IF there is a war like the "Gulf-war" - between the allied forces and Iraq - which is later "technically" terminated through a peace agreement that one of the parts, in this case Iraq, later on VIOLATES, then the other part (in this case the allied forces) can NOT be considered as an agressor IF, as in this case, they first launched an attack as a DEFENSIVE action (in order to defend Kuwait)!
One should remember that Iraq has continually been given the chance to cooperate, but have they? War is in fact something that Bush and Blair in a juridical/technical sense have been trying to avvoid - whatever their TRUE intentions are (- can you display something about such possible "hidden" intentions that would be considered as a substansive proof in a context like that of the Nuremberg trials?).
When the conditions stated by a peace treaty are no longer respected, then that actual war will likely sooner or later be continued. The most crucial questions to be asked in such a case are these two:
1. Who started the war in the first place?
2. Who violated the peace agreement?

Provided that we, in strict accordance with the basic principles of international law, are justified in answering "Iraq", people like you will not have a case.
What you´re claiming is in fact that the world community has no legal right to strike against a tyrant who invades neighbour contries, like Iraq invaded Kuwait. One could say that there is no such MORAL right, but we´re talking INTERNATIONAL LAW here, right?

"IF there is a war like the "Gulf-war" - between the allied forces and Iraq - which is later "technically" terminated through a peace agreement that one of the parts, in this case Iraq, later on VIOLATES, then the other part (in this case the allied forces) can NOT be considered as an agressor IF, as in this case, they first launched an attack as a DEFENSIVE action (in order to defend Kuwait)!"

Uh huh! So because of Iraq's aggression in 1991,which,
as I'm sure you are aware, was officially okayed by
the then US ambassador to Baghdad, April Glaspie, Iraq
may be attacked in perpetuity. Does the same apply for
Germany? May we bomb that nation to dust whenever we so choose based on the War Crimes that were committed their sixty years ago?

"One should remember that Iraq has continually been given the chance to cooperate, but have they?"

Ahh, the Wall Balls.. Nurse! It's time for his next jab.

"War is in fact something that Bush and Blair in a juridical/technical sense have been trying to avvoid."

Yes... Bush/Blair only have the interests of the Iraqi
baaaaybees in mind.. Treat yourself to a line of depleted uranium dust.

" - whatever their TRUE intentions are (- can you display something about such possible "hidden" intentions that would be considered as a substansive proof in a context like that of the Nuremberg trials?)."

I don't see any evidence that the true agenda for this war
is being hidden. Mr Dubya Bush, bought his presidency with
Big Oil ca$h. He now serves as Big Oil's chief whore.

"When the conditions stated by a peace treaty are no longer respected, then that actual war will likely sooner or later be continued. The most crucial questions to be asked in such a case are these two:"

1. Who started the war in the first place?

Who approved the Iraq invasion of Kuwait?
Answer: the Merkins. It's just that they got cold feet
when Iraq invaded a bit more of Kuwait that had been bargained for.

2. Who violated the peace agreement?

Who is illegally "enforcing" the no-fly zones in Iraq?
Answer: the Merkins and their foreign reichmarshall Blair.


"Provided that we, in strict accordance with the basic
principles of international law, are justified in answering Iraq, people like you will not have a case."

Reality check: This "we" you refer to- that must be the 12%
minority crank set who want a Big Oil war. "You" (i.e. us) on the otherhand, form part of the 84% majority who DO NOT WANT A WAR. That's called democracy in action. Learn to live with it, jack-boot bully-boy.

"What you´re claiming is in fact that the world community has no legal right to strike against a tyrant who invades neighbour contries, like Iraq invaded Kuwait."

Yes, that particular stool of spin has been thoroughly dissected as pure myth.. Let's not waste any more time on it. Next point...

" One could say that there is no such MORAL right, but we´re talking INTERNATIONAL LAW here, right? "

Any you, zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz, are somehow an expert on the application of the Nuremberg principles?

The Blair/Hoon/Straw Criminal Cabal have been warned by
many experts in international law.... that their Trials for War Crimes is now a distinct possibility.

 http://www.ukwilpf.gn.apc.org/cndpressrelease23jan03.html

"IF there is a war like the "Gulf-war" - between the allied forces and Iraq - which is later "technically" terminated through a peace agreement that one of the parts, in this case Iraq, later on VIOLATES, then the other part (in this case the allied forces) can NOT be considered as an agressor IF, as in this case, they first launched an attack as a DEFENSIVE action (in order to defend Kuwait)!"

