Society Issues Talk

wendell · Guest

http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/2008/07/20087166397881715.html

-- First al-Bashir, next ... Bush? --

While there is little chance Omar al-Bashir, the Sudanese president, will
ever be brought to trial following his indictment by the International
Criminal Court (ICC), the charges brought against him nevertheless offer
hope for anyone concerned about human rights around the world.
For Americans, however, the ICC indictment should offer a moment of sombre
reflection not merely for our relative inaction with regard to years of mass
murder in Sudan.

It is equally disturbing that much of the al-Bashir indictment could just as
easily be applied to George Bush, the US president.

Here is part of what the indictment says:

"Bashir was directly responsible [for the activities of the militias]. He is
the president. He is the commander-in-chief. Those are not just formal
words. He used the whole state apparatus. He used the army; he enrolled the
militia/Janjaweed. They all report to him. They all obey him. His control is
absolute."

In such context, Bush is also directly responsible for the horrific disaster
in Iraq.

Bush's imperial presidency, with its "Unitary Executive" and arrogation of
the right to declare war from the constitutionally-appointed Congress, has
similarly "used the whole state apparatus" to wage the Iraq war. He
"enrolled" our soldiers and his military commanders who "all report to him".

For Bush, like al-Bashir, "they all obey him. His control is absolute".

Iraq's chaos

When I was in Iraq in the late winter and early spring of 2004 I saw this
clearly, and saw the already huge scale of the war crimes being committed
systematically by US forces across the country.

It was clear to most Iraqis that the chaos being reaped by the US in their
country was in fact deliberately sown by the US in order to create a
situation that would make any US withdrawal almost impossible to pull off.

While the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis - for which Bush, and
along with him, the American people who twice elected him, are responsible -
is tragic, it should not be understated that the invasion itself was a crime
against humanity.

The war and invasion were in clear breach of the UN charter, which prohibits
invading other countries except when an attack on one's sovereign territory
is about to occur or has just occurred.

Add to that US torturing of prisoners, illegal secret renditions, and a host
of other human rights abuses, and you have a long list of actions that are
prohibited and outlawed by US federal law.

Ideal America

In an America that still lived up to its founding ideals Bush and his
henchmen and women would not be worrying about an ICC indictment because
they would be too busy already defending themselves against a US federal
indictment for war crimes and other violations of US law.

At least in this imperfect world, Bush and the architects and executioners
of the Iraq war can join al-Bashir in suffering the ignominy of being
at-large international criminals.

Mark Levine is a professor of Middle East history at the University of
California, Irvine and is the author of the newly released Heavy Metal
Islam: Rock, Resistance, and the Struggle for the Soul of Islam

---

come November we'll see

yep

Obwon-Gandalf-Hope IV · Guest

One-hundred-forty-million U.S. voters -- including Democrats -- cannot
comprehend that THEIR "president" is also a WAR CRIMINAL.

They could readily perceive "war criminal" in a Saddam Hussein or a
Omar al-Bashir -- if they ever heard of Omar, highly unlikely -- but
no way can these non-informed, duped and benighted bigots can get
their little minds around a "Bush-as-war-criminal" concept!

Yes, Bushie can be compared to al-Bashir, but the Bushies years ago
"declined" membership in the ICC, because they knew the
"administration" was about to commit CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY.