Former US president George W. Bush invented a bogus casus belli to justify his invasion of Iraq. He claimed Saddam Hussein had WMDs. But, now we know that his claim was nothing but a barefaced lie. His excuse for wreaking havoc on Afghanistan was America's need to hunt down bin Laden responsible for the 9/11 attacks. Following the killing of that terrorist deep inside Pakistan, the world is now aware that both Bush and his successor President Barack Obama, who continues his predecessor's policy, have lied to the world.
President Bill Clinton was caught with his pants down after turning the Oval Office into a gymnasium of sex, ably assisted by Monica Lewinsky. He committed perjury but was lucky enough to get away without being impeached. President Obama, too, lied through his teeth having turned the Situation Room at the White House into a command centre for the operation that took bin Laden last Sunday (May 1). First, he said bin Laden had been shot dead in a firefight. (We pointed out the absurdity of this claim as none of the US troops who took part in the raid had suffered any injury.) But, now the White House has admitted that bin Laden was unarmed at the time of his death!
Killing unarmed terrorists, however dangerous they may be, is a war crime according to UN pundits and the whole caboodle of human rights groups that US itself funds. So, if one goes by their criteria, one will see that President Obama, his security advisors, Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the US military are responsible for a serious war crime - the killing of unarmed bin Laden and his son. President Obama cannot absolve himself of the responsibility for that 'war crime' as he has claimed that the hit team acted on his direct orders. That he directed operations and was privy to what was happening in bin Laden's hideout is evident from a picture released by the While House with him watching the execution of bin Laden live, in the company of Vice President, Secretary of State et al.
The UN Human Rights Commission and the international human rights watchdogs baying for the blood of lesser persons now have prima facie evidence of a serious 'war crime' committed by the US. UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon does not have to appoint an advisory panel on the US. The White House has confirmed bin Laden was unarmed when he was shot; President Obama has said he ordered the killing and an official picture of President Obama and others watching the operation live is available. What is called for is action!
US assistant secretary of state Robert Blake claimed before the release of the Moon Panel report that Sri Lanka could be hauled up before a war crimes tribunal. But, when he was asked by this newspaper on Wednesday at a press conference in Colombo to comment on the UNHRC's demand that the White House make public 'precise facts surrounding his (bin Laden) killing ', he claimed he was not aware of that development back at home as he had been away in Sri Lanka for a few days! The Island wanted to question him further but the journalists were allowed to ask only one question each. Anyway, we would like to pose this query to him wherever he may be today: Mr. Blake, don't you think that President Obama could be hauled up before a war crimes tribunal since there is damning evidence that he ordered the killing of an unarmed terrorist?
We suggest that US ambassador to Sri Lanka Patricia Butenis call a meeting of diplomats and NGOs to discuss the killing of bin Laden in the context of the White House statement and picture at issue.
Uncle Sam has got caught in the trap Blake set for Sri Lanka.
No comments:
Post a Comment