The Prosecution of George W Bush for Murder

11 posts / 0 new
Last post
The Prosecution of George W Bush for Murder

Unfortunately I haven't yet read it, although I did buy it. Will report back soon.

What is your take on the book? 


CMOT Dibbler


I don't understand why everybody attacks George W. Bush. I mean granted, he's a warmongering zealot who started an illegal war against Iraq, unquestionably supports the IDF and is a slave to big oil, but many American presidents have similar track records and have done similar things. Clinton blew up Kosovo. Reagan destabilized the democratically elected government of Nicaragua. Nixon allowed the bombing of Cambodia. Most of these men violated international law, so why aren't other presidents being criticized. Why is it only Bush, who's being condemned as a bad leader. Why isn't Clinton being brought justice.


Takes more than combat gear to make a man Takes more than license for a gun Confront your enemies, avoid them when you can A gentleman will walk but never run -Sting, an englishman in new york

George Victor


Why does discussion of a book go cosmological?


Suggest another damn book.


The argument put forth by Bugliosi is from a conservative perspective. The idea is that there is concrete evidence Bush was involved in a criminal conspiracy to lead the US Congress and House to vote in favour of the war against Iraq.

This conspiracy has led to the unnecessary deaths of 4000 Americans.

Bugliosi is a former prosecutor who says the rules of law and the rules of evidence apply to all Americans - even the President. 

He states the example of how a thief robbed a convenience store at gunpoint. The storeowner grabbed his gun and shot at the thief as he tried to escape. He missed and hit a customer in the store kiliing them instantly. Under law it was the felony that resulted in the death and the thief not the storeowner was charged with murder.

Bugliosi is not being belicose here. He builds a tight reasoned argument that portrays the current senior execs in the Whitehouse as base, vile and spineless, criminals who are actually completely indifferent to the fate of the average American.

The argument is very simple and backed by the outriight doctoring of CIA reports which stated that Hussein was no imminent threat to America. He was told there was no evidence of ties to Al Queda nor nuclear or biological weapons. During the 9-11 investigations Rice was asked how she could ignore the CIA advice found in documents addressed to her personally which counselled against the war. She said she never read them!

This is criminal negligence plain and simple and constitutes a conspiracy by any legal definition. The result has been the death of 4000 troups and 100000 Iraqis...

The author believes that Bush could be tried and convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to death by the electric chair or the gas chamber if convicted in a jurisdiction that provided for the death penalty.  

It is well written and well documented book.    




Thanks for that analysis blackhand. I can't wait to read it. He's an amazing lawyer and I'm really looking forward to his legal arguments....


I don't know why this book isn't discussed here more widely since it is a fact driven work.

The author is no "conspiracy nut" as he calls those of us who think there is more to the story than the official recounting of 9-11. Everyone you talk to today readily concedes that the US objective was Iraq's oil reserves.

But this doesn't seem to be Bugliosi's understanding of the motivation. He seems to think that Bush was single-mindedly diven to take out Hussein to the exclusion of everthing else. Others supported this motivation for their own ends.


M. Spector M. Spector's picture

For a somewhat less conservative point of view, read this:

[url=Why"> We Must Prosecute Bush and His Administration for War Crimes[/url] 



M. Spector M. Spector's picture

December 6, 2004

Canada blocks torture charges against Bush

The Canadian government used a claim of diplomatic immunity Monday to block torture charges laid under the Canadian Criminal Code against President George W. Bush. The charges had been laid by Gail Davidson of LAW [Lawyers against the War] on the occasion of Bush’s visit to Canada on November 30. They concerned the well-known abuses at Abu Ghraib prison, photos of which shocked the world earlier this year, as well as similar abuses at Guantánamo Bay that have emerged more recently. On behalf of LAW, Davidson was seeking to fix a date for a hearing into the charges and came armed with evidence, but Judge William Kitchen acceded to the Attorney General’s objections and declared the charges ‘a nullity’. 

“Of course, they’re not a nullity”, said Professor Michael Mandel, co-chair of LAW, who criticized the decision as “irregular in procedure and wrong in substance.” “These charges were properly laid and backed up by powerful evidence. The government didn’t deny that evidence because it couldn’t deny it. Diplomatic immunity is purely procedural. It doesn’t affect the validity of the charges, only whether they can be proceeded with, for the time being, in a foreign court, in this case a Canadian court. Even if Bush has immunity, it’s only temporary and it won’t shield him or anyone in his administration from Canadian law, or any other law, when they leave office. That the Canadian government would try to hush this up by hiding Bush behind diplomatic immunity was only to be expected. Paul Martin invited Bush here to ingratiate himself with the President, despite the President’s crimes against our laws and against international law, despite even his inadmissibility as a war criminal under Canada’s immigration laws – above all, despite the unending human disaster the President’s illegal ‘war of choice’ has brought to the people of Iraq.”  

Vancouver lawyer Gail Davidson, who laid the charges, said “We have a lot of objections to the way these charges were handled. We can’t see the legal basis for sealing the courtroom and excluding the press and the public. We think the claim of immunity was premature and exaggerated, and the quashing of the charges not authorized by the law. We are considering our options, including an appeal of the decision. One thing we will do for sure is to pursue similar charges in Germany as part of the prosecution launched there by the American Center for Constitutional Rights. There is good reason to believe that the German authorities will show more backbone than the government of Canada in the face of the Bush administration’s trashing of international human rights law.”

For more info, see the [url=Lawyers">][u]Lawyers Against The War website.[/url]




I agree that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, all should be charged with War crimes. Obama should recognize the International  Court in the Hague created for this reason and see what happens...

Bush is a man without a shred of compassion for the "bad guys" as his record setting capital punishment sentencing in Texas proved. He's has been called the "death penalty president" by some. Well what happens when the tables are turned?

Bugliosi says that if he were prosecuting Bush he would "turn" his buddies who would rat him out for a plea bargain. It would be interesting to see if Bugliosi is right...