Way to go, Malaysia!

jackiebaron

Malaysia finds Bush and Blair guilty of war crimes. I guess those to gimps aren't going to be visiting Kuala Lumpur any time soon.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article29815.htm

Jonny7

jackiebaron wrote: »

Malaysia finds Bush and Blair guilty of war crimes. I guess those to gimps aren't going to be visiting Kuala Lumpur any time soon.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article29815.htm

Its only symbolic unfortunately.. a mock trial.

jackiebaron

Jonny7 wrote: »

Its only symbolic unfortunately.. a mock trial.

Why "unfortunately", for you Jonny. I thought you worshipped the ground these two weasels crawled on. Surely you would find it fortunate that it was only symbolic.

I'm under no illusion that any justice will be delivered to these two assholes but it does go on record and it does tarnish the record and legacy that Blair is so adamant to polish. Bush is too dumb to give a fück. That dope will never leave the comfort of New England anyway.

But remember, Rumsfeld has to have staffers constantly checking where he can travel. Again, he'll never face charges but the dick will die with that cloud over his head. Hardly the "legacy" one would want as "defender" of the homeland.

You see Blair is such a narcissist that after his stint as UK PM and prick in chief he toddles off to try and become some kind of Middle East peace broker...no doubt with the Nobel Prize on his mind. Well he can forget about that now, so he may as well just go back to earning 50k an hour blabbing to the young conservatives and a bunch of other dildos on the lecture circuit.

Jonny7

jackiebaron wrote: »

Why "unfortunately", for you Jonny. I thought you worshipped the ground these two weasels crawled on. Surely you would find it fortunate that it was only symbolic.

Bush and that administration were one of the worst things to happen to the US in recent memory, and likewise Blair with the UK.

Overheal

I thought you worshipped the ground these two weasels crawled on.

Im sure Jonny7 gave you any indication of the sort.

jackiebaron

Overheal wrote: »

Im sure Jonny7 gave you any indication of the sort.

Not really, no. Anytime I, or anyone else, points out that this draft-dodging paper cowboy launched a war and slaughtered over a million Iraqis, Jonny...and you for that matter make excuses. You quibble about how the world is better off without Saddam......but not without a million others.

And the last thing you'll do is admit that the invasion of Iraq was a crime. Oh, you might call it a "mistake" or piss on about how intelligence or logistics or Michael Moore or some other such shït was responsible for its failure. But you'll never call it a crime, because to do so would take a little bit of moral fibre and strength of character on your part.

jackiebaron

Overheal wrote: »

Im sure Jonny7 gave you any indication of the sort.

What?

Overheal

jackiebaron wrote: »

Not really, no. Anytime I, or anyone else, points out that this draft-dodging paper cowboy launched a war and slaughtered over a million Iraqis, Jonny...and you for that matter make excuses. You quibble about how the world is better off without Saddam......but not without a million others.

And the last thing you'll do is admit that the invasion of Iraq was a crime. Oh, you might call it a "mistake" or piss on about how intelligence or logistics or Michael Moore or some other such shït was responsible for its failure. But you'll never call it a crime, because to do so would take a little bit of moral fibre and strength of character on your part.

Hmm. See, I don't recall really ever having had the political positions that you claim that I have. Maybe you have lost the ability to distinguish one name from the next on the internet? So I have a suggestion for you: if you can't keep them straight, don't make your argument personal. Because what you seem to be putting in my mouth is "It's okay that there is a staggering death toll in Iraq because Saddam is dead", which I never said, or agreed with, or insinuated, in my life.

Second, you've done that thing again, where you like to confuse legality with morality. Iraq was not a "Crime". It was morally questionable, but it was not a crime. Sorry. I can sure call it immoral, but I can't say that it can be called a crime. Are you capable of understanding the distinction?

Manic Moran

jackiebaron wrote: »

Anytime I, or anyone else, points out that this draft-dodging paper cowboy

I'm not sure any of that line is accurate.

He signed on for a unit which was in Vietnam at the time, he owns a ranch, and wears a cowboy hat. Seems legit enough.

