Archives for category: AIPAC

“The Palestinian Arab leadership rejected partition as unacceptable, given the inequality in the proposed population exchange and the transfer of one-third of Palestine, including most of its best agricultural land, to recent immigrants. The Jewish leaders, Chaim Weizmann and David Ben-Gurion, persuaded the Zionist Congress to lend provisional approval to the Peel recommendations as a basis for further negotiations. In a letter to his son in October 1937, Ben-Gurion explained that partition would be a first step to “possession of the land as a whole.” The same sentiment, that acceptance of partition was a temporary measure beyond which the Palestine would be “redeemed . . in its entirety” was recorded by Ben-Gurion on other occasions, such as at a meeting of the Jewish Agency executive in June 1938, as well as by Chaim Weizmann” [1]

It was the “Peel recommendations” eventually morphed into United Nations Resolution 181(II), creating the state of Israel. Noteworthy is the Israeli founders’ disingenuous acceptance of borders when acquiring statehood.

This exercise of patent fraud on Ben Gurion & Weizmann’s part might be tempered by exam of consequent ‘questionable right’ of Israel to exist. In light of this, as previously stated by this author, the United Nations is a far from perfect entity, necessarily flawed from circumstance of birth:

“However sincere certain statesmen might have been in creating the United Nations and associated international law of the present era, flaws were inevitable in the mold at casting; the ideological contest between East and West, the naivety of non-Western, especially non-European, nation-states in matters of the Western conceived international law…” [2]

In today’s geopolitical climate, the UN possibly most resembles the post-Tito, but pre-implosion Yugoslavia, with a Security Council polarized and pulling in irreconcilable directions similar to the rotating presidency that had been a failed successor to the man who’d held mutually antagonistic nations (especially Croatia & Serbia, or Catholicism vs Orthodoxy) together with the force of his personality. As time has passed in a disintegrating social fabric across the world, leadership capable of holding a multi-national state together with leadership qualities appears increasingly rare. In the larger case of the United Nations, currently gridlocked due to competing visions of the future at the Security Council, perhaps more often than any other issue, at the nexus of this circumstance is the state of Israel.

It is combined social and cultural psychology demands (or drives) the Jewish state towards a ‘Greater Israel.’ This demand is embedded in the mythology of history where ‘Samaria’ and ‘Judea’ are, at one time or another in ancient past linked, aligned with, or integrated to the historical Kingdom of Israel, having little to do with the fact of modern Israel.

According to the Oxford:

Samaria |səˈme(ə)rēə|
1 an ancient city in central Palestine, founded in the 9th century bc as the capital of the northern Hebrew kingdom of Israel. The ancient site is situated in the modern West Bank, northwest of Nablus.
2 the region of ancient Palestine around Samaria, between Galilee in the north and Judaea in the south.

Judaea |jo͝oˈdēə, -ˈdāə|
the southern part of ancient Palestine that corresponds to the former kingdom of Judah.

This next affirms Ben Gurion and subsequently Israeli duplicity:

roman_judea-jpg-1

“The term Judea as a geographical term was revived by the Israeli government in the 20th century as part of the Israeli administrative district name Judea and Samaria Area for the territory generally referred to as the West Bank” [3]

A state does not give the names of one’s historical mythology to an area except that state intends to assert sovereignty over the same. Prior to this, Judea had last been the name of the area under Hadrian’s rule, changed after the era of Agrippa II, the last Roman approved ‘Herodian’, or ‘titular’ king of the Jews, who were NOT a sovereign people.

If there were Jews who were enslaved by, or fled Roman rule, there were many, many more who stayed in what was no longer ‘Judea’ but what became Roman ruled Palaestina, renamed by the Roman Emperor Hadrian. Where are those ancient Jewish people’s descendants today? They’re in Palestine and they’re called Palestinians. [4] The inconvenience for the modern Ashkenazi and associated ‘historic’ claim to a Jewish state is, most of these indigenous people had, with passing time, converted to Islam. Any ‘Jewish’ right, claim and/or title to a geographic state of Israel prior to the creation of the UN would have traced (and ultimately become extinguished) through the Palestinian people. In the pre-United Nations ‘customary’ international law, there is no title (sense of sovereign) survived that could be described as ‘Israeli.’ The uniqueness of Israel is, it had been created by a new incarnation of international law, that is the United Nations.

It follows, any rational inquiry concerning Israel’s right to exist must be examined in a context different to the sovereign title of those nations established prior to the United Nations’ founding charter or, the right of Israel to exist can only be explored within the framework of the UN.

Insofar as those states holding Israel is an ‘illegitimate’ state, it would not require formal relations with Israel to confer legitimacy; in fact recognition of Israel by the disputing states is implicit by the very fact of those states opposed to Israel having joined and belonging to the United Nations; where in fact Israel is a UN creation. Disputing Israel is in fact disputing the United Nations; where international law should not provide for an oxymoron of belonging to the body which had created Israel and disputing Israel’s right to exist, these are mutually exclusive proposals. You cannot belong to the one and deny the other. The actual debate should be, if the UN can confer legitimacy on a state of its own creation, can it ‘uncreate’ that state?

If such a debate were to ensue, the fraudulent aspect of Israel’s founders in relation to borders should open the conversation, followed on with analysis of subsequent behavior. Do the policies of Israel reflect the admitted fraud?

But opening this conversation at the United Nations could be a self-inflicted multiple Swords of Damocles in environment of corrupt intrigues where the interests of ‘peoples’ are suborned away by the petty arrogance of those who would presume to rule us. Israel is certainly not the only state in circumstance of abusing indigenous populace and encroaching borders while sleeping with Salafi militants. For instance, one is reminded the dreams of the Ottoman die hard. All of this is internationally influenced behavior attended by blackmail & bribes subject to possible public purview within any UN debate.

