Illegitimate Transfer of Inalienable European Rights via Convention(s) & Supranational Bodies Establishment of Sovereignty-Usurping Supranational Body Dictatorships Enduring Program of DEMOGRAPHICS WAR on Europeans Enduring Program of PSYCHOLOGICAL WAR on Europeans Enduring Program of European Displacement, Dismemberment, Dispossession, & Dissolution
No wars or conditions abroad (& no domestic or global economic pretexts) justify government policy facilitating the invasion of ancestral European homelands, the rape of European women, the destruction of European societies, & the genocide of Europeans.
U.S. RULING OLIGARCHY WAGES HYBRID WAR TO SALVAGE HEGEMONY [LINK | Article]
Who's preaching world democracy, democracy, democracy? —Who wants to make free people free?
Operation Telic = British military ops, invasion of Iraq 2003 to withdrawal of troops 2011.
British deployed 46,000 troops at outset of illegal invasion.
[EDIT: Wikipedia entry refers to initial troops but does not mention huge number of British troops sent to Iraq since 2003. The Op Telic report refers to circa 80,000 British troops since February 2003 to (presumably) 2006 date of report (page 9). Wikipedia info is from a 2011 BBC article that summarises the Iraq illegal war, and this article also only mentions the 46,000 UK troops, which may well have been the initial invasion force - but there is at least a total of 80,000 if not more British troops having been deployed to Iraq, judging by the 2006 report. That's a stunning number. But almost 50k soldiers sent to illegally invade another country is pretty impressive, as well. So is spending £9.24 billion at taxpayer expense, while ONE MILLION BRITONS rely on FOOD BANKS and while the ESSEX POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN UNDERFUNDED for years, risking public safety. Wow. ]
Bulk of the British military mission ended by 2009. Small number of British navy personnel remained to 2011. British continue to remain involved in training and advisory mission in Iraq.
Totalcost of war to British taxpayer at £9.24 billion. [Wikipedia]
But there would be interest on that, so that can't be the full total. Unless it's fixed interest credit from the bankers to the British? LOL
"US will have spent almost $802bn (£512.8bn) on funding the war by the end of fiscal year 2011" [BBC] That's obscene. America's infrastructure is crumbling.
Summary / Understanding of WikiLeaks Overview / Introduction ... and limited skimming of report:
Report reveals
UK govt secretly planning illegal Iraq war during 2002 Blair govt kept pending invasion ('TELIC') secret
/ those privy were only inner circle officers & officials
/ until 3 months prior to invasion of Iraq
US 'ideological agenda' dominated / UK working to US timetable [not sure what that is, apart from American capitalists wanting to illegally invade and rob Iraq].
UK secrecy meant that:
1. military at large kept uninformed (to late 2002) 2. contractors vital to reconstruction & stabilisation of Iraq not contacted until end of invasion (Apr. 2003)
Limited discussion and scope of planning re the following, as result:
- strategy
- logistics, resources etc
- undertaking establishment of interim government
- undertaking reconstruction
- executing non-military tasks
Further: little finance requested for reconstruction purposes at commencement of post combat ops
UK focus was therefore on resourcing Security Line of Operations (spending millions) and virtually nothing on the economic aspect, even though security depends on maintaining economic stability. [Not sure what 'Security Line' of ops is. Assume it is just gaining control of the country? ]
Geneva Conventions are applicable to states (and their agents), as well as the military. UK breached Geneva Conventions.
Looks like US wasn't so big on being restricted by obligations of international law and human rights law, in terms of the onus to exercise proportionality and to limit 'collateral damage'.
Interrogation of high value detainees was also an issue for UK staff embedded with coalition units in Iraq. Not quite clear to me in which way (but I'm not familiar with this kind of thing). Sounds like the interrogators needed lawyers.
US and UK had no plan for contending with post Iraq invasion insurgency. Americans thought they knew better and did not take suitable early counter-measures to Iraqi insurgency suggested in mid-2003 by the more savy British imperialist masters, who are widely experienced at invasion and suppression of local populations (and at recognising and quelling local uprisings), due to a history of hundreds of years of aggressive imperialist military activity (examples of British imperialist counter-insurgency experience: Northern Ireland, Malaya and Kenya). [British Malaya = Malay States (Malay Peninsula) + Singapore + Straits Settlements ]
British applied techniques used in Northern Ireland to 'intelligence cells' in Iraq and some battle groups in Iraq used trained personnel, experienced in Northern Ireland (eg. info ops, psyops, media ops).
