"Exactly so young man."

The wisdom of our elders

By Geoffrey Stetson, Co-Chair Central Florida Veterans for Peace

I wore my new ARREST BUSH t-shirt tonight to my local Outback restaurant located next to The Villages retirement community near Lady Lake Florida for my monthly test of republican sentiment towards the Bush administration.

An old lady approached, a very old and very small and very determined lady who demanded to know “What will you do after you arrest Him?” To which I replied “We will try him for war crimes” and she replied “Exactly so young man.”

I’ve been aggravating the Republican denizens of The Villages with anti-bush t-shirts for years to both generate debate and judge the silent sentiment one may see in the eyes of those who won’t or can’t speak.

What occurred to me when the old lady said “exactly so” was not that she had changed her mind about Bush as so many of her fellow Villagers had but that she remembered the old days when the rules on war crimes were written.

She recalled the Nuremburg War Crimes tribunal wherein the Allied Powers tried the Nazi Government for crimes against humanity, establishing rules of conduct in future wars. With the United States as it’s guiding power.

She recalled the Geneva Conventions on War governing conduct of armies towards combatants and civilians during wartime. With some origins in the American Civil war the Geneva Conventions were formally adapted after World War Two for the protections of those caught up in war. Again with the explicit support of the United States.

She recalled The United Nations Charter obligating members to get permission before initiating aggressive warfare against another country. A Treaty signed by the United States in San Francisco, California as our government inaugurated its conception.

These three examples above contain the accumulated wisdom of thousands of years and thousands of minds dealing with war and the desire to abolish it and short of that to ameliorate the suffering.

These documents are Treaties of the United States and as such are the duty of every constitutional officer of the United States to obey.

Now then as to The Nuremburg War Crimes trials, Chief Justice Jackson a United States Supreme Court Judge ruled aggressive warfare to be the number one war crime, because that is the root from which all other war crimes spring. This is the United States speaking to the world and for violation of, we executed people.

The United Nations allows a member country to defend itself from imminent attack until the United Nations intervenes, but no member may initiate an attack without United Nations approval. This is another Treaty which requires all United States officers to comply.

As to the Geneva Conventions, they apply when the above restraints have failed.

George Bush et al have caused the United States to aggressively invade a foreign country against the vote of the Untied Nations in violation of United States and International law.

This is a war crime as defined by Justice Jackson at Nuremburg.

Every other incident of death from the invasion is a war crime.

Everything else pales in comparison.

Forget Pelosi, forget impeachment, this criminal cabal has clearly violated the law as it relates to war crimes which carry far more serious consequences than removal from office.

In summation, should the President be held to the rule of the law or shall he have in house lawyers write opinions unanswered absolving him and them of the responsibilities he took on when he swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States?

The Laws are in place the violations are obvious where are the indictments?