Illegitimate Transfer of Inalienable European Rights via Convention(s) & Supranational Bodies Establishment of Sovereignty-Usurping Supranational Body Dictatorships Enduring Program of DEMOGRAPHICS WAR on Europeans Enduring Program of PSYCHOLOGICAL WAR on Europeans Enduring Program of European Displacement, Dismemberment, Dispossession, & Dissolution
No wars or conditions abroad (& no domestic or global economic pretexts) justify government policy facilitating the invasion of ancestral European homelands, the rape of European women, the destruction of European societies, & the genocide of Europeans.
U.S. RULING OLIGARCHY WAGES HYBRID WAR TO SALVAGE HEGEMONY [LINK | Article]
Who's preaching world democracy, democracy, democracy? —Who wants to make free people free?
Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research.
-------/\/\/
WAR ON EUROPEANS
MIGRANT TSUNAMI 2013
Yes — 3 Years Ago
For f*ck's sake
https://youtu.be/bCK_m3ds1fU
-------/\/\/
WAR ON EUROPEANS
GERMANY
MIGRANT INVADER
OPEN THREATS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFb7cmFsPoc
-------/\/\/
WAR ON EUROPEANS
MIGRANT INVADER ATTACK 60 Minutes Crew In Sweden
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42jpuXJPk0w
-------/\/\/
WAR ON EUROPEANS EUROPEANS ATTACKED Location Unknown
Likely Calais, France
Red NPA flags:
The Left is the Enemy of Europeans
Nouveau Parti Anticapitaliste (NPA)
'New Anticapitalist Party' - France - (ATTACK VIDEO BELOW)
f. 2009 / far left
associated with postal worker Olivier Besancenot
middle-class 'commie'
*looks like they're trying to cover up their Trotskyism & their 'patriarchy theory'
-- opposing all forms of discrimination
-- aim to overthrow existing institutions eventually
-- LCR's distinctive identification with Trotskyism supposedly discontinued
-- patriarchy theory is not mentioned (as per earlier LCR documents)
-- active in various social movements
-- produce weekly newspaper: Tout est à nous!
-- ie. 'Everything is ours!'
-- same slogan shouted at rallies
-- 2010: hijab controversy - hijab-wearing 21-year old party candidate
-- headscarf: incompatible with feminism
-- choice of candidate considered: radical pragmatism
Putin Aide Details Russia's Gameplan Against the Empire The Empire's debt casino is unsustainable and the ruling oligarchy sees war as the only way to salvage their hegemony
Sergey Glaziev Subscribe to Sergey Glaziev
Thu, Mar 31, 2016
Originally appeared at Lenta.ru. Translated by Julia Rakhmetova and Rhod Mackenzie
The author is a prominent economist, advisor to the Russian President on regional economic integration, and the mind behind the Eurasian Economic Union
Is there any reason to expect the lifting of American sanctions?
The sanctions are an element of the hybrid war that the US is waging against us. They are doing this not because they do not like Russia’s ‘annexation’ of the Crimea, but because of the objective and subjective interests of the American establishment.
The US is losing its hegemony: it is already producing fewer products and exporting fewer technologies than China.China is also catching up with America in the number of scientists and engineers, and many innovative Chinese technologies are capturing world markets.China’s development rate is five times that of the US. The international system of economic entities recently set up in China exemplify the new world economic order.
The economic entities that dominate in the US, serving a financial oligarchy, have destabilized the American monetary and financial system, which defaults about twice a year. The causes of the global financial crisis of 2008 have not disappeared and the American debt bubble — financial pyramids composed of derivatives and the national debt —are still growing.
According to systems theory, this process cannot continue indefinitely. The American oligarchy is desperate to get rid of its debt burden, which is why it is conducting a hybrid war, not only against Russia, but against Europe and the Middle East.
As always happens in a changing world economic order, the country that is losing its leadership tries to unleash a world war for control over the periphery. Since Americans consider the former Soviet space to be their financial and economic periphery, they are trying to gain control over it.
