Article Image The End Of The Rope

Part I. War Criminals To Hang: Those Hunting Them Fry On Their Own Lard

Written by Edwin Sumcad Subject: Criminal Justice System
     They have committed “war crimes” according to Obama’s legal hatchet men.  The main target was former president George W. Bush.  But based on the legal criterion they are using to identify what a war criminal is, the hunt goes beyond Bush.
     The legal benchmark of pursuit has been publicly announced: Those accused of “war crime” or “genocide” must be investigated and if found guilty must be punished to the fullest extent of the law.
      Based on that publicized legalese, “war criminals” to be investigated are identifiable.  This may shock the public.  There are 373 of them in Congress, plus six still living presidents of the United States which includes Bush and Obama himself.
     The number explodes beyond one’s wildest imagination if those who committed “war crimes” by following the orders of their Commanders-In-Chief are included.
     Under this classification of “war criminals” based on the new administration’s legal jargon [legal guideline], are those who actually committed the crime: Officers of our intelligence community, homeland security personnel and thousands of members of our U.S. Armed Forces that committed “war crimes” by order of their Commander-In-Chief.
     This legal pursuit of “war criminals” to hang will fry Obama and his underlings in their own lard.
     I repeat without fear of contradiction, that President Obama and Speaker Pelosi’s barking Dobermans in Congress that smelled blood and now want President Bush hanged as a “war criminal” may fry in the simmering oil they themselves boiled.
      Let’s help them jump into their frying pan the most helpful way we can.
      I would like to restate this action baseline for clarity: Their legal ding-a-ling is that those accused of committing “war crimes” must be persecuted – I mean prosecuted and if found guilty must be punished to the fullest extent of the law. 
      Since “war crimes” are high crimes punishable by death, the ultimate punishment is usually hanging by the neck until dead.
      The “monster” in human clothing that recently had a terminal date with the hooded hangman fashionably dressed in black in celebration of death, was the infamous dictator of Iraq Saddam Hussein. 
      This war criminal head of state reached the end of the rope, and died immediately without a chance of growing his dreaded mustachio like Hitler’s, the Holocaust war criminal who took the law into his hand and ended it all.
      Nose-leading blood-thirsty Dobermans in a Bush-hunting Safari in this manner, it is imperative that we must first call their attention to the fact that without this war on terror and the war in Iraq, there would be neither “war crimes” to speak of nor “crime against humanity” to level off against Bush in the first place. 
      Bush is currently hunted for allegedly committing “genocide” in Iraq.  War crime hunters premised this rather obsessive belief that Bush is a “war criminal” on and because of what he did in Iraq [to America’s enemies that joined forces against U.S. in the Iraq war], and what he did to captured terrorists and those caught on the act, to protect Americans from Islamic terrorism – save us from enemies of the state who were surreptitiously conducting their clandestine operations right here in the homeland.
      The alleged criminal acts -- real or imagined -- were speckled and wide-ranging, but the intensity of the charges narrows down to “waterboarding” or “torture”, which Obama’s hatchet men in black toga claim is a serious “crime against humanity”.
       But this is what they forgot, or if not, are trying to ignore.  Facts are facts nonetheless, and they need facts to carry in their luggage in this expedition to hunt down “war criminals” to hang.
       There were 373 “war criminals” in Congress who were “Bush’s accomplices” if such is the case. We are presenting this proof to them in their own language.  On October 10 and October 11, 2002, Congressmen and Senators voted for the “Resolution of Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq …” -- the power they gave to Bush to commit those alleged “war crimes” in Iraq.    
       296 co-conspirators in the House of Representatives and 77 co-conspirators in the Senate voted for what those who voted now call “misadventure” in Iraq, seeing to it that Bush commits the “war crimes” they have authorized him to commit.
      We call upon those Senators and Congressmen as witnesses to fry in their own lard.  We take as evidence their statements on record that the war powers they gave to Bush are “unconstitutional, felonious and treasonous”.
      Most if not all of these “war criminals” are now in Obama’s Cabinet.  Obama himself is an accomplice.  He voted at least 11 times since 2003 to fund “Bush’s war” … the “war of mass murder, maiming and torture” as the put it without batting an eyelash.
       As Bush’s war crime accomplices, they also voted several times for those several amendments of the Patriot Act that created the Military Tribunal to try terrorists, and on top of that conspiracy to commit “war crimes” they authorized by law the use of military Information Interrogation Technique [torture] to extract information from the captured enemy of the state to save millions of American lives that the discovered plots had targeted to wipe out.
        It has been said that only a fool can fool a fool more than anyone else.
        As illustrated in this editorial piece, the imagery is pithy and forceful, its headiness sharp and pungent: The fool who cut off the fellow’s head that lay asleep, and hid it, and then waited to see what this guy would say when he awaked and missed the head-piece, was right in the first thought, that a man would be surprised to find such an alteration in things since he fell asleep; but the head chopper was a little mistaken to imagine the man could awake at all after the head was cut off. [Tatler] #
© Copyright Edwin A. Sumcad.  Access February 10, 2009.
The writer is an award-winning journalist.  Know more about the author by reading his published editorials and feature articles or you may e-mail your comment to