Google+ Badge

Tuesday, February 20, 2018

Why An Iraq War Inquiry Is More Necessary Than Ever

John Howard, Bush, Cheney, Blair et al. will be present and accounted for at The Hague War Crimes Tribunal  

By James O'Neill

There has been a flurry of activity caused by the comments made by Green’s parliamentarians Adam Bandt and Richard di Natale over recently installed Liberal Senator Jim Molan. The facts relate to the Australian situation, but the issue has wider ramifications.

Bush awards his 'man of steel' John Howard the
Medal of Freedom
The ostensible reason for the attack on Molan was his sharing of two videos originating from a Neo Nazi far right group in the United Kingdom.

Bandt, who later withdrew his remarks, called Molan a “coward” and said that Molan should be prosecuted for his service in the Iraq war. In the Senate di Natale accused Molan of overseeing a “humanitarian catastrophe” nearly 15 years ago during the assault on Fallujah, Iraq. Di Natale said that there was “a question that needs to be answered, and the only way with answer that is through an enquiry.”

Liberal politicians, from the Prime Minister downward, came to Molan’s defence, claiming that he was a “great Australian soldier” who “stood up for freedom.”

Lost among all the expostulations and threats of legal action were two key issues behind the remarks of both Bandt and Di Natale: were there war crimes committed in Iraq by Australian forces; and whether or not there should be an enquiry (as has happened in Canada, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom) into the precise circumstances surrounding Australia’s involvement in that disastrous war.

Instead we have seen sustained attempts two divert from legitimate questions surrounding this issue. It has been variously suggested that Molan is not racist; that it is somehow scurrilous to question the conduct of Australia’s servicemen; and that Bandt and Di Natale had a view “that anyone who goes to war is a war criminal.” That simply does not address the real issues.

To answer the first of those questions one needs to go no further then the assaults on Fallujah, the first of which occurred in April 2004 and the second, codenamed Operation Phantom Fury, in October 2004.

Before the second attack began, citizens were instructed to leave, but that did not extend to men aged 15-45 who were prohibited from leaving. Once the bombing began, all exits from the city were sealed off. According to the Washington Post, electricity and water were also cut off. The Red Cross and other agencies were denied access to the city to deliver humanitarian aid and render medical assistance.

Iraq war crimes continue to dog Abbott 

A United Nations special rapporteur, Jean Ziegler, described these action as a:

”flagrant violation” of the Geneva Conventions. Mr Zeigler was unquestionably correct. Cutting off water and electricity and denying access to humanitarian aid is prohibited under Article 54 (Protocol 1) of the Geneva Conventions.

The attacking forces also seized the city’s only hospital, taking its staff prisoner, and also bombed to destruction two other medical clinics. Eyewitness accounts described Red Cross workers being denied entry to the city, and ambulances trying to enter the city being fired upon. This is also a breach of Article 8 of the Geneva Conventions (Protocol 1).

There were further eyewitness accounts of snipers shooting women and children in the street, and unarmed men carrying a white flag were also shot. The United States also admitted using chemical weapons, including white phosphorus, napalm and depleted uranium weapons. The use of such weapons are banned under Protocol III of the United Nations Convention on Certain Weapons that Australia ratified on 29 September 1983. The United States has refused to ratify this Convention.

General Molan has admitted his role in planning and directing the attacks in Fallujah in October 2004. 

It is a matter of public record that Molan was seconded from the Australian defence forces to US forces in April 2004 and served as chief of operations through 2005. An article in the Australian emphasized that Molan not only planned, but directed the 2004 assault on Fallujah.

The horrific consequences for civilians of this assault have also been documented, with extraordinarily high levels of birth defects, infant and maternal mortality, and various cancers. Patrick Cockburn in the Independent described the results reported by Busby and his co-researchers as worse than Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

There can be no serious argument therefore, that war crimes were committed in Fallujah (and elsewhere) in October 2004. Who then might be held responsible? Under the legal doctrine of common purpose, senior Australian officials are responsible for these attacks. Those individuals would include the defence Minister Robert Hill, the foreign minister Alexander Downer, and at the Prime Minister John Howard.

Under the doctrine of command responsibility Government and military officials can be held liable if they knew, or should have known, anyone under their command was committing war crimes and failed to prevent them from doing so. These principles are incorporated in the Statute of the International Criminal Court that Australia ratified on 27 June 2002 and which came into effect in Australian law on 1 September 2002.

Before persons alleged to have committed war crimes can be referred to the International Criminal Court however, the accused’s own State must take action against them, and only if that State is “unable or unwilling” to act will the ICC become involved.