The American political establishment has been brought up on the chimeras of nineteenth century geopoliticians. American students study basic English and German geopolitical ideas of that time in political science classes. The main question back then washow to ruin the Russian Empire, and they still look at the world through the eyes of the XIX century ‘hawks’,when Great Britain tried to save its hegemony by starting the First World War, then lost their colonial empire after the Second World War.
This is what American geopoliticians study in the State Department and the White House, continuing to look at the world through the prism of both the Cold War and British confrontations with Russia and Germany in the nineteenth century, and now the US is unleashing another world war.
The combination of the objective problems of the American financial oligarchy, and the strange mindset of American geopoliticiansthreatens a world conflict. This has nothing to do with the Crimea. Any reason will do.
We need to act in terms of the contradictions leading the US to an aggressive stance fraught with the risk of a hybrid war with the whole world. They have chosen Russia as their main objective, and the Ukraine, occupied by them, as their main means of destruction.
To survive under these conditions, maintain our sovereignty and develop our economy, we need to build a broad anti-military coalition, pursue our priority development strategy, recover our financial and economic sovereignty and pursue Eurasian integration.To prevent war, we need to realize the president’s goal of a common development area from Lisbon to Vladivostok. It is very important to convince our European partners as well as our partners in the Far East and in the South that we need to cooperate, not by blackmailing or threatening them, but through mutually beneficial projects, joining our economic potential while respecting the sovereignty of each state.
Can we mend relations with the EU and how
To mend cooperation with the European Union, we need to restore its sovereignty. The sight of European politicians among the crowd of Nazis at Euromaidan showed how much European political culture has degraded. The EU leaders are not independent; they are US puppets.
American media dominates Europe’s political space, embedding anti-Russian chimeras into people’ consciousness, intimidating them with a so-called Russian threat. Their politicians are forced to go with the media line provided by Washington in order to win votes. This has lead to the catastrophe we are watching today in Brussels and other European cities, which are gripped with fear as governments fail to provide security.
Unfortunately, the sovereignty of Europe cannot be restored just by booting up social consciousness. The problemsdid not appear out of the blue; they are theresult of the European political class abandoning its national interest.Europe is facing a very difficult period of transition, during which it is not yet a partner, but Washington’s shadow.
Europeans have lost their sense of direction. They live in a mosaic, a fragmentary world that has no shared relationships. But life will force them back to reality, and I believe that eventually European democratic traditions and humanism will prevail.
Don't know what's going on with the money thing in the US, but it's really weird.
Egypt gets an annual US$1.4-billion American 'aid package', as well as 'cash flow financing' (ie extra funding, in addition to the Congress funding -- a line of credit for buying weapons on contract from private US arms manufacturers) - NYT article 2014 here.
The US government puts ordinary American taxpayers into debt so that private arms manufacturers can have contracts to fill for years to come.
Where there is reason to halt financing (eg the political instability in Egypt), the US government cannot do so without causing the private American arms manufacturing businesses broken contracts, as I understand.
That makes no sense to me: the US taxpayer is subsidising private, American arms manufacturers.
And the government would also be subsidising whoever the actual lender of this money is? I'm not sure where this money's coming from when the US is in debt. US debt clock: here.
That looks like $19-trillion? I'm not much good with massive numbers ... but I think that's what it says.
It's the poor being indebted to the rich, so that the rich can continue to get rich ... but this is a country in which the minimum wage, health care etc, are begrudged the poor.
That doesn't seem right to me.
Meanwhile, Europe is totally f%$#ed. It's insane.
