TOKYO MASTER BANNER

MINISTRY OF TOKYO
US-ANGLO CAPITALISMEU-NATO IMPERIALISM
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]

*U.S. OLIGARCHY WAGES HYBRID WAR* | U.S. Empire's Casino Unsustainable | Destabilised U.S. Monetary & Financial System | U.S. Defaults Twice A Year | Causes for Global Financial Crisis of 2008 Remain | Financial Pyramids Composed of Derivatives & National Debt Are Growing | *U.S. OLIGARCHY WAGES HYBRID WAR* | U.S. Empire's Casino Unsustainable | Destabilised U.S. Monetary & Financial System | U.S. Defaults Twice A Year | Causes for Global Financial Crisis of 2008 Remain | Financial Pyramids Composed of Derivatives & National Debt Are Growing | *U.S. OLIGARCHY WAGES HYBRID WAR*

Who's preaching world democracy, democracy, democracy? —Who wants to make free people free?
[info from Craig Murray video appearance, follows]  US-Anglo Alliance DELIBERATELY STOKING ANTI-RUSSIAN FEELING & RAMPING UP TENSION BETWEEN EASTERN EUROPE & RUSSIA.  British military/government feeding media PROPAGANDA.  Media choosing to PUBLISH government PROPAGANDA.  US naval aggression against Russia:  Baltic Sea — US naval aggression against China:  South China Sea.  Continued NATO pressure on Russia:  US missile systems moving into Eastern Europe.     [info from John Pilger interview follows]  War Hawk:  Hillary Clinton — embodiment of seamless aggressive American imperialist post-WWII system.  USA in frenzy of preparation for a conflict.  Greatest US-led build-up of forces since WWII gathered in Eastern Europe and in Baltic states.  US expansion & military preparation HAS NOT BEEN REPORTED IN THE WEST.  Since US paid for & controlled US coup, UKRAINE has become an American preserve and CIA Theme Park, on Russia's borderland, through which Germans invaded in the 1940s, costing 27 million Russian lives.  Imagine equivalent occurring on US borders in Canada or Mexico.  US military preparations against RUSSIA and against CHINA have NOT been reported by MEDIA.  US has sent guided missile ships to diputed zone in South China Sea.  DANGER OF US PRE-EMPTIVE NUCLEAR STRIKES.  China is on HIGH NUCLEAR ALERT.  US spy plane intercepted by Chinese fighter jets.  Public is primed to accept so-called 'aggressive' moves by China, when these are in fact defensive moves:  US 400 major bases encircling China; Okinawa has 32 American military installations; Japan has 130 American military bases in all.  WARNING PENTAGON MILITARY THINKING DOMINATES WASHINGTON. ⟴  
Showing posts with label Universal Jurisdiction. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Universal Jurisdiction. Show all posts

March 10, 2016

Assange Interview Pagina - Sept 2015 - US Unilateral Universal Jurisdiction | Various Subjects Discussed





Article
SOURCE
http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/elmundo/4-281541-2015-09-13.html

THE WORLD
Interview with Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks
"US It has created a unilateral universal jurisdiction"

Under the Congress of Universal Justice Garzón Foundation, he talked about the immigration crisis and the absence of laws and institutions of human rights in the global legal architecture that emerged from 9-11.

By Santiago O'Donnell

Julian Assange has spent three years, two months, three weeks, one day, 21 hours and several minutes exile in a small apartment which occupies part of the Embassy of Ecuador in London, when it appears on the big screen this city Teatro Cervantes to answer questions via videoconference. He looks more tired, weaker, hit a year ago, when excited with the possibility of leaving his prison before the end of the Obama administration. But it remains active. His site, Wikileaks still leaking new documents. In so far this year has posted a military plan for the European Union to sink boats of refugees before they leave Africa, an instructional NSA for US spies on how to avoid detection in European airports, secret clauses two megatratados US trade talks with Europe and the Pacific Rim and the confessions of a crew engineer British nuclear submarines warning of impending catastrophe because the security protocols are not respected. Also, this week came out in Britain Assange's new book, The Wikileaks files on the impact that has had the leak site in different corners of the world. His lawyer Baltazar Garzon invited to participate in the Congress of Universal Justice this week was held in the Teatro Cervantes in this city, with Garzón listening intently from the stage, Assange spoke with Pagina / 12 double impact of the war on terror and the technological revolution have had on individual liberties in general and freedom of expression in particular.

I'd like to ask about the child's photo Aylan Kurdi that shook the world. What does the immigration crisis, the rise of anti-immigrant parties in Europe and its counterpart in the United States with the candidacy of Donald Trump? How all this relates to your own situation of asylum in the Embassy of Ecuador in Britain?

There was a major change in migration flows to Europe in the last ten years. We have published some papers on it. In fact the document published on the European Union plan to destroy boats coming from Libya before leaving ports shows a very interesting militarization of the European Union. I know this is a lecture on Universal Justice, but I must say that the right to universal protection invoked by many human rights lawyers has been used as an excuse in recent years to bomb Serbia in Belgrade, bomb Tripoli and introduce weapons significant in Libya and more recently destabilize Syria to the point where we now see the emergence of the Islamic State, which is pushing these refugees causing a humanitarian catastrophe. This catastrophe is caused, in terms of intelligence and geopolitical level, the various factions and propagandists of the European intelligence services, who always need to justify their budgets and want to pursue their geopolitical knock out Syria ambitions, to make Israel to consolidate its position in the Golan Heights, to marginalize Hezbollah, and to get into the navel of Iran to influence key decisions about its energy program and its future.

