Airliners.net

So what are they up to these past few months? How is life in Dallas, or have they moved. Has the Library at SMU started yet? (I have no idea where they are going to put it)....

Also, where, if anywhere, are we on possible war crimes accusations/legal action?

UAL

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter): Also, where, if anywhere, are we on possible war crimes accusations/legal action?

We should be nowhere. Charging a US president with war crimes in the US is politicaly dangerous. It will only be a matter of time before the country shifts right again and a someone who is a political opposite of GWB will be on the stand answering for what he has done.

If you think the country is divided now try trying a US president for war crimes in his own country and you will really see division.

The election is over and GWB is out of the white house so get over it!

Quoting Falstaff (Reply 1): The election is over and GWB is out of the white house so get over it!

I don't have anything to get over really, you are right he's out of the White House, but isn't there supposed to an ongoing investigation at this point in time? I'm merely asking the question because I do not know. No political motivations behind it.

Also just wondering if they are settling in, what they are doing now, etc. If they've been seen around Dallas, speaking engagements, etc.


UAL

[Edited 2009-04-04 08:39:51]

GWB is supposed to be throwing the first pitch at the Ranger's opener.

In March he was in Calgary for a speaking engagement, while last week he threw the opening pitch for Texas Rangers

Personally, who cares what they're up to? I sure don't.

As for war crimes, forget it. One reason the U.S. doesn't recognized the Kangaroo, eeeer, I mean International Court, is that every yahoo in the world would have been after U.S. citizens to haul them before that institution. As much as I wa against going to war in Iraq, I don't see Mr. Bush guilty of any war crimes.

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter): Latest Status On The Bush's?

I believe he's living in exile in the island of Elba or St. Helena.

What's odd is that about 3/4 of his administration is unemployed. Most notably is former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, he hasn't found a job in a about two years. Maybe they'll find jobs when the Obama stimulus kicks in and AG Gonzales can find a nice construction job.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 5): Personally, who cares what they're up to? I sure don't.

  

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 5): As for war crimes, forget it. One reason the U.S. doesn't recognized the Kangaroo, eeeer, I mean International Court, is that every yahoo in the world would have been after U.S. citizens to haul them before that institution. As much as I wa against going to war in Iraq, I don't see Mr. Bush guilty of any war crimes.

Maybe. Don't forget there were the kidnapping charges against several CIA officers regarding a rendition in Italy (Genoa, I believe). I do not know if that case is still open. A prosecutor trying to make a name for himself/herself in Europe might charge Mr. Bush -- assuming he or she is willing to stir up a sh*tstorm politically.

Personally, I think Bush is guilty of prosecuting a war of aggression. Cheney and Rummy too. Whether it's worth the effort and cost to pursue it, I still haven't made up my mind.

Quoting Commies4ever (Reply 7): Personally, I think Bush is guilty of prosecuting a war of aggression. Cheney and Rummy too. Whether it's worth the effort and cost to pursue it, I still haven't made up my mind.

Sounds like selective prosocution on your part.   Fact is he's not guilty of anything and he's out of office. Get over it and find a new target for left wing vengence.

Quoting Connies4ever (Reply 7): Personally, I think Bush is guilty of prosecuting a war of aggression. Cheney and Rummy too. Whether it's worth the effort and cost to pursue it, I still haven't made up my mind.

That's not really something that can be prosecuted when nearly the entire US Congress voted for it. Give it up.

Quoting Falstaff (Reply 1): Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter): Also, where, if anywhere, are we on possible war crimes accusations/legal action? We should be nowhere. Charging a US president with war crimes in the US is politicaly dangerous. It will only be a matter of time before the country shifts right again and a someone who is a political opposite of GWB will be on the stand answering for what he has done.

Then charge FDR.You know he wanted WW2.War crimes commited against the innocent in that conflict.Start with B-17 bombings.Or how about under the table dealings.Liberty ships that were flawed?Lend-lease?.And then charge every other president who commited war.

You guys are too much.Let it go.

