Even Republicans Are Beginning To Balk At The Trump/Hegseth Murders

 

The following post is by Steve Benen at MS NOW:

After three months of deadly U.S. military strikes against civilian boats in international waters, the Trump administration has generated a great many questions, though a simple one has hovered near the top of the list: Are these operations legal?

A great many experts have argued that the White House policy of extrajudicial killings is plainly illegal. Evidently, the senior military lawyer for the combatant command overseeing the lethal strikes came to the same conclusion, as did a variety of other legal voices within the administration.

These questions grew considerably louder late last week, with striking reporting from The Washington Post. In an article published on the day after Thanksgiving, the Post reported that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth gave a spoken directive to military personnel to kill everybody on a vessel carrying 11 people. From the piece:

A missile screamed off the Trinidad coast, striking the vessel and igniting a blaze from bow to stern. For minutes, commanders watched the boat burning on a live drone feed. As the smoke cleared, they got a jolt: Two survivors were clinging to the smoldering wreck. The Special Operations commander overseeing the Sept. 2 attack … ordered a second strike to comply with Hegseth’s instructions, two people familiar with the matter said. The two men were blown apart in the water.

The Post’s report, which has not been independently verified by MS NOW, emphasized the fact that the men targeted in the second strike posed “no imminent threat of attack” and were not in an “armed conflict” with the United States. . . .

Todd Huntley, a former military lawyer who advised special operations forces for seven years at the height of the U.S. counterterrorism campaign, told the Post that this second deadly strike “amounts to murder.” This is not an uncommon reaction to the allegations.

Ryan Goodman, a former special counsel at the Pentagon, described the allegations as a “textbook” example of a war crime. Jack Goldsmith, who led the Office of Legal Counsel under George W. Bush, added that if the Post’s reporting is accurate, “it appears that Special Operations Forces committed murder.” A group of former military lawyers issued a joint statement that concluded that the allegations raised in the Post’s report “constitute war crimes, murder, or both.”

This, among other things, also adds fresh context to the hyperaggressive response to Democratic veterans who advised service members not to follow illegal orders.

Complicating matters for the White House, some congressional Republicans have raised related concerns.

Late Friday, Republican Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi, the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, issued a statement with Democratic Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the panel’s ranking member, noting that the committee was aware of the reporting and adding, “we will be conducting vigorous oversight to determine the facts related to these circumstances.”

A day later, Republican Rep. Mike Rogers of Alabama, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, issued a related statement with Democratic Rep. Adam Smith of Washington, the panel’s ranking member, which added, “This committee is committed to providing rigorous oversight of the Department of Defense’s military operations in the Caribbean. We take seriously the reports of follow-on strikes on boats alleged to be ferrying narcotics in the SOUTHCOM region and are taking bipartisan action to gather a full accounting of the operation in question.”

Appearing on CBS News’ “Face the Nation,” Republican Rep. Mike Turner of Ohio, the former chair of the House Intelligence Committee, also said, “Obviously if that occurred, that would be very serious, and I agree that that would be an illegal act.”

For the administration, this is not good news. Donald Trump has grown accustomed to GOP lawmakers simply turning the other way in response to scandalous allegations. That the bipartisan leadership of the Armed Services committees, in both chambers, plan to put these allegations under the microscope will lead to scrutiny the White House would likely prefer to avoid.

U.S. Military Commits War Crime On Hegseth's Order

From joycevance.substack.com 

61% Of Jewish Americans Say Israel Has Committed War Crimes In Gaza

 

The charts above are from the Washington Post Poll -- done between September 2nd and 9th of a nationwide sample of 815 Jewish Americans, with a 4.7 point margin of error.

The Israeli Government Is Turning Their Nation Into A Pariah Nation

A couple of days ago, Israel attacked a Gaza hospital full of starving children with a drone bombing. A second drone attack on that same hospital a short time later, killing rescue workers and at least four journalists, showed the attack was not a tragic mistake - it was intentional.

This follows other violations of international law by the Israeli government. For nearly three months, it refused to allow any food or medical supplies into Gaza as it continued to attack the citizens there. Then, even after inadequate food supplies were allowed to enter, Israeli soldiers fired on and killed Gaza's trying to access that food numerous times.

None of this was necessary for the defense of Israel. Israel has long ago destroyed Hamas as a fighting force. The continuing attacks on Gaza citizens now seems to have two purposes - to allow Netanyahu to stay in power and to permanently take over Gaza.