There is legislation on the Australian statute books that is designed to provide a means off prosecuting alleged war criminals. The Howard government introduced a raft of legislative changes to the Criminal Code (Commonwealth) beginning in 2002 before the Iraq invasion. Part 5.3 of s100 of the Criminal Code, for example, creates the offence of a “terrorist act”. This is defined as being when there is serious harm to property or death caused with the intention of advancing a political, religious or ideological cause, and with it the intention of coercing, or influencing by intimidation, the government of a foreign country, or intimidating the public or a section of the public.

It is submitted that this is precisely describes the actions of the Australian government and its officials, including military personnel, in the conduct of the Iraq War in general, and in specific instances of which Fallujah is a prime, but far from only example.

Successive Australian governments have refused to prosecute anyone involved in the events described above. The ICC’s requirement of a State being “unable or unwilling” to prosecute alleged war crimes has therefore been met. In these circumstances there is nothing to prevent a direct referral to the ICC Public Prosecutor who must then initiate their own inquiry.

It is this history that probably accounts for the reaction to questions raised about General Molan’s alleged responsibility for war crimes committed in Iraq. The politicians and mainstream media coming to his defence with frankly ridiculous and irrelevant claims are fully aware of their own potential liability for the events arising out of the original illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Di Natale was simply stating the obvious: there should have been a proper inquiry, there should be one now, and Australia’s persistent refusal to do so only undermines its frequently professed claims to being a strong supporter of the “rules based international order.”

This news bureau contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.  We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

Monday, February 19, 2018

Charleston Chopper Crash Blamed On Private Drone

Favorite tool of perverts, pedophiles and criminals now graduates to taking down civilian aircraft - as predicted  

By Tyler Durdin

Officials at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) are investigating a serious helicopter crash that may have been triggered by a drone Wednesday near the southern tip of Daniel Island, South Carolina, in what could be the first-ever drone-related crash of an aircraft in the United States.

The crash was initially reported on Wednesday by WCSC-TV, a CBS-affiliated television station for the Lowcountry area of South Carolina in the United States that is licensed to Charleston, which obtained a copy of the incident report from the police stating that a Robinson R22 helicopter struck a tree and crash-landed. The private helicopter instructor told police, he was conducting a training exercise at approximately 3:30 p.m, when the incident occurred on the tip of Daniel Island. 

His student was practicing “low impact and hover taxi maneuvers” above undeveloped land on the island, as a white “DJI Phantom quad-copter” breached their airspace, the report states. The instructor immediately commandeered all flight controls from the student and attempted to avoid a potentially deadly air collision, that is when the tail rotor of the helicopter struck a tree, triggering a crash landing.

The student told the police they were at a maximum altitude of 50 feet when the quadcopter breached their airspace. 

She said when the helicopter’s tail struck the tree, “several pieces of the helicopter hit surrounding brush causing the helicopter to turn on its side when it landed,” reported WCSC. Luckily, neither the pilot nor the student was injured, though the helicopter sustained severe damage.

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) announced Friday it is opening an investigation into the accident, spokesman Chris O’Neil said. “The NTSB is aware of the pilot’s report that he was maneuvering to avoid a drone, but the NTSB has not yet been able to independently verify that information,” O’Neil said in a statement.

Bloomberg quoted a statement from drone maker DJI which said:

“DJI is trying to learn more about this incident and stands ready to assist investigators,” the company said in a statement. “While we cannot comment on what may have happened here, DJI is the industry leader in developing educational and technological solutions to help drone pilots steer clear of traditional aircraft.”

The accident investigation is the second incident involving a drone in less than two weeks. Earlier this month, we reported the FAA is investigating an incident in which someone piloted a racing drone feet from a commercial jetliner on approach to land at McCarran International Airport in Las Vegas. The video below is quite startling:

According to the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) Michael Huerta said back in March 2017 that more than 777,000 drone registrations have been filed with the agency. Bloomberg notes that the FAA is having trouble monitoring all the consumer drones in the sky.

The FAA in a study based on computerized models last fall concluded that drones would cause more damage than birds of similar size because they contain metal parts. Significant damage to windshields, wings and tail surfaces of aircraft was possible, the study found. The surging number of episodes combined with a regulatory system that makes it difficult to monitor drone flights has alarmed traditional aviation groups.

Drone shoot-down technology set to take a great leap forward as Americans are done with allowing criminals to target them both on the ground and in the skies

“The likelihood that a drone will collide with an airline aircraft is increasing,” said a letter to U.S. lawmakers earlier this week from Airlines for America, a trade group representing large carriers, and the Air Line Pilots Association and the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, the unions that represent pilots and controllers.

This news bureau contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.  We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

U.S. - UK Accuse Russia Of Cyberattack, Offer Zero Evidence

CIA along with their CNN/BBC/MSM collaborators and shills shriek for WWIII with Russia to cover for their impending indictments and the complete destruction of both dens of treason and mass-murder  

By Ulson Gunnar

The US and European press have both published stories accusing the Russian government, and in particular, the Russian military, of the so-called “NotPetya” cyberattack which targeted information technology infrastructure in Ukraine.

