Bush cancels Swiss visit amid threats of protest, arrest

[koheesti]

It really doesn't matter what the law in Switzerland or anywhere else is if they try to arrest any former American president.

Do you consider any American President immune (anywhere in the world) no matter what he did or not ?

I'm saying it doesn't matter what the law says. If China grabbed Bush then Obama would be leading the charge and he would have a large majority supporting him from across the political spectrum. Sorry, that is the reality of the situation.

[krading]

Does China have oil?

[powderpuff]

Here is a few dimwit democrats arguing strongly that the US should invade Iraq. Of course the cowards later denied it.

These worthy's H Clinton, John "Yacht" Kerry, John "Lovechild" Edwards Al Bore (I invented the internet), BJ billy & the old drunk Teddy Kennedy. (I teach driver ed & lifesaving).

[LaoPo]

Does China have oil?

Yes, but that doesn't have anything to do with this topic. China is the world's 4th largest oil producer (2009) after Russia, Saudi Arabia and the United States. Some sources say they're in 5th place, after Iran on 4th, depending on the year of production.

LaoPo

[LaoPo]

It really doesn't matter what the law in Switzerland or anywhere else is if they try to arrest any former American president.

Do you consider any American President immune (anywhere in the world) no matter what he did or not ?

I'm saying it doesn't matter what the law says. If China grabbed Bush then Obama would be leading the charge and he would have a large majority supporting him from across the political spectrum. Sorry, that is the reality of the situation.

Most heads of states have political immunity, in MOST cases........... but I'm not so sure about warcrimes.

The fact that quite a few heads of States are sought after by the International Community proves that international criminal laws are followed up.

But, I doubt very much that a head of a super power, like the US, UK, Germany, France, (Italy...well that's another story ) Japan, India and China would be brought to justice, where ever.

But, the complaints, filed by Amnesty International in a tiny state like Switzerland is scaring off the former President of the USA?

What a world....

LaoPo

[farang000999]

If Bush is tried for war crimes shouldn't Obama?

[LaoPo]

President Bush cancels visit to Switzerland

Amnesty International:

6 February 2011

Former US president George W. Bush has cancelled a planned visit to Geneva on February 12, according to reports in the Tribune de Genève newspaper. The cancellation comes ahead of expected protests and possible legal action against the former president.

On Friday, Amnesty International sent Genevoise and Swiss federal prosecutors a detailed factual and legal analysis of President Bush's criminal responsibility for acts of torture he is believed to have authorised. Amnesty International concluded that Switzerland had enough information to open a criminal investigation against the former president.

Such an investigation would be mandatory under Switzerland's international obligations if President Bush entered the country.

<snip>

Anywhere in the world that he travels, President Bush could face investigation and potential prosecution for his responsibility for torture and other crimes in international law, particularly in any of the 147 countries that are party to the UN Convention against Torture.

"As the US authorities have, so far, failed to bring President Bush to justice, the international community must step in," said Salil Shetty.

Link with whole article:

http://www.amnesty.o...land-2011-02-06

LaoPo

[Jingthing]

If Bush is tried for war crimes shouldn't Obama?

Of course not! He's got a Nobel peace prize.

Next ...

[h90]

The Swiss might be bound by law to investigate, but that doesn't mean they would have to detain him, I don't think.

He should come to Thailand, he will be long dead and buried by the time they finish any investigation that doesn't suit them.

Victor Bout?? If someone pays enough Thailand sells

[LaoPo]

The Swiss might be bound by law to investigate, but that doesn't mean they would have to detain him, I don't think.

He should come to Thailand, he will be long dead and buried by the time they finish any investigation that doesn't suit them.

Victor Bout?? If someone pays enough Thailand sells

Yeah, I almost forgot but than again: Bout wasn't President of Russia and Bout wasnt tortured in a Thai jail, was he?.

Now, Putin would be an interesting target, wouldn't he, shoving off Mikhail Khodorkovsky to Siberia and taking all of his Billions...that's also torture isn't it ?

LaoPo

[Jingthing]

Probably nobody would actually want to lead a country if they knew they were actually going to be held accountable for their actions. Where's the fun in that?

[Jingthing]

I said I would like to see Bush tried for war crimes. Cheney and Rumsfeld as well. I didn't say I expected it! Bush derangement syndrome? I plead guilty based on rationality.

JJ, could you be tried for posting crimes

Au contraire, I charge you, but I think you can get off with the inanity defense ...

