NATO has painted itself into a corner in Libya. Its daily acts of terrorism against Libyan civilians, its acts of murder against Libyan children and its flagrant breach of international law make Obomber, Cameron and Sarkozy war criminals. Why are they not sitting alongside General Mladic in The Hague?
There exists something called international law and like it or not - and we have all seen how the USA and UK, principally, flout it at every turn (Iraq, Serbia) - even the countries belonging to NATO, the most hated organisation on the planet, imposed upon the citizens without any iota of constitutional validity, are bound to follow its precepts.
The precepts of international law are as perfectly simple to follow as they are clear to read. The band of murderous countries currently conducting the illegal act of butchery in Libya are signatories to the United Nations Charter and this is crystalline in the terms and conditions involving an armed insurrection inside a sovereign state. Third parties are not allowed to take sides. Only those with criminal intentions would bend and flout international law in siding with terrorists - and why has there been no similar action against other countries fighting extremists?
The Libyan Revolution is staged, aided, financed and abetted from abroad and this is patently obvious in the way it began - not inside the capital, Tripoli, but in the endemically separatist Benghazi, among a band of heavily armed Islamist fanatics whose militancy and racism have long been apparent and also along the already secured western frontier. Enter some SEALS into Misrata and we have a made-in-the-USA Revolution with its backers Washington's poodle and former colonial master, Britain and Sarko "I want your oil" the Psycho.
NATO has sided with these criminals, murderers and thieves - rascals from the dregs of Libyan society, who themselves fought against NATO in Afghanistan and Iraq. What are that prissy snob Cameron, the bald-headed wonder William "Hey! I ain't gay!" Hague, that monumentally disappointing and treacherous Obomber, that lying Hillary War Zone Clinton female and that revolting little Napoleon, Sarko the Psycho doing cavorting with terrorists?
Having taken sides, NATO has broken the law. Moreover, the remit under UNSC Resolutions 1970 and 1973 (2011) is for the policing of a no-fly zone. Whoever gave the order to murder Colonel Gaddafi's grandchildren was policing what no-fly zone exactly? Furthermore, why has the act of war not received the go-ahead from the UN Military Commission and if it is not an act of war, then what is the legality of strikes on civilian targets?
Somewhere along the line there is a criminal case against the above-mentioned Obama, Clinton, Hague, Cameron and Sarkozy. If The Hague does not recognise this case, then it is acting in breach of international law, is partial and therefore has no right whatsoever to judge General Ratko Mladic. Either there is one set of weights and measures which apply to all or else the notion that international law exists is nonsensical, and ipso facto, The Hague has no legitimacy whatsoever.
Now we turn to the shocking atrocities committed by the Libyan terrorists. Following are some videos which the bought media has tried to suppress. I would urge Messrs. Hague, Cameron and Sarkozy to look at them (I shall not bother with Obomber and Clinton, they'd probably just laugh). In these videos, you can see some horrifically shocking images of children slaughtered and hacked to pieces by the Libyan "rebels" (sorry, "unarmed civilians").
Viewer discretion is recommended.
Here is a video of the butchery and rape of little girls. Viewer discretion recommended.
How do the citizens of the UK, France and the USA feel about their governments siding with these monsters, lying about Gaddafi's forces attacking unarmed civilians when all they were doing was fighting Islamist terrorists? How do the citizens of these countries feel about the millions upon millions of their taxpayers' hard-earned wages being squandered on this monumental miscalculation, at best, and criminal act of collusion, at worst?
How many times have Sarkozy, Obomber and Cameron said there is no funding for hospitals, schools and social services, when all the time they know that the cost of a military aircraft is 50,000 USD per hour, per aircraft. Sorry, Mr. Smith we cannot afford your cancer treatment, I am afraid you will have to die.
And the people of the United States of America, Britain and France just sit back and do nothing? Kind of makes them guilty by association does it not?
And just before we finish, proof that Cameron, Hague, Obomber, Clinton and Sarkozy are incompetent to be in their jobs: the whole footage which sparked off their reaction was based on a false flag event: it was not the Libyan Government forces firing on civilians. Watch:
I rest my case.
Photos: Unarmed civilians being brutally attacked by Colonel Gaddafi. What would Obomber, Camoron or that disgusting little Napoleon do if a band of Islamist fanatics ran amok in their countries? OK we know the answer. They'd collude with them. Muammar al-Qathafi however is more of a man. He fights. He was after all the first international leader to issue an arrest warrant against bin Laden and Al-Qaeda. The USA was then his ally. Time for an ethical foreign policy and doing the decent thing. NATO, stop! NOW!
The Russian Defence Ministry acknowledged that the Americans treat Russian military men in Syria with respect. The Americans always warn Russia accordingly, but not Israel
After the incident with the shootdown of the Ilyushin Il-20 reconnaissance aircraft over the Mediterranean Sea, Russia will supply an S-300 anti-aircraft missile system to Syria
Indeed, how dare they run US-independent policy? They should have followed the example of the European Union that turned independent states of the Old World into US-ditto entities