Reprinted with permission
Website: www.comarlaw.com
______________________________________________________
Late Friday, a federal judge dismissed a civil claim filed against George W. Bush and other high-ranking officials regarding their conduct in planning and waging the Iraq War, and immunized them from further proceedings.
“This is an early Christmas present to former Bush Administration officials from the federal court,” Inder Comar of Comar Law said. Comar brought the claim on behalf of an Iraqi refugee and single mother, Sundus Shaker Saleh. “This was a serious attempt to hold US leaders accountable under laws set down at the Nuremberg Trials in 1946. I am very disappointed at the outcome.”
The tribunal at Nuremberg, established in large part by the United States after World War II, declared international aggression the “supreme international crime” and convicted German leaders of waging illegal wars.
The case alleged that George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz committed aggression in planning and waging the Iraq War. Specifically, the lawsuit claimed that high-ranking Bush officials used the fear of 9/11 to mislead the American public into supporting a war against Iraq, and that they issued knowingly false statements that Iraq was in league with Al-Qaeda and had weapons of mass destruction, when none of those things were true.
“The decision guts Nuremberg,” Comar said. “Nuremberg said that domestic immunity was no defense to a claim of international aggression. This Court has said the opposite.”
The court’s ruling comes in the wake of the Senate report regarding the use of torture by the CIA during the Bush Administration. The Senate report confirmed that a false confession obtained from the torture of Ibn Shaykh al-Libi was cited by the Administration in support of the war.
Comar, a corporate attorney based out of Impact Hub San Francisco, primarily works with startups and venture funds. He took the case pro bono after learning about the plight of Iraqi refugees displaced through the Iraq War. Comar connected with Saleh through mutual colleagues in San Francisco.
Comar filed the initial complaint on March 13, 2013. While Comar recognizes the year-and-a-half-long effort was a long-shot, he remains steadfast. “The plaintiff will consider all her options, including an appeal. Judicial inquiry into possible wrong-doing that led to the Iraq War is warranted.”
In August 2013, Obama’s Department of Justice requested that the lawsuit be dismissed pursuant to the Westfall Act, a federal law that immunizes any government official from a civil lawsuit if that official was acting “within the scope of his office or employment.” Judge Jon S. Tigar, an Obama appointee, ruled that the defendants were shielded by the Westfall Act regardless of the allegations made in the Complaint.
The case is Saleh v. Bush (N.D. Cal. Mar. 13, 2013, No. C 13 1124 JST). The opinion can be found at http://witnessiraq.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/12-19-14-Order.pdf. The Second Amended Complaint subject to the dismissal can be found at http://witnessiraq.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/SAC.pdf. Other court filings and updates can be found at http://witnessiraq.com.
Contact: Inder Comar
Email: inder@comarlaw.com
Website: www.comarlaw.com
Office: (415) 562-6790(415) 562-6790
______________________________________________
The PPJ Gazette 
Federal Court Gives “Early Christmas Present” to War Criminals Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Others, Immunizing Them From Civil Inquiry Regarding Iraq War - Michael Butler
Feb 14, 2015 @ 19:50:21
Dec 27, 2014 @ 18:02:45
Can this be the bandwagon we all jump on, to – once and for all – lance this boil?
LikeLike
Devilish New Year Aspirations | ozziethinker
Dec 26, 2014 @ 03:27:30
Dec 24, 2014 @ 17:42:20
Hold up there Laibow
Manning did not commit a crime. The criminal acts were committed by Bush and his crime syndicate. Him telling that they were committing those crimes was HIS DUTY! He had a duty to report!
LikeLike
Dec 24, 2014 @ 12:17:46
Manning’s oath was to the people of the United states and the constitution against all enemies both foreign and domestic The oath is not to officers, commanders in chief or any other individual. Nuremberg dispensed with the “I was just following orders” nonsense. At some point, morality, integrity and ALLEGIANCE to your country must surpass idol worship of men. Especially when they themselves are violating the law, the constitution and abusing the offices they hold. Marti
LikeLike
Dec 23, 2014 @ 23:20:12
Though this transcends “rich” versus “poor” or “elite” versus “those outside”, the court has made a clear statement:
“”They” can do as they will, for the people have no will and are excised from due process against their “betters””
War has been declared against the people and the courts are squarely founded on Racist insolence. Justice and truth be DAMNED.
Merry Christmas
OT
LikeLike
Dec 23, 2014 @ 22:56:01
Bradley/Chelsea Manning violated his Oath of Allegiance as a uniformed member of the US Army, and deserves his prison term, not a day less. He should have waited until he was a civilian to make those revelations, and he could be recognized as a hero.
I served in the US Army Reserve and National Guard from 1961 to 1967 under two successive Commanders-in-Chief (John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson) that I heartily loathed and deeply mistrusted. I fulfilled the letter and spirit of my Oath of Allegiance until I mustered out as a Sergeant, Grade E-5. If I was able to fulfill my Oath of Allegiance, why should I have anything but contempt for someone who wasn’t able to?
I’m David Laibow; contact me anytime at “caballafamily[at]yahoo.com”.
LikeLike