The other day I found myself wondering if maybe Sweden was broke or something. There's no other possible explanation for the voluntary self-destruction they're enacting.
only effective for duration of fire
fire + is coordinated with manoeuvre of forces
(destroy, neutralise or suppress)
formerly known as 'neutralisation'
neutralisation
= now NATO-defined as fire to render target temporarily f*cked
ie pinned down, unable to respond due to the intensity of fire
suppressive fire
-- is force which threatens casualties to those exposed
-- willingness to expose depends on:
- morale
- motivation
- leadership
-- suppressive fire used as covering fire
Suppressive fire can be used against:
-- protection of troops w/in range of enemy small arms
(ie covering fire) -- indirect firers [the following, I think?]:
- mortars
- artillery
- ships
- aircraft
-- enemy air defences
-- other activities: eg construction, logistics
-- for temporary area denial
*unsuitable for prolonged area denial b/c ammo supply constraints
Non-lethal suppression:
-- smoke to blind enemy
-- night: illumination to deny enemy cover
Suppressive weaponry:
-- any capable of intensity of fire for required period suppression
-- but bullet has less suppressive power than artillery shell
-- bullet has 1 metre w/in trajectory
-- artillery shell covers wider range when exploding
-- small arms fire sustained suppression - limit: few minutes
-- air delivered suppression likewise limited by payload limits
*ARTILLERY can suppress area for extended period
Purpose:
stop enemy observing, shooting, moving or carrying out military tasks
Features:
-- suppressive fire only effective while it lasts
-- & if it has sufficient intensity
-- enables covered (vulnerable, on the move) forces to advance to new positions etc, while enemy / target is rendered unable to act b/c of the suppressive fire
Entry says: Marines Tactic (but I think this is likely common military tactic)
communication + suppressive fire
enables movement on battlefield
Used to extract troops from battle zone:
1. helicopter
2. boat (hot extraction)
Suppressive fire
-- psychological tactic
-- targets keep heads down
-- (depending on variables) can result in target casualties & damage
-- used in close combat zone as covering fire
Suppressive fire - indirect fire systems:
- mortars
- artillery
- ships
- aircraft
-- important consideration is safety of troops
-- 'fragmenting munitions' indiscriminate & lethal in all directions
Suppressive Fire Tactics
-- first used in the Boer War
-- developed 1915 British WWI
-- unable to smash German trenches or destroy enemy artillery
-- employed artillery suppression fire techniques
-- suppressed enemy artillery to protect attacking infantry
-- allowed infantry to advance
-- thereafter, suppression defining British artillery tactic
-- ammunition used by British: shrapnel
-- target was enemy artillery
Suppression by infantry direct fire weapons
-- usually only used v. targets without:
-- mutual support from adjacent positions
-- ammunition stocks only for several mins. of sustained firing
So anyone who knows anything about the military would know that suppressive fire will last only a few minutes usually and that the other side is either advancing troops, pulling troops, or moving troops, and that it is largely a psychological tactic that can be countered (I think ... I haven't stumbled on the counter-offensive yet).
August 6 + August 9, 1945
1950 estimate:230,000 killed
only use of nuclear weapons
in history
6 August 1945 Hiroshima
first atomic bomb bomb bears name 'Little Boy' initially kills 70,000
{20% of 350,000 inhabitants} Giant shock-wave flattens city centre
End of 1945: further 60,000 die (Hiroshima alone)
Result of:
radiation exposure, burns & severe injuries
9 August 1945 Nagasaki
{original target Kyoto}
second atomic bomb bomb bears name 'Fat Man' 22,000 tons of TNT
est 70,000 killed
Mitsubishi Steel & Munitions Works
{torpedo construction
- used Pear Harbour (2,403 killed)}
shipyards & port
1950 estimate:230,000 killed
US-Anglo Atomic Bombings
est. 230,000 killed in two deadly strikes
WAR CRIMES
Many historians regard the US-Anglo attacks on Hiroshima & Nagasaki as war crimes.
"It is amazing what you can accomplish if you do not care who gets the credit."