Quoting Confuscius (Reply 6): I believe he's living in exile in the island of Elba or St. Helena

He's back in Dallas, according to my folks (who live nearby).

As for the Bush Library--supposedly it's going to be in the area between SMU and Central Expressway off of Mockingbird--where a Barnes and Noble and a couple of shops are right now currently.

Quoting Connies4ever (Reply 7): I think Bush is guilty of prosecuting a war of aggression. Cheney and Rummy too.

Name one war that couldn't be perceived as aggressive?

If they are going to prosecute him on one thing, I'd nail him for lying about the WMD's in Iraq.
I think that's what most people were pissed off about anyway. Not that he went into Iraq, but that he lied about the reasons for doing so. Had he just been honest and said we are going in there to take out Saddam Hussein, I think people would have backed it, although not as many as backed it based on the WMD case.

I would like to see an investigation conducted to see if he violated any major U.S. laws while in office (ie something on the scale of Watergate)

Quoting Us330 (Reply 14): He's back in Dallas, according to my folks (who live nearby). As for the Bush Library--supposedly it's going to be in the area between SMU and Central Expressway off of Mockingbird--where a Barnes and Noble and a couple of shops are right now currently.

So does this mean that La Madeleine, Roly Poly...the SMU staple foods are going? God!

UAL

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter): Also, where, if anywhere, are we on possible war crimes accusations/legal action?

Hopefully nowhere. There should be an investigation into the many things that went wrong with his presidency in order to make sure that the mistakes are learned from, but trying to get some prosecutions out of it, while it may make people feel good for a bit, is ultimately going to be counterproductive.

-Mir

Quoting Us330 (Reply 14): He's back in Dallas, according to my folks (who live nearby).

He has frequented Cafe Pacific in Highland Park a few times. My grandmother is about as stalwart a conservative as they come (campaigned for Goldwater in Texas, enough said), and happened to be celebrating her 85th birthday there when George and Laura sat down at the table next to them. She was downright giddy.

Quoting Us330 (Reply 14): As for the Bush Library--supposedly it's going to be in the area between SMU and Central Expressway off of Mockingbird--where a Barnes and Noble and a couple of shops are right now currently.

The library is going to sit south of Binkley Ave and will stretch down to the corner of Centarl and Mockingbird. All of it will be east of Dublin St. It looks like the only businesses that will be displaced is a row of old apartment complexes on Binkley. The strip containing Barnes and Noble and those restaurants UAL747 mentions look safe according to the master plan:

http://www.georgewbushlibrary.com/about

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 15): So does this mean that La Madeleine, Roly Poly...the SMU staple foods are going? God!

Someone would actually miss Roly Poly sandwhiches?  

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 15):

Well, if that particular La Madeleine is going away.. There are plenty of other ones around. They're based in Dallas.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 17): Someone would actually miss Roly Poly sandwhiches?

God! I loved them when I went there. They were the hangover food from heaven!

La Madeleine got old though. There's only so much tomato basil soup and low fat Caesar salad you can take. It was rather overrated.

UAL

Quoting Falstaff (Reply 1): We should be nowhere. Charging a US president with war crimes in the US is politicaly dangerous. It will only be a matter of time before the country shifts right again and a someone who is a political opposite of GWB will be on the stand answering for what he has done.

If you're going to do that, then you need to have pretty clear and unambiguous evidence that he did something truly heinous. For example, if the DNC had evidence that Bush actually arranged the 9/11 attacks and the evidence was solid, then they would probably go after him. You would have a very small minority who would support Bush in that case.

In this case, most of the charges, while probably valid, would cause enough public outcry to lead to actual civil unrest. IMHO, putting Bush on trial for war crimes (which he committed by any standard definition) is the right thing to do, BUT it would be so damaging that it is also the wrong thing to do.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/03/pm.torture/index.html

Interesting:

Quote: Any investigations or potential prosecutions could set off a national debate complicating everything else Obama wants to accomplish. But the U.S. has signed international treaties on torture and war crimes, suggesting it's legally obligated to prosecute any cases that come to light. Countries in Europe, Africa and the Americas have found a way to face their secret crimes. The United States has to decide if it wants to take its own turn.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 26): Well, gee, I'm not surprised! If you don't fund research, then you don't get any cures. Are you aware that it takes 15 years to bring a medical treatment to market once it's been developed to its final state? Right now drug companies are starting to investigate drugs that will not hit the market for OVER A DECADE.

