GlobalResearch: "The Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal entered its fourth and final day of hearing war crimes charge of Crimes against Peace against George W Bush and Anthony L Blair in Kuala Lumpur. For the first time a war crime charge has been heard against these two former heads of state in compliance with due legal process, wherein complaints from war victims had been received, duly investigated and formal charges instituted by the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission.
In a criminal trial such as this, there are two elements that need to be proven. The actus rea (the act), which was the war, which is an accepted fact. The mens rea (intention) is shown clearly from the planning and preparation as early as November 2001 when he had asked his Secretary of Defence to draw up plans for the invasion of Iraq. And that in September 2002, the Defence Secretary had informed the first accused, who was the commander in chief that it would take six months to mobilise for invasion. On 4 November 2002, the UN resolution 1441 was passed and the invasion was launched on 19 March 2003. On 17 March 2003 the first accused stated “…Saddam Hussein and his sons must leave Iraq within 48 hours. Their refusal to do so will result in military conflict, commenced at a time of our choosing”. And on 19 March, the ‘shock and awe’ campaign called Operation Iraqi Freedom was launched.
The same is true of the second accused who had attacked Iraq. And that he had planned and prepared to invade since 1998.
There are 40 UN Security Council Resolutions against Israel but no action is taken. But Saddam had not adhered to 16 resolutions and Iraq is invaded. This is gangsterism.
The Tribunal deliberated over the case and decided unanimously that the first accused George W Bush and second accused Anthony L Blair have been found guilty of the Crimes against Peace.
The evidence showed that as far back as 15 September 2001 the accused had planned to invade Iraq. Documents showed that this plan was conveyed by the first accused to the second accused. The accused had attempted to seek he UN approval for invasion. On 2 November 2002, UN Security Council Resolution 1441 did not authorise the use of force against Iraq. Weapons investigators had confirmed that there were no WMD. Iraq was not posing any threat to any nation at the relevant time that was immediate that would have justified any form of pre-emptive strike.
Humanitarian intervention was not a basis for the invasion. The UN Security Council must authorise any use of force. An individual state cannot replace the UN in deciding the use of force. The 9/11 attack did not show any connection with Iraq but instead the US had used this as a pretext to invade Iraq. Invasion to effect regime change has no legal basis under international law."
Hetzelfde geldt voor de oorlog tegen Libië die illegaal is begonnen door Cameron en Sarkozy, gevolgd door de gebruikelijke schuldigen, de VS en de NAVO. Onder het mom van het opleggen van een 'no-fly zone' zijn ziekenhuizen en burgerdoelen gebombardeerd door de NAVO. De NAVO is een criminele organisatie die niets meer te maken heeft met defensie maar alles met verovering van soevereine gebieden en het opleggen van een nieuwe politieke en economische orde. Daarvoor gebruikte men zelfs illegale middelen, waaronder folter, vreemd genoeg een van de aangegeven redenen om Irak binnen te vallen.