Wednesday, 1 July 2015

Nuclear Warfare in the 21st Century


As NATO and Russia revive the old nuclear Cold War, the public is being prepared to accept the first-strike use of tactical nuclear weapons on targets in the Middle East and elsewhere. And as the world inches closer to a World War III scenario, we find the old MAD doctrine being revived in a new round of madness.



[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, July 1st, 2015.]

Iraq Residents: ‘We Know America is Providing ISIS with Weapons & Food’


The people of Iraq are increasingly blaming the United States for the spread of ISIS in their country, a Wall Street Journal report reveals.

While interviewing Iraqi refugees in a tent city in Baghdad, journalist Yaroslav Trofimov discovered that a growing number of residents believe ISIS is receiving direct support from the American government.

“We all know that America is providing ISIS with weapons and food, and that it is because of American backing that they have become so strong,” said Abbas Hashem, a 50-year-old who recently fled Ramadi.

Others, such as prominent lawmaker Alia Nusseif, made equally striking comments, accusing the US of using ISIS as a proxy army to split up the country.

“We don’t have any trust in Americans anymore,” Nusseif said. “We now think ISIS is being used as a tool by America to divide and weaken Iraq.”
http://www.prisonplanet.com/iraq-residents-we-know-america-is-providing-isis-with-weapons-food.html


[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, July 1st, 2015.]

‘Greece Should Grexit Which is Fantastic, They Could Restart Their Economy’ – Max Keiser


Europe's financial markets were jolted today by the imposition of capital controls in Greece. For more on the ongoing crisis in Greece RT is joined by Max Keiser, host of "The Keiser Report"



[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, July 1st, 2015.]

Paul Craig Roberts: Bond Bubble In Big Trouble


Economist and nationally syndicated columnist Paul Craig Roberts joins the show today to discuss how the bond bubble is in big trouble. http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/



PCR points out that the Bond market can be propped up almost indefinitely, via money printing, so long as the US dollar does not crash. The financial system has been corrupted and we face similar consequences to what happened in the 2007-2008 crash. The problem is that we have become spectators to the corruption. This clip summarises the overall state of the system very well.

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, July 1st, 2015.]

TPP Grants Banks Terrifying Secret Powers


"In March 2014, the Bank of England let the cat out of the bag: money is just an IOU, and the banks are rolling in it. So wrote David Graeber in The Guardian the same month, referring to a BOE paper called "Money Creation in the Modern Economy." The paper stated outright that most common assumptions of how banking works are simply wrong. The result, said Graeber, was to throw the entire theoretical basis for austerity out of the window.

The revelation may have done more than that. The entire basis for maintaining our private extractive banking monopoly may have been thrown out the window. And that could help explain the desperate rush to "fast track" not only the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), but the Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA). TiSA would nip attempts to implement public banking and other monetary reforms in the bud."



[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, July 1st, 2015.]

Tuesday, 30 June 2015

We Restarted the Cold War: The Real Story About the NATO Buildup that the New York Times Won’t Tell You


You would think it something close to a magician’s trickery to conduct a century and more’s worth of coups, political subterfuge and military interventions and keep Americans convinced that all done in their names is done in the name of good. But we live through a case in point. We now witness an aggressive military advance toward Russia’s borders on a nearly astonishing scale, yet very few Americans are able to see it for what it is.

Such is the power of our golden rule.

The theme of new Russian aggression sounded over the past couple of months reeked of orchestration from the first, as suggested in this space when it was first sounded. It was too consistent in language, tone and implication, whether it came from the Pentagon, NATO or Times news reports—which are, naturally, based on Pentagon and NATO sources.

Anything counted: Russia’s military exercises within its own borders were aggressive. Russian air defense systems on its borders were aggressive. Russia’s military presence in Kaliningrad, Russian territory lying between Lithuania and Poland, was an aggressive threat.

The caker came 10 days ago, when Putin promised his generals 40 new intercontinental ballistic missiles. Aggressive times 10, we heard over and over. “Loose rhetoric” was the incessantly repeated phrase.