The Netanyahu government seems to think it can do whatever it wants and still retain the support of the world. They are wrong. The genocidal war crimes they are committing is turning the world against them and making their country a pariah among nations. And it is even causing them to lose support among their most reliable supporters - the people of the United States.

A recent poll showed that when asked if they supported Israel or the Palestinians, the American public was virtually equal in support for Israel and Palestine and those who said they supported both. This shows a remarkable loss of support for Israel. Traditionally, the U.S. public has overwhelmingly supported Israel over the Palestinians.

Israel is a tiny nation, and it needs the support of the world - especially the United States. It is not likely to lose the support of Donald Trump, since Netanyahu has shown the ability to play Trump as effectively as Putin has. But Trump won't be in power forever, and without the support of the American public, Israel could be in trouble when he is gone.

Israel has the right to exist, but so do the Palestinians. The world wants a two-state solution and peace in the Middle East. The Netanyahu government has squandered much of the world's good will by their actions in Gaza. It must stop the war crimes or it will soon stand alone. 

Israel Created And Is Maintaining The Famine In Gaza

 

By cutting off all food supplies from entering Gaza for about three months, the Israeli government intentionally created the current famine in Gaza. And they continue to refuse to allow enough food to enter to stop the famine.

Netanyahu and his right-wing supporters have a purpose in doing this. They want to kill off or force out the residents of Gaza so they can take over and annex Gaza. And when they complete that, the West Bank is next.

Israel doesn't want a two-state solution. They want all of the Palestinian territories. It's why they have refused to negotiate a two-state solution.

This is a war crime. And Donald Trump is allowing them to do it. In fact, Trump will make sure the United Nations can do nothing to stop it!

Russian Troops Continue War Crimes Against Ukranians

From the editorial board of The Washington Post:

When Russian forces retreated last week from most of Ukraine’s Kharkiv region, they left behind tanks and a howitzer — and disturbing reports of violence. In the village of Zaliznychne, one woman describedburying the bodies of two men killed after they kept lights on past curfew. In other towns, Russian shelling destroyed civilian targets, including schools and hospitals. Officials from the city of Izyum claim at least 1,000 civilians were killed and 80 percent of the city destroyed during a six-month occupation.

Grisly evidence is emerging. On Thursday, Ukraine’s chief police investigator announced the discovery of a mass burial site near Izyum, containing more than 400 bodies. An Associated Press video showed hundreds of graves lining the forest, marked with numbers and simple wooden crosses. While many of the victims were killed by shelling and airstrikes, some were reportedly found with their necks and hands tied, suggesting the execution of prisoners.

These horrifying allegations follow a sad pattern. From Chechnya to Syria, Russia has a record of waging war with a brutal disregard for human rights and civilian life. In Ukraine, perhaps the most infamous example is what happened in the city of Bucha, near Kyiv: After Russian troops retreated in late March, more than 450 bodies were found, and the majority of the victims had been tortured, shot or bludgeoned to death. The images spurred global outrage, as did reports of systematic sexual violence and rape.

Since then, evidence has mounted suggesting Russia has committed atrocities. A database from the Associated Press and Frontline has documented 430 “incidents involving potential war crimes” across Ukraine, including attacks on civilians, food and water facilities and medical infrastructure.

In the coming weeks, the world will learn more about what Ukrainian civilians in the Kharkiv area experienced. Towns such as Izyum have been cut off from the internet, phone signals and electricity for months, with little information escaping about conditions and treatment. The Ukrainian government has dispatched investigators and prosecutors to the region to gather evidence, and international investigations will no doubt follow suit. It is imperative reports of violence are quickly and carefully documented. Collecting information in real time — crucial in such situations — will require both resources and coordination.

“Russia leaves death everywhere. And it must be held accountable for it,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said in a video address Thursday night. Every day, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s senseless war in Ukraine claims more lives and causes irreparable suffering. There must be an urgent, thorough investigation into alleged crimes against civilians, followed by sincere efforts to prosecute perpetrators and hold them accountable. Anything less would represent a grave injustice for victims and survivors — and would send an unacceptable signal to Mr. Putin that his troops can commit atrocities with impunity.

U.S./U.N./NATO Must Take Action To Defend Human Rights

This is what President Zelensky told the United Nations about the atrocities committed against Ukrainian citizens by Russian soldiers:

“They cut off limbs, slashed their throats, women raped and killed in front of their children. Their tongues were pulled out only because the aggressor did not hear what they wanted to hear from them.”