[mark45y]

The Swiss would have been foolish to even consider such an arrest. Switzerland and a few other western European nations are the clearing houses for the proceeds of some of the world's worst thugs, despots and thieves. Just as Switzerland may claim "international" obligations, the same "obligations" hold to the USA in respect to money laundering and the funding of terrorist organizations. It wouldn't take much for a U.S. Senator to ask for an enforcement action or an investigation of questionable Swiss banking practices that would then paralyze the Swiss banking system.

Sadly true, the Swiss are morally responsible for supporting many despotic rulers who stash their wealth with Swiss banks and use it to supress millions of their own citizens into starvation and illiteracy. However, should that be the reason for welcoming the greatest tyrant in history?? Every civilised nation should send clear signals that he is no longer welcome to visit them.

Who is the greatest tyrant in history that Switzerland is welcoming?

[WarpSpeed]

It really doesn't matter what the law in Switzerland or anywhere else is if they try to arrest any former American president.

Do you consider any American President immune (anywhere in the world) no matter what he did or not ?

BTW: the article in the OP does not speak of an arrest.

LaoPo

Not necessarily, but there's proper diplomatic channels to go through...

[WarpSpeed]

The Swiss would have been foolish to even consider such an arrest. Switzerland and a few other western European nations are the clearing houses for the proceeds of some of the world's worst thugs, despots and thieves. Just as Switzerland may claim "international" obligations, the same "obligations" hold to the USA in respect to money laundering and the funding of terrorist organizations. It wouldn't take much for a U.S. Senator to ask for an enforcement action or an investigation of questionable Swiss banking practices that would then paralyze the Swiss banking system.

However, should that be the reason for welcoming the greatest tyrant in history??

:cheesy: I get it! You're a comedian by trade!!!.................... Er um troll I mean.... Well done!!

Edited February 8, 2011 by WarpSpeed

[WarpSpeed]

Does China have oil?

Probably plenty they're either hoarding or have yet to discover..Honestly who knows how much for certain? But the obvious, known answer is yes...

China has the most notable, viable, intact dinosaur fossils anywhere to date, not that I believe oil comes from fossils but most science does and that's another topic altogether..

many have already been destroyed by locals who cook them up in soup and believe that there are special healing and virulent powers contained in them.. Kind of contradictory though as it didn't seem to work for the dinosaurs did it?

Edited February 8, 2011 by WarpSpeed

[mark45y]

It really doesn't matter what the law in Switzerland or anywhere else is if they try to arrest any former American president.

Do you consider any American President immune (anywhere in the world) no matter what he did or not ?

BTW: the article in the OP does not speak of an arrest.

LaoPo

Two Presidents were impeached. Bill Clinton and Andrew Johnson.

Bush never came close to being impeached.

Apparently most Americans have a different opinion than most Thai Visans about the actions of Bush.

I wonder if you all would be upset by anything Bush did if he had done it during WW II?

A lot of Americans think we are or were at least at war with Iraq. The mother of all battles and such.

Also the loss of life in the Twin Towers was greater than the American loss of life at Pearl Harbor.

I know Iraq didn't have anything to do with the Twin Towers but at the time many things were not as clear as they are now.

You don't really think that Bush is bright enough to have thought of all of that stuff himself do you?

The congress approved everything he did in one way or another.

I think there is a large gap of knowledge between what people on Thai Visa think an American President can do and what he can do in reality.

Boys, he does not have any money. He can shout and cajole but he don't have any cash. How long do you think the Iraq war would last without funding? It stops immediately if the congress does not approve funds. If the congress does not approve funds for the government the American government stops. That's right. Stops. Everybody goes home.

The American President is not a dictator. He is not responsible for things like a dictator is responsible for things. He doesn't have the power.

Some Presidents have more power than others because of majorities in the House and Senate or because of conditions like war or national emergency. You are loading all the responsibility on one man. When in fact the responsibility is the responsibility of the country. Bush was elected twice. Blame the American electorate.

In Germany when someone disagreed with Hitler they were killed or sent to a concentration camp. In Russia Stalin sent them to the Gulag.

Many people disagree with a President and they don't end up at Gitmo. There is always a minority vote in the House and Senate and a minority opinion in the Supreme court. They don't get sent to prison. The majority rules. All of the crimes you are accusing Bush of were approved by a majority of the elected representatives of the US government.