In this connection I loved Ashton Carter in an exclusive interview on CBS Tuesday morning. Announcing NATO’s new plans for deployments in Eastern Europe and the Baltics, the defense secretary cited Putin’s “loose rhetoric.” The correspondent must have lost the playbook and had the temerity to ask him to explain. Whereupon the wrong-footed Carter mumbled, “Well, it’s… it’s… it’s loose rhetoric, that’s what it is.”

Got it, Ash. Loose rhetoric.

Does the secretary mind if we spend a few minutes in the forbidden kingdom known as historical reality?

Putin has not uttered a syllable of rhetoric—no need of it—since the Bush II White House floored him with its 2002 announcement that it would unilaterally abandon Nixon’s 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. “This, in fact, pushes us to a new round of the arms race, because it changes the global security system,” the Russian leader said subsequently. Whereupon Russia set about rebuilding its greatly reduced nuclear arsenal, of which the 40 new ICBMs are an exceedingly small addition.

There are no secrets here—only chronology and causality. In the context, I view the 40 new missiles as a very measured message—and of little consequence in themselves—in reply to the immodest lunge into frontline nations Carter disclosed in Estonia this week.

Where did President Obama get the idea to name this guy to head Defense? He outdoes Rumsfeld in certain respects. Not only is he deploying weapons and rotating troops in and out of six of NATO’s easterly members—the three Baltics, Poland, Bulgaria and Romania. He now advances a number of bluntly escalating nuclear “options.”
http://www.salon.com/2015/06/25/we_restarted_the_cold_war_the_real_story_about_the_nato_buildup_that_the_new_york_times_wont_tell_you/

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, June 30th, 2015.]

ISIS Promised Day Of Bloodshed Has Arrived




If you are concerned with the recent terrorist attacks overseas, and the increased frequency of such events, then it helps to be interested in what has caused them. Unlike what Bush and co. had said, it is not simply because they 'hate us for our freedoms'.

ISIS didn't exist until the secular, albeit corrupt, Iraqi, Libyan and Syrian states were subject to western intervention via trumped up charges of a WMD threat, or via Proxy Wars (in Syria and Libya). There is strong evidence showing western involvement in supporting the extremists in ongoing proxy wars which is a war crime (aggressive war) according to Nuremburg.

The US has a long history of using fundamentalists to conduct war. It began in Afghanistan against the Soviets and never ended. The jihadists are simply tools for foreign policy. The fact that tourists and civilians in the west end up as collateral damage is not a problem for these people. Terror blowback is used to justify further interventions and it helps Governments advance Police State powers (whilst the amnesic and misled public forgets the contributing factors that gave rise to such an environment).

Yes, there are usually crazy fundamentalists that do exist within society in any event, but without war and destabilisation, they have little support. Promoting and expanding conflict create more of these people - and thus we end up with various massacres of innocent people outside the conflict zone.

The recently declassified US DIA report stated that "The West, Gulf Countries, and Turkey" were supporting the opposition in Syria where the leading fighting groups were 'Salafists, the Muslim Brotherhood, and Al Qaeda' - all extremists. The other group admittedly supported by the West is the 'moderate' Free Syrian Army which admits (in interviews appearing in the US media) to working closely with Al Qaeda and sometimes with ISIS (go and Google that if you don't believe me).

If you want an end to the massacres, then some interest in the issue of western intervention in the Middle East, with Turkey/NATO and Saudi Arabia being part of the game, will be useful. Public opinion still counts. If the public are sleep walking, information-absent, zombies then they will fall for any war prolonging rhetoric and we will never see an end to what is happening presently.
_______________________

Please note: Although there may be some support for ISIS goals in the general Muslim population, most people are not blood thirsty murderers or are in favour of violence (as this video implies). I have little sympathy for people who would advocate murder and mayhem regardless of their backgrounds, whether from The West or Middle East.  

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, June 30th, 2015.]