Complicating this proposed debate in already compromised environment, particularly relating to Israel, would be the frailties of the modern human psychology and attending nuclear armed Zionism, especially the irrational Zionism of an apocalyptic Christian persuasion perhaps best illustrated where behaviorism determines with simple example:

“You can’t convince a chimpanzee to give you a banana with the promise it will get 20 more bananas in chimpanzee heaven. It won’t do it. But humans will” -Yuval Noah Harari

In this case it should be noted, at the creation of the United Nations, the many joining states were binding themselves to a western standard of international law within a newly created, quasi-republican order remarkable for the granting of what amounts to plenipotentiary rule to the handful of powers making up the ‘permanent’ membership of the Security Council.

In this circumstance enforcement of United Nations resolutions require consensus relating to Israel that is actually impossible to arrive at. If the net outcome is a rogue state refusing to honor its granted borders; shielded from consequence of its aggression; in a duplicitous drive for a Greater Israel; not only allowed to perpetrate fraud as result of Security Council gridlock but in fact is protected by one or several of the member parties, the natural follow on subject to explore should be whether the United Nations is outlived its promise, and in that case, moving forward, what is to be done.

Perhaps Israeli geopolitical malfeasance is a symptom, not the disease.

Notes:

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine

[2] https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2018/10/12/a-breaking-point-in-geopolitical-torsion/

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judea

[4] https://shavei.org/palestinians-jewish-roots/

Zionists_for_Jesus - 1

^ Getty Images

Zion is for Jesus

I don’t see so much as a single Israeli in this photo, these are the Zionists of Saint Paul or so-called ‘Christians’, each and every one. Until these ‘people’ (are they actually human?) are out of power, certain criminal policies pointed to apocalyptic outcome will be sustained. Blaming everything wrong with the geopolitical cluster-f**k in the middle-east on ‘Jews’ is a classic misdirection, these are the main force, by far, empowering Bibi’s insanity. Without the pictured lobby for evil (wolves in sheep’s clothing in ascendance throughout the USA government, executive, legislative & judicial) arranging money, weapons and sustained policies better suited to the medieval superstitions of crusaders, there might be an Israel; but it wouldn’t be nearly the miscreant, necrotic Israel of the present era in ongoing violation of every UN resolution ever passed in relation to the subject of its’ misdeeds and persistent bad behavior.

“And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others” -Jesus

Right. So, this is why images like the above one are deliberately created and disseminated around the world, because these people believe in following the instruction of Jesus? I don’t think so.

Israel is perhaps best described with the metaphor of a single mother, America’s ‘lady liberty’, who never disciplined her child but only shielded him from consequence of his actions, resulting in a world class criminal.

There are 7 million American Jews (of which a significant percentage do NOT support the Zionism of a ‘Greater Israel’) versus 25 percent of American Christians, or 60 million, are Zionist, backing the criminal (annexing & other) policies of Bibi Netanyahu and his ilk. Do the math.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jewish-population-in-the-united-states-nationally

https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20140129-christian-zionism-the-new-heresy-that-undermines-middle-east-peace/

Jon Bolton’s (September 2018) presentation of the Trump administration policy towards the International Criminal Court, given in a speech to the Federalist Society, is reproduced here in full (Bolton quoted in italics), with my annotations. I don’t believe I had ever seen such open justification and promotion of criminal behavior by a USA official.

“I am here to make a major announcement on US policy toward the International Criminal Court, or ICC.

“After years of effort by self-styled “global governance” advocates, the ICC, a supranational tribunal that could supersede national sovereignties and directly prosecute individuals for alleged war crimes, was agreed to in 1998. For ICC proponents, this supranational, independent institution has always been critical to their efforts to overcome the perceived failures of nation-states, even those with strong constitutions, representative government, and the rule of law”

Funny how Bolton seems to be unaware the USA was involved in the Rome Statute at its inception; mainly to convince the court should not exercise universal jurisdiction. The other states were keen to have the USA onboard but would appear this had been a ruse all along. When universal jurisdiction had been excluded, to please the Americans, the USA lost interest in joining.

“In theory, the ICC holds perpetrators of the most egregious atrocities accountable for their crimes, provides justice to the victims, and deters future abuses. In practice, however, the court has been ineffective, unaccountable, and indeed, outright dangerous. Moreover, the largely unspoken, but always central, aim of its most vigorous supporters was to constrain the United States. The objective was not limited to targeting individual US service members, but rather America’s senior political leadership, and its relentless determination to keep our country secure”

A Bolton type mentality is incapable to grasp if the USA had not pushed its nose into the affairs of nation-states across the globe, while flexing military might in the process (the crime of aggression), populations would not have become radicalized and turned that radicalized anger on the USA. Should any nation’s political leadership be privileged with impunity? Is Bolton saying impunity is a privilege reserved to the USA and its ‘chosen’?

“The ICC was formally established in July 2002, following the entry into force of the Rome Statute. In May 2002, however, President George W Bush authorised the United States to “un-sign” the Rome Statute because it was fundamentally illegitimate. The ICC and its prosecutor had been granted potentially enormous, essentially unaccountable powers, and alongside numerous other glaring and significant flaws, the International Criminal Court constituted an assault on the constitutional rights of the American people and the sovereignty of the United States”

What a load of patent nonsense. The USA’s Constitution makes treaty law entered into by the United States the “the supreme law of the land” in which case the relevant treaty law is absolutely constitutional as regards sovereignty. The real point here should be, if the USA’s citizens are worried about individual rights conforming to USA standards, they should stay home and keep their noses clean within the context of American law. That’s why we’ve had a constitutional treaty law provision since the USA’s inception, because the entire world isn’t the USA. But Bolton and like-minded minions of USA foreign policy seem to think American standards should apply to the entire globe. It follows, American empire isn’t welcome across much of the globe and understandably so.