— Harry S Truman
US-Anglo Atomic Bombings
President Harry S. Truman
Winston Churchill
USA
(with British consent)
as per Quebec Agreement Anglo-American
re nuclear energy & weapons
Signatories:
Winston Churchill
Franklin Delano Roosevelt
1943
initiated by British
UK handed over all material to USA
Britain received all copies of US progress reports
British atomic research subsumed under Manhattan Project
until after WWII
Post WWII
large team of British & Canadian scientists moved to USA
How Britain tortured Nazi PoWs: The horrifying interrogation methods that belie our proud boast that we fought a clean war
By Ian Cobain
Published: 09:34 EST, 27 October 2012 | Updated: 09:35 EST, 27 October 2012
The German SS officer was fighting to save himself from the gallows for a terrible war crime and might say anything to escape the noose. But Fritz Knöchleinwas not lying in 1946 when he claimed that, in captivity in London, he had been tortured by British soldiers to force a confession out of him.
Tortured by British soldiers? In captivity? In London? The idea seems incredible. Britain has a reputation as a nation that prides itself on its love of fair play and respect for the rule of law. We claim the moral high ground when it comes to human rights. We were among the first to sign the 1929 Geneva Convention on the humane treatment of prisoners of war.
Surely, you would think, the British avoid torture? But you would be wrong, as my research into what has gone on behind closed doors for decades shows.
It was in 2005 during my work as an investigative reporter that I came across a veiled mention of a World War II detention centre known as the London Cage. It took a number of Freedom Of Information requests to the Foreign Office before government files were reluctantly handed over.
From these, a sinister world unfolded — of a torture centre that the British military operated throughout the Forties, in complete secrecy, in the heart of one of the most exclusive neighbourhoods in the capital.
Thousands of Germans passed through the unit that became known as the London Cage, where they were beaten, deprived of sleep and forced to assume stress positions for days at a time.
Some were told they were to be murdered and their bodies quietly buried. Others were threatened with unnecessary surgery carried out by people with no medical qualifications. Guards boasted that they were ‘the English Gestapo’.
The London Cage was part of a network of nine ‘cages’ around Britain run by the Prisoner of War Interrogation Section (PWIS), which came under the jurisdiction of the Directorate of Military Intelligence.
Three, at Doncaster, Kempton Park and Lingfield, were at hastily converted racecourses. Another was at the ground of Preston North End Football Club. Most were benignly run.
But prisoners thought to possess valuable information were whisked off to a top-secret unit in a row of grandiose Victorian villas in Kensington Palace Gardens, then (as now) one of the smartest locations in London.
Today, the tree-lined street a stone’s throw from Kensington Palace is home to ambassadors and billionaires, sultans and princes. Houses change hands for £50 million and more.
Yet it was here, seven decades ago, in five interrogation rooms, in cells and in the guardroom in numbers six, seven and eight Kensington Palace Gardens, that nine officers, assisted by a dozen NCOs, used whatever methods they thought necessary to squeeze information from suspects.
Of course, it is crucial to put these events into context. When the gloves first came off at Britain’s interrogation centres — the summer of 1940 — German forces were racing across France and the Low Countries, and Britain was fighting for its very survival. The stakes could not have been higher. [see: Dresden fire-bombings war crime for comparison -- "well over 250,000 -- possibly as many as a half a million -- persons" killed "within a 14-hour period, whereas estimates of those who died at Hiroshima range from 90,000 to 140,000" -- here]
In the following years, large parts of Britain’s cities were left in ruins, hundreds of thousands of service personnel and civilians died, and barely a day passed without evidence emerging of a new Nazi atrocity. Little wonder, perhaps, that it was felt acceptable for German prisoners to suffer in British interrogation centres. [I'm going to guess that the 'new Nazi atrocity' referred to, as if to justify allied war crimes, is a production of British and allied wartime propaganda, as well as the product of illegitimate 'confessions' obtained under torture.]
And it should also be said that whatever went on within their walls, it paled into insignificance compared with the horrors the Nazis visited on millions of prisoners. [And what of the Dresden genocide and what of the post-war atrocities visited upon millions of starved German civilians and German POWs deliberately murdered? Elements of this article sound like an apology for those that were much the same as their vilified German enemy, based articles and videos I've seen so far on the subject of allied crimes and atrocities.]
So, how can we be sure about the methods used at the London Cage? Because the man who ran it admitted as much — and was hushed up for half-a-century by an establishment fearful of the shame his story would bring on a Britain that had been fighting for honesty, decency and the rule of law.
That man was Colonel Alexander Scotland, an accepted master in techniques of interrogation. After the war, he wrote a candid account of his activities in his memoirs, in which he recalled how he would muse, on arriving at the Cage each morning: ‘Abandon all hope ye who enter here.’
Because, he said, before going into detail: ‘If any German had any information we wanted, it was invariably extracted from him in the long run.’
As was customary, before publication Scotland submitted his manuscript to the War Office for clearance in 1954. Pandemonium erupted. All four copies were seized. All those who knew of its contents were silenced with threats of prosecution under the Official Secrets Act.
What caused the greatest consternation was his admission that the horrors had continued after the war, when interrogators switched from extracting military intelligence to securing convictions for war crimes.
Of 3,573 prisoners who passed through Kensington Palace Gardens, more than 1,000 were persuaded to sign a confession or give a witness statement for use in war crimes prosecutions.
Fritz Knöchlein, a former lieutenant colonel in the Waffen SS, was one such case. He was suspected of ordering the machine-gunning of 124 British soldiers who surrendered at Le Paradis in northern France during the Dunkirk evacuation in 1940. His defence was that he was not even there.
At his trial, he claimed he had been tortured in the London Cage after the war. He was deprived of sleep for four days and nights after arriving in October 1946 and forced to walk in a tight circle for four hours while being kicked by a guard at each turn.
He was made to clean stairs and lavatories with a tiny rag, for days at a time, while buckets of water were poured over him. If he dared to rest, he was cudgelled. He was also forced to run in circles in the grounds of the house while carrying heavy logs and barrels. When he complained, the treatment simply got worse.
Nor was he the only one. He said men were repeatedly beaten about the face and had hair ripped from their heads. A fellow inmate begged to be killed because he couldn’t take any more brutality.
All Knöchlein’s accusations were ignored, however. He was found guilty and hanged.
Suspects in another high-profile war crime — the shooting of 50 RAF officers who broke out from a prison camp, Stalag Luft III, in what became known as the Great Escape — also passed through the Cage.
Of the 21 accused, 14 were hanged after a war-crimes trial in Hamburg. Many confessed only after being interrogated by Scotland and his men. In court, they protested that they had been starved, whipped and systematically beaten. Some said they had been menaced with red-hot pokers and ‘threatened with electrical devices’.
Scotland, of course, denied allegations of torture, going into the witness box at one trial after another to say his accusers were lying.
It was all the more surprising, then, that a few years later he was willing to come clean about the techniques he employed at the London Cage.
In his memoirs, he disclosed that a number of men were forced to incriminate themselves. A general was sentenced to death in 1946 after signing a confession at the Cage while, in Scotland’s words, ‘acutely depressed after the various examinations’.
A naval officer was convicted on the basis of a confession that Scotland said he had signed only after being‘subject to certain degrading duties’.
Scotland also acknowledged that one of the men accused of the ‘Great Escape’ murders went to the gallows even though he had confessed after he had — in Scotland’s own words — been ‘worked on psychologically’. At his trial, the man insisted he had been ‘worked on’ physically as well.
Others did not share Scotland’s eagerness to boast about what had gone on in Kensington Park Gardens. An MI5 legal adviser who read his manuscript concluded that Scotland and fellow interrogators had been guilty of a ‘clear breach’ of the Geneva Convention.
They could have faced war-crimes charges themselves for forcing prisoners to stand to attention for more than 24 hours at a time; forcing them to kneel while they were beaten about the head; threatening to have them shot; threatening one prisoner with an unnecessary appendix operation to be performed on him by another inmate with no medical qualifications.
Appalled by the embarrassment his manuscript would cause if it ever came out, the War Office and the Foreign Office both declared that it would never see the light of day.
Two years later, however, they were forced to strike a deal with him after he threatened to publish his book abroad. He was told he would never be allowed to recover his original manuscript, but agreement was given to a rewritten version in which every line of incriminating material had been expunged.
A heavily censored version of The London Cage duly appeared in the bookshops in 1957.
But officials at the War Office, and their successors at the Ministry of Defence, remained troubled.
Years later, in September 1979, Scotland’s publishers wrote to the Ministry of Defence out of the blue asking for a copy of the original manuscript by the now dead colonel for their archives.
The request triggered fresh panic as civil servants sought reasons to deny the request. But in the end they quietly deposited a copy in what is now the National Archives at Kew, where it went unnoticed — until I found it a quarter of a century later.
Is there more to tell about the London Cage? Almost certainly. Even now, some of the MoD’s files on it remain beyond reach.
Scotland, his interrogators, technicians and typists, and the towering guardsmen left the building in January 1949. The villas were unoccupied for several years.
Eventually, numbers six and seven were leased to the Soviet Union, which was looking for a new embassy building. Today, they house the chancery of the Russian embassy.
Number eight — where it is thought the worst excesses were carried out — remained empty. It was too large to be a family home in the post-war years and in too poor a state of repair to be converted to offices. By 1955, the building had fallen into such disrepair it was sold to a developer, who knocked it down and built a block of three luxury flats. One that went on the market in 2006 was valued at £13.5 million.
The Cage was not, however, Britain’s only secret interrogation centre during and after World War II. MI5 also operated an interrogation centre, code-named Camp 020, at Latchmere House, a Victorian mansion near Ham Common in South-West London, whose 30 rooms were turned into cells with hidden microphones.
The first of the German spies who arrived in Britain in September 1940 were taken there. Vital information about a coming German invasion was extracted at great speed. This indicates the use of extreme methods, but these were desperate days demanding desperate measures. In charge was Colonel Robin Stephens, known as ‘Tin Eye’, because of the monocle fixed to his right eye.
It was not a term of affection. The object of interrogation, Stephens told his officers, was simple: ‘Truth in the shortest possible time.’ A top secret memo spoke of ‘special methods’, but did not elaborate.
He arranged for an additional 92-cell block to be added to Latchmere House, plus a punishment room — known chillingly as Cell 13 — which was completely bare, with smooth walls and a linoleum floor.
Close to 500 people passed through the gates of Camp 020. Principal among them were German spies, many of whom were ‘turned’ and persuaded — or maybe forced — to work for MI5.
Its first inmates were members of the British Union of Fascists. Some were held in cells brightly lit 24 hours a day, others in cells kept in total darkness.
Several prisoners were subjected to mock executions and were knocked about by the guards. Some were apparently left naked for months at a time.
Camp 020 had a resident medical officer, Harold Dearden, a psychiatrist who dreamed up regimes of starvation and of sleep and sensory deprivation intended to break the will of its inmates. He experimented in techniques of torment that left few marks — methods that could be denied by the torturers and that civil servants and government ministers could disown.
These techniques surfaced again after the war in a British interrogation facility at Bad Nenndorf, a German spa town, in one of the internment camps for those considered a threat to the Allied occupation.
In the four years after the war, 95,000 people were interned in the British zone of Allied-occupied Germany. Some were interrogated by what was now termed the Intelligence Division.
In charge of Bad Nenndorf was ‘Tin Eye’ Stephens,on attachment from MI5, and drawing on his Camp 020 experiences. An inmate recalled him yelling questions at prisoners and then punching them.
Over the next two years, 372 men and 44 women would pass through his hands. One German inmate recalled being told by a British intelligence officer: ‘We are not bound by any rules or regulations. We do not care a damn whether you leave this place on a stretcher or in a hearse.’
He was made to sleep on a wet floor in a temperature of minus 20 degrees for three days. Four of his toes had to be amputated due to frostbite.
A doctor in a nearby hospital complained about the number of detainees brought to him filthy, confused and suffering from multiple injuries and frostbite. Many were painfully emaciated after months of starvation. A number died.
The regime was intended to weaken, humiliate and intimidate prisoners.