Not quite clear to me what 'intelligence cells' are, but I guess it's there in the report. Dictionary look-up would indicate that these are 'terrorist cells' (ie probably small groups of organised Iraqi resistance to invasion of their homeland [tfd]). The dictionary meaning needs changing, by sound of things. It should be 'resistance cells'.
Those that took part described Iraq as exactly like Northern Ireland. So what does that say about the British in Ireland? [Ireland that's now been defeated by bankers and losing its culture and its mother tongue.]
Note: increase in violent incidents (late 2003) led to locals being able to gain support for insurgency. That probably explains why insurgencies need to be suppressed quickly: so support for insurrection does not spread. Same goes for sh*tty local economy: if economy is bad, locals will support insurgents. That's where what I guess is money for bribes and money for pumping into the local economy is handy. UK didn't come prepared for that.
Note: in the case of invasions or military interventions in failing or fragile states, such interventions will cause collapse of government. Invaders need to be prepared to take on the work of government and invader military is not the best man for the job, unless it is for very short periods of time. And maintaining various structures and stability is complicated: there's government, humanitarian aid, the justice system and info ops that are on the agenda for future planning of invasions.
LMAO ... capitalist invaders haven't got it right, after all the invasions committed in the name of US-Anglo Capitalism. UK Capitalist report suggests that post invasion responsibilities need to be divvied up between the invaders before the invasion. Basically, if the invaders don't coordinate their post invasion and military conflict control & stabilisation efforts with one another, re-establishing the state functions that they destroyed will take longer and that will mean taking longer to pull out troops (probably making voters at home unhappy).
Re-establishing stability in destroyed nations takes years. First 3 months of invasion are critical for the invaders, in terms of winning over the invaded masses.
British soldiers became habituated to violence due to acceptance of high levels of violence, profoundly changing British soldiers that served in Iraq.
British investigating in Iraq did a lame job of finding abuse: out of 191 cases investigated, despite rising violence, classed only 5 cases as deliberate abuse.
[*Not sure if 'TELIC' is also an acronym for something and, if so, what.]
[*that's how I understood the WikiLeaks introduction to the leaked report ... but that's not necessarily 100%, as I haven't yet read much of this kind of material. ]
MoD admits troops assaulted nine Iraqi civilians at food depot
The Ministry of Defence has admitted nine Iraqi men suffered unlawful assaults while being detained by British troops, it has been revealed.
The men are bringing a claim for civil damages against the MoD for physical and sexual abuse they say they suffered at Camp Bread Basket, a food distribution depot near Basra, in May 2003.
Three soldiers from the 1st Battalion The Royal Regiment of Fusiliers were court martialled, jailed and expelled from the Army in February 2005 for mistreating suspected looters in the incident, which led to the head of the Army apologising to the people of Iraq.
On A Tangent: *Enjoy reading the military tactical sort of info, but the same Capitalist Forces war machinery, that is applied by Capitalist government to invade and pillage foreign nations, can be applied to domestic populations in event of domestic insurrection. That means domestic populations are really just another occupied people, who must do as the occupiers demand ... and domestic populations are empty-handed and they rely completely on the Capitalists (eg. urban populations dependent upon retail logistics etc, LIKE A BIG CAPITALIST FARM & MAN IS THE DOMESTICATED FARM ANIMAL, FOR THE CAPITALIST FARMER'S PROFIT. That is why there is never change, why hard-won gains for working classes can be wound back by politicians, why the masses are exploited (eg. crumbling infrastructure, services under-funded, medical services privatised etc, while the MASSES are indebted for GENERATIONS to bankers to the tune of BILLIONS of dollars spent by CAPITALIST-CONTROLLED GOVERNMENTS on WARS OF AGGRESSION ABROAD, primarily and vastly for the benefit of the wealthy capitalist class). AND DUE to the fact that helpless domestic populations areOCCUPIED BY CAPITALISTS AND THEIR FORCES, all European domestic populations have their homelands invaded as a top-down implemented program of invasion — they can do nothing about. For an example of how ineffectual protest is in what they refer to as 'democracy', look at the 1980s British miners' strikes and look at the might of the state: police. And that is just the police. The state also has the military, that is well armed, experienced, habituated to violence and killing.