“In no uncertain terms, the ICC was created as a free-wheeling global organization claiming jurisdiction over individuals without their consent”

Since when had it been necessary, in any society in the world, to ask the consent of criminals to prosecute?

“According to the Rome Statute, the ICC has authority to prosecute genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and crimes of aggression. It claims “automatic jurisdiction,” meaning that it can prosecute individuals even if their own governments have not recognized, signed, or ratified the treaty”

What a worm’s slimy rationalization; if you wouldn’t like to be prosecuted by the ICC 1) behave yourself and 2) stay away from where the court’s jurisdiction is in force (like Afghanistan.)

“Thus, American soldiers, politicians, civil servants, private citizens, and even all of you sitting in the room today, are purportedly subject to the court’s prosecution should a party to the Rome Statute or the chief prosecutor suspect you of committing a crime within a state or territory that has joined the treaty”

So, what’s the problem? Don’t commit crimes, keep your soldiers at home and mind your own business, it couldn’t be more simple.

“To protect American service members from the ICC, in 2002 Congress passed the American Service-Members’ Protection Act, or ASPA, which some have branded “The Hague Invasion Act”

“This law, which enjoyed broad bipartisan support, authorizes the president to use all means necessary and appropriate, including force, to shield our service members and the armed forces of our allies from ICC prosecution. It also prohibits several forms of cooperation between the United States and the court”

The preceding two paragraphs is nothing short of an oblique declaration the USA has enacted a de facto rejection of the Geneva Conventions.

“I was honored to lead US efforts internationally to protect Americans from the court’s unacceptable overreach, starting with un-signing the Rome Statute. At President Bush’s direction, we next launched a global diplomatic campaign to protect Americans from being delivered into the ICC’s hands. We negotiated about 100 binding, bilateral agreements to prevent other countries from delivering US personnel to the ICC. It remains one of my proudest achievements”

This criminal disregard for the rule of law in international relations poses a relevant question: Were a state signatory to the ICC to act on Bolton’s, Bush era (strong-armed) agreements, would the actors be committing a crime of ‘aiding and abetting’? Methinks, yes.

“Unfortunately, we were unable to reach agreement with every single nation in the world, particularly those in the European Union, where the global governance dogma is strong. And last fall, our worst predictions about the ICC’s professed and overly broad prosecutorial powers were confirmed.

“In November of 2017, the ICC prosecutor requested authorization to investigate alleged war crimes committed by US service members and intelligence professionals during the war in Afghanistan – an investigation neither Afghanistan nor any other state party to the Rome Statute requested. Any day now, the ICC may announce the start of a formal investigation against these American patriots, who voluntarily went into harm’s way to protect our nation, our homes, and our families in the wake of the 9/11 attacks”

Two things with these preceding paragraphs. 1) The entire point of the Rome Statute is to bring prosecutions when states refuse to. A state that refuses is certainly not going to make a request. Bolton’s logic is beyond flawed, it is self-canceling. 2) the dry observation the USA’s own investigative conclusions concerning the 9/11 attacks, particularly as relates to WTC Building 7, is as flawed as, and only less far-fetched than, a proposal space weapons were responsible.

“The ICC prosecutor has requested to investigate these Americans for alleged detainee abuse, and perhaps more – an utterly unfounded, unjustifiable investigation”

This phrase in Bolton’s diatribe overlooks the fact of the John Yoo (Yoo, a Federalist Society member, may well have been in the audience) “torture memos” and the USA’s authorizing torture as a matter of policy

“Today, on the eve of September 11th, I want to deliver a clear and unambiguous message on behalf of the president of the United States. The United States will use any means necessary to protect our citizens and those of our allies from unjust prosecution by this illegitimate court.

“We will not cooperate with the ICC. We will provide no assistance to the ICC. We will not join the ICC.

“We will let the ICC die on its own. After all, for all intents and purposes, the ICC is already dead to us.

“The United States bases this policy on five principal concerns about the court, its purported authority, and its effectiveness.

“First, the International Criminal Court unacceptably threatens American sovereignty and US national security interests. The prosecutor in The Hague claims essentially unfettered discretion to investigate, charge, and prosecute individuals, regardless of whether their countries have acceded to the Rome Statute”

This first ‘principle concern’ is not only disingenuous but contains incoherent logic. There is no threat to American sovereignty except that Bolton is claiming the USA is, example given, de facto Afghanistan’s sovereign overlord in what would amount to a feudal sense of fealty. If, in actuality, the USA were present at the discretion of a de jure Afghan government, they have placed themselves under the applicable laws of Afghanistan, inclusive of the Rome Statute. Bolton doesn’t mention this but the American contingent of NATO having ‘granted’ itself immunity in Afghanistan is irrelevant to the ICC except Afghanistan were to have withdrawn for the Rome Statute.

“The court in no way derives these powers from any grant of consent by non-parties to the Rome Statute. Instead, the ICC is an unprecedented effort to vest power in a supranational body without the consent of either nation-states or the individuals over which it purports to exercise jurisdiction. It certainly has no consent whatsoever from the United States”

To reiterate a former point, Bolton cannot seem to grasp if the Americans avoid violating the Geneva Conventions and even more to the point, quit with its’ (often uninvited) military adventures abroad, there would be no controversy.

“As Americans, we fully understand that consent of the governed is a prerequisite to true legal legitimacy, and we reject such a flagrant violation of our national sovereignty”

It follows, Bolton is, in no uncertain terms, claiming the the USA’s sovereignty extends beyond the USA’s borders. Bolton’s claim is USA sovereignty extends as far as the USA can flex its’ military might. The only other way to read this is, he cannot read a map and has no inkling where the USA ends and other national jurisdictions begin.

