This piece loses points on fairness. The reader doesn't get an opposing perspective on the legality of the Iraq invasion until well into the second half of the piece.

The article presents the condemnation of the invasion of Iraq in a major speech by one of Britain's major judicial figures.

Although this article may seem biased at first, one needs to consider that it's a news story reporting on the speech by one of Britain's top judges, who is delivering his learned opinion about the legality of Bush-Cheney's invasion which was based on very shaky pretenses.

Not to be missed. Lord Bingham condemns the invasion of Iraq by the US and the UK, as a fundamental violation of international law.

Why bother reporting this type of nonsense? War and peace and foreign relations are out the sphere of lawyers even if they try to horn in.

Though the story is brief, it is linked to deeper support on the topic at hand. the story does address the responsibility of nations to respect "the rule of law" which are based upon the laws passed by international and domestic lawyers. To sustain that rule of law is every nations responsibility. this is well presented.