Paul Craig Roberts Warns Greek Government May Be Assassinated In This Crisis If They Pivot East To Stop World War III


Dr. Paul Craig Roberts: “The Greek people and the Greek government have before them the unique opportunity to prevent World War III. All the Greek government needs to do, if the Greek people will get behind the government, is to default on the loans, resign from the EU and from NATO, and accept the deal that the Russians have offered them….

“This would begin the unraveling of NATO. Very quickly Spain and Italy would follow. So southern Europe would desert NATO and so would Austria, Hungary and the Czech Republic. NATO is the mechanism that Washington uses to cause conflict with Russia. So as the EU and NATO unravel, the ability of Washington to produce this conflict disappears.
http://sgtreport.com/2015/06/paul-craig-roberts-warns-greek-government-may-be-assassinated-in-this-crisis-if-they-pivot-east-to-stop-world-war-iii/

Related Info:

Varoufakis: If Europe Wants to Humiliate Greece, Do We Need Such Europe?

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, June 30th, 2015.]

Keiser Report (E776): IMF Failed Greece Long Before Bailout


In this episode of the Keiser Report, Max Keiser and Stacy Herbert discuss forecasts that go wrong and whether or not Christine Lagarde could forecast her way out of a Dominique Strauss Kahn orgy. In the second half, Max interviews Mark O’Byrne about the gold and silver markets, cryptobullion, the confetti masters on Wall Street and the Federal Reserve which is not federal and has no reserves.



[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, June 30th, 2015.]

History is Not a Slogan, Civil War and Flag "Controversy" (It was Not About Slavery)


Why bother with the complexity of history when a offensive mythology based on the victor's war propaganda can take its place? The US put a naval blockade on its own states [before the war started] to prevent them from avoiding the tariffs and forcing them to buy internally. It wasn't about slavery.



I am not an expert on this subject but it seems that those saying that US Civil War came about because of a difference over slavery are wrong. My understanding, thus far, is that slavery was not an issue at the start of the conflict. Instances that mention slavery in Sucessionist Declarations appear to be cherry picked in the current debate whereas such a position at the time was a commonly accepted 'right'. Furthermore five slave states fought on the side of the North, and were not included in the Emancipation Act, while Lincoln himself was a white supremacist - and he admitted that his aim was to keep the United States together, with or without slavery. The war came about because of taxation (tariffs) without representation.

Related Info:

The Confederate Constitution

Special interests have long used the democratic political process to produce legislation for their own private benefit, and the U.S. Constitution contains flaws that make this easier. One attempt to remedy these flaws was the Confederate Constitution.

The Confederate Constitutional Convention opened in February 1861. Robert Barnwell Rhett of South Carolina, called the "Father of Secession" for initiating his state's breakoff from the union, thought that the U.S. model was the best. The other 50 delegates agreed. He nominated Howell Cobb, a Georgia attorney and former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, to preside over the meeting, which was completed by March I 1, 1861. By the end of that year, 13 states had ratified the new Constitution.

In broad outline, the Confederate Constitution is an amended U.S. Constitution. Even on slavery, there is little difference. Whereas the U.S. Constitution ended the importation of slaves after 1808, the Confederate Constitution simply forbade it. Both constitutions allowed slave ownership, of course.

In fact, slavery only became a constitutional issue after the war had begun. In his 1861 inaugural address, Abraham Lincoln said, "Apprehension seems to exist among the people of the Southern States that by the accession of a Republican administration their property [is] to be endangered.... I have no purpose, directly or indirectly to interfere with the institution of slavery in the United States where it exists.... I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclina6on to do so."

But the differences in the documents, small as they are, are extremely important. The people who wrote the Southern Constitution had lived under the federal one. They knew its strengths, which they tried to copy, and its weaknesses, which they tried to eliminate.

One grave weakness in the U.S. Constitution is the "general welfare" clause, which the Confederate Constitution eliminated.

The U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to "lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts, and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States."

