JB Campbell: Anti-American

December 14, 2010

by J. Bruce Campbell

The leakers are being called “anti-American.”

What decent person, anywhere in the world today, is not anti-American? Is there anyone more dangerous than our typical ignorant, arrogant American “citizen,” who very likely couldn’t find America on a marked map of the world? Well, yes: the American military man, who is the most dangerous son of a bitch on the planet. And I don’t mean that in a good way.

I’m anti-American. I really wasn’t until I returned to Rhodesia in January, ’73 to join up and help in their struggle against Communist terrorists. I’d been down there in ’71 for discussions with the government on bringing Americans and others wanting to be part of a new country project based on a book by my boss, Michael Oliver, called A New Constitution for a New Country. The plan was to have a minimum of a hundred square miles with no taxes and no draft, replacing the former tax-haven in Freeport, Bahamas. Thousands of productive Americans and others were ready to relocate.

Mike’s real name was Olitsky and he was a Lithuanian Jew who’d fled into Germany to escape Stalin’s Red Army. He wound up in Dachau for four years. He introduced me to Holocaust Revisionism when I ventured to ask him about his experience. He shrugged and said, “It was a factory. We worked during the day and stayed in a dormitory at night.”

“But what about the, uh, the-”
“The what?”
“You know, the killings.”
“I never saw any of that.”

Four years in Dachau, never saw any of that. Okay. He did see the US Army “liberate” the camp in April, ’45. The SS and Alpine troops recuperating there had negotiated a surrender to the Americans, who entered the camp and started shooting the guys who thought they were surrendering. Then the Americans marched the surviving soldiers (all the prison guards had fled days earlier) up to a wall near the hospital and set up a machine gun. Three hundred forty-six German soldiers on R&R were slaughtered in a few minutes, five hundred twenty in all that morning. George Patton handled the cover-up and protected the war criminals. The army doctor on the scene, Col. Howard Buechner, described it in his book, Dachau: Hour of the Avenger. Of the 32,000 inmates freed, about 1,200 were Jews, including Mike.

My new country project discussions were with the Rhodesian minister of internal affairs, Jack Howman. He rather indignantly turned us down. Nevertheless, I did return and take part in their war against Communist terror. I suppose it was during those two years that I became reluctantly anti-American. Our country, the good old USA, supported the Communist war of terror against the Rhodesian people, black and white. Our country put Robert Mugabe in power, just as it put Nelson Mandela in power a few years later. Mandela was Member Number One of the South African Communist Party. America put every Communist party in power in every single Communist country since 1917. That includes Lenin & Trotsky, Mao Tse Tung, Kim Il-sung, Ho Chi Minh, Tito, Pol Pot and Fidel Castro. Our government kept Stalin in power from 1924 until his death in ’53. It went to war in ’41 to rescue Stalin from well-deserved German destruction. Billions (trillions in today’s worthless money) were given by America to save Soviet Communism.

An itinerant writer named Robert K. Brown came to Salisbury, Rhodesia in 1974 to interview me. He said he was freelancing for Esquire Magazine and Guns Magazine. He wanted to know what would make a Californian such as I come over to this little country in southern Africa and fight terrorism? The interview eventually appeared in the first issue (Summer ’75) of a strange magazine called “Soldier of Fortune.” I took Brown up to Mt. Darwin and introduced him to my farmer friends who were on the front lines of terrorism every day and night of their lives. I asked him not to quote me because I could be prosecuted for “mercenary activities” by the State Department. He quoted the hell out of me but changed my name to “Mitchell McNair.” But the point of this is that he told me what he did for the CIA back in the ’50s… Brown was in the CIA’s Special Forces and was part of the assassination team that murdered Rafael Trujillo in ’61. But in ’58 and ’59, Brown ran guns to Fidel Castro to assist in his coup against Fulgencio Batista. Once Castro came to power, the CIA pretended to be against Castro to justify its gigantic power-grab of the government. But Castro, along with every other Communist leader in the world, was put in power by the US government. Then our government exploited the “threat” presented by Communism to justify “defense spending” and lucrative no-win wars. Today, the Chicoms, those ultimate Communists, are our business partners and we have arranged for the anti-Communist Moslems to be our new worst enemies.

Brown’s magazine was funded by the CIA and was immediately put to use in recruiting mercenaries for their ludicrous operation in Angola. I called Brown in Boulder at one point to ask why the hell he was recruiting for the foul Angolan terrorist, Holden Roberto? He said lamely, “Well, the CIA likes him.” Any questions so far?

The more I studied US history over the next few years, the more I came to hate everything this country stands for, or pretends to stand for. American history turns out to be one gigantic lie, as phony as a Hollywood movie. In fact, all we have come to believe about ourselves has pretty much come from Hollywood. This is no exaggeration. The American myth was created by a few Russian Jews who ripped off Tom Edison’s film process in New Jersey and split for the coast to avoid prosecution. Neal Gabler wrote a book entitled An Empire of Their Own, How the Jews Invented Hollywood. The inescapable fact is that not only did they invent Hollywood, but the entire myth of America as the promised land.

For Russian Jews, it was. America was the land of milk, honey and suckers by the millions. Our self-image as Americans is a Jewish image. The slaughter and rip-off and exile of American Indians to Bantustans we call “reservations” was glamorized (authorized) by Hollywood Jews. The reality of this genocide makes American condemnation of Zionist genocide of Palestinians meaningless. That is, it would be meaningless if any American politician condemned Israel, which hasn’t happened yet. If we had some bacon we could have bacon and eggs, if we had some eggs.

The whole American experience is based on mass murder and land-grabs and lies (broken treaties). Not one treaty made by the US Army with the Indians was left unbroken. Maybe the one with the Yakimas, but I’m not sure about that. Up in this country where we live, you see the slogan once in a while, “Custer Had It Coming.” When you investigate what all he did to the Lakota, Cheyenne and others, such as mass murdering women and children, for no reason other than ethnic cleansing, you have to conclude that he and his war criminals definitely had it coming.

Custer worked for Phil Sheridan and Bill Sherman, both of whom are in the War Crimes Hall of Fame. Their crimes against the Southern people and the Indian people will turn your hair white with shock. American (Yankee) war of aggression and genocide are the bases of all modern total war. The buffalo were exterminated just to cripple the Plains Indians. To punish the Nez Perce for resisting another broken treaty, the army slaughtered thousands of their Appaloosa horses. The army put the Nez Perce in boxcars in the winter of ’77 and shipped them to Ft. Leavenworth. This is the actual American way.

I’ll skip over our genocidal adventures in the Philippines and our Jewish-engineered role in the Great War and go right to the World War, or rather its aftermath in Europe. Our mopping-up method is described above with the Dachau massacre of surrendered troops. Such sadistic butchery was encouraged by a 1941 book “highly recommended” to the troops by Franklin Roosevelt, a book by an obscure Jew in advertising named Theodore Kaufman, entitled “Germany Must Perish!” It was the basis for what became known as the Morgenthau Plan for Germany, which called for the extermination of a large percentage of Germans, the forced sterilization of the rest and the destruction of all industry or its removal to the Soviet Union, flooding all mines and turning Germany into a goat pasture. Henry Morgenthau was FDR’s Jewish treasury secretary. George Patton writes in his memoirs that Eisenhower gave Morgenthau his plan, which was eventually drafted by another Jew named Weiss (Harry Dexter “White”). Upon war’s end, Eisenhower put the plan into effect with his order to starve to death all captured German PoWs. This is documented in James Bacque’s Other Losses. Over a million German prisoners died eating grass and bugs out in open fields in the American starvation program from May to December, 1945.

Then, Ike starved millions more German civilians throughout that period ’til 1947, when the Cold War started and America needed Germany to pretend to fight our erstwhile ally, Stalin. This merciless starvation program is documented also by Bacque in his Crimes & Mercies. Naïve people have doubted this crime against humanity and asked, “Why didn’t the Germans complain, if what you say is true?” Answer: For one thing, the Germans are not a complaining people, the way Jews are. This is not a good thing, but it’s the way they are. They shut up and take it. But the real point is, to whom could they complain if they were complaining people? The Americans? The British, the Soviets, the French, all of whom were participants in the American genocide program? Bacque estimates that between nine and thirteen million Germans were slaughtered in Eisenhower’s starvation and forced exposure operation in two years.

