Talk:Bush, aides convicted of Iraq war crimes in absentia by Malaysia

NPOV
This article does not meet npov. For a start the title is completely misleading. This was not state action. Further, the article should have stated that this so-called tribunal is not recognised by the UN, ICC or by the international community. This is rather important Brian &#124; (Talk) &#124; New Zealand Portal 13:56, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * will expand when I get home. Internet on mobile phones can be annoying at times :) Brian &#124; (Talk) &#124; New Zealand Portal 14:00, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * This is all, however, unsourced. And, a tribunal formed by what was then a serving Prime Minister is a state action. Given the tribunal self-states to have little real power, and the article reflects this, I don't see a problem. An intelligent reader should be able to reach a conclusion on how much credence they give or do not give a relatively ineffectual tribunal. There is no claims stated that this is a good thing either, despite many in the sources. I would greatly appreaciate a sourced statement on the inadequacies of the tribunal, but this should be matched by the fierce support granted by certain quarters. Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 14:18, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * (As an aside, I despair that this has been selected above fresher, larger articles about frankly more important things as lead one.) Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 14:20, 15 May 2012 (UTC)