Saudi Arabian Prince defects

Saudi prince defects: ‘Brutality, oppression as govt scared of Arab revolts’ 

 August 12, 2013

Saudi Arabia, a major supporter of opposition forces in Syria, has increased crackdown on its own dissenters, with 30,000 activists reportedly in jail. In an exclusive interview to RT a Saudi prince defector explained what the monarchy fears most.

Saudi Arabia has stepped up arrests and trials of peaceful dissidents, and responded with force to demonstrations by citizens,” Human Rights Watch begins the country’s profile on its website.

Political parties are banned in Saudi Arabia and human rights groups willing to function legally have to go no further than investigating things like corruption or inadequate services. Campaigning for political freedoms is outlawed.

One of such groups, which failed to get its license from the government, the Saudi Civil and Political Rights Association (ACPRA), was cited by AFP as saying the kingdom was holding around 30,000 political prisoners.

Saudi Prince Khaled Bin Farhan Al-Saud, who spoke to RT from Dusseldorf, Germany, confirmed reports of increased prosecution of anti-government activists and said that it’s exactly what forced him to defect from his family. He accused the monarchy of corruption and silencing all voices of dissent and explained how the Saudi mechanism for suppression functioned.

There is no independent judiciary, as both police and the prosecutor’s office are accountable to the Interior Ministry. This ministry’s officials investigate ‘crimes’ (they call them crimes), related to freedom of speech. So they fabricate evidence, don’t allow people to have attorneys”, the prince told RT Arabic. “Even if a court rules to release such a ‘criminal’, the Ministry of Interior keeps him in prison, even though there is a court order to release him. There have even been killings! Killings! And as for the external opposition, Saudi intelligence forces find these people abroad! There is no safety inside or outside the country.”

The strong wave of oppression is in response to the anti-government forces having grown ever more active. A new opposition group called Saudi Million and claiming independence from any political party was founded in late July. The Saudi youths which mostly constitute the movement say they demand the release of political prisoners and vow to hold regular demonstrations, announcing their dates and locations via Facebook and electronic newspapers.

Human rights violations are driving people on to the streets despite the fear of arrest, according to activist Hala Al-Dosari, who spoke to RT from Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

We have issues related to political and civil rights, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. These are the main issues that cause a lot of people to be at risk for just voicing out their opinions or trying to form associations, demonstrate or protest, which is banned by the government.”

The loudest voice of the Saudi opposition at the moment is a person called ‘Saudi Assange’. His Twitter name is @Mujtahidd, he keeps his identity and whereabouts secret and is prolific in online criticism of the ruling family, which has gained him over a million followers.

The regime can destroy your credibility easily and deter people from dealing with you if your identity is public,” Mujtahid wrote to RT’s Lindsay France in an email.

Prince Khalid Bin Farhan Al-Saud announced his defection from the Saudi Arabian royal family on July 27.

They don’t think about anything but their personal benefits and do not care for the country’s and people’s interests, or even national security,” his statement reads as cited by the website of Tehran-based Al Alam International News Channel.

The prince criticized the royal family for silencing all voices calling for reforms and said he learned of the common Saudis’ sufferings having gone through “horrible personal experience,” without specifying exactly what it was.

The Twitter activist’s anonymity is understandable. The most recent example of what can happen to activists is the case of Raif Badawi, the founder of the Free Saudi Liberals website, who was found guilty of insulting Islam through his online forum and sentenced the activist to 600 lashes and seven years in prison.

In June, seven people were sentenced to up to 10 years in prison for ‘inciting protests’ via Facebook. The indicted denied charges and said they were tortured into confession.

The government is obviously scared of the Arab revolutions. And they’ve responded as they usually do: by resorting to oppression, violence, arbitrary law, and arrest,” Prince Khaled says, adding that so far the tougher the measures the government took to suppress the dissent, the louder that dissent’s voice was.

The opposition used to demand wider people’s representation in governing bodies, more rights and freedoms. But the authorities reacted with violence and persecution, instead of a dialogue. So the opposition raised the bar. It demanded constitutional monarchy, similar to what they have in the UK, for example. And the Saudi regime responded with more violence. So now the bar is even higher. Now the opposition wants this regime gone.”

There was a time, at the beginning of the Arab Spring movement in the region in 2011, when the government tried to appease opposition activists by a $60 billion handout program by King Abdullah, according to Pepe Escobar, a correspondent for the Asia Times. He calls that move an attempt to “bribe” the population. However there was also a stick with this carrot.

The stick is against the Shiite minority – roughly 10 percent of Saudi Arabia – who live in the Eastern province where most of the oil is, by the way. They don’t want to bring down the House of Saud essentially. They want more participation, judiciary not answering to religious powers and basically more democratic freedoms. This is not going to happen in Saudi Arabia. Period. Nor in the other Gulf Cooperation Council [GCC] petro-monarchies”.

Escobar points out the hypocrisy of the Saudi Arabian rulers, who feel free to advise other regional powers on how to move towards democracy, despite their poor human rights record.

They say to the Americans that they are intervening in Syria for a more democratic post-Assad Syria and inside Saudi Arabia it’s the Sunni-Shiite divide. They go against 10 percent of their own population.”

‘Buying favors from West’

Saudi Arabia’s crackdown on opposition has been strongly condemned by human rights organizations, but not by Western governments, which usually claim sensitivity to such issues.

The White House certainly does maintain a long-standing alliance with the leaders of Saudi Arabia, cemented by common political, economic and military interests in the Middle East,” said Prince Khaled.

Germany came under fierce criticism last week over its arms sales to Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states, which have almost tripled in just two years, from 570 million euro in 2011 to almost one-and-a-half billion in 2012.

And Angela Merkel’s government has approved weapons exports of more than 800 million euro in the first half of this year – suggesting the level will continue to grow.

With arms they [Gulf States] are also buying favors from the West. They are insuring the maintenance of their legitimacy on spending massive amounts of money that are pouring into Western economies,” Dr. Ahmed Badawi, co-executive director of Transform, which studies conflicts and political developments, told RT.

In 2012, Amnesty International claimed that German-made small firearms, ammunition and military vehicles were commonly used by Middle Eastern and North African regimes to suppress peaceful demonstrations.

Small arms are becoming real weapons of mass destruction in the world now. There is absolutely no way to guarantee that the weapons that are being sold legally to countries like Saudi Arabia, even Egypt, do not fall into the hands of terrorists. The two important examples are German assault rifles found in the regions in Mexico and also in Libya. And there’s absolutely no way of knowing how these weapons ended up there,” Badawi said. Source  Videos at source.

Recent

Millions in farm subsidies given to dead US farmers

Canada: Railway Disaster in Lac-Mégantic, Quebec Part 2

Najaf: A toxic “health catastrophe” – US weapons blamed for Iraq’s birth defects

//

Published in: on August 12, 2013 at 1:48 pm  Comments Off on Saudi Arabian Prince defects  
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

UK police in Hot Water

UK police under fire for seducing activists, stealing dead infants’ names

March 01, 2013

British MPs have condemned practices used by undercover police, including sleeping with those they were investigating and using dead infants’ names for their covert identity. The MPs have called for legislation to regulate undercover work.

The UK House of Commons held a Home Affairs Select Committee probe into a series of scandals involving undercover police officers. In an interim report published on Friday, the committee addressed three separate issues.

First: Undercover officers became intimate with those they were investigating. Second: The practice of using the names of dead infants to create cover identities for the officers. And last, but not least: MPs criticized the overall system of undercover police work.

Unauthorized, but ‘almost inevitable’ sex

The MPs highlighted several cases in which undercover officers infiltrated various activist groups and initiated long-term intimate relationships with members of those groups. The affairs were then broken off when the agents finished their work. Some incidents reviewed by the commission dated as far back as the 1980s.

Several of the women are now claiming damages over the incidents. While MPs refrained from commenting on the legality of the officers’ actions, “the terrible impact on the lives of those women who had relationships with undercover officers is beyond doubt,” they said, adding that the officers “were not unaffected” either.

“There is an alarming degree of inconsistency in the views of Ministers and senior police officers about the limits of what may and may not be lawfully authorized,” the report said. Officials offered MPs different views on whether such relationships were justified, could be prevented or should be banned outright. One official said such closeness “could almost be inevitable” is some cases.

One practical consideration, former Minister for Policing Nick Herbert explained, is that an explicit ban on such intimacy “would provide a ready-made test for the targeted criminal group to find out whether an undercover officer was deployed among them.” However, there must be strict rules for officers becoming intimate with their targets, the MPs said.

“We do not believe that officers should enter into intimate, physical sexual relationships while using their false identities undercover without clear, prior authorization, which should only be given in the most exceptional circumstances,” the report said.

The report outlined that it is clearly unacceptable to conceive a child as result of such relationships, which reportedly happened to one of the officers. “This must never be allowed to happen again,” the MPs said.AFP Photo / Carl de Souza)

‘Ghoulish and disrespectful’

Another dubious practice condemned by the MPs was the use of the names of dead infants to create aliases for undercover agents. The practice was “ghoulish and disrespectful,” and potentially dangerous to the bereaved families, they said.

One witness told the commission how she found the home address of the people she believed to be the parents of her missing partner, who was an undercover officer using a fake name. Her intention was not malevolent, but “it is easy to see how officers infiltrating serious, organized criminal and terrorist gangs using the identities of real people could pose a significant risk to the living relatives of those people,” the report stressed.

“The families who have been affected by this deserve an explanation and a full and unambiguous apology from the forces concerned,” the commission continued. “We would also welcome a clear statement from the Home Secretary that this practice will never be followed in future.” 

The Metropolitan Police is currently conducting an investigation into the use of dead infants’ names. To the shock of the commission, the practice was “apparently a surprise to senior officers and it is vital that the investigation establish quickly how high up the chain of command this practice was sanctioned,” the report said.

The commission pledged to request updates on the progress of the probe every three months, including the remaining amount of work, costs, disciplinary proceedings, arrests made, and the families involved being identified and informed. The probe should be concluded by the end of 2013, and the results will be published on the commission’s website every three months.

“It cannot be sufficiently emphasized that using the identities of dead children was not only abhorrent, but reflects badly on the police. It must never occur again,” the MPs said. (Reuters)

Reform pending

During the investigation, the MPs found that “standards in undercover operations are jeopardized by lack of clear lines of responsibility between… the different forces and units involved.” They cite discrepancies in training, tactics and review, and called for the establishment of a coherent set of operational instructions.

Of particular concern for the commission was the weak oversight for undercover agents who were gathering intelligence, and how there was no expectation that the evidence gathered must stand up in court.

The MPs argued that undercover police activity should be limited to genuine threats to public safety or national security. They also expressed doubts over the practice of infiltrating activist groups engaged in peaceful protest in the hopes of reaching more radical groups.

The report said that a compelling case exists for a fundamental review of the legislative framework governing undercover policing, including 2000’s Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act.

“We recommend that the Government commit to the publication of a Green Paper on the regulation of investigatory powers before the end of this Parliament, with a view to publishing draft legislation in the Session after the next general election,” the report said.

http://tiny.cc/nxuatw

Undercover police officers, that were really under the covers.

Read the  Report. It is a long read but what the witnesses have to say is heart breaking.  Imagine living with a fake Pearson for 5 or 6 years. They lived as a married couple would in some cases. So how would it feel to find out your husband was not real? Then he just vanished off the face of the earth. So you go to visit his parents etc. One did try that. Now if she had spoken to them they would have been shocked to find out that their son who died had his identity stolen.

There are so many things that could have happened by doing these types of thing it staggers the imagination.

What if and this was not the case as the people being investigated were not terrorists but if they had been or drug dealers etc. The parents may even have been killed. I could see a drug dealer going there to find the guy and his parents who were not even his parents getting caught up in the cross fire. In the US drive by shooting happen all the time and innocent people die.

They certainly did not think when they used the name of real children, with real parents and relatives.

In the 5 or 6 years  those police officers lived with these women they took that time from them. If not for the lies those women may have found a real partner. They may have found real love. That time can never be given back to those women. One wanted to have a child. Now she may or may not have that happen. She will have to find a new partner and by the time that happens it may be too late. How dare they steal years of a woman’s life in such a manner. Imagine finding out all those years you were just being used and it was all a lie. No wonder the sexual abuse in the UK is so bad, the police are part of it. Do read the Report.It is eye opening.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmhaff/837/837.pdf

Special Demonstration Squad, which was initially funded by the Home Office and set up in 1968, ran for 40 years.

A lot could have happened over those 40 years.

All I can say is if you don’t know who your Father is, he may be a police officer was working uncover in more ways then one. . That is something to ponder. Also 40 years ago birth control was not as efficient as it is today. Even with all the new types of birth control, they are not all 100% guaranteed to work. If it turns out the woman was left with a child to raise on her own that is unacceptable, in every sense of the word.

Sexual exploitation of any type is unacceptable, but when it is the police doing it, that is beyond words to explain the nightmare it leaves in the minds of those who were exploited and the loss of trust in the police who are suppose to protect individuals from such crimes. They have become the criminals, they are suppose to protect us from. Then they have the audacity, to question why the public does not trust them.

As a parent, if this was done to your daughter, how would you feel?

If anyone thinks this is acceptable behavior I would say you have a sick, criminal mind. This is sexual exploitation at it’s worst.

The women did not consent to to sleep with an undercover police officer they consented to sleep with a non existing person who had died years before. You cannot consent to have sexual relations with a person, who is a not real in any seance of the word.

