- Article 27: Adequate clothing, underwear and footwear required
- Article 28: Canteens must be installed; Fairly priced food, soap, tobacco and ordinary items must be stocked
- Articles 29 - 32: Proper hygiene and medical attention, including monthly health inspections, required
- Articles 34 - 37: Prisoners must be afforded complete latitude in the exercise of religion, including attendance at services, on condition they comply with disciplinary routine
- Article 38: Provisions for physical, intellectual and recreational activities
- Article 70: Prisoners must be allowed to write to family, others "
and has subverted Article 5 and 4 in redefining the status of enemy POW's.
2006-12-29 10:46:29
·
answer #9
·
answered by IRunWithScissors 3
·
3⤊
1⤋
As the saying goes, you're only a war criminal if you lose...that's why he wants to keep us there!
2006-12-29 10:34:26
·
answer #10
·
answered by Middleclassandnotquiet 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
His disregard for the Geneva Conventions, which this country helped shape & had signed, leaves him wide open. What concerns me more is outright attacks against the Constitution, which is treason if he is found guilty.
2006-12-29 10:41:09
·
answer #11
·
answered by bob h 5
·
2⤊
1⤋