Um has anyone anywhere made any progress with this line of research? No...In fact it caused fatal tumors in the lab animals and person they tried in on...

Has anyone anywhere made any progress with Adult Stem Cells? Yes! In use for over 72 different types of diseases.

Same time frame, two different paths and two very different results...You can't argue with results.

You're trying to make the case that Bush impeded science, yet the path he pursued produced better results....

And to your last point:

Did Bush stop private drug firms from doing this research? No! And who do you think has the most money to spend? A cash strapped government or big pharmaceutical firms with access to the capital markets?

You seem to gloss over the fact that Big Pharma spends tens of BILLIONS of research and Bush's order didn't do anything to deter them from pursuing this path.

You also ignore that Obama's spending bill curtailed the use of federal dollars for expanding the research any further so nothing has really changed unless Congress changes the law...

Google the Dickey Wicker Amendment...

Regarding the WMD in Iraq and the infamous moment in UN, did anyone apologize to the French and German government? When France said the true and did not accept the case, there was freedom fries, do not drink french wine, old and new Europe etc?

Now Obama suddenly go around and smiles and request the old Europe to join the cleening.  

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):

Leno has had some pretty good clips with Steve Bridges, the Bush Impersonator called "What is George Bush doing now". So far my favorite was Bush using a leaf blower to spin himself around in a swivel chair.   

Status of the Bush family? Probably not doing much outside of playing golf and fixing fences on the ranch. I'm basing this on other Republican ex-presidents, e.g., Ford, Reagan, and Bush Sr. I'm sure if I did a complete internet search on these Republicans, I could probably find a few charity boards of which they were members. Compare their retirements to Democrat ex-Presidents like Carter and Clinton. Both of these men have dedicated their lives to public service as heads of foundations (Habitat for Humanity for Carter) and as informal diplomats at international hot spots. Even ex- Vice President Gore has remained heavily involved in global climate issues.

Democratic ex-Presidents tend to stay in public service, while Republican ex-Presidents seem to be reclusive and stick pretty much to the country clubs.

I doubt he will travel outside the USA (except to Mexico or has already done to Canada unless it is a place where he cannot be served or arrested on international war crimes. I suspect that he leads a very lonely life, due to security needs due to the hatred for him by many. I doubt he will be doing much except for working on his library and his autobiography. He won't be making million dollar speeches with his lousy speaking style or cushy corp board posts as his many conterversial and indeed illegal acts per some keeps any sane person from making such offers.

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 23): He won't be making million dollar speeches with his lousy speaking style

Yeah, he can screw up some things hilariously from time to time, but he was president during one of the most pivotal points in US history. He'll have some speaking engagements.

-Mir

Quoting RNOcommctr (Reply 22): Democratic ex-Presidents tend to stay in public service, while Republican ex-Presidents seem to be reclusive and stick pretty much to the country clubs.

What do you base this off of? Bush, Sr. has worked along side Clinton numerous times. The first one that comes to mind is on the Tsunami relief, then again on Katrina relief. Reagan had Alzheimer's for much of his post-Presidency.

Quoting FlyDeltaJets87 (Reply 25): Quoting RNOcommctr (Reply 22): Democratic ex-Presidents tend to stay in public service, while Republican ex-Presidents seem to be reclusive and stick pretty much to the country clubs. What do you base this off of?

Recent history? Reagan made a few million speaking before his unfortunate illness. Bush Sr. has done some work with President Clinton, but it hasn't been his life's work since leaving office. I doubt you'll see Bush 43 do much in the way of that kind of work, as it was never his cup of tea. He's more interested in trying to justify all the mistakes he made the last 8 years.