True consent can only be given if the partner is real and who he or she says she is, other wise it is not consent.

If you steal someones identity and ran up credit card charges or other crimes using “identity theft”, they crimes are they not?

The police have done the same thing except they stole the lives of women for weeks, months and in some cases years using “identity theft”.

You cannot legally give consent to have a sexual relationship. with a person who does not exist, identity theft or other wise.

The more I think about this, the angrier I get.

Breach of Trust, Betrayal, Lies, Corruption, Theft, Coercion,  Sexual Exploitation, Fatherless children, Abuse of power, Disregard for another person or persons emotional or physical well being, Seduction, Endangerment of innocent people, Prostitution of oneself to get information (Yes and they got paid to do so, with tax dollars) and those are just off the top of my head.

Police spy Mark Kennedy may have misled parliament over relationships

Inquiry hears claims of 10 or more women having sexual relations with undercover officer who infiltrated eco-activists

Mark Kennedy, undercover police officer

Mark Kennedy-Fake Name :Mark Stone
Mark Kennedy’s evidence saying he had sexual relationships with two people is disputed by women taking legal action against the police. Photograph: Philipp Ebeling

Mark Kennedy, the police spy who infiltrated the environmental movement, appears to have misled parliament over the number of sexual relationships he had with women while he was working undercover.

Kennedy told a parliamentary inquiry that he had only two relationships during the seven years he spied on environmental groups.

However, at least four women had come forward to say that he slept with them when he was a police spy.

Friends who knew Kennedy when he was living as an eco-activist in Nottingham have identified more than 10 women with whom he slept.

Kennedy was the only undercover police officer to give evidence to the inquiry conducted by the home affairs select committee.

He testified in private, but transcripts of his evidence released on Thursday reveal that he claimed he had sexual relationships with “two individuals”.

But three women who say they are Kennedy’s former lovers are part of an 11-strong group taking legal action against police chiefs for damages.

The Guardian has been investigating this story for some time.

For more go HERE

Mark Jenner, the police spy who went by the name of Mark Cassidy for six years

Mark Jenner, the undercover officer in the Metropolitan police’s special demonstration squad, who went by the name of Mark Cassidy for six years – then disappeared.

He was called Mark Cassidy. His girlfriend – a secondary school teacher he shared a flat with for four years – believed they were almost “man and wife”. Then, in 2000, as the couple were discussing plans for the future, Cassidy suddenly vanished, never to be seen again. Source

Those are just who who victimized civilians. There are more.

Then we have this type of intrusive behavior. Child abuse under the Authority of the State.

43,000 strip-searches carried out on children as young as 12

Recent

Icelandic Food and Veterinary Authority Discovery “Something was Missing”

Forced Birthcontrol

Published in: on March 2, 2013 at 3:43 am  Comments Off on UK police in Hot Water  
Tags: , , , , , , ,

The boycott of Israel is “gaining speed”

By Lawrence Davidson

September 9 2010

On 5 September 2010 the Israel newspaper Ha’aretz published an article the headline of which read ‘Anti-Israel economic boycotts are gaining speed’. The subtitle went on to state that “the sums involved are not large, but their international significance is huge”. Actually, what seems to have triggered the piece was not international. Rather, it was the decision of a “few dozen theatre people” to boycott “a new cultural centre in Ariel”, an illegally settled town in the occupied territories. This action drew public support from 150 academics in Israel. The response from the Israeli right, which presently controls the government and much of Israel’s information environment, was loud and hateful.

Though this affair was domestic, it provided a jumping off point for Ha’aretz to go on and examine the larger international boycott of Israel which is indeed “gaining speed”. It noted that Chile had recently pledged to boycott products from the Israeli settlements and Norway’s state pension plan had divested itself of companies involved in construction in the occupied territories. The Ha’aretz article pointed out that these incidents (and there are others that can be named in such countries as Ireland and Venezuela) are signs that the boycott movement – so long the province civil society – is now finding resonance at the level of national governments. The Israeli paper declared that “the world is changing before our eyes. Five years ago the anti-Israel movement may have been marginal. Now it is growing into an economic problem.”

The article puts forth two explanations for this turn of events one of which is problematic, and the other incomplete. Let’s take a look at them.

1. “Until now boycott organizers had been on the far left. [Now] they have a new ally: Islamic organizations… The red side has a name for championing human rights, while the green side [the Islamic side] has money.” I have some personal knowledge of the boycott movement and I find some of these particulars to be, at best, exaggerations. The term “far left” must be based on some arbitrary Zionist definition of the political spectrum. Worldwide community support for the growing boycott movement has gone beyond political alignments. Today, it is a reflection of real united front seeking the promotion of Palestinian human rights (in this Haaretz is on the mark). As for the “green side”, there is certainly an understandable affinity here. Muslims too are concerned about the human rights of Palestinians (including the Christians ones). However, the claim of any significant flow of cash is, as far as I know, another exaggeration. The Ha’aretz piece cites the example of the aid flotilla to Gaza, with its link to Turkey. But this is just one case in a worldwide movement. And, there was nothing illegitimate (despite Israeli propaganda) about the involvement of Turkish charities. It might come as a surprise to the Israelis, but you can run a boycott movement without heavy outside funding – as was the case of the boycott against South Africa.

2. Ha’aretz continues: “but then came the occupation, which turned us into the evil Goliath, the cruel oppressor, a darkness on the nations”. The article suggests that this is such a contrast with the righteous stand that helped convince the West to support the original formation of Israel that many have turned away from Israel in disappointment. “And now we are paying the price of presenting ourselves as righteous and causing disappointment: boycott.” No doubt there is much disappointment. The horrors of Israeli expansionism and occupation are such that they draw worldwide attention. And rightly so. But, they are symptoms of some deeper cause. What might it be? The state of Israel was founded on an ideological programme called Zionism. That programme called for the establishment of a state designed to serve the exclusive interests of one religiously identified group. While the Zionists felt this aim was justified by the centuries of persecution suffered by European Jews, it actually carried within it the seeds of its own corruption. The simple truth is that you cannot successfully design a state for one group only unless you found it on some desert island. If you put it down in a place that is occupied by others who are not of your group, what is the most likely next step? You turn into racists, ethnic cleansers or worse. The Zionist adherence to their ideology and its programme is the cause of their turning into “cruel oppressors”. The means dictated by their end made it so.

The Ha’aretz article does not go beyond these points, but there is plenty more to say. Those who wonder whether they should support the boycott should certainly consider the horrors of the Israeli occupation and its ghettoizing of the people of Gaza. They might also consider the following:

1. The non-Jewish population of Israel proper, that is Israel within the 1967 borders (the “Green Line”) are subject to segregation and economic and social discrimination that is both de jure and de facto. Their overall standards of living are lower than the Israeli Jews, their educational facilities inferior and their economic prospects poorer. This is to be expected. If you are running your state based on a racist principle, by definition discrimination must infuse the home front. This fact does not appear to fit with the often heard claim that the Israelis are “just like us” Americans. However, in a rather anachronistic way they are “like us” – that is like the United States prior to our civil rights legislation. In other words, Israel is like, say, Georgia or Alabama circa the 1920s.

2. The second factor worthy of consideration is the negative international impact of Zionist ideology, for the harm of Zionism is not confined to either Israel or its occupied territories. The fact is that Zionist influence spreads far beyond Israel’s area of dominion and now influences many of the policy-making institutions of Western governments, and particularly those of the United States. This influence is corruptive if only because it distorts both official and popular notions of national interests in the Middle East. When you have a powerful and single-minded lobby that is able to manipulate your government in such a fashion that it pours its national treasure into a racist state, arms it and protects it to the point of becoming an accomplice to its crimes, and by doing so wilfully alienates 22 per cent of the world’s population, you know that your notion of national interest has been seriously mangled. This harmful influence makes it imperative that Israel’s oppressive behaviour be singled out as a high priority case from among the many other oppressive regimes that may be candidates for boycott.

So no one in Israel, the US or anywhere else should be surprised that the boycott against Israel, in its many manifestations, is “gaining speed.” If you are not yet a supporter you should become one. To join the boycott is good for the world’s future in general. It is certainly good for the Palestinians, and yes, it is good for the Jews too.

For more information on how to join the boycott Israel campaign, visit the websites of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Movement website and the Boycott Israeli Goods campaign.

* Lawrence Davidson is professor of history at West Chester University

Source

Recent

The next big thing in autos: a hand-cranked hybrid?

More birds dying in Alberta oil sands than first reported

Blackwater Worldwide/Xe Services formed a network of 30 shell companies

Pentagon declined to investigate hundreds of purchases of child pornography

Published in: on September 9, 2010 at 6:37 pm  Comments Off on The boycott of Israel is “gaining speed”  
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Netanyahu Takes His Siege Against Human Rights NGOs to the US

Day-long conference apparently encouraged by the Israeli government labels Israeli human rights workers as traitors.

By Max Blumenthal

March 17 2010

As the anti-Goldstone, human rights-bashing Lawfare Project’s opening event on March 11 wrapped up, I asked its chairman, Columbia University Law School Dean David Schizer, for an interview. Schizer, who had just attacked the Goldstone Report from the podium, pointedly refused to speak to me and looked for the exit. As Schizer was leaving, he was politely confronted by Columbia Law School Professor Katherine Franke, who heads the school’s Program in Gender and Sexuality Law.

“Why didn’t you invite any speakers with an alternative perspective?” Franke asked Schizer.

His reply was curt. “We invited one or two but they couldn’t make it,” Schizer claimed before hurrying away.

Schizer was understandably nervous about his exposure. After all, he had just presided over a day-long conference during which Israeli human rights workers were labeled as traitors while Judge Richard Goldstone and human rights groups were compared to “anti-Semitic street gangs.” After several speakers had harshly condemned legal efforts against the construction of Israeli settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, Schizer appeared beside them to lend his credibility to their views.

Columbia Law Dean David Schizer Attacks Goldstone, Human Rights NGO’s @Lawfare Conference

Schizer attacks Goldstone

Held in the ornate NY County Lawyers Association meeting room in downtown Manhattan, where the walls were adorned with portraits of the pioneers of international jurisprudence, the Lawfare Project’s conference had the look of a non-partisan academic conference. However, the event was organized by a network of American Zionist groups and conservative operatives with apparent encouragement from the Israeli government.

As Scott Horton noticed at Harper’s, the Lawfare Project’s rollout event followed a remarkably similar conference in Jerusalem two weeks earlier. Both conferences followed legislation in the Knesset designed to force NGO’s to disclose their foreign donors so they can be more easily branded as a fifth column and to strangle human rights groups in Israel and occupied Palestine.

The presence of high-level Israeli officials like UN Ambassador Gabriela Shalev at the Lawfare Project conference suggested that the Netanyahu administration was the hidden hand behind the event. If so, the Israeli government has deployed its American Jewish allies to take the fight across the Atlantic to groups like Human Rights Watch and the Center for Constitutional Rights. Both groups were attacked at the event as anti-Israeli and anti-American.

I arrived late in the day but just in time for a panel moderated by Pat Robertson’s longtime legal counsel, Jay Sekulow. Sekulow, a convert from Judaism to evangelical Christianity who has spent his career representing anti-gay and anti-abortion clients, appears to be playing a key role in the Lawfare Project.

Through his American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), Sekulow reaps millions of dollars each year from Christian conservative donors. He uses that money to pay himself upwards of $600,000, provide a lavish lifestyle for his family, and procure the services of the PR firm, 5WPR, which represents other upstanding clients like Girls Gone Wild and the pro-settler Hebron Fund.

5WPR was handling the press list for the Lawfare Project and shuttling its speakers to and from media appearances. 5W Senior Account Executive Maggie Davis told me that through the firm’s relationship with Sekulow, she was arranging media appearances for Brooke Goldstein, founder of the Children’s Rights Institute, which happens to share a domain address with the Lawfare Project. Both websites were registered by the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, which played a direct role in planning the conference. Goldstein is now the lead spokesperson for the Lawfare Project, according to 5W’s Davis.

NGO Monitor legal advisor Anne Herzberg was featured prominently at the conference. During a panel discussion, she accused the European Union of “pouring hundreds of millions into these NGO’s…that are actually in favor of a one-state solution.” Without naming those NGO’s or explaining why accepting foreign money was such a crime, Herzberg boasted of suing human rights groups to force them disclose their donors. She accused Israeli NGO’s like B’tselem of causing “a breach of sovereignty” against Israel by contributing data to the Goldstone Report — an insinuation that Israeli human rights workers were traitors.

An NGO Monitor report was distributed to conference attendees identifying groups supposedly promoting “post-colonial ideology” as “anti-state,” “anti-democracy” and “anti-American.” The report identified NGO Monitor’s top targets: the Palestinian Center for Human Rights and Al-Haq. Al-Haq was singled out because, along with a staffer from the Israeli group B’Tselem, it filed an expert opinion in the case to move a section of the separation wall annexing thousands of acres of farmland from the Palestinian town of Bil’in to a nearby Jewish settlement.

The attack on Al Haq highlights part of NGO’s Monitor’s not-so-hidden agenda: to allow the settler movement to usurp land in the West Bank without limitations. As Didi Remez reported, NGO Monitor has partnered with the Institute for Zionist Strategies, led by Yisrael Harel, who helped to found the Gush Emunim settler movement and lives in the religious nationalist settlement of Ofra. Remez also pointed out that NGO Monitor has made no demand for financial transparency from pro-settler organizations which are also engaged in what it would call “lawfare.”

