Saturday morning, the dean of Massachusetts School of Law at Andover will convene a two day planning session with a single focus: To arrest, put to trial and carry out sentence on criminals in the Bush Administration.

The conference, arranged by Lawrence Vevel, cofounder of the Andover school, will focus on which of Bush's officials and members of Congress could be charged with war crimes. The plan also calls for "necessary organizational structures" to be established, with the purpose of pursuing the guilty "to the ends of the Earth."

"For Bush, Richard Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and John Yoo to spend years in jail or go to the gallows for their crimes would be a powerful lesson to future American leaders," Velvel said in a media advisory.

In a published document entitled "The Long Term View" (PDF link), Vevel argues, at the very least, "there is no question" George W. Bush is guilty of conspiracy to commit torture, a war crime.

"He is a former drunk, was a serial failure in business who had to repeatedly be bailed out by daddy's friends and wanna-be-friends, was unable to speak articulately despite the finest education(s) that money and influence can buy, has a dislike of reading, so that 100-page memos have to be boiled down to one page for him, is heedless of facts and evidence, and appears not even to know the meaning of truth," said Vevel.

The conference will focus on:



# What international and domestic crimes were committed, which facts show crimes under which laws, and what punishments are possible.

# Which high level Executive officials -- and Federal judges and legislators as well, if any -- are chargeable with crimes.

# Which international tribunals, foreign tribunals and domestic tribunals (if any) can be used and how to begin cases and/or obtain prosecutions before them.

# The possibility of establishing a Chief Prosecutor’s Office such as the one at Nuremburg.

# An examination of cases already brought and their outcomes.

# Creating an umbrella Coordinating Committee with representatives from the increasing number of organizations involved in war crimes cases.

# Creating a Center to keep track of and organize compilations of relevant briefs, articles, books, opinions, and facts, etc., on war crimes and prosecutions of war criminals.


And, addressing the conference will be:


# Famed former Los Angeles prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi, author of the best-selling "The Prosecution of George W. Bush For Murder" (Vanguard).

# Phillippe Sands, Professor of Law and Director of the Centre of International Courts and Tribunals at University College, London. He is the author of "Torture Team: Rumsfeld's Memo and the Betrayal of American Values" (Penguin/Palgrave Macmillan), among other works.

# Jordan Paust, Professor of Law at the University of Houston and author of "Beyond The Law."

# Ann Wright, a former U.S. Army colonel and U.S. Foreign Service official who holds a State Department Award for Heroism and who taught the Geneva Conventions and the Law of Land Warfare at the Special Warfare Center at Ft. Bragg, N.C. She is the coauthor of "Dissent: Voices of Conscience."

# Peter Weiss, Vice President of the Center For Constitutional Rights, which was recently involved with war crimes complaints filed in Germany and France against former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and others.

# Benjamin Davis, Associate Professor at the University of Toledo College of Law and former American Legal Counsel for the Secretariat of the International Court of Arbitration.

# David Lindorff, journalist and co-author with Barbara Olshansky of "The Case for Impeachment: Legal Arguments for Removing President George W. Bush from Office"(St. Martin’s Press).

# Colleen Costello of Human Rights USA.

# Christopher Pyle, a professor at Mt. Holyoke and author of several book on international matters.

# Lawrence Velvel, a leader in the field of law school education reform, who has written numerous internet articles on issues relevant to the conference.


http://www.mslaw.edu/MSLMedia/LTV/6.4.pdf

none of that will happen except in absentia.

why, you may ask, is that, o prolific wise man?

because they will all be tried and convicted of ATTEMPTED MURDER and/or PREMEDDITATED MURDER in the first degree before such a day will ever see W present before such a kangaroo court.

presumptively conclusory, wouldee. huh?



getting through the secret service personnel given hhis attendance for the rest of his life as a past president assures that going through them to kidnap W will require deadly force.


but, have fun tripping on it.

Just war crimes?

http://www.slate.com/id/2195892/sidebar/2195972/

copy and pasting nonsense, again?



here's your first clue, clueless.

there are no Geneva conventions for countryless combatants.

there is no flag and no international recognition of their, the terrorists, political structure.

hence, the Geneva Conventions do not apply.

there goes the rest of that waste of thought right out the window of self inflicted delusions apprehended by the gullible, once again.




no doubt, nobama in 2008.

