Iraq Invasion 2003 - Aussies US-Anglo Capitalist Puppets

US-ANGLO CAPITALIST AUSSIE PUPPETS IRAQ INVASION 2003 CHILCOT REPORT WAR CRIMINALS https://youtu.be/HP55OMZbM6Y Press TV (Mahi Ramakrishnan) - LINK | Source "The judges in the verdict said that that the United States, under the leadership of Bush, forged documents to 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." Press TV (Mahi Ramakrishnan) LINK | Source COMMENT 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. Hague Invasion Act Human Rights Watch | 2002  http://archive.is/OXr7k "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. " Human Rights Watch | 2002  http://archive.is/OXr7k Press TV Thu Jul 7, 2016 6:2AM A former Australian army chief has warned Canberra against “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 investigate Britain’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 were killed 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. According to the Australian constitution, the government does not require a permission from the country’s parliament to declare war. http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2016/07/07/473989/Australia-Peter-Leahy-Iraq-War-US-Chilcot-Inquiry 2011 - Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia War Crimes Tribunal BUSH & BLAIR WAR CRIMINALS tribunal found former US President George W Bush former British PM Tony Blair GUILTY of crimes against humanity LINK | here WikiLeaks | Assange [RIGHT-CLICK IMAGE & 'NEW TAB'] WikiLeaks | Assange FCO & MI6 BRITISH INTELLIGENCE Source | @WikiLeaks FREE ASSANGE SAVE JULIAN ASSANGE Saddam Hussein Iraq government described as: "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." SIGNED: JOHN SAWERS SENT BY CAIRO ON 21-02-2002 09:52 RECEIVED BY NO 10 ON 21-02-2002 22:07 http://www.iraqinquiry.org.uk/media/210163/2002-02-21-teleletter-sawers-to-jay-iraq-policy.pdf 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 to Egypt 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 JOHN SAWERS, MI6 WikiLeaks | Assange Chilcot Report Rigging Plan Source | @WikiLeaks COMMENT 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. SAVE JULIAN ASSANGE WikiLeaks | Assange @WikiLeaks AUSSIE SUPPORTER DICK SMITH | AUDIO Dick Smith Takes On Sweden & US Empire LINK | here

Tyler Scott Drumheller - CIA Europe Division Station Chief - Exposed USG Lies re Iraq