NGO Monitor has also targeted US-based human rights group. It has gone after Human Rights Watch on the basis of the group’s contribution of reporting to the Goldstone Report and because Goldstone was at one point a HRW board member. The Center for Constitutional Rights was singled out because its founder, Michael Ratner, went on the recent Viva Palestina mission with Code Pink. None of the factual documentation these groups released was challenged by the NGO Monitor report or in Herzberg’s presentation. Instead, the groups and their leadership are being targeted with a scattershot of accusations that recall McCarthyism in its crudest form.

As a consequence of his zeal, NGO Monitor director Gerald Steinberg was hauled into an Israeli court this month and forced to apologize for claiming a Palestinian human rights group “justified violence.” Yossi Alpher, a former advisor to Ehud Barak, has condemned Steinberg’s activities, writing that NGO Monitor “seems dead set on eliminating human rights monitoring of Israel entirely and smearing anyone who supports this vital activity.”

The NGO Monitor report and the speakers at the Lawfare Project event expressed alarm about the effectiveness of the global BDS movement and its success in exposing apartheid practices in Israel and the Occupied Territories. Speaker Richard Heidemann, the Honorary Chairman of B’nai Brith, said that the fight against BDS was essential to the Lawfare Project. “We have to stand up against slander, we have to stand up against boycott,” he proclaimed. “If you were accused of apartheid, wouldn’t you consider taking action?” However, he proposed no specific measures or tactics other than making vehement statements.

Francois-Henri Briard, a conservative French attorney, voiced his outrage that the BDS movement had successfully pressured the French company Veolia to pull out of an Israeli light rail project that would have connected illegal Jewish settlements in the West Bank to Jerusalem. He called the initiative against the rail line “an attack on Israeli sovereignty” even though it specifically targeted the settlement enterprise across the Green Line.

Jeremy Rabkin, an outspoken neoconservative law professor, echoed Herzberg’s smearing of human rights groups as treasonous. “These human rights groups we keep hearing about are not loyal to their country or to democracy, but to some strange world order,” he declared.

Not to be outdone, David Matas, the senior legal counsel to B’nai Brith Canada, maintained that because the International Criminal Court represented the legacy of the Holocaust, it should always side with Israel. He went on to compare the Goldstone Report and efforts to invoke international law to prosecute Israeli officials to “anti-Semitism by gangs in the street.”

Matas’s invective against international law was ironic in light of the fact that his most notable court case called upon international legal bodies to prosecute China for supposedly harvesting the organs of Falun Gong practitioners. In September 2009, Matas hailed a Spanish court (the concept of “forum shopping” in Spanish courts was attacked repeatedly during the conference) for indicting former Chinese President Jiang Zemin and Chinese officials for what he called “genocide and torture.”

Matas has defined genocide as merely stating “the intent to kill” a group of people. What’s more, he has justified prosecuting Jiang by invoking International Criminal Court statutes governing the prosecution of high government officials who did not directly commit crimes against humanity but may have allowed them to occur through specific administrative measures. Couldn’t these statutes also be applied against the Israeli government officials who oversaw the assault on Gaza?

Matas’s invocation of international law to prosecute Chinese officials while attacking it to protect Israeli officials highlighted the underlying cynicism of the Lawfare Project. Indeed, the project has nothing to do with combating the abuse of international law per se; it is an ideologically-driven effort to intimidate anyone who stands in the way of Israel’s human rights abuses.

According to 5W’s Davis, the Lawfare Project’s opening event was a strategy session designed to “raise awareness.” Though it is still unclear what actions the project will take, the demonization that human rights groups and other democratic elements in Israel have weathered foreshadows the attacks their American allies may soon face.

Source

The Lawfare Project was promoting hate against Human Rights organizations no less.  Really have to wonder about them as well NGO Monitor, which is nothing more then an organization to destroy Freedom of Speech.

Say anything about Israel and you are demonized.

With Israels Human Rights record, we should never loose our freedom to tell the world.  Hiding the truth is not to be tolerated.

March 11-17 2010 Report on Israeli Human Rights Violations in the Occupied Palestinian Territory

Israeli Military Investigator Admits Failures in the Military Investigation of Rachel Corrie’s Killing

Egypt : 42 electoral candidates and 145 protestors arrested in one day

Children of Gaza are Suffering, Scarred, Trapped

Report: U.S. vows to halt Israeli building in East Jerusalem

Amir, ten years old, abducted by Israeli soldiers from his bed

“This Time We Went Too Far” Truth and Consequences in the Gaza Invasion

E-book on Jewish National Fund’s role in colonization of Palestine

Israel on Trial – The Russell Tribunal on Palestine

US/Israeli Charity uses little Palestinian Childs photo to raise money for Israel’s Hungry

China renews call for diplomacy on Iran

Food industry probe reveals abuse of foreign workers

Japan Report: Private Agreements Allowed US to Bring Nukes

Published in: on March 20, 2010 at 5:10 am  Comments Off on Netanyahu Takes His Siege Against Human Rights NGOs to the US  
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Israel abducted over 5,000 people and put them in prison

February 1 2009

In Palestine, Israeli forces continued to raid towns and villages, arresting more Palestinians. On January 25, Israeli forces seized 334 Palestinians in Israel who were working without permit. They also arrested 16 Israelis for employing them. That same day, Israeli troops stormed homes and restaurants in several neighborhoods in Ramallah and Al-Bireh, but with no reported arrests. However, they did arrest four Palestinians at a checkpoint in Nablus. The next day, Israeli forces Israeli forces raided homes in Husam near Bethlehem, while army bulldozers dug up the main roads linking the village with neighboring areas. Israeli border guards also seized another 250 Palestinian workers in Israel, accusing them of staying in Israel without permits. Most of those detained are West Bank residents. On January 28, Israeli forces imposed a curfew on Zabuba, near Jenin, and seized eight Palestinians in dawn raids. On January 29, another 14 Palestinians were seized in raids in Bethlehem, Hebron, and Beit Suweif. In Beit Ummar, two Palestinians were injured and two others seized when Israeli troops opened fire at a house belonging to 63-year-old Fathi Jamal Al-Alamah, injuring him in the chest. His 55-year-old wife Fahima was injured in the leg. Israeli troops also detained eight men in Hijjah near Qalqiliya before dawn on January 30. That same day, 17 Palestinians were injured when Israeli soldiers opened fire with live ammunition on Palestinian demonstrators in Israeli-occupied Hebron.

Israeli settlers have been busy this week, when on January 25, protected by soldiers, they seized new land south of Hebron. After erecting a metal fence on the land, they prevented the owners and local Palestinian residents from approaching it. This comes as a disturbing new report was published on January 28 by Peace Now claiming that Israel has accelerated construction in illegal settlements in the West Bank during 2008 by nearly 60%. Roughly 1,257 new structures were built within settlements during 2008, compared to 800 in 2007. Building more than doubled in “outposts,” — unauthorized settlements that are not officially recognized by the Israeli government — with 261 structures built, compared to 98 the year before.

Source

In the past three weeks, more than 135 Hamas supporters and members have been rounded up. Among the detainees are journalists, university professors and students and preachers. In some cases, Hamas supporters who were released by the IDF were arrested hours later by the PA security forces.

The crackdown has also included intimidation of reporters and critics. Several Palestinian reporters have been “advised” by Abbas’s top aides not to report on the massive anti-Hamas crackdown. Samir Khawireh, a journalist from Nablus, found himself in a prison cell earlier this week for reporting about the torching of a car belonging to Prof. Abdel Sattar Kassam, a long-time outspoken critic of financial corruption in the PA.

No freedom of Speech allowed.

Israel to release 231 detainees instead of 250

December 08, 2008
By Saed Bannoura

The office of the outgoing Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, issued a press release stating that Israel will release 231 Palestinians detainees instead of 250 after it canceled the names of 19 detainees from the Gaza Strip.

All of the detainees who would be freed are from the West Bank and are members of Fateh movement and other “non-Islamic factions”.

Olmert’s office said that the detainees who would be freed “do not have bloody hands” and that freeing them is a “gesture of good will to the Palestinian Authority”.

Meanwhile, Ziad Abu Ein, in charge of the Palestinian Ministry of Detainees, said that the Israeli Prison Administration started transferring the detainees to Ofer prison in preparation for their release before the end of this week.

The Palestinian Ministry of Detainees and Freed Detainees, in Gaza, said that in November Israel abducted more than 390 Palestinians in 300 invasions carried out in the Gaza Strip.

The Ministry added that the army abducted more than 5,000 Palestinians since the beginning of this year.

Also, the Ministry stated that more than two months ago, Israel released 198 detainees, but none of them were from the Gaza Strip.

Approximately 10,000 Palestinians, including hundreds of women, children and elderly, are imprisoned by Israel. Hundreds of detainees were kidnapped by Israel before Israel and the Palestinian Liberation Organization singed the first Oslo agreement in August 1993.

Source

Why is is OK for Israel to just kidnap 5,000 people and never be charged with kidnapping. “WHY?” They abduct farmers, fishermen, women, men, and children , anyone they just feel like kidnapping. Then throw them in prison. No reason necessary.  They just do.  They did before and still do it.

How many are in prison today I wonder??????????

Israeli Court Sentences PFLP Secretary-General to 30 Years Imprisonment

December 26, 2008 by Saed Bannoura

Israeli online daily, Haaretz, reported on Thursday that the Ofer Israeli military court sentenced the Secretary-general of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), Ahmad Sa’adat, to thirty years imprisonment, even though he was acquitted of planning the assassination of the Israeli Tourism Minister, Rehavam Ze’evi in 2001.

The Israeli court said that Sa’adat was sentenced for other attacks dating, according to claims by the Israeli Army, to the time when he was kidnapped by Israeli soldiers in 2006.

The PFLP claimed responsibility for assassinating Ze’evi at a hotel in Jerusalem.

On Monday, December 1, 2008, the Israeli central Court in Jerusalem sentenced the head of the armed wing of the PFLP, Ahed Ghalama, to one life-term, and an additional five years for the assassination of Ze’evi.

The court claimed that Ghlama supervised the cell that assassinated Zeevi in 2001 in retaliation to the assassination of the PFLP secretary-general Abu Ali Mustafa. Mustafa was assassinated by the Israeli air force while he was in his office in the central West Bank city of Ramallah, several months before Zeevi was killed.

Ghalama, age 40, is from Beit Forik village, near the northern West Bank city of Nablus. He was initially imprisoned by the Palestinian Authority at the Jericho Prison in 2002. The Israeli army broke into the prison, which was guarded by European guards that had fled the scene shortly before the army attacked it.

Ghalama, along with the secretary-general of the PFLP, Ahmad Saadat, and several other PFLP members and the financial official of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), including Fuad Shobaky, were kidnapped by the Israeli Army.

On Thursday Palestinian official, Dr. Saeb Erekat, slammed the Israeli court ruling against Sa’adat, and said that Sa’adat is an elected member of the Palestinian Parliament.

Hamas, the ruling party in Gaza, said that the name of Sa’adat will be among the first names of detainees it will demand to be released in exchange for releasing the captured Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit, Haaretz said.

The PFLP issued a press release denouncing the Israeli court ruling against Sa’adat, and called on international human right groups to intervene for the release of the political leader.

Nasser Abu Aziz, member of the political bureau of the PFLP, said that this ruling is illegitimate as it is a ruling of a court that resembles the occupation, and considered the trial a trial against the human rights of all Palestinians.

Abu Aziz called on the Palestinian Authority to place this file of detainees on the top of its agenda, and called for wide public support for Sa’adat and all political detainees in Israeli prisons.

Source

Why is it if a Palestinian assassinates someone they are charged,  but if the Israelis assassinates someone it is OK and charges are never laid against them? “WHY?” This not a stupid question because as well as the assassination of the Palestinian, more times then not innocent civilians are killed as well. Israels justification for this, is based on lies of course.

These are crimes Israel has been committing for years.

If they Israeli’s assassinate anyone it is just as much of crime, as if a Palestinian assassinates someone.

When one retaliates is it really a crime or self defense. The Palestinians have the right to defend themselves.

Palestinian Detainee Dies Due to Medical Negligence in al-Ramah Israeli Prison

December 24, 2008
By Saed Bannoura

The Palestinian Prisoners Society reported on Wednesday that detainee Jom’a Ismail Mousa, 65, from Shu’fat refugee camp in East Jerusalem, died as a result of medical negligence on the part of the Israeli Prison Services.

The detainee spent most of his time in the al-Ramla prison hospital, which lacks the basic medical equipment.

Mousa was sentenced to one life-term, and an additional ten years. The Israeli Prison Authorities claimed that the police are investigating his death, and that “he died while receiving medical treatment at the prison hospital”.

Fares Abu Hasan, head of the International Solidarity Institution for Human Rights in Palestine, held the Israeli occupation responsible for the death of Mousa because Israel ignored calls by several human rights groups, demanding the immediate release of Mousa in order to receive proper medical attention and treatment.

Palestinian researcher and specialist in detainees’ affairs, Abdul-Naser Farwana, said that the number of detainees who died due to medical negligence since 1967 is now 49, and that a total of 196 detainees due to medical negligence and torture, while some of them were killed by Israeli soldiers after being kidnapped.

Mousa is the second detainee who died in Israeli prisons in 2008. Detainee Fadil Shahin, from Gaza, died in an Israeli prison on February 29.

The Waed Society for Detainees and Freed Detainees slammed the Israeli violations of human rights.

The Society’s head, Legislator Fathi Hammad, said that the Israeli Prison Administration continuously violates the human rights of detainees.