Then there was the Eisenhower program officially called by the army, Operation Keelhaul. If you still think that being an American is a good thing, consider this one… During the war, millions of Russians, Ukrainians, Cossacks and others escaped from Soviet slave-terror into Italy, Austria, Yugoslavia and other countries. Many of them were Red Army soldiers captured by the German army at Stalingrad, Leningrad, Kursk and countless other battles and sent to PoW camps in Germany and Poland and Italy. The hysterical beast, Josef Stalin, who fled Moscow at the approach of the German army, gave the order that any Red Army soldier who surrendered was to be shot when the war was over. This was well-known. Nevertheless, Dwight Eisenhower broke all international laws regarding treatment of captured enemy forces and ordered the rounding up and handing over of these men and their families. Approximately five million of them were forced into boxcars by US Army soldiers at bayonet point and sent east to Hungary, where they were taken off the trains and either shot by the tracks or sent to the Gulag Archipelago to be worked to death over the next year. This was documented also by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn in his monumental record of Soviet/American bestiality. I have interviewed veterans who participated in this unimaginable betrayal of humanity.

Reportedly, the only photo on Ike’s Oval Office desk was one of Josef Stalin-autographed.

In 1956, our President Eisenhower encouraged the Hungarians to rise up and kick the Soviets out of Budapest, promising them American help if they showed they deserved it. So the Hungarians rose up and seized all the Jews that Khrushchev and Stalin had installed over them, hanging and shooting many hundreds, and forced the Soviets out of Budapest. Khrushchev wrote in his memoirs that he waited a couple of weeks for Eisenhower to follow through on his promise of aid, but it never came. So he ordered the tanks back in and the wiping out of the freedom fighters.

This is the actual American way, administered by respectable political pukes such as Dwight David Eisenhower, nicknamed in the 1915 West Point yearbook as “The Terrible Swedish Jew.”

We are just now learning what the army and air force did to the Koreans during the Korean War. Millions were slaughtered. We Americans wonder why the crazy North Koreans are so paranoid and ready to fight? We wonder because we don’t know what the hell our government did to those people in the 1950s. We have no idea that our government approved the Soviet occupation of North Korea in 1945, making it Communist in ’48. Then we drew an arbitrary line across the 38th parallel and created “South Korea” and prepared to go to war against “North Korea” when everyone was ready in 1950. War made to order with unbelievable profits to the bankers and “defense contractors.” 34,000 Americans killed – for what?

Viet Nam. Did you know that Ho Chi Minh was a US intelligence agent during World War II? He made his reports to the OSS at the Texaco office in Hanoi. Did you know that the American OSS installed Ho Chi Minh in power in the northern half of Indochina in 1945? An arbitrary line was drawn across the 17th parallel in ’54 and our northern puppet started the war against our southern puppet in ’59, which we of course lost in ’75. Another war made to order with unbelievable profits to the bankers and “defense contractors.” Millions of Vietnamese slaughtered by our wonderful boys, 58,000 of whom were also slaughtered – for what?

The United Nations is a US front. It was devised by American traitors in the Council on Foreign Relations in 1945 and has always been housed in New York. John D. Rockefeller, Jr. donated the sixteen acres in Manhattan and built the edifice in 1951. Its first crime against humanity was the creation of the Israeli nation of parasites in 1948, while the UN was still headquartered on Long Island. The UN waged war against Rhodesia and South Africa throughout the ’60s and ’70s, always subsidized by American taxpayers. Most Americans don’t know or remember that the Korean War was fought by American soldiers under the blue and white flag of the United Nations.

And now, our wonderful boys are fighting for Israel against Moslems in Iraq and Afghanistan and secretly killing thousands in Pakistan and Yemen. These wars are based on Israeli lies stemming from their massacre of 9/11. Even though the American FBI director, Mueller, admitted there was no evidence of Moslem hijackers, we invaded Afghanistan. Americans don’t know that the Taliban were our guys until they objected to a Unocal pipeline being constructed across their country. Richard Armitage told them they could either have a carpet of gold (if they went along with the pipeline) or a carpet of bombs if they didn’t cooperate. They didn’t cooperate and virtually overnight, the Americans categorized them as the enemy, showering our gold on a rival group, the Northern Alliance. Our former friends, the Taliban, are kicking our butts, which is only fair. You invade someone’s country based on your own lies, you deserve to have your butt kicked.

Football star and millionaire Pat Tillman fell for the 9/11 legend and joined the Army Rangers to hunt down Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan. But then he and his brother were sent to Iraq, which puzzled them both. Why Iraq? Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 (but neither did Osama or Afghanistan). Pat Tillman signed his own death warrant with his questions and complaints about invading Iraq. So he was sent back to Afghanistan to be silenced. In one of the dumbest excuses for a skirmish I’ve ever heard of, he was sent forward to engage with some non-existent enemy fighters. Then he was shot at by his own guys behind him. The odd thing is that his forehead had three .22 caliber bullet holes in it. The M-4 rifle shoots a .22, of course, but it’s a high-power, high-velocity .223 that does serious damage. The fact that his forehead had three .22 holes and wasn’t obliterated means he was executed with three low-powered. 22LR bullets from a pistol. The general in charge of the official heroic lies about enemy action and then “friendly fire” was Stanley McChrystal, an infamous black ops leader of The Secret Team and organizer of many, many assassinations.

And so, I’m anti-American. I suspect that if Pat Tillman were alive he’d be just as anti-American. Real patriots can get that way quickly when they realize they’ve been hustled.

Don’t start about the Constitution. Don’t tell me that if we just stuck to the Constitution we’d be in good shape. I’ve found that people who go on about the Constitution have never read it. They don’t understand that it’s just a seven-part plan for running the government. They don’t understand that it was crafted by Freemasons using Masonic lodge rules of order as a template. They don’t know or forgot that the founders sneaked the Constitution on us when they were supposed to modify the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union between the States.

The Bill of Rights was our friend and it was added by Patrick Henry and truly patriotic friends to protect us from the Constitutional government. But George Bush and his PATRIOT Act destroyed the Bill of Rights. Obama is a foreign-born CIA asset so he has no understanding of the Bill of Rights. Apparently both he and his strange wife lost their law licenses several years ago anyway and I suspect they missed Bill of Rights day in law school.

I’m not sure what it is about America that we’re expected to love. The government? The Federal Reserve? The IRS? Our banking system? Wall Street? How about our schools? The way we conduct our foreign policy? How about the CIA and sanctioned kidnapping, torture and false imprisonment and killing Israel’s enemies with our cowardly Predator flying death machines? Maybe the FBI, America’s number one terrorist organization?

Tell me, what is there to love? Our farms and Monsanto suicide seeds and all our fake food? Our labor unions that don’t try to protect American jobs? How about NAFTA that was jammed down our throats by Bill Clinton and Rush Limbaugh? You don’t remember that 1994 tag-team?

Maybe we should love Wal-Mart and all the Chinese junk inside. How about our great industries? Wait a minute-we don’t have any industries. They’re all in China.

Should we love our cities? How about the War on Drugs and the War on Terror. We really need a War on Warmongers and Profiteers. I won’t even ask if we’re supposed to love our politicians, our judges and our news media. Our ranches are nice, except the cattle are full of growth hormones and antibiotics.

Nope. Sorry. Nothing here to love, if we’re honest. Maybe if we brought our occupation forces home from the 120 countries they’re occupying, this country wouldn’t be so hateful. But there’s a gene in us that makes us extremely dangerous and destructive. We have been conditioned to view ourselves as exceptional-better than other people-and deserving of whatever other people have, such as land, gold, oil, water, whatever. You can see this gene metastasizing in the leaked videos of Americans slaughtering Iraqi civilians from our multi-million dollar attack helicopters. I say they’re ours because we’re on the hook for them.

Somebody is going to say, Well partner, you better love your right to shoot your mouth off and you can thank a veteran for that right. Uh, huh. You mean the guy over in Iraq, blowing away a family that misunderstood orders in a foreign language to stop at this goddamned roadblock (that wasn’t here yesterday)? You think I owe my free-speech right to a guy who spent the war spraying Agent Orange on foreign civilians? Do you think any of the ten amendments in the Bill of Rights was reinforced by the crew of the Enola Gay? My old man was a marine in the first World War. I said to him, Man, you made the world safe for Democracy! He just looked at me, like, very funny.

It is not safe to shoot your mouth off these days and hasn’t been for a long time. The military is not making it any safer, in fact, just the opposite. The US military is breaking the law wholesale by acting as “law enforcement,” in complete violation of the law (Posse Comitatus). But shut my mouth, because there is no law anymore. We’re under the law of the gun, or Deuteronomy, which is the same thing.