Article SOURCE as marked https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/tyler-drumheller-cia-officer-who-exposed-us-reliance-on-discredited-iraq-source-curveball-dies-at-63/2015/08/06/b45aeed2-3b99-11e5-b3ac-8a79bc44e5e2_story.html Tyler Drumheller, CIA officer who exposed U.S. reliance on discredited Iraq source ‘Curveball,’ dies at 63 [Veteran CIA officer Tyler Drumheller on “60 Minutes” in 2007. (Courtesy of CBS)]   By Greg Miller August 6, 2015 Tyler S. Drumheller, a high-level CIA officer who publicly battled agency leaders over one of the most outlandish claims in the U.S. case for war with Iraq, died Aug. 2 at a hospital in Fairfax County. He was 63. The cause was complications from pancreatic cancer, said his wife, Linda Drumheller. Mr. Drumheller held posts in Africa and Europe over a 26-year career during which the CIA’s focus shifted from the Cold War to terrorist threats. He rose to prominent positions at CIA headquarters, serving as chief of the European division at a time when the agency was abducting al-Qaeda suspects on the continent and U.S. allies there faced a wave of terrorist plots. But he was best known publicly for his role in exposing the extent to which a key part of the administration’s case for war with Iraq had been built on the claims of an Iraqi defector and serial fabricator with the fitting code name “Curveball.” In contrast to Hollywood’s depiction of spies as impossibly elegant and acrobatic, Mr. Drumheller was a bulky, rumpled figure who often seemed oblivious to the tufts of dog hair on his clothes. “I always thought of him as an overfed George Smiley,” said Bill Murray, a former CIA colleague, referring to the character in John le Carré spy novels known for his espionage acumen but unassuming appearance. Mr. Drumheller spent the bulk of his career as an undercover officer seeking to avoid public attention. But after retiring in 2005, he emerged as a vocal critic of the George W. Bush administration’s use of deeply flawed intelligence to build support for its decision to invade Iraq in 2003. Curveball, who had defected to Germany in the late 1990s, was the primary source behind the administration’s assertions that Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq had developed biological weapons laboratories — lethal germ factories supposedly built on wheels or rails to evade detection. The claim was included in Bush’s 2003 State of the Union speech as well as then-Secretary of State Colin Powell’s presentation to the United Nations designed to marshal international support for intervention in Iraq. Mr. Drumheller later came forward to say that he had learned early on that German authorities had grave doubts about Curveball’s credibility. In his book “On the Brink” (2006), written with Elaine Monaghan, he recounted the Curveball debacle in detail, noting that his German counterpart had cautioned that Curveball “could be a fabricator. He’s a very erratic character.” Mr. Drumheller said he relayed that warning to top CIA officials, and even attempted to strike the language on mobile labs from an early draft of Powell’s speech, only to be stunned to learn that the text was subsequently restored. In “On the Brink,” Mr. Drum-heller described feeling his “heart sinking” as he watched Powell’s speech. “We had failed,” he wrote. “It was bad enough that we had not prevented the Sept. 11 attacks and we were being blamed for that. Now the nation was about to embark on a war based on intelligence I knew was false, and we would surely be blamed for that, too.” A scathing 2005 report on the intelligence failures in Iraq did not mention Mr. Drumheller by name but concluded that officials in the agency’s European division had “expressed serious concerns about Curveball’s reliability to senior officials at the CIA,” and that the warnings were inexplicably dismissed. The allegation touched off a bitter feud. When then-CIA Director George J. Tenet denied that he had ever been warned about Curveball, Mr. Drumheller fought back in public, saying that “everyone in the chain of command knew exactly what was happening.” Mr. Drumheller was widely quoted in news accounts and appeared on the CBS program “60 Minutes.” No mobile germ warfare labs were found, and the defector, Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi, has since admitted that the story was a fiction he fed to German intelligence while seeking asylum. The blow-up over Curveball coincided with Mr. Drumheller’s retirement from the CIA. “I think he was really proud of standing up against the war,” Linda Drumheller said in an interview. “That was his personal greatest achievement.” The son of an Air Force chaplain, Tyler Scott Drumheller was born in Biloxi, Miss., on April 12, 1952. He spent part of his childhood in Germany before attending the University of Virginia. He graduated in 1974 with a history degree and did postgraduate work in Chinese at Georgetown University before being hired by the CIA in 1979. He met Linda Blocher while she was working at the spy agency as a secretary in the Africa division, and proposed to her in a stairwell at CIA headquarters after learning that he would soon be sent to Zambia. It was the first in a series of stops for the couple that would also include South Africa, Portugal, Germany and Austria. Two and sometimes three pet dogs accompanied every move. ... Mr. Drumheller’s affable manner made it easy for him to form lasting connections with people throughout his career, Linda Drumheller said. He also had a prodigious memory, she said, that enabled him to keep track of cryptonyms, children’s birthdays and Detroit Tigers statistics. Mr. Drumheller “understood human nature,” Murray