The Confederate Constitution gave Congress the power "to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, for revenue necessary to pay the debts, provide for the common defense, and carry on the Government of the Confederate States..."

The Southern drafters thought the general welfare clause was an open door for any type of government intervention. They were, of course, right.

Immediately following that clause in the Confederate Constitution is a clause that has no parallel in the U.S. Constitution. It affirms strong support for free trade and opposition to protectionism: "but no bounties shall be granted from the Treasury; nor shall any duties or taxes on importation from foreign nations be laid to promote or foster any branch of industry."

The use of tariffs to shelter domestic industries from foreign competition had been an important issue since tariffs were first adopted in 1816. Southern states had borne heavy costs since tariffs protected northern manufacturing at the expense of Southern imports. The South exported agricultural commodities and imported almost all the goods it consumed, either from abroad or from Northern states. Tariffs drastically raised the cost of goods in the Southern states, while most of the tariff revenue was spent in the North.
https://mises.org/library/confederate-constitution

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, June 30th, 2015.]

Monday, 29 June 2015

US, NATO Powers Intensify Preparations for Nuclear War in Response to “Russian Aggression”


The claim that discussion about a revision of nuclear weapons policy is in response to Russian aggression turns reality on its head. In the aftermath of the US and NATO-backed coup in Ukraine last year, the major imperialist powers have engaged in a relentless militarization of Eastern Europe, including the establishment of a rapid reaction force of 40,000 troops.

This week, US Defense Secretary Ashton Carter announced that the US would permanently deploy tanks, military vehicles and other equipment to countries bordering Russia. There are also ongoing discussions about directly arming Ukraine, beyond the extensive assistance the right-wing government already receives.

NATO is now planning to respond to any attempt by Russia to maintain or counter US imperialism’s aggressive moves in Eastern Europe with even more massive military response, including nuclear weapons.

An indication of the thinking of NATO strategists was provided by a report in theFinancial Times. In the event of a conflict involving one of the Baltic countries, “Russia might…accuse the alliance of escalating the conflict and threaten to use intermediate range nuclear weapons.” The Times quotes Elbridge Colby, of the Center for a New American Security (CNAS): “NATO does not need a total nuclear rethink. But it needs to be realistic about how it would respond and willing to show Putin that he would not get away with it.”

This scenario builds on allegations from the US that Russia has violated the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF), allegations that the Russian government has denied. US officials have stated that the Pentagon is preparing to launch preemptive attacks against missiles or other targets in Russia, including with nuclear weapons, in response to Moscow’s alleged violation of the treaty.

The announcement of major revisions to NATO’s nuclear strategy came just days after the publication of an extensive report, “Project Atom: Defining US Nuclear Strategy and Posture for 2025-2050,” by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). The main portions of the report were authored by a career US government strategist and senior CSIS analyst, Clark Murdock, a man who previously worked in high-level strategy jobs at the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the Department of Defense (DOD), the US Air Force and the National War College. The report included contributions from a large team of researchers and experts, including panels from the CNAS and the National Institution for Public Policy (NIPP).

The thrust of the CSIS analysis is that the US must make its nuclear arsenal easier to use in a war with Russia, China or some other power. The military must adopt “a US nuclear strategy designed for twenty-first century realities,” based on new generations of tactical warheads and delivery systems.

More advanced tactical nuclear weapons will enable Washington to threaten and launch small nuclear wars, without being “self-deterred” by concerns that its actions would lead to a nuclear holocaust, the CSIS report argues.

“The United States needs to develop and deploy more employable nuclear weapons,” the CSIS wrote, including “low collateral damage, enhanced radiation, earth penetration, electromagnetic pulse, and others as technology advances.”

Such advances, the report argues, are the only way to counter the erosion of American technological superiority by the growth of the Chinese and Russian nuclear arsenals, together with the addition of as many as nine new governments to the “nuclear club.”

Under the “Measured Response” theory advocated by the CSIS and Murdock, these types of highly mobile nuclear strike forces could engage in “controlled nuclear operations,” firing “low yield, accurate, special effects” nukes against enemy targets without leading to a full-scale nuclear war.