“To make matters worse, the court’s structure is contrary to fundamental American principles, including checks and balances on authority and the separation of powers. Our founders believed that a division of authority among three separate branches of government would provide the maximum level of protection for individual liberty”

Which extra-territorial American individual liberty is that? Again, Bolton cannot seem to grasp there are other nations with entirely differing cultures, philosophies and laws, possessed of their own inherently equal sovereignty which Americans, present as alien citizens, must submit to.

“The International Criminal Court, however, melds two of these branches together: the judicial and the executive. In the ICC structure, the executive branch – the Office of the Prosecutor – is an organ of the court. The framers of our constitution considered such a melding of powers unacceptable for our own government, and we should certainly not accept it in the ICC. Other governments may choose systems which reject the separation of powers, but not the United States”

In other words, other countries systems are inferior to the USA in Bolton’s view. It should be noted here that ‘American Exceptionalism’ is synonymous to ‘American Empire’ and was a concept born twin to “Manifest Destiny” or the idea the USA is Über Alles.

“There are no adequate mechanisms to hold the court and its personnel accountable or curtail its unchecked powers when required

“ICC proponents argue that corrupt or ineffective judges can be removed by a two-thirds vote of parties to the Rome Statute and that a prosecutor can be removed by a majority vote.

“However, I ask everyone in the room today: would you consign the fate of American citizens to a committee of other nations, including Venezuela and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and entities that are not even states, like the Palestinian Authority?

“You would not. I would not. And this Administration will not”

America Über Alles. As a USA citizen with a reasonable grasp of how this nation, the USA, had been philosophically founded, Bolton’s characterizations can only be described as grotesque caricature.

“The ICC’s Assembly of States Parties cannot supervise the court any more than the United Nations General Assembly can supervise the UN bureaucracy.

“Recent allegations of mismanagement and corruption among ICC personnel make this perfectly clear. The first prosecutor elected by the Assembly of States Parties attempted to protect a high-ranking government official from prosecution, assisted a businessman with links to violations in Libya, and shared confidential court documents with Angelina Jolie.

“In short, the International Criminal Court unacceptably concentrates power in the hands of an unchecked executive, who is accountable to no one. It claims authority separate from and above the constitution of the United States”

Let’s juxtapose the corruption and accountability of the ICC to the corruption and accountability of the Pentagon. The result would look like the kid who stole ten cents candy compared to the Keating Five & fleecing thousands of investors for billions of dollars in the saving & loan scandal.

“It is antithetical to our nation’s ideals. Indeed, this organization is the founders’ worst nightmare come to life: an elegant office building in a faraway country that determines the guilt or innocence of American citizens”

No, the founders’ worst nightmare was stated by Benjamin Franklin when he answered the crowd’s demand to know what form of government would be forthcoming from the American Constitutional Convention with “A republic. If you can keep it.” John Bolton is evidence prima facie we couldn’t keep our republic, it has been handed to neo-corporate-fascism.

“Second, the International Criminal Court claims jurisdiction over crimes that have disputed and ambiguous definitions, exacerbating the court’s unfettered powers.

“The definitions of crimes, especially crimes of aggression, are vague and subject to wide-ranging interpretation by the ICC. Had the ICC existed during the Second World War, America’s enemies would no doubt be eager to find the United States and its allies culpable for war crimes for the bombing campaigns over Germany and Japan”

Well, firebombing civilian areas for sake of ‘demoralizing’ the enemy is a war crime by definition. Firebombing of Dresden, famously written about by Kurt Vonnegut in his ‘Slaughterhouse Five” is widely regarded as a war crime, even among USA academics, and then there’s “Operation Meetinghouse, which was conducted on the night of 9–10 March 1945, is regarded as the single most destructive bombing raid in human history. 16 square miles (41 km2) of central Tokyo were destroyed, leaving an estimated 100,000 civilians dead and over 1 million homeless.”

“The “crime of aggression” could become a pretext for politically motivated investigations. Was the mission of US Navy SEALs that killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan a crime of aggression? What about the US and coalition strikes in Syria to protect innocent children from chemical weapons? How about US military exercises with allies and partners around the world? Or Israel’s actions to defend itself on countless occasions?”

The Osama raid, from a juridical point of view, would be a targeted assassination. The Syria strikes might qualify, particularly in case of false flag chemical attacks sponsored by NATO associated actors but Bolton could never admit he knows this. The military exercises angle is patently cute, that is until a military exercise were to be cover for going live with surprise attack (an expressed concern of North Korea.) As for Israel, we can let an Israeli citizen speak to Bolton’s nonsense:

“For refugees, camps were shelters for the reconstruction of personal and social life, but were also seen as sites of great political significance, the material testimony of what was destroyed and ‘all that remains’ of more than four hundred cities, towns and villages forcefully cleansed throughout Palestine in the Nakba of 1947-9. This is the reason refugees sometimes refer to the destruction of camps as ‘the destruction of destruction.’ The camp is not a home, it is a temporary arrangement, and its destruction is but the last iteration in an ongoing process of destruction.

“This rhetoric of double negation – the negation of negation – tallies well with what Saree Makdisi, talking about the Israeli refusal to acknowledge the Nakba, has termed ‘the denial of denial’, which is, he says, ‘a form of foreclosure that produces the inability – the absolutely honest, sincere incapacity – to acknowledge that denial and erasure have themselves been erased in turn and purged from consciousness.’ What has been denied is continuously repeated: Israel keeps on inflicting destruction on refugees and keeps on denying that a wrong has been done” –Eyal Weizman: ‘The Least Of All Possible Evils’ (Humanitarian Violence From Arendt To Gaza)

“In the years ahead, the court is likely only to further expand its jurisdiction to prosecute ambiguously defined crimes. In fact, a side event at the Assembly of States Parties recently included a panel discussion on the possibility of adding “ecocide”, environmental and climate-related crimes, to the list of offenses within the court’s jurisdiction.