said. “Beneath that pleasant and fun kind of personality, he understood exactly what people were and what he was dealing with. Good or bad.” Mr. Drumheller had retained a young CIA recruit’s enthusiasm for much of his career. But he seemed to grow tired of the internal conflicts after the Sept. 11 attacks. In his memoir, he wrote that in retirement he asked to have his Distinguished Career Intelligence medal delivered by mail rather than returning to headquarters for a ceremony. When the envelope arrived, he wrote, “I opened it up and fell into a bit of a reverie, reflecting on my career and the years past, the successes and the friends gained, the colleagues lost and the mistakes made.” Greg Miller covers intelligence agencies and terrorism for The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/tyler-drumheller-cia-officer-who-exposed-us-reliance-on-discredited-iraq-source-curveball-dies-at-63/2015/08/06/b45aeed2-3b99-11e5-b3ac-8a79bc44e5e2_story.html -------/\/\/ SUMMARY source http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/01/01/286004/-Book-Review-Tyler-Drumheller-rsquo-s-ldquo-On-the-Brink-rdquo Illegal War on Iraq Following appointed to investigate "what went wrong with the intelligence gathering/application pre-invasion" of Iraq: Senate Intel Committee Robb-Silbermann Commission yet the White House was given a 'clean bill of health' -- re distortion of intel & misleading the nation re 'weapons of mass destruction' in Iraq -- despite Drumheller account indicating that White House:     -- politicised Iraq intelligence     -- cherry-picked Iraq intelligence -- and none of this was recorded in the commissioned reports -- nor was it mentioned: -- White House ignored a CIA key informant in Iraqi govt -- who informed the US that there were no active weapons programs -- even though Drumheller was interviewed by:     -- Robb-Silbermann Commission - three (3) times     -- Senate Select Committee on Intelligence - two (2) times -- the what-went-wrong re Iraq invasion reports were dishonest -- Drumheller's account was not included in these reports -- Josh Marshall:  speaks volumes re agenda of writers of such reports -- both Drumheller & his colleagues (presumably CIA?) in shock so little mention in reports -- Investigators re lead-up to Iraq: -- principal goal wasn't not covering up for the White House (Marshall concludes) Article goes on to discuss Drumheller book. Pre 9/11 -- US intel / securty agencies appear to have a vast amount of overlap of agency and of task -- jealous guarding of info -- either hoarded or forced each other -- stove-piping info - without verification stovepipe -- pathway for transmitting info higher in org. hierarchy while bypassing -- mid levels that remain uninformed re this info http://www.thefreedictionary.com/stovepipe LOL ... arguments CIA vs. Dept. Defence -- re 1.  verification of validity of source responsibilities 2.  who to analyse material & place into context "One group says: Hey, all we do is report info. We don’t guarantee the source or if it’s valid. Another group says: No, all we do is pass it along; it’s up to someone else to draw conclusions from it." [source] Post 9/11 & pre-Iraq Invasion: -- Bush admin cherry picks info -- takes from one source; ignores another -- re-using same info as if info provided by two separate sources -- no analysis in interim -- pre Iraq invasion even more layers bureaucracy, assistance + experts added -- but no clear hierarchy re channels of reporting or procedures for verification of sources Drumheller -- pro streamlined methods re info flow & decision making -- per tested methods of Cold War Drumheller discusses role USA shares with Western allies -- re growth of corrupt, oppressive govts. in Middle East -- as legacy of colonisation & of Cold War -- refers to USA having made a 'deal with the devil' to get support -- US & allied support of dictators & corrupt rulers -- to supposedly deal with "global threat posed by Soviet Union" -- ie pragmatic choice of USA, followed by FALLOUT -- fallout results from poor & disenfranchised being drawn to al-Qaeda -- & other radical orgs that offer "simple explanations" -- & ready villain:  USA & allies http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/01/01/286004/-Book-Review-Tyler-Drumheller-rsquo-s-ldquo-On-the-Brink-rdquo ---------------------- ---------------------- COMMENT -------/\/\/ Drumheller sounds really brainwashed about the nature of communism & Russians. / I think he has an enormous blind spot as far as US and US allies are concerned ... How can that be, after 26 years of service?  Doesn't he know he's dealing with a bunch of sociopaths and that the villain title is well-deserved? / and I think he under-estimates the dangers inherent in culture & ideology of the Middle East -------/\/\/ Found myself wondering if the 'war on terror' is even real, and if the entire thing isn't a series of false flag ops or something, to keep the CIA in funds post Cold War -- ie. to justify the existence of a massive agency etc. Look at the extremes they go to in Latin America, with the history of all the investment in undermining elected governments, funding opposition, non-stop interference, lies, deceiving the American public, manipulating the American media, crafting pretexts for aggression -- any excuses -- to back intervention and brutal take-over. Bet those pretexts would also include false flag ops.  So how would we ever know when it's a false flag op and when its genuine terrorist attacks? Sounds like the CIA isn't the big happy family I thought it might have been.  But that could be in the past.  Not sure. Wonder if any foreign agencies exploited that vulnerability?