By “forward deploying a robust set of discriminate nuclear response options,” the US could launch tactical nuclear strikes “at all rungs of the nuclear escalation ladder,” Murdock wrote.

Such “small-scale” nuclear conflicts would inevitably claim tens, if not hundreds of millions of lives, even assuming they did not escalate into a global nuclear war.

The continental US, according to this theory, would be protected from the consequences of regional-scale nuclear warfare by the deterrent effect of Washington’s huge arsenal of high-yield strategic weapons. Any “controlled” nuclear conflicts started by the US government, moreover, would not involve nuclear operations targeting or launched from North America.

“The US homeland would not be engaged in the US response to a nuclear attack on a regional ally,” the CSIS wrote.

In barely veiled language, CSIS is suggesting that the US should utilize allied and client governments as staging areas and arenas for “controlled” atomic warfare.

As the product of collaboration between an extensive network of ruling-class policy theorists, such proposals are extremely ominous and represent a grave warning to the international working class.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-nato-powers-intensify-preparations-for-nuclear-war-in-response-to-russian-aggression/5458679

I sincerely hope that the Washington analysts are not serious and are looking to simply ramp up a new Cold War that aims to funnel more money into the arms industry.

There needs to be a take over of the US Government, either through the ballot box or via a military coup, whereafter all the various think-tank institutions, such as this one, and large parts of the 'Deep State', are shut down. Media ownership must also be dispersed - and corporate monopolies of all sorts broken down.  

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, June 29th, 2015.]

Hundreds of Saudi Soldiers and Artillery Commander Join Yemeni Popular Forces


300 Saudi soldiers and an artillery commander have joined the Yemeni forces, a senior Yemeni politician announced on Friday.

“The latest blow at the Al Saud came as Hashem al-Ahmar, artillery commander of the Saudi army in al-Wadia border crossing and 300 soldiers joined the Yemeni army and the revolutionary forces,” the Middle East Panorama website quoted Head of Yemen’s Free Army Nasser bin Yahya al-Orujli as saying on Friday.

He noted that the Saudi regime is still in a difficult situation and the Saudi officials know it quite well.

Last Wednesday, tribal forces and activists in Saudi Arabia’s Najran region formed a military and political opposition movement to the Saudi regime, called “Ahrar al-Najran” after the region declared earlier this month that it has separated from Saudi Arabia and joined Yemen in the war on Riyadh.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/hundreds-of-saudi-soldiers-and-artillery-commander-join-yemeni-forces/5458682#

Related Info:

Yemen could Starve


[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, June 29th, 2015.]

Alleged Boston Bombers' Backpacks Not the Same as Bomb Backpacks - WRH RECAP


This is the official FBI photo of the remains of the BLACK backpack they claimed held the pressure cooker bomb:


In this next photo we see the two Tsarnaev brothers on the left, wearing light and dark GREY backpacks! To the right is a figure known as "military man" who is wearing a BLACK backpack.


The surviving brother is in solitary confinement...without access to the media or to religious services...and is denied the right to confidential communication with his attorney. Even Timothy McVeigh wasn't locked down like that.

Two weeks after the Boston bombing, the government lawyers realize they don't actually have a case against Lee Harvey Tsarnaev, the supposed hospital bed confession turned out to be a media rumor for which no court admissible confirmation exists, so suddenly, two weeks after a "Magic Confession" magically appears (according to the government) on the wall of the boat where Tsarnaev was hiding. Photos of the boat on the day Tsarnaev was captured show no signs of any such note.

And let us not forget how the FBI was trying to coerce Ibragim Todashev into implicating the Tsarnaevs in a drug-murder, to trick the public into believing these were bad guys not worthy of a second thought, which ended with the FBI shooting and killing the reluctant (and unarmed) Todashev when he tried to leave; once in the crown of the head! The cover-up of THAT murder is due out next year.
http://whatreallyhappened.com/

The text for this post is taken from Whatreallyhappened.com.