As for the legal aspects of my situation, there is something interesting and has to do with the right to asylum. In the debate in Europe on how to stem the flow of refugees, there are two perspectives. Is the conservative perspective, it is to eliminate the flow completely. And there is the humanitarian perspective, which is that we must reduce the number of drowning. The conservative approach has led to the emergence, particularly in Sweden and Finland, anti-immigrant far-right parties. In Sweden are divided but is growing much anti-immigrant party the Democrats and anti-immigrant party in Finland party is part of the government coalition. And from the perspective huamanitaria we say we do not want people drown as that famous Syrian child, then we will process asylum claims in our embassies in the southern Mediterranean, in Libya and elsewhere, to give people direct access asylum, without having to risk their lives so that their rights are recognized, and to facilitate their asylum within the European Union. But Sweden, which is me, that I have held for more than five years without presenting a single charge against me is now in an awkward situation. Because even though there are no records that have done that (process orders asylum in foreign embassies) now knows that this process exists, which is an accepted international practice and that Ecuador has the right to do so (me). Moreover other humanitarian items within Sweden are saying that to meet the quota of refugees proposed by the European Union, should process asylum claims in northern Africa. The UK faces the same dilemma. If processed for asylum in embassies, legitimizes the argument Ecuador is legal practice to decide on asylum for a person, not just when it comes to a territory but when you are in a jurisdiction, and that jurisdiction includes the embassies and ships of war. To British justice I am neither arrested nor asylum, does not accept a pass so you can get to Ecuador.

'And about Trump?

'I looked at him from the following perspective. I followed Hillary Clinton for years, you know that I have a personal issue with Hillary because she was Secretary of State when we published the diplomatic cables and more recently emails refused to disclose. And she is much more warlike than Obama. What happened in Libya, the destruction of that country and the collapse of its state, was above all a war of Hillary. Hillary was behind everything. Pentagon generals opposed Hillary intervene but was pushed to bomb. So now comes in Donald Trump's even more warrior than Hillary. So whoever wins will be even more aggressive than Obama. The Trump phenomenon is interesting. Right now there is not a massive flood of Latin Americans wanting to enter the United States. So it is interesting to see where does this phenomenon. Trump is appealing at the same grotesque nationalism it can be seen in discussions on refugees in Australia and Europe. The issue of migrants was not really on the agenda significantly until Donald Trump started lifting. The rest of the Republican Party has more decency and more willing to like the voters of Hispanic roots.

By going to the theme of this conference, the doctrine of universal justice, the case seems to be the opposite of what is being discussed here. Because while Dr. Garzon and other proponents of the doctrine seeking to create a legal architecture which is above the legal systems of each country, if a country, the United States, seek to impose their own legal architecture over the international system. And seeking to judge you, who is granted asylum in the Embassy of Ecuador in Britain, through an order from the Swedish justice for questioning in Sweden so we can extradite him to the US from Sweden, so you can be tried for terrorism. At the same time, you and WikiLeaks have complained that the United States seeks to expand its legal jurisdiction over much of the rest of the world through trade agreements with whole regions such as Europe and the Pacific Rim and global reach through its Internet servers.

As a result of having more than 400 military bases in over 120 countries around the world the United States is the world's largest military empire. Therefore it has great influence in many countries. But as we speak formal universal jurisdiction in this Congress, the US has been doing something else, it has created a unilateral universal jurisdiction, which only applies from the United States to other countries, and that's my case. In the past five years the United States has subjected me to a very aggressive investigation of Grand Jury investigation remains open, which I am accused of espionage, computer hacking, destruction of public documents and conspiracy. But I'm not American. WikiLeaks is not registered in the United States. We do not publish in the United States and have not published in the United States during the period covered by our judicial investigation. The US government claims for itself universal jurisdiction in any subject having to do with the US government. Then they claim that if someone publishes information related to national defense, they have jurisdiction, even if the documents are not government reached with the government referring or relating to US defense apparatus. Then US demands full universal jurisdiction and therefore was able to follow this case against me and my organization so long, to the point that research is the longest in American history against a publication. It is also the largest legal case that led the Pentagon, which has been admitted a few months ago by the prosecutor who conducts an aspect of the case that has to do with Chelsea Manning, my alleged co-conspirator who was sentenced 35 years in a military prison. But it's not just about me or WikiLeaks. The United States has done the same with many other publications it considers a threat, when it considers that the political cost of pursuing them is less than the benefits. Then the Islamists who have published articles in favor of the Taliban, although they were not directly linked to terrorism, were charged to give ideological support for the right to resist US troops invaded Afghanistan.