Most people today are afraid even to READ my material, let alone comment on it. Let alone write something along these lines. Why do you suppose there’s so much fear in this country since 9/11? Is the military relieving this fear or reinforcing it? What about the reports that the military will be rounding up dissidents? Don’t believe them? They’re already illegally working as cops. The military does not protect ANYONE’s rights. The military kills people and destroys property. No American is safer because our military is killing Moslems in Iraq or Afghanistan-just the opposite. Not only is the military killing the world with depleted uranium munitions, but it is causing a blinding hatred of us. Just imagine armed thugs breaking into your house or your relative’s house and what it would do to your mind, assuming they didn’t blow you away because of the look of resentment on your face.

I discovered myself, years ago, that the FEMA camps are staffed by the 300th Military Police POW Command headquartered in Inkster, Michigan.

An honest American has to admit that he hates this country, not just the government. The government is a reflection of the people who pay for it. This country isn’t what you thought it was and it never has been. We’ve been conditioned to pledge allegiance to the flag and to the nation for which it stands, but what it stands for isn’t what Hollywood has had us believing since we were little kids.

All leaks are good, as long as they’re the real deal, not redacted or altered to make us support Israel. The only way we can survive is to know the truth about what government and the corporations have been secretly doing to us and others. The truth may be anti-American, but that’s the way the cookie crumbles.


Pakistan No Obedient Ally

August 12, 2010

WikiLeaks data shows how volatile nation is forced to act against own self interests

By ERIC MARGOLIS, QMI Agency

WASHINGTON – Release of 92,000 U.S. military field reports from Afghanistan by WikiLeaks has revealed the war’s ugly underbelly and embarrassed the hell out of Washington and its NATO allies, including Canada.

They have fired back, claiming release of these old reports from 2004-2009, endangers “our boys.”

Nonsense. The only thing the truth endangers are the politicians who have hung their hats on the Afghan War and some paid informers.

The facts are shocking: Wide-scale killing of civilians by U.S. and NATO forces; torture of prisoners handed over to the Communist-dominated Afghan secret police; death squads; endemic corruption and theft; double-dealing and demoralization of western occupation forces facing ever fiercer Taliban resistance.

I’ve been reporting on the lies and propaganda about the Afghan war since 2001.

The most interesting part of Wikigate was Pakistan’s supposedly duplicitous behaviour in aiding the U.S.-led war while maintaining secret links with the Taliban and its allies.

The U.S. government and media have been blasting Pakistan while downplaying the atrocities – and, charges WikiLeaks, “war crimes” – committed by western forces.

Here’s the bottom line on Pakistan’s “duplicity.”

After 9/11, the U.S. threatened to “bomb Pakistan back to the Stone Age” unless it turned against the Taliban, a religious, anti-Communist movement, and opened Pakistan to U.S. military forces and intelligence operations.

This was told to me by a former head of ISI, Pakistan’s intelligence service whose directors I have known since 1985.

Former Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf says his nation was forced to reluctantly give in to intense U.S. pressure and abandon the Taliban, which served as Pakistan’s proxy army in Afghanistan battling the still active Afghan Communist Party – Tajik Northern Alliance, also backed by Russia and Iran. Intensifying efforts by India to extend its influence into Afghanistan deeply worry Pakistan.

Pakistan was forced by the U.S. to act against its own vital strategic interests. Southern Afghanistan has long been Pakistan’s sphere of influence.

This column revealed that in 2007, Pakistan and India concluded that the U.S. and its dragooned allies would be defeated and driven from Afghanistan. Both old foes began implementing a proxy war to control strategic Afghanistan.

Pakistan was compelled to follow a dual-track policy: Accepting semi-occupation by the U.S. and $1 billion annually from Washington and paying lip service to the U.S.-led war, while keeping open links to Taliban and tribal militants.

This was basic common sense. No one should have been surprised – particularly not Washington which has a long record of abandoning faithful allies.

Washington and U.S. media are heaping blame for the growing fiasco in Afghanistan on Gen. Hamid Gul, former director general of the ISI intelligence agency.

Gul led the anti-Soviet struggle in Afghanistan in the 1980s and was one of America’s most formidable allies.

I knew Gul well. He is not anti-American. He is pro-Pakistan, a Pakistani patriot at a time when so many Pakistani politicians and generals have been bought like bags of Basmati rice.

Many of the false charges against Gul came from the Communist-led Afghan secret police.

What Washington really wants is a totally obedient, obsequious Pakistan, not a real ally.

But the interests of the two nations must at times diverge

Trying to make Pakistan into a satellite state will result in that vastly important, nuclear-armed nation one day exploding with anti-American hatred, as was the case in Iran in 1979.

The U.S.-led war in Afghanistan is putting the two nations on a collision course.

Here in Washington, the U.S. Congress just ignored the WikiLeaks scandal and voted for yet more billions to fuel the Afghanistan War.

Politicians are petrified to oppose this nine-year war, lest they be accused of being anti-patriotic, the kiss of death in hyper-patriotic America – where flag-wavers root for foreign wars so long as their kids don’t have to serve and they don’t have to pay taxes to finance them.

eric.margolis@sunmedia.ca


A powerful but masochistic expression of gratitude by the USA to Israel

June 15, 2010

Written by Mark Glenn

Today, while driving through town, I wound up behind a minivan that had a big sticker on the back. The sticker had an Israeli flag in the middle of it and under it the quotation from the book of Genesis that reads “I will bless those who bless thee.”

I would like to take this time to list my own reasons for thanking and blessing Israel, our lone ally in the Middle East, for everything she has done for us, since I am quite sure most Americans are unaware of just what kind of friend she has been to us.

For extorting from me and my fellow Americans $16,000,000,000 (billion) a year for the last 4 decades, we bless thee.

For taking our most sophisticated weapons technology and stealing it for yourself without paying the American Patent Holders, we bless thee.

For taking that high-tech military technology and selling it to our enemies,such as the Russians and Chinese, thus further endangering us, we bless thee.

For using that weaponry in a sustained attack against a United States Ship,the USS Liberty, in an attempt to sink her, thus preventing US Servicemen from revealing to the rest of the world information concerning the War Crimes they witnessed you commit against Egyptian Soldiers in the Sinai Desert during the Six Day War, we bless thee.

For killing 35 and wounding 170 American Sailors aboard the USS Liberty, we bless thee.

For bribing the United States Government into covering it up, preventing any justice from being done for the benefit of the families of the lost sailors – as well as the American People, we bless thee.

For sending your Agents into Egypt and blowing up American Buildings for the purpose of blaming the Arabs in an event known as the Lavon Affair, we bless thee.

For sending your agents into Libya during the Reagan Administration, and broadcasting radio messages in Arabic that were designed to sound like “terrorist cell planning” so that the US would initiate military strikes against Ghaddafi, we bless thee.

For withholding information from us concerning the planned attacks against the US Marine Barracks in Lebanon, attacks you knew about through your moles in the Islamic World and about which you deliberately refused to warn us in order to further your interests against the Arabs, we bless thee.

For employing Jonathon Pollard, an American Serviceman paid to spy for Israel in order to steal even more of our National Security Secrets for your parasitic purposes, we bless thee.

For blackmailing President Clinton through one of your intelligence agents, Monica Lewinsky, in order to prevent a coherent Peace Program from being pushed forward between yourself and the Palestinian People that you have brutalized and murdered for the last 50 years, we bless thee.

For breaking every agreement you have made with your Arab Neighbors,stealing their land, displacing, murdering, and treating them like the animals you see them as, we bless thee.

For using your Agents within the first Bush Administration to involve us in the First Gulf War, causing the deaths of American men and women, and exposing our Servicemen to whatever bio weapons were/are responsible that has led to Gulf War Syndrome, we bless thee.

For your role in the September 11 attacks in this Country, and for blackmailing and bribing the US Government into deporting back to Israel the 100 or more Intelligence Agents that were arrested after the attacks, we bless thee.

For suppressing the information from the American People of your involvement in the September 11 attacks and sending us in the wrong direction in search of answers, we bless thee.

For using one of your Agents in the US Army Weapons Lab, Lt Colonel Philip Zack to steal Anthrax and distribute it into our Mail System, terrorizing US Citizens and killing several in order to blame the Arabs, we bless thee.

For using your Agents in the US Government, namely, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, Abrams, and the rest into initiating this War in the Middle East so that you could bring to heel all the enemies you have made during the last 50 years, we bless thee.