NTM

Manach

As there was no mention in the text of the powers/jurisdiction under which this event occurred I reckon that any possible Bush & Blair book signing can proceed apace in Malaysia.

Jonny7

jackiebaron wrote: »

Not really, no. Anytime I, or anyone else, points out that this draft-dodging paper cowboy launched a war and slaughtered over a million Iraqis, Jonny...and you for that matter make excuses. You quibble about how the world is better off without Saddam......but not without a million others.

And the last thing you'll do is admit that the invasion of Iraq was a crime. Oh, you might call it a "mistake" or piss on about how intelligence or logistics or Michael Moore or some other such shït was responsible for its failure. But you'll never call it a crime, because to do so would take a little bit of moral fibre and strength of character on your part.

Think you have me mistaken for someone else, I've spoken out against Iraq since it began. I marched against it.

Memnoch

Overheal wrote: »

Second, you've done that thing again, where you like to confuse legality with morality. Iraq was not a "Crime". It was morally questionable, but it was not a crime. Sorry. I can sure call it immoral, but I can't say that it can be called a crime. Are you capable of understanding the distinction?

What is the distinction in your opinion? Specifically, how do you define crime in this particular context?

Overheal

Memnoch wrote: »

What is the distinction in your opinion? Specifically, how do you define crime in this particular context?

Did it breach defined law?

take a recent example: It's not illegal for congressman to perform insider trades. I find this to be unethical and immoral, since it would seem to undermine the integrity of the system, but it is not illegal, as it is not restricted in law (not yet anyway).

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2011-11-16/congress-insider-trade-ban/51245468/1

Memnoch

Overheal wrote: »

Did it breach defined law?

take a recent example: It's not illegal for congressman to perform insider trades. I find this to be unethical and immoral, since it would seem to undermine the integrity of the system, but it is not illegal, as it is not restricted in law (not yet anyway).

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2011-11-16/congress-insider-trade-ban/51245468/1

That's an interesting example but I'm not sure it correlates.

Firstly, which law would we be talking about here? International law? And how does that get defined?

There seems to be a lot of discrepancy in both the application and the enforcement of it, depending on how powerful a nation the people in question happen to represent.

Bush decided to exempt himself from the jurisdiction of the international criminal court. Even going as far as to create bilateral treaties with various nations to prevent any challenge or prosecution.

Add to this the fact that the scenes of the crime have been controlled by the people who would be accused. I.E. the invaded lands. They ceded control only to corrupt puppets who through their own selfish interest would never pursue the matter or justice in any meaningful way or form.

We're talking about a system where the supposed criminal gets to decide who is the judge, who is the jury, who can examine the evidence (if they allow it to be examined at all) and whether or not they can be tried for their actions in the first place.

This is the context that we are talking about and in THIS context the argument you are making about the distinction between morality and criminality is in danger of becoming one of heavy semantics.

You seem to be taking a stand against the use of the word crime. Because this word has certain implications. It means that a person has committed wrong for which they should be punished and held to account by society. It means they are a criminal. One who commits crime.

So in the context of absolute semantics, you are correct. One cannot call them criminals for they will never be tried in any court of law and their guilt will never be proven in such a venue.

But for me, and I guess many others. There is enough obvious evidence of the wrong doing of their actions that that is exactly what they are. War criminals who deserve the full brunt of society's scorn. There should be no placation or watering down of words.

They are responsible for the suffering of countless innocents (in my opinion) for the pursuit of pure greed. Though I will never be able to prove this (because they would never allow anyone to investigate it) in any meaningful legal venue, there is so little doubt in my mind as to their criminality as to be negligible.

If Bush and Blair aren't criminals then our system of laws is worthless and does not serve justice or truth.

jackiebaron

Manic Moran wrote: »

I'm not sure any of that line is accurate.

He signed on for a unit which was in Vietnam at the time, he owns a ranch, and wears a cowboy hat. Seems legit enough.