USA - Rome Statute - ICC

ꕤ Info ROME STATUTE as marked USA & ISRAEL - 'UNSIGN' AS SIGNATORIES TO ROME STATUTE [Click on Image for Clear View, or link to article(s)] Jurist [Click on Image for Clear View, or link to article(s)] USA THREATENS MILITARY FORCE IF USA BROUGHT BEFORE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT American Free Press [Click on Image for Clear View, or link to article(s)] American Free Press [Click on Image for Clear View, or link to article(s)] US-NATO / CIA PROPAGANDA SELLING AFGHANISTAN WAR USA UNSIGNING ROME STATUTE USA THREATENING MILITARY ACTION RE BRINGING USA BEFORE ICC CIA PROPAGANDA & MEDIA CONTROL - GENERAL Page | Link ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT As at 2015, USA is not party to the Rome Statute (nor is Israel ... and some others). However, both USA and Israel were parties to the Rome Statute, but both 'unsigned' themselves -- in the US case, by the Bush-Cheney administration in 2002 (post invasion of Afghanistan, and just prior to illegal invasion of Iraq). I'd forgotten that the US has threatened to USE FORCE if its citizens were brought before the International Criminal Court (ICC), per the Rome Statute. How shady is this?   And how hypocritical is it to then expect (and lobby) to bring other states before the ICC for war crimes prosecution?  Especially states targeted for regime change:  Libya and Syria. -------/\/\/ Edit  |  March 2016: In the lead-up to the establishment of the ICC, USA signed up to the ICC just before the December 2000 deadline: -- to ensure that it would be a State party to the agreement -- that could participate in DECISION-MAKING on how the Court works To make certain it would remain immune to prosecution: Washington began to negotiate bilateral agreements with other countries, insuring immunity of US nationals from prosecution by the Court. As leverage, Washington threatened termination of economic aid, withdrawal of military assistance, and other painful measures. Washington ... has no intention to join the ICC, due to its concern about possible charges against US nationals. https://www.globalpolicy.org/international-justice/the-international-criminal-court/us-opposition-to-the-icc.html 'Hague Invasion Act'  - Servicemembers Protection Act (ASPA) (2002)   In addition: US threatens military force if personnel held at The Hague: -- U.S. President George Bush -- 3 August, 2002, signs: -- Servicemembers Protection Act (ASPA) (2002) -- dubbed the 'Hague Invasion Act' -- because the law:     -- law authorises the use of US military force     -- to liberate any American or citizen of a US-allied country     -- being held by ICC in The Hague -- USA punishing those that ratify ICC treaty     -- Servicemembers Protection Act     -- provides for withdrawal of US military assistance     -- from countries ratifying the ICC treaty     -- reconstructs US participation in UN peacekeeping, unless US obtains immunity from prosecution     -- but provisions may be waived on 'national interests' grounds -- however, the US has written into law, the provision that the US may:     -- assist internationally to 'bring to justice' those accused of:         -- genocide;         -- war crimes;         -- crimes against humanity;     -- including assistance with efforts of ICC. *USA makes an exception of itself and its partners in crime. http://www.globalissues.org/article/490/united-states-and-the-icc [Think I might need to re-work this untidy post some time  :)  ] ꕤ