Uh huh! So because of Iraq's aggression in 1991,which,
as I'm sure you are aware, was officially okayed by
the then US ambassador to Baghdad, April Glaspie, Iraq
may be attacked in perpetuity. Does the same apply for
Germany? May we bomb that nation to dust whenever we so choose based on the War Crimes that were committed their sixty years ago?

"One should remember that Iraq has continually been given the chance to cooperate, but have they?"

Ahh, the Wall Balls.. Nurse! It's time for his next jab.

"War is in fact something that Bush and Blair in a juridical/technical sense have been trying to avvoid."

Yes... Bush/Blair only have the interests of the Iraqi
baaaaybees in mind.. Treat yourself to a line of depleted uranium dust.

" - whatever their TRUE intentions are (- can you display something about such possible "hidden" intentions that would be considered as a substansive proof in a context like that of the Nuremberg trials?)."

I don't see any evidence that the true agenda for this war
is being hidden. Mr Dubya Bush, bought his presidency with
Big Oil ca$h. He now serves as Big Oil's chief whore.

"When the conditions stated by a peace treaty are no longer respected, then that actual war will likely sooner or later be continued. The most crucial questions to be asked in such a case are these two:"

1. Who started the war in the first place?

Who approved the Iraq invasion of Kuwait?
Answer: the Merkins. It's just that they got cold feet
when Iraq invaded a bit more of Kuwait that had been bargained for.

2. Who violated the peace agreement?

Who is illegally "enforcing" the no-fly zones in Iraq?
Answer: the Merkins and their foreign reichmarshall Blair.


"Provided that we, in strict accordance with the basic
principles of international law, are justified in answering Iraq, people like you will not have a case."

Reality check: This "we" you refer to- that must be the 12%
minority crank set who want a Big Oil war. "You" (i.e. us) on the otherhand, form part of the 84% majority who DO NOT WANT A WAR. That's called democracy in action. Learn to live with it, jack-boot bully-boy.

"What you´re claiming is in fact that the world community has no legal right to strike against a tyrant who invades neighbour contries, like Iraq invaded Kuwait."

Yes, that particular stool of spin has been thoroughly dissected as pure myth.. Let's not waste any more time on it. Next point...

" One could say that there is no such MORAL right, but we´re talking INTERNATIONAL LAW here, right? "

Any you, zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz, are somehow an expert on the application of the Nuremberg principles?

The Blair/Hoon/Straw Criminal Cabal have been warned by
many experts in international law.... that their Trials for War Crimes is now a distinct possibility.

 http://www.ukwilpf.gn.apc.org/cndpressrelease23jan03.html

Perhaps the learned gentleman who has just posted a comment can inform the readers of the likelihood of successful criminal prosecution of the aforementioned subjects, Mr Bush, the appointed US President, and MR Anthony Blair, the elected PM of UK, for the current bombings and attacks in the no fly zones.

AN ATTEMPT TO ARREST BLAIR THE WAR CRIMINAL!

Carolyn went to the Houses of Parliament to arrest Tony Blair; this is an account of her experiences.


PARLIAMENT 21ST MARCH 2007


I watched the news on the evening of 20th March 2007 and realised that tomorrow was budget day. Suddenly something that had never interested me before was a riveting piece of information. I knew exactly what I had to do!


The next morning I left my house to travel to London in my new car. A Rover 220SD- diesel powered and turbo charged. Perfect for the job ahead! I played Skunk Anansie's "Skankheads" to match my mood of defiance! I thought about Tony Blair and all of the other war criminals who murder babies for money and I was determined.


I arrived in Parliament Square, 21st March 2007. There was beautiful Barbara and lovely Maria. I dropped off my tent and said, "Right! Now I'm going to arrest Tony Blair!" I drove off and spun the car safely around Parliament Square!


I had been in the Square the day before to mark the 4th anniversary of the illegal invasion, the illegal war, the genocide, those poor, poor babies, those poor women and men, mothers and fathers seeing their depleted uranium deformed babies. Knowing that they will never have a normal baby! What happens to these women, who leave the hospitals in horror?


