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. ⟴  

September 15, 2015

Legal Advice on Extra-Judicial Assassination Drone Strikes & How the British Establishment Works - Syria

Article
SOURCE
http://www.globalresearch.ca/i-can-reveal-the-legal-advice-on-drone-strikes-and-how-the-establishment-works/5475352


I Can Reveal the Legal Advice on Drone Strikes, and How the British Establishment Works
By Craig Murray
Global Research, September 11, 2015

Craig Murray 9 September 2015
Region: Europe, Middle East & North Africa
Theme: Law and Justice, Militarization and WMD
In-depth Report: PALESTINE
This may be the most important article I ever post, because it reveals perfectly how the Establishment works and how the Red Tories and Blue Tories contrive to give a false impression of democracy. It is information I can only give you because of my experience as an insider.

It is a definitive proof of the validity of the Chomskian propaganda model. It needs a fair bit of detail to do this, but please try and read through it because it really is very, very important. After you have finished, if you agree with me about the significance, please repost, (you are free to copy), retweet, add to news aggregators (Reddit etc) and do anything you can to get other people to pay attention.

The government based its decision to execute by drone two British men in Syria on “Legal Opinion” from the Attorney-General for England and Wales, Jeremy Wright, a politician, MP and Cabinet Minister. But Wright’s legal knowledge comes from an undistinguished first degree from Exeter and a short career as a criminal defence barrister in Birmingham. His knowledge of public international law is virtually nil.

I pause briefly to note that there is no pretence of consulting the Scottish legal system. The only legal opinion is from the Attorney General for England and Wales who is also Honorary Advocate General for Northern Ireland.

So Jeremy Wright’s role is as a cypher. He performs a charade. The government employs in the FCO a dozen of the most distinguished public international lawyers in the world. When the Attorney-General’s office needs an Opinion on public international law, they ask the FCO to provide it for him to sign.

The only known occasion when this did not happen was the Iraq War. Then the FCO Legal Advisers – unanimously – advised the Attorney-General, Lord Goldsmith, that to invade Iraq was illegal. Jack Straw asked the Attorney General to dismiss the FCO chief Legal Adviser, Sir Michael Wood (Goldsmith refused). Blair sent Goldsmith to Washington where the Opinion was written for him to sign by George Bush’s lawyers. [I know this sounds incredible, but it is absolutely true]. Sir Michael Wood’s deputy, Elizabeth Wilmshurst, resigned in protest.

In consequence Blair and Straw decided that, again for the first time ever, the FCO’s chief legal adviser had to be appointed not from within the FCO legal advisers, who had all declared the war on Iraq to be illegal, but from outside. They had to find a distinguished public international lawyer who was prepared to argue that the war on Iraq had been legal. That was a very small field. Blair and Straw thus turned to Benjamin Netanyahu’s favourite lawyer, Daniel Bethlehem.

Daniel Bethlehem had represented Israel before the Mitchell Inquiry into violence against the people of Gaza, arguing that it was all legitimate self-defence. He had also supplied the Government of Israel with a Legal Opinion that the vast Wall they were building in illegally occupied land, surrounding and isolating all the major Palestinian communities and turning them into large prisons, was also legal. Daniel Bethlehem is an extreme Zionist militarist of the most aggressive kind, and close to Mark Regev, Israel’s new Ambassador to the UK.

Daniel Bethlehem had developed, in his work for Israel, an extremist doctrine of the right of States to use pre-emptive self-defence – a doctrine which would not be accepted by the vast majority of public international lawyers. He clinched his appointment by Blair as the FCO chief legal adviser by presenting a memorandum to the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee in 2004 outlining this doctrine, and thus de facto defending the attack on Iraq and the Bush/Blair doctrine.

A key sentence of Daniel Bethlehem’s memorandum is this

    It must be right that states are able to act in self-defence in circumstances where there is evidence of further imminent attacks by terrorist groups, even if there is no specific evidence of where such an attack will take place or of the precise nature of the attack.