“The Russian military … purposefully killed anyone who served our country. They shot and killed women outside their houses…They killed entire families, adults and children, and they tried to burn the bodies. I am addressing you on behalf of the people who honor the memory of the deceased every single day and the memory of the civilians who died, they were shot and killed in the back of their head after being tortured. Some of them were shot on the streets.” 

“There is not a single crime they would not commit there just for their pleasure.” 

“Where is the security that the Security Council is supposed to be guaranteed?” 

“Are you ready to close the U.N.? Do you think that the time of international law is gone? If your answer is no, then you need to act immediately.”

His words are powerful because he is right. War crimes are being committed against innocent civilians in Ukraine. Genocide is being committed against the Ukrainian people. And that's not all. Putin has ordered the bombing and missile strikes against civilian population centers.

One American general has declared that the war could go on for years. If true, that would be devastating for the Ukrainian population. The population would virtually be wiped out!

The United Nations is failing the Ukrainian people!

NATO is failing the Ukrainian people!

The United States is failing the Ukrainian people!

All of these organizations claim to be defenders of human rights. But they are failing in their duty to actually defend human rights. 

Applying and supporting economic sanctions does not stop the human rights violations. Supplying weapons to the Ukrainian army does not stop the human rights violations, since it could take years for them to win the war.

I am not usually in favor of any war. But there are times when it cannot be avoided, and failure to engage those committing human rights violations on a massive and continuing scale is cowardice -- not prudence.

The United Nations cannot act because of their structure (with Russia having a veto over any proposed action). But the United States and NATO could act. 

At the very least, a no-fly zone could be established over Ukraine (including the Eastern provinces). This, along with supplying missile defenses, could stop much of the carnage. And the West should stop saying troops would not engage the Russians in Ukraine. That should be an option that Russia has to consider when violating human rights, and may actually be needed in the future.

It's easy to mouth platitudes about human rights. But it's time for the West to live up to their words.

Trump To Desecrate Memorial Day And Dishonor Our Troops By Pardoning War Criminals On This Sacred Holiday

Memorial Day is supposed to be a holiday that honors the brave soldiers who gave their lives to defend this country throughout its history. It should be a solemn occasion with the emphasis on those soldiers -- not politicians.

Sadly, Donald Trump is planning to desecrate this important holiday. He is planning to pardon several war criminals -- members of the military who have committed acts that no civilized country can accept. This would dishonor the brave troops who gave their lives doing the right thing, and it would endanger the troops now serving our country.

Here is part of an op-ed on this travesty by retired Lt General Lawrence D. Nicholson and former State Department Official J. Kael Weston (from the New York Times). They tell us why Trump's plan would be a terrible mistake:

President Trump's consideration of pardons for several service members accused of war crimes is disturbing. It would send the wrong signal to United States troops under his command, undercut the country’s well-established military justice system and call into question America’s longstanding commitment to human rights and the rule of law.

Horrific if not illegal conduct would be condoned at the highest level, setting a new and very dark precedent and detracting attention from the honorable actions of millions of United States service members.

Over many years of service leading and advising Marines in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan, we worked closely together to ensure everyone in the command understood not just the legal aspects of the law of armed conflict but also the reasoning behind them. We also stressed how, especially in a counterinsurgency environment, our daily actions, not just our words, made an impact for good or bad with the local population.

As a rifle company commander in Helmand Province, Afghanistan, stated, “Every day, we are hunting and helping” — hunting the enemy, and helping the people who ultimately will determine the success or failure of our campaign.

Combat — grueling, exhausting and deadly — demands extraordinary teamwork, exacting discipline and a bedrock of ethical and moral clarity. Leaders’ solemn obligation is to equip their teams with tools and training to win the fight while never losing their moral compass. The most successful combat units we witnessed were fierce on the battlefield but also well trained and highly disciplined in carrying out their responsibilities with prisoners of war, detainees and civilians.

We spent a lot time making sure that was adhered to during occasions as violent as epic battles in Falluja, Iraq, and in Helmand. Holding our troops to a high standard is not an easy task. It requires a thorough approach at the tactical level and small-unit combat leadership dedicated to upholding strict rules of engagement. If abuses or crimes take place, the Uniform Code of Military Justice provides defendants with representation and due process. That system, established in 1950, has been tested over many decades — and it works.

Presidential pardons for service members accused or convicted of war crimes could erode confidence in this well-documented legal process and lead to an atmosphere where battlefield criminal conduct might become more common. The result of this presidential prerogative would not easily be corrected in the near term, and it would be in direct conflict with the military chains of command. Junior ranks across the services could interpret these pardons as a commander in chief’s indifference toward illegal actions, including the reported killings by a SEAL operator of a young Iraqi girl and an unarmed old Iraqi man.

