That’s why we need an independent investigation of 9/11
Recap of Days Three and Four — While the prosecution of President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair for the crime of aggression, crimes against the peace, took two days to present because the docket was so full of important evidence, including their own books written after the Iraq War, the Defense (by way of Amicus Curiae) sought to conclude its proceedings by invoking the emotionalism of the tragedy that took place on 11 September 2001. Amid multiple rebukes by the Chief Justice of the Tribunal to avoid emotionalism, the Defense team could not help itself.
Lead Defense Counsel continued, “Had George W. Bush said ‘we know who you are, we know what you did, and we forgive you,’ the world could have been a much different place. But, instead, Afghanistan, Iraq, Guantanamo happened. We are fallible human beings. We make mistakes.” And the Defense stated that the defense of Bush and Blair defense is that the accused “are human.”
The Judges interjected at this point that perhaps the correct defense should have been “temporary insanity” or “provocation” since the prosecution had already stated that 9/11 was a pretext for the war that was desired by certain personalities as far back as 1998.
The Defense noted that what happened was human fallibility and in the end, the information that prompted the war was wrong.
When the Defense team video of the planes hitting the twin towers began to play, Professor Boyle objected. Boyle said that this is a continuation of the Bush Administration’s propaganda campaign against Iraq. Boyle continues, “It’s not simply irrelevant it’s pathetic for Defense Counsel to stir up emotions over 9/11 when Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. This video is completely irrelevant, immaterial, prejudicial to these proceedings and I respectfully request the Court to terminate it immediately.”
Professor Nijar, Lead Prosecutor, noted that the intelligence reports submitted to the Tribunal from the US and the UK showed very clearly that 9/11 provided more than a pretext because the plan to invade Iraq goes back to 1998. He continued, “The people who formed the Administration of Bush–the accused–have informed well in advance that their objective was to get rid of Saddam.”
The Defense team then proceeded to state that the entire proceedings had been prejudiced from Day One and from before this Tribunal because of the Exhibition that is one floor down and across the Hall. (The human toll of war is presented in an exhibition within the same building as the Tribunal. In it, paper mache replications of the deformed babies of Iraq, the torture chamber, waterboarding demonstrations are available as a kind of museum of war macabre.)
Prosecutors noted that the Exhibit had nothing to do with whether the war against Iraq was a crime of aggression. In addition, they called President Bush a “war criminal gone beserk” who ought to come and explain to us his intentions.
Judge Webre then went where, perhaps, this Tribunal should go next: He spoke about the allegations that 9/11/01 was a false flag operation and that expert witnesses should be brought to testify before the Tribunal about the truth of the Bush Administration’s explanation of what happened on that
The Defense team called for delays, but in the end, the Court found that the Prosecution had satisfied the Court that there is a prima facie case that the war against Iraq was a crime against peace. The chief Judge asked Defense Counsel why didn’t Bush ask for a Security Council Resolution?
The Judges announced the unanimous verdict at around 5:00 pm local Kuala Lumpur time.
“The Tribunal came to the unanimous conclusion that a prima facie case exists” that President George Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair committed a crime against peace by their decision to invade and conquer Iraq and overthrow Saddam Hussein.
The Judges noted the role of the Project for a New American Century in the policy of going to war against Iraq and and the events of 9/11/01
Nothing in the United Nations Charter permits the actions undertaken by President Bush and Prime Minister Blair. The idea that the United States or United Kingdom was threatened by Iraq is “preposterous.” “It is our view that the doctrine of pre-emptive strike is a doctrine without limit.” Both the U.S. and the U.K. were complicit in the human rights abuses committed by Saddam Hussein. An attack on Iraq because of its possession of weaponws of mass destruction has no basis in international law. “The United States with all its might does not have the right to change international law.” The invasion of Ira was an unlawful act of aggression and is an international crime. The feature of the Un is also at stake. The two accused took the law into their own hands. They acted with deceit therefore, the charge are therefore found guilty as
Recommends to fille reports with International Criminal Court against the two accused; that the name of the two be included in the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission’s register of war criminals and published accordingly. The general assembly of the UN must consider a resolution to eliminate the occupation of Iraq. Genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity committed by the United States and the United Kingdom against the people of Iraq.
A sad day for humanity that such crimes were committed, a good day for justice that such grave crimes are recognized.
Today, Kuala Lumpur embarked on its mission to become the Peace Capital of the world. The Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal: built on truth, justice, peace, dignity.
P.S. On this date in 1963, President John F. Kennedy was murdered by the opening shot of a coup that changed the course of the United States. I highly recommend all of these videos. Incredible information.
I’m watching this right now: http://www.
and I watched this yesterday: http://www.archive.org/
and I watched this the day before: http://www.
by Cynthia Mckinney , 22 November 2011