The center of the US attempt to impose its jurisdiction on other countries is in Alexandria, Virginia, an elegant suburb of Washington DC There the grand jury meets once a month to advance the case against Wikileaks. They've been five years doing that. Alexandria has the highest density of government employees across the country, then the jurors are chosen from among employees of the Department of Homeland Security, the CIA, Air Force, National Security Agency and other state agencies, all based near the town. So how do they justify their jurisdiction over my case? Well, turn to a number of legal rinses to ensure that a grand jury national security take the case. One example is the recent case of CIA mole (Jeffrey) Sterling, the man who allegedly leaked information to a journalist from the New York Times (James Risen) on a program of the agency (Operation Merlin). The did not live in Virginia, lived in another state. Then the US government commissioned a book Amazon shipping the reporter from the New York Times had written, which contained information about the CIA Sterling, to be sent to an address in Alexandria. When the book came to Alexandria the government claimed that the shipment was a mail fraud because Sterling had signed a contract saying he would not reveal any information from the CIA. Then they use all kinds of tricks to bring cases there. So we have people of 67 different nationalities being tried in Alexandria. It is the explicit policy of tax of Alexandria jurisdiction try to win one way or another, with respect to the greatest possible number of countries and to publicly boast of being able to get to 67 countries within its jurisdiction. There is the case of Kim Dotcom, Megaupload manager, who did not want the record because people up to music to your site. Who's up? Kim Dotcom was not, but that hardly mattered to the authorities and did the same with many other cases of alleged piracy in different countries.

And Kim Dotcom is in New Zealand.

Yes, he is in New Zealand, fighting to avoid being extradited. Lives and works in New Zealand, the site is registered in Hong Kong. has nothing to do with the United States and less with Virginia except that the owners of the copyright, as Universal, are based in the United States.

Here it has been argued that the new generation of offenses punishable by universal justice should include environmental crimes that produce disasters and economic offenses linked to crimes against humanity. Do you think that this list should be added cybercrimes committed by countries, corporations or individuals?

-The Topic interests me because WikiLeaks has been attacked by state actors, has been hacking, but I wonder whether it is a war crime because we have a strong infrastructure that is damaged and sometimes destroyed by these actors. It is an interesting question but a legal question, it seems to me that is a political question. If you're all for all the people you end up being nothing to anyone. Diluís the concept to the point where it ceases to be effective. With this idea you can get to a point in the United Nations and countries. The concept of universal justice can collapse if you use it as a defense for all human rights violations.

I'd like to ask you a couple of questions related to freedom of expression. Through diplomatic documents on Argentina that you gave me from the place of his house arrest in London four years ago I learned how thin is the line between diplomacy and espionage. Following the event also I learned how thin is the line between journalism and terrorism. My first question is this: the so-called war against terrorism, the war against supranational organizations such as Al Qaeda and the Islamic State already has fourteen. What has been its impact on freedom of expression? My second question is how it has affected freedom of expression technological revolution we are living.

Something very serious has happened here in the UK in recent days because Britain was first launched drone attacks in Syria. And these attacks are targeted assassinations. They have been used against its own citizens as a result of these attacks two or three British citizens have been killed. There is now a blacklist of five British citizens to be killed. It is argued that these murders are justified under the law because these citizens participate in a variety of plots against Britain. But the reality is more interesting. You may participate in the Islamic state with the idea of ​​carrying out terrorist attacks in the UK, but not in the UK. They are in Syria and anyone who wants to project force on a country to reach that country to do so. Now if you encourage people through the internet, or if involved in a conspiracy against the United Kingdom over the Internet, do it with people in the UK, or people who could go to the UK. People who are not in the UK can be stopped at the border and the people inside can be arrested as long as he gets to intercept your communications. But if you kill the communication is interrupted, as the agents of the Islamic State in the UK remain undetected. Then the justification for police level is quite weak to kill people in Syria who might be willing to conspire to do something in the UK. If there is a plot want to identify and arrest the people involved. Like to allow the coordinator to continue communicating to identify who are the ones who commit terrorism act. The British intelligence service GCHQ, is very advanced, the most advanced in the world, and control all communications, with few exceptions, communications coming out of the UK and should be able to use that to thwart the plots. Either way using a secret list of murders, no trial, no way to know if one is listed. It is an example how the policy of targeted killings of Barack Obama has expanded to the UK, which is worrying because soon will wishlist New Zealand, Australia yours. Another disturbing revelation this week is that Sweden has a representative on the committee of targeted killings in the United States, along with Germany. Germany says US pressured him to join the committee to cover geopolitically, but at the same time is very concerned about the legality of what is being done. Instead Sweden so far seems to be happy with their participation.

I should also note that the International Criminal Court in theory is a very important instrument, but to the universal jurisdiction for something that resembles it. In my last book I came out yesterday (The WikiLeaks files) have a whole chapter on how the United States has sought to marginalize and undermine the International Criminal Court. Basically what happened is that Bill Clinton had accepted with reservations form part of the ICC, to have some control over the court, tried to sell the idea to his security council but failed, and when he arrived W. Bush United States ICC was. At that time the United States began a strong campaign against the CPI, trying to close deal with a variety of countries, so-called agreements of Chapter 97, that every country could convince the United States, signed an agreement guaranteeing that never send yet US citizens to the ICC. Through incentives and sanctions the United States managed a number of countries sign these secret agreements Article 97. When Barack Obama came, the policy was more subtle but continued in the same direction. The result is what we see today: only citizens of African countries have been tried by the ICC. Now we see that Palestine has joined the ICC despite a strong campaign that does not happen. The interesting thing is that the campaign was so strong, demonstrating a real fear of ICC. That means that even the remote threat of prosecution at the ICC brings an extraordinary effort to eliminate that possibility. The threat of being judged even if it is remote, change behavior and it is important to learn to value universal jurisdiction.