For using your Agents in the Media to lie to us on a minute by minute basis about the War, how “just” this cause is, and what the real reasons behind it are, we bless thee.

For using your Agents in the Christian Evangelical Community, such as Falwell, Graham, Swaggert, and the rest who praise you as God’s chosen people and further keep Americans in the dark about who you really are, what you have done, and what you are truly about, we bless thee.

For bringing idiots like Limbaugh, Liddy, Hannity, Beck, and Savage to the forefront as paid liars that will support you and further lead Americans astray, we bless thee.

For making America your attack dog, and for sending her sons and daughters to fight and die in all your future wars, we bless thee.

For using your influence in the Media to hide the real statistics about the War, the dead and wounded on both sides, we bless thee.

For using us in such a way that not only further inflames the Arab World against us, but as well has succeeded in our alienating ourselves against those nations with whom we have been friendly for over a Century, we bless thee.

And finally, for using your influence in our Media and Academia to flood our minds with Pornography and Lies, as well as inculcating in us a hatred for our History, Religion, and Culture, for dividing our Nation between races and sexes, and for releasing into our Society all of your plagues and filth that have left us a Rotted out Corpse of a once great Nation, oh Israel, our friend, we bless thee.

Note: For further information regarding the above cited events, read either books written by ex- Israeli Intelligence agent Victor Ostrovsky entitled “By Way of Deception” and “The Other Side of Deception”.

Mark Glenn is a writer for American Free Press Newspaper since Jan. 2007 and along with Hesham Tillawi a co-founder of the Crescent and Cross Solidarity Movement, the website of which can be found at www.crescentandcross.com.


US medical staff experimented on terror suspects: report

June 9, 2010

By Lucile Malandain (AFP) – 1 day ago

WASHINGTON – Medical personnel apparently experimented on terror detainees during CIA-led torture after the September 11 attacks, aiming to improve interrogation techniques, a human rights group said Monday.


Demonstrators from the group “World Can’t Wait” hold a mock waterboarding torture in Times Square

“There is evidence that they were calibrating the harm inflicted by these techniques allegedly and also looking to extend their knowledge about the effects,” said Nathaniel Raymond, from Physicians for Human Rights.

Read the rest of this entry »


Kashmir: Junta leaders must be brought to ICJ

March 18, 2010

Abdur Rashid

Article 2 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crimes of genocide (1948) defines genocide as “any of the following acts committed with intention to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious groups” including

1. Killing members of the group,

2. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group,

3. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part,

4. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group and

5. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

The present ruling military junta has been perpetrating almost all the crimes mentioned in Article 2 of the Convention against the Rohingya people without any slightest doubt amounting to genocide. Human Rights organizations have documented in a systematic way to prove that the junta is in fact carrying out genocide against the Rohingya people.

There are hundreds of instances of killing of Rohingya individuals like Zahir Ahmed 47, son of Abul Bashar of Khanripara who was tortured to death on February 4 in Maungdaw military intelligence office called Sarapa and his dead body thrown in to nearby river, almost everyday. In 1994 hundreds of youths had been shot to death extra judicially by the military and dumped in mass graves which were discovered by the public. In 1978 during Nagamin and in 1991-92 during Pyithaya operations hundreds of people were detained, tortured killed and starved to death by the ruling military junta. Are not these killings carried out with the intention to destroy Rohingya community?

Indictment of people with false cases like owning foreign mobile phone sets, secretly trading in narcotic tablets known as Yaba, illegally crossing to Bangladesh, and having links with insurgent groups etc. etc. with the intention of extorting money and torturing them to extract false confession is everyday phenomenon giving rise to a situation of fear in the Rohingya community. Police, Nasaka and intelligence people are roaming around towns and villages to find their prey almost all the time. Are these acts not causing serious bodily or mental harm to Rohingya community?

Revoking the citizenship and depriving the people from their political rights and perpetration of severe human rights violations like restriction on movement, forced labour, confiscation of lands, restriction on trade and business, seizure of agricultural produce in the name of tax have all been carried out under State patronization and direction. Are these acts not imposed on the Rohingyas to bring about a condition of life calculated to bring about their physical destruction?

Since 1980s severe restriction on marriage has been imposed on the Rohingya community. At times no permission is given at all to marry. Couples have to sign documents stating that they will not bear more than two children. Contraceptives injections have been given without the consent of the couple. Are not these measures intended to prevent birth within the Rohingya community?

All the above acts have been perpetrated against the Rohingya people alone among the people of Arakan because they are felt as dangerous, undesirable and a threat to junta’s continuous grip over Arakan. There is not the slightest doubt according to the definition of genocide that it is being carried out against the Rohingya people of Arakan. If Milosevic, Radovam Karadic could be brought to the International Court of Justice by the international community to face charges of war crimes and genocide why not the leaders of Burmese military junta should be brought to ICJ to face similar charges?

Author is the Publicity and media department, Rohingya Solidarity organization, Arakan, Burma.Email:info@arakanyoma.org


Wanted: Tony Blair for war crimes. Arrest him and claim your reward

January 28, 2010

Chilcot and the courts won’t do it, so it is up to us to show that we won’t let an illegal act of mass murder go unpunished

George Monbiot

The only question that counts is the one that the Chilcot inquiry won’t address: was the war with Iraq illegal? If the answer is yes, everything changes. The war is no longer a political matter, but a criminal one, and those who commissioned it should be committed for trial for what the Nuremberg tribunal called “the supreme international crime”: the crime of aggression.

But there’s a problem with official inquiries in the United Kingdom: the government appoints their members and sets their terms of reference. It’s the equivalent of a criminal suspect being allowed to choose what the charges should be, who should judge his case and who should sit on the jury. As a senior judge told the Guardian in November: “Looking into the legality of the war is the last thing the government wants. And actually, it’s the last thing the opposition wants either because they voted for the war. There simply is not the political pressure to explore the question of legality – they have not asked because they don’t want the answer.”

Others have explored it, however. Two weeks ago a Dutch inquiry, led by a former supreme court judge, found that the invasion had “no sound mandate in international law”. Last month Lord Steyn, a former law lord, said that “in the absence of a second UN resolution authorising invasion, it was illegal“. In November Lord Bingham, the former lord chief justice, stated that, without the blessing of the UN, the Iraq war was “a serious violation of international law and the rule of law“.

Under the United Nations charter, two conditions must be met before a war can legally be waged. The parties to a dispute must first “seek a solution by negotiation” (article 33). They can take up arms without an explicit mandate from the UN security council only “if an armed attack occurs against [them]” (article 51). Neither of these conditions applied. The US and UK governments rejected Iraq’s attempts to negotiate. At one point the US state department even announced that it would “go into thwart mode” to prevent the Iraqis from resuming talks on weapons inspection (all references are on my website). Iraq had launched no armed attack against either nation.

We also know that the UK government was aware that the war it intended to launch was illegal. In March 2002, the Cabinet Office explained that “a legal justification for invasion would be needed. Subject to law officers’ advice, none currently exists.” In July 2002, Lord Goldsmith, the attorney general, told the prime minister that there were only “three possible legal bases” for launching a war – “self-defence, ­humanitarian intervention, or UNSC [security council] authorisation. The first and second could not be the base in this case.” Bush and Blair later failed to obtain security council authorisation.

As the resignation letter on the eve of the war from Elizabeth Wilmshurst, then deputy legal adviser to the ­Foreign Office, revealed, her office had ­”consistently” advised that an ­invasion would be unlawful without a new UN resolution. She explained that “an unlawful use of force on such a scale amounts to the crime of aggression”. Both Wilmshurst and her former boss, Sir Michael Wood, will testify before the Chilcot inquiry tomorrow. Expect fireworks.

Without legal justification, the war with Iraq was an act of mass murder: those who died were unlawfully killed by the people who commissioned it. Crimes of aggression (also known as crimes against peace) are defined by the Nuremberg principles as “planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties”. They have been recognised in international law since 1945. The Rome statute, which established the international criminal court (ICC) and which was ratified by Blair’s government in 2001, provides for the court to “exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression”, once it has decided how the crime should be defined and prosecuted.

There are two problems. The first is that neither the government nor the opposition has any interest in pursuing these crimes, for the obvious reason that in doing so they would expose themselves to prosecution. The second is that the required legal mechanisms don’t yet exist. The governments that ratified the Rome statute have been filibustering furiously to delay the point at which the crime can be prosecuted by the ICC: after eight years of discussions, the necessary provision still has not been adopted.

