Verified answer

Wow but there are some silly questions in these parts. Why not ask what would happen if God and Superman got in a fight or something that challenges the intellectual level of your supporters, like what are the ingredients of a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. Okay, put me down for not guilty, or at least not any more guilty of any American war time president.

It has come to the point of the lesser of two evils. He HAS NOT committed a crime against humanity! Better to have the conflict away from our shores than here. Know of any attacks on the U S shores since 9/11? Never forget that we were attacked!!! He would have been found guilty by the kangaroo court that the United Nations might put together, but we all know that the U N has not been for anything the United States stands for in many, many years... The biggest fault I find with George Busch is that he is tooooo easy. He has not vetoed any spending bills since taking office. SHAME!!!

Guilty!

Guilty of crimes against humanity.

Crime against humanity are common -who cares. He can claim that he is saving humanity from murderers and deserve Nobel prize for peace.

Mr. Bush is holding a most respectable post in the world. His country men are very sensitive to security issues. Their culture is to bring the culprit to court and not to settle matters themselves. They do not want war at their door step. He is doing his national duties. Chances of errors are there.

the U. S. invaded a sovereign u . s . that had not at all attacked us, had no longer backed al Qaeda, became into no longer related to the worldwide commerce center assaults, had no hugely unfavorable weapons, and posed little danger to all people because it became into already pinned down with "no fly zones" and shackled via monetary sanctions. notwithstanding President Bush made the perfect determination for the invasion and occupation of Iraq, it became into with the complicity of the congress (the two Democrats and Republicans), the information media, and the final public of the yank public. people who brazenly antagonistic the invasion had their patriotism questioned, and maximum of our legislators on the two sides of the isle have been too cowardly to take a stand against a warfare. optimistically, sooner or later, us of a will take a tougher seem in the previous letting our legislators devote us to a discretionary warfare.

depends who is trying the case..... if a democratic government was trying it, he would be found not guilty.

If a state run by the koran was judging him, he would be found guilty.

Regardless... I freakn hate bush. He is guilty of a lot - but he's not guilty of crimes against humanity.

Crimes against humanity? Please, be more specific:

Reneging on campaign promises - guilty

Betraying his supporters - guilty

Appointing morons to executive leadership positions - guilty

Compromising principles - guilty

Being a bad president - guilty

War Crimes and human rights violations - charges thrown out of court

Of course a hypothetical terrorist kangaroo court would find him guilty. You happy now? OK., unpause you Michael Moore movie now.

your screen name tells me all i need to know. A silly person in your own silly little world....most people like you would say guilty.....of course the majority of us intelligent people who stand for family values, working for a living, and are pro-life, would absolutely say not guilty. The only thing he is guilty of is standing up in the face of the tree huggers and defending our country. Im sure if it were up to you people, we would all sit in a circle and hug and cry........like I said..in your own silly little world.