Detainee Jom’a Ismail Mousa was born in 1943. He was kidnapped by the Israeli army on March 29, 1993. He suffered from a heart disease, high blood pressure and diabetes.

Currently, there are thirty detainees hospitalized at the al-Ramla prison hospital, and could meet the same fate if they do not receive the needed medical treatment.

Source

He is not the first there have been others.

193 detainees died in Israeli prisons since 1967

December 31, 2007

Abdul-Nasser Farawna, head of the Census Department at the Palestinian Ministry of Detainees, specialized researcher in the issue of detainees, stated on Saturday that 193 Palestinian detainees died in Israeli prisons and detention facilities since 1967.

On December 28, one detainee identified as Fadi Abdul-Latif Abu Al Rob, from Qabatia town north of the northern West Bank city of Jenin died of medical negligence.

Farwana stated that 73 detainees died in Israeli prisons in the period between 1967 and December 1987, 120 detainees died in Israeli prisons during the first Intifada in the period between 1987 and December 1994, eight more detainees died in the period between 1994 and 2000.

70 more detainees died during the Al Aqsa Intifada in the period between September 28, 2000 and December 2007.

Farwana also stated that 70 of the deceased detainees died of torture, 47 detainees died of medical negligence, in addition to 76 were practically executed after arrest; the latest casualty of execution after arrest is detainee Mohammad Al Ashram who was shot and killed while in detention.

Commenting on the geographical distribution of the deceased detainees, Farawna said that 111 (57.5%) detainees are from the West Bank 61 (31.6%) are from the Gaza Strip and 14 (7.3%) are from Jerusalem and Arab cities and towns in Israel.

Farwana also added that among the detainees, who died during the Al Aqsa Intifada, 51 were executed after arrest, 3 died of torture, and 16 died of medical negligence; seven of them died in 2007.

He added that Israeli prisons and detention facilities lack the basic health facilities and equipment and considered the medical negligence policy in Israeli prisons as a policy of slow death and execution against the detainees, especially those who need urgent surgeries or serious illnesses that required ongoing monitoring.

Farwana held the Israeli government responsible for the lives of hundreds of detainees who are in immediate need for medical attention, and called for the formation of a neutral committee to be in charge or probing the deaths of the detainees in Israeli prisons and detention facilities.

He appealed the Red Cross, and other international human rights groups, to intervene and oblige Israel to abide by the international law.

Source

The following interrogation centers, are probably still functioning.

The Russian Compound Interrogation Center “ Mosqubiyeh” located in west Jerusalem. There are solitary confinement cells interrogation section and sections for Palestinian Collaborating with The Israeli Intelligent Service (Asafeer).

Beitah Tikva interrogation section in Beitah Tikva City near Ramleh city inside Israel.

Jalameh Interrogation section located to the south of Haifa City inside Israel.  The section has a solitary confinement wing, interrogation wing and a wing for Asafeer.

Beit Eil located near El-Bireh city in The Palestinian National areas and is considered a temporary lock up for Palestinians pending transfer to other facilities.  It contains solitary confinement sections, and interrogations section as well as a Court and a Police Station.

Hiwarah Military Camp near Hiwarah Village in Nablus district in The Palestinian National areas and is considered a temporary lock up for Palestinians pending transfer to other facilities.  It contains solitary confinement sections, and interrogations section.

Kadomim Military Camp near Kufor Kaddom village in Qalqilya District of The Palestinian National areas and is considered a temporary lock up for Palestinians pending transfer to other facilities.  It contains solitary confinement sections, and interrogations section.

Kfar Atsyoun Military Camp located near El-Aroub Refugee Camp/ Hebron District in The Palestinian National areas and is considered a temporary lock up for Palestinians pending transfer to other facilities.  It contains solitary confinement sections, and interrogations section.


Prisoners’ Needs:

Detainees inside Israeli detention facilities are nearly deprived from family visits. Even if such visits are conducted, then with strict conditions and is limited to nuclear family members.

It had happened that some single detainees have their parents dead, their brothers and sisters are over 16 years of age, thus most likely to be prevented from visiting their brothers for Israeli “security reasons”. Therefore, ending with no family visits.

Usually detainees are in need to the following items:

1- Training suites, clothes and underwear.

2- Medication and medical supporting equipments.

3- Hygiene items.

4- Cantina: – Tea, Coffee, sugar, Sweets and cigarettes.

5- Books

Administrative detention in the Occupied Territories

Israel has claimed that it uses administrative detention only as a necessary security measure and that the decision to administratively detain an individual is made only when normal legal measures or less severe administrative measures will not attain the objective and there is no other way to ensure security. In practice, however, the authorities apply administrative detention in violation of international law. They misuse the powers granted to military commanders in the military order:

  1. Administrative Detention as an Alternative to Criminal Proceedings: The authorities use administrative detention as a quick and efficient alternative to criminal trial, primarily when they do not have sufficient evidence to charge the individual, or when they do not want to reveal their evidence. This use of administrative detention is absolutely prohibited and totally blurs the distinction between preventive and punitive detention. The only legal justification for administrative detention is in exceptional circumstances where a person is deemed to pose an immediate danger and no other measures have proven effective to avert it. Past actions of the detainee are therefore irrelevant, except insofar as they indicate the future danger the detainee may pose.
  2. Detention of Political Opponents: Israel administratively detains Palestinians for their political opinions and non-violent political activity. Following the signing of the Oslo Accords, Israel also administratively detained Palestinians who opposed the peace process. In this way, the authorities expand greatly the meaning of danger to “security of the area” by flagrantly violating freedom of expression and opinion, which are guaranteed under international law.
  3. Lack of Due Process: In some cases, the detainee does not receive the administrative detention order upon arrest and is transferred directly to a detention center. Administrative detainees are not given the reasons for their detention or any opportunity to refute the suspicions against them. In most cases, the only explanation given to the detainee is that he is “a senior activist in the PFLP” (or Hamas, etc.). Although the detainee ostensibly can appeal the detention, in practice he is not given a meaningful opportunity to defend himself because the evidence against him is not revealed to him or his attorney. The general rule is that the evidence is classified, and, to the best of our knowledge, in no case has a military court or the Supreme Court ordered any of the classified evidence to be revealed. The reliance on secret evidence demonstrates a total, unquestioning trust in the General Security Service and its judgment. This trust was not dampened by the many known cases in which GSS interrogators have misled and lied to judges. The systematic and extensive reliance on classified information constitutes one of the most problematic aspects of administrative detention and contradicts a principle fundamental to due process.
  4. Extending Administrative Detention: Military commanders are authorized to detain persons for up to six months. However, the commander can extend the detention for additional six-month periods indefinitely. From the time of the signing of the Declaration of Principles in September 1993 to the middle of 1998, military commanders repeatedly extended the period of administrative detention. Some Palestinians were administratively detained for years. The use of administrative detention has fallen sharply recently, but the law remains in effect, and Israel may theoretically return to its earlier policy.
  5. Holding Administrative Detainees inside Israel: Holding Palestinian administrative detainees inside Israel is a flagrant breach of international law which prohibits the transfer of detainees outside of occupied territory. Prior to the transfer of some of the territory to the Palestinian Authority, some of the detainees were held in the Occupied Territories, but they were subsequently transferred to detention facilities inside Israel. As a result, the closure imposed on the Occupied Territories severely harmed the right of detainees to family visitation and to meet with their attorney.

Source

Many of their prisoners are Children?

Like the prisoners in Guantanamo, I find it hard to believe these people would ever get a fair trial and most that are locked up have not committed any crime whatsoever.

Israel can do anything it wants to the Palestinians and get away with it.

There is no statute of limitations on War crimes or Crimes Against  Humanity.

If Israel had not committed crimes against Palestinians in the first place,  stolen their land, tortured, kidnapped, assassinated, executed, imprisoned innocent victims, bulldozed their homes, pillaged and plundered their natural resources, , murdered, starved, bombed, crippled, humiliate,  forced them into refugee camps, destroyed their lives repeatedly,  from day one, of the conception of the  Zionist State,  the Palestinians would not have retaliated in the first place. “Apartheid 101”

Israel is guilty,  not the Palestinians.  Israel is the cause.

History should be enlightening people of the truth, but they seem to blindly believe everything they are told about  Israel. Well if you go through history you will find the truth but most just believe the lies and propaganda, dished out by the main stream  media. They treat their prisoners the same as those from Iraq were treated by the US. The US as we all well know, committed War Crimes as well. Israel’s crimes are just as horrific.


Interview: Adam Shapiro, co-founder of the ISM/UN Reports: Gaza  destruction/ US Aid to Israel 6. 5 million a day

Spain: Judicial probe looks at 2002 Gaza War Crimes Claims

Letting AP in on the Secret: Israeli Strip Searches are “Torture” “this desrves attention” Israel still Tortures people

Why Americans get a distorted View of the Conflict between

Gaza detainee treatment ‘inhuman’

Israeli troops fire warning shots at European diplomats

Israel Broke Ceasefire From Day One

Information Wanted by the International Criminal Court/ UN: Falk Likens Gaza to Warsaw Ghetto

Indexed List of all Stories in Archives

Israel warns soldiers of prosecution abroad for Gaza ‘war crimes’/Israels Latin America “Trail of Terror”

Israel warns soldiers of prosecution abroad for Gaza ‘war crimes’
Israel has warned military officers and senior officials that a threat of prosecution for alleged war crimes in Gaza could hinder future travel abroad.

By Damien McElroy in Jerusalem
January 24 2009

Israel warns soldiers of prosecution abroad for Gaza 'war crimes'
Daniel Friedman, Israel’s justice minister, was appointed to head a special task force to defend individuals detained abroad and the military censor declared that names of officers from lieutenant to colonel must not be published Photo: AFP

At least four human rights groups are believed to be compiling suits alleging that Israelis perpetrated war crimes in planning or carrying out the three-week operation Cast Lead.

Daniel Friedman, Israel’s justice minister, was appointed to head a special task force to defend individuals detained abroad and the military censor declared that names of officers from lieutenant to colonel must not be published.

More than 1,300 Palestinian deaths were reported during the offensive in Gaza and the United Nations has led demands that Israel investigate high-profile incidents including the shelling of its facilities.

Private prosecutions are already being prepared. “We are building files on war crimes throughout the chain of command from the top to the local level,” said Raji Sourani of the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights. “We are convinced these have been the most bloody days for Gaza since the occupation and that war crimes were perpetrated against Palestinian civilians.”

Courts in six countries, including Britain, have accepted petitions to prosecute alleged war crimes in previous wars. Most notoriously, activists in Belgium used a clause, since removed from the statute, to target the former prime minister, Ariel Sharon.

Accusations of war crimes strike an especially sensitive chord in Israel, a nation founded in the wake of the Holocaust. Comparisons between the long siege of Gaza and the Jewish ghettoes of central Europe draw a vociferous denunciation from the government. Israel insists troops did their best to limit civilian casualties in heavily populated areas where Hamas gunmen were attacking from tunnels and had booby-trapped civilian homes.

While senior politicians travel with diplomatic immunity, retired officials have already faced problems travelling abroad.

A retired major general, Doron Almog, was forced to remain on an El Al plane at Heathrow in 2005 after the Israeli military attaché warned he would be arrested if he disembarked. Gen Almog commanded Israeli forces in Gaza when a bombing raid on an apartment block that killed a Hamas commander, Salah Shehadeh, resulted in the deaths of 14 others. The magistrates’ warrant was later quashed.

An unknown number of officials have been notified that they should submit future travel plans to the military for review. Avigdor Feldman, an Israeli lawyer, said that thousands of serving officers could be affected. “I would highly recommend any soldier or officer contemplating going to the UK to reconsider,” he told an Israeli newspaper.

According to Lt Col David Benjamin of the Military Advocate Corps, lawyers were deployed at divisional commands in operation Cast Lead. He said: “Approval of targets which can be attacked, methods of warfare – it all has gone through us.”

But ensuring that those involved in the Gaza Campaign are never sentenced is set to be a long-term challenge for Israel. “The government will stand like a fortified wall to protect each and every one of you from allegations,” said Ehud Olmert, the prime minister, at a military gathering after a ceasefire was called last week.

Source

How dare they scream  Holocaust, when in fact they have helped in the murder of millions.

Screaming Holocaust is there favorite pass time, but it doens’t cut it,  when you look at their history.

Israel was on the road, long before the Holocaust transpired at any rate anyway. Anyone who knows the history of the Jewish Community would know that.

Seems they always use that as a tactic. The rest of the world is suppose to feel guilty and forgive them for their terrorizing innocent people.

Well there have been numerous Holocausts. Like all the Aboriginal Indians in North and South America. In Africa  and other countries. There has even been a Holocaust in Palestine.  Perpetrated by the Israelis them selves. That being said lets move on.

Here are a few Facts about Israel, I had tucked away for prosperity.

They are not the sweet wonderful country, they pretend to be.

Israel’s Latin American trail of terror
By Jeremy Bigwood
June 5, 2003

“I learned an infinite amount of things in Israel, and to that country I owe part of my essence, my human and military achievements” said Colombian paramilitary leader and indicted drug trafficker Carlos Castao in his ghostwritten autobiography, Mi Confesin.

Castao, who leads the Colombian paramilitaries, known by their Spanish acronym AUC, the largest right-wing paramilitary force to ever exist in the western hemisphere reveals that he was trained in the arts of war in Israel as a young man of 18 in the 1980s.

He glowingly adds: “I copied the concept of paramilitary forces from the Israelis,” in his chapter-long account of his Israel experiences.

Castao’s right-wing Phalange-like AUC force is now by far the worst human rights violator in all of the Americas, and ties between that organisation and Israel are continually surfacing in the press.

Outside the law

The AUC paramilitaries are a fighting force that originally grew out of killers hired to protect drug-running operations and large landowners. They were organised into a cohesive force by Castao in 1997. It exists outside the law but often coordinates its actions with the Colombian military, in a way similar to the relationship of the Lebanese Phalange to the Israeli army throughout the 1980s and 1990s.

According to a 1989 Colombian Secret Police intelligence report, apart from training Carlos Castao in 1983, Israeli trainers arrived in Colombia in 1987 to train him and other paramilitaries who would later make up the AUC.

Fifty of the paramilitaries’ “best” students were then sent on scholarships to Israel for further training according to a Colombian police intelligence report, and the AUC became the most prominent paramilitary force in the hemisphere, with some 10,000-12,000 men in arms.

The Colombian AUC paramilitaries are always in need of arms, and it should come as no surprise that some of their major suppliers are Israeli. Israeli arms dealers have long had a presence in next-door Panama and especially in Guatemala.

In May of last year, GIRSA, an Israeli company associated with the Israeli Defence Forces and based in Guatemala was able to buy 3000 Kalashnikov assault rifles and 2.5 million rounds of ammunition that were then handed over to AUC paramilitaries in Colombia.

Links with the continent

Israel’s military relations with right-wing groups and regimes spans Latin America from Mexico to the southernmost tip of Chile, starting just a few years after the Israeli state came into existence.

Since then, the list of countries Israel has supplied, trained and advised includes Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru and Venezuela.
But it isn’t only the sales of planes, guns and weapons system deals that characterises the Israeli presence in Latin America.
Where Israel has excelled is in advising, training and running intelligence and counter-insurgency operations in the Latin American “dirty war” civil conflicts of Argentina, El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, and now Colombia.

In the case of the Salvadoran conflict – a civil war between the right-wing landowning class supported by a particularly violent military pitted against left-wing popular organisations – the Israelis were present from the beginning. Besides arms sales, they helped train ANSESAL, the secret police who were later to form the framework of the infamous death squads that would kill tens of thousands of mostly civilian activists.

From 1975 to 1979, 83% of El Salvador’s military imports came from Israel, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. By 1981, many of those in the civilian popular political movements who had survived the death squads headed for the hills to become guerrillas.

By 1981 there was an open civil war in El Salvador which took over a decade to resolve through negotiations.

Even though the US was openly backing the Salvadoran Army by 1981, as late as November 1983 it was asking for more Israeli “practical assistance” there, according to a declassified secret document obtained recently by Aljazeera.

Among the assistance asked for were helicopters, trucks, rifles, ammunition, and combat infantry advisors to work at both the “company and battalion level of the Salvadoran Army”.

One notable Salvadoran officer trained by the Israelis was Major Roberto D’Aubuisson, who always held a high opinion of the Israelis. It was Major D’Aubuisson who ordered the assassination of El Salvador’s archbishop amongst thousands of other murders.
Later he would organise the right-wing National Republican Alliance Party (ARENA) and send his son to study abroad in the relative safety of Israel.

Dirty war

Amazingly, while the Israelis were training the El Salvadoran “death squads” they were also supporting the anti-semitic Argentine military government of the late 1970s and early 1980s – at a time when that government was involved_in another “dirty war” of death squads and disappearances.

In 1978, Nicaragua’s dictator Somoza was making his last stand against a general uprising of the Sandinista-led population who were sick of his family’s dynasty which had ruled and monopolised the county for half a century. The Israelis and the US had been supplying Somoza with weapons for years. But when President Jimmy Carter came into office in 1976 he ordered a cessation of all US military assistance to Nicaragua.
Filling the void, the Israelis immediately increased their weapons supplies to Somoza until he fled the country when the Sandinistas took power.

Israeli operatives then helped train right-wing Nicaraguan Contras in Honduran and Costa Rican camps to fight the Sandinista government, according to Colombian police intelligence reports Aljazeera_has obtained.

At least some of the same Israeli operatives had also previously trained the nucleus of the paramilitary organisations that would become the AUC in Colombia.

But by far the bloodiest case of Israeli involvement in Latin America was its involvement in Guatemala from the 1970s to the 1990s. As in El Salvador, a civil war pitted a populist but, in this case, mainly Indian left against a mainly European oligarchy protected by a brutal Mestizo Army.

As Guatemalan President Carlos Arana said in 1971, “If it is necessary to turn the country into a cemetery in order to pacify it, I will not hesitate to do so.”

Active involvement

The Israelis supplied Guatemala with Galil rifles, and built an ammunition factory for them, as well as supplying armoured personnel carriers and Arava planes. Behind the scenes, they were actively involved in the bloodiest counter-insurgency campaign the hemisphere has known since the European conquest, in which at least 200,000 (mostly Indians) were killed.
Like Israel’s original occupation of Palestine, several entire Guatemalan Indian villages were razed and a million people displaced. “The guerrilla is the fish. The people are the sea. If you cannot catch the fish, you have to drain the sea,” said Guatemalan President Rios Montt in 1982.

Guatemalan army officers credit Israeli support with turning the tide against the uprising, not only in the countryside where Israeli counter-insurgency techniques and assistance set up strategic-hamlet-like “development poles” along the lines of the Israeli kibbutz, but also in the cities where “Israeli communication technicians and instructors” working through then-sophisticated computers were able to locate and then decimate guerrillas and their supporters in Guatemala City in 1981.

From the late 1970s until the 1990s, the US could not overtly support the Guatemalan army because of its horrendous human rights record (although there was some covert support), but many in the US government, especially in the CIA, supported Israel in taking up the slack.

Wrong

But the US grew to regret its actions. On 10 March 1999, US President Bill Clinton issued an apology for US involvement in the war: The “United States… support for military forces or intelligence units which engaged in violent and widespread repression…was wrong.” No similar statement has ever been forthcoming from the Israelis.

At the present time, the only major insurgency war in Latin America is in Colombia, where Israel has an overt involvement.
Besides the dozen or so Kfir IAI C-7 jet fighters they have sold the Colombian government, and the Galil rifles produced in Bogota under licence, most of the Israeli ties to the government’s counter-insurgency war are closely-guarded secrets.

Aljazeera’s attempts to obtain clarification on these and other issues for this story were stonewalled by the Israeli embassy in Washington.

Why does Israel continue to provide arms and expertise to the pariahs of the world? Clearly, part of the reason is the revenues produced by arms sales, and part of it has do with keeping up with trends in counter-insurgent war across the globe.
But another factor is what is demanded of Israel by the world’s only superpower, the US, in partial exchange for the superpower’s continued support for Israeli dominance in the Middle East.

Assistance

This relationship can be best illustrated by recently declassified 1983 US government documents obtained by the Washington, DC-based National Security Archives through the Freedom of Information Act.

One such declassified document is a 1983 memo from the notorious Colonel Oliver North of the Reagan Administration’s National Security Council and reads: “As discussed with you yesterday, I asked CIA, Defense, and State to suggest practical assistance which the Israelis might offer in Guatemala and El Salvador.”

Another document, this time a 1983 cable from the US Ambassador in Guatemala to Washington Frederic Chapin shows the money trail.

He says that at a time when the US did not want to be seen directly assisting Guatemala, “we have reason to believe that our good friends the Israelis are prepared, or already have, offered substantial amounts of military equipment to the GOG (Government of Guatemala) on credit terms up to 20 years…(I pass over the importance of making huge concessionary loans to Israel so that it can make term loans in our own backyard).”
In other words, during civil wars in which the US does not want to be seen getting its hands dirty in Latin America, the superpower loans Israel money at a very good rate, and then Israel uses these funds to do the “dirty work”. In this regard, in Latin America at least, Israel has become the “hit-man” for the US.

Wars funded by American Tax Dollars.

Wars and funding to prop up Brutal governments or regimes.

Israel the, Money Laundering, “Funnel Tunnel” for the US.

They love extermination pure and simple. They were more, then willing to help other regimes exterminate innocent people.

Of course it doesn’t end there, they also supplied weapons etc to other countries as well. Africa is also on my list as well. It’s a pretty long list.

What has changed over the years, not much.

Why would anything change.

We will in the future find out who and how many.

The trail of cookie crumbs, is not all that hard to follow.

Have a cruel bloodthirsty regime and you will find both the US or Israeli involvement.

Most time they work together. All in the name of profit, power, control and death.

They call it Self Defense or I am rescuing you.

Iran is evil because thy want to help innocent victims rebuild.

Hamas is pure evil are they?  The Hamas they helped create.

Haitian’s are pure evil are they?

Indians are pure evil are they?

All the innocent people they had a hand, in murdering are all evil are they?

Death Squads are a good thing are they?

I can almost bet, the “Death Squads” in the Philippines, were trained by Israelis.

The Israeli Gov. and the US Gov. should mind their own business and clean up their, own moral bankruptcy.

They both should clean up their own Weapons of Mass Destruction.

They are two the most corrupt, countries in the world.

They blame everyone else of crimes, they themselves are actually committing.

Well like all criminals they will plead not guilty. They are no different from any other criminal.

Both countries lied to their people.

Both oppressed their own people.

Both are warmongering countries.

They could pass as twins, in their sins against humanity.

Those who are corrupt past and present should be rooted out and charged.

There is no statute of limitation on murder or war crimes.

They should be held responsible for the millions, they have murdered or helped murder. Directly or indirectly they are responsible.

Can or will Obama be able to clean up the US.

Maybe:  We will have to wait and see.

Will the corruption in Israel, get cleaned up, not flippin likely.

Will the corruption in the International Agency’s get cleaned up, we will have to wait and see.

The less they do to stop those in the US Gov. and Israeli Gov. the more obvious it is, they are corrupted.

Information Wanted by the International Criminal Court/ UN: Falk Likens Gaza to Warsaw Ghetto

Israel Accused of Executing Parents in Front of Children

White Phosphorus Victims in Gaza

What Types of Gruesome Weapons Did Israel Use in Lebanon?

UN: Israel should pay for Humanitarian Aid they Destoyed

Father: ‘I watched an Israeli soldier shoot dead my two little girls’

Unusually Large U.S. Weapons Shipment to Israel: Are the US and Israel Planning a Broader Middle East War?

Outrage as Israel bombs UN and Hospital

Israel Navy ships turn back “Spirit of Humanity” carrying Gaza humanitarian aid

President of the United Nations General Assembly: Israel violating International Law

Israel Hits another “United Nations” Building in Gaza

Israel Violating Egyptian Airspace to attack Gaza

Israel continues to attack Hospitals, Clinics and Public Buildings in Gaza

Red Cross slams Israel over 4 day wait to access wounded

The making of Israel’s Apartheid in Palestine

Samouni family recounts Gaza horror

79 % of the time: Israel caused conflicts not Hamas

Gaza War Why?: Natural Gas valued at over $4 billion MAYBE?

Israel ‘rammed’ medical aid boat headed to Gaza

Israel Used Internationally Banned Weaponry in Massive Airstrikes Across Gaza Strip

Shoot Then Ask, Israeli Soldiers Told

Gaza (6) A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words

Israel’s ‘Crimes Against Humanity’

Gaza Families Eat Grass as Israel Blocks Food Aid

Will the world do nothing to stop Genocide in Gaza?

Israeli violations of Lebanese sovereignty

Israel blocks foreign media from Gaza

U.N.: Israel won’t allow food aid to enter Gaza

Indexed List of all Stories in Archives

UK firm blasted for arming Israeli military

hermes-450

Hermes 450, the primary UAV system of the Israeli air force

January 12 2009

A British company’s links to the Israeli military come under scrutiny, as pressure mounts on the government to curb arms sales to Tel Aviv.

UAV Engines, of Lichfield, Staffordshire, (known as UEL) is a world leading drone engine manufacturer that is owned by the Israel drone company Silver Arrow, which in turn, is a subsidiary of the Israeli defense contractor Elbit Systems. reported.

According to The Guardian, one of UEL’s rotary Wankel engines is used in Elbit’s Hermes 450 drone, which carries out surveillance and targeting operations for Israel’s F-16 fighters in the current offensive against Gaza.

Reliable military news journals and Elbit’s own website suggest that the Lichfield factory produces engines for the Hermes, despite denials by Elbit’s head of corporate communications, Dalia Rosen.

“UEL engines are provided to the British UAV programs and to other international customers, not to Hermes 450 in the service of the IDF [Israeli military],” she said, rejecting all references given in support of the information.

Elbite denies the sales although arms sales records indicate that the export of ‘components for unmanned aerial vehicles’ to Israel has been authorized by the UK government.

Recently, many right groups and political figures have urged the UK government to stop the export of weapons to Israel, as the regime’s deadly attacks continue in the Gaza Strip, in violation of a UN Security Council resolution.

Last week, over a hundred lawmakers, from Britain’s three main parties, issued a statement, calling Israel’s military operation in the Gaza Strip as an outrage that should not be allowed by the international community, and urging an embargo on the supply of military equipment to both sides.

Campaigners against the arms trade also said that the sales must stop, citing the latest Foreign Office annual report on human rights, which raised ‘concerns over whether Israel’s use of lethal force has always been justifiable.’

“We have been particularly concerned that, in the course of Israeli Defence Forces operations, too little effort has been made to avoid civilian casualties. We are extremely concerned by the humanitarian situation in Gaza and remain committed to supporting the Palestinian people.”

In a soon to be released report, Amnesty International has also urged the British government to stop selling weapons to Israel.

“The UK should suspend all arms exports to Israel, including indirect exports via other countries and the sale of military components, until there is no longer a substantial risk that such equipment will be used for serious violations of human rights or international humanitarian law,” says the UK campaigns director for Amnesty International Tim Hancock.

During the 17-days Israeli military operations in the Gaza Strip, over 900 Palestinians have lost their lives, while another 4080 have been wounded. According to Hamas records, 33 Israeli soldiers have also been killed.

Source

Embargo against Israel: Spreading Willingness in the Middle East

US delivering more “Weapons of Mass Destruction” to Israel

79 % of the time: Israel caused conflicts not Hamas

Gaza War Why?: Natural Gas valued at over $4 billion MAYBE?

Gaza (1): A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words

Indexed List of all Stories in Archives

Israel Used Internationally Banned Weaponry in Massive Airstrikes Across Gaza Strip

Hiyam Noir reports from the war zone in Gaza. We thank her and her colleague, photographer Fady Adwan, for risking their lives to report the truth from Gaza.

photo by Fady Adwan, December 27, 2008

photo by Fady Adwan, December 27, 2008

December 27 2008

GAZA
On Saturday noon in the first wave of air strikes, the Israelis targeted Gaza City government buildings. Casualties are confirmed and include the Commander of Gaza Police Force Tawfiq Jabir, the Commander of Security and Protection Services in Gaza police, Ismail Al-Ja’bari and the Governor of the Al-Wusta (central) Districts Ahmad Abu Aashur. Islam Shahwan, a Hamas police spokesman, said that the Israeli attacks have destroyed most of the Gaza Strip police headquarters and that a police graduation ceremony was being held during the Israeli assault.

Following the first wave of Israeli air strikes, that killed at least 156 and injured over 200 Palestinians (Ed. note: updated numbers since Hiyam wrote this, reported in some western media: at least 200 dead and 300 injured – end note), Palestinian medical sources said in a press statement during Saturday afternoon that at least 80 of the wounded has arrived to hospital in “bits and parts” and the Head of the Gaza Emergency and ambulance department in the Ministry of Health, Mu’awieyah Hasaneen confirm that medical crews and rescue workers are still pulling dozens of people from underneath rubble. Hasaneen have pledged to all Arab governments, to send medications and operating supplies to Gaza, saying most of the injured were too badly injured to be moved outside the Gaza Strip. Hospital corridors are filled with bodies and gourneys, and in the local morgues there is no space to for all the bodies.

Leaders and citizens of Arab countries condemned Israeli air strike on Saturday. A few minutes after the first 30 Israeli air strikes at noon on Saturday, an Egyptian official said that the Israeli missile attacks was “an unprecedented massacre.” Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian president condemned the attacks, demanded that the ceasefire between the Palestinian resistance in Gaza and the Israeli army to be renewed. “Egypt will forge ahead with its contacts to create a favorable atmosphere in renewing the truce and attaining inter-Palestinian reconciliation in a bid to end the suffering of the Palestinian people”, a statement from the Mubarak’s office said.

Fouad Seniora, the Lebanese prime minister called the Israeli operations “tragic and criminal”. A statement from the Seniora’s office “strongly denounces and rejects the criminal operation in the Gaza Strip.” The Lebanese prime minister called on the Arab League and other heads of state to immediately convene in an emergency session to adopt a “united Arab stand to face the Israeli aggression.” Seniora also called upon United Nations security council to adopt “deterring and necessary measures against Israel for its continuous violations of Palestinian and Arab human rights”.

The Gaza operation plan was architectured on Wednesday. Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert ordered the air strikes on Gaza, Saturday morning, the assaults on Gaza Strip are intended to last throughout Saturday and perhaps into Sunday. The two Zionist leaders asserted that Israel has prepared for an operation that could take several weeks. Preparations have also been taken to contain any expected response in the West Bank. Ehud Barak and his chief of staff, Gabi Ashkenazi, are supervising the air strikes, which they say – will “continue until the Israel has achieved its goals”. Israeli sources asserted that the operation does not aim to topple Hamas, but “we will stop homemade projectiles,” the statement said, warning for ” tougher images” in the Gaza Strip in the coming days.

A member of the executive committee in the PLO Taysir Khaled, accused Israel of using weapons in Gaza that are banned internationally and condemned the Israeli attack. He called for immediate intervention to stop the Israelis military actions, which he said have been in performance for months. In Jenin Al-Aqsa Brigades ( Fatah) said in a statement that their fighters are in a state of high alert and “would not be handcuffed,” and would retaliate “in the right place at the right time.”

The Al-Quds Brigades ( Islamic Jihad) asserted that they are in high alert and that the Israelis will pay a severe toll for their heavy handed attacks. The Islamic Jihad leader, Khaled Al-Batsh, said that the Israeli attack is a declaration to “open war” against the Palestinian people, intended “to repress the Palestinian resistance.” Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum asked the Palestinian people to “remain patient in the light of Israeli crimes ” – he called for a massive response to the Israelis air strikes that have killed at least 200 Gaza residents, and wounded over 200. Barhoum stated that there will be a renewal of Palestinian operations within Israel.

Source

Israel needs to stop these attacks. This is murder. What Israel is doing is a crime. Not everyone in the world agrees with what they are doing.  There are many who believe they are committing criminal acts of genocide. These are crimes against humanity and war crimes.  The United Nations should find a way to stop this.

All aid to Israel should be stopped. They only use it to kill.

There are a Number of Videos Here not for the faint of heart.

Iran preps humanitarian aid ship to Gaza Strip

Israeli teenagers jailed for refusing to serve in army

Published in: on December 28, 2008 at 5:15 am  Comments Off on Israel Used Internationally Banned Weaponry in Massive Airstrikes Across Gaza Strip  
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Last Guantanamo trial of Bush era is delayed

December 10 2008

By Jane Sutton

GUANTANAMO BAY U.S. NAVAL BASE, Cuba

A U.S. military judge on Wednesday indefinitely delayed the January trial of a young Afghan captive, leaving the future course of justice at the Guantanamo prison camp in the hands of President-elect Barack Obama.

Defendant Mohammed Jawad had been set to go to trial at the Guantanamo Bay naval base in Cuba on January 5 on charges of throwing a grenade that injured two U.S. soldiers and their Afghan interpreter at a bazaar in Kabul in December 2002.

His was the last trial scheduled to start before Obama takes office on January 20. Obama has said he will close the Guantanamo detention center and move the prisoners’ terrorism trials into the regular U.S. civilian or military courts.

Human rights groups have urged him to issue an executive order immediately upon taking office, halting the tribunals that have been widely condemned by rights activists, foreign leaders and military defense lawyers.

In the seven years since President George W. Bush first authorized the tribunals, military juries have convicted only two prisoners on terrorism charges and a third pleaded guilty in an agreement that limited his sentence to nine months.

A military judge, Army Col. Stephen Henley, indefinitely postponed Jawad’s trial on Wednesday to give prosecutors time to appeal his earlier decision to throw out much of the evidence.

Henley had ruled that Jawad’s confession to Afghan government authorities was obtained through death threats that constituted torture and that his subsequent confession to U.S. interrogators was fruit of that torture.

The judge ruled that neither could be admitted as evidence against Jawad, who was drugged and only 16 or 17 years old at the time of his arrest in Afghanistan. Jawad was turned over to U.S. forces and sent shortly afterward to Guantanamo.

A hearing is still scheduled at Guantanamo on Friday for a young Canadian captive, Omar Khadr, who is accused of throwing a grenade that killed a U.S. soldier in Afghanistan in July 2002. His trial is scheduled to start on January 26, a date now in doubt because of the change in the U.S. administration.

CONFUSION IN HIGH PROFILE CASE

No further hearings have been set for the most high-profile case among the 17 pending at Guantanamo, that of five al Qaeda suspects charged with orchestrating the September 11 attacks.

The five, including self-described mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, came to the Guantanamo courtroom on Monday ready to hand the Bush administration a major victory in its final days by confessing to the mass murders that prompted its war on terrorism.

What stopped them was confusion over whether the murky tribunal rules allowed the defendants to plead guilty to charges that could lead to their execution and whether their treatment at U.S. hands had left them sane enough to do it.

All five said they were tortured, though details have not been made public. A decision is still pending on whether two of them, Ramzi Binalshibh and Mustafa Ahmed al Hasawi, are mentally competent to act as their own attorneys and carry out their plans to confess.

“Each one of these individuals has some problems because of what we did to them,” said Army Maj. Jon Jackson, the military lawyer appointed to defend Hawsawi.

The defense lawyers said the confusion over whether the tribunal rules allow guilty pleas in death penalty cases illustrates why the trials should be moved into the regular courts where the rules have been long tested.

They said they were confident Obama would pull the plug on the Guantanamo tribunals, which are formally known as military commissions.

“What you saw was the death throes of the commissions,” said Michael Berrigan, deputy chief defense counsel for Guantanamo. “Everybody knows why — it’s not justice.”

(Editing by Cynthia Osterman)

Source

Pleading Guilty after Torture-Did you really do it?

Omar Khadr witness withdrawn to `cover up’ abuse: defence

U.S. acknowledges it held 12 juveniles at Guantanamo Bay prison

Scandal of six held in Guantanamo even after Bush plot claim is dropped

Sindh High Court issues notice to respondents in Aafia Siddiqui case

CIA Torture Tactics Endorsed in Secret Memos

Israel Responsible for Genocide by Starvation in Gaza

By Omar Karmi,

November 19 2008

AMALLAH, WEST BANK

Israel rebuffed a plea by the UN to open crossings into Gaza for humanitarian supplies yesterday and continued barring international media from reaching the impoverished strip of land.

Asked yesterday whether Israel intended to reopen crossings, Ehud Barak, the defence minister, told Israel Army Radio: “No. There needs to be calm in order for the crossings to be opened.”

Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary general, telephoned Ehud Olmert, the Israeli prime minister on Tuesday, urging him to facilitate the movement of urgently needed humanitarian supplies into Gaza, where relief agencies have had to halt food distribution and the only power station is running out of fuel.

Israel closed the crossings two weeks ago when Palestinians responded with a salvo of rockets to a Nov 4 Israeli army raid into Gaza that resulted in the killings of six Gazans.

The tit-for-tat violence has continued since, with Israeli air raids causing at least a dozen Palestinian fatalities and one Israeli wounded by a Palestinian mortar.

Hamas is understood to be trying to persuade some of the smaller Palestinian factions, including the Popular Resistance Committees and the Palestinian Front for the Liberation of Palestine who have claimed responsibility for firing rockets in the past two weeks, to desist.

Nevertheless, Hamas’s military wing yesterday also warned that it was prepared to end a five-month-old ceasefire should crossings remain closed.

It would appear to be in neither Israel’s nor Hamas’s interests to end the ceasefire, however. Israeli politicians are facing general elections in early February and although taking a tough posture with Palestinians is an oft-tried campaign strategy, barring a full-scale – and unpredictable – invasion of the Strip, Israel would seem unable to ensure calm around Gaza without the ceasefire in place.

Hamas, for its part, will be eager for the ceasefire, which officially runs out on Dec 19, to be extended to continue to consolidate its rule over Gaza and strengthen its hand in internal Palestinian negotiations over reconciliation. Nevertheless, Hamas cannot afford to be seen to have abandoned the option of armed struggle and will probably enter the fray should crossings into Gaza remain shut.

Several international relief agencies have warned of a full-scale humanitarian disaster should food and medicine continue being blocked from entering the strip. On Sunday, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency announced that it had to stop distributing food to the about 750,000 Palestinians who rely on it for their immediate needs.

On Monday, Israel allowed a limited shipment of food and medicine to reach the strip, but the army shut the border again after three rockets were fired across the border on Tuesday, and yesterday it was reported that Gaza’s biggest mill had closed because of a lack of wheat. Gazans are also suffering regular electricity blackouts as a result of the scarcity of fuel.

Foreign journalists, meanwhile, are protesting against a ban on international media entering the Gaza Strip, also in effect since Nov 4.

The Foreign Press Association, which represents journalists working for international media in the region, has slammed the decision by the Israeli government as a “serious violation” of press freedom.

In an open letter published on Tuesday, the FPA said the decision to bar journalists from Gaza was an “unprecedented restriction of press freedom” and said its protests to the Israeli government had gone unheeded.

“Never before have journalists been prevented from doing their work in this way. We believe it is vital that journalists be allowed to find out for themselves what is going on in Gaza. Israel controls access to Gaza. Israel must allow professional journalists access to this important story.”

In spite of repeated requests, the Israeli ministry of defence was not available for comment. Israeli officials had said no official decision has been made to stop journalists from reaching Gaza, but that preventing them from doing so in the past two weeks was consistent with army policy only to allow passage for essential humanitarian staff.

In Gaza, officials and human rights activists said Israel was trying to prevent foreign journalists from revealing the reality there.

“Israel doesn’t want journalists to report on the conditions in Gaza that have resulted from the Israeli siege,” said Eyad Sarraj, a psychiatrist with the Gaza Community Mental Health Project and a human-rights activist. “Israel doesn’t want journalists from all over the world to bear evidence to what they are doing here.”

Mr Sarraj also suggested that Israel was preparing a major military operation, a suspicion echoed by Ahmad Yousef, a senior Hamas official.

“Israel might be planning something. For this, they don’t want any journalists here to cover their brutality against Palestinians… Journalists are those that can open the eyes of the world by showing them what is really going on in Gaza.”

Source

The Real Goal of Israel’s Blockade

By Jonathan Cook

November 17, 2008

The latest tightening of Israel’s chokehold on Gaza – ending all supplies into the Strip for more than a week – has produced immediate and shocking consequences for Gaza’s 1.5 million inhabitants.

The refusal to allow in fuel has forced the shutting down of Gaza’s only power station, creating a blackout that pushed Palestinians bearing candles on to the streets in protest last week. A water and sanitation crisis are expected to follow.

And on Thursday, the United Nations announced it had run out of the food essentials it supplies to 750,000 desperately needy Gazans. “This has become a blockade against the United Nations itself,” a spokesman said.

In a further blow, Israel’s large Bank Hapoalim said it would refuse all transactions with Gaza by the end of the month, effectively imposing a financial blockade on an economy dependent on the Israeli shekel. Other banks are planning to follow suit, forced into a corner by Israel’s declaration in Sept 2007 of Gaza as an “enemy entity”.

There are likely to be few witnesses to Gaza’s descent into a dark and hungry winter. In the past week, all journalists were refused access to Gaza, as were a group of senior European diplomats. Days earlier, dozens of academics and doctors due to attend a conference to assess the damage done to Gazans’ mental health were also turned back.

Israel has blamed the latest restrictions of aid and fuel to Gaza on Hamas’s violation of a five-month ceasefire by launching rockets out of the Strip. But Israel had a hand in shattering the agreement: as the world was distracted by the US presidential elections, the army invaded Gaza, killing six Palestinians and provoking the rocket fire.

The humanitarian catastrophe gripping Gaza is largely unrelated to the latest tit-for-tat strikes between Hamas and Israel. Nearly a year ago, Karen Koning AbuZayd, commissioner-general of the UN’s refugee agency, warned: “Gaza is on the threshold of becoming the first territory to be intentionally reduced to a state of abject destitution”.

She blamed Gaza’s strangulation directly on Israel, but also cited the international community as accomplice. Together they began blocking aid in early 2006, following the election of Hamas to head the Palestinian Authority (PA).

The US and Europe agreed to the measure on the principle that it would force the people of Gaza to rethink their support for Hamas. The logic was supposedly similar to the one that drove the sanctions applied to Iraq under Saddam Hussein through the 1990s: if Gaza’s civilians suffered enough, they would rise up against Hamas and install new leaders acceptable to Israel and the West.

As Ms AbuZayd said, that moment marked the beginning of the international community’s complicity in a policy of collective punishment of Gaza, despite the fact that the Fourth Geneva Convention classifies such treatment of civilians as a war crime.

The blockade has been pursued relentlessly since, even if the desired outcome has been no more achieved in Gaza than it was in Iraq. Instead, Hamas entrenched its control and cemented the Strip’s physical separation from the Fatah-dominated West Bank.

Far from reconsidering its policy, Israel’s leadership has responded by turning the screw ever tighter – to the point where Gazan society is now on the verge of collapse.

In truth, however, the growing catastrophe being unleashed on Gaza is only indirectly related to Hamas’s rise to power and the rocket attacks.

Of more concern to Israel is what each of these developments represents: a refusal on the part of Gazans to abandon their resistance to Israel’s continuing occupation. Both provide Israel with a pretext for casting aside the protections offered to Gaza’s civilians under international law to make them submit.

With embarrassing timing, the Israeli media revealed at the weekend that one of the first acts of Ismail Haniyeh, the Hamas prime minister elected in 2006, was to send a message to the Bush White House offering a long-term truce in return for an end to Israeli occupation. His offer was not even acknowledged.

Instead, according to the daily Jerusalem Post, Israeli policymakers have sought to reinforce the impression that “it would be pointless for Israel to topple Hamas because the population [of Gaza] is Hamas”. On this thinking, collective punishment is warranted because there are no true civilians in Gaza. Israel is at war with every single man, woman and child.

In an indication of how widely this view is shared, the cabinet discussed last week a new strategy to obliterate Gazan villages in an attempt to stop the rocket launches, in an echo of discredited Israeli tactics used in south Lebanon in its war of 2006. The inhabitants would be given warning before indiscriminate shelling began.

In fact, Israel’s desire to seal off Gaza and terrorise its civilian population predates even Hamas’s election victory. It can be dated to Ariel Sharon’s disengagement of summer 2005, when Fatah’s rule of the PA was unchallenged.

An indication of the kind of isolation Mr Sharon preferred for Gaza was revealed shortly after the pull-out, in Dec 2005, when his officials first proposed cutting off electricity to the Strip.

The policy was not implemented, the local media pointed out at the time, both because officials suspected the violation of international law would be rejected by other nations and because it was feared that such a move would damage Fatah’s chances of winning the elections the following month.

With the vote over, however, Israel had the excuse it needed to begin severing its responsibility for the civilian population. It recast its relationship with Gaza from one of occupation to one of hostile parties at war. A policy of collective punishment that was considered transparently illegal in late 2005 has today become Israel’s standard operating procedure.

Increasingly strident talk from officials, culminating in February in the deputy defence minister Matan Vilnai’s infamous remark about creating a “shoah”, or Holocaust, in Gaza, has been matched by Israeli measures. The military bombed Gaza’s electricity plant in June 2006, and has been incrementally cutting fuel supplies ever since. In January, Mr Vilnai argued that Israel should cut off “all responsibility” for Gaza and two months later Israel signed a deal with Egypt for it to build a power station for Gaza in Sinai.

All of these moves are designed with the same purpose in mind: persuading the world that Israel’s occupation of Gaza is over and that Israel can therefore ignore the laws of occupation and use unremitting force against Gaza.

Cabinet ministers have been queuing up to express such sentiments. Ehud Olmert, for example, has declared that Gazans should not be allowed to “live normal lives”; Avi Dichter believes punishment should be inflicted “irrespective of the cost to the Palestinians”; Meir Sheetrit has urged that Israel should “decide on a neighbourhood in Gaza and level it” – the policy discussed by ministers last week. (Criminals they are)

In concert, Israel has turned a relative blind eye to the growing smuggling trade through Gaza’s tunnels to Egypt. Gazans’ material welfare is falling more heavily on Egyptian shoulders by the day.

The question remains: what does Israel expect the response of Gazans to be to their immiseration and ever greater insecurity in the face of Israeli military reprisals?

Eyal Sarraj, the head of Gaza’s Community Mental Health Programme, said this year that Israel’s long-term goal was to force Egypt to end the controls along its short border with the Strip. Once the border was open, he warned, “Wait for the exodus.”

Source

Israel blocks foreign media from Gaza


U.N.: Israel won’t allow food aid to enter Gaza

These are War Crimes.

Innocent Civilians are being murdered by Starvation.

This includes Children just in case we have forgotten.

What Israel is doing is in fact Illegal.

They are murdering innocent people.

That is a crime.

All “Aid” should be cut off, that is going to Israel and no one should be selling them “Weapons of Mass Destruction”.

The US does both.  American tax dollars hard at work.
Israel is not to be trusted with any “Weapon of Mass Destruction”.

US Aid: The Lifeblood of Occupation

US Aid to Israel  January 2008

Israel is one of the 50 richest countries in the World. They don’t need any more aid.

Petition to End Israel’s Restrictions on Freedom of Movement and the Press

To: Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520

We, the undersigned, condemn Israel’s appalling treatment of Palestinian journalist Mohammed Omer, Washington Report on Middle East Affairs Gaza correspondent and author of the magazine’s regular feature, “Gaza on the Ground.” The 24-year-old Palestinian journalist was brutally assaulted by Israeli Shin Bet security officials at the Allenby Bridge border crossing on his way home to Gaza on June 26. He had just received the 2008 Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism, which he shared with independent American journalist Dahr Jamail. Omer’s award citation reads, “Every day, he reports from a war zone, where he is also a prisoner. His homeland, Gaza, is surrounded, starved, attacked, forgotten. He is a profoundly humane witness to one of the great injustices of our time. He is the voice of the voiceless.” (see John Pilger’s July 2 article, “From Triumph to Torture,” in the Guardian:

This is not an isolated incident, Pilger points out, but part of a terrible pattern. Israel gives its border guards and Shin Bet agents free rein to regularly harass Palestinians (as well as Palestinian Americans and American peace activists and academics) traveling to and from the occupied territories. Israel randomly abuses, searches, interrogates and humiliates travelers of every age—men and women—and frequently refuses to let them pass through Israeli-controlled borders to their homes in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip. We just don’t hear their voices.

Israel simply doesn’t want Palestinian voices to be heard abroad. Palestinians are routinely prevented from accepting invitations to speak in Europe or North America. Students with scholarships to study overseas are not permitted to leave. Israel is now preventing Palestinians from returning home, even for a visit, once they have left to work or study abroad. (Israel recently revoked Zeina Ashrawi Hutchison’s travel documents, and will not renew her Jerusalem ID card. She is not allowed to return home to visit her father and mother, Dr. Hanan Ashrawi.)

We, the undersigned, also urge the Israeli government to end its efforts to censor international reports from the occupied territories. The government prefers stories to be filed from Tel Aviv or Jerusalem, where they are subject to censorship, and allows few, if any, international journalists to enter the West Bank and Gaza. Israel censors, harasses and even kills Palestinian journalists who are trying to report on conditions in the occupied territories.

We call on the Israeli government to protect journalists who are trying to work in the occupied territories. At least eight journalists have been killed in the West Bank and Gaza since 2001, seven of them in attacks by Israel Defense Forces, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists research.*

We call on the Israeli government to end its harassment of travelers and journalists. When Israel targets journalists it infringes on a basic pillar of democracy, freedom of the press. Human beings, even those ruled for decades by an occupying power, have the right to leave home and return safely, without interference, and the right to freedom of speech.

To Sign Petition

Published in: on November 19, 2008 at 11:28 pm  Comments Off on Israel Responsible for Genocide by Starvation in Gaza  
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

US and Zimbabwe were the only countries to vote against the Arms Treaty


Control Arms campaign demands urgent move to end the carnage

On Friday 31st October, 147 states voted overwhelmingly at the United Nations to move forward with work on an Arms Trade Treaty. This is an increase on the 139 states which voted to start the UN process in October 2006, showing increasing global support for the treaty. Support was particularly strong in Africa, South and Central America and Europe indicating high demand for global arms controls, both from countries severely affected by armed violence and from major arms exporters. Only the US and Zimbabwe voted against, ignoring growing global consensus on an ATT.

The Control Arms campaign, which represents millions of people around the world welcomes the vote but continues to call for more urgency from states to advance the process quickly and ensure a strong Treaty with human rights and development at its heart.

Every day, over 1000 people are killed directly with firearms and many thousands more die indirectly as a consequence of armed violence, or are driven from their homes, forced off their land, raped, tortured or maimed. Since the UN process started in December 2006, approximately 695,000 people have been killed directly with firearms, illustrating the urgent need for an Arms Trade Treaty. Any further delay means more lost lives.

Brian Wood from Amnesty International said:

This big vote today moves the world closer to an Arms Trade Treaty with respect for human rights at its heart, the only way such a treaty can really stop the carnage. Today’s decision is that the principles of the UN Charter and other state obligations must be considered central to the Treaty. It is shameful that the US and Zimbabwe governments have taken an unprincipled stand today against a Treaty that would save so many lives and livelihoods.

Anna Macdonald from Oxfam International, said:

Most governments now support an Arms Trade Treaty and they must now move forward with urgency. Today’s vote is one step closer to turning off the running tap of irresponsible arms transfers which have flooded the world’s conflict zones for decades, fueling death, injury and poverty, such as is happening now in DRC. However we need leaps forward not steps, as every day lost means hundreds more lives lost.

Mark Marge from the International Action Network on Small Arms said:

This vote is a victory for the millions of campaigners in countries around the world. But we cannot afford to rest. All those against the misuse of arms will continue to pressure their governments to move quickly to implement a strong, legally binding treaty.

Source

Bush baulks at Obama’s plan to protect jobs

November 12 2008

By Leonard Doyle in Washington

An ideological battle has erupted between George Bush and Barack Obama, with the outgoing President baulking at proposals to prop up General Motors, once the world’s largest car maker, which could go bust by Christmas.

Despite the smiles for the cameras at the White House on Monday, a tense stand-off is flaring between the two. It is testing Mr Obama’s assertion that “we only have one president at a time” and his desire to stay out of Mr Bush’s way in the remaining two and a half months of his presidency. With car sales collapsing in a steadily worsening economy, the President-elect wants to avoid the prospect of tens of thousands of Democrat-voting union workers being thrown out of work just as he starts his term of office.

According to one account of their Oval Office discussions, Mr Obama asked Mr Bush to use some of the billions of dollars in the financial bailout package to prop up the car industry. Economists are already warning that if GM goes broke it could bring down the rest of the economy and tip the world into a much-feared depression.

Mr Bush seems determined to play hardball by refusing the car industry access to any of the $700bn (£450bn) financial rescue package agreed by Congress, say sources quoted by The New York Times and Associated Press. Hand-over meetings between incoming and outgoing presidents are traditionally confidential and Mr Bush was reported to be furious over leaks from the Obama camp, perceived as undermining his remaining days in office.

As Mr Bush sees it, he has one last opportunity to secure a legacy as a champion of free trade, and he reportedly tied the Democrat’s request for billions of taxpayer dollars for the failing car industry to a controversial trade deal with Colombia. The White House denied Mr Bush had suggested a “quid pro quo” but confirmed that he had spoken about the “merits of free trade”.