“And here we come directly to the unspoken but powerful agenda of the ICC’s supporters: the hope that its essentially political nature, in defining crimes such as “aggression,” will intimidate US decision-makers and others in democratic societies.

“As we know, the ICC already claims authority over crimes committed in States Parties, even if the accused are not from nations that have acquiesced to the Rome Statute.

“The next obvious step is to claim complete, universal jurisdiction: the ability to prosecute anyone, anywhere for vague crimes identified by The Hague’s bureaucrats”

“ecocide” is a specialty of the audience Bolton is pitching his aggression to, the Federalist Society is where you’ll find USA based multinational minerals extraction stockholders rubbing shoulders with the military-industrial complex stockholders who concurrently become richer via strong-arm robberies of weaker nations around the world for the extraction people. Bolton is singing to a choir of major sociopath personalities whose wealth (and growing it) is more important to the lot of them than any crime committed in process of pursuing that wealth. Small wonder people with a conscience would hold aside conversations on the future of justice in an environmental context.

“Third, the International Criminal Court fails in its fundamental objective to deter and punish atrocity crimes. Since its 2002 inception, the court has spent over $1.5bn while attaining only eight convictions.

“This dismal record is hardly a deterrent to dictators and despots determined to commit horrific atrocities. In fact, despite ongoing ICC investigations, atrocities continue to occur in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Sudan, Libya, Syria, and many other nations.

“The hard men of history are not deterred by fantasies of international law such as the ICC. The idea that faraway bureaucrats and robed judges would strike fear into the hearts of the likes of Saddam Hussein, Hitler, Stalin, and Gaddafi is preposterous, even cruel. Time and again, history has proven that the only deterrent to evil and atrocity is what Franklin Roosevelt once called “the righteous might” of the United States and its allies – a power that, perversely, could be threatened by the ICC’s vague definition of aggression crimes”

To begin, if the USA were not, as a matter of policy, blocking the court at every opportunity (one presumes the USA clandestine services could be involved, with a string of dead witnesses and the relevant-impudent war criminal running a quasi-state hosting Camp Bondsteel, example given), rather jointly pursuing justice, the success rate should have been considerably stronger. Then we have to notice the USA’s clandestine services paramilitary and/or military fingers have been involved with stirring the pot in “Congo, Sudan, Libya, Syria and many other nations”, and in the immediate preceding paragraph you could substitute the names George, Condoleezza, Barack, and Donald and the description ‘cruel’ is a good fit.

“Thus we see paradoxically that the dangers of the International Criminal Court stem from both its potential strength and its manifest weakness”

I would prefer to think of the court’s future as one of ‘manifest strength.’

“Fourth, the International Criminal Court is superfluous, given that domestic US judicial systems already hold American citizens to the highest legal and ethical standards. US service members in the field must operate fully in accordance with the law of armed conflict. When violations of law do occur, the United States takes appropriate and swift action to hold perpetrators accountable. We are a democratic nation with the most robust system of investigation, accountability, and transparency in the world. We believe in the rule of law, and we uphold it. We don’t need the ICC to tell us our duty or second-guess our decisions”

Huh. I can only wonder what that has to do with the USA aggressively, proactively, protecting it’s criminals tied to the renditions (kidnapping for delivery to torture) program from prosecution; unpunished at home with arrest warrants in Germany and Italy outstanding.

“ICC proponents argue that robust domestic judicial systems are fully consistent with the court because of the so-called complementarity principle. According to its supporters, the ICC functions only as a “court of last resort”. If nations have taken appropriate steps to prosecute perpetrators of crimes, the ICC will take no further action”

Right, see preceding. If the USA had properly prosecuted its’ criminals, there would be no action taken by the ICC. But if criminality is your fundamental nature, you could easily be a Federalist Society member in agreement with John Bolton.

“And yet, there is little precedent for the ICC to determine how to apply the complementarity principle. How is the ICC prosecutor to judge when this principle has been met? Under what circumstances will the ICC be satisfied? How much sensitive documentation would the ever-toiling bureaucrats in The Hague demand from a sovereign government? And, who has the last word? If it’s the ICC, the United States would manifestly be subordinated to the court”

Not if the USA would keep its nose clean per Geneva Conventions and keep its’ nasty people out of other nations business, because there’d be no case to be subordinated to.

“If the ICC prosecutor were to take the complementarity principle seriously, the court would never pursue an investigation against American citizens, because we know that the US judicial system is more vigorous, more fair, and more effective than the ICC. The ICC prosecutor’s November 2017 request, of course, proves that this notion, and thus the principle of complementarity is completely farcical. The ICC prosecutor will pursue what investigations it chooses to pursue, based upon its own political motives, and without any serious application of the complementarity principle”

“more vigorous, more fair and more effective” is a rank lie in a nation where non-violent offenders are incarcerated in for profit prisons with political (lobbyists & $$$) incentive to keep them there and, where bankers who turned families out on the street via fraudulent mechanisms walk free and constitutional protections seem to entirely depend on how much money you have, for instance the indigent whose court appointed attorney slept through his murder trial and the appellate court could find no problem with that… and what about a sitting Supreme Court justice (then appellate court judge) having let an innocent man rot an extra 8 years in prison because of a procedural flaw where the evidence exonerating him wasn’t brought to the court’s attention within the rules deadline, the USA appears to have buried that case with ‘search engine optimization.’