OK, but in that regard, if what we are doing is chasing the countryless combantants, then what in Christs name are we doing in Iraq and Afghanistan?


You can't have it both ways, since we are waging war against the citizenry of both countries, so is it about chasing countryless combatants or is it about Islamofacsists (what a made up word, Can we change it to Muslimolicious?)

If it's about chasing the countryless combantants, the thugs I've mentioned. Then the war in both Iraq and Afghanistan would qualify as war crimes, because we've destroyed those countries, rebuilt them and destroyed them again to the tune of hundreds of thousands if not millions of destroyed innocent lives.

Not to mention that would make us an aggressor Military occupying soveriegn nations.

Which way is it now?

In spite of the fascist world you want to live in, some of us do believe in human rights.

WASHINGTON - In a stinging rebuke to President Bush's anti-terror policies, a deeply divided Supreme Court ruled Thursday that foreign detainees held for years at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba have the right to appeal to U.S. civilian courts to challenge their indefinite imprisonment without charges.

Bush said he strongly disagreed with the decision — the third time the court has repudiated him on the detainees — and suggested he might seek yet another law to keep terror suspects locked up at the prison camp, even as his presidency winds down.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the 5-4 high court majority, acknowledged the terrorism threat the U.S. faces — the administration's justification for the detentions — but he declared, "The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25117953/

It looks to me like times have changed here are the current facts on this

WASHINGTON - In a stinging rebuke to President Bush's anti-terror policies, a deeply divided Supreme Court ruled Thursday that foreign detainees held for years at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba have the right to appeal to U.S. civilian courts to challenge their indefinite imprisonment without charges.

Bush said he strongly disagreed with the decision — the third time the court has repudiated him on the detainees — and suggested he might seek yet another law to keep terror suspects locked up at the prison camp, even as his presidency winds down.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the 5-4 high court majority, acknowledged the terrorism threat the U.S. faces — the administration's justification for the detentions — but he declared, "The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25117953/

The Supreme Court of the United States has consistently told the Bush Administration that their policies in regards to detainees are unconstitutional.

This despite the fact there are Bush appointees on the court. He thought I am sure he'd stacked it.

He is close but guess what? His actions are unconstitutional.

The administration has skirted the rulings of the courts persuading the congress when the republicans held a majority to rewrite laws. Then by using "new" laws and signing statements and while ignoring current law and the rulings of the courts, the administration has continued it's unlawful actions.

What have we got?

Our tenuous grip on the moral high ground and our dedication to democracy have disappeared. We are now what we once despised.

Too bad those that worship NeoConservativism like it this way, it lets them continue with the false notion of us against the "liberal" world.

same same for America.

it is not a law enforcement burden, nor a war crime punishable by international tribunals that is presently on the table.

If a sovereign nation is attacked by parasitic forces harbingered in any recognized nation and that nation is unwilling or unable to eradicate the meance, then the menace remains to be eradicated.

If nations are so daft as to harbor such rogue mercenary forces, then they can expect no less than to be overrun by their parasitic mmercenaries enemies in that host nation.

simple.

whether or not it is conmfortable to embrace as a doctrine of justifiable means to an end has yet to be fully tested in retribution, as ity is presently being tested.

But these parasitic groups throughout the world are plying their premises on hosts and challenging the conventional constraints so valued by international agreements and treaties.

but let's face it. the cloak of these mercenary groups is that they are not nations themselves.

Sooner or later, their assumption was certain to be challenged.

Bush has led the way and continues to lead the way.

Will the world learnm from this?

you bet.

the terrorists are learning with their lives.

Their harbingers are learning to their own peril often enough. NOt pleasant, but that is a casualty of the host's choice, not the eradicator's.

parasites like osama bin ladin become hitlers and stalins and pol pots and idi amin dadas.

that the wicked sit in the gutter in silence where they belong is wise to accomodate.

but when nations overstep their rights and plunder other nations in disguise....

that is pure evil too.