BBC: Russian propaganda machine "worse than
The Washington Post in an article titled, “UK blames Russian military for ‘malicious’ cyberattack,” would report:

"Britain and the United States blamed the Russian government on Thursday for a cyberattack that hit businesses across Europe last year, with London accusing Moscow of 'weaponizing information' in a new kind of warfare. Foreign Minister Tariq Ahmad said “the U.K. government judges that the Russian government, specifically the Russian military, was responsible for the destructive NotPetya cyberattack of June 2017.” 

The fast-spreading outbreak of data-scrambling software centered on Ukraine, which is embroiled in a conflict with Moscow-backed separatists in the country’s east. It spread to companies that do business with Ukraine, including U.S. pharmaceutical company Merck, Danish shipping firm A.P. Moller-Maersk and FedEx subsidiary TNT.

British state media, the BBC, would report in its article, “UK and US blame Russia for ‘malicious’ NotPetya cyber-attack,” that:

"The Russian military was directly behind a 'malicious' cyber-attack on Ukraine that spread globally last year, the US and Britain have said."

The BBC also added that:

"On Thursday the UK government took the unusual step of publicly accusing the Russia military of being behind the attack. The UK and its allies will not tolerate malicious cyber activity, the foreign office said in a statement. Later, the White House also pointed the finger at Russia."

Yet despite this “unusual step of publicly accusing the Russian military of being behind the attack,” neither the US nor the British media provided the public with any evidence, at all, justifying the accusations. The official statement released by the British government would claim:

"The UK’s National Cyber Security Centre assesses that the Russian military was almost certainly responsible for the destructive NotPetya cyber-attack of June 2017. Given the high confidence assessment and the broader context, the UK government has made the judgement that the Russian government – the Kremlin – was responsible for this cyber-attack."

CNN fake news tag-teams with the BBC spewing ludicrous, 24/7 anti-Russia lies and propaganda fed to them by MI6 and the CIA

Claiming that the Russian military was “almost certainly responsible,” is not the same as being certain the Russian military was responsible. And such phrases as “almost certainly” have been used in the past by the United States and its allies to launch baseless accusations ahead of what would otherwise be entirely unprovoked aggression against targeted states, in this case, Russia. The White House would also release a statement claiming:

In June 2017, the Russian military launched the most destructive and costly cyber-attack in history. The attack, dubbed “NotPetya,” quickly spread worldwide, causing billions of dollars in damage across Europe, Asia, and the Americas. It was part of the Kremlin’s ongoing effort to destabilize Ukraine and demonstrates ever more clearly Russia’s involvement in the ongoing conflict. This was also a reckless and indiscriminate cyber-attack that will be met with international consequences.

BBC has a long history of covering for pedophiles and MI6 deviant, cross-dressing homosexuals

Considering claims that this is the “most destructive and costly cyber-attack in history,” it would seem imperative to establish evidence beyond doubt of who was responsible. No Evidence From Governments Confirmed to Possess the Means to Fabricate Attribution Yet, so far, this has not been done. Claims that Russia’s military was behind the attacks seems to be built solely upon private analysts who have suggested the attacks appear to have originated in Russia.

However, as it was revealed by Wikileaks in its Vault 7 release, exposing cyber hacking tools used by the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the origin of attacks can be forged. USA Today in an article titled, “WikiLeaks: CIA hacking group ‘UMBRAGE’ stockpiled techniques from other hackers,” would admit:

"A division of the Central Intelligence Agency stockpiled hacking techniques culled from other hackers, giving the agency the ability to leave behind the “fingerprints” of the outside hackers when it broke into electronic devices, the anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks alleges as it released thousands of documents Tuesday."

The article continues by pointing out:

"The documents also suggest that one of the agency’s divisions – the Remote Development Branch’s UMBRAGE Group – may have been cataloguing hacking methods from outside hackers, including in Russia, that would have allowed the agency to mask their identity by employing the method during espionage. With UMBRAGE and related projects the CIA cannot only increase its total number of attack types, but also misdirect attribution by leaving behind the ‘fingerprints’ of the groups that the attack techniques were stolen from," Wikileaks said in a statement.

Not only does this ability allow the CIA to carry out espionage that if discovered would be attributed to other parties, it also allows the CIA to conduct attacks the US government and its allies can then blame on foreign states for the purpose of politically maligning them, and even justifying otherwise indefensible acts of aggression, either militarily, or in the realm of cyberspace.