'And with regard to freedom of expression?

Some of our research has had legal consequences. we have shown war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan, in relation to torture, the killing of civilians but the United States government did not investigate any of these cases, investigated the source of information and that source was sentenced to 35 years in prison. Similarly, with the former agent John Kiriakou leaked information that waterboarding in interrogations of the CIA, was tried and spent two years in prison. Now he is free again, but the only person who was tried, nobody was judged by what he denounced.

Wikileaks, in recent months has been reporting and publishing information on two treaties being negotiated secretly almost worldwide: the TTP (Strategic Agreement Trans-Pacific Economic Cooperation) and the TPIP (Association of the Transatlantic Trade and couple Investment.

-United States has decided to leave the World Trade Organization as an effective tool to regulate international financial exchanges. So it is getting out, creating different mechanisms and you are doing it at high speed to encircle China geopolitically and legally with a new trade bloc, a new legal block. That is building block is the most significant since the creation of the European Union geopolitical event. Fifty-two countries representing two-thirds of global GDP, 2.6 billion people and a new legal system that does not eliminate the existing systems but that is very intense and aggressive covering the main topics of the economy, property, internet , corporate structures, intrusive covering topics of property rights for corporations, transportation. But something is not covered and is the idea of ​​human rights. Follow economic criteria such as the European Union, but without its Enlightenment values. No envisages Court of Human Rights and the European Union. It is no secret that we have obtained and published some chapters. At the geopolitical level it is the most important thing that is happening now is the broadest more ambitious and more comprehensive legal relations and economic restructuring that has ever been attempted. This is an interesting event, which may offer some opportunities, if you can gather enough political strength to derail some of these agreements unless the system incorporating the appropriate human rights instruments.

Any message for Argentina?

More than anything I order. I would much rather be in Argentina. I've heard good things about your country. The ambassador in London, Alicia Castro, expressed strong support and I want to thank Argentina for that support. Argentines already know how difficult and misleading they can be and are the British in a negotiation, and what they do with the law. Argentina acts from the legal standpoint, geopolitical and development in Latin America is very important, integration and independence are important not only for Argentina, also for many people living in Europe, also for WikiLeaks and me. My basic policy philosophy is that when a group of people or a nation has no bargaining power, then there is no freedom of choice, which leads to unfair situations. What more honest world is not electoral politics. What makes the world more honest, which makes people more honest, it is that you can go the other way, that you can choose another. In terms of electoral politics, able to choose between one or the other party. At the national level is the ability to say, "if the United States is misbehaving in some aspect, I have the possibility of negotiating with China, or Europe or any other country." This is very important. There has been an explosion of freedom of expression and there have been many different writings on what the world is and what it can be in globalization, where publications need not be tied to a single public, why be subjected to a only the police department that touched their jurisdiction, they can compare and choose. They can choose which they prefer state education. This interactive dance between states, jurisdictions and power groups is allowing people who have been harmed can choose another place to stay. So it works the law of supply and demand and that freedom is what makes the world more honest, beyond what the political system or the legal system you have to deal with.
http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/elmundo/4-281541-2015-09-13.html

---------------------- ꕤ ----------------------





Summary


Universal Protection
'right' to 'universal protection'
= invoked by many human rights lawyers
= used as an excuse to bomb:

    -- Serbia in Belgrade
    -- bomb Tripoli (Libya)
    -- introduce arms in Libya
    -- destabilize Syria - to emergence of the Islamic State
   
-- which is pushing these refugees
-- causing a humanitarian catastrophe
-- catastrophe is caused at intelligence & geopolitical level
-- factions in European intel services need to justify their budgets
-- as they pursue 'knock out Syria ambitions'
-- to enable Israel to consolidate its position on Golan Heights &:
    1.  -- marginalising Hezbollah
    2.  -- & gaining advantage over Iran, by gaining position to
        influence key decisions re Syria's (*?) future & energy program
       
        *That's how I read it, but I could be wrong.

Refugees Europe

two (2) perspectives:

1.  conservative:  eliminate immigration flow completely
2.  humanitarian perspective:  reduce drownings


CONSERVATIVE

*Conservative approach, according to Assange, has led to emergence (particularly in Sweden & Finland) of anti-immigrant far-right parties
[comment:  I strongly disagree.  

It is the liberal (humanitarian) approach -- or pretext -- leading to flooding those European countries with mass third world immigration in basically homogeneous European nations that has led to the strengthening of support for what is described as 'far-right' parties, owing to the SOCIAL COSTS of such mass immigration & the failure of mainstream political parties to consider such costs or the concerns, preferences etc. of the people that they represent, and failure to prevent what is:  invasion and displacement of native European populations, on a path to what is undoubtedly the genocide of native Europeans.]

