When the two-faced UN Security Council weapons supply line decided their War on Terror would replace their Cold War, they had to invent the International Criminal Court.

They invented the International Criminal Court the United States and Russia wouldn’t join, so they could all try and undermine the existing European Court of Human Rights.


...not big fans of the real democracy of the peace and harmony of the rule of law...


It is possible to join the European Court of Human Rights [like Russia and Turkey have] without belonging to the European Union, but it is not possible to join the European Union without belonging to the European Court of Human Rights, which is what Westminster doesn't like.


Their war 'games' with real civilians lives is played out by the Russian government turning a blind eye to the lawless U.S. military in the European Union, flying under the radar of the European Court of Human Rights that Russia do belong to, while both refuse to join the International Criminal Court.


Tony Blair had to invent the misnomer of the 'Human Rights Act' with Westminster interpreting a 'margin of appreciation' so broad that human rights did not exist, unless it was convenient to say otherwise.


Prior to the introduction of Tony Blair's phoney 'Human Rights Act' people could go directly to the European Court of Human Rights, without having to work their way through the abuse of all process that is the system of British injustice.


It is well documented the devastating effect this denial of any real and timely access to justice had on law abiding civilians like ourselves who were tortured and imprisoned in the UK without legal representation or trial etc etc etc.


The inherent deceit is an obvious corporate sleight of hand.


The cumulative affect is they all help try and undermine the European Court of Human Rights.


They don't even bother to make any pretense of caring about civilians lives beyond a few cheap soundbites through their respective propaganda machines while it is business as usual for global corporations.


It is equally well documented that Westminster really didn't like our proving that law abiding civilians can lawfully repeal without the luxury of legal representation, their multi-billion dollar fraudulent corporate legislation without having to 'vote' for what we also proved are their phoney 'sides' of politicians.


The old cobblers about nationalists, globalists and patriots and so on hides that none of the above dare admit what law abiding civilians can achieve.


We have always openly practiced the real democracy of the peace and harmony of the rule of law for the benefit of everyone.


Their latest spurious argument over which weapons have the most chemicals !! for goodness sakes in Syria, when everyone has always known the OPCW has no ability to install a chain of evidence in a war zone, is specious.

One could go round in circles of opinion all day where President Assad admitted he had chemical weapons, of which the only possible reason for ever having had them would be to use them, while the phoney opposition who are far more murky than anyone cares to admit also had access to chemical weapons etc etc etc.

The reality is President Assad alone is responsible for opening the door to 'argument' over chemical weapons, where it isn't sensible to take as gospel anything the two-faced Russian government say. 


This is the same Russian government peddling Brexit, Team Trump, Farage and Le Pen as 'revolutionary' for goodness sakes.





The interview just repeats two-faced UN Security Council war propaganda, also covering up that the Russian government back 'Kurdish' mercenaries too.


The Syrian people are the ones being slaughtered because they refuse to join all manner of murky mercenary brigades.

Any objective observer would say President Assad should really have had the courage to join the International Criminal Court a very long time ago, to try and put the civilian population in Syria out of harms way, instead of hiding behind his duplicitous weapons supplier in Moscow.

President Assad had noticed the Iraq War going on for a very many years and is avoiding the question why he did not have the courage to join the International Criminal Court to try and really put the Syrian population out of harms way.


It is self evident it's far, far more sensible for governments to deploy armies of lawyers at the International Criminal Court or the European Court of Human Rights.


Saleem al-Saqqa from Gaza forced Abbas and Meshaal to join the International Criminal Court to try and save civilians lives, so everyone can see it is Netanyahu who refuses to do the same.



... some of the article 50 racketeers...

It wastes civilians lives arguing about weapons and borders when the U.S. and Russia lack the obvious common-sense to honestly try and save civilian lives by joining the International Criminal Court, because what they are really trying to do is undermine the European Court of Human Rights.

The latest sisyphean deceit of Article 50 is only the propaganda tool of every corporate fascist.   

The reason governments in the Middle East aren't really pro-actively progressive is because they are still living under the medieval UN Security Council's divide and rule.


Everyone can now very clearly see the UN Security Council trying to drag the European Union back down into their lawless divide and rule with their Article 50 woo, because they do not want real democracy that can only exist through the peace and harmony of the rule of law.