Court finds Bush and Blair guilty of war crimes

[GostHacked]

Canadian forces participated in military actions and the government "lied" to Canadians about it!

http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/05/16/canada-offered-secret-support-for-iraq-invasion/

No they did not lie about it, and this was cleared up in another thread some time ago. Canadians were serving on US vessels or with US Forces in an exchange program. They were given the choice, they could come home or continue the exchange program and go in with those US forces.

If this is different, the article fails to go into detail about the specifics.

[Guest American Woman]

Waiting for what? When did the Cnd gov "lie"?

Have you read a word I posted??? A word of the sources I provided???

The Canadian government lied when it said it wasn't getting involved in the Iraq war. The Canadian government was making plans with the U.S. to do just that as it was telling the Canadian people it was NOT going to be involved.

Judging from this post, it looks as if I'll be waiting even longer than I had thought!

Edited November 25, 2011 by American Woman

[bush_cheney2004]

....Judging from this post, it looks as if I'll be waiting even longer than I had thought!

Indeed....it's more hopeless than I thought. The Canadian government would never, ever lie to its citizens. That would be too American...LOL!

[Guest American Woman]

Indeed....it's more hopeless than I thought. The Canadian government would never, ever lie to its citizens. That would be too American...LOL!

I'm just sitting here shaking my head at it all, at the conspiracy theorist who is so sure the U.S. lied about 9-11 and is actually responsible for the attacks - as he denies his government lied about Iraq, even as there is proof - even as people 'in the know' outright say the government lied about it.

[bush_cheney2004]

I'm just sitting here shaking my head at it all, at the conspiracy theorist who is so sure the U.S. lied about 9-11 and is actually responsible for the attacks - as he denies his government lied about Iraq, even as there is proof - even as people 'in the know' outright say the government lied about it.

I agree...such overtly paranoid people who are afraid of everything usually are more consistent.

[DogOnPorch]

I agree...such overtly paranoid people who are afraid of everything usually are more consistent.

Meh...some of our dear posters would want proof Hitler was bad for the economy before acting....and even then.

[kactus]

Screw the protesters....they were fools. The UK/AUS/US/Poland and others completed what was longstanding policy for Iraq going back to the first Gulf War. Canada didn't even oppose the war outright like France or Germany, choosing to sit on the fence to see how the wind would blow. Then after all the invadin' was over, PM Martin crawled on his knees to beg President Bush for access to oil services contracts in Iraq.

wtf are you talking about?? Those protests were happening in thousands if not tens of thousands protested against the war. If that is not the real value of democracy when people voices can be heard then what's the difference between the west and some of these middle eastern/ african countries we often criticise for their lack of democracy???

France objected to this bloody illeagal war that Bush Blair et al started...

The fact that some countries like Canada may have had some level of involvement in Iraq war in 2003 does not by any stretch of imagination bring their involvement to any comparison to the lies Bush/ Blair put together and fed to jo blogs that the war was justified on the basis that Iraq had WMD. This is despite ample evidence from Hutton enquiry and credible sources that proved otherwise:

In 2003 Dr David Kelly was found dead in the woods. Caught in a political vortex, Dr Kelly had been forced to appear before a televised government committee investigating whether he had accused British government figures of planting in a dossier the questionable claim that WMDs could be unleashed from Iraq in 45 minutes.

http://dr-david-kelly.blogspot.com/

The dodgy dossier:

In its opening paragraph the briefing document claimed that it drew "upon a number of sources, including intelligence reports". Before the document's release it had been praised by Tony Blair and Colin Powell as further intelligence and quality research. The day after Channel 4's exposé, Tony Blair's office issued a statement admitting that a mistake was made in not crediting its sources, but did not concede that the quality of the document's content was affected.

The claims contained in the 'September' and 'Iraq' Dossiers were called into question when weapons of mass destruction were not found in Iraq, and the dossiers were encompassed by House of Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee inquiry. The Committee subsequently reported that the sources should have been credited, and that the dossier should have been checked by ministers before being released. The dossier had only been reviewed by a group of civil servants operating under Alastair Campbell. The committee stated that the publication was "almost wholly counter-productive" and in the event only served to undermine the credibility of the government's case.

The controversy over the 'Iraq Dossier' was mentioned frequently in the government's conflict with the BBC over the claim in the 'September Dossier' that Iraq could deploy biological weapons within 45 minutes of an order to do so, and the controversy surrounding the death of Doctor David Kelly. Andrew Gilligan, the BBC journalist who wrote a report which claimed that the September Dossier had been deliberately exaggerated, stated before the Hutton Inquiry that recalling the February Dossier had led him to file his report based on his interview with David Kelly without seeking confirmation from other sources.

