What's new

Prosecute Bush & Blair: Nobel laureate, Desmond Tutu

Kompromat

ADMINISTRATOR
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
40,366
Reaction score
416
Country
Pakistan
Location
Australia
Desmond Tutu calls for Blair and Bush to be tried over Iraq

_62628528_006317715-1.jpg



Tony Blair and George W Bush should be taken to the International Criminal Court in The Hague over the Iraq war, Archbishop Desmond Tutu has said.

Writing in the UK's Observer newspaper, he accused the former leaders of lying about weapons of mass destruction.

The Iraq military campaign had made the world more unstable "than any other conflict in history", he said.

Mr Blair responded by saying "this is the same argument we have had many times with nothing new to say".

'Playground bullies'
Earlier this week, Archbishop Tutu, a veteran peace campaigner who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1984 in recognition of his campaign against apartheid, pulled out of a leadership summit in Johannesburg because he refused to share a platform with Mr Blair.

The former Archbishop of Cape Town said the US- and UK-led action launched against Saddam's regime in 2003 had brought about conditions for the civil war in Syria and a possible Middle East conflict involving Iran.

"The then leaders of the United States [Mr Bush] and Great Britain [Mr Blair] fabricated the grounds to behave like playground bullies and drive us further apart. They have driven us to the edge of a precipice where we now stand - with the spectre of Syria and Iran before us," he said.

He added: "The question is not whether Saddam Hussein was good or bad or how many of his people he massacred. The point is that Mr Bush and Mr Blair should not have allowed themselves to stoop to his immoral level."

Archbishop Tutu said the death toll as a result of military action in Iraq since 2003 was grounds for Mr Blair and Mr Bush to be tried in The Hague.

But he said different standards appeared to be applied to Western leaders.

He said: "On these grounds, alone, in a consistent world, those responsible should be treading the same path as some of their African and Asian peers who have been made to answer for their actions in The Hague."

In response to Sunday's article, Mr Blair issued a strongly worded defence of his decisions.

He said: "To repeat the old canard that we lied about the intelligence [on weapons of mass destruction] is completely wrong as every single independent analysis of the evidence has shown.

'Chemical weapons'

"And to say that the fact that Saddam massacred hundreds of thousands of his citizens is irrelevant to the morality of removing him is bizarre.

"We have just had the memorials both of the Halabja massacre, where thousands of people were murdered in one day by Saddam's use of chemical weapons, and that of the Iran-Iraq war where casualties numbered up to a million, including many killed by chemical weapons.

"In addition, his slaughter of his political opponents, the treatment of the Marsh Arabs and the systematic torture of his people make the case for removing him morally strong. But the basis of action was as stated at the time."

He added: "In short this is the same argument we have had many times with nothing new to say. But surely in a healthy democracy people can agree to disagree.

"I would also point out that despite the problems, Iraq today has an economy three times or more in size, with child mortality rate cut by a third of what it was. And with investment hugely increased in places like Basra."

Human rights lawyer Sir Geoffrey Bindman told BBC Radio 4 the Iraq war was an illegal aggressive war.

He said a war crimes trial "should be and could be held on the basis a crime of aggression has been committed and the crime of aggression was starting the war.

"It's now almost certain that the war was illegal because it breached the UN Charter provisions which say that all member of the United Nations must refrain from the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state."

Former Lord Chancellor Lord Charles Falconer said he disagreed with Desmond Tutu and Sir Bindman.

"The use of force is allowed among other reasons when the United Nations authorises it, and the United Nations authorised it by resolution 1441.

"The dispute between Geoffrey and myself would be whether or not resolution 1441 did or did not authorise war and we say that it did.

"Even that disagreement doesn't give rise to the possibility of war crimes, the world has very impressively over the last two decades come together and identified what they mean by war crimes; genocide, ethnic cleansing, torture and in a variety of ways brought people to trial for that"

BBC News - Desmond Tutu calls for Blair and Bush to be tried over Iraq
 
The Americans foresaw this kind of scenarios and that's why they never signed off the International Criminal Court agreements. And I don't think the young Bush ever traveled aboard either. One can imagine how embarrass it will be when someone sues him and there's an outstanding warrant for his arrest somewhere in Africa.
 
You can't prosecute powerful men in the West, we need another century or so for that
 
The Americans foresaw this kind of scenarios and that's why they never signed off the International Criminal Court agreements. And I don't think the young Bush ever traveled aboard either. One can imagine how embarrass it will be when someone sues him and there's an outstanding warrant for his arrest somewhere in Africa.

But that does not stop these bastards from using the so-called international criminal court, this court should be broken up for good.
 
Bush from the outset wanted War but Bliar (yes it should be spelt B-LIAR) was the one that made it possible for Bush to get his way hence Bliar is the catalyst or the conduit for the evil Bush to start and a war on fake pretences. Without the poodle UK coming along for the massacre of over 1 million innocent Iraqis (read that figure again - 1 million - indeed it is shock and awe) and hence these two along with Cheney and the neo cons should be hung from the same Nurenberg gallows that the Nazis were made an example of.
 
Ahhh Archbishop Desmond Tutu. He's a straight speaking priest who doesn't mince his words. In this case however I am inclined to question the good man of the cloth's agenda. Until a week before the summit in South Africa, the good ole Archbishop was going to share a platform with the former PM of Britain. The Archbishop confirmed his attendance some 3 months prior to the event and was aware that Blair would be sharing a platform with him. Then the good ole Archbishop finds out about a week prior to the event that a demonstration would be held against Blair in South Africa. Out comes the cancellation of his attendance of the event and a call for the arrest of Blair and Bush.

C'mon Archbishop Tutu. You refused to sanction the arrest of thousands of apartheid agents and leaders and you personally hugged and forgave them for their evil deeds in South Africa's truth and reconciliation committee. What was that term you used in reference to those White Nazis in South Africa? Oh yes. "Lost children of God." Are Iraqi lives more sacred to you than African lives that you can't see it fit to forgive Blair and Bush but yet could embrace apartheid leaders, generals and agents oh Holy Father?
 
Back
Top Bottom