“Fifth, the International Criminal Court’s authority has been sharply criticized and rejected by most of the world. Today, more than 70 nations, representing two-thirds of the world’s population, and over 70 percent of the world’s armed forces, are not members of the ICC”

Bolton’s shamelessness is beyond adequate description. One nation, China, is at the core of his statistic. Beyond this, more than 120 nations are signed on to the Rome Statute.

“Several African nations have recently withdrawn or threatened to withdraw their membership, citing the disproportionate number of arrest warrants against Africans. To them, the ICC is just the latest European neocolonial enterprise to infringe upon their sovereign rights”

This criticism is uttered by the most crass hypocrite to ever occupy the role of National Security Advisor for the USA. How’s that? One acronym that describes neocolonialism in Africa on steroids: The Pentagon’s AFRICOM.

“Israel too has sharply criticized the ICC. While the court welcomes the membership of the so-called “State of Palestine”, it has threatened Israel – a liberal, democratic nation – with investigation into its actions to defend citizens from terrorist attacks in the West Bank and Gaza. There has also been a suggestion that the ICC will investigate Israeli construction of housing projects on the West Bank”

Simply stated, “Yinon Plan” should be adequate rebuttal.

“The United States will always stand with our friend and ally, Israel. And today, reflecting congressional concerns with Palestinian attempts to prompt an ICC investigation of Israel, the State Department will announce the closure of the Palestine Liberation Organization office here in Washington, DC”

Well, this recalls the time HAMAS won the election in Gaza and the USA reacted by refusing to recognize the outcome. Palestinians get the shaft coming and going in their dealings with the USA-Israel axis (Yinon plan.)

“As President [Ronald] Reagan recognized in this context, the executive has “the right to decide the kind of foreign relations, if any, the United States will maintain”, and the Trump administration will not keep the office open when the Palestinians refuse to take steps to start direct and meaningful negotiations with Israel. The United States supports a direct and robust peace process, and we will not allow the ICC, or any other organization, to constrain Israel’s right to self-defense”

Right, that why caches of Israeli weapons were discovered to have been in the possession of Islamic State in Syria, ‘self-defense.’ Maybe the ICC will have a look into that at some point (someone certainly should.)

“In sum, an international court so deeply divisive and so deeply flawed can have no legitimate claim to jurisdiction over the citizens of sovereign nations that have rejected its authority.

“Americans can rest assured that the United States will not provide any form of legitimacy or support to this body. We will not cooperate, engage, fund, or assist the ICC in any way. This president will not allow American citizens to be prosecuted by foreign bureaucrats, and he will not allow other nations to dictate our means of self-defense.

“We take this position not because we oppose justice for victims of atrocities, but because we believe that perpetrators should face legitimate, effective, and accountable prosecution for their crimes, by sovereign national governments”

Again, lost on Bolton is the fact the ICC only prosecutes when national governments refuse to.

“In April of 2016, it was right here, at the Mayflower Hotel, that President Trump gave his first major foreign policy address during his campaign. At that time, candidate Trump promised he would “always put the interests of the American people and American security above all else””

“Today, it is fitting that we reassert this fundamental promise within these walls. This afternoon, we also make a new pledge to the American people.

“If the court comes after us, Israel or other US allies, we will not sit quietly. We will take the following steps, among others, in accordance with the American Servicemembers’ Protection Act and our other legal authorities:

“We will negotiate even more binding, bilateral agreements to prohibit nations from surrendering US persons to the ICC. And we will ensure that those we have already entered are honored by our counterpart governments.

“We will respond against the ICC and its personnel to the extent permitted by US law. We will ban its judges and prosecutors from entering the United States. We will sanction their funds in the US financial system, and we will prosecute them in the US criminal system. We will do the same for any company or state that assists an ICC investigation of Americans.

“We will take note if any countries cooperate with ICC investigations of the United States and its allies, and we will remember that cooperation when setting US foreign assistance, military assistance, and intelligence sharing levels.

“We will consider taking steps in the UN Security Council to constrain the court’s sweeping powers, including ensuring that the ICC does not exercise jurisdiction over Americans and the nationals of our allies that have not ratified the Rome Statute.

“This administration will fight back to protect American constitutionalism, our sovereignty, and our citizens. No committee of foreign nations will tell us how to govern ourselves and defend our freedom. We will stand up for the US constitution abroad, just as we do at home. And, as always, in every decision we make, we will put the interests of the American people first”

In short, in Bolton’s view of the world, the criminality of American empire is über alles, having little or nothing to do with the several foreign organs of the Unites States keeping a clean nose abroad, let alone staying home and minding its own business.

A former Special Forces Sergeant of Operations and Intelligence, Ronald Thomas West is a retired investigator (living in exile) whose work focus had been anti-corruption. Ronald is published in International Law as a layman (The Mueller-Wilson Report, co-authored with Dr Mark D Cole) and has been adjunct professor of American Constitutional Law at Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany (for English credit, summer semester 2008.) Ronald’s formal educational background (no degree) is social psychology. His therapeutic device is satire.

Contact: penucquemspeaks@googlemail.com

Author’s Preface

My Christian, Muslim and Jewish readers, when perusing this series, should bear in mind Jesus is a much abused historical figure, bearing a name that has been used for cynical manipulations since the era of the Crusades. There is a world of difference between the authentic Jesus and the Jesus put forward by radical Christian Zionists who would cynically see the Christians of Syria made extinct (along with Alawites and Druze) by machinations that enrich the American military-industrial complex in tandem with the Israeli radical right wing and Bibi Netanyahu’s pursuit of the Yinon Plan for a Greater Israel. If one gave it one minute’s thought, it raises a question: why are there Christians on both sides of every issue?