The dossier became a point of amusement in British politics. In a Prime Minister's Questions conflict with Blair, Michael Howard (then leader of HM Opposition), informed Blair, "I've got a great big dossier on his past, and I haven't even had to sex it up!".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Dossier

Bush and Blair knew fully well what that Saddam didn't have the WMD capability. The dossier was "sexed up" to make the case for the illegal war.

Edited November 26, 2011 by kactus

[bush_cheney2004]

wtf are you talking about?? Those protests were happening in thousands if not tens of thousands protested against the war. If that is not the real value of democracy when people voices can be heard then what's the difference between the west and some of these middle eastern/ african countries we often criticise for their lack of democracy???

Who are you kidding.....Canada's PM went to war against Serbia and Afghanistan without even a vote...at least the Americans had some semblance of "representative democracy".

France objected to this bloody illeagal war that Bush Blair et al started...

France....schmance.

The fact that some countries like Canada may have had some level of involvement in Iraq war in 2003 does not by any stretch of imagination bring their involvement to any comparison to the lies Bush/ Blair put together and fed to jo blogs that the war was justified on the basis that Iraq had WMD. This is despite ample evidence from Hutton enquiry and credible sources that proved otherwise:

Look, we have already been over this dozens of times....no need to rehash. The US had as a matter of public law regime change in Iraq as of 1998 when Saddam expelled UN weapons inspectors. Canada helped to strangle and bomb Iraq all the same. Then for extra credit, Canada provides depleted uranium for military munitions! Don't you have any clue what your country does on a regular basis? Why are some Canadians so mis-informed about such things?

Bush and Blair knew very well what that Saddam didn't have the capability. The dossier was "sexed up" to make the case for the illegal war.

So what? They wanted Saddam gone and the PM of Australia concurred. WMD's were a post 9/11 pretext to execute continuing UK/US policy to topple Saddam's Iraq.

Edited November 26, 2011 by bush_cheney2004

[Guest Manny]

Still committed war crimes, regardless of any consensus in policy amongst various countries. The only additional question is, who else committed war crimes.

Edited November 26, 2011 by Manny

[bush_cheney2004]

Still committed war crimes, regardless of any consensus in policy amongst various countries. The only additional question is, who else committed war crimes.

President Bush and PM Blair will live out their lives with no concern for any such kangaroo court "war crimes". And there is not a damn thing that will be done about it. People who don't like it will just have to lump it.

[Guest American Woman]

Still committed war crimes, regardless of any consensus in policy amongst various countries. The only additional question is, who else committed war crimes.

That's not the additional question I have. As stated earlier, I'd like to know when this court is going to try Hamas leaders for "war crimes," but I don't see that coming. I think they are very selective in who they would 'put on trial.'

I see this as a political move, no more, no less; and all of those ignoring the part their government played while applauding this 'verdict' are playing right into it - giving them exactly what they want.

I always say: "Be careful what you wish for, because you might get it." I think that applies in the western world today.

Edited November 26, 2011 by American Woman

[Guest American Woman]

Anyway this is about the court case finding Bush and Blair guilty. There is no pending court case for Canadian Ministers... Maybe there should be. Still just as in the past like in Nuremberg they go after the big dogs first. Then if they can get them, the littler ones will be easy.

You do realize this is a "kangaroo court," right? Isn't that what Bush was accused of in Gitmo? Now suddenly a kangaroo court is a good thing? The verdict 'just and binding?'

As for going after the big dogs first, then the littler ones will be easier - perhaps it's more like 'get the world to help topple the big dogs first, then the rest will be ours for the taking....' mentality.

I can't help but wonder how many who are applauding this have taken the time to look into Malaysia's human rights record...........

[Moonlight Graham]

Have you read a word I posted??? A word of the sources I provided???

The Canadian government lied when it said it wasn't getting involved in the Iraq war. The Canadian government was making plans with the U.S. to do just that as it was telling the Canadian people it was NOT going to be involved.

Judging from this post, it looks as if I'll be waiting even longer than I had thought!

The whole point is moot because how can anyone tell if Jean Chretien ever lied or not if nobody can understand a damned word that comes out of his mouth. It's just "aahb baa dee blah boo deh!..." etc.