Some countries, mostly in eastern Europe and central Asia, have incorporated the crime of aggression into their own laws, though it is not yet clear which of them would be willing to try a foreign national for acts committed abroad. In the UK, where it remains ­illegal to wear an offensive T-shirt, you cannot yet be prosecuted for mass ­murder commissioned overseas.

All those who believe in justice should campaign for their governments to stop messing about and allow the international criminal court to start prosecuting the crime of aggression. We should also press for its adoption into national law. But I believe that the people of this nation, who re-elected a government that had launched an illegal war, have a duty to do more than that. We must show that we have not, as Blair requested, “moved on” from Iraq, that we are not prepared to allow his crime to remain unpunished, or to allow future leaders to believe that they can safely repeat it.

But how? As I found when I tried to apprehend John Bolton, one of the architects of the war in George Bush’s government, at the Hay festival in 2008, and as Peter Tatchell found when he tried to detain Robert Mugabe, nothing focuses attention on these issues more than an attempted citizen’s arrest. In October I mooted the idea of a bounty to which the public could contribute, ­payable to anyone who tried to arrest Tony Blair if he became president of the European Union. He didn’t of course, but I asked those who had pledged money whether we should go ahead anyway. The response was overwhelmingly positive.

So today I am launching a website – www.arrestblair.org – whose purpose is to raise money as a reward for people attempting a peaceful citizen’s arrest of the former prime minister. I have put up the first £100, and I encourage you to match it. Anyone meeting the rules I’ve laid down will be entitled to one quarter of the total pot: the bounties will remain available until Blair faces a court of law. The higher the ­reward, the greater the number of ­people who are likely to try.

At this stage the arrests will be largely symbolic, though they are likely to have great political resonance. But I hope that as pressure builds up and the crime of aggression is adopted by the courts, these attempts will help to press ­governments to prosecute. There must be no hiding place for those who have committed crimes against peace. No ­civilised country can allow mass ­murderers to move on.


Letter from America: Blackwater’s trigger-happy criminals

January 19, 2010

By Dr. Habib Siddiqui

Blackwater, which now goes by the name Xe, is again all over the news. Two of its guys were among those killed on December 30 in the suicide attack at the CIA station at Forward Operating Base Chapman in Khost, Afghanistan.

According to Jeremy Scahill, author of the international bestseller Blackwater: The Rise of the World’s Most Powerful Mercenary Army, Puffin Foundation Writing Fellow at the Nation Institute, of the two Blackwater operatives killed at this bombing-one was a former Navy Seal; the other was an Army master chief sergeant-and that there was a third Blackwater operative that was wounded in the blast.

This report proves that the notorious mercenary group is still heavily engaged with the CIA for many clandestine activities not just inside Iraq but also in other territories including Afghanistan. What is also quite revealing from this incident is that CIA had lied to us again when it said that it had stopped all connections with Blackwater or Xe a month earlier. As recently disclosed in a Democracy Now interview with Illinois Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky, a leading member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the chair of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, such on-going collaboration with Blackwater, which is a repeat offender and known to have killed innocent civilians and committed war crimes, puts the very mission of the United States at risk, threatening and endangering the lives of the very Americans it is supposed to protect.

In his interview with the Vanity Fair magazine, CEO Erik Prince confirmed Blackwater’s deep-rooted association with the CIA. Shortly after 9/11, Prince claimed to have assembled a team, a secret clandestine team for the CIA that trained not at any of the official CIA facilities, but at one of his homes in Virginia. He trained this team, and then they were deployed around the world. And they would go into countries, and, in some cases, the CIA chief of station in the countries that they went into wasn’t even notified that they were going in there. They even went to Germany to hunt down suspected links to al Qaeda. The German government is embarrassed by such a revelation. Last Wednesday, prosecutors in Germany announced that they had launched a preliminary investigation into a report that the CIA and Blackwater had planned a secret operation in 2004 to assassinate a Syrian-born naturalized citizen of Germany in Hamburg with suspected ties to al-Qaeda.

In the last few days, two former Blackwater operatives — Justin Cannon, 27, and Christopher Drotleff, 29 — were arrested on murder charges stemming from their alleged involvement in the shooting deaths of two Afghan civilians and wounding a third in Kabul in May. These killings took place under the Obama Administration. This news surfaced just hours after it was revealed that Blackwater had reached a settlement with Iraqi victims of a string of shootings, including the Nisoor Square massacre, who had sued the company for the “senseless slaughter.” Even a U.S. military investigation conducted soon after the massacre found that Blackwater was unprovoked when it killed Iraqi civilians in Nisoor. The company is reportedly paying $100,000 for each of the Iraqis killed by its forces and between $20,000 and $30,000 to each Iraqi wounded. The amount of compensation is pitiful by American standard. It is worth noting that Blackwater received $1.5 billion dollars from the US government for its security and other clandestine activities in Iraq. As noted by Scahill 90 percent of this company’s revenue comes from the US government. For them to pay, two or three million dollars hush-money for their war crimes is nothing – only a bargain – basement sale price (Libya paid $10 million for each of the Lockerbie victims)!

News of the settlement came a week after a federal judge in Alexandria, VA, dismissed manslaughter charges against five Blackwater operatives involved in the Nisoor Square massacre that killed seventeen Iraqi civilians and wounded 27 in 2007. The lawsuit was filed by 70 Iraqis. The shootings, in which the guards opened fire with grenade launchers and machine guns on civilians in a busy Baghdad traffic circle, have since then become a rallying point for Iraqi resistance and grievances against America. To many Iraqis, the massacre is a symbol of U.S. disregard for their lives. U.S. District Judge Ricardo M. Urbina threw out the indictments because he found that prosecutors and agents had improperly used statements the guards had provided to the State Department with the understanding that the statements would not be used against them.

As is quite evident now, Condoleezza Rice’s U.S. State Department had given immunity to those killers, which violated its own policy in that regard. The appropriate legal venue for the trial should have been Iraq and not the USA. To avoid any trouble inside Iraq, those Blackwater employees were secretly ferried out of the country in the dead of night by the State Department and Blackwater, taken to the US, where they then got off on murder-on manslaughter charges, on a technicality.

Family members of the dead and survivors said that the judge’s decision added a painful epilogue to the incident, making a mockery of the justice that the United States was supposed to bring to their country. The Iraqi government also protested the judge’s decision. There is little doubt that the judge’s decision would fuel anti-American rhetoric and may affect the outcome of the important parliamentary election scheduled for March 7.

As noted by Scahill, there is yet another lawsuit filed by some other Iraqi victims against Blackwater in the state of North Carolina. The man who was perhaps the single most prominent witness to the Nisoor Square shooting was driving a vehicle right behind the first vehicle that the Blackwater guys shot. His nine-year-old son was shot in the head. His head exploded on a van, on his cousins and other people in the vehicle. That man has retained counsel in North Carolina and is suing. That could be a very problematic case for Blackwater, because they’re not only suing Erik Prince of Blackwater, they’re suing the individual shooters in state court in North Carolina. One can only hope that this lawsuit ends up actually going to trial.

As hinted earlier, Blackwater’s has been deeply involved with the CIA on a number of covert activities. The group was part of a covert program in Pakistan that included planning the assassination and kidnapping of Taliban and Al-Qaeda suspects. It is also said to be involved in a previously undisclosed U.S. military drone campaign that has killed scores of people inside Pakistan. Its operatives have been working under a covert program run by the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), the military’s top covert operations force. As noted by Scahill, Blackwater operatives are effectively running the drone bombings for both JSOC and the CIA inside Pakistan. Not only that, the group is taking part in ground operations with Pakistani forces under a subcontract with a local security firm – Kestral. The operations have included house raids and border interdictions in northwest Pakistan and other areas. Not surprisingly, many in Pakistan hold Blackwater responsible for some of the worst bombings inside Pakistan.

Blackwater personnel have also been accused of posing sometimes as aid workers. According to Scahill, JSOC has no regard for civilian population in its hunt for the so-called bad guys. Its drone attacks are known to kill more civilians than real ‘targets.’

Blackwater has also been given responsibility for planning JSOC operations in Uzbekistan. The program has become so secretive the top Obama administration and military officials have likely been unaware of its existence.

It is worth pointing out that the JSOC used to be headed by General McChrystal who has now been promoted and is the head of all US forces and NATO forces in Afghanistan. With such a development, one can expect more involvement from mercenary groups like Xe (or erstwhile Blackwater). It is not difficult to understand why more civilians have died from drone attacks in Obama’s first year than the preceding eight years of Bush. This is a sad resume of a president who had just won the Nobel Peace Prize!