We write from extensive personal experience — over a decade between us in specific and complex combat zone leadership roles. During our time in Falluja, a Marine was ordered to confinement in Anbar Province after a civilian had been killed at nighttime in questionable circumstances. In Helmand, the governor of the province and other provincial religious and tribal leaders would press us on incidents in which United States military operations resulted in civilian deaths. These Iraqis and Afghans wanted to believe the Americans could be trusted to follow up, especially behind closed doors and in courtrooms.

Maintaining our moral standing in war is among the greatest challenges for any service member, particularly for those who see friends die. It is the adherence to law in wartime that defines us as Americans and keeps civilians and our own troops safe.

Presidential pardons for military members accused of war crimes would be a tremendous disservice to these troops who remain our best unofficial ambassadors in outposts around the world. If the current commander in chief pardons service members accused or convicted of war crimes, we risk having our own citizens, and perhaps even our most trusted allies around the world, note the lowering of standards on the explicit order of the American president himself.

The Horrors Of War Continue

(This photo of the Medecins Sans Frontieres (Doctors Without Borders) Hospital is from ibtimes.co.uk.)

The following message is from the group called United for Peace & Justice. I agree with it.

The horror continues in Afghanistan with the deadly bombing of the Doctors Without Bordershospital in Kunduz killing 22 people - 12 staff members and 10 patients, some of them children, with dozens more wounded.

Bombing a hospital is a violation of International Humanitarian Law and a War Crime.

Afghanistan is our country’s longest war – entering its 15th year today, October 7th. President Obama can’t claim he ended combat operations in 2014 when we continue to bomb the country. Bombing is war!

The President and military leaders have repeatedly told us there is no military solution in Afghanistan. Why are the same failed policies that began under the George W. Bush administration still in effect?

Since the 2009 “surge”, things in Afghanistan have only gotten worse. The Taliban have launched more attacks every year. Rather than being diminished they have grown in size and capacity. For the 5th consecutive year Afghan civilian casualties have hit record highs. Some Afghan people, fueled by anger at foreign occupation and a corrupt government, have turned to the Taliban.

The government of Afghanistan is one of the most corrupt in the world – hundreds of millions of our dollars go into the hands of crooked officials, warlords, drug lords and the Taliban. 

The U.S. has spent $65 billion to build the Afghan Army and Police Forces. Despite the infusion of $110 billion in foreign assistance since 2001, Afghanistan’s only real economy is the poppy drug trade which has rapidly increased in recent years under U.S. occupation. America has supported a corrupt Afghanistan government at the expense of Afghan people American service members.

Now, President Obama has ordered a slowdown in U.S. troop withdrawal and we fear he may extend troop deployments beyond 2016.

U.S. military intervention is a proven failure. We invested in drones, bombs, soldiers, and night raids but did not invest in solutions. These failed military tactics have led to more enemies, more extremists and futile, endless war, while increasing suffering for the people of Afghanistan (2.5 million refugees and 700,000 displaced per UNHCR). 

How do we respond to those who say if the U.S. leaves there will be a bloodbath? Unfortunately a bloodbath has been underway for 14 years and the U.S. must take responsibility for its part in it. U.S. military involvement in Afghanistan and the Middle East is seen as a crusade against Islam and used by Al-Qaeda, ISIS and other extremist groups to attract recruits. There are no easy answers or fast solutions. But if we change course, take diplomatic methods seriously, backed by intelligence, money and our full, determined effort, we can achieve a political solution leading to stability instead of endless war.

The Afghanistan war is an abysmal failure. We must ask President Obama, our Congressional representatives, and the military two basic questions:

• Why should U.S. forces stay one more day in Afghanistan? 
• What is preventing a full, focused effort on diplomacy – in Afghanistan as well as in the Middle East?

Send a message to your Congressional Representatives calling on them to end military operations, bring our troops home, and demand focused diplomatic efforts to reach a political solution to the crisis in Afghanistan.

We need to end military intervention and support a diplomatic process leading to a political solution. As long as there are U.S. forces in Afghanistan there will be no peace. As President Obama himself has said, a lasting solution will depend on Afghans and their neighbors reaching a political settlement.

Please share this message with others who want to end the war.

Freedom Fighters And War Criminals

I will probably make some of you angry with what I am about to say, but it is something I deeply feel and believe -- and I think it needs to be said (over and over again by as many people as possible), because it concerns just what kind of country we want to live in.