HUMANITARIAN

from humanitarian perspective
-- seeks to process asylum claims in embassies in:
    -- southern Mediterranean
    -- in Libya
    -- elsewhere
-- to give direct access asylum
-- without risking their lives
-- so their 'rights' are recognised
-- to facilitate their asylum within the European Union

Sweden
-- have arrested Assange over 5 years without producing a single charge against him

Processing asylum via embassies
-- records do not exist of process
-- but process exists
-- accepted international practice
-- Ecuador has right to grant asylum

Meanwhile, Sweden's humanitarian elements have put forward
-- processing asylum claims in north Africa
-- to meet quotas of refugees proposed by the European Union

[comment:  'quotas of refugees' would suggest that this is an orchestrated invasion inflicted on native European populations by their political masters]

Britain
-- same dilemma
-- processing asylum requests in embassies
-- legitimises Ecuador's granting of asylum
-- not only when asylum is on national territory
-- but also right to grant asylum from a jurisdiction
-- which jurisdiction includes embassies & ships of war
-- yet to British justice, Assange is neither detained nor asylee

Hillary Clinton
-- more war hawk than Obama

Trump
-- said to be appealing to "same grotesque nationalism"
-- that can be seen in discussions on refugees in Australia & in Europe
-- Latin American refugees in USA not seen as a 'massive flood'
-- issue of immigrants was not on agenda significantly until Trump's rise
-- remainder of Republican party seen as possessing more 'decency' in relation to Hispanics
[comment:  issue may not have been significant on political stage because the media and politics is very much controlled in the West, and related issues are SUPPRESSED by media and political parties, who go so far as to agree NOT to use immigration as an issue against one another.
American elections are a joke and Trump is clowning around, I guess.
Maybe Trump's the controlled 'opposition' or something?
Any real grass roots opposition to immigration stands absolutely no chance -- especially in the hijacked American political system --  in pursuing and maintaining European interests and integrity.

Nationalism tends to only be seen as 'grotesque' when it is expressed by the European man.  In the non-European, it is acceptable 'pride' in one's identity, culture and heritage and something to be honoured, even by Europeans who are denied the same.
So there's some double standards in operation.

I believe preserving European territory, identity, culture, heritage, character, political, military and administrative representation etc and political strength (among much more), is of utmost importance to Europeans.
The only 'grotesque' element is that this truth is obscured, denied, and suppressed while European people and the societies that they have developed over many thousands of years are being destroyed by capitalism and its companion, 'Enlightenment' ideology.]

Doctrine of Universal Justice
-- Garzon & other proponents of the doctrine
-- seek to create legal architecture which is over the international system


USA
-- seeks to expand its legal jurisdiction over much of the rest of the world
-- by trade agreements with whole regions, eg. Europe & Pacific Basin
-- via global reach of its internet servers

USA
-- 400 military bases over 120 countries
-- planet's largest military empire
-- USA much influence, in many countries
-- USA has created a unilateral universal jurisdiction
-- universal jurisdiction only applies from USA
-- to other countries, as in Assange case
-- eg over 5 years aggressive Grand Jury investigation
-- longest investigation against a publication in American history
-- largest case led by Pentagon
-- USA has taken an aggressive approach
-- with many other publications it considers a threat
-- Islamists who have published articles in favour of the Taliban,
-- although they were not directly linked to terrorism
-- were charged for providing ideological support for the right to resist the invasion of Afghanistan by US troops
-- accusation of espionage, computer hacking, destruction of public documents & conspiracy
-- Assange is not an American & WikiLeaks is not registered in USA
-- nor do they publish in USA
-- nor have they published in the USA during the period covered by US judicial investigation
-- US government claims for itself universal jurisdiction in any subject having to do with the US government
-- USA claims that if someone publishes information related to national defence, USA has jurisdiction

[comment:  the Americans have a history of slippery behaviour when it comes to law. 
Look at the WWII designation of German POWs as  'Disarmed Enemy Forces' or 'Surrendered Enemy Personnel', so that the Americans could deny the Germans (who observed the Geneva Convention) Geneva Convention rights, and so that the Americans could deliberately abuse, starve, and murder German POWs who were murdered en masse on the banks of the Rhine, in the heart of Europe, while survivors (including civilians) were enslaved and used as slave labour abroad for many years.

This dodgy US attitude to law has applied to CIA torture, CIA kidnappings, US incarceration, US invasions, US orchestrated coups etc, the Illegal bombing of Serbia, illegal invasion of Iraq.  The list is endless.

Redefining the legal arena to suit the American empire's agenda is nothing for the US oligarchy's government servants:  they are the masters of lawlessness, deceit and hypocrisy.  

Law and honourable conduct means nothing to them.  So all this discussion about 'rights', 'Enlightenment' and other bullsh*t is a waste of breath. 
We're all doomed and the destruction and enslavement of the European people has been in progress for hundreds of years. ]

Alexandria, Virginia
-- suburb of Washington DC
-- at centre of US attempt to impose jurisdiction on other countries
-- Alexandria =  highest density of government employees across the country
-- Grand Jury meets there once a month to advance case against WikiLeaks
-- jurors - chosen from employees of:
    -- Dept Homeland Security
    -- CIA
    -- Air Force
    -- National security Agency
    -- + other agencies
-- through legal manoeuvres ensure that grand jury national security take the case

    -- likewise re CIA Jefferey Sterling, who allegedly leaked info to reporter from NY Times (James Risen)
    -- re CIA program:  Operation Merlin
    -- not residents of Virginia
    -- so US govt ordered an Amazon shipment of the book that the NY Times reporter had written
    -- containing info re CIA / Sterling
    -- to be sent to Alexandria
    -- on receipt of shipment, US govt claimed 'mail fraud' (re confidentiality contract signed by Sterling)
-- through these legal manoeuvres, there is 67 nationalities being tried in Alexandria
-- eg. Kim Dotcom, Megaupload, alleged piracy
-- Kim Dotcom resides and works in New Zealand
-- the site is registered in Hong Kong
-- it has nothing to to with USA or Virginia, except that the owners of the copyright (Universal) are US-based

Concept of Universal Justice
-- New generation of capital offences re universal justice should include crimes that produce disasters
-- & economic offences linked to crimes against humanity envisaged by some.
-- Should cybercrimes committed by countries, corporations or individuals be included?