- Asian Tribune -


When Obama took his eyes off the Palestine ball

January 1, 2010

By Daoud Kuttab

For a few minutes on Sunday I wondered what would have happened if I was reading rather than listening to US President Barack Obama’s statement from Hawaii. The US president took time off his Christmas vacation to speak about the incident that occurred on the flight from Amsterdam to Detroit. Had I not heard his voice and seen his picture, I would have thought that the speaker was none other than former US president George W. Bush. What has happened to Obama in less than one year?

Unlike any of his previous speeches, Obama spoke totally out of script by using the word “terrorism” three times in a statement that lasted only a few minutes. Until this incident, Obama had preferred to use the word “radical” or “extremist” rather than much more politically loaded terrorists and terrorism.

What made the statement sound more like a Bush speech rather than an Obama one was the reference to the aim of the anti-American attackers. Obama had the following to say: “Those plotting against us seek not only to undermine our security, but also the open society and the values that we cherish as Americans.”

Obama clearly capitulated to forces on the right who have repeatedly described any attack against the US because of its foreign policy as attacks against America’s “open society” and American “values”.

What has happened to President Obama?

Is it simply that he was shocked that people around the world would dare attack America and American soil despite his own pro-world point of view? Is it that he is so angry that he is unable to realise that his own decision to ratchet up US presence in Afghanistan would inevitably produce anti-American violence?

During Obama’s visit to Cairo and his speech to the Muslim world, the attitude and tone of the son of an African-Muslim leader was widely welcomed. In fact worldwide reaction to Obama’s first months in office was extremely positive about the direction he plans to take on major foreign policy issues.

Obama’s appointment of Senator George Mitchell as his personal envoy to the Middle East and his call to close Guantanamo during his first year in office were seen as positive signs of a change. Obama’s public position as well as that of his secretary of state, in total opposition to any sort of Israeli settlement activities was seen as a breath of fresh air in Washington. But those signals would quickly crumble and US foreign policy, especially vis-à-vis Palestine, would retract back to its tilt in the direction of Israel. This was clear with the way Obama and Hilary Clinton retracted the call for a total settlement freeze. It was also obvious when the US exerted political pressure on the Palestinian president in an attempt to quash the Goldstone report. One would have expected jurist and internationalist Obama to support rather than oppose actions of an impeccable South African war crimes lawyer such as Richard Goldstone.

A search of what happened to Obama since his early hopeful days can be found in the president’s own rhetoric.

One issue that Obama and his personal envoy clearly articulated during those crucial first months was the need for the creation of an independent and viable Palestinian state. The language used in support of such a political resolution was unprecedented because of its repeated emphasis that the creation of a Palestinian state is in the “national interest” of the United States of America.

During the presidential election campaign, candidate Barack Obama attacked. Bush for what he considered the mistaken launch of the wrong war against Iraq. Obama repeatedly stated that in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, Bush took his eyes off the ball by attacking Iraq rather than Afghanistan.

Surely Obama, who has been seen worldwide as having started on the right foot regarding the Middle East, was drawn away by the healthcare debates and the internal discussions on troop deployment. Others believe that Obama has allowed some pro-Israeli staff and advisers such Rahm Emanuel and Denis Ross to manage the Palestine-Israeli dossier. Adding more troops to an unwinnable war also doesn’t help to stem the motivations for continued attacks against Americans.

Observers of the Middle East conflict insist that the continuation of the plight of the Palestinians and the injustice they are suffering at the hands of the Israeli occupiers is a source of anger and frustration for millions around the world. Candidate Obama, as well as President Obama in his first 100 days, would not have taken his eyes off the ball. Preventing further attacks against American targets will not take place with hard power. Soft power and support of justice and neutrality in the Middle East will provide much better protection than body scanners and efficient intelligence work.

If 2009 is to be evaluated fairly in respect to the issue of Palestine, it would be safe to say that Obama took his eyes off an issue that is of national interest to the US.


Gaza marks year of deadly Israeli war

December 29, 2009

ADEL ZAANOUN
December 27, 2009

AFP

Sirens wailed across the Gaza Strip on Sunday as the still-devastated Hamas-ruled enclave marked one year since the start of Israel’s deadliest offensive ever launched on the territory.

Events marking the anniversary began with sirens sounding at 11.20am (2020 AEDT), when the first bombs of Israel’s Operation Cast Lead, launched in a bid to halt years of rocket fire from the enclave, slammed into the coastal strip.

Senior Hamas leader Ahmed Bahar struck a defiant tone, saying the “will of the steadfast and the resistance was victorious” at a ceremony unveiling a war memorial with the names of hundreds of Palestinians killed in the fighting.

“Gaza was steadfast and did not fall in this ugly, destructive war … And the resistance, which defended its land with honour, was not broken,” he said.

“We call on all the sons of our people to unite and to take to the trenches of the resistance to face the criminal Zionist occupation.”

Several demonstrations were to be held during the day and Hamas prime minister Ismail Haniya was to make a television address in the evening, with Hamas planning to stage events for 22 days, the length of the war.

On Saturday, December 27, 2008, Israeli warplanes launched simultaneous strikes on numerous Hamas targets throughout the territory of 1.5 million people, raids that killed at least 225 people in what was one of the bloodiest single days in the decades-long Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The war ended 22 days later with mutual ceasefires by Israel and Hamas, with some 1400 Palestinians, including more than 400 minors, and 13 Israelis left dead.

Entire neighbourhoods of Gaza were flattened in the onslaught, which wounded more than 5500 people.

“Those were dark days. There was killing in every street and alley,” said Dr Muawiya Hassanein, the head of Gaza emergency services, who had 16 paramedics killed as they struggled to collect the wounded.

“The time has come now for unity and peace and justice and an end to the blockade,” he said, referring to Israeli and Egyptian border closures that have sealed Gaza off from all but basic goods since Hamas seized power in June 2007.

The end of the war ushered in the calmest period in years along Gaza’s borders as the ceasefires have held despite occasional violations by both sides.

The number of Palestinian rocket attacks in the year since the war has been 90 percent less than the one preceding it, according to Israeli figures.

But Israel has come under intense criticism from the international community and human rights groups who have accused it of disproportionate force during the operation, including the use of white phosphorous in residential areas.

A UN Human Rights Council report released several months ago accused both Israel and Palestinian militants of committing war crimes and possible crimes against humanity during the offensive.

And UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Sunday warned that “neither the issues that led to this conflict nor its worrying aftermath are being addressed.”

“There is a sense of hopelessness in Gaza today for 1.5 million Palestinians, half of whom are under eighteen (years old). Their fate and the well-being of Israelis are intimately connected,” he added.


Substitute ‘Obama’ for ‘Bush’ and ‘Afghanistan’ for ‘Iraq’ . . .

October 7, 2009

By Dana Milbank

It was a scene repeated countless times during the Bush years:

A few hundred people massed on Pennsylvania Avenue outside the White House, wearing orange jumpsuits and hoods, holding photos of wounded children or carrying coffins. They chanted antiwar slogans, acted out waterboarding and pretended to die on the sidewalk. Those who refused orders to leave the area — including ubiquitous activist Cindy Sheehan — were arrested.


You probably won’t find the Guantanamo Bay-prisoner costume in the Halloween aisle. (By Sarah L. Voisin — The Washington Post)

But the remarkable thing about this familiar antiwar demonstration is that it occurred Monday, and the target was not George W. Bush but the White House’s current occupant. Protesters’ signs carried Obama-specific barbs: “Change? What Change?” “The Audacity of War Crimes.” “Yes We Can: U.S. Out of Afghanistan.”

Several of the demonstrators had T-shirts showing a missile labeled “Obomba” and the question “Is it really OK if Obama does it?”

Besides those wording changes, the only other difference was the spiffy new natural-gas-powered Metrobus that arrived to take those arrested for processing. It said “Special” on the front and, on the side, had a McDonald’s ad with the slogan “Commander-in-Beef.”

If the commander in beef had been watching from a window, he would have had reason for concern. Not the demonstrators themselves: They were Green Party types with some self-proclaimed socialists thrown in, and they had never been enthusiastic Obama supporters to start with. What the president should worry about is whether these activists are indicators of bigger things to come if he sides with his generals and decides to bulk up the U.S. force in Afghanistan.