The three people pictured above are Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, and Bradley Manning. They are all in legal trouble now, and some of our elected officials (of both parties) have even called them "traitors". What was their horrible crime? They exposed to you, the citizens of the U.S. (and the world), what our government was doing -- and they did it by releasing documents for publication that our government wanted to keep secret.

Some have said they put lives in danger. That is not true. Others have said they put the security and defense of our nation in jeopardy. That is not true either. What they did is expose the devious, underhanded, and unethical way our government does business. And that is considered a crime by government because they are embarrassed by the exposure of their lies and corrupt behavior.

Should the government be allowed to keep secrets? My general answer is NO, but I recognize that there is an extremely small number of instances when secrecy is desirable (when the lives of real people are in danger -- such as not exposing the names of undercover agents, or exposing the plans of an imminent military attack). But that was not the kind of secrets exposed by the men shown above. The "secrets" they exposed was information that should never have been secret in the first place.

Some of you may be saying at this point that a government cannot operate without secrecy. That's nonsense. Any government acting in a moral and humane manner has no need for secrecy -- especially the vast secrecy engaged in by our government. Secrecy is the currency of authoritarian governments (who engage in illegal, inhumane, and unethical behavior to stay in power). Knowledge and openness is the currency of democracy (because a democracy cannot exist unless the people know what the government is doing and why it is being done -- so they can decide at the ballot box if that is what they want done).

Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, and Bradley Manning are not criminals -- they are freedom fighters, and heroes of democracy. But they will all probably be severely punished -- because government officials consider the exposure of their misdeeds, malfeasance, and unethical behavior to be a crime greater than any other.

Meanwhile, real criminals (like George Bush and Dick Cheney) go unpunished. These war criminals LIED to the American people so they could start an unnecessary war in Iraq -- which had nothing to do with self-defense or the "war" on terrorism. And that unnecessary invasion and occupation of another country cost the lives of thousands of Americans, and many more Iraqis (thousands of them innocent women and children). These men (Bush and Cheney) have engaged in the murder of innocents (for either political or financial gain) -- and that is truly a crime. They should be convicted and imprisoned for an extended period of time.

Until we are willing to convict real criminals like Bush and Cheney, it is an egregious injustice to seek criminal penalties against Assange, Snowden, and Manning (who harmed no one, but furthered the cause of democracy).

War Criminals

These two men have not been indicted, and probably never will be (because of their powerful political connections), but they are war criminals. They lied to get this nation into two totally unnecessary wars -- Iraq had no WMDs (and we never had any credible information that they did), and Afghanistan was willing to turn Osama bin Laden over to the World Court for a fair trial (which the American public was never told about).

Their was no reason at all to start either war -- but that didn't stop Bush and Cheney. They had political and financial reasons for those wars (both personal), and they were willing to sacrifice many thousands of innocent lives to accomplish them. Neither of those wars were started to defend this country -- and that makes these two men the worst kind of war criminals.

A Dying Soldier's Letter To Bush/Cheney

The open letter below was written by Tomas Young. Mr. Young is a patriotic American who joined the U.S. Army two days after the 9/11 tragedy. He is now a paralyzed veteran living out the final days of his life in hospice care. I am reposting his open letter (found at truthdig) to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney because I think it deserves as wide a readership as possible. It is a searing indictment of the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

To: George W. Bush and Dick Cheney
From: Tomas Young

I write this letter on the 10th anniversary of the Iraq War on behalf of my fellow Iraq War veterans. I write this letter on behalf of the 4,488 soldiers and Marines who died in Iraq. I write this letter on behalf of the hundreds of thousands of veterans who have been wounded and on behalf of those whose wounds, physical and psychological, have destroyed their lives. I am one of those gravely wounded. I was paralyzed in an insurgent ambush in 2004 in Sadr City. My life is coming to an end. I am living under hospice care.

I write this letter on behalf of husbands and wives who have lost spouses, on behalf of children who have lost a parent, on behalf of the fathers and mothers who have lost sons and daughters and on behalf of those who care for the many thousands of my fellow veterans who have brain injuries. I write this letter on behalf of those veterans whose trauma and self-revulsion for what they have witnessed, endured and done in Iraq have led to suicide and on behalf of the active-duty soldiers and Marines who commit, on average, a suicide a day. I write this letter on behalf of the some 1 million Iraqi dead and on behalf of the countless Iraqi wounded. I write this letter on behalf of us all—the human detritus your war has left behind, those who will spend their lives in unending pain and grief.

