chroniclesmagazine.org — I wonder how the International Criminal Court picks war criminals for trial. Why al-Bashir from the Sudan? Is it because Sudan is a powerless state, and the International Criminal Court hasn?t the courage to name George W. Bush and Tony Blair as war criminals? Bush and Blair?s crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan dwarf the terrible situation in Darfur
Jul 30, 2008 View in Crawl 4
caferrellJul 30, 2008Submitter
FTA - "Bush and Blair’s crimes against humanity in Iraq and Afghanistan dwarf, at least in the number of deaths and displaced persons, the terrible situation in Darfur. The highest estimate of Darfur casualties is 400,000, one-third the number of Iraqis who have died as a result of Bush’s invasion. Moreover, the conflict in the Sudan is an internal one, whereas Bush illegally invaded two foreign countries—war crimes under the Nuremberg Standard.But of course the Great Moral West does not commit war crimes. War crimes are charges fobbed off on people demonized by the Western media, such as the Serbian Slobodan Milosevic and the Sudanese al-Bashir."Put Dubya on trial instead!
Closed AccountJul 31, 2008
The next president will have a choice. He can uphold US law and prosecute George Bush and his co-conspirators, or he can join them as an accomplice. There is no middle ground.Unfortunately, we all know what is going to happen. We have always been at war with Eurasia.
caferrellJul 31, 2008Submitter
That is unfortunately the way that it works.
Closed AccountJul 31, 2008
Saddam did everything the US asked of him in the end and his country got invaded anyway. Go look up the definition of "war of aggression" which was coined during the Nuremberg trials.