[Jingthing]

The last post was so full of distortions that it isn't even funny.

The US congress never declared war on Iraq just as it never declared war on North Vietnam.

Bush was elected twice, but you'd be surprised how many Americans consider his initial election illegitimate and corrupt.

Bush expanded the executive power of the presidency to historic proportions.

Bush popular? At some points in his second Iraq war, he had a 25 percent approval rating.

What percentage of Americans think Bush, Cheney, and Rumseld are war criminals? I don't know but I would guess about 25 percent. The bottom line is that many Americans feel the neocons made up all kinds of lies, and they knew they were lies, and they didn't care if they were lies as long as it served their propaganda purposes. Yes, as Hillary Clinton, used to say, it was indeed a right wing conspiracy.

I see AI is going after the water boarding charges. That makes sense. It's no wonder most of the world has lost faith in America's values and good intentions when we tolerated a president who promoted the use of illegal torture techniques more typical of brutal autocratic dictators. How did he sell that descent into barbarism? Fear of the terrorist bogey man (which replaced demonization of the Clinton man, which had replaced fear of the already crumbling Soviet Union), that's how, watch the video I suggested and it will become more clear.

Edited February 8, 2011 by Jingthing

[WarpSpeed]

WOW!! JT sounds like you're referring to Obama not Bush... Much the same can be said from another point of view..

[manarak]

The Swiss would have been foolish to even consider such an arrest. Switzerland and a few other western European nations are the clearing houses for the proceeds of some of the world's worst thugs, despots and thieves. Just as Switzerland may claim "international" obligations, the same "obligations" hold to the USA in respect to money laundering and the funding of terrorist organizations. It wouldn't take much for a U.S. Senator to ask for an enforcement action or an investigation of questionable Swiss banking practices that would then paralyze the Swiss banking system.

This isn't accurate.

The non-US approved dirty money has left Switzerland a long time ago, headed to the Channel Islands, Singapore, Panama, BVI, etc.

Many of the world's "worst thugs, despots and thieves" have support from the US and can therefore bank in many places of the world, including Switzerland. The other "worst thugs, despots and thieves" are supported by the Enemy: China and Russia, and therefore bank elsewhere.

The US made sure Switzerland wouldn't help US citizens to evade taxes, because every Swiss account with a US beneficial owner has to be declared to the US. Now can we speak of Switzerland as a truly sovereign and independent country when the US bullied them into signing that fiscal treaty forcing the Swiss to rat out US citizens to the IRS?

We can certainly assume that if the US really wanted to stop all the dirty money in Switzerland, they could. But it would be more of a hindrance to US interests than a help.

The USA has it's own money laundering machine in the shape of Delaware corporations, of which the real owners can remain anonymous if they wish (!!!!) a thing that is totally impossible in Switzerland.

The "historical ally" of the US, Great Britain, maintains the special fiscal status of Guernsey trusts, which are the largest tax-evasion machine in the world.

I say: US, begin the clean-up in your backyard.

Edited February 8, 2011 by manarak

[LaoPo]

...Ouch....we better hide ourselves since we have a civil war between fellow Americans Jingthing and Mark45y...

LaoPo

[Ulysses G.]

He's got a Nobel peace prize.

For what exactly?

[koheesti]

It's no wonder most of the world has lost faith in America's values and good intentions when ...

I've lived overseas (outside America) since 1994. If Thaivisa had been around then, there would be just as many posters here who had already "lost faith in America's values and good intentions". To paraphrase Billy Joel, Bush didn't start the fire.

[mark45y]

...Ouch....we better hide ourselves since we have a civil war between fellow Americans Jingthing and Mark45y...

LaoPo

Actually we probably have a lot more in common than we have differences. I didn't vote for Bush and did not like the war in Iraq. I'm more of an isolationist. I didn't like the water boarding or any of those things and am in favor of putting money and spooks on the ground. I believe in good intelligence rather than torture.

I have always liked spies. The Brits had a wonderful spy service way back when. Even when the Yanks took over SEA from the Brits after WW II they were too heavy handed.

JT and I could never have a Civil war because neither one of us would ever surrender. The Civil war was won. The South surrendered at Appomattox courthouse. Like the American Revolutionary war was won. The British surrendered at Yorktown.

The chances of arresting an American President by a foreign country are nil. The only way an American President gets arrested is the same way an Iraq leader got arrested and that involved war between two countries.