I write this letter, my last letter, to you, Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney. I write not because I think you grasp the terrible human and moral consequences of your lies, manipulation and thirst for wealth and power. I write this letter because, before my own death, I want to make it clear that I, and hundreds of thousands of my fellow veterans, along with millions of my fellow citizens, along with hundreds of millions more in Iraq and the Middle East, know fully who you are and what you have done. You may evade justice but in our eyes you are each guilty of egregious war crimes, of plunder and, finally, of murder, including the murder of thousands of young Americans—my fellow veterans—whose future you stole.

Your positions of authority, your millions of dollars of personal wealth, your public relations consultants, your privilege and your power cannot mask the hollowness of your character. You sent us to fight and die in Iraq after you, Mr. Cheney, dodged the draft in Vietnam, and you, Mr. Bush, went AWOL from your National Guard unit. Your cowardice and selfishness were established decades ago. You were not willing to risk yourselves for our nation but you sent hundreds of thousands of young men and women to be sacrificed in a senseless war with no more thought than it takes to put out the garbage.

I joined the Army two days after the 9/11 attacks. I joined the Army because our country had been attacked. I wanted to strike back at those who had killed some 3,000 of my fellow citizens. I did not join the Army to go to Iraq, a country that had no part in the September 2001 attacks and did not pose a threat to its neighbors, much less to the United States. I did not join the Army to “liberate” Iraqis or to shut down mythical weapons-of-mass-destruction facilities or to implant what you cynically called “democracy” in Baghdad and the Middle East. I did not join the Army to rebuild Iraq, which at the time you told us could be paid for by Iraq’s oil revenues. Instead, this war has cost the United States over $3 trillion. I especially did not join the Army to carry out pre-emptive war. Pre-emptive war is illegal under international law. And as a soldier in Iraq I was, I now know, abetting your idiocy and your crimes. The Iraq War is the largest strategic blunder in U.S. history. It obliterated the balance of power in the Middle East. It installed a corrupt and brutal pro-Iranian government in Baghdad, one cemented in power through the use of torture, death squads and terror. And it has left Iran as the dominant force in the region. On every level—moral, strategic, military and economic—Iraq was a failure. And it was you, Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney, who started this war. It is you who should pay the consequences.

I would not be writing this letter if I had been wounded fighting in Afghanistan against those forces that carried out the attacks of 9/11. Had I been wounded there I would still be miserable because of my physical deterioration and imminent death, but I would at least have the comfort of knowing that my injuries were a consequence of my own decision to defend the country I love. I would not have to lie in my bed, my body filled with painkillers, my life ebbing away, and deal with the fact that hundreds of thousands of human beings, including children, including myself, were sacrificed by you for little more than the greed of oil companies, for your alliance with the oil sheiks in Saudi Arabia, and your insane visions of empire.

I have, like many other disabled veterans, suffered from the inadequate and often inept care provided by the Veterans Administration. I have, like many other disabled veterans, come to realize that our mental and physical wounds are of no interest to you, perhaps of no interest to any politician. We were used. We were betrayed. And we have been abandoned. You, Mr. Bush, make much pretense of being a Christian. But isn’t lying a sin? Isn’t murder a sin? Aren’t theft and selfish ambition sins? I am not a Christian. But I believe in the Christian ideal. I believe that what you do to the least of your brothers you finally do to yourself, to your own soul.

My day of reckoning is upon me. Yours will come. I hope you will be put on trial. But mostly I hope, for your sakes, that you find the moral courage to face what you have done to me and to many, many others who deserved to live. I hope that before your time on earth ends, as mine is now ending, you will find the strength of character to stand before the American public and the world, and in particular the Iraqi people, and beg for forgiveness. 

Tutu Calls Bush/Blair War Criminals

Recently, Archbishop Desmond Tutu (pictured above) refused to share a state with former British prime minister Tony Blair in South Africa (at the Discovery Invest Leadership Summit). He defended his action in an article for The Guardian (a British newspaper). He said it was not appropriate to be on stage with Blair at a leadership summit after Blair (and Bush) has demonstrated a failure of leadership in using lies to justify their invasion of Iraq. Here is some of what Mr. Tutu wrote:

The immorality of the United States and Great Britain's decision to invade Iraq in 2003, premised on the lie that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, has destabilised and polarised the world to a greater extent than any other conflict in history.