If the world wants to pay attention to the lessons of afghanistan and iraq, let them learn and come to the table with their stopgap measures for eradicationg parasites within their own borders with action and results displaying their sincerity and resolve.

Otherwise, let them expect to get what they get from those that eradicate the world of their known enemies in combat and engagement.



At the end of the day, my advice for all nations is to take note of the American soldieAmerican soldiers know their business and how to clear the streets of any city.

that should be enough motive to keep the American soldier out of their streets and deliver up the parasitic menace in their midst.


Our government is doing itsoriginal job according to the purpose given our military through constitutional authority to protect and defend this nation.

Others cn apply these same lessons and aachieve similar results.

If the world community is smart, it will move expeditiously to formulate an omnilateral mutual consent decree against parasitc mercenaries throughout the world.



hhmmmmm,

that is a slippery slope, isn't it?


Best American interests lead the charge then, huh?

It's the best hope for a better outcome.



far from perfect, but very close to National Security concerns being of American authorship than any other.

the world can expect better from the US if the world recognizes American leadership in this c0onfligration of such a world wide menace to civility as is represented by the tragedy of 911.

and I have seen no signs that any nation wants a piece of America's soldiers raining hell on them as well.

Thw world watches. The world learns.

no appeasement.

Just as a side note. Schools once used to assign students the task of exploring issues and debating the merits if each side. That's not happening as much these days in part I am sure because no one wants to offend. It's much better to be pc and walk in lockstep these days...don't hurt anyone's feelings. go along and be a good citizen.

wouldee I am not sure things are as simple as you'd set out in your post.

It's interesting that in many parts of the world, where the policies of the United States and our President are hated American citizens are not. Please, I beg you all to look at your country, and the administration along with it's policies with a new eye.

There's a reason people don't like us. Oh, and don't tell me I am ashamed to be a citizen or I should get out or any of that other crap before you look at what we've done. It's not a right and wrong world.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

I think this completely sums it up. We have become the very thing we were fighting against.

Not only that, but if you take the broad strokes of power that Bush's Admin has sought after since day 1, you have to remember that rolls over.

I can't believe that a real Conservative would allow Bush to continue grabbing for power, for a presidency that may fall into the hands of an Obama.

How long before the mindwashed masses of the Goring... I mean republican party start screaming bloody murder, if a President Obama picks up where Bush left off with signing statements, PDD and EO's circumventing the checks and balances, because he and Biden won't rescind that power, thats what they are after.

I can see it now.

After the next "terror" event, Baracks advisors and handlers convince him he has no option, but to declare martial law. As the Police state closes in and Obama begins to Nationalize the resources of the nation (actually Bush already started this with the banking industry) and creates the harsh crackdown on dissent that his predecessor, Bush, put the laws in place to dissolve.

As the camps fill up and people begin to revolt against the nanny/police state, President Obama has no choice but to show his true power, by charging dissenters as enemy combatants under the patriot act, all the while going on the Corporate media telling everyone how much he loves us and is doing it for our own good.
As his poll numbers sink, as does the democratically controlled, but nuetered congress, Pres. Obama now has the power to "force" the people to "love" him back.

I got side tracked. I was planning to say that even if it would never happen, as one person said, it is an excellent workshop for the law students. Just like the activities we used to do in government class. The type that Lynnan says people aren't doing anymore.

That's sad. Debating it, questioning it, arguing it, breaking down and looking at both side of it is how we truly understand things. And see them for what they are worth.

Not doing it and following blindly like sheep destroys and erodes growth and progress and improvement.

I've said it before and still say it. The MOST patriotic action we can take it to question, challenge, and protest out government when we things that it is doing wrong or that we do not believe in.

Thomas Jefferson said "Dissent is the most important form of Patriotism"

Or something to that effect.

The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.
George Orwell

I am very surprised that the supreme court ruled this way. I think it has something to do with the watered down version of the patriot act.

In any case, wouldee we will be reminding those who think our rights were somehow eroded when we get attacked again because we started taking the defense instead of the offense in the war on terror here at home.

No matter how they slice the pie...BUSH kept us safe. THAT'S A FACT!