-- concept of universal justice can collapse if you use it as a defence for all human rights violations

Freedom of Expression
-- thin is the line between diplomacy and espionage
-- thin line between journalism and terrorism
-- interviewer suggests
-- what is impact of 'war on terror' / war against supranational orgs such as al-Qaeda & Islamic State
-- on freedom of impression?
-- how has it affected freedom of expression from tech aspect?

Targeted Killings:

-- Britain has launched first drone attacks in Syria
-- these are targeted killings
-- targeted killings against own citizens (2 or 3 British citizens killed)
-- blacklist of x5 British citizens to be killed
-- argument that killings justified under law b/c citizens participate in conspiracies against Britain
-- however, the targets of killings are in Syria & must project force to UK to carry out terrorist attacks in UK
-- by going to UK
-- those at the border can be stopped
-- those within the borders can be arrested
-- as long as communications are intercepted
-- but by killing targets, communication is interrupted
-- agents of Islamic State remain in UK without being detected
-- justification for killing in Syria is weak
-- if there is a plot, arrests should be made
-- continued communications enables identification of conspirators etc
-- GCHQ very advanced & control all communications leaving UK
-- GCHQ should be able to use that info to thwart plots
-- it is instead using secret lists of murders with:
    -- no trial
    -- no way to know if one is listed
-- Obama's policy of targeted killings has expanded to UK
-- it will soon be on the intel wishlist of New Zealand, Australia & others
-- also disturbing:  Sweden + Germany have representatives on the committee for targeted killings of USA
-- Sweden is happy with their participation
-- Germany claims USA pressure to join committee  concern re legalitiy

Universal Jurisdiction
-- International Criminal Court (in theory) very important instrument
-- entire chapter in 'The WikiLeaks Files' re USA seeking to undermine & marginalise ICC
-- Bill Clinton accepted (with many reservations) to be part of ICC
-- tried to sell idea of security council to have control over court, but failed
-- USA began strong campaign against ICC
-- agreements of Chapter 97 deals with range of countries
-- had other nations signing guarantee NEVER TO SEND US CITIZENS to ICC
-- USA got several countries to sign these agreements through:  sanctions & incentives
-- Obama was more subtle, but followed same path
-- result:  only citizens of African countries tried by ICC
-- Palestine has now joined ICC, despite strong campaign against this
-- strength of campaign demonstrates fear of ICC
-- therefore, even the remote threat of prosecution at ICC provokes extraordinary effort to eliminate possibility
-- merit in universal jurisdiction = change of behaviour even if threat of being judged remote
[comment:  I don't think so ... it's business as usual, combined with sanctions and threats + threat of military intervention if anyone stands in the way of the Western oligarchy's geopolitical aims and crimes.

The only behaviour that alters is the defensive behaviour of the criminal state, to ensure that the American empire and that its off-sider, Israel, are not held to account -- however remote the possibility.

Therefore, like all (false) universal doctrines, it is just another tool for the Western oligarchy to actually further their own political aims.]

War Crimes Exposed:

-- WikiLeaks has shown war crimes in Iraq & Afghanistan re:
    -- torture
    -- killings of civilians
-- but US govt did not investigate any cases
-- instead, USA investigated the source of information (Manning) & that source was sentenced to 35 years in prison
-- John Kiriakou, former CIA agent who leaked waterboarding interrogations by CIA info
-- tried & spent 2 years in prison
-- Kiriakou the only person who was tried:  
-- nobody was judged by what Kiriakou denounced

US Trade Agreements:

-- US to leave World Trade Org as effective tool to regulate international financial exchanges
-- US creating different mechanisms at great speed
-- to encircle China GEOGRAPHICALLY + LEGALLY with new trade bloc
-- building block is most significant since creation of European Union geopolitical event
-- 52 countries represent:
    -- two-thirds of global GDP
    -- 2.6 billion people
    -- new legal system, aggressively covering main issues:
        -- economy
        -- property
        -- internet
        -- corporate structures
        -- property rights for corporations
        -- transportation
       
    *but does not cover idea of human rights
    *lacks Enlightenment values
    *does not contemplate a Court of Human Rights & European Union
   
    = broader and more ambitious,  more comprehensive legal relations + economic restructuring ever attempted
   
-- represents opportunity to incorporate human rights into instruments, given sufficient political strength

Argentina
-- ambassador London, Alicia Castro
-- supportive of Assange

Assange
-- basic political philosophy
-- when a group of people or a nation has no bargaining power
-- it has no freedom to choose
-- this leads to unfair situations
-- ability to choose makes world more honest
-- eg. choose b/w one political party or another / ability to negotiate with another nation etc.
-- in terms of education, choice is available as result of explosion of freedom of expression
-- re writings about what world is & what it may be in globalisation
-- interactive dance between states, jurisdictions & power groups allows those who have been harmed to chose otherwise
-- law of supply & demand & that freedom is what makes the world more honest, beyond political system or legal system

[comment:  I'm not convinced. 