Instead of recognising that the world we lived in, with increasingly sophisticated communications, transportations and weapons systems necessitated sophisticated leadership that would bring the global family together, the then-leaders of the US and UK fabricated the grounds to behave like playground bullies and drive us further apart. They have driven us to the edge of a precipice where we now stand – with the spectre of Syria and Iran before us. . .

The cost of the decision to rid Iraq of its by-all-accounts despotic and murderous leader has been staggering, beginning in Iraq itself. Last year, an average of 6.5 people died there each day in suicide attacks and vehicle bombs, according to the Iraqi Body Count project. More than 110,000 Iraqis have died in the conflict since 2003 and millions have been displaced. By the end of last year, nearly 4,500 American soldiers had been killed and more than 32,000 wounded.

On these grounds alone, in a consistent world, those responsible for this suffering and loss of life should be treading the same path as some of their African and Asian peers who have been made to answer for their actions in the Hague.

But even greater costs have been exacted beyond the killing fields, in the hardened hearts and minds of members of the human family across the world.

Has the potential for terrorist attacks decreased? To what extent have we succeeded in bringing the so-called Muslim and Judeo-Christian worlds closer together, in sowing the seeds of understanding and hope?

Leadership and morality are indivisible. Good leaders are the custodians of morality. The question is not whether Saddam Hussein was good or bad or how many of his people he massacred. The point is that Mr Bush and Mr Blair should not have allowed themselves to stoop to his immoral level.

If it is acceptable for leaders to take drastic action on the basis of a lie, without an acknowledgement or an apology when they are found out, what should we teach our children?

I have to agree. The United States and Great Britain are quick to condemn leaders of other countries, and demand they be tried for war crimes, or crimes against humanity. But they want a double standard to be applied to their own leaders, who they think should have immunity from their own crimes. The invasion of Iraq was a war crime (and can no more be justified than Hitler's invasion of Poland or Saddam's own invasion of Kuwait). Bush and Blair will never pay the price for their lies leading to the lost lives of many thousands of people, but they should be held accountable.

American War Criminals Convicted

(This image is from the website of The Diplomat.)

You may have already heard about the nation of Kuala Lumpur convicting Bush, Cheney, and several of their cohorts of war crimes. I believe the conviction was justified -- they are war criminals. I have been considering writing about this, but Justin Rosario over at Addicting Info has beat me to it, and has probably done a better job than I could have. So I bring you his excellent post:

In the first verdict of its kind since former President George W. Bush left office, he and several members of his administration have been successfully convicted in absentia of war crimes in Malaysia.


Yes, this is a BFD.


This past Friday, a five panel tribunal delivered a unanimous guilty verdict after a week long trial that, unsurprisingly, was not covered by American media. The witnesses included several ex-Guantanamo detainees that gave testimony on the conditions and human rights violations that were systematically carried out under orders of the Bush administration.


Former President Bush, Former Vice-President Dick Cheney, Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and the legal advisers Alberto Gonzales, David Addington, William Haynes, Jay Bybee and John Yoo that crafted the legal ‘justification’ for torture that basically said, ‘we can if we want to even if it’s illegal’ were the defendants. None were present, of course, but international war crime trials do not require the presence of the accused. The trial was run according to the standards set by the Nuremberg Trials to convict war criminals after World War II.


The United States is subject to international law which makes this trial significant beyond the borders of Malaysia. Foreign Policy Journal reports:


President Lamin told a packed courtroom: “As a tribunal of conscience, the tribunal is fully aware that its verdict is merely declaratory in nature. The tribunal has no power of enforcement, no power to impose any custodial sentence on any one or more of the 8 convicted persons. What we can do, under Article 31 of Chapter VI of Part 2 of the Charter is to recommend to the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission to submit this finding of conviction by the tribunal, together with a record of these proceedings, to the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, as well as the United Nations and the Security Council.


The Tribunal also recommends to the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission that the names of all the 8 convicted persons be entered and included in the Commission’s Register of War Criminals and be publicized accordingly.


The Tribunal recommends to the War Crimes Commission to give the widest international publicity to this conviction and grant of reparations, as these are universal crimes for which there is a responsibility upon nations to institute prosecutions if any of these Accused persons may enter their jurisdictions.


The hope is that other countries will hold trials of their own and the guilty verdicts will mount up. This is not that outlandish an idea as Bush and Cheney have not only brazenly admitted they authorized torture in direct contravention of the Geneva Convention, but bragged about it. Nothing more helpful than having a criminal do all the heavy lifting for the prosecution. If enough of these verdicts are passed on to the international courts, they will have no choice but to hold a trial of their own. While Bush won’t be arrested on American soil, he’ll have a very difficult time leaving the country. Already he’s canceled a trip to Switzerland, due to possible charges of war crimes.


