The Lies That Kill .... Why Isn't George Bush On Trial?

[Itsthetruth]

CounterPunch
May 17, 2005

The Lies that Kill
Why Isn't Bush in the Dock?
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review.

------------------------------------------------------------------


As intent as Republicans were to impeach President Clinton for lying about a sexual affair, they have a blind eye for President Bush's far more serious lies. Bush's lies have caused the deaths of tens of thousands of people, injured and maimed tens of thousands more, devastated a country, destroyed America's reputation, caused one billion Muslims to hate America, ruined our alliances with Europe, created a police state at home, and squandered $300 billion dollars and counting.

America's reputation is so damaged that not even our puppets can stand the heat. Anti-American riots, which have left Afghan cities and towns in flames and hospitals overflowing with casualties, have forced Bush's Afghan puppet, "president" Hamid Karzai, to assert his independence from his US overlords. In a belated act of sovereignty, Karzai asserted authority over heavy-handed US troops whose brutal and stupid ways sparked the devastating riots. Karzai demanded control of US military activities in Afghanistan and called for the return of the Afghan detainees who are being held at the US prison in Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.

Abundant evidence now exists in the public domain to convict George W. Bush of the crime of the century. The secret British government memo (dated July 23, 2002, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-15936), leaked to the Sunday Times (May 1, 2005), reports that Bush wanted:

"to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. . . . But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. . . . The Attorney-General said that the desire for regime change was not a legal base for military action. There were three possible legal bases: self-defence, humanitarian intervention, or UNSC authorization. The first and second could not be the base in this case. Relying on UNSCR 1205 of three years ago would be difficult."

This memo is the mother of all smoking guns.


http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts05172005.html

[Iriemon]

1. Look at who controls the government

[newyawker99]

8. Hi Iriemon!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[BillZBubb]

2. What made Roberts see the light?

He's been a doctrinaire right winger forever. He supported Bush for election in 2000. He's a supply side nutcase. He doesn't like Social Security. It seems like Busholini would be exactly his cup of tea.

[Itsthetruth]

3. That's Good, Not Bad

I don't know what made him "see the light" or when that conversion took place. However, it is refreshing to see someone move from the right to the left on some important issues. Usually it's the other way around.

You might want to read some of his other articles at:

http://www.google.com/search?q=Paul+Craig+Roberts+&hl=en&lr=&domains=http://www.counterpunch.org&sitesearch=http://www.counterpunch.org&start=10&sa=N

[Chipper Chat]

4. Side issue: Will Saddam's trial result in aquittal?

The GOP War Machine's case against him seems to be unraveling.

[Itsthetruth]

5. What Are The Charges?

What is he being charged with? If the charge is that he was a dictator and imprisoned and executed opponents that same charge could be made against many dictators that have been or are being currently supported by the U.S. government.

[Chipper Chat]

6. One is that he gassed the Kurds.

But didn't our own government murder countless American Indians in cold blood in the name of manifest destiny?

[donkeyotay]

7. The evidence is there, so will the Right ignore it?

If the GOP rank and file doesn't revolt, if they don't leave their party and turn independent, then they are complicit in the crimes. They are tearing up the Constitution and telling the American people that some are above the rule of law.

Moral majority? Really?