All political parties serve the same master & pitch for votes from the same gullible and indoctrinated audience.

The ability to chose is an illusion, especially given (a) power of corporations and (b) power of hidden interests at play behind the scenes, serving corporate & other elite interests (see PM Whitlam removal etc).
Look at the Europeans who do not want their societies destroyed by mass immigration.
THE ONLY GUARANTEE OF FREEDOM
& THE ABILITY TO SAY 'NO'
IS THE ABILITY TO SAY 'NO' MILITARILY

eg.  Novorossiya

guns & tanks
+ courage
+ willingness to die
+ willingness to kill

to ensure
+ manifestation
+ defence
of one's choice

Western plebs don't have access to arms or access to meaningful choice.]
-----------------------------------

COMMENT

Must have had this article in my drafts for ages & I've somehow  accidentally published it when I was last on here, while cleaning up what had become a massive collection of draft posts.

Getting into this article was a bit of a chore at first.  I couldn't remember what it was about or why I might have set it aside.  Also, I'm not that focused at the moment, so even skimming the material didn't help me quickly get to grips with it.

Doing my little summary helped me understand (or I think it did ... lol).

Anyway, the comments are my take.  I'm obviously no humanitarian and I'm not opposed to nationalism, so my outlook is entirely different to that of Assange.

While I'm a supporter of freedom of information, I'm not a supporter of mass population movement or of anything that threatens the integrity of European identity or European soil.

No other consideration comes before the preservation of Europe and what is European.  None whatsoever.  Nothing.  Zilch.

No idealistic, universalist 'humanitarian' cause warrants the destruction of Europe.  And the destruction of Europe is the antithesis of 'humanitarianism', if you stop to think about it.

The universalist ideology and agenda is detrimental to European nations and is an entirely illegitimate doctrine that is being imposed on Europeans, who are at risk.

There is a vast difference between a nation choosing to grant political asylum to the occasional individual from another society, to opening its borders to mass population movement that is, in fact, invasion.






Principle
of
UNIVERSAL CHAOS

Debrecen, Hungary

Third World Invasion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhZeHEOovLk

October 19, 2015

No Nuremberg for Anglo-American War Criminals

Article
SOURCE
as indicated


http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/10/18/433878/Tony-Blair-Bush-Iraq-war-
Bush, Blair plotted Iraq war 1 year before invasion had started: White House memo

Sun Oct 18, 2015 12:54AM

A damning White House memo has revealed details of the so-called “deal in blood” forged by former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and US President George W. Bush over the Iraq war.

The document, titled “Secret... Memorandum for the President”, was sent by then-US Secretary of State Colin Powell to President Bush on March 28, 2002, a week before Bush’s summit with Blair at his Crawford ranch in Texas, Britain’s Daily Mail reported on Sunday.

The sensational memo revealed that Blair had agreed to support the war a year before the invasion even started, while publicly the British prime minister was working to find a diplomatic solution to the crisis.

The document also disclosed that Blair agreed to act as a spin doctor for Bush and convince a skeptical public that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein had Weapons of Mass Destruction, which actually did not exist.

In response, Bush would flatter Blair and give the impression that London was not Washington’s poodle but an equal partner in the “special relationship.”

Powell told Bush that Blair “will be with us” on the Iraq war, and assured the president that “"the UK will follow our lead in the Middle East.
In November 2002, US President George W. Bush and Secretary of State Colin Powell applaud at a summit in Prague. Between them is National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, to their right, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. (Reuters photo)
Another sensational memo revealed how Bush used “spies” in the British Labour Party to help him to influence public opinion in the United Kingdom in favor of the Iraq war.

Both documents were obtained and published by The Mail on Sunday. They are part of a number of classified emails stored on the private server of former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton which courts have forced her to reveal.

Blair has always denied the claim that he and Bush signed a deal “in blood” at Crawford to launch a war against Iraq that began on March 20, 2003, that has killed hundreds of thousands of people.

The Powell memo, however, showed how Blair and Bush secretly prepared the Iraq war plot behind closed doors at Crawford.

Powell told Bush: “He will present to you the strategic, tactical and public affairs lines that he believes will strengthen global support for our common cause.”

The top US diplomatic official added that the UK premier has the presentational skills to “make a credible public case on current Iraqi threats to international peace.”

Powell wrote that Blair will “stick with us on the big issues” but he needs to show the British public that “Britain and America are truly equal partners in the special relationship.” 
In March 2003, the US and Britain invaded Iraq in blatant violation of international law and under the pretext of finding WMDs; but no such weapons were ever discovered in Iraq.

More than one million Iraqis were killed as the result of the US-led invasion, and subsequent occupation of the country, according to the California-based investigative organization Project Censored.

