Bush and Blair could face war crimes charges, says International Court

[Heimdallr]

.
A new, and perhaps the deadliest, confrontation between the War Allies United States, Britain and the World has emerged recently with the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court stating that the War Leaders, Bush and Blair, could face war crimes charges in the Hague.

Source: Pravda >>> Bush and Blair could face war crimes charges, says International Court


.Tony Blair and George Bush

[ewald steiner]

Who will send them to the hague ? They will not go on their own volition.

[Errigal]

If there was any justice they would both be in prison right now. My guess is that Tony Blair will be abandoned by his American friends soon.

[Gavril]

That's not going to happen...ever.

[Gladstone]

Originally Posted by Ljubomir

That's not going to happen...ever.

I'd tend to agree. The statement by the chief prosecutor was just for show.

[Errigal]

Originally Posted by Ljubomir

That's not going to happen...ever.

You're right that they will never face war crimes charges but Tony Blair could be nailed in Britain on corruption charges and, at the same time, he could be blamed for much of the intelligence reports which led up to the war. It will be another lie, of course, but America would never blame themselves or their precious Israel.

[Ostrogorski]

USA reached her zenith in 1999 and is going down,slightly...like all empires she has a desperate need for expansion,or she's going to stagnate,and stagnation is the worst solution...America's own philosophy is: war equals progress...

America has too many enemies,and too many countries,that she needs to control like Venezuela,Cuba,European union,Russia,Iraq,Iran,Syria,Afghanistan,China,north Korea and many others...but,she isn't such a great world power,like she once was!

[Marcus Marulus]

If they start one more war (Iran, e. g.), the sum of their crimes will be so big that even the good old Adolf will pale in comparison.

[Franze]

I am against these types of tribunals, because they have no jurisdiction for these things, the countries have sovereignity, also in justice things.
Respect Bush and Blair, the first is a horrible dhimmi friendly of Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Egypt, Pakistan and Turkey, all anti-christian countries, and Blair is a disgrace, building muslim toilets for muslim prisoners or giving money to criminals for coming back to their countries.

[Marcus Marulus]

Originally Posted by Peter

I am against these types of tribunals, because they have no jurisdiction for these things, the countries have sovereignity, also in justice things.
Respect Bush and Blair, the first is a horrible dhimmi friendly of Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Egypt, Pakistan and Turkey, all anti-christian countries, and Blair is a disgrace, building muslim toilets for muslim prisoners or giving money to criminals for coming back to their countries.

I am against such tribunals as well, but if you have the kangaroo court in the Hague, which prosecutes only the (alleged) war criminals in former Yugoslavia and Ruanda, according to that logic Bush and Blair should be subject to some kind of judicial jurisdiction too.

[Franze]

Originally Posted by prometheus

I am against such tribunals as well, but if you have the kangaroo court in the Hague, which prosecutes only the (alleged) war criminals in former Yugoslavia and Ruanda, according to that logic Bush and Blair should be subject to some kind of judicial jurisdiction too.

Yes, with this logic, it´s fair, I know, of course.

[Almost a Christian]

They both should be shot for treason but will instead die happy but hated men because both are fanatics. They need to be fanatics because a fanatical conviction is the only way one can make nonsense seem credible...