CAPITALIST FARM HANDLERS AT WORK
[CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE]
Ambassador Bremer, please give us our medal back
By Jon Perr
Wednesday Jun 18, 2014 · 4:31 AM AEST
"This weekend, the architects of President Bush's disastrous Iraq war fanned out in what might be deemed Operation Iraqi Blame Shift. But of all the Republican efforts to make Barack Obama's the face of Bush's failure, perhaps none is more pathetic than that of L. Paul Bremer. On television and in the op-ed pages of the Wall Street Journal, Bremer blamed President Obama for the explosion of sectarian conflict unleashed by the removal of Saddam Hussein. That is about as disgusting a charge as Ambassador Bremer could make. After all, as Viceroy of the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq, Paul Bremer almost single-handedly destroyed the infrastructure of the Iraqi government and military. And for that, George W. Bush gave him the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
In his WSJ op-ed, Bremer writes about the implosion of Iraq as if we were never there. Arguing for a perpetual American military presence ...
... with his aggressive de-Baathification of the government, privatization of state-owned businesses and the disbanding of the 400,000 man Iraqi army in May 2003, L. Paul Bremer was a one-man Sunni insurgency-generating machine. Or as Republicans are so fond of saying, he built that. "
Listening to this right now ... even though I'm personally not remotely into the humanitarian, universalist philosophy of WikiLeaks.
Still interesting in a number of respects. And nobody deserves an illegal invasion, illegal war, looting, destruction, theft of national treasures, killings of civilians etc, committed in Iraq by theUS-ANGLO CAPITALIST serving governments (and that of allied capitalist).
*LOL .. the way George Galloway says 'ruse' ... rrrrrrrruse.
I'm completely brain dead today. I keep replaying this and listening to it, but nothing sinks in.
"The judges in the verdict said that that the United States, under the leadership of Bush, forged documentsto claim that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction."
"“Bush and Blair are found guilty under the same law that applied to the Nazis after the end of the World War II. So, they are international (war) criminals guilty of Nuremberg crimes against peace; and they should be prosecuted by any state in the world that gets a hold of them."
US Capitalist Empire has taken steps IN ADVANCE to ensure that no country dare prosecute the AMERICAN-ANGLO CAPITALIST WAR CRIMINALS (or their associates), as US Capitalist Empire has given itself permission to wage war against those that seek to bring US CAPITALIST WAR CRIMINALS to justice.
"A new law supposedly protecting U.S. servicemembers from the International Criminal Court shows that the Bush administration will stop at nothing in its campaign against the court.
U.S. President George Bush today signed into law the American Servicemembers Protection Act of 2002, which is intended to intimidate countries that ratify the treaty for the International Criminal Court (ICC). The new law authorizes the use of military force to liberate any American or citizen of a U.S.-allied country being held by the court, which is located in The Hague. This provision, dubbed the "Hague invasion clause," has caused a strong reaction from U.S. allies around the world, particularly in the Netherlands.
In addition, the law provides for the withdrawal of U.S. military assistance from countries ratifying the ICC treaty, and restricts U.S. participation in United Nations peacekeeping unless the United States obtains immunity from prosecution. At the same time, these provisions can be waived by the president on "national interest" grounds.
...
The law is part of a multi-pronged U.S. effort against the International Criminal Court. On May 6, in an unprecedented move, the Bush administration announced it was "renouncing" U.S. signature on the treaty. "
A former Australian army chief has warned Canberraagainst “blindly” following the United States in the American military adventures, a day after a long-awaited inquiry into Britain’s role in the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq blamed the UK for rushing to war.
“We... need to be careful of blindly going along with our senior strategic partners,” Peter Leahy, who was the chief of the Australian army from 2002 to 2008,said in an apparent reference to the US.
“I think as we look at other issues that are afoot at the moment, there are some thoughts to be given there — what decisions are we making?” he said, speaking on Thursday.
The former army chief, who is now a professor at Canberra University’s National Security Institute, added that “Frankly, some of the decisions the United States, our senior partner in our strategic alliance, have [sic] made over the last 20 or 30 years have been a bit crook.”
The Chilcot Inquiry, established in 2009 to investigateBritain’s most controversial military engagement since the end of the Second World War, published its 6,000-page report in 12 volumes on Wednesday, slamming former British Prime Minister Tony Blair over support for former US President George W. Bush in the 2003 Iraq war.
At the time, Blair presented the case for war with “a certainty which was not justified”based on “flawed” intelligence about Iraq’s supposed weapons of mass destruction (WMD), which was not challenged as it should have been, the report concluded.
Blair’s government sent 120,000 members of the British armed forces and civilians to Iraq, proving its role as Bush’s chief military ally. A total of 179 British personnel werekilled in the war.
In 2003, Australia also sent 2,000 troops to support the US and British forces in the invasion of Iraq, whose legal basis, according to the Chilcot Inquiry, was “far from satisfactory.”
According to Leahy, a review of the Australian involvement in the Iraq war released in 2004 also showed that Canberra relied on flawed advice in joining its senior allies.