I knew that if the police moved out of the way I could drive straight in. But I did not want to hurt anyone obviously! I sat at the traffic lights and turned "Skankheads" up fullblast, I made sure that my poster was to hand so that they would know immediately why I had invaded! There it was clearly put in orange paint "I, CAROLYN EMMERSON, CHARGE YOU, TONY BLAIR, WITH INTERNATIONAL ACTS OF AGGRESSION AND I CLAIM MY RIGHT TO MAKE A CITIZEN'S ARREST ON BEHALF OF THE ATTOURNEY GENERAL".


I looked across at the gates of Parliament, smiling. Two groups of Japanese tourists and the police officers who usually stand in the middle so one cannot drive straight in parted like the darlings I've come to know them to be. "Get off, Get off me. GET OFF, GET OFF ME!" Skin screeches through the speakers. The lights change, "VROOOOOMM".


"Stay out of the way, stay out of the way, STAY OUT OF THE WAY!!!" I call out. The music is loud! And I'm in, right in at the barrier, through the gates of Parliament! I have my poster against the window. I'm shouting, "I've come to arrest Tony Blair, he's a war criminal, he's killing the babies!" The police are banging on the window, "I'm sorry officer, I can't hear you my music's too loud!" I say. One is doing all the talking! "I know," I say, "I'll turn it down shall I?" I turn the dulcet tones of Skin down to a whisper and turn to look at the officer, "What appears to be the problem officer?" I ask, "I've come to arrest Tony Blair- he's a war criminal!"

"Open your window now!"


I open my window and he puts a metal rod in the gap- I later discover that this is a taise weapon. The next few minutes happen very quickly.


"Unlock your doors!"


"No! I'm an honourable British citizen. I've come to do the job that you should be doing, arresting criminals. I'm not a criminal. I'm a pacifist and I want them to stop killing the children. I love children!"


"Unlock your door otherwise I'll smash the window!"


I don't want my windows smashed and so I unlock the doors and grab my keys just as the officer tries to grab them, "You're not having those they're mine!" I shriek. Two officers try to remove me from the car- no chance! I jam my feet in by the pedals and push my back against the seat. "Get out of the car!"


"Nooooooo!! I've come to arrest Tony Blair! Owwww! Police brutality! Everybody film this-" everybody is filming this all around the fences, on phones, on cameras! "- I'm a pacifist- I don't have any weapons!"


"If you don't get out of the car I'm going to use this!" he puts what I realise must be a taise gun on my upper leg. "This will really hurt!" I don't want to be taised- I've heard it feels like being shot. I get out of the car!


That's when the trouble really began! Could they get my hands behind my back? They could not! Eventually four police officers who badly injured my ring finger and my thumb got cuffs on to me and marched me to the little police house in Parliament- where in the end we had quite a chat, myself and those officers. The one who threatened to break my thumb apologised and I told him not to do it again. He said that he wouldn't.


I said, "Sergeant Healey! Am I now a criminal for driving through the security at Palace of Westminster?"

Sergeant Healey said, "No! It's not a criminal offence!"


"So is it a civil offence then?"


"No it's not even a civil offence!" he said.


"So what have I done wrong then? Why are you holding me? I have to arrest the war criminals we're wasting time!"


"Basically!" he smiled, "You've broken the house rules! Like if you were in court and you shouted at the judge- you would be in contempt of court- you are in contempt of Parliament!"

"Well Sergeant Healey," I stated, "I am in contempt of Parliament! So that must mean that I've done the right thing by driving my car through the security mustn't it!"


"No comment!" he said. I was released without charge after 3 hours, my car returned to me and asked not to do it again that day by Sergeant Healey because of all the extra paperwork.


The reason that I took such a drastic action? As I told the anti-terrorism man, who said to me that I could have been shot- "If I'd been a muslim I probably would have been"- I don't want to live in a world where you're more likely to be shot for the colour of your skin, or your race. I don't want to live in a world where innocent people are shot. "That's why I had to do it because I'm small, female, English, very strong with a big gob!" He said I had a lot of bottle!


"ARREST TONY BLAIR, GORDON BROWN, MARGARET BECKETT, JACK STRAW ETC. All that say yes to war!