NTM

Hid daddy got him into the "champagne unit", i.e. the Texas Air National Guard. The rich kids' unit. They spent their days siting around hangars and drinking. Maybe flew the odd sortie over the Gulf of Mexico for a laugh. He refused to be stationed overseas and he went awol for a damn year. That adds up to draft-dodging in my book. Oh he didn't leave the country or get five (count 'em FIVE) deferrals like Cheney (what a hero) who had "other priorities" rather than joining up and serving his country like everyone else, but he got his ass covered which is worse than draft-dodging. A draft dodger only has himself to take the responsibility for his cowardice. Bush didn't even have the balls for that. He got his connections to get him into some rear-echelon joke unit so he not only would never see the odd angry shot but he could also brag that he "served". The worst form of weasel.

As for cowboys....he owns a ranch? He wears a cowboy hat?

The prick is afraid of horses FFS. His Crawford ranch was a former hog farm and slaughterhouse that still stinks of death and pigsh!t on a hot day. He doesn't live there anymore. Buying that kip was a publicity stunt to endear him to the moron element of the American electorate

Amerika

I’ve come to realize a day at boards.ie without hate-induced ignorant tirades against republicans and conservatives is like day not followed by night.

jackiebaron

Amerika wrote: »

I’ve come to realize a day at boards.ie without hate-induced ignorant tirades against republicans and conservatives is like day not followed by night.

What's ignorant about calling Bush a war-criminal and a coward and a spoilt punk whose daddy's contacts got him everything in life. The fool didn't even have a proper job until he was 40 and even then his father had to pull strings for him.

What's ignorant about that? It's the truth. Or do you just not like the truth if it upsets you?

Suryavarman

jackiebaron wrote: »

Hid daddy got him into the "champagne unit", i.e. the Texas Air National Guard. The rich kids' unit. They spent their days siting around hangars and drinking. Maybe flew the odd sortie over the Gulf of Mexico for a laugh. He refused to be stationed overseas and he went awol for a damn year. That adds up to draft-dodging in my book. Oh he didn't leave the country or get five (count 'em FIVE) deferrals like Cheney (what a hero) who had "other priorities" rather than joining up and serving his country like everyone else, but he got his ass covered which is worse than draft-dodging. A draft dodger only has himself to take the responsibility for his cowardice. Bush didn't even have the balls for that. He got his connections to get him into some rear-echelon joke unit so he not only would never see the odd angry shot but he could also brag that he "served". The worst form of weasel.

As for cowboys....he owns a ranch? He wears a cowboy hat?

The prick is afraid of horses FFS. His Crawford ranch was a former hog farm and slaughterhouse that still stinks of death and pigsh!t on a hot day. He doesn't live there anymore. Buying that kip was a publicity stunt to endear him to the moron element of the American electorate

Dodging the draft is a display of cowardice now? Would a slave fleeing his master also be considered an act of cowardice? Dodging the draft doesn't make you a coward, it makes you a hero.

Manic Moran

Hid daddy got him into the "champagne unit", i.e. the Texas Air National Guard. The rich kids' unit. They spent their days siting around hangars and drinking. Maybe flew the odd sortie over the Gulf of Mexico for a laugh

They also served, who were allocated against the Warsaw Pact.

That said, Bush joined the 147th FIG in May 1968. Would you care to guess where pilots of the 147th FIG were serving at that moment and time?

Clue, it's in Asia, and involved some forceful exchange of opinion. As the war progressed, F102s were downgraded in combat value (they're primarily interceptors), so the demand for those pilots had dropped by the time Bush was out of flight school.

NTM

jackiebaron

Suryavarman wrote: »

Dodging the draft is a display of cowardice now? Would a slave fleeing his master also be considered an act of cowardice? Dodging the draft doesn't make you a coward, it makes you a hero.

It was the wrong term to use. I fully agree that draft dodgers and conscientous objectors are true heroes in that they have the courage to stand alone in the face of reproach and stick with the strength of their convictions. The fools are the ones who join up out of fear of being called a coward while the ultimate cowards are the ones who hide behind mummy's apron strings until daddy's wallet can buy them into a safe and cushy alternative.