There is a fundamental flaw in this argument. How can you be certain that an attack in “imminent”, if you are not certain where or what it is? Even if we can wildly imagine a scenario where the government know of an “imminent” attack, but not where or what it is, how could killing someone in Syria stop the attack in the UK? If a team were active, armed and in course of operation in the UK – which is needed for “imminent” – how would killing an individual in Syria prevent them from going through with it? It simply does not add up as a practical scenario.

Interestingly, Daniel Bethlehem does not pretend this is accepted international law, but specifically states that
    The concept of what constitutes an “imminent” armed attack will develop to meet new circumstances and new threats  [EDIT:  ie ARBITRARY]

Bethlehem is attempting to develop the concept of imminent” beyond any natural interpretation of the word “imminent”.

Daniel Bethlehem left the FCO in 2011. But he had firmly set the British government doctrine on this issue, while all FCO legal advisers know not to follow it gets you sacked. I can guarantee you that Wright’s Legal Opinion states precisely the same argument that David Bethlehem stated in his 2004 memorandum. Knowing how these things work, I am prepared to wager every penny I own that much of the language is identical.

It was New Labour, the Red Tories, who appointed Daniel Bethlehem, and they appointed him precisely in order to establish this doctrine. It is therefore a stunning illustration of how the system works, that the only response of the official “opposition” to these extrajudicial executions is to demand to see the Legal Opinion, when it comes from the man they themselves appointed. The Red Tories appointed him precisely because they knew what Legal Opinion would be given on this specific subject. They can read it in Hansard.

So it is all a charade.

Jeremy Wright pretends to give a Legal Opinion, actually from FCO legal advisers based on the “Bethlehem Doctrine”. The Labour Party pretends, very unconvincingly, to be an opposition.
The Guardian, apparently the leading “opposition” intellectual paper, publishes articles by its staff neo-con propagandists Joshua Rozenberg (married to Melanie Phillips) and Rafael Behr strongly supporting the government’s new powers of extrajudicial execution. In summer 2012 Joshua Rozenberg presented a programme on BBC Radio 4 entitled “Secret courts, drones and international law” which consisted mostly of a fawning interview with … Daniel Bethlehem. The BBC and Sky News give us wall to wall justification of the killings.

So the state, with its neo-con “opposition” and media closely in step with its neo-con government, seamlessly adopts a new power to kill its own subjects based on secret intelligence and secret legal advice, and a very weird definition of “imminent” that even its author admits to be outside current legal understanding.

That is how the state works. I do hope you find that helpful.

This article has been updated to reflect the fact the Daniel Bethlehem is now retired from the FCO.

SOURCE
http://www.globalresearch.ca/i-can-reveal-the-legal-advice-on-drone-strikes-and-how-the-establishment-works/5475352

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

SUMMARY

'Red Tories'
= British Labour Party - aka 'New Labour'

'Blue Tories'
= British Conservatives - ie the Tories

Subject
= extra-judicial drone killings / extra-judicial assassinations

region
= Syria

legal opinion
= bollocks

state
=  law unto itself / making it up as it goes / arbitrary definition etc

dissenters - ie legal dissenters
=  threat of being fired

Jeremy Wright 'Legal Opinion'
= charade

FCO
= Foreign & Commonwealth Office
| Link | here


FCO *UNANIMOUSLY*
Advised:  ILLEGAL to INVADE IRAQ
advised:  British Attorney-General, Lord Goldsmith
Lord Goldsmith
= Peter Goldsmith (Baron Goldsmith)
= barrister & attorney-general
= announced resignation same day as Tony BLAIR stepped down
= currently works in private capacity
Link | here

Jack STRAW
Sought Attorney-General, Lord Goldsmith
dismissal of FCO chief Legal Adviser, Sir Michael Wood

Jack STRAW
  • Anglican
  • Labour
  • Cabinet - Gordon govt
  • Cabinet - Blair govt
Cabinet = 1997-2010
    *Home Secretary - internal affairs; immigration
    *Foreign Secretary - foreign relations & intelligence

    Attorney-General, Lord Goldsmith
    = refused to fire:  FCO chief Legal Adviser, Sir Michael Wood

    Tony Blair
    = Sent Goldsmith Washington

    George Bush lawyers
    = write 'legal opinion'
    = for Lord Goldsmith, British Attorney-General to SIGN