CNN fake news seditionist, CIA dupe George Howell trashes U.S.-Russia relations using former CIA mass-murderer Bob Baer to spew lies 

Evidence provided by the UK and US governments would have to establish Russia’s role in the “NotPetya” cyberattack beyond mere attribution, since this is now confirmed to be possible to forge. The UK and US governments have failed to provide any evidence at all, likely because all it can offer is mere attribution which skeptics could easily point out might have been forged. NATO Had Been Preparing “Offensive” Cyber Weapons 

As previously reported, NATO had been in the process of creating and preparing to deploy what it called an “offensive defense” regarding cyber warfare. Reuters in an article titled, “NATO mulls ‘offensive defense’ with cyber warfare rules,” would state:

"A group of NATO allies are considering a more muscular response to state-sponsored computer hackers that could involve using cyber attacks to bring down enemy networks," officials said.

NATO Nazis go insane as their tottering EU empire collapses

Reuters would also report:

"The doctrine could shift NATO’s approach from being defensive to confronting hackers that officials say Russia, China and North Korea use to try to undermine Western governments and steal technology."

It has been repeatedly pointed out how the US, UK and other NATO members have repeatedly used false pretexts to justify military aggression carried out with conventional military power. 

Examples include fabricated evidence of supposed “weapons of mass destruction (WMD)” preceding the 2003 US invasion of Iraq and the so-called “humanitarian war” launched against Libya in 2011 built on fabricated accounts from US and European rights advocates.

BBC, Blair on the road to The Hague War Crimes Tribunal

With UMBRAGE, the US and its allies now possess the ability to fabricate evidence in cyberspace, enabling them to accuse targeted nations of cyber attacks they never carried out, to justify the deployment of “offensive” cyber weapons NATO admits it has prepared ahead of time. 

While the US and European media have warned the world of a “cyber-911″ it appears instead we are faced with “cyber-WMD claims” rolled out to justify a likewise “cyber-Iraq War” using cyber weapons the US and its NATO allies have been preparing and seeking to use for years. 

Were Russia to really be behind the “NotPetya” cyberattack, the US and its allies have only themselves to blame for decades spent undermining their own credibility with serial instances of fabricating evidence to justify its serial military aggression. Establishing that Russia was behind the “NotPetya” cyberattack, however, will require more evidence than mere “attribution” the CIA can easily forge.

This news bureau contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.  We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.



The real truth on 9/11 slowly continues to bleed out

Technical experts are mounting major challenges to official U.S. government accounts of how three World Trade Center skyscrapers collapsed in near-freefall after the 9/11 attacks 15 years ago.

Many researchers are focusing especially on the little-known collapse of



The Geopolitics Of The United States, Part 1: The Inevitable Empire

The Empire and the inevitable fall of the Obama criminal regime

STRATFOR Editor’s Note: This installment on the United States, presented in two parts, is the 16th in a series of STRATFOR monographs on the geopolitics of countries influential in world affairs.

Like nearly all of the peoples of North and South America, most Americans are not originally from the territory that became the United States.



Geopolitics Of The United States Part 2: American Identity And The Threats of Tomorrow

A look back at 2011 predictions for the future in order to put events of today into perspective

 photo capitalism_zpsah78uy5p.jpg
We have already discussed in the first part of this analysis how the American geography dooms whoever controls the territory to being a global power, but there are a number of other outcomes that shape what that power will be like. The first and most critical is the impact of that geography on the American mindset.



By Robert S. Finnegan

This e-mail outlines and confirms the acts of espionage against Indonesia and Indonesians by Akiko Makino and the others involved both in Kobe University and in AI Lab at University of Airlangga, Surabaya; Bahasa Indonesia original follows English translation...



UPDATED 01/07/2015 : New Analysis Challenges Tamiflu Efficacy; Hong Kong Corona Virus Outbreak


 photo TAMIFLU_small_zpssojx6okt.jpg

Obama criminals now resulting to biowarfare in quest to destroy Chinese and ASEAN economy; "novel virus substrain" points directly to a Kawaoka / Fouchier / Ernala-Ginting Kobe lab virus weaponized and genetically altered to specifically target and infect the Asian population: Ribavirin...



 photo WHO02_zpsplmhtlpr.jpg
The 5th Estate has just purchased a library on H5N1 "Novel" virus pandemics, there are dozens of PDF and Exel documents we feel will assist you in saving lives following intentional releases of the H5N1 and now MERS viruses; we will begin by printing those that appear to be extremely relevant here: H5N1 Kobe-Kawaoka-Ernala series continues soon with more "Smoking Gun" e-mails from Teridah Ernala to The 5th Estate . . .



By Robert S. Finnegan

On October 12, 2002 the Indonesian island of Bali experienced a terrorist attack that rocked the world. It was unquestionably well-coordinated and executed, the largest in the country's history.