How has Bush violated international law? What laws did he violate?
107610
Numerous UN Treaties (accepted and ratified by the US) which set forth standards for treatment of prisoners (see Abu Gharib) including the Geneva Convention (which the US has said we are no longer following in the 'war on terror'). \n\nAlso, civil rights violations -- numerous treaties forbid holding citizens indefinitely without trial (see US v. Padilla), denying them access to attorneys (see Hamdi v. Rumsfeld), or violating our own constitutional laws (warrantless wiretapping).
805447
International law - no grounds for it.\n\nA stronger case could be made for treason trials for several Democratic leaders.  Are you in?
790788
how can you say he did nothing???\n\n1) Seizing power to wage wars of aggression in defiance of the U.S. Constitution, the U.N. Charter and the rule of law; carrying out a massive assault on and occupation of Iraq, a country that was not threatening the United States, resulting in the death and maiming of tens of thousands of Iraqis, and thousands of U.S. G.I.s.\n\n2) Lying to the people of the U.S., to Congress, and to the U.N., providing false and deceptive rationales for war.\n\n3) Authorizing, ordering and condoning direct attacks on civilians, civilian facilities and locations where civilian casualties were unavoidable. \n\n4) Instituting a secret and illegal wiretapping and spying operation against the people of the United States through the National Security Agency.\n\n5) Threatening the independence and sovereignty of Iraq by belligerently changing its government by force and assaulting Iraq in a war of aggression.\n\n6) Authorizing, ordering and condoning assassinations, summary executions, kidnappings, secret and other illegal detentions of individuals, torture and physical and psychological coercion of prisoners to obtain false statements concerning acts and intentions of governments and individuals and violating within the United States, and by authorizing U.S. forces and agents elsewhere, the rights of individuals under the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.\n\n7) Making, ordering and condoning false statements and propaganda about the conduct of foreign governments and individuals and acts by U.S. government personnel; manipulating the media and foreign governments with false information; concealing information vital to public discussion and informed judgment concerning acts, intentions and possession, or efforts to obtain weapons of mass destruction in order to falsely create a climate of fear and destroy opposition to U.S. wars of aggression and first strike attacks.\n\n8) Violations and subversions of the Charter of the United Nations and international law, both a part of the "Supreme Law of the land" under Article VI, paragraph 2, of the Constitution, in an attempt to commit with impunity crimes against peace and humanity and war crimes in wars and threats of aggression against Afghanistan, Iraq and others and usurping powers of the United Nations and the peoples of its nations by bribery, coercion and other corrupt acts and by rejecting treaties, committing treaty violations, and frustrating compliance with treaties in order to destroy any means by which international law and institutions can prevent, affect, or adjudicate the exercise of U.S. military and economic power against the international community.\n\n9) Acting to strip United States citizens of their constitutional and human rights, ordering indefinite detention of citizens, without access to counsel, without charge, and without opportunity to appear before a civil judicial officer to challenge the detention, based solely on the discretionary designation by the Executive of a citizen as an "enemy combatant."\n\n10) Ordering indefinite detention of non-citizens in the United States and elsewhere, and without charge, at the discretionary designation of the Attorney General or the Secretary of Defense.\n\n11) Ordering and authorizing the Attorney General to override judicial orders of release of detainees under INS jurisdiction, even where the judicial officer after full hearing determines a detainee is wrongfully held by the government.\n\n12) Authorizing secret military tribunals and summary execution of persons who are not citizens who are designated solely at the discretion of the Executive who acts as indicting official, prosecutor and as the only avenue of appellate relief.\n\n13) Refusing to provide public disclosure of the identities and locations of persons who ha
237210
Bush doesn't understand the word illegal when it applies to him or his friends.
842601
True, Bush has not committed any crimes. Libs are steaming mad that they have been out of power so long. They're also mad that Bush accomplished what they wanted to do but did not: topple Saddam.
500916
They have committed crimes against humanity. 2500 of our guys and 10's of thousands of Iraqi have died because mistakes were made. Bush and Blare are the top dogs and responsible for those deaths, because of mistakes. Bush has committed crimes because of the interment of people without due process. Not allowing the red cross to visit is against the Geneva convention, not releasing name of the prisoners. ect. ect. ect. I do think that both should have to go to the Hague and be tried for these crimes.
