Providing evidence and arguments to support your claims is not "spoonfed bootlicking".

Your claim was: "NATO is a war-crime committing, human-rights abusing entity."

The first seems to be a link collecting data points for civilian casualties. I don't see any NATO actions on there; and in any case it's missing the further evidence that war crimes and human rights abuse occurred.

The second page, on the front page anyway, has nothing about NATO whatsoever as far as I could tell.

Airwars tracks civilian casualties of war. These casualties - war crimes and crimes against humanity - are committed by NATO members and aligned states almost every single day. NATO bases are used to launch the attacks. NATO resources are used to cover up the crimes.

Clearly, you're not asking for this information in good faith, or else you'd have discerned this already, even with a casual look at the Airwars reports, which details quite descriptively the nature of NATO involvement in war crimes and crimes against humanity.

As far as your glib understanding of Wikileaks, I suggest you really, really study the material.

> are committed by NATO members and aligned states

That's not the same as committed by NATO.