The best possible outcome is that the world court delivers a guilty verdict that sends a clear message to President Obama and his successors that the United States is not above the law, American Exceptional-ism be damned. It’s a lesson we’ve forgotten and need to relearn.

War Criminals Just Had "Poor Judgement"

During the Nuremberg trials at the end of World War II, the United States (along with Russia, Great Britain and France) laid down a new legal precedent. They made it clear that a country's leaders who issued illegal orders and the goons who carried out those orders were not the only war criminals.

They said those in the legal profession who justified those illegal orders and gave them the cloak of judicial respectability were also guilty of war crimes. But then those were Germans. Evidently this precedent doesn't apply if you're an attorney justifying the illegal actions of the United States government.

Bush administration Justice Department attorneys John Yoo (currently a Berkley law professor) and Jay Bybee (currently a federal judge), wrote memos for President Bush giving him the authority to violate American and international law by ordering the torture of prisoners believed to be muslim insurgents.

Yoo even went further. He told Justice Department Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) investigators that a president not only had the authority to order the torturing of prisoners, but could even order an entire village of people to be massacred! That is an incredible mis-reading of the president's constitutional powers. It is obvious that Yoo considered the president to be above the laws that apply to all other citizens.

But the OPR did not accept the weak, unethical and obviously wrong advice that Bybee and Yoo offered the president to justify ordering the torture of prisoners. They concluded "John Bybee committed professional misconduct when he acted in reckless disregard of his duty to exercise independent legal judgement and render thorough, objective, and candid legal advice."

They were even harder on Yoo saying, "John Yoo committed intentional professional misconduct when he violated his duty to exercise independent legal judgement and render thorough, objective, and candid legal advice." In the original report, the OPR recommended the two men be referred to their state bar associations for possible disciplinary actions.

But in perhaps his most cowardly decision since assuming office, President Obama said last year he doesn't want any prosecutions for crimes these men (war criminals) did. He said he was afraid it would have a chilling effect on attorney's advising the president. That was a ridiculous position to take. The only effect it would have is to convince government attorney's they could not give advice they knew to be illegal.

Following the president's wishes, senior Justice Department attorney David Margolis toned the report down, and said the two men had only exhibited "poor judgement". That means these two war criminals will get off with no punishment for their dastardly and reprehensible conduct.

I can't help but believe that if these men had been German attorney's giving that same advice to Hitler, they would have been prosecuted as war criminals. They deserve nothing less just because they were giving illegal advice to an American president.

(The above picture is from the Nuremberg trial of judges who helped implement the illegal and immoral laws dictated by Hitler.)

Cheney Is Running Scared !

During the eight years of the Bush administration, the American public heard very little from Vice-President Dick Cheney. He gave few press conferences and few interviews. More often than not, he was not only silent but out of sight, in one of his famous "undisclosed locations".

But now that he's out-of-office, it seems like Cheney is giving another interview every day. He going on every TV and radio program that will have him, and the other day, he even had dueling speeches with President Obama. What has happened? Why is he so high-profile and public these days?

It's certainly not because the Republican Party wants him out front. They know he is one of the most disliked politicians in America, and most Republicans just wish he would go away. They'd like for Americans to forget that he is a Republican, but they won't do that as long as he's pushing himself on every show he can.

Finally, we have an answer. It seems that Cheney is running scared. He's afraid he's going to be charged and tried for his war crimes, especially since the White House memos were released that showed he ordered the torturing of prisoners. How do we know this? His daughter says it's true.

Liz Cheney went on CNN the other day. She said, "I don’t think he planned to be doing this, you know, when they left office in January. But I think, as it became clear that President Obama was not only going to be stopping some of these policies, that he was going to be doing things like releasing the — the techniques themselves, so that the terrorists could now train to them, that he was suggesting that perhaps we would even be prosecuting former members of the Bush administration."

He should be scared. He has violated both American and International laws, and if he weren't an American, he would probably already have been charged as a war criminal. So he's pedaling as fast as he can right now, hoping to convince enough Americans that waterboarding is not torture, so it will be harder to bring charges against him.

I doubt if he has anything to worry about from the Obama administration. President Obama has already decided that it is in his political interest to ignore the war crimes of the Bush administration. But there are still those few brave souls in Congress who still want to do the right thing. I hope they are able to do so.

Cheney should already be serving a prison sentence, along with several others in the Bush administration.