735656
The law condemns man. God offered himself to torture and death to pay the price for those who accept the atonement of Jesus Christ. Bush is not God.
537020
Unconstitutional is all. Of course disregarding the constitution has never been a problem for Bush. He has broken both domestic and international law and I hope that someday he has to answer for it.
949890
Yes I do! He's broken more laws than I can possibly count at the moment DURING HIS PRESIDENCY. It's just that simple.... He's worse than Nixon ever was.
28230
This is an interesting question. International law is seemingly in the process of being written. It is tough to decide what really is a violation of international law.\n\nThis also brings up the point of the idea of whether country's are sovereign or not. Is a country bound by laws made by an International group?
933140
The U. S. Constitution, Art. VI, para. 2, makes treaties adopted by the U.S. part of the “law of the land.” Thus, a violation of the U. N. Charter, Hague IV, Geneva Conventions, etc. is also a violation of U.S. federal law.\n\nU.S. Federal Law 18 U.S.C. § 2441 (War Crimes Act of 1996) makes committing a war crime, defined as: " ...a grave breach in any of the international conventions signed at Geneva 12 August 1949, or any protocol to such convention to which the United States is a party... " punishable by fine, imprisonment, or death.\n\nAmendment IV\n\n"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. "\n\nShall we consider all the ways this administration has violated THAT section of the Consitution? Or was it just "a guideline" not a law all these years?\n\nAmendment VI.\n\n"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."\n\nGuess that doesn't apply if we're really, REALLY mad at someone, huh?\n\nAnd then there is the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act which provides for the President a classified process for collecting sensitive intelligence with the approval of a court.\n\nForeign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, Pub. L. No. 95- 511, 92 Stat. 1783 (codified as amended at 50 U.S.C. §§ 1801-1811, 1821-1829, 1841-1846, 1861-62).\n\n50 U.S.C. §1801 et al. (FISA) -- Warrantless wiretapping is illegal if anyone (US citizen or resident alien) is a party to the conversation. Admitted by him on multiple different occasions that the NSA is listening in to conversations where at least one party is in the US. The govt also stipulated to violation of FISA in the ACLU v. NSA case decided last month.\n\n18 U.S.C. § 2511 -- Compliance with FISA "shall be the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance... may be conducted". \n\n18 U.S.C. § 2441: War Crimes as defined under federal law, which include specific violations of articles of the Geneva Conventions. Confirmed in the Supreme Court in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507 (2004) (Section II), and Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006) (Section I, confirming §2441 applies).\n\nThat's just what he has publicly admitted to, and what federal courts have already confirmed. Other arguable violations:\n\n18 USC 402: Contempt of Court, for unreasonably delay to abide by the Hamdi and related decisions requiring access to counsel.\nAlso for denial of habeas corpus (section 1005)\n18 USC 372: Conspiracy resulting in injury to any officer of the US, where such officer is conducting his lawful duties.\n18 USC 371: Conspiracy to interfere with the normal functioning of the government, by signing statements indicating that he will refuse to enforce any law that he doesn't agree with.\n\n18 USC 1001: Fraud, for making material false statements to Congress, or willfully refusing to provide information to Congress. (sections 8106 and 8119, et al.)\n\n18 USC 1505: Obstruction, making material false statements to Congress, and for willfully refusing to provide information to Congress
733417
Bush challenges hundreds of laws\nPresident cites powers of his office\nBy Charlie Savage, Globe Staff  |  April 30, 2006\nWASHINGTON -- President Bush has quietly claimed the authority to disobey more than 750 laws enacted since he took office, asserting that he has the power to set aside any statute passed by Congress when it conflicts with his interpretation of the Constitution.\nAmong the laws Bush said he can ignore are military rules and regulations, affirmative-action provisions, requirements that Congress be told about immigration services problems, ''whistle-blower" protections for nuclear regulatory officials, and safeguards against political interference in federally funded research.\nLegal scholars say the scope and aggression of Bush's assertions that he can bypass laws represent a concerted effort to expand his power at the expense of Congress, upsetting the balance between the branches of government. The Constitution is clear in assigning to Congress the power to write the laws and to the president a duty ''to take care that the laws be faithfully executed." Bush, however, has repeatedly declared that he does not need to ''execute" a law he believes is unconstitutional.\nFormer administration officials contend that just because Bush reserves the right to disobey a law does not mean he is not enforcing it: In many cases, he is simply asserting his belief that a certain requirement encroaches on presidential power.