No one has done more as a humanitarian than Jimmy Carter. Yes, he was not a very good president, but he's a good man, and has done a lot of good things for people all over the world. Which is why, despite his shortcomings as President, he is respected by more people than probably any of the former presidents currently still alive, or any of the three that hve died in the last decade.

From Wikipedia-- total lines devoted to the post-presidential activities of various presidents, including charitable work, diplomatic efforrts, and awards and acolades:

Bill Clinton: 102
Jimmy Carter: 167

Gerald Ford: 44
George H.W. Bush 37

I have left Ronald Reagan out of this because of his post-presidential illness.
Carter is known perhaps best for his Nobel Peace Prize, while it seems the senior Bush spends a lot of time organizing fishing tournaments off the coast of Maine.

Carter and Ford spent a lot of time together, and became good friends, but their activities were more political in nature, not in humanitarian efforts. Bush41 and Clinton may not be fast friends, but they've come to admire and respect each other a lot more with their work in helping the people after the Indian Ocean Tsunami, and with Hurricane Katrina. But Mr. Clinton has devoted far more time to other endeavors, like stopping AIDS in Africa. I can see Mr. Clinton and Bush 43 perhaps doing some work on the AIDS problem, as it was one of the things I thought President Bush did that was spot on.

Comedians (at the Melb comedy festival) down under are in general not so happy with his removal from the world stage although one did point out that now there was less competition.

Bush and science gives 74 million hits and even allowing for a few that relate to science on the Australian bush, that is a large set of relevant material and most of it is distinctly unflattering. A good example is

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040308/kennedy

Cannot help the author, he write for many US scientists.

The Junk Science of George W. Bush

...
Today, flat-earthers within the Bush Administration--aided by right-wing allies who have produced assorted hired guns and conservative think tanks to further their goals--are engaged in a campaign to suppress science that is arguably unmatched in the Western world since the Inquisition. Sometimes, rather than suppress good science, they simply order up their own. Meanwhile, the Bush White House is purging, censoring and blacklisting scientists and engineers whose work threatens the profits of the Administration's corporate paymasters or challenges the ideological underpinnings of their radical anti-environmental agenda. Indeed, so extreme is this campaign that more than sixty scientists, including Nobel laureates and medical experts, released a statement on February 18 that accuses the Bush Administration of deliberately distorting scientific fact "for partisan political ends."

I've had my own experiences with Torquemada's modern successors, both personal and related to my work as an environmental lawyer and advocate working for the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Waterkeeper Alliance.

T was the First Inquisitor Gen of the Spanish Inquisition for those who were not around then or have forgotten!!

There is a whole book on the Bush attacks on Science. On Google you only get 740 K hits for Torquemada but 9.1 million for "Bush attacks on Science".
Seth Shulman
Undermining Science
Suppression and Distortion in the Bush Administration

It will be interesting to follow the new mercury emission laws now they being are de-Bushed. There is a great story about Texan mercury emissions from power stations for anyone keen enough to follow it up. I have asked a number of times for comments on this wondrous scandal, but it seems that most do not mind being given doses of mercury that are banned in most countries. I cannot give you references as the information has been suppressed including letters of protest from senior science staff in other states, but look for it to start dribbling out.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 28): I can see Mr. Clinton and Bush 43 perhaps doing some work on the AIDS problem, as it was one of the things I thought President Bush did that was spot on.

Absolutely. Bush was actually really great on that.

And I am praising a guy who I believe was part of a criminal gang who ordered killings primarily based on ethinic group. He has a good heart I think, he is not a monster, but all the same, his crimes are what they are. Bush is a person with a heart. But people who kill in cold blood, are defective and they need to be in a jail environment, if only to educate others not to do the same thing. Bush killed too many people in cold blood, maybe without even meaning to. So, he belongs in jail. So do many others in his criminal gang.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 30): Bush killed too many people in cold blood, maybe without even meaning to. So, he belongs in jail. So do many others in his criminal gang.

How is what Bush did different than what Truman did to Japan?

Anyone try and bring Truman up on War Crimes?