Reposted in light of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's recent confession/apology. However, a confession is not necessarily proof of guilt.

The Boston Bombing trial looked to be an instance where the defence team was part of the problem - the defence tactic, of admitting guilt, looks like a plea bargain strategy to avoid the death penalty.

The big problem is the Tsarvaev bags which, as far as I can see, are grey and light grey, do not match the FBI's pic of the black bomb bag debris - which is same type of bag as other people present at the crime scene. It does not matter what fairy story has been told about the events surrounding the crime if the bags don't match. I dunno what exactly happened, but when the images and evidence don't add up, I'd like to see a good explanation. ... plus what about the FBI murder of the Tsarnaev brother's friend Ibragim Todashev? 

This is a Rachel Maddow clip on the murder of Todashev, who apparently was executed by the FBI (important elements of the FBI are corrupt - unlike the fantasy you see on TV - which can be found out in simple internet search checks where you can see where they have framed people, killed people, intimidated people, had blackmail files on people, engaged in counterintelligence against peace activists etc). When the FBI tells you a story, there is a possibility, especially if it is related to terrorism or political murder, that it will be false.



[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, June 29th, 2015.]

CrossTalk: Greek Pain


Again Athens finds itself at loggerheads with its creditors, particularly the IMF. The Greeks appear to be willing to do only enough to stay in the Eurozone, while the rest of Europe is willing to offer it just enough support to stay afloat – all awhile making the Greek economy almost impossible to grow. Is the Euro a failure? CrossTalking with Mitch Feierstein, Stephen Haseler, and Scheherazade Rehman.



[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, June 29th, 2015.]

How they Bleep You - The Military Industrial Complex


How the central bank, and government use war to rob the people and feed themselves and select corporations with corporate welfare. Notice that the media basically ignores this as do schools, and yet it took only about 4 minutes to explain the whole thing.



[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, June 29th, 2015.]

Sunday, 28 June 2015

US To Begin Invasion of Syria


Unbeknownst to the general public, their elected politicians do not create the policy that binds their national destiny domestically or within the arena of geopolitics. Instead, corporate-financier funded think tanks do – teams of unelected policymakers which transcend elections, and which produce papers that then become the foundation of legislation rubber stamped by “legislators,” as well as the enumerated talking points repeated ad naseum by the corporate-media.

Such a policy paper has been recently written by the notorious US policy think-tank, the Brookings Institution, titled, “Deconstructing Syria: Towards a regionalized strategy for a confederal country.”
 
The signed and dated open-conspiracy to divide, destroy, then incrementally occupy a sovereign nation thousands of miles from America’s shores serves as a sobering example of how dangerous and enduring modern imperialism is, even in the 21st century.
 
Pretext ISIS: US Poured Billions Into “Moderates” Who Don’t Exist
 
The document openly admits that the US has provided billions in arming and training militants fed into the devastating and increasingly regional conflict. It admits that the US maintains – and should expand – operations in Jordan and NATO-member Turkey to provide even more weapons, cash, and fighters to the already catastrophic conflict.
 
It then recounts the rise of the so-called “Islamic State” (ISIS), but fails to account from where its money, cash, and weapons came. It should be obvious to readers that if the United States has committed billions in cash, weapons, and training on multiple fronts to alleged “moderates” who for all intents and purposes do not exist on the battlefield, a state-sponsor of greater magnitude would be required to create and sustain ISIS and Al Qaeda’s Al Nusra Front who Brookings admits dominates the “opposition” uncontested.
 
In reality, ISIS’ supply lines lead right into US operational zones in Turkey and Jordan, because it was ISIS and Al Qaeda all along that the West planned to use before the 2011 conflict began, and has based its strategy on ever since – including this most recent leg of the campaign.
 