This series explores the behaviors of faux Christians and their dishonest allies, that is if authentic Christians follow the Sermon on the Mount. The two cannot be conflated; you cannot stamp out Syria’s Christians in the name of Jesus except to practice oxymoron or hypocrisy. But that would be precisely the outcome if the USA & Israel’s employ of Salafi-Takfiri to overthrow Assad were to prevail. Authentic Christians should be deeply disturbed at the following narrative little different to Jews practicing Tikkun Olam should be deeply disturbed at Netanyahu’s role in the same. No doubt the authentic practicing Sufi who reads here will know precisely what I am speaking of as well, as there are sincere parties in the 1/2 of each group determined to be ‘the righteous of God.’

The Plot To Capture The White House Part 1 treason at the apex

The Plot To Capture The White House Part 2 treason at the apex

The Plot To Capture The White House Part 3 treason at the apex

Additional thoughts: Historically (since JFK’s assassination) it had been more or less CIA neoliberal elements had controlled the White House; best reflected in the nominally ‘conservative’ Christian-Republican George H.W. Bush, whose criminal behaviors were influenced by his (and the CIA’s) Ivy League roots. Ironically, it was the culturally West Texan George W. Bush saw the pendulum begin to swing towards a more radical breed, or hard-core evangelical members of the Doug Coe cult, aligned with the Pentagon, ascend towards practical control of the White House, presently reflected in Mike Pence, Mike Pompeo, Dan Coats, Jeff Sessions, Betsy DeVoss (sister of Eric Prince), and The Generals.

The third historical player (other than CIA & Pentagon) in this tug-of-war would be MOSSAD. All of these cooperate in some areas, and contest in other areas of policy. Each of these vie to control the White House. But just now, there is a fourth agency in the play, that is the personality of Donald Trump, conducive to manipulations but not control. The present era is likely the first era, since Allen Dulles had been Director, the CIA hasn’t had the upper-hand. Interesting times!

Moreover, whether ‘God’s Chosen’ in the original Zionist form, or the ‘new chosen’ in the radical Christian Zionist iteration of übermensch, these present Zionist ‘partners’ fully intend that each will attempt to annihilate the other before all is said and done. There’s not much room for the rest of us (other than as collateral damage) in their plans.

Afterthought would be; the more in the remote past the National Security Act of 1947 had become embedded in the USA’s institutions of governance, the more in the remote past de jure (factual) democratic and constitutional principles had been in play. ‘Liberal democracy’ is just an existential threat (to all of us) and cosmic joke at this point in time.

Footnote: Insofar as the Vatican’s fascist fingers in the intelligence agencies’ pie, the curious won’t be disappointed (or will be terribly disappointed depending on your  degree of cynicism) with a read of this (external link) 1983 investigative history-report that remains relevant today: ‘Their Will Be Done.’ A more recent assessment HERE.

*

A former Special Forces Sergeant of Operations and Intelligence, Ronald Thomas West is a retired investigator (living in exile) whose work focus had been anti-corruption. Ronald is published in International Law as a layman (The Mueller-Wilson Report, co-authored with Dr Mark D Cole) and has been adjunct professor of American Constitutional Law at Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany (for English credit, summer semester 2008.) Ronald’s formal educational background (no degree) is social psychology. His therapeutic device is satire.

Contact: penucquemspeaks@googlemail.com

“Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you” -Chuck Schumer

Well, Schumer is likely correct in the preceding but there’s a very questionable follow-on…

“Whether you are a super liberal Democrat or a very conservative Republican, you should be against dismantling the intelligence community” -Chuck Schumer

I’m not aware Trump has called for ‘dismantling’ the intelligence community per se but it should be mentioned in the context of Schumer warning everyone ‘don’t go there’, there have been numerous, I would characterize as responsible, calls over the years to dismantle the operations sector of the CIA. But maybe Schumer’s protective scare-mongering over the matter of our notoriously corrupt intelligence agencies goes to a deeper matter; the matter of the most powerful intelligence agency operating in the USA is MOSSAD, an entity which has penetrated every aspect of American governance. And then recall we are dealing with Zionists, whether the hyper-conservative cult-Christians dealt with in Part 1 of this series or the ‘super liberal’ Chuck Schumer and his ilk. There is one public forum in this world and likely only one, where you would discover a man whose cult beliefs conflate Jesus’ teachings with Hitler’s behavior and expect that a good thing, that is Mike Pence, rubbing shoulders and sharing a podium with a super liberal Democrat along the lines of Chuck Schumer: that venue is AIPAC.  AIPAC is one of MOSSAD’s favorite playgrounds and it’s not the first time [1] Jewish Zionists have consorted with Nazis (important note: all Jews are not practicing Zionists, not by a long shot, just as a majority of Christians are not political Zionists, despite theological demand in certain sects of both religions that Zionism is paramount.)

Now, let’s look at a thumbnail sketch of past possibilities versus actual outcome and we can reasonably surmise which intelligence agency had come out on top (to now) in the most recent USA election cycle. To begin, we examine Bernie Sander’s role as ‘sheepdog’ [2].

“The sheepdog’s job is to divert the energy and enthusiasm of activists a year, a year and a half out from a November election away from building an alternative to the Democratic party, and into his doomed effort. When the sheepdog inevitably folds in the late spring or early summer before a November election, there’s no time remaining to win ballot access for alternative parties or candidates, no time to raise money or organize any effective challenge to the two capitalist parties.