\nBut with the disclosure of Bush's domestic spying program, in which he ignored a law requiring warrants to tap the phones of Americans, many legal specialists say Bush is hardly reluctant to bypass laws he believes he has the constitutional authority to override.\n   \n\nFar more than any predecessor, Bush has been aggressive about declaring his right to ignore vast swaths of laws -- many of which he says infringe on power he believes the Constitution assigns to him alone as the head of the executive branch or the commander in chief of the military.\nMany legal scholars say they believe that Bush's theory about his own powers goes too far and that he is seizing for himself some of the law-making role of Congress and the Constitution-interpreting role of the courts.\nPhillip Cooper, a Portland State University law professor who has studied the executive power claims Bush made during his first term, said Bush and his legal team have spent the past five years quietly working to concentrate ever more governmental power into the White House.\n''There is no question that this administration has been involved in a very carefully thought-out, systematic process of expanding presidential power at the expense of the other branches of government," Cooper said. ''This is really big, very expansive, and very significant."\nFor the first five years of Bush's presidency, his legal claims attracted little attention in Congress or the media. Then, twice in recent months, Bush drew scrutiny after challenging new laws: a torture ban and a requirement that he give detailed reports to Congress about how he is using the Patriot Act.\nPage 2 of 7 -- \nBush administration spokesmen declined to make White House or Justice Department attorneys available to discuss any of Bush's challenges to the laws he has signed.\nInstead, they referred a Globe reporter to their response to questions about Bush's position that he could ignore provisions of the Patriot Act. They said at the time that Bush was following a practice that has ''been used for several administrations" and that ''the president will faithfully execute the law in a manner that is consistent with the Constitution."\nBut the words ''in a manner that is consistent with the Constitution" are the catch, legal scholars say, because Bush is according himself the ultimate interpretation of the Constitution. And he is quietly exercising that authority
480564
Where do we begin with this question...  He LIED to us!!  He broke the law.  He intentionally mislead us into believing that there was cause for a war when there was not.  (And don't say that the attacks were cause for it, because that was not what we went to war for - besides that, I would be upset if someone used my death as an excuse to kill other people)  He hides behind Chritian values, but does not uphold them.  He protects the rich but not the poor.  He continually manipulates the public into backing him on decisions that they normally wouldn't by using their religious convictions against them.  He rigged the election.  \nI mean, come on, people....  The office of President of the U.S. is a difficult one.  There is no doubt about that.  But the difficulties in comparison with the power of the office is minute!  And all the things that have been speculated about him and his cabinet cannot all be complete fabrications.  Just the number of things that he has been accused of doing is proof that all is not right in the house of W.\nLet's not kid ourselves... Bush had an agenda when he ran for office the first time and the second.  \nHe's an idiot.  I am ashamed to be from the same state as him, and unlike the spineless Dixie Chicks, I will not apologize for it.\nAnd as for Clinton - he did something that a million american men do every single day, and was crucified for it.  Killing our soldiers as well as innocent people over seas is in no way comparable to a bl*w j*b.
731361
Can you be specific about which part he violated? Please refer to the Article and Section, and explain what he did to violate it.\n\nIf you're referring to his favoring an amendment to ban gay marriage, the process for making amendments already exists in the Constitution.  He was proposing something go through the process, unlike some of the changes to the Constitution that have come out of USSC decisions dealing with "emanations" from "penumbras", and arguments about whether the Second Amendment really says what it says.
891133
so Greenpeace has been jailed? and you claim Bush is a liar! if you are captured on the battlefield, you are an "enemy combatant", not a suspect in custody, there is a vast difference. you have the rights guaranteed (if you're in uniform) by the Geneva Convention, not Miranda, understand? if you are not in uniform, then by the laws of war, you can be summarily executed on the field of battle without trial. this is not some new thing Bush made up, either. Major Andre, the Brit who took the plans for the defense of West Point from Bendict Arnold was summarily executed when he was captured because he was out of uniform. you libs really need to learn the laws before going off half cocked accusing someone of breaking them
152498
Bush brings chaos to anything he touches. He really should be deported to Iraq, and made to serve with those that he sent to their deaths for a made-up cause.
648547
Touche. So I agree with you, and I don't want to bash Bush, but what's happening in the Middle East isn't acceptable either. Where'd you get that information anyway? I want to read it.