    Elizabeth Wilmshurst
    Deputy
    of Sir Michael Wood (ie the FCO chief Legal Adviser)
    = RESIGNS in protest

    As result:
    Jack STRAW + Tony BLAIR
    • decide to break with tradition
    • for first time EVER
    • FCO chief adviser to be appointed from OUTSIDE the FCO
    • (not from the FCO legal advisers, who had ALL declared war on IRAQ to be illegal)
    Jack STRAW + Tony BLAIR
    turn to:

    DANIEL BETHLEHEM
    Benjamin Netanyahu 'favourite lawyer'

    DANIEL BETHLEHEM
    = extreme Zionist militarist
    = extremist pre-emptive 'self-defence' doctrine
    = such pre-emptive doctrine:
    not accepted by vast majority of international lawyers

    DANIEL BETHLEHEM
    = legal opinion that legal to build Wall built
    = on ILLEGALLY OCCUPIED LAND
    (surrounding& isolating all major Palestinian communities & turning them into large prisons)
    DANIEL BETHLEHEM
    = close to:  MARK REGEV Israel new Ambassador to UK

    DOCTRINE
    Daniel Bethlehem developed in work for Israel
    = right of STATES to use PRE-EMPTIVE 'self-defence'

    DANIEL BETHLEHEM
    = de facto defended attack on IRAQ & the BUSH-BLAIR DOCTRINE
    (previously written by BUSH admin lawyers for  Peter Goldsmith, Attorney-General, Britain)

    KEY to DANIEL BETHLEHEM DOCTRINE
    • - STATES
    • - 'self-defence'
    • - 'further imminent attacks'
    • - 'IMMINENT' 
    [arbitrary & accepted on the go to fit whatever circumstances develop as 'new']
    • - no specific EVIDENCE
    • - no precise NATURE of attack
    RESULT
      • no EVIDENCE required
      • arbitrary: make up definitions, as you will
      • Stretch definition of 'imminent' threat
      • legalise state extra-judiciary assassinations

    DANIEL BETHLEHEM
    = was appointed to FCO
    = by Jack STRAW & John BLAIR


    DANIEL BETHLEHEM
    =  leaves FCO, 2011

    Britain's BETHLEHEM DOCTRINE
    = firmly set British government doctrine
    = all FCO legal advisers know to follow it or get sacked

    JEREMY WRIGHT
    = legal opinion PRECISELY SAME as DANIEL BETHLEHEM legal opinion

    BETHLEHEM DOCTRINE
    = not even accepted under international law
    = what constitutes 'imminent armed attack' is arbitrary

    *BETHLEHEM DOCTRINE attempts to "develop the concept of 'imminent' beyond natural interpretation of word"

    DANIEL BETHLEHEM
    = was appointed by New Labour (Red Tories) - ie Labour Party, UK
    = appointed PRECISELY because they knew WHAT legal opinion would be given

    JEREMY WRIGHT
    = pretends to give legal opinion
    = ACTUALLY from FCO legal advisers, 
    BASED on BETHLEHEM DOCTRINE

    Labour Party UK ... 
    PRETENDS to be in 'opposition'


    Meanwhile:

    PRESS | MEDIA
    IN DEMOCRACY

    'OPPOSITION' PRESS
    THE GUARDIAN
    = 'opposition' intellectual press outlet
    = publishes articles by "its staff neo-con propagandists" 
    [see propagandists]
    = strongly SUPPORT govt
    NEW POWERS OF EXTRA-JUDICIAL EXECUTION
    OTHER PRESS
    BBC
    =  wall-to-wall justification broadcast, for extra-judicial killings

    Sky News
    =  wall-to-wall justification broadcast, for extra-judicial killings

    MURRAY’S CONCLUSION

    MEDIA 

    >   closely in step with its neo-con government
    =   seamlessly adopts new power kill state subjects
    =   based on secret intel & secret legal advice






    Assange
    Transnational Security Elite,
    Carving Up the World Using Your Tax Money

    London 
    OCT8 Antiwar Mass Assembly (2011)
    Link  |  here








    No comments: