| War on drugs is a hoax! US admits to guarding, assisting lucrative Afghan opium trade!

War on drugs is a hoax: US admit to guarding, assisting lucrative Afghan opium trade ~ Ethan Huff

December 1, 2011

Afghanistan is, by far, the largest grower and exporter of opium in the world today, cultivating a 92 percent market share of the global opium trade. But what may shock many is the fact that the US military has been specifically tasked with guarding Afghan poppy fields, from which opium is derived, in order to protect this multibillion dollar industry that enriches Wall Street, the CIA, MI6, and various other groups that profit big time from this illicit drug trade scheme.

Prior to the tragic events of September 11, 2001, Afghanistan was hardly even a world player in growing poppy, which is used to produce both illegal heroin and pharmaceutical-grade morphine. In fact, the Taliban had been actively destroying poppy fields as part of an effort to rid the country of this harmful plant, as was reported by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on February 16, 2001, in a piece entitled, Nation’s opium production virtually wiped out (http://news.google.com/newspapers?n…).

But after 9/11, the US military-industrial complex quickly invaded Afghanistan and began facilitating the reinstatement of the country’s poppy industry. According to the United Nations Drug Control Program (UNDCP), opium cultivation increased by 657 percent in 2002 after the US military invaded the country under the direction of then-President George W. Bush (http://www.infowars.com/fox-news-ma…).

CIA responsible for reinstating opium industry in Afghanistan after 9/11

More recently, The New York Times (NYT) reported that the brother of current Afghan President Hamid Karzai had actually been on the payroll of the CIA for at least eight years prior to this information going public in 2009. Ahmed Wali Karzai was a crucial player in reinstating the country’s opium drug trade, known as Golden Crescent, and the CIA had been financing the endeavor behind the scenes (http://www.infowars.com/ny-times-af…).

“The Golden Crescent drug trade, launched by the CIA in the early 1980s, continues to be protected by US intelligence, in liaison with NATO occupation forces and the British military,” wrote Prof. Michel Chossudovsky in a 2007 report, before it was revealed that Ahmed Wali Karzai was on the CIA payroll. “The proceeds of this lucrative multibillion dollar contraband are deposited in Western banks. Almost the totality of revenues accrue to corporate interests and criminal syndicates outside Afghanistan” (http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/A…).

But the mainstream media has been peddling a different story to the American public. FOX News, for instance, aired a propaganda piece back in 2010 claiming that military personnel are having to protect the Afghan poppy fields, rather than destroy them, in order to keep the locals happy and to avoid a potential “security risk” — and FOX News reporter Geraldo Rivera can be heard blatantly lying about poppy farmers being financially supported by the Taliban, rather than the CIA and other foreign interests.

You can watch that clip here:

So while tens of thousands of Americans continue to be harmed or killed every year by overdoses from drugs originating from this illicit opium trade, and while cultivation of innocuous crops like marijuana and hemp remains illegal in the US, the American military is actively guarding the very poppy fields in Afghanistan that fuel the global drug trade. Something is terribly wrong with this picture.

This article originally appeared at Natural News.

Sources for this article include:

U.S. Soldiers Grow Opium/Heroin Poppy in Afganistan – Fox News

Geraldo interviews U.S. soldiers about how they grow Opium/Heroin Poppy in Afganistan:








International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People.

Franklin Lamb, Contributing Writer

Activist Post 

Embassy of Palestine, Tripoli — Libya Every year on November 29, as part of International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, Palestinians in Libya as well as approximately a quarter million Palestinian refugees in Lebanon, the descendants of more than 129,000 who were forced into Lebanon during the 1947-48 Nakba, commemorate the infamous United Nations Resolution 181.

Between Nov. 29, 1947, and Jan. 1, 1949, Zionist terrorists depopulated and destroyed more than 530 Palestinian villages and towns, killing more than 13,000 Palestinians and expelling 750,000;   approximately half the population.

UN General Assembly resolution 181, adopted on November 29, 1947, purported to divide Palestine between the indigenous inhabitants and European colonists who arrived seeking to occupy and exploit Palestine and create an exclusive Jewish homeland. Under the UN plan, European Jews were granted more than fifty-six percent of historical Palestine, while the native Palestinians (who owned ninety-three percent of the territory) were offered less than forty-four percent of their own land.

The partition vote was based on a UN Special Committee (UNSCOP) recommendation to divide the country into three parts: a Palestinian state with a population of 735,000, of which 725,000 were Palestinians and 10,000 Jews; a new Jewish state comprised of 499,000 Jews and 407,000 Palestinians, creating a new state with roughly less than sixty percent Jewish majority.

Zionist leaders have never concealed their intentions, especially when holding political gatherings.

In addressing the Central Committee of the Histadrut (the Eretz Israel Workers Party) days after the UN vote to partition Palestine, David Ben-Gurion expressed apprehension and told the party leadership:

the total population of the Jewish State at the time of its establishment will be about one million, including almost 40% non-Jews. Such a [population] composition does not provide a stable basis for a Jewish State. This [demographic] fact must be viewed in all its clarity and acuteness. With such a [population] composition, there cannot even be absolute certainty that control will remain in the hands of the Jewish majority… There can be no stable and strong Jewish state so long as it has a Jewish majority of only 60%.

Ben Gurion, told Zionist leaders in December of 1947, “I don’t care if half the Jews in Europe have to die so the other half come to Palestine.” And Chaim Weizmann would later say: “With regard to the Arab question – the British told us that there are several hundred thousand Negroes there but this is a matter of no consequence.” 

Former Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, architect of the 1982 Sabra-Shatile Massacre, in an interview with General Ouze Merham in 1956 said:

I don’t know something called International Principles. I vow that I’ll burn every Palestinian child (that) will be born in this area. The Palestinian woman and child is more dangerous than the man, because the Palestinian child’s existence infers that generations will go on, but the man causes limited danger. I vow that if I was just an Israeli civilian and I met a Palestinian I would burn him and I would make him suffer before killing him. With one hit I’ve killed 750 Palestinians (in Rafah in 1956). I wanted to encourage my soldiers by raping Arabic girls as the Palestinian women is a slave for Jews, and we do whatever we want to her and nobody tells us what we shall do but we tell others what they shall do.

To ensure an absolute Jewish majority, the Zionist’s “Transfer [Expulsion] Committee” waged a terror campaign to cleanse their part of the non-Jewish population. The “War [Expulsion] Committee” under the leadership of Ben Gurion, assigned ethnic cleansing language to its military operations, from Hebrew names such as Matateh (broom), Tihur (cleansing), Biur (a Passover quasi-religious expression meaning “to cleanse the leaven”) and Niku (cleaning up).

Following Israel’s unilateral declaration of independence in 1948, it accelerated the land-grab strategy to secure an absolute Jewish majority. The Zionists assailed, depopulated, and occupied an additional thirty percent of the land which had been designated for the future Palestinian state under the UN plan.

Since 1967, Israeli Occupation Forces have demolished more than 24,000 Palestinian homes, while more than 600,000 Jews currently are colonizing the West Bank and Jerusalem. Also since 1967, the Israeli military has detained more than 700,000 Palestinians – 20 percent of the population – according to statistics released at the First International Conference on the Rights of Palestinian Prisoners and Detainees held in Geneva in March 2011.  Approximately 5,700 Palestinians are currently being detained in prisons within Israel, a direct violation of international law. In addition, the siege on Gaza and the Apartheid Wall in the West Bank and Jerusalem have severely restricted or denied Palestinians’ freedom of movement.

Sixty-four years since the November 29, 1947 UN Resolution 181, and after twenty years of negotiating with Israel, the international community allows the status quo while Israel encroaches on the remaining twenty-two percent with ever more illegal Jewish-only settlements.

Sixty-four years later in Lebanon, where 129,000 Palestinian refugees fled during the 1947-48 Nakba, approximately 250,000 remain in Lebanon with approximately 130,000 squeezed into twelve fetid Refugee camps. Each new study of Palestine refugees in Lebanon documents a steepening, descending economic, social, and humanitarian slope as this largest and oldest refugee population skids and descends into more degradation.  Today in Lebanon, Palestinian refugees continue to live in conditions more inhumane than anywhere on Earth including the six decades of suffering endured by their sisters and brothers, under the brutal Zionist occupation of their own country, Palestine.

Six decades since UN GA Resolution 181, Lebanon continues to forbid — implied through penalty of arrest and imprisonment — Palestinian refugees from working in more than 50 jobs and professions. This prohibition is in direct contravention of a large and condemnatory body of international law; specifically, numerous UN Resolutions, multilateral agreements, international customary law and even the Lebanese Constitution, as well as the UN Declaration of Universal Rights, which some of Lebanon’s leaders helped draft in 1949. 

Since 2001, the Government of Lebanon has also outlawed Palestinian refugees who lost their homes to Zionist colonialists, from purchasing even a sliver of property for a one-room shack or tent home, even though most Palestinians might be willing to agree that their ownership of Lebanese real estate would vest only until such time as they are able to return to Palestine, which, given current events in the region, seems to support CIA estimates of the dissembling of Israel by 2029.

For this failure to uphold the law, Lebanon increasingly faces the prospects of international sanctions as well as civil unrest. What Palestinian refugees in Lebanon seek and have right to enjoy, just as every refugee in any country, is to live in dignity, to be able to apply for a job, and to care of their families. Living in dignity includes the right to live outside the teeming, squalid camps and to purchase better housing if they are able.

An additional troubling violation of the rights of Palestinians in Lebanon is the fact that increasingly, the Lebanese Armed Forces are sealing off the Palestinian refugee camps which increase the perception and reality of illegal governmental harassment and yet more pressure on the everyday lives of these unwanted guests.

Today, 64 years after UNGA Resolution 181, virtually every political party and every religious authority in Lebanon boldly and regularly pays insincere lip service to the “sacred cause of Palestine”, as “the bloodstream issue for every Arab and every Muslim.” Each avers that in Lebanon “our brothers must live in dignity until they are able to return to Palestine” and that “for us Lebanese, as their hosts, to refuse them fewer human rights than even their Zionist oppressors allow them violates our religious duty for which certainly Allah (Christians typically insert ‘Jesus’ or ‘God Almighty’) will justly condemn us to Hell on judgment day”.

Lebanese political parties and movements that have truly sacrificed for Palestine and seek to liberate it, and Lebanese political parties whose militia have massacred Palestinian civilians, women, children and the elderly in refugee camps, have a special obligation to act now and give meaning to their words.

And most certainly those Lebanese politicians whose words and ubiquitous photoshopped posters identifying with the cause of Palestine, but who, in the service of foreign governments, have conducted massacres in Palestinian camps mislabeling them “camp wars” should do immediate penitence and use their political power and politically acquired financial wealth to do justice.

Neither Lebanese politicians, political parties, nor religious enterprises have a legitimate excuse not to devote an afternoon in Parliament, currently in session, and rid the country of its self-imposed debasement by repealing the racist 2001 law forbidding home ownership for Palestinian refugees.  As part of the same Parliamentary action Palestinians must be granted the same right to work that every other refugee enjoys in Lebanon, and which is mandated by International law, religious doctrine and belief, and the common morality to which all people of goodwill are committed.

To do less condemns all of us and makes a mockery of Lebanon as a claimed civilized society.

Franklin Lamb is doing research in Libya and Lebanon and reachable c/o fplamb@gmail.com

| Obama Fulfilling the Neocon Dream? Mass Regime Change in Muslim World?


| Obama Fulfilling the Neocon Dream? Mass Regime Change in Muslim World?

Obama Fulfilling the Neocon Dream?
Mass Regime Change in Muslim World?

Glenn Greenwald

November 28, 2011 “Democracy Now!” — Political blogger Glenn Greenwald recently wrote about retired General Wesley Clark’s recollection of an officer telling him in the weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks that the then U.S. Secretary of Defense had issued a memo outlining a plan for regime change within five years in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran. We play an excerpt of Clark’s comments and ask Greenwald to respond. “What struck me in listening to that video … is that if you go down that list of seven countries that he said the neocons had planned to basically change the governments of, you pretty much see that that vision, despite the perception that we have a Democratic president and therefore the neo-conservative movement is powerless, is pretty much being fulfilled,” Greenwald says.



AMY GOODMAN: Glenn Greenwald, in your latest piece, you wrote about the Project for New American Century or PNAC, and started talking about neocon, neoconservative, foreign policy as it relates to the Obama administration. Explain.

GLENN GREENWALD: There was this speech that General Wesley Clark gave in 2007 to the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco in which he recounted meetings that he had at the Pentagon with people with whom he had close relationships — meetings he had at the Pentagon with people with whom he had close relationships in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, and he talked about how, as he had done before, that he was told within a week or two after 9/11 that the Pentagon intended to attack Iraq even though no one thought that they were involved in the 9/11 attack. And he described an incident where he went back to the Pentagon a few weeks after he was told this, in October and November of 2001, and he asked his source, well, it looks like we’re going to attack Afghanistan, you told me we were going to attack Iraq. Are we still going to attack Iraq? And the source told him, oh, General, it’s actually much worse than this.

AMY GOODMAN: We’re going to play the clip of Wesley Clark.


WESLEY CLARK: What happened in 9/11, IS we didn’t have a strategy, we didn’t have bipartisan agreement, we didn’t have American understanding of it. And we had, instead, a policy coup in this country, a coup, a policy coup. Some hard-nosed people took over the direction of American policy and they never bothered to inform the rest of us. I went through the Pentagon 10 days after 9/11. I couldn’t stay away from mother army. I went back there to see Don Rumsfeld. I had worked for him as a white house fellow in the 1970’s. All this is in the book. I said, am I doing OK on CNN? He said, yeah, yeah, yeah, fine. He said, I’m thinking about—-I read your book. And he said—-this is the book that talks about the Kosovo campaign—-and he said, I just want to tell you, he said, nobody’s going to tell us where or when we can bomb, nobody. He said, I’m thinking of calling this a floating coalition. What do you think about that? I said, well sir, thanks for reading my book, and well… He said, thanks, that is all the time I have got. Really. I went downstairs leaving the Pentagon and an officer from the Joint Staff called me into the office and said, I want you to know, sir, we’re going to attack Iraq. I said, why? He said, we don’t know. I said, well did they tie Saddam to 9/11? He said, no, he said, but I guess they do not know what to do about terrorism and so the—-but they can attack states and they want to look strong. So, I guess they think if they take down a state it will intimidate the terrorists. It’s like that old saying, he said, that if the only tool you have is a hammer, then every problem has to be a nail. Well, I walked out of there pretty upset, and then we attacked Afghanistan. I was pretty happy about that. We should have. And then I came back to the Pentagon about six weeks later. I saw the same officer. I said, why haven’t we attacked Iraq? We still going to attack Iraq? He said, oh, sir, it’s worse than that. He pulled up a piece of paper off his desk. He said, I just got this memo from the Secretary of Defense’s office, says we’re going to attack and destroy the governments in seven countries in five years. We’re going to start with Iraq and then we’re going to move to Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran.

AMY GOODMAN: That was General Wesley Clark. Glenn Greenwald, the significance of what he said?

GLENN GREENWALD: So, that seems like a fairly radical plan, and he’s talking about, what he calls, this neocon cabal that had implemented this extremist militaristic vision justified on the basis of 9/11. He actually goes on to describe how Paul Wolfowitz, ten years earlier, was talking about these things well before 9/11. But, what struck me in listening to that video just a couple of days ago is that if you go down that list of Seven countries that he said the neocons had planned to basically change the governments of, you pretty much see that vision, despite the perception that we have a Democratic president and therefore the neoconservative movement is powerless, is pretty much being fulfilled. I mean, the governments of Iraq and Libya and Lebanon, three of those countries, have been changed, including Libya this year by military force. You then look at Somalia and Sudan where the Obama administration in Somalia has, according to The Washington Post just this weekend, massively escalated it’s proxy fighting and drone attacks, we’re involved in trying to subvert and control Somalia in all sorts of ways. We have a modest deployment to the south part of Sudan. But, that’s another country where we’re now militarily active and trying to control. And then the most important countries on that list, Iran and Syria, are clearly the target of all sorts of covert regime change efforts on the part of the United States and Israel. That is clearly the goal the U.S. government has adopted for itself, is to get rid of the Iranian laws and the Assad regime in Syria. And so, if you look at what Clark described in a way that he intended to be very frightening an extremist, that the neocons wanted to do in these seven countries, it seems pretty clear to me that although we may not be doing it with as much of an overt war as the neocons would like, it’s just a slightly more subtle and different means of achieving the same end.

AMY GOODMAN: And the significance of the drone strikes and fitting it in with the Project for a New American Century, what’s happened Pakistan now, Pakistan saying the U.S. has to clear out of a base that is believed to be being used by the United States to launch drone strikes, but drone strikes not only in Pakistan?

GLENN GREENWALD: Well, this is what’s so amazing to me. If you look back at what the Congress did in the wake of 9/11 when it enacted the authorization to use military force, if you look at that authorization, it’s incredibly narrow, as it turns out. If you go and actually read it, it says the President is authorized to use military force against those who perpetrated the 9/11 attack and those countries who harbored those individuals. That’s it, that’s the only authorized use of military force. Well, here we are more than a decade later, and there was an article in The Washington Post from a week ago where U.S. officials anonymously are saying that, in essence, Al Qaeda, the group that perpetrated the 9/11 attack according to the government, is now dead. There’s only two leaders left they say in that entire region. It already rendered “effectively inoperable”. There is no more Al Qaeda left in Afghanistan or Pakistan according to the U.S. government. The group that perpetrated 9/11, according to it is no longer even existing. And yet, here we are engaged in extraordinarily broad military efforts, constantly escalating in numerous parts of the world. There’s six different countries in which the U.S. is actively using drones; in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Somalia, Libya and Yemen, against groups that didn’t even exist at the time that 9/11 was perpetrated. And constantly, what you find is we are killing all sorts of civilians. There was just a story, a horrible story from four days ago where a U.S. air-strike in Afghanistan slaughtered an entire family of children, six children between the ages of 4 and 12. What we’re doing in essence is not only going way beyond what we were supposed to be doing when the Congress authorized military force, but what we’re really doing is we’re constantly manufacturing the causes of our war. Everywhere we go, every time we kill Pakistani troops or kill children in Yemen or in Afghanistan, we’re generating more and more anti-American sentiment and violence, and therefore, guaranteeing we will always have more people to fight.

AMY GOODMAN: We’re talking to Glenn Greenwald. Constitutional law attorney, political blogger for Salon.com.


“No power but Congress can declare war; but what is the value of this 
constitutional provision, if the President of his own authority may make such 
military movements as must bring on war? … [T]hese remarks originate purely 
in a desire to maintain the powers of government as they are established by the 
Constitution between the different departments, and hope that, whether we have conquests or no conquests, war or no war, peace or no peace, we shall yet 
preserve, in its integrity and strength, the Constitution of the United States.” 
~ Daniel Webster,
(1782-1852), US Senator,
Source: December 2, 1846 speech in Philadelphia.

| 29th November: International Day of Solidarity with Palestinian People!


| 29th November: International Day of Solidarity with Palestinian People!

In 1977, the United Nations declared the 29th November of each year as the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, but, in fact, this has demonstrably been a clear admission of guilt and abdication of responsibility towards this people. Nevertheless, It recognises that the Palestinian people deserve international solidarity and support, in the name of Justice and Human Rights, without which there can be no lasting Peace.  

This is, in reality, a small step in a long journey. The journey of Palestine and her people is one that will go down in history as an epic and enduring struggle. In fact, with more and more people awakening to this struggle every day, the collective dispossession, ethnic cleansing and apartheid matrix of control exercised by Israel and its illegal occupation in it’s relentless quest for land-thievery is being exposed, and like with South African apartheid a new day is dawning.

“Until lions have their historians, tales of the hunt shall always glorify the hunter.” ~  African Proverb. Palestine, God willing, will prevail one day soon. If it is said that the victor is the one writing history, the victor in this case will inevitably be Justice, and justice is at the core of the Palestinian struggle against apartheid, colonialism and zionist oppression.

And as in every episode in history, everyone will be mentioned according to their positions, and more importantly according to their deeds with respect to each chapter of the story, in Historic Palestine’s epic struggle and her refusal to lie down and die despite overwhelming odds.

Today, on this Day of Solidarity, let us honour the memory of those who have sacrificed their blood, sweat, tears and very lives for this epic cause of Freedom and Justice and renew our commitment to Palestine and her People in their inexhaustable Quest for Freedom as well as all oppressed indigenous peoples everywhere.

“Let us, on this International Day, reaffirm our commitment to translating ‎solidarity into positive action. The international community must help steer the situation ‎towards a historic peace agreement.” ~ Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon

Message on the International Day of
Solidarity with the Palestinian People
29 November 2011

In 1977, the General Assembly called for the annual observance of 29 November as the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People (resolution 32/40 B). On that day, in 1947, the Assembly adopted the resolution on the partition of Palestine(resolution 181 (II))

In resolution 60/37 of 1 December 2005, the Assembly requested the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People and the Division for Palestinian Rights, as part of the observance of the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People on 29 November, to continue to organize an annual exhibit on Palestinian rights or a cultural event in cooperation with the Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine to the UN.

The observance of the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People also encouraged Member States to continue to give the widest support and publicity to the observance of the Day of Solidarity.

| Wag the Dog Alert ~ Obama bullied? Jerusalem Post: “Entire American Jewish Community” Supports Freeing convicted Israeli Master Spy: Jonathan Pollard!

| Wag the Dog Alert ~ Obama bullied? Jerusalem Post: “Entire American Jewish Community” Supports Freeing convicted Israeli Master Spy: Jonathan Pollard!

Obama under more Israeli pressure!
Following a meeting just before Thanksgiving, between “American” Jewish leaders and Joe “Zionist” Biden calling for letting “Israel’s Master Spy” Jonathan Pollard out of jail, here’s a link to an article about it and below are some very revealing excerpts from what transpired.

See for yourself the pathetic excuses made at that meeting of over an hour at the White House calling for Pollard’s release, of which the following is perhaps the most risible example of wag the dog and telling the President what to do with a convicted traitor to America:

“The last argument made in the meeting was that while most American Jewish leaders were initially hesitant to stick out their neck for Pollard, the entire American Jewish community was now united in support of US President Barack Obama commuting his sentence.

“The meeting was an important opportunity to share with the vice president the fact that there is a consensus on this issue in the American Jewish community,” Foxman said.

“We shared our feelings, he shared his, and that’s constructive and important. I don’t know what the next step is, but whatever happens, the vice president is better informed about where the American Jewish community is on this issue.”

This is especially noteworthy:

“Thousands of Americans and Israelis called the White House switchboard to request Pollard’s release on Monday to mark the anniversary of his arrest. Efforts to persuade Obama to grant Pollard clemency have intensified in recent days, because American presidents traditionally grant pardons and clemency to a select group of prisoners as an act of goodwill between Thanksgiving and Christmas.”

Talk about wag the dog ~ treason is treason is treason!!!

Here’s an absurd zionist propaganda video of case in point, disgracefully portraying this American traitor as a hero – it would be comedic were it not so shocking!

“After investigating the Pollard case for more than a year, and interviewing dozens of U.S. and Israeli officials, I have learned some of what Pollard provided to Israel. My information suggests that far from the small-time bungler portrayed in some new accounts, Pollard was a master spy, who provided important information to the Israelis.

Pollard held “Top Secret” security clearance. According to the pre-sentencing memo submitted last month by U.S. Attorney Joseph E. diGenova, Pollard had access to “Sensitive Compartmented Information,” (SCI) principally data about technical systems for collecting intelligence “as well as the intelligence product collected by the systems.” A relatively small percentage of individuals who have “Top Secret” clearances are also approved for SCI access, the court document said.

In fact, diGenova says that Pollard provided Israel with more than 1,000 classified documents, some of which were several hundred pages in length. Stacked up, the tens of thousands of pieces of paper could have filled a small hall. Most of the documents, according to a pre-sentencing memo, “were detailed analytical studies containing technical calculations, graphs and satellite photographs.” Other information included “highly classified message traffic and intelligence summaries” as well as data on “specific weapon systems.” He apparently was able to take copies of this material – including satellite photos – with him out the door.”

Though I’m wary of the death-penalty in principle given so many miscarriages of justice, surely, surely this is as clear-cut a case as it gets for capital punishment not clemency?

Would this even be contemplated let alone discussed were it an agent for any other country?

Let’s not forget how Israel treats any foreign professionals it dislikes – state sanctioned assassination via Mossad death-squads.

And, this whilst the Israeli perpetrators of the USS Liberty massacre still remain at large.

Or how Israel brutally killed US citizens Rachel Corrie or Furkan Dogan, with apparent impunity with not even a proper coroner’s report afterwards.

Is there no depth of depravity that will not be plumbed, for the furtherance of an alien foreign interest, even if it involves proven treason against the USA?

Obama, what have you allowed your Office of Presidency to become?

America, what have you allowed your democracy to become?

And, all for whose benefit? 

| US Army Private John Needham’s “Notification of War Atrocities and Crimes” in Iraq!


| US Army Private John Needham’s “Notification of War Atrocities and Crimes” in Iraq!


Make no mistake this was a brave young man – a whistle-blower whose mind finally snapped under acute PTSD over the war crimes he witnessed who then tragically killed his own partner and later committed suicide – more collateral damage for dumbass phony wars ARE terror! 

“48 Hours” preview: Private Needham’s war – CBS News Video:  http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7387801n 


John Needham’s “Notification of War Atrocities and Crimes”

The Veterans Project (11.13.11)

The November 12 episode of 48 Hours Mystery mentioned a letter U.S. Army Private John Needham sent to high-ranking military officials in which allegations of various war crimes are detailed. The program focused on only one of those incidents, and included only one of several photographs that John had submitted with his letter to substantiate his accusations. CBS chose to blur the image “because it’s so graphic.” Here is John’s letter with that image and additional photographic evidence, all of which is completely uncensored. 

WARNING: The images are very disturbing, as are John’s allegations:
December 18, 2007

To: Mr. Randy Waddle, Assistant Inspector General, Ft Carson, Colorado
CC: LTC John Shawkins, Inspector General, Ft Carson, Colorado
Major General Mark Graham, Commanding Officer, Ft Carson, Colorado
Major Haytham Faraj, USMC, Camp Pendleton, California
Lt General Stanley Greene, US Army Inspector General

Subject: Formal Notification of War Atrocities and Crimes Committed by
Personnel, B Company, 2-12, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry
Division in Iraq

Dear Mr. Waddle

My name is John Needham. I am a member of Bravo Company, 2nd Battalion, 2nd Infantry division, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division, (BCo,2-12INF,2BCT,2ID . I deployed with my unit to Iraq from October 2006 until October 2007 when I was medically evacuated for physical and mental injuries that I suffered during my deployment. The purpose of my letter is to report what I believe to be war crimes and violation of the laws of armed conflict that I personally witnesses while deployed in Iraq.

Upon arriving in Iraq in October of 2006 my unit was assigned to the ¼ Cavalry unit at Camp Prosperity. In March of 2007 I was sent back to my unit, B Company 2-12 at Camp Falcon. It was at Camp Falcon that I observed and was forced to participate in ugly and inhumane acts against the Iraqi citizens in our area of responsibilities. Below I list some of the incidents that took place.

In March of 2007, I witnessed SSG Platt shoot and wound an Iraqi national without cause of provocation. The Staff Sergeant said that he suspected the Iraqi be a “trigger” man. We had not been attacked and we found no evidence on the man to support the suspicion. As the Iraqi lay bleeding on the ground, PVT Smith requested to administer first aid to the Iraqi. SSgt Platt said no and “let him bleed out.” When SSG Platt walked away, Pvt Smith and PVT Mullins went to the Iraqi, dragged him to an alley, and applied first aid. They then drove him to the cache for further treatment.

In June of 2007 1SG Spry caused an Iraqi male to be stopped, questioned, detained, and killed. We had no evidence that the Iraqi was an insurgent or terrorist. In any event when we stopped he did not pose a threat. Although I did not personally witness the killing, I did observe 1sg Spry dismembering the body and parading of it while it was tied to the hood of a Humvee around the Muhalla neighborhood while the interpreter blared out warnings in Arabic over the loud speaker. I have a photo that shows 1SG Spry removing the victim’s brains.

On another occasion an Iraqi male

was stopped by a team led by Sgt Rogers as he walked down an alleyway. The Iraqi was detained and questioned then with his hands tied behind his back, SGT Rogers skinned his face.

1ST Spry shot a young Iraqi teenager who was about 16 years old. The shooting was unprovoked and the Iraqi posed no threat to the unit. He was merely riding his bicycle past an ambush site. When I arrived on the scene I observed 1SGT Spry along with SSG Platt dismember the boy’s body.

In August of 2007, I responded to radio call from SGT Rogers reporting that he had just shot an Iraqi who was trying to enter through a hole that the platoon had blown in a wall to allow them observation of the area during a security patrol. When I arrived, I saw a one armed man who was still alive lying on a barricade. The man was about 30 years old. He had an old Ruger pistol hanging from his thumb. It was obvious to me that the pistol was placed there because of the way it hung from his thumb. The Iraqi was still alive when I arrived. I saw SGT Rogers

shoot him twice in the back with hollow point bullets. The Iraqi was still moving. I was asking why they shot him again when I heard Sgt Hoskins say “he’s moving, he’s still alive.” SPEC Hoskins then moved to the Iraqi and shot him in the back of the head. SSG Platt and SGT Rogers were visibly excited about the kill. I saw them pull the Iraqi’s brains out as they placed him in the body bag. CPT Kirsey must have learned something about this incident because he was very upset and admonished the NCOs involved.

I have seen and heard 1SGT Spry brag about killing dogs. He kept a running count. At last count I remember he was boasting of having killed 80 dogs.

On many occasions I observed SGT Temples, SSG Platt and SGT Rogers beat and abuse Iraqi teenagers, some as young as 14, without cause. They would walk into a house near areas where they suspected we had received sniper fire, then detain and beat the kids.

I have photos that support my allegations. I also have numerous other photos on a laptop PC that the unit illegally seized from me. I have requested its return but they have refused.

My experiences have taken a terrible toll on me. I suffer from PTSD and depression. I had no way to stop the ugly actions of my unit. When I refused to participate they began to abuse and harass me. I am still in treatment at the Balboa Naval hospital. I respectfully request that you investigate these matters, that you protect my safety by reassigning me to a different unit that is not located at Fort Carson, that you return my PC or, at least, seize it to protect the evidence on it, and that you issue a military protective order to prohibit the offending members of my unit from harassing, retaliating, or contacting me.

I have some photographs and some supporting documentation to these allegations.


PFC John Needham
US Army
John’s father, Michael Needham, will read the above letter at a special Human Rights Day event in Los Angeles on December 10. Click here for info.

| Landmark Decision [albeit symbolic] as Bush, Blair found Guilty of War Crimes in Malaysia tribunal!

| Landmark Decision [albeit symbolic] as Bush, Blair found Guilty of War Crimes in Malaysia tribunal!

Former US president George Bush and his former counterpart Tony Blair were found guilty of war crimes by the The Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal which held a four day hearing in the Malaysia.

The five panel tribunal unanimously decided that Bush and Blair committed genocide and crimes against peace and humanity when they invaded Iraq in 2003 in blatant violation of international law.

The judges ruled that war against Iraq by both the former heads of states was a flagrant abuse of law, act of aggression which amounted to a mass murder of the Iraqi people.

In their verdict, the judges said that the United States, under the leadership of Bush, forged documents to claim that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

They further said the findings of the tribunal be made available to members of the Rome Statute and the names of Bush and Blair be entered into a war crimes register.

Both Bush and Blair repeatedly said the so-called war against terror was targeted at terrorists.

Lawyers and human rights activists present here say the verdict by the tribunal is a landmark decision. And the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Foundation said it would lobby the International Criminal Court to charge former US president George Bush and Former British prime minister Tony Blair for war crimes.

| The War on Terrorism or a Global Crusade against Islam?


| War on Terrorism or a Global Crusade against Islam?


The War on Terrorism or a Global Crusade against Islam

Posted on 21. Nov, 2011 by  in War On Terror

“We have little concern about our violations of human rights in Guantanamo. ….the real horrors – of this war come with the primitive killer mentality developed in our youth. I’ve now seen a half dozen documentary films and read eyewitness accounts that reveal troops or pilots gloating over the massacres of civilians who just happened to be available targets.” Paul J. Balles

By Mahboob A. Khawaja, Ph.D.

British author and producer Adam Curtis (The Power of Nightmares: The Rise of the Politics of Fear: BBC documentary challenging the American version of the “War on Terrorism”), spells out the myth with clarity: “international terrorism is a fantasy that has been exaggerated and distorted by politicians. It is a dark illusion that has spread unquestioned through governments around the world, the security services and the international media.”

“It is the policy of the United States government to provoke violent extremist groups into action. Once they are in play, their responses can then be used in whatever way the government that provoked them sees fit. And we also know that these provocations are being used, as a matter of deliberate policy, to rouse violent groups on the “Af-Pak” front to launch terrorist attacks.”  Chris Floyd “Darkness Renewed: Terror as a Tool of Empire,” 04/2009)

“We have now reached a stage where our extreme horrors of brutality and cruelty have exceeded our past records. We no longer have the rationale of moral righteousness of the earlier wars…. There were no excuses for Abu-Ghraib, but our interest in that inhuman travesty dried up and blew away. We have little concern about our violations of human rights in Guantanamo. ….the real horrors – of this war come with the primitive killer mentality developed in our youth. I’ve now seen a half dozen documentary films and read eyewitness accounts that reveal troops or pilots gloating over the massacres of civilians who just happened to be available targets.” Paul J. Balles (“The World Sickest Warrior State” 03/2010, ICH) 


When people and nations live in darkness, they lose sense of direction. In an information age, knowledge–driven global culture of reason, ignorance is no longer a requisite to learn from the living history. The previous Empires knew their geography and limits, but the newly articulated American Empire in its infancy, is challenging the limits of the Laws of God and appears obsessed with “fear” of being replaced by the new emerging nations of Asia (China-India) and South America. Former president Bush invoked the “War on Terrorism”, as a dictum of power, not of reason and wisdom, to camouflage the prospective future with acts of barbarity and to dispel the notion of accountability in global affairs. If history is to be believed, people and nations pursuing this path of policy behavior have caused massive deaths and destructions to the mankind and indeed ended up in self-defeat and self-destruction.

The 9/11 attacks in the US and Islamic faith have nothing in common. To date, the US Government has not spelled out who were the people responsible for these acts of violence and barbarity. Politics of convenience overrides reason and facts of human life. Some hourly paid intellectuals turned guardian of approved truth, allege that Islam breeds terrorism. The Western mass media complements the theoretically convenient notion to poison the public perceptions and source of judgments against the Arabs and Muslims. The corporate controlled news media is the creative weapon of the Western powers and sadistic political warmongers. The Neo-Conservatives helped to rob the humanity of its human heritage. The perception of ‘radical Islam’ was manufactured and enhanced by the ‘fear’ of terrorism as if Arabs and Muslims were born in the eye of the storm and terrorism was an exclusive domain of the Islamic religious tenets.

“Terrorism is a political technique, not an ideology and any group willing to use violence in pursuit of its political goals may resort to it, noted Gwynne Dyer, London based prominent writer (The International Terrorist Conspiracy”: June 2006). He goes on to explain that “there are left-wing terrorists and right-wing terrorists; national terrorist and international terrorist; Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist and atheist terrorists. In theory, you could have a “war against terrorism”, but it would involve trying to kill everybody who uses this technique anywhere in the world. The United States is not trying to do that, so it is not fighting a “war against terror.”  In reality, what the United States leadership is doing is fighting its own articulated war against the people and nations who had no animosity, nor did any perceive capability to threaten the US as a global power.

British author and producer Adam Curtis (The Power of Nightmares: The Rise of the Politics of Fear: BBC documentary challenging the American version of the “War on Terrorism”), spells out the myth with clarity: “international terrorism is a fantasy that has been exaggerated and distorted by politicians. It is a dark illusion that has spread unquestioned through governments around the world, the security services and the international media.” Remember, after the 9/11 attacks, the US official statements made no mention of involvement of the government or people of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Iran in the accused list of the 9/11 perpetrators.  In 1997, many leading architects of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), did include the name of Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Syria, PLO as selected targets to impose the American liberal democracy and throw out the authoritarian regimes. It was a strategic stunt to inject the fear into people’s mind. Paul Craig Roberts, author of the Tyranny of Good Intentions, in his recent article (“The High Price of American Gullibility”, June 2006: ICH), makes a logical assertion: Bush’s rhetoric “you are with us or against us” is perfectly planned to influence the common masses. Emotional appeals to fear and to patriotism have led close to half of the population to accept unaccountable government in the name of “the war on terrorism.” What a contradiction it is that so many American have been convinced that safety lies in their sacrifice of their civil liberties and accountable government.” Obviously, human intelligence, emotions and perceptions, superficially turned antagonistic with compelling impulse of media propaganda strategies to view Arabs and Muslims as the qualified candidates for extreme militancy.

Truth is one and indivisible. When it comes to terrorism and Arabs or Muslims, the North American and European mass media portrayals enforces two distinct order of truth – one for the general public and one reserved for the Muslims. In all human affairs, facts are considered to reach the conclusion. End cannot be assumed to play with the facts, nor based on dogmas to explain the facts of human life. Under the guise of the Anti-Terrorist legislation, America, Britain and Canada have misused the logic of power to arrest, defame and punish people of Arabian and Islamic origin who had no linkage to the terrorism myth. The strategy dictates that selected groups should be detained and tortured indefinitely, to drain out their moral, intellectual and creative energies, making them incapable to survive socially or professionally credible citizens of the country. Consequently, the public will view them as crazy and undesirable people to be counted as numbers and digits in economic terms, but not dignified human beings.

Divergent scenarios flourish to manifest lies and deception about the real aims of the “War on Terror.” When the Western leaders play with words, it is known and often acknowledged, but when the Muslim leaders offer ignorant excuses, they are masked under willful lies and deceptions without any accountability.  Many Western scholars wonder, why leaders of the Muslim countries and the masses appear disinterested in the post 9/11 affairs when it had direct impacts on the entire Arab and Muslim world. Foremost reasons being that the Arabs and the Muslim countries in general, have no educated and responsible leadership to represent the masses and their interests. The West and its scheme of political subjugation institutionalized the neo-colonial authoritarianism. Arabs and Muslim societies are devoid of public institutions for thinking, change and policy development. There are various shadowy groups and organizations claiming to represent the Arab-Islamic interests in North America. In real world affairs, hardly anyone seems genuinely capable to deal with the issue of terrorism that directly confronts the Muslim living in North America. Many pretend to be the spokespersons of the Arabs and Muslims communities but they are aligned with the official establishments including the intelligence agencies, lacking credibility, often playing the role of informants rather than representing the Islamic concerns. There are 57 or more, so-called Muslim countries member of the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC), not one of them has genuine Muslim leadership, nor Islam as a system of life. When the Muslim Ummah (nation), looks for intellectual security, all authoritarian leaders operate under the dictates of Western masters, namely the American and British leaders. Islam is One and so should be the believing folks, but there is no unity of thought and actions across the Muslim world, a typically neo-colonial landscape governed by ignorant and intellectually bankrupt rulers, subservient to the West. For ages, the Arabs and Muslims masses continue to pray to Almighty God for change, reformation and democratically elected governments without public demonstrations. Strangely enough, they seemed eager to hold demonstrations for the symbolic “cartoon” controversy, but not for the real world problems affecting the lives and future of the common Muslims. For sure, there is no “terrorism” in thoughts and in words of the prayers and no Arabic- Islamic vocabulary exists of “extremism” or “terrorism” to reciprocate the Western accusations and mass media propaganda campaigns.

Would the American and British political leaders learn any lessons from the war on Iraq? John Laughland (“The Mask of Altruism Disguising a Colonial War: The Guardian: Aug 2, 2004), offers a real world perspective: “Just an old fashioned colonial war – the reality of killing and escalation of violence, disguised with the hypocritical mask of altruism. If Iraq has not taught us that, then we are incapable of ever learning anything.”  Every beginning has its end. It is just that most transgressors do not know about it when they crossover the limits of the Laws of God. The Roman, Austro-Hungarian and British Empires collapsed after they violated the limits. Nazis claimed to run the world for thousands of years, but ended up in just 12 years after killing millions of human beings throughout the Western hemisphere. Fascism met resistance at its early stages. The beginning envisions the end. The USSR was defeated, the day it raided the destitute people of Afghanistan and disturbed the dead in graveyards with continuous bombing. The American and British surrendered the day international community learned about the Guatonomo Bay prisoners and photos of the Abu Ghraib Prison. An estimated 3 million civilians have been killed by the American-British bombings in Iraq since March 2003. Millions of others have been displaced/killed in the on-going wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan. America runs the military dominated Pakistan and operates drone attacks on the civilians without any accountability. Reports indicate more than 3000 civilians killed in Waziristan tribal belt of Pakistan just last year. After the facts, the American and British apologists would put up the explanations that the soldiers had social and mental disorders. On the continuing daily massacres of the civilians and rapes of women in Iraq,

According to Paul Craig Roberts, the neo-conservative policy claims: …evil terrorists attacked virtuous America. America is protecting itself by going to war and overthrowing regimes that sponsor or give shelter to terrorists, erecting in their place democracies loyal to America. In a rational context, the “War on Terrorism” has nothing to do with the alleged terrorists; it is a war to help Halliburton, Bectal and other corporations to capitalize their holds on the oil supplies and gas business. Defense Secretary Rumsfeld contracted Halliburton of Dick Cheney for 7 billion works to be done in Iraq before the invasion of March 2003. President Bush passed the Executive Order # 13303, giving complete immunity from criminal prosecution to the American oil companies dealing with the Iraqi oil management. Who is going to write the closing chapter of the history of the “War on Terrorism?” Is the history going to wait for the ceasation of the unilateral hostilities? Would the American-led war achieve its agenda priorities or meet the same destiny as it happened to the Roman, Nazis and the USSR Empires? Obviously, history will judge the nations by their actions, not by the claims of the leaders.

Did the US Empire achieve any of its strategic goals in transporting super war machines and themilitary and civilian death squads to Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan? Chris Floyd (“Darkness Renewed: Terror as a Tool of Empire,” 04/2009) explains the prevalent reality in global affairs:

“The United States government is planning to use “cover and deception” and secret military operations to provoke murderous terrorist attacks on innocent people. Let’s say it again: Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, George W. Bush and the other members of the unelected regime in Washington plan to deliberately foment the murder of innocent people – your family, your friends, your lovers, you – in order to further their geopolitical ambitions.”

Overwhelmingly deficient with its thinking, moral and intellectual resources, America and Britain desperately need “Idea MEN” and THINKING people to avert the obvious military defeats and surrender in Iraq and Afghanistan. These are some of the critical measures that any strategic thinkers should prefer to have for change and adaptability to the future in -waiting for the lost in action US and British forces.

Paul J. Balles (“The World Sickest Warrior State” 03/2010, ICH), offers candid observations:

“We have now reached a stage where our extreme horrors of brutality and cruelty have exceeded our past records. We no longer have the rationale of moral righteousness of the earlier wars…. There were no excuses for Abu-Ghraib, but our interest in that inhuman travesty dried up and blew away. We have little concern about our violations of human rights in Guantanamo. ….the real horrors – of this war come with the primitive killer mentality developed in our youth. I’ve now seen a half dozen documentary films and read eyewitness accounts that reveal troops or pilots gloating over the massacres of civilians who just happened to be available targets.”

Undoubtedly, the wars spread hatred, chaos and human degeneration as are the global institutions responsible for security, peace and conflict resolution. The UN, NATO and other security agencies are driven to failure by their own deviations of the original role-play and inaction in situation of real world challenges. They have been manipulated and misled by the contemporary superpowers as was the devastating fate of the League of Nations. When something loses its purpose and direction, it ends-up in self-defeat and piles of garbage. The US-British strategic policy makers do not have the right kind of mindset and weapons to fight against Islam and God.  Simply put, they must be either sadistic or lack rational thinking to fight against Muslims and God that no human being can imagine to have the capacity to do so – unless they believe in illusion not reality  of cartoons of superhuman being.  They appear to miss the historical conclusion that those people and nations who dare to cross-over the limits of REASON and global responsibility, do end –up in failure and self generated disasters. Both are entrapped in self-generated illusions and are fighting against their own interest and survival.  American and British policy makers appear more victims of their own failing mindset than the challenges posed by the Talibans and other handful of Mujihdeens fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq. America and its allies need a Navigational Change. Karzai of Afghanistan, Maliki of Iraq and Zaradri (Pakistan) are the hired stooges and stage puppets, not the voices of the people in their nations. President Obama was elected in 2008 with reference to “Audacity of Hope” onward to a public promise: “Yes We Can.”  But the contemporary history is telling loud and clear that Obama played joke with the mankind – raised false hope of change and when he assumed the office,  he renegade his global vision and commitments to change and reform the Bush’s era wrongs and injustices to the interests of the people of the United States.  History shall judge the leaders and nations by their actions, not by their claims.

| KL War Crimes Tribunal: Prima Facie Case Established Against Bush And Blair!


| KL War Crimes Tribunal: Prima Facie Case Established Against Bush And Blair!

Prima Facie Case Established Against Bush And Blair

Posted: 2011/11/21
From: Mathaba
The Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal (Tribunal) entered its third day of hearing war crimes charge of Crimes against Peace against George W Bush (former U.S. President) and Anthony L Blair (former British Prime Minister) in Kuala Lumpur.
KUALA LUMPUR, 21 November 2011 –  For the first time a war crime charge has been heard against the two former heads of state of Britain (Blair) and USA (Bush) in compliance with due legal process, wherein complaints from war victims had been received, duly investigated and formal charges instituted by the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission (Commission).With the close of the Prosecution’s case, the Defence opened the proceedings to argue that there is no case to answer. The Tribunal will decide if there is a prima facie case established against the accused. Some of the points submitted and argued are stated in the following paragraphs. 

The Defence responded to the Prosecution’s case. War crimes are difficult to comprehend especially in a distant land. Persons accuse of war crimes are innocent until proven guilty. Some of the documents tendered fall under the hearsay rule. And the Tribunal assured counsels that it had taken note of that and was aware of the same and would take into account the relevant credibility and weight to be attached to such documents.

The Defence submitted that there is no case to answer and argued their stand. The argument raised was one on the doctrine of ‘responsibility to protect’ raises the moral and legal obligation to protect people facing aggression. In 1999, US and NATO intervention in Kosovo was to prevent genocide and was carried out without UN approval. The circumstances required such an action.

The Defence also raised the argument of self-defence. Anticipatory self-defence is permissible under the UN Charter Article 51. The Defence argued that pre-emptive strikes are permissible once a state is certain and believes that another state is about to attack it militarily. Examples cited in support of the use of this doctrine are when Israel attacked on Egypt in 1967 and the attack on Iraq’s nuclear reactor in 1981.

Anticipatory self-defence arises when war is unavoidable, the response must be proportional and the threat must be immediate. Bush had fulfilled these preconditions as stated in his memoirs where he said that the use of force against Iraq was the last option and that all diplomatic measures must be exhausted. And cited Iraqi acts of hostility including the firing at US planes enforcing the no fly zone in 2002. The non-compliance with the UN resolutions on weapons inspection and the immediate threat of WMD that was believed that Iraq possessed.

Saddam Hussein had inflicted acts of aggression and violation against his own people. UN Security Council Resolutions 660 and 678 (pertaining to the invasion of Kuwait) were for Iraq to comply with its international obligations. The failure of Iraq to comply with these resolutions was the background for the passing of UN Security Council Resolution 1441.

That Iraq had attacked its own people such as the Kurds and Shiites including the use of chemical weapons is well documented. And humanitarian intervention is justified.

The Defence argued that the attack on Iraq is justified based on the UN Security Resolution 1368 and 1373 that were passed after the 9/11 attacks. These resolutions affirmed the right of nations to defend against acts of terrorists and combat with any means the threat of terrorists’ acts. It was submitted based on US government documents that Iraq had a link with terrorism through terrorist operations in Kurdish areas and against Western nations including the US.

In 1998 there were mass killings in Kosovo by the state. There was no UN support for the intervention. The US unilaterally launched an intervention on humanitarian grounds. The UN did not condemn this intervention. That is a tacit approval of the humanitarian intervention doctrine.

The Saddam Hussein regime had used murder as a tool of terror and control. The UN Security Council Resolution 1483 (23 May 2003) was tacit approval of the invasion of Iraq.

The Prosecution responded that all the issues raised by the Defence in no way justified the actions of the accused. Authorities or documents relied upon were essentially, US government agencies.

There is no doctrine of ‘responsibility to protect’ and ‘humanitarian intervention’. These supposed doctrines go against the UN Charter and are therefore, unlawful. The entire conduct of both the accused was one of illegally waging war to effect regime change. And this is a Crime against Peace. The evidence submitted by the prosecution clearly shows a policy and planning dating years before the 2003 invasion. There is no issue of any humanitarian intervention. And both the accused had participated in this planning and ordering action.

There is no issue of self-defence where the right to strike pre-emptively arises. There was no issue of anticipatory self-defence. Iraq was not about to wage war nor was it threatening to wage war. This is a groundless assertion. 9/11 was used as a pretext to wage war against Iraq after Afghanistan. The plans to attack Iraq were drawn before 9/11. Bush and Blair continued to further their agenda of effecting regime change.

Saddam Hussein had carried out killings of his people in the 1980s through the use of chemical weapons. There was no action on these matters at the relevant time on grounds of humanitarian intervention. And there was real immediacy in 1988. Instead the invasion in 2003 resulted in the death of 1.4 million Iraqis. This certainly was not about protecting the Iraqis’ human rights.

There is no link between terrorism with Iraq. There is no evidence submitted on this.

The Prosecution had submitted that not only have they established a prima facie but have proven their case beyond a reasonable doubt on the guilt of the accused.

After deliberating, the Tribunal made a unanimous finding that a prima facie case has been made out against both the accused. The accused are now to enter their Defence.

The matter was adjourned till the following morning at 9.00am.

The trial is being held in an open court from November 19-22, 2011 at the premises of the Kuala Lumpur Foundation to Criminalise War (KLFCW) at 88, Jalan Perdana, Kuala Lumpur.

Further Information

For further information, please contact:

Dato’ Dr Yaacob Merican
Secretary General of the KLWCC Secretariat
Tel:                         +6012-227 8680

Ms Malkeet Kaur
Media Representative of KLWCC
Tel:                         +6012-3737 886

Tribunal Members

Dato’ Abdul Kadir Sulaiman
Dato’ Zakaria Yatim (Recused)
Tunku Sofiah Jewa
Prof Salleh Buang
Mr Alfred Lambremont Webre
Prof Emeritus Datuk Dr Shad Saleem Faruqi
Prof Niloufer Bhagwat (Recused)

The Prosecution

Prof Gurdial S Nijar
Prof Francis Boyle
Mr Avtaran Singh

Amicus Curiae (appointed Defence team)

Mr Jason Kay
And 3 other counsels.

The Charge

Crimes Against Peace filed against George W Bush (former President of the U.S.) and Anthony L Blair (former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom) wherein they are charged as follows:

The Accused persons had committed Crimes against Peace, in that the Accused persons planned, prepared and invaded the sovereign state of Iraq on 19 March 2003 in violation of the United Nations Charter and international law.

The Tribunal will adjudicate and evaluate the evidence presented on facts and law as in any court of law. The judges of the Tribunal must be satisfied that the charge is proven beyond reasonable doubt and deliver a reasoned judgement. The verdict and the names of the persons found guilty will be entered in the Commission’s Register of War Criminals and publicised worldwide.

“WHY is it that the murder of one man is considered a criminal act whereas the killing of hundreds of thousands of innocent people committed in wars, is not considered so?” — Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, former Prime Minister of Malaysia.

Stay Tuned

To ensure readers do not miss further updates, they are urged to sign up via email at www.mathaba.net/go/daily and if they have Facebook or Twitter accounts or RSS news feed readers, to like the page atwww.facebook.com/mathaba.net or follow @mathaba on Twitter, or subscribe to the main news feed for Mathaba News atrss.mathaba.net/MathabaNews


| Also see:

War Criminals

War crimes are “violations of the laws or customs of war”, including but not limited to “murder, the ill-treatment or deportation of civilian residents of an occupied territory to slave labor camps”, “the murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war”, the killing of hostages, “the wanton destruction of cities, towns and villages, and any devastation not justified by military necessity”.  http://criminalisewar.org/?page_id=12

| Palestine – What Next? ~ Alan Hart.


| Palestine – What Next? ~ Alan Hart

Palestine – What Next? ~ Alan Hart

In advance of the formal burial of the Palestinian Authority’s bid for state recognition at the UN, BBC Radio 4′s flagship Today programme was on the right track. In his introduction to a quite revealing report, presenter John Humphrys said reporter Kevin Connolly had gone to Israel to find out “what hopes there are, if any, for the establishment of a Palestinian state.”

Among those Connolly interviewed were Akiva Eldar, the Ha’aretz columnist who has been a constant critic of Israel’s settlement policy. He said. “The settlers have won and Israel has lost… Israel must now live with the consequences.”

As I have written from time to time in the past, the possible consequences include Israel tearing itself apart in a Jewish civil war; Israel going down and taking the whole region with it; and/or a final Zionist ethnic cleansing of Palestine.

If I take it as a given (I do) that Israel’s leaders are not remotely interested in peace on terms that would satisfy even minimum Palestinian demands and needs for justice, and that as things are the major powers will continue to allow Zionism to go on calling the policy shots, the question arising is this: What can the Palestinians do themselves to advance their cause?

It’s not for the gentile me to tell the Palestinians what to do but if I was a Palestinian the following is what I would want to happen.

The first and immediate priority – the dissolution of the PA, effectively making Israel fully and completely responsible and accountable for its occupation. Having to take complete responsibility would be quite costly for Israel financially and in terms of the additional call on its security resources. And in theory it ought to be less difficult (at present it’s impossible) for the Palestinians, with the assistance of concerned and caring agencies and governments, to hold Israel accountable to international law for its occupation policies and actions.

Why should the PA be dissolved? Apart from the fact that it’s corrupt and useless, the short answer is in two parts.

One is that under the leadership of Mahmoud Abbas and his Fatah cronies, the PA’s main role has been to keep the Palestinians, Hamas supporters on the West Bank in particular, under control for Israel. In that context the PA has been more or less a quisling authority, collaborating with Israel, and by so doing it has undermined the liberation struggle.

The other is that under Abbas’s leadership the PA has subverted Palestinian democracy. He was elected as chairman in January 2005 for a term of four years which expired in January 2009. There should then have been new elections. In the absence of them Abbas and his PA are without legitimacy and thus any real mandate to represent the occupied and oppressed Palestinians.

Abbas’s response to the statement by the Security Council’s admissions committee that it had failed to reach agreement on the PA’s bid for full membership and state recognition was to say that he would “keep on trying.” He also ruled out the possibility of dissolving the PA.

I think it’s not unreasonable to speculate that his prime concern is to preserve the good life and privileges he and his Fatah leadership colleagues enjoy. Arafat was never a member of the discredited Arab Leadership Club. Abbas is a fully paid up member. On reflection I also think his decision to seek UN recognition of a Palestinian state was entirely self-serving. He knew the bid could not succeed but he calculated, correctly, that it would focus global attention on the Palestinian cause in a way that would improve his low standing in the eyes on his people. It did but only briefly.

Obviously the dissolution of the PA will only happen if enough Palestinians demand it. But in my view it’s not only the occupied and oppressed Palestinians who need to do the demanding. In my view it’s time for Palestinians everywhere to become engaged by peaceful and democratic means in the struggle to end the Zionization of their homeland and secure their rights. Put another way, if the Zionist colonial project is to be contained and defeated, the incredible, almost superhuman steadfastness of the occupied and oppressed Palestinians must now be supplemented by practical, effective and co-ordinated Palestinian diaspora action. For what purpose?

Not only to bring about the dissolution of the PA but to have it replaced as soon as possible by a re-structured and re-invigorated PNC (Palestine National Council). Once upon a time this now side-lined, parliament-in-exile was the supreme decision-making body on the Palestinian side. Even Arafat was accountable to it. (It did, in fact, take him six long years to persuade a majority of PNC delegates representing Palestinians nearly everywhere to endorse his policy of politics and compromise with Israel. That happened towards the end of 1979. The PNC vote in favour of Arafat’s policy – the two-state solution – was 296 for it and only four against. From then on the Palestinian door was open to peace on terms which any rational government in Israel would have accepted with relief).

For the PNC to be brought back to life re-structured and re-invigorated, there would have to be elections to it in communities/constituencies throughout the Palestinian diaspora. The following by country and numbers of Palestinians is the most recent available estimate of its composition that I am aware of.

The occupied West Bank and the Gaza Strip – 4,200,000

Jordan – 2,900,000

Israel – 1,600,000

Syria – 800,000

Chile – 500,000

Lebanon – 490,000

Saudi Arabia – 280,245

Egypt – 270,245

United States – 270,000

Honduras – 250,000

Venezuela – 245,120

United Arab Emirates – 170,000

Germany -159,000

Mexico – 158,000

Qatar – 100,000

Kuwait – 70,000

El Salvador – 70,000

Brazil – 59,000

Iraq – 57,000

Yemen – 55,000

Canada – 50,975

Australia – 45,000

Libya – 44,000

Denmark – 32,152

United Kingdom – 30,000

Sweden – 25,500

Peru – 20,000

Columbia – 20,000

Spain – 12,000

Pakistan -10,500

Netherlands – 9,000

Greece – 7,500

Norway – 7,000

France – 5,000

Guatemala – 3,500

Austria – 3,000

Switzerland – 2,000

Turkey – 1,000

India – 300

That global spread of the original (1947/48) and subsequent (1967) Palestinian refugees and their descendants is an awesome tribute to the success of Zionist ethnic cleansing.

The prime task of a re-structured and re-invigorated PNC would be to debate and determine Palestinian policy and then represent it by speaking to power with one credible voice. That, I believe, would significantly improve the prospects for getting a real peace process going. By definition a real peace process is one that would require the major powers led by the U.S. to confront the Zionist monster.

The organizational effort required to bring the PNC back to life, re-structured and re-invigorated, is massive, but what might have taken years in the past could be done in months by making best and most effective use of the internet.

If diaspora Palestinians do not now make the effort and put their act together, I think it’s possible, even probable, that future Palestinian historians will conclude that they betrayed their occupied and oppressed brothers and sisters as much as the regimes of an impotent, corrupt and repressive Arab Order did.

Alan Hart has been engaged with events in the Middle East and their global consequences and terrifying implications – the possibility of a Clash of Civilisations, Judeo-Christian v Islamic