2010 - Obama & Bush - Geneva Conventions of 1949

ꕤ Article SOURCE http://foreignpolicy.com/2010/08/11/obama-bush-and-the-geneva-conventions/ http://foreignpolicy.com/2010/08/11/obama-bush-and-the-geneva-conventions/ SUMMARY - 2010 Article Geneva Conventions of 1949 -- international treaties -- x4 separate treaties -- first 3 agreements revised previous treaties -- ie.  dating from 1864, 1906 & 1929 -- humanitarian protections     - for sick or wounded soldiers on land     - sailors at sea     - prisoners of war -- 1949 - fourth agreement: protections for civilians in conflict zones Best known of agreements is:  Third Geneva Convention -- protections for those who qualify as Prisoners of War (POWs) -- USA long objected to certain provisions in First Protocol -- Second Protocol submitted to Senate 1987 -- *Senate DID NOT ACT ON IT -- Bush admin signed & ratified Third Protocol -- creating alternative protection symbol (Red Diamond) for countries -- primarily Israel, that do not use Red Cross or Red Crescent -- x4 1949 protocols = bedrock of international laws of war -- Geneva Conventions applied in:     - Korea     - Vietnam     - First Gulf Wars -- post 9-11, George W Bush admin decides Conventions do not apply to conflict with al Qaeda because al Qaeda not a party to the conventions -- determined that while Afghanistan was party to Conventions, Taliban were not entitled to POW protections -- Bush admin refusal to apply Geneva Conventions (& certain provisions of human rights treaties) condemned:  placing detainees into 'legal black hole'. -- 2006 Supreme Court - rejects Bush admin argument -- US Supreme Court held that EVEN IF Geneva Conventions did not apply in entirety:  COMMON ARTICLE 3 prohibits torture & inhuman or degrading treatment of detainees, including al-Qaeda detainees. -- Obama entered into pledge to restore US respect for international law. -- purportedly banned coercive interrogation methods (torture) -- rescinded Bush's interpretations of Common Article 3 -- 2009, Obama reaffirmed US commitment to "abide by the Geneva Conventions" in his Nobel Prize remarks -- but Obama admin had not as at 2010 applied Conventions as legal framework -- as at 2010 Obama admin held 100's of al-Qaeda & Taliban detainees -- as ENEMY COMBATANTS in Guantanamo & Afghanistan, but -- denied POW status per Third Convention -- denied civilian 'protected persons' status per Fourth Convention -- detainees denied minimum protections for detained persons -- per Article 75 of the First Protocol -- ie. to be told reasons for one's detention Article claims USA has been, for over 100 years, a respected leader in developing international laws of war & suggests USA should engage in dialogue to develop rules. http://foreignpolicy.com/2010/08/11/obama-bush-and-the-geneva-conventions/ ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT Found this an interesting article. [no time to check for typos properly] ꕤ

2011 - '$6.6billion of taxpayers' money sent to Iraq by Bush may have been STOLEN'

ꕤ Article SOURCE http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2003101/Missing-6-6billion-sent-George-W-Bush-aid-Iraq-stolen.html IRAQ GOLD DAILY MAIL - 2011 Revealed: How $6.6billion of taxpayers' money sent to Iraq by Bush may have been STOLEN By Paul Bentley for the Daily Mail Updated: 07:56 EST, 14 June 2011 It is thought to have been the biggest international cash airlift of all time, when $12billion in aid was flown by the Bush administration to postwar Iraq. And now, for the first time, investigators auditing the cash have admitted that more than half of that huge amount may have been stolen when it got there in 'the largest theft of funds in national history'. The Pentagon is finally closing the books on the reconstruction programme in Iraq but still cannot say what happened to $6.6billion of the money. The massive amount of taxpayers' money is the equivalent of the amount needed to run the Los Angeles Unified School District or the Chicago Public Schools for a year. In 2004, the U.S. sent $2.4billion in packaged bricks of $100 bills to Iraq in a giant C-130 Hercules cargo plane, followed by 20 other flights full of cash. The loss of $6.6billion in taxpayers' money is a continuous embarrassment to the Pentagon. Iraqi officials are also threatening legal action to reclaim the money, which came from seized Iraqi assets and Iraqi oil sales. Now, for the first time, rather than put the loss down to an error in accounting, investigators have suggested the cash may have been stolen on the ground. Stuart Bowen, special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, said the money could have gone missing in 'the largest theft of funds in national history', according to the Los Angeles Times. 'Congress is not looking forward to having to spend billions of our money to make up for billions of their money that we can't account for, and can't seem to find,' said Rep. Henry A. Waxman. In 2005, the committee charged that U.S. officials in Iraq 'used virtually no financial controls to account for these enormous cash withdrawals once they arrived in Iraq, and there is evidence of substantial waste, fraud and abuse in the actual spending and disbursement of the Iraqi funds.' It is thought that once the cash arrived in Iraq, officials stored the money in a basement vault in one of the palaces formerly owned by Saddam Hussein, before it was distributed to individual Iraqi ministries. There wasn't, however, the staff or time to keep proper financial controls and cash was stored in gunnysacks and thrown onto pickups when it was transported. While Pentagon officials claimed six years ago that they could account for the loss if given time to go through records, they have consistently failed in attempts. Iraq's chief auditor, Abdul Basit Turki Saeed, has warned the U.S. that it will be taken to court by Iraq to get the money back. Iraq's ambassador to the United States, Samir Sumaidaie, said: 'Clearly Iraq has an interest in looking after its assets and protecting them.' http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2003101/Missing-6-6billion-sent-George-W-Bush-aid-Iraq-stolen.html ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT Iraq was illegally invaded and attacked by America and its allies. Americans then seized Iraqi assets and oil sales. The US then issues Iraq with worthless paper money that's not backed by anything of value.  Printed paper money that represents debt (and inflation) currency to the US taxpayers (and profits to bankers). The worthless paper notes from the US are described as 'aid money', so the US bankers are LENDING the Iraqis the Monopoly money the US has printed, after the US stole real assets from Iraq in the first place ... having destroyed their country, so that it needs to be rebuilt.  And, once again, America's corporations and bankers profit. Americans then proceed to rob the Iraqis of $6.6-BILLION of the dodgy paper money 'aid,' having helped themselves to the nation's real wealth/assets and having destroyed Iraqi infrastructure etc. But it doesn't end there:  the average American is then left with the responsibility to pay off the $6.6-BILLION of the stolen US issued notes. Meanwhile, US bankers who profit from government issue currency (many times over) get profits minus responsibility for any of the liabilities.  Liabilities that are passed onto the economically enslaved taxpayer -- eg. liabilities like paying off that stolen $6.6-BILLION. That's probably how the Mafia conducts its affairs. And the CIA's probably used the missing $6.6-BILLION to fund its worldwide terrorist operations. ꕤ