“Let’s have a discussion, not an inquiry, around our relationship with the United States, how we decide to go to war and very importantly how we decide every day when we are at war to stay at war,” Leahy said.
Meanwhile, Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop, who at the time of the Iraq invasion was part of then-Prime Minister John Howard’s conservative government, defended the decision made by the government to send troops to Iraq, saying it was “based on… the best information that we had at the time.”
“The government takes responsibility for all decisions that a government makes and we take responsibility for this one,” she further said, describing the decision as “a bipartisan position up to a point.”
Blair himself has defended the British decision to follow in the US’s footsteps into Iraq following the publication of the Chilcot report.
"AN OBSTACLE TO EVERY SINGLE WESTERN OBJECTIVE IN THE MIDDLE EAST"
"OUR GOAL IS REGIME CHANGE"
"WE HAVE HAD SUCH GOALS BEFORE. WE SUCCEEDED IN THE SOVIET UNION, IN APARTHEID SOUTH AFRICA AND IN BELGRADE."
"I ASSUME [REGIME CHANGE] REMAINS OUR GOAL IN PLACES LIKE BURMA, IRAN, LIBYA, ZIMBABWE AND LIBERIA."
"LAWYERS AND PEACENIKS SHOULD NOT PREVENT US FROM SAYING WHAT WE REALLY WANT IN IRAQ"
"IF WE WERE TO BUILD UP THE KURDS AND THE SHIA AS PROXIES, WHAT ASSURANCES WOULD WE HAVE TO GIVE THEM THAT WE WOULD NOT LET THEM DOWN YET AGAIN?"
"ALL OF THESE ARE MUCH MORE IMPORTANT QUESTIONS THAN LEGALITY ..."
"WE CAN LOOK FOR A LEGAL BASIS ONCE WE HAVE DECIDED WHAT TO DO, AS WE DID IN KOSOVO."
"WE KNOW BUSH, AT THE END OF THE DAY, WILL BE BOTH INTELLIGENT AND RESPONSIBLE IF WE CAN HELP THE AMERICANS COME UP WITH A PERSUASIVE PLAN TO OUST THE WORLDS WORST TYRANT, THEN WE SHOULD DO SO. AND IF THE BEST MILITARY AND INTELLIGENCE ORGANS OF LONDON AND WASHINGTON FAIL TO PRODUCE A CONVINCING PLAN, THEN WE STICK TO CONTAINMENT."
John Sawers descendant of Norman invaders (12th C.)
former British Diplomat
former British Senior Civil Servant
Foreign & Commonwealth Office 1997 MI6 agent in Yemen & Syria
Political Officer, Damascus 1982
FCO Desk Officer, European Union Dept. 1984
Private Sec. to Minister of State 1986
FCO, Pretoria, Cape Town, South Africa 1988-1991
Head of European Union Presidency Planning Unit 1991
Principal Private Secretary to Douglas Hurd 1993:
- Bosnia War
- Middle East war
- European Union debate
International Fellow at Harvard University, USA, 1995-1998
British Embassy, Washington DC, headed Foreign & Defence Policy Team Foreign Affairs Adviser to PM Tony Blair 1999-2001
- Kosovo War
- Northern Ireland peace process
- Iraq sanctions policy Ambassador toEgypt 2001 - 2003 British Special Representatives to Baghdad (3 mths)
FCO, Director Gen. for Political Affairs 2003
wide scope, negotiations with: G8, EU and the UN
closely involved re policy on:
Iran
Iraq
Afghanistan
Balkans
British Permanent Representative to the United Nations 2007-2009
former Chief of MI6, Secret Intelligence Service 2009-2014
governor of the Ditchley Foundation, Anglo-US capitalist relations promo Ditchley Foundation est. 1958 by Sir David Wills, descendant of the tobacco importing family, W. D. & H. O. Wills (Bristol)
W.D. & H.O. Wills, est. 1786
one of founding companies of: Imperial Tobacco
on merger of W.D. & H.O. Wills & x7 other tobacco companies
key: William Wills, 1st Baron Winterstoke
businessman, Liberal politician
Julie Bishop defending the decision to enter into ILLEGAL WAR ON IRAQ, on a CONCOCTED basis, for the enrichment of US-ANGLO CAPITALISTS who destroyed and robbed the country, is appalling. But what else can the government do? It's not like they're going to admit to being war criminals and admit liability, are they? LOL It also sounds like Australia might want to address the issue of the constitution that permits a declaration of war without parliamentary backing.
EU-NATO IMPERIALISM ❌ 