Mr Obama has already voted to block the Colombia deal in the Senate because of widespread human rights abuses against union workers. He seems ready to call Mr Bush’s bluff, calculating that the outgoing President is so unpopular that he will buckle rather than be accused of driving a stake through the heart of an iconic, century-old American company.

GM has watched helplessly as US consumers stop buying gas-guzzling Cadillacs, Hummers and Chevrolet pick-ups in favour of hybrid and other more fuel-efficient vehicles. With no money coming in, the company has burnt through cash reserves so quickly that its share price yesterday fell below $3 for the first time since 1943 and Wall Street analysts have started to predict that shares in the company could actually be worthless.

Last week, Mr Obama called the car sector “the backbone of American manufacturing”. The three big makers, GM, Ford and Chrysler, have operations across America and if they collapse, it would devastate the economy. The estimates are that three million jobs would be lost, counting the car-workers, their suppliers and even the hot-dog sellers outside the factories.

Even Mr Obama’s generosity towards the car companies has its limits. As part of his energy and environmental plans being drafted with the help of Al Gore, he wants to ensure taxpayers’ money is spent wisely in a way that helps reduce dependence on imported oil and fights climate change. He asked Mr Bush to quickly release $25bn which has already been agreed to help companies retool to make more fuel-efficient cars. Mr Gore is advising that “we should help America’s automotive industry to convert quickly to plug-in hybrids that can run off renewable energy that will be available”.

Car companies have lobbied hard to block higher fuel-efficiency standards which average 17 miles per gallon. The big three say they need immediate unrestricted access to cash just to meet their wage and supplier bills. The Michigan-based Centre for Automotive Research has warned that the price of their failure would reach as much as $156bn in lost taxes and extra costs of health care and unemployment assistance.

Another problem Mr Bush and Mr Obama now face is that the bailed-out financial companies have come back for more money. On top of that, the country’s credit-card industry is grinding to a halt. Even American Express has its hand out for taxpayer money. This week, it joined commercial banks and became eligible for rescue funds. The credit-card giant is in danger of collapse because millions of Americans have failed to repay debts run up to fund consumer-driven lifestyles.

The Bush administration has spent all but $60bn of the first half of the bailout funds and only this week had to cough up more money for the insurance giant, AIG.

Source

Well fuel-efficient vehicles are something GM should be making instead of the gas gulers considering the oil and gas situation on the planet.  Maybe bailing them out might be a consideration if they produced more fuel efficient vehicles. There is not much point in GM continuing on the road to bankruptcy, by producing the gas guzzlers however.

Maybe they should start making Chevettes again. Damb good little cars and fuel efficient as well.

Bush had no problem bailing out the banks. So why is he Balking about GM? I guess GM didn’t bribe him with enough money at election time or something.

No problem bailing out AIG twice.  I am so confused.

Nothing like making something people aren’t going to purchase.

As for Columbia well Human Rights should be considered on all levels, Free Trade included.

Most trade agreements do not benefit the people of a country, benefit usually go to the Corporations who want cheap labour and massive profits.

All trade agreements should protect the people of the country. People are more important.

Published in: on November 12, 2008 at 9:39 am  Comments Off on Bush baulks at Obama’s plan to protect jobs  
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

US Spending and Revenues 1902 to 2008 and 2011

Just added Statics on Debt for 2011 at bottom of page.

In 1915 there were no revenues from Income Tax.

Well that was because no one paid any Income Tax.

45% revenue was spent on Defense (war).

In 1916 there were Income tax revenues.  I guess someone between 1915 and 1916 figured they needed to tax peoples income.


Over 47% revenue was spent on Defense (war).

It is all rather interesting to see how income Revenues and Spending compares from year to year however.

One can track the changes in social spending as well. Do visit the Source, you will find it all rather interesting.

IN 2008

Amounts in $ billion

About one quarter of the Budget is Spent on Defense ( War) 728.7,

Add that to interest paid 243.9 on money that was borrowed.

War + Interest = about one third of the spending.

Total spending is 2,931.2

Revenue however is only 2,521.2

They are of course spending more then they receive in Revenue, as a result are running a deficit, meaning they will have to borrow money to cover their spending.

This means also more interest will have to be paid the following year or years.

This adds to the Debt for future generations.

Go to source for 1902 to 2008 and see how things have changed over the years.

Source

Who they have borrowed money from?

Who do the American people owe?

Foreign owners of US Treasury Securities (April 2008) Nation (in billions of dollars) are

Japan 592.2

Mainland China 502

United Kingdom 251.4

Oil exporters 153.9

Brazil 149.5

Caribbean banking centers 115.4

Luxembourg 84.8

Hong Kong 63.1

Russia 60.2

Norway 45.3

Germany 44

Republic of China (Taiwan) 42.6

Switzerland 42.5

South Korea 40.5

Mexico 38

Singapore 33.3

Turkey 31.1

Thailand 27.9

Canada 24

Ireland 18.5

Netherlands 15.5

Sweden 13.1

Egypt 12.7

Belgium 12.5

Poland 12.5

Italy 10.6

India 10.5

All other 154.2

Grand Total 2,601.8 =About 25 %

Source

Other creditors include

Venezuela,

Indonesia,

Iran,

Iraq,

Saudi Arabia,

The United Arab Emirates,

Libya

Nigeria.

Source

About 52% is the privately owned Federal Reserve

What is interesting about this, Bush is working on convincing Americans to go to war with some of the very people that have lent the US money. Now isn’t that SPECIAL??

Now if you look at this way, it is a bit easier to understand. I like to simplify things. Sometimes when you simplify it is easier to grasp the concept of a senerio.

So you lend your neighbor money, then he bad mouths you to all the other neighbor, then comes and blows your house up.

He kills your wife, kids, aunts uncles, cousins. grandparents and a few of your friends.

Then says he did it to rescue them, from the mean nasty father namely you.

Of course what the rest of the neighbors didn’t know,

You were nice enough to lend the murder money.

They actually thought he the murder was a nice guy.

He sure could BS his way into their hearts and minds.

He even took some of the money you lent him and paid one of the other neighbors money, to help him blow up your house.

Well you know sooner or latter the rest of the neighbors will find out what he did and yes he should go to jail.

Not much of a neighbor is he. Not someone you really want as a friend.

Turns out a whole lot of other neighbors, lent him money too.

Oh yes it gets more interesting all the time.

He also went around bad mouthing them too. Well the nerve of him.

He was also trying to get some of the other neighbors, to go blow their houses up too.

What and S.O.B.

Well everyone finally had a neighborhood meeting and found out what was really going on.

They found out the murder was a drug dealing, drug doing, low life, lier.

Boy is everyone pissed off when they find out the truth.

Well wouldn’t you be a bit angry or downright furious?

Think about it?

Anyway Back to the task at hand.

The national debt equates to $30,400 per person U.S. population, or $60,100 per head of the U.S. working population, as of February 2008.

Of course now that the Bailout Bill of about 810 billion has been implemented keeping in mind &00 Billion + $110 Billion in other areas and the 612 billion for Defense Spending has been put in place that will increase substantially. More borrowing, more interest, More Debt.

This is also like dating a drug addict. They just can’t quit. Their drug of choice is War.

Now from what I understand they will to save money, cut anything but Defense spending as a matter of fact it has grown year after year and has become a staggaring burden to the American people. So if they tell you they need to cut social spending or pension plans that is pure BS if anything should be cut it would be Defense spending. War is not a nessesity.

If they try blaming their problems on the Poor which have been doing for years it is not now or ever was the poor it was always War that drove the American people into deficit and debt. Because of their war addiction they have also created poverty not only in America but in the countries they have invaded.

Because of absolute mismanagement, the American people are being driven onto the streets and becoming homeless. The middle class are becoming the poor. Children are going hungry. Innocent people are dieing due to lack of Health Care. For others their debts due to medical bills or job losses are also causing them to lose their homes.They are the new homeless folks. You could be next. You could end up on welfare. Many have because of mismanagement.

Cause and affect. If you know the cause you can cure the problem.

Military Industrial Complex 2.0


Pentagon can’t find $2.3 trillion

World Wide Network of US Military Bases

Map Military Bases

The shaded countries are one which have a U.S. military presence through bases and/or a significant number of troops in 2005. They have more now.

Department of Defense, Base Structure Report, FY2005 Baseline and Active Duty Military Personnel Strengths by Regional Area and Country as of December 31, 2005.

A Study of the History of US Intelligence Community Human Rights Violations and Continuing Research

in Investigative Research

By Peter Phillips, Lew Brown and Bridget Thornton

This research explores the current capabilities of the US military to use electromagnetic (EMF) devices to harass, intimidate, and kill individuals and the continuing possibilities of violations of human rights by the testing and deployment of these weapons. To establish historical precedent in the US for such acts, we document long-term human rights and freedom of thought violations by US military/intelligence organizations. Additionally, we explore contemporary evidence of on-going government research in EMF weapons technologies and examine the potentialities of continuing human rights abuses.

Just added November 2 2011

Who owns US Debt for 2011

MAJOR FOREIGN HOLDERS OF TREASURY SECURITIES (in billions of dollars), HOLDINGS AT END OF PERIOD

Last Column on the right is

% change, June 2010 to April 2011

Country                                   April,11    Jan,11      June,10       %                 

China, Mainland 1,152 1,155 1,112 3.6
Japan 907 886 800 13.4
United Kingdom 333 278 94 252.4
Oil Exporters 222 216 210 5.4
All Other 199 194 199 -0.1
Brazil 207 198 164 26.3
Carib Bnkng Ctrs 138 166 179 -22.8
Hong Kong 122 128 137 -10.7
Taiwan 154 157 152 1.7
Russia 125 139 168 -25.4
Switzerland 112 108 106 5.5
Canada 88 86 36 144.3
Luxembourg 78 83 98 -19.7
Thailand 61 56 36 70.0
Germany 61 61 52 17.4
Singapore 60 58 53 13.1
Ireland 40 44 56 -27.8
Korea, South 31 32 37 -16.8
India 42 41 35 18.9
Mexico 27 34 33 -19.3
France 20 30 24 -16.1
Belgium 32 32 35 -9.2
Egypt 14 21 25 -45.6
Turkey 38 33 26 47.5
Poland 27 26 26 6.6
Italy 25 25 23 9.3
Norway 21 19 15 37.0
Netherlands 24 25 25 -4.5
Colombia 20 20 16 20.7
Israel 19 20 18 5.5
Sweden 21 17 18 21.6
Philippines 24 23 20 19.5
Chile 19 15 12 55.0
Australia 13 15 18 -28.8
Malaysia 12 11 11 8.1
Total 4,489 4,453 4,070 10.3

Source

Another source  had a few other details mot in the above one.

$14 Trillion in Debt, But Who Owns All That Money?

Jul 22 2011,

Hong Kong

Total Holdings of US Treasuries: $121.9 billion

Percent of US Debt that they own: 0.9%

Social Security Trust Fund

Total Holdings of US Treasuries: $2.67 trillion

Percent of US Debt that they own: 19%

The Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) and Disability Insurance (DI) Trust Funds invest exclusively in special issue bonds that are only available to the Social Security trust fund. These are not publicly traded securities, but they still constitute a huge amount of debt.

The Privately owned Federal Reserve

The Treasury owes the Fed $1.63 trillion in Treasuries, much of which were bought for the Quantitative Easing programs.

That’s 11.3% of US debt, much more than China.

China

Total Holdings of Treasuries: $1.16 trillion

Percent of US Debt that they own: 8%

 US Households

Total Holdings of US Treasuries: $959.4 billion

Percent of US Debt that they own: 6.6%

The ‘Household Sector’ does include hedge funds, by the way

Japan

Total Holdings of Treasuries: $912.4 billion

Percent of US Debt that they own:

State and Local Governments

Total Holdings of US Treasuries: $506.1 billion

Percent of US Debt that they own: 3.5%

Private Pension Funds
Total Holdings of US Treasuries: $504.7 billion

Percent of US Debt that they own: 3.5%

United Kingdom
Total Holdings of Treasuries: $346.5 billion

Percent of US Debt that they own: 2.4%

Money Market Mutual Funds

Total Holdings of US Treasuries: $337.7 billion

Percent of US Debt that they own: 2.4%

State, Local, and Federal Retirement Funds

Total Holdings of US Treasuries: $320.9 billion

Percent of US Debt that they own: 2.2%

Commerical Banks

Total Holdings of US Treasuries: $301.8 billion

Percent of US Debt that they own: 2.1%

Mutual Funds
Total Holdings of US Treasuries: $300.5 billion

Percent of US Debt that they own: 2%

Oil Exporting Countries

Total holdings of Treasuries: $229.8 billion

Percent of US Debt that they own: 1.6%

Oil exporters include Ecuador, Venezuela, Indonesia, Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Algeria, Gabon, Libya, and Nigeria.

Brazil
Total Holdings of Treasuries: $211.4 billion

Percent of US Debt that they own: 1.5%

Taiwan

Total Holdings of US Treasuries: $153.4 billion

Percent of US Debt that they own: 1.1%

Caribbean Banking Centers

Total Holdings of US Treasuries: $148.3 billion

Percent of US Debt that they own: 1%

The Bahamas, Bermuda, Cayman Islands, Netherlands Antilles and Panama, and British Virgin Islands all function as offshore financial centers. Of course, they invest in Treasury Securities as well.

 Source