With complaints soaring, a British court of inquiry was convened to investigate what had been going at Bad Nenndorf. It concluded that former inmates’ allegations of physical assault were substantially correct. Stephens and four other officers were arrested while Bad Nenndorf was abruptly closed.
But there was a quandary for the Labour government. The political fallout could be deeply damaging. There were other similar interrogation centres in Germany.
From the very top, there were urgent moves to hush things up.
Stephens’ court martial for ill-treatment of prisoners was heard behind closed doors. He did not deny any of the horrors. His defence was that he had no idea the prisoners for whom he was responsible were being beaten, whipped, frozen, deprived of sleep and starved to death.
This was the very defence that had been offered — unsuccessfully — by Nazi concentration camp commandants at war-crimes trials. But he was acquitted.
When it comes to propaganda, lies, corruption, cruelty, murder, war crimes, and evil, it looks like it's a level playing field: there's no distinction between the 'good guys' and the 'bad guys'.
Everything is a lie.
The account in this article is a drop in the ocean of injustices and crimes committed by the 'good guys' before, during and after world wars, and in the 70 years since.
Seventy years since the WWII torture of Germans and various other war crimes committed by the British and the Americans, the corrupt, lying, lawless and morally bankrupt British authorities hold an Australian journalist hostage of political persecution and detention without charge, following WikiLeaks exposure of modern day corruption and war crimes of Western governments.
Assange is denied medical access and deprived of liberty, under threat of extradition to the convicted in absentia, war criminal, torturing, kidnapping and assassinating Americans, while the bustling modern world stands by and lets these long-time bad actors and geopolitical villains get away with this crime, day after day for 5 years.
Does anybody else feel sick knowing there's no limit to the depths of Western state depravity, lies and hypocrisy?
How odd that the Russians have been allocated the British torture chamber interrogation suites in London as embassy premises.
Is this some kind of attempt at modern-day psychological warfare on the Russian ambassadors in London, I'm wondering?
Although I'm appalled by disclosures in the article, I'm also kind of drawn to the creepiness of the torture chamber and imagine a visit to the back end of the Russian embassy in London could be an interesting and eerie experience.
The British were torturing German prisoners 4 years after the end of war, but it's unclear to me why, when the war was a long time over.
First inmates of the London torture chambers were members of the British Union of Fascists.
As the torturing war criminal Western governments are just totalitarian fronts for elites and their corporate interests, the first round targeting of fascists with state torture is probably based more on the existing political and economic elite's determination to maintain its power, than on the objective merits of proposals by fascists:
"British fascist corporatism planned to replace the House of Lords with elected executives drawn from major industries, the clergy, and colonies. The House of Commons was to be reduced to allow for a faster, "less factionist" democracy." [wikipedia]
Replacement of the House of Lords sounds like a sensible idea, but replacing the overlords with industrialists and clergy is just allocating power to more of the same types of elites, isn't it?
Don't know enough about political fascism to judge these ideas as a whole.
Hey, I've just realised that the CAGE support for victims of 'war on terror' UK NGO is probably styled after the original British Cage torture history name.
As torture and war, disguised as 'national security' and 'humanitarianism', has continued unabated the last 70 years, the warmonger elite serving Western puppet state fronts for what poses as 'democracy' and representative government, really ought to drop the entirely unconvincing 'peace' and 'humanitarian' propaganda: the financial and social costs of serial US-led military interventions, resulting in blow-back invasion by refugee immigration that inundates the Western austerity-punished underprivileged, Western working classes and Western taxpayers, is evident to those bearing the brunt of blow-back, whose societies are being wilfully destroyed by treasonous, lying, elite and foreign interest serving politicians.
Copyright
Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is
made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news
reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research.
57,000 German POWs, Moscow, July 1944
ꕤ COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER
Copyright
Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is
made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news
reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research.
Iran, mid-late 1800s
Execution by Cannon
ꕤ COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER
Copyright
Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is
made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news
reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research.
EU-NATO IMPERIALISM ❌ 
----------------------