In that case he could find many more people sounding like Liz McAlister, who addressed the crowd from a stage in McPherson Square before the two-block march to the White House. She spoke of a nation “where leader follows leader from bad to worse — as though by a malign law of nature, one ruler, evil or stupid or violent, breeds another, more evil or stupid or violent.”

The policies that earned Obama such a salute were printed on the back of the “Obomba” T-shirts, sold by the group World Can’t Wait: “Indefinite Detention.” “CIA Rendition.” “Escalation of War in Afghanistan.” “Increase in Government Spying.” “Unmanned Drones Bombing Pakistan.”

And those shirts didn’t mention Obama’s latest bomb dropped on civil libertarians: reversing his support for a law to protect anonymous sources who expose wrongdoing.

“I’m disappointed, approaching betrayal,” said an organizer of the march, Jeremy Varon of Witness Against Torture. Once an avid Obama supporter, he now charges that the president is “giving a level of legitimacy to the Bush policies.”

Observing the scene with some satisfaction was counter-demonstrator Phil Wilk of the conservative group Free Republic, who found himself in the odd position of defending Obama against his left-wing critics. “We’re a little queasy about this,” he admitted. Just to make clear that he was no Obama fan, he had a sign asserting that “Liberal Protest of Obama Doesn’t Make Him a Hawk — Just a Flip-Flopper.”

The demonstrators were an odd assortment of left-wing interests. One speaker proclaimed herself a member of the African People’s Socialist Party; a group distributed literature suggesting that 9/11 was a U.S. government conspiracy. But they were unified for the moment by Obama’s policies on war and terrorism. Obama voter Marge van Cleef of Philadelphia, handing out “Torture Team” trading cards featuring various Bush officials, considered whether an Obama card should be added to the collection. “I guess we will,” she said.

They marched to the White House and, once there, listened to the bullhorn-amplified voice of Medea Benjamin, whose Code Pink group often heckled Bush officials. She spoke of an Afghan farmer who lost his family to an American bomb. “Do you think that man is going to think that Obama is a peace president?”

“No!” the crowd shouted.

“Do you think that man will think that Obama is sincere?”

“No!”

“This is a Democratic Congress and a Democratic president. Does it look very different from the Bush regime?”

“No!”

Nearby, the leader of the orange-jumpsuit brigade shouted that Obama had “invested in torture.” Steps away, the mock waterboarding was underway. “The Obama administration knows they did this and refuses to prosecute!” shouts the waterboarder.

After a while, Park Police had had enough. Mounted officers pushed back demonstrators, who responded with shouts of “Fascist,” “Nazi” and “Sieg heil.” Officers cut the chains that some had used to attach themselves to the White House fence. About 60 people stayed behind to be arrested. “Obama!” somebody called out. “Where are you?”

The officers began to lead the demonstrators, in plastic handcuffs, to the bus. One removed Cindy Sheehan’s scarf and jewelry and gave her a good frisking.

“Stop the war! Stop the torture! Shame!” the demonstrators chanted, just as they had in recent years. Then someone added a new line: “Shame on you, Obama!”


US urges Israel to probe Gaza crimes to boost peace

September 30, 2009

Stephanie Nebehay

GENEVA: The United States called on its close ally Israel Tuesday to conduct credible investigations into allegations of war crimes committed by its forces in Gaza, saying it would help the Middle East peace process. Michael Posner, US Assistant Secretary of State, said that Hamas leaders also had a responsibility to investigate crimes and to end what he called its targeting of civilians in Israel and use of Palestinians as human shields.

The UN Human Rights Council held a one-day debate on a report issued this month by Richard Goldstone, a South African jurist and former UN war crimes prosecutor.

His panel found the Israeli army and Palestinian militants committed war crimes and possibly crimes against humanity during their December-January war. Israel did not cooperate with the UN inquiry and has rejected the report as biased.

“We encourage Israel to utilize appropriate domestic [judicial] review and meaningful accountability mechanisms to investigate and follow up on credible allegations,” Posner said during a speech to the Geneva forum.

“If undertaken properly and fairly, these reviews can serve as important confidence-building measures that will support the larger essential objective which is a shared quest for justice and lasting peace,” he said.

But he also said Goldstone’s report was “deeply flawed,” without providing any details. Washington disagreed with the report’s “methodology and many of its recommendations,” he said.

He added that the Council paid “grossly disproportionate attention” to Israel, but said that the United States delegation was ready to engage in balanced debate.

Goldstone told a news conference it was encouraging that the United States “has called for acceptable investigations of the allegations by both sides. I think that’s important support.”

“We believe deeply in the rule of law, humanitarian law, human rights and the principle that in armed conflict civilians should to the greatest extent possible be protected from harm,” Goldstone told the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva that commissioned the report.

Earlier, he said a lack of accountability for war crimes committed in the Middle East had reached “crisis point,” undermining any hope for peace in the region.

Israeli human rights group B’Tselem says 773 of 1,387 Palestinians killed were civilians. Israel says 709 combatants and 295 civilians were killed. But Israel includes policemen, who are legally viewed as non-combatants, in its militant death toll. Thirteen Israelis, 10 soldiers and three civilians, died.

Goldstone’s report urges the UN Security Council to refer the allegations to the International Criminal Court in the Hague if either Israeli or Palestinian authorities fail to investigate and prosecute those suspect of such crimes within six months.

“International courts are courts of last resort, not first resort,” he said on Tuesday.

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay said that the Council had a duty to follow up on Goldstone’s recommendations in the interest of all victims. In a speech, she also decried the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Gaza.

Later this week, the Council is due to consider a resolution presented by Arab and Islamic countries condemning Israel’s failure to cooperate and calling on all parties to implement the report’s recommendations. A vote is expected on Friday.

Israel’s ambassador Leshno Yaar rejected the report as “shameful” and “one-sided.” Israel had opened more than 100 investigations, 23 of which had led to criminal proceedings.

Lawyers want Barak arrested in UK over Gaza war

LONDON: Lawyers have asked a British court to issue an arrest warrant for Israeli defense chief Ehud Barak, who is in the country to meet with Prime Minister Gordon Brown and other officials.

Tayab Ali, one of several lawyers representing a coalition of Palestinian groups, said papers his group filed in the City of Westminster Magistrates Court accuse the Israeli defense minister of violating the Geneva Conventions and committing war crimes while directing the Israeli offensive against the Gaza Strip that began late last year.

“We think anybody suspected of war crimes should be brought to justice,” said Ali.

He added that it was possible a hearing would be held on the request late Tuesday afternoon or Wednesday morning, adding that allegations are “narrowly focused” on Barak’s actions as defense minister and do not deal with his earlier tenure as Israel’s prime minister.

Israeli officials said that Barak, who is in Britain to speak to the Labor Friends of Israel group at the ruling Labor Party’s conference in the English seaside city of Brighton, would not change his plans or curtail his trip because of the attempt to have him arrested.

Barak’s office said he would have immunity from arrest due to his status as a senior minister, and Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor said the bid to have Barak arrested had no merit.

“We haven’t had the time to see all the details of the suit, but apparently this is a typical case of legal ha­rassment,” Palmor said. “It is based on nothing but bad will and political propaganda, maybe some newspaper clippings, nothing more. We have seen these cases of legal ha­rassment in other countries and they have all had the treatment they deserved and we believe this time also this will not be taken further than today’s headlines.” – AP


The Johnny Procedure

July 21, 2009

by Uri Avnery

“If we strip this doctrine of all ornaments, what remains is a simple principle: the state must protect the lives of its soldiers at any price, without any limit or law. A war of zero casualties. That leads necessarily to a tactic of killing every person and destroying every building that could represent a danger to the soldiers, creating an empty space in front of the advancing troops.”

Like the ghost of Hamlet’s father, the evil spirit of the Gaza War refuses to leave us in peace. This week it came back to disturb the tranquility of the chiefs of the state and the army.

“Breaking the Silence”, a group of courageous former combat soldiers, published a report comprising the testimonies of 30 Gaza War fighters. A hard-hitting report about actions that may be considered war crimes.

The generals went automatically into denial mode. Why don’t the soldiers disclose their identity, they asked innocently. Why do they obscure their faces in the video testimonies? Why do they hide their names and units?

How can we be sure that they are not actors reading a text prepared for them by the enemies of Israel? How do we know that this organization is not manipulated by foreigners, who finance their actions? And anyhow, how do we know that they are not lying out of spite?

