UK Gets Hots Over Genocides Past

War crimes suspects from Rwanda and the Balkans – and other nasty Third World shitholes - living in Britain could be tried in the UK under plans outlined by Injustice Secretary Jack Straw in response to recent warnings from human rights campaigners that the UK was becoming the first choice safe haven and holiday break destination for fugitive war criminals – especially so during Wimbledon fortnight.

Under the proposals, anyone having their names in Amnesty International’s ‘Naughty Book’ and suspected of war crimes – since 1991 - ten years earlier than the current law allows - could be prosecuted in a UK court.

This action would close a legal loophole and could possibly initiate a flood of prosecutions – hopefully including those of Tony Bliar and Co – and Straw himself - for their dodgy dossiers, illegal invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, the assisted suicide of Dr. David Kelly, and the 7/7/2005 false flag terrorist attacks on their own British electorate.

However critics from Amnesty International are pushing for the time limit to be made retrospective to the mid-1960’s so US war criminals such as geriatric political meddler Henry Kissinger could be charged and brought to account for his crimes against humanity committed in Indo-China where he was personally responsible for sanctioning the slaughter of millions of innocent civilian peasant types.

Conversely hard liners want the time limit made retroactive to the signing of the royal charter of the East India Company in 1600 so the crimes against humanity committed by the British Empire Inc. across the globe might be finally called to account – with slavery topping the dirty deeds index.

Straw informed a reporter from the Genocide Gazette that the proposed amendments would be made to the Coroners and Justice Bill in the House of Lords this coming autumn.

Under the UK's current International Criminal Court Act 2001, UK nationals or residents suspected of war crimes and acts of genocide committed anywhere in the world since 2001 can be prosecuted in Britain.

By extending the cut-off point back to January 1991, the new law would open up an entirely fresh ballpark for the arrest and prosecution of anyone suspected of nasty human rights atrocities and massacres under the Geneva Conventions Act 1957.

Further, it would also reflect on and uphold European human rights convention articles enshrining the right to life and prohibiting torture, or inhuman or degrading treatment – such as the US extreme rendition favourite – after ripping out finger nails – of water boarding.

The Aegis Trust, an anti-genocide group, welcomed Strawman's statement but called on the government to replace the residency requirement for prosecution of war crimes with a simple presence test – which would ensure the long overdue arrest of international war criminals - such as Henry Kissinger the next time he attended Wimbledon.

Further, revision of the International Criminal Court Act 2001 will allow for the arrest and prosecution of big Pharma’ company personnel – such as Baxter in March - responsible for purposely tainting anti-flu medications and vaccines with Manky Mallard avian flu coronavirus or the currently popular Sneezy Pig H1N1 swine flu virus – and a legion of other evil genetically-modified weapons grade pathogens - to cause a global pandemic and wipe out the world’s ‘useless eaters’.

The implications of extending the retroactive scope of the International Criminal Court Act 2001 draws scrutinising focus on governments around the world contemplating how to implement mandatory vaccinations on their hapless populations.

First they launch a massive propaganda campaign to trick the sheeple into submitting to their anti-plague jab – loaded with all types of nasties including a microchip and various immune system compromisers such as the man-made Morgellon’s Disease nano-tech’ thread virus – or HIV/AIDS or cancer.

If Western governments attempt to force these untested and essentially experimental vaccinations on their populations then the International Criminal Court Act can be applied and enforced due a breach of the Nuremberg Code, which states:
“The voluntary consent of the human subject is essential. No experimental vaccine trials should be conducted on a population where there is a prior reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur, except, perhaps, in those circumstances where the experimental physicians – and politicians who order such mandatory vaccinations – first serve as a test subjects.'