The US Invasion of Syria
 
After arming and funding a literal region-wide army of Al Qaeda terrorists, the United States now plans to use the resulting chaos to justify what it has sought since the beginning of the conflict when it became clear the Syrian government was not to capitulate or collapse – the establishment of buffer zones now called “safe zones” by Brookings.
http://journal-neo.org/2015/06/26/us-to-begin-invasion-of-syria/

The original neocon plan, if we consider the PNAC documents, was to weaken Arab states - including the dismemberment of Syria in order to secure 'Israel's security.' We must also understand that the Israeli occupation of the Golan Heights will probably be expanded, and this will allow their army to circumvent Hezbollah positions in Southern Lebanon (effectively flanking the militia group positions during the next round of aggression).

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, June 28th, 2015.]

Ukraine Crisis Dr Paul Craig Roberts Interview


Ukraine Crisis Dr Paul Craig Roberts Interview



[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, June 28th, 2015.]

The International Criminal Court (ICC) Does Not Prosecute War Criminals - US and Israeli ICC Prosecutions? Don't Bet on It


The International Criminal Court (ICC) was established to prosecute culpable individuals for crimes of war, against humanity and genocide.

Its mandate calls for “end(ing) impunity for the perpetrators of the most serious crimes of concern.”
US and Israeli officials are guilty of the highest of high crimes. Yet none of their officials ever were held accountable – not by their own courts or the ICC.

The international body operates on the principle of complementarity. It can only prosecute when governments won’t or can’t – even against officials of non ICC-member countries like America and Israel.

On December 31, 2000, Bill Clinton signed the Rome Statute of the ICC. Over 130 other countries are members. Clinton lied saying “(t)he US has a long history of commitment to the principle of accountability…and for bringing to justice perpetrators of genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.”

America commits these crimes and others against one country after another, as well as persecuting its own most disadvantaged people in violation of international and constitutional laws.

It partners with the high crimes of key allies like Israel. When Bush succeeded Clinton, his Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security John Bolton stripped off the mask of US accountability by unsigning the Rome Statute – an unprecedented political act.

More followed, including enactment of the American Service-Members Protection Act (the so-called Hague Invasion Act).

It prohibits providing funds to the ICC and authorized the president to use “all necessary measures (including force) to protect United States military personnel and other elected and appointed officials of the United States government against criminal prosecution by an international criminal court to which the United States is not party.”

At the same time, over 100 other nations were pressured to sign Bilateral Immunity Agreements assuring they’d never surrender a US official or soldier to the ICC.

The court functions as an imperial tool. It targets officials of Western designated states like Sudan’s Omar Hassan al-Bashir, former Libya leader Muammar and his son Saif al-Islam Gaddafi.

Or special Western tribunals are established to accomplish the same thing – against Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, Yugoslavia’s Slobodan Milosevic, and Liberia’s Charles Taylor among others.

The principle of universal jurisdiction (UJ) holds that certain crimes are too grave to ignore – including genocide, crimes of war and against humanity.

Under UJ, nations nations may investigate and prosecute foreign nationals when their country of residence or origin won’t, can’t or hasn’t for any reason.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-international-criminal-court-icc-does-not-prosecute-the-war-criminals/5457613

Related Info:

Dr Mads Gilbert Doctor in Gaza from Norway Exposes and Slams Israel America and UK!


[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, June 28th, 2015.]

Exploding the Korean War Lies


On the 65th anniversary of the beginning of the Korean War James is joined by James Perloff of jamesperloff.com to discuss his in-depth article, "The Korean War: Another Conflict that Served the Illuminati Agenda." From deals with the Soviets to protection for the Chinese to pulled punches and "missed" opportunities, we examine how the pretext for the war was created, why it was thrown, and who was behind it.



[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, June 28th, 2015.]

Keiser Report (E775): Grexodus, Brexit & Too-Big-To-Fail


In this episode of the Keiser Report, Max Keiser and Stacy Herbert discuss Grexodus, Brexit, Too-Big-To-Fail and how to make activism succeed. In the second half, Max interviews Mike Bonanno of the Yes Men about climate change, activism and more.



[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, June 28th, 2015.]