One can answer with a Hebrew adage: “It has the feel of Truth”. Anyone who has ever been a combat soldier in war, whatever war, recognizes at once the truth in these reports. Each of them has met a soldier who is not ready to return home without an X on his gun showing that he killed at least one enemy. (One such person appears in my book “The Other Side of the Coin”, which was written 60 years ago and published in English last year as the second part of “1948: A soldier’s Tale”.) We have been there.

The testimonies about the use of phosphorus, about massive bombardment of buildings, about “the neighbor procedure” (using civilians as human shields), about killing “everything that moves”, about the use of all methods to avoid casualties on our side – all these corroborate earlier testimonies about the Gaza War, there can be no reasonable doubt about their authenticity. I learned from the report that the “neighbor procedure” is now called “Johnny procedure”, God knows why Johnny and not Ahmad.

The height of hypocrisy is reached by the generals with their demand that the soldiers come forward and lodge their complaints with their commanders, so that the army can investigate them through the proper channels.

First of all, we have already seen the farce of the army investigating itself.

Second, and this is the main point: only a person intent on becoming a martyr would do so. A solder in a combat unit is a part of a tightly knit group whose highest principle is loyalty to comrades and whose commandment is “Thou shalt not squeal!” If he discloses questionable acts he has witnessed, he will be considered a traitor and ostracized. His life will become hell. He knows that all his superiors, from squad leader right up to division commander, will persecute him.

This call to go through “official channels” is a vile method of the generals – members of the General Staff, Army Spokesmen, Army Lawyers – to divert the discussion from the accusations themselves to the identity of the witnesses. No less despicable are the tin soldiers called “military correspondents”, who collaborate with them.

BUT BEFORE accusing the soldiers who committed the acts described in the testimonies, one has to ask whether the decision to start the war did not itself lead inevitably to the crimes.

Professor Assa Kasher, the father of the army “Code of Ethics” and one of the most ardent supporters of the Gaza War, asserted in an essay on this subject that a state has the right to go to war only in self defense, and only if the war constitutes “a last resort”. “All alternative courses” to attain the rightful aim “must have been exhausted”.

The official cause of the war was the launching from the Gaza Strip of rockets against Southern Israeli towns and villages. It goes without saying that it is the duty of the state to defend its citizens against missiles. But had all the means to achieve this aim without war really been exhausted? Kasher answers with a resounding “yes”. His key argument is that “there is no justification for demanding that Israel negotiate directly with a terrorist organization that does not recognize it and denies its very right to exist.”

This does not pass the test of logic. The aim of the negotiations was not supposed to be the recognition by Hamas of the State of Israel and its right to exist (who needs this anyway?) but getting them to stop launching missiles at Israeli citizens. In such negotiations, the other side would understandably have demanded the lifting of the blockade against the population of the Gaza Strip and the opening of the supply passages. It is reasonable to assume that it was possible to reach – with Egyptian help – an agreement that would also have included the exchange of prisoners.

No only was this course not exhausted – it was not even tried. The Israeli government has consistently refused to negotiate with a “terrorist organization” and even with the Palestinian Unity Government that was in existence for some time and in which Hamas was represented.

Therefore, the decision to start the War on Gaza, with a civilian population of a million and a half, was unjustified even according to the criteria of Kasher himself. “All the alternative courses” had not been exhausted, or even attempted.

But we all know that, apart from the official reason, there was also an unofficial one: to topple the Hamas government in the Gaza Strip. In the course of the war, official spokesmen stated that there was a need to attach a “price tag” – in other words, to cause death and destruction not in order to hurt the “terrorists” themselves (which would have been almost impossible) but to turn the life of the civilian population into hell, so they would rise up and overthrow Hamas.

The immorality of this strategy is matched by its inefficacy: our own experience has taught us that such methods only serve to harden the resolve of the population and unite them around their courageous leadership.

WAS IT at all possible to conduct this war without committing war crimes? When a government decides to hurl its regular armed forces at a guerrilla organization, which by its very nature fights from within the civilian population, it is perfectly clear that terrible suffering will be caused to that population. The argument that the harm caused to the population, and the killing of over a thousand men, women and children was inevitable should, by itself, have led to the conclusion that the decision to start this was a terrible act right from the beginning.

The Defense Establishment takes the easy way out. The ministers and generals simply assert that they do not believe the Palestinian and international reports about the death and destruction, stating that they are, again in Kasher’s words, “mistaken and false”. Just to be sure, they decided to boycott the UN commission that is currently investigating the war, headed by a respected South African judge who is both a Jew and a Zionist.

Assa Kasher is adopting a similar attitude when he says: “Somebody who does not know all the details of an action cannot assess it in a serious, professional and responsible way, and therefore should not do so, in spite of all emotional or political temptations.” He demands that we wait until the Israeli army completes its investigations, before we even discuss the matter.

Really? Every organization that investigates itself lacks credibility, not to mention a hierarchical body like the army. Moreover, the army does not – and cannot – obtain testimony from the main eye-witnesses: the inhabitants of Gaza. An investigation based only on the testimony of the perpetrators, but not of the victims, is ridiculous. Now even the testimonies of the soldiers of Breaking the Silence are discounted, because they cannot disclose their identity.

IN A war between a mighty army, equipped with the most sophisticated weaponry in the world, and a guerrilla organization, some basic ethical questions arise. How should the soldiers behave when faced with a structure in which there are not only enemy fighters, which they are “allowed” to hit, but also unarmed civilians, which they are “forbidden” to hit?

Kasher cites several such situations. For example: a building in which there are both “terrorists” and non-fighters. Should it be hit by aircraft or artillery fire that will kill everybody, or should soldiers be sent in who will risk their lives and kill only the fighters? His answer: there is no justification for the risking of the lives of our soldiers in order to save the lives of enemy civilians. An aerial or artillery attack must be preferred.

That does not answer the question about the use of the Air Force to destroy hundreds of houses far enough from our soldiers that there was no danger emanating from them, nor about the killing of scores of recruits of the Palestinian civilian police on parade, nor about the killing of UN personnel in food supply convoys. Nor about the illegal use of white phosphorus against civilians, as described in the soldiers’ testimonies gathered by Breaking the Silence, and the use of depleted uranium and other carcinogenic substances.

The entire country experienced on live TV how a shell hit the apartment of a doctor and wiped out almost all of his family. According to the testimony of Palestinian civilians and international observers, many such incidents took place.

The Israeli army took great pride in its method of warning the inhabitants by means of leaflets, phone calls and such, so as to induce them to flee. But everyone – and first of all the warners themselves – knew that the civilians had nowhere secure to escape to and that there were no clear and safe escape routes. Indeed, many civilians were shot while trying to flee.

WE SHALL not evade the hardest moral question of all: is it permissible to risk the lives of our soldiers in order to save the old people, women and children of the “enemy”? The answer of Assa Kasher, the ideologue of the “Most Moral Army in the World”, is unequivocal: it is absolutely forbidden to risk the lives of the soldiers. The most telling sentence in his entire essay is: “Therefore…the state must give preference to the lives of its soldiers above the lives of the (unarmed) neighbors of a terrorist.”

These words should be read twice and three times, in order to grasp their full implications. What is actually being said here is: if necessary to avoid casualties among our soldiers, it is better to kill enemy civilians without any limit.

In retrospect, one can only be glad that the British soldiers, who fought against the Irgun and the Stern Group, did not have an ethical guide like Kasher.

This is the principle that guided the Israeli army in the Gaza War, and, as far as I know, this is a new doctrine: in order to avoid the loss of one single soldier of ours, it is permissible to kill 10, 100 and even 1000 enemy civilians. War without casualties on our side. The numerical result bears witness: more than 1000 people killed in Gaza, a third or two thirds of them (depending on who you ask) civilians, women and children, as against 6 (six) Israeli soldiers killed by enemy fire. (Four more were killed by “friendly” fire.)

Kasher states explicitly that it is justified to kill a Palestinian child who is in the company of a hundred “terrorists”, because the “terrorists” might kill children in Sderot. But in reality, it was a case of killing a hundred children who were in the company of one “terrorist”.

If we strip this doctrine of all ornaments, what remains is a simple principle: the state must protect the lives of its soldiers at any price, without any limit or law. A war of zero casualties. That leads necessarily to a tactic of killing every person and destroying every building that could represent a danger to the soldiers, creating an empty space in front of the advancing troops.

Only one conclusion can be drawn from this: from now on, any Israeli decision to start a war in a built-up area is a war crime, and the soldiers who rise up against this crime should be honored. May they be blessed.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 97 other followers