Totalitarian American Domestic Surveillance

ꕤ Article SOURCE http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2015/12/02/the-spies-who-ruin-us/ December 2, 2015 By Judge Andrew Napolitano 'The Spies Who Ruin Us' SUMMARY Post 9/11 intelligence failure to protect: --> principle target 4th Amendment right to privacy -->  Patriot Act 2001 Unread & undebated legislation -->  US Congress unaware re liberties they were sacrificing --> US domestic spying unleashed USG secret mass data gathering + warrants not based on probable cause Lapsed law ... but: USA telecoms + Internet service providers to retain records for five (5) years --> NSA instant access. Patriot Act + USA Freedom Act: unconstitutionally do away with probable cause requirement for warrants USA Freedom Act warrants: unconstitutionally do away with probable cause requirement -->  based on standard of “govt'l needs” Reality:  “governmental needs” = no standard whatsoever, as USG will always claim that it needs what it wants. USG using same basis for warrants as British colonialists for raids that provoked Revolution & 4th Amendment. propaganda that NSA have been shut down is false / operate remotely --> telecoms & ISPs s.702 FISA & EO is valid s.702 FISA & Bush EO both bypass US Constitution & continue to permit mass #surveillance data collection s.702 FISA --> permits warrantless surveillance of Americans speaking to foreigners. --> FISA court issues warrants / intercept FISA court: --> issue warrants to intercept calls of third parties (to Americans speaking to foreigners) ... encompasses all. Bush Executive Order (EO) to military intelligence (NSA is one of more) --> to intercept calls of anyone - NO WARRANT. Andrew Napolitano asserts that secret USA spying: produces too much material for the government to evaluate / Paris failure eg. General warrants: =  hallmark of totalitarian government {article US example} http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2015/12/02/the-spies-who-ruin-us/ ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT Good overview. As Napolitano said, with all of France's surveillance capabilities (and infringements of civil liberties that accompany these capabilities), both France and America, who spy on France, missed the opportunity to prevent the Paris attacks -- because they are not conducting target-specific surveillance, and their manpower is bound up in blanket surveillance of entire populations. What goes on in the US pretty much goes on elsewhere.  The same principles apply, save for the lack of constitutional protections that are supposed to be in place for Americans. The mention of British colonialists raiding homes on basis of warrantless searches ahead of the American Revolution, is an interesting detail I wasn't aware of.  Ironically, what led to revolution and Fourth Amendment rights being enshrined in the American Constitution, is present day state totalitarianism being repeated by those that exercise behind-the-scenes control of the usurped American state. ꕤ

No Nuremberg for Anglo-American War Criminals

ꕤ 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 ꕤ