The US war in Iraq cost American taxpayers $1.7 trillion with an additional $490 billion in benefits owed to war veterans, expenses that could grow to more than $6 trillion over the next four decades counting interest, according to a study called Costs of War Project by the Watson Institute for International Studies at Brown University.
http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/10/18/433878/Tony-Blair-Bush-Iraq-war-


http://www.globalresearch.ca/kuala-lumpur-war-crimes-tribunal-bush-convicted-in-absentia-it-s-official-george-w-bush-is-a-war-criminal/30839
Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal. Bush Convicted in Absentia: IT’S OFFICIAL – George W Bush is a war criminal.
By Yvonne Ridley
Global Research, May 14, 2012
Foreign Policy Journal 14 May 2012
EXTRACT
In what is the first ever conviction of its kind anywhere in the world, the former US President and seven key members of his administration were today (Friday) found guilty of war crimes.

Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and their legal advisers Alberto Gonzales, David Addington, William Haynes, Jay Bybee and John Yoo were tried in absentia in Malaysia.

The trial held in Kuala Lumpur heard harrowing witness accounts from victims of torture who suffered at the hands of US soldiers and contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan.

They included testimony from British man Moazzam Begg, an ex-Guantanamo detainee and Iraqi woman Jameelah Abbas Hameedi who was tortured in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison.

At the end of the week-long hearing, the five-panel tribunal unanimously delivered guilty verdicts against Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and their key legal advisors who were all convicted as war criminals for torture and cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment.

Full transcripts of the charges, witness statements and other relevant material will now be sent to the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, as well as the United Nations and the Security Council.

The Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission is also asking that the names of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzales, Yoo, Bybee, Addington and Haynes be entered and included in the Commission’s Register of War Criminals for public record.

The tribunal is the initiative of Malaysia’s retired Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, who staunchly opposed the American-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.
FULL AT SOURCE
http://www.globalresearch.ca/kuala-lumpur-war-crimes-tribunal-bush-convicted-in-absentia-it-s-official-george-w-bush-is-a-war-criminal/30839

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2011/11/20111128105712109215.html
Kuala Lumpur tribunal: Bush and Blair guilty
A war crimes tribunal in Malaysia offers a devastating critique of international criminal law institutions today.

28 Nov 2011 13:37 GMT
Richard Falk

Richard Falk is Albert G Milbank Professor Emeritus of International Law at Princeton University and Research Fellow, Orfalea Center of Global Studies. He is also former UN Special Rapporteur on Palestinian human rights.
EXTRACTS
In Kuala Lumpur, after two years of investigation by the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission (KLWCC), a tribunal (the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal, or KLWCT) consisting of five judges with judicial and academic backgrounds reached a unanimous verdict that found George W Bush and Tony Blair guilty of crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, and genocide as a result of their roles in the Iraq War.

The proceedings took place over a four-day period from November 19-22, and included an opportunity for court-appointed defense counsel to offer the tribunal arguments and evidence on behalf of the absent defendants. They had been invited to offer their own defense or send a representative, but declined to do so.
...
Universal jurisdiction
The KLWCT did not occur entirely in a jurisprudential vacuum. It has long been acknowledged that domestic criminal courts can exercise universal jurisdiction for crimes of state wherever these may occur, although usually only if the accused individuals are physically present in the court.

The underlying legal theory is based on the recognition of the limited capacity of international criminal trials to impose accountability in a manner that is not entirely dictated by geopolitical priorities and reflective of a logic of impunity. In this regard, universal jurisdiction has the potential to treat equals equally, and is very threatening to the Kissingers and Rumsfelds of this world, who have curtailed their travel schedules. The United States and Israel have used their diplomatic leverage to roll back universal jurisdiction authority in Europe, especially in the United Kingdom and Belgium.
"War must be outlawed. That will have to be our struggle for now. We must struggle for justice and freedom from oppression, from economic hegemony. But we must remove the threat of war first. With this sword of Damocles hanging over our heads we can never succeed in advancing the interests of our countries.  War must therefore be made illegal. The enforcement of this must be by multilateral forces under the control of the United Nations. No single nation should be allowed to police the world, least of all to decide what action to take, [and] when."
Mahathir Mohamed
anti-war speech of February 24, 2003

...

In his 2007 statement, Mahathir promised that a future KLWCT would not, in his words, be "like the 'kangaroo court' that tried Saddam". Truly, the courtroom proceedings against Saddam Hussein was a sham trial excluding much relevant evidence, disallowing any meaningful defense, and culminating in a grotesque and discrediting execution.  ...
FULL AT SOURCE
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2011/11/20111128105712109215.html
---------------------- ꕤ ----------------------

COMMENT

When you don't know what's going on, the conviction for war crimes in absentia sounds vaguely amusing -- as if the Malaysians were off their heads and had gone rogue in deciding to convict such fine and upstanding Americans (and Blair) for war crimes.

It's only down the track that you learn that, yes, there really is grounds for such an outlandish-sounding conviction, as there is a convention against torture and against waging wars of aggression.

Yes, people were tortured and, yes, the Iraq invasion was illegal and was launched on false pretexts (WMDs).
So these government representatives are totally bent and criminal in their actions.

And, as time progresses, more information comes out supporting that ugly fact.  The latest is just more confirmation that these people and their governments really are criminals.

Germans were tried by the victors at Nuremberg and hanged for war crimes.

But there won't be any such trials for the Anglo-American war criminals.
________________

Wonder if those Clinton e-mails were meant to come out, to maybe influence elections.  As in, Bush is Republican and Clinton is Democrat.  So creating a situation (private server) where this information would be released could maybe have been deliberate to advantage the Democrats, I'm thinking.

Of course, I could be completely wrong.  lol