Who can indict Bush and Blair for war crimes?

Question

Seeing todays lead in the Mail on Sunday about CIA flights through the UK to transport Suspects to places of torture from iraq etc. Who is there in this big wide world that is powerful ow strong enough to somehow make them pay for all their crimes?

Answer 1

Everyone ranting here should also ask themselves how many of them have written their senators, congressmen and other representative about being pissed off about this insanity. The greatest problem is we are all willing to write our rants here for a few seconds, but few have gone to the websites of their representatives to actually begin the impeachment.

And btw- many of you who come from nations which claim to have religious freedoms are casting hatred on ALL Muslims. That is really vile. Do not forget the embarrassment we now have for the manner our communities treated our citizens of Asian decent during the past few wars.

Answer 2

And besides terrorist organizations who in their right mind would want to see these 2 men indicted for war crimes. The only people commiting aggrecious crimes are the terrorist organizations.

And just out of curiosity what war crimes have been committed? Don't give me the typical spiel of they invaded a sovereign country, Guantanamo is illiegal, etc... Give me something solid instead of the drivel we've all heard before. Since you are calling for someone to indict Bush and Blair then you must know something. You must be inside the government, right? Because Joe Blow that gets his news from MSNBC and the internet does not know what is truly happening right now.

I've got an idea: let's blow up Mosques, hospitals, and libraries that we suspect house terrorists. Oh no, wait, they can't hide there. That's against the rules...But wait, they do hide there. Well then let's abduct journalists and film their executions. Wait, that's wrong too, huh?

Answer 3

Okay, so Scotland Yard have been bribed to say there is no evidence that the CIA are using UK 'airports' to transport prisoners.

I guess this means they are using US airbases in UK instead!

Frankly, I don't really give a damn.

A famous Russian politician, Nikita Khrushchev, once described UK as an American Aircraft Carrier.

Right on Nikita!

Edit: a very strange airplane flew over my house this afternoon. It had wings with propellers at the back. Is that the CIA plane?

Answer 4

If there is sufficient evidence, the US Federal Authorities are required to indict Bush. That won't happen while the people who control Bush also control the judiciary. The American people could elect a government that will put Bush on trial, but their record to date has not been very good.

The CPS is responsible for putting Blair on trial, but his prosecution could be vetoed by the Attorney General who just happens to be one of Tony's mates. Again it's up to the people of the UK to elect a government prepared to put Blair on trial. The only likely candidate is George Galloway and not many people want the rest of the package. Possibly the Liberals would consider it if there were enough votes in it.

If the UK Government won't put Blair on trial, he could be indicted by the European Court. The Greek Bar Association filed a complaint following the invasion of Iraq, but nothing came of it.

If all else fails, the UN could establish a special court to try them both, as it has done for war crimes in the former Yugoslavia. However, that would require a vote in the Security Council and both the US and the UK have a veto.

So it's down to you and the Daily Mail.

Answer 5

no-one can bring Bush to book over Iraq.
he had the foresight to have unsigned many a treaty, back in 2003
see box below for the complete list.
But yes someone could one day very well call B'Liar to face the International Court for war crimes.
the question is who's brave enough to do that?
anyone coming close to that has been met with a massive smear-campaign & spin-doctors set to denounce them.

Answer 6

An ACPO spokeswoman said: "These planes could be empty - there is no evidence that prisoners were on board."

She denied Liberty’s claim that their inquiry had been limited and driven by spin.

"There has been a full examination to see if there was any evidence to suggest criminal activity, and there wasn't," she said.

A Foreign Office spokeswoman said: "We have been through the records, and there is no evidence of detainees being rendered through the UK since 1997."

More stone throwing without evidence. Getting boring.

Answer 7

Oh, and I guess those American soldiers tortured and hung from a roadway bridge were treated under the accords of the Geneva Convention? What about the American soldier who was tortured and killed this past week and tossed into a river? What about the other two missing soldiers? What about the missing Israeli soldiers who were abducted? Probably tortured also.

I have no problems with Bush clandestinely torturing Muslims. If gutting one out gets information that saves even one American life, it's worth it. If I could get ahold of one myself, I'd scalp him from his eyebrows to his elbows!

War crimes? Not hardly, but it sure is war! If you don't like it, don't start one. Muslims are going to provoke the United States too far, and they're going to see firsthand how brutal 19 year old American boys can be. We haven't gotten mad enough yet. YET.

Answer 8

The Silver Surfer

Answer 9

I think Blair can not be held to account for war crimes as he has been President of the EU, which makes him safe for the rest of his life against war crime charges, but wasn't Jack Straw foreign secretary at the time of the first landings in Scotland? now he could be charged under the Geneva convention.
Bush? can be charged I think re the US senate, why don't they?

Answer 10

Someone who can abduct the President or the Prime Minister without the consent of the country??????

Good Luck with your extreme leftist wet dream, who would ever try to grab one of these men with the US/UK militaries standing behind them.