I would have liked to see impeachment proceedings against Bush. It would have cleared the air and set to rest all of the theories of what actually occurred.

I don't think he would have been impeached like Clinton but I guess we will never know.

In any event I do think the Bush haters should decide whether he was bright enough to have orchestrated all these terrible things or he was too dumb to do any of it and was just a pawn. If he was too dumb cut the guy a break and start bashing Dick Cheney. Or if he was smart enough to have thought of all this stuff stop calling him an idiot.

[mark45y]

It's no wonder most of the world has lost faith in America's values and good intentions when ...

I've lived overseas (outside America) since 1994. If Thaivisa had been around then, there would be just as many posters here who had already "lost faith in America's values and good intentions". To paraphrase Billy Joel, Bush didn't start the fire.

I was in law school in 1967 when I got drafted. I was full of faith in American ideals. I got back home in 1972. I went to Colorado and became a ski bum. It has been 43 years and I'm still angry.

Why do you think I came to Thailand? Because I lost my youthful idealism here many years ago. I keep looking for it. I know it's here someplace.

I live in the same place I lived in 1970. How's that for irony. Yup, same place and I'm not alone. I know at least 100 other guys doing the same thing.

We prowl around Kilo Sip and New Land late at night hoping for a glimpse of it. Here, youthful idealism, come here boy, where are you?

[SerpentSea]

Freedom loving people are celebrating the loud voices in the streets of Egypt calling for the downfall of Mubarek, and yes, many would like to see him convicted of his crimes. If that's OK, it's also OK for Americans to still feel vindictively about the president who lied to us blatantly to start the war against Iraq.

If you don't understand what Bush did, I suggest this video -- The Power of Nightmares, The Rise of the Politics of Fear, a BBC documentary.

So what happen in the USA: What the people do against this 'criminal' Bush? Will Bush get arrested and put on trail? Did Obama watched that video?

[Jingthing]

So what happen in the USA: What the people do against this 'criminal' Bush? Will Bush get arrested and put on trail? Did Obama watched that video?

I am sure Obama knows everything in that video, judging from the rhetoric of his 2010 campaign. What happens now? Nothing, of course. American presidents don't go to jail, not even Nixon.

[SerpentSea]

If Bush is tried for war crimes shouldn't Obama?

Of course not! He's got a Nobel peace prize.

Next ...

What are actually the exact 'war crimes' of Bush?

Is Obama the leading force that bring the 'war criminal' Bush to justice or is he doing nothing about or isn't it so that he just do the same?

Looks more like that under Obama the USA still doing the same so shouldn't Bush get a Nobel peace prize too?

[Jingthing]

The illegal tortures have stopped under Obama.

Obama couldn't simply cut and run from Iraq, that would be like breaking it and not fixing it, which would be immoral. Now the Iraqis are actively kicking the US out of Iraq. Now Iran is much more powerful in the region (thanks to Bush) and has lots of power in Iraq. The whole exercise, trillions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of dead, a total mistake.

Obama is owning the Afghanistan war now. I also think that is another big mistake, simply look at history. There is a difference between wars and war crimes though.

[SerpentSea]

The illegal tortures have stopped under Obama.

Obama couldn't simply cut and run from Iraq, that would be like breaking it and not fixing it, which would be immoral. Now the Iraqis are actively kicking the US out of Iraq. Now Iran is much more powerful in the region (thanks to Bush) and has lots of power in Iraq. The whole exercise, trillions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of dead, a total mistake.

Obama is owning the Afghanistan war now. I also think that is another big mistake, simply look at history. There is a difference between wars and war crimes though.

Who knows if the tortures has stopped. I pretty sure neither Bush nor Obama getting personal involved in interrogation that are done in such way.

And the 'war crimes' of Bush are wasting trillions of dollars and making the Iran more stronger?

How could have the latter been prevent (if true at all)? Giving the Iraq all the money to continue wars with Iran? What kind of power the Iran actually have in Iraq?

I still don't get it. What is in your argumentation the the difference between the war in Iraq & Afghanistan under Bush and exactly the same wars under Obama? How comes that one is a war criminal and the other fight just wars?

Anyway, many countries in the world bring their former leaders to justice if they did commit crimes. At least in the more advanced democratic states happen something like that, banana republics and dictatorships maybe do not so. If according to you, Bush is a war criminal, why nothing happen in the USA? What kind of country is that?

Your logic becomes flawed if you rant about Bush and praise Obama at the same time.