“At that point, with all the alternatives foreclosed, the narrative shifts to the familiar “lesser of two evils.” Every sheepdog candidate surrenders the shreds of his credibility to the Democratic nominee in time for the November election. This is how the Bernie Sanders show ends, as the left-leaning warm-up act for Hillary Clinton” –Bruce Dixon, May 2015

Why the sheepdog in the larger, geopolitical picture? The only real threat to Israel’s miscreant behaviors lies outside of the normal body politic or, a third party success, with the American voter freed from the constraints of the Democrat-Republican ‘duopoly’ in the USA. The Democrats habit is the ‘sheepdog’, the Republican habit in the 2000s had been computerized vote fraud in the primaries, it is a known fact that’s how Ron Paul had been disposed of in most primaries over more than one election cycle and is how George W Bush was elected in 2000 (with a Supreme Court decision pushing him over the top) and reelected in 2004; but this would have been too obviously dangerous to attempt in 2008, 2012 & 2016 general elections and wasn’t applied in the 2016 primaries likely for the reason is this phenomena had become closely monitored by two many parties since the documentary Hacking Democracy [3]. Both of these methods, when putting evangelical Zionists into office as means to the stated end, that  is working towards implementing the Yinon Plan, would be supported by MOSSAD. It must have been a great temptation for a Pentagon that could not stomach Hillary in the 2016 cycle in a system where it is allies of the Department of Defense counts your vote [4].

“E-voting has obvious downsides—no ability to check recorded votes, no ability to perform meaningful recounts and susceptibility to electronic voting fraud. Nonetheless, the 2002 Help America Vote Act (HAVA) mandates that by January 1 states submit plans to make the switch in time for the 2006 elections.

“More troubling, the backers of the act and the manufactures of e-voting machines are a rat’s nest of conflicts that includes Northrop-Grumman, Lockheed-Martin, Electronic Data Systems (EDS) and Accenture. Why are major defense contractors like Northrop-Grumman and Lockheed-Martin mucking about in the American electoral system? And who are Accenture and EDS?”

More likely than not, when computerized voter fraud is too dangerous to employ at the national (general) election level, it is nevertheless frequently employed at the state level with an eye to pushing the national agenda in certain direction [5].

Back to the ‘sheepdogging’ model: Sanders sandbagging the progressive electorate for the Democrats in 2016 is a particularly interesting case, relevant to today’s subject. There was a tremendous drive that was anti-Clinton in the liberal progressive movement organized behind Sanders. This unnerved the Clinton people within the DNC who began working to sabotage Sanders lest he morph from sheepdog to unintended nominee. This is when things get interesting with the DNC mails leak promoted in Western corporate media as a so-called ‘hack.’

No one has argued the released mails detailing the DNC plot to sabotage Sanders were not authentic. But rather than employ effort to call out and to disqualify Clinton, Sanders kept his head down, endorsed Hillary and effectively sent enough of his base off to elect Trump [6].

Sanders_vote - 1

Did Sander’s people challenge ‘the Russians did it’ propaganda line, demand the DNC servers be examined by forensic specialists and investigate Crowdstrike? No. They sat back and said nothing as the FBI folded the tent concerning the entire business of investigating the DNC (didn’t seize the server that was supposedly hacked) and what’s more is, Sanders has joined the chorus of ‘Putin is the 21st Century’s geopolitical Vlad the Impaler’ [7]. As well we have:

“The DNC had several meetings with representatives of the FBI’s Cyber Division and its Washington (D.C.) Field Office, the Department of Justice’s National Security Division, and U.S. Attorney’s Offices, and it responded to a variety of requests for cooperation, but the FBI never requested access to the DNC’s computer servers,” DNC deputy communications director Eric Walker told BuzzFeed in an email.

“According to one intelligence official who spoke to the publication, no U.S. intelligence agency has performed its own forensics analysis on the hacked servers.

“Instead, the official said, the bureau and other agencies have relied on analysis done by the third-party security firm CrowdStrike, which investigated the breach for the DNC. [8]

Looking a bit deeper, a very relevant question is posed:

“Is giving misleading or false information to 17 US Intelligence Agencies a crime? If it’s done by a cyber security industry leader like Crowdstrike should that be investigated?” [9]

In actuality we know it was the assassinated Seth Rich took the DNC mails with a thumbdrive [10]. More than that, we know the DNC mails that had damaged Clinton together with Sanders sheepdog act were released by Wikileaks whose fingerprints are found all over [11] the so-called ‘Arab Spring’ that has thrown the Middle-east into turmoil, breaking up nations and generally following geopolitical footprints that point to a gradual implementation of the Yinon Plan for a ‘Greater Israel.’ In this midst of this, Bernie Sanders doesn’t want you to know that he was a big piece of the electoral puzzle that fell together in favor of Trump. Why? Why is ‘anti-war’ Sanders on ‘the Russians did it’ path (pointed towards war) when in fact there is entirely too much evidence to the contrary available to his people to credibly make that case, particularly in regards to the DNC mails? Why did Sanders deliberately fold his hand in favor of Trump? Meanwhile Sanders supports the absolutely corrupt script detailed in Part 2 of this series…

“Democrats should wait for special counsel Robert Mueller to complete his investigation against the president before seeking impeachment, Sanders said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” He was referring to a Democrat-led resolution to impeach Trump that died on the House floor Friday.

“I think Mr. Mueller is doing a very good job on his investigation,” Sanders said. “If Mueller brings forth the clear evidence that there was collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians, I think you have grounds for impeachment” [12]

…even as Trump implores his treasonous Attorney General Jeff Sessions to do something…

““Department of Justice will not be improperly influenced by political considerations.” Jeff, this is GREAT, what everyone wants, so look into all of the corruption on the “other side” including deleted Emails, Comey lies & leaks, Mueller conflicts, McCabe, Strzok, Page, Ohr……” [13]

&

“Ex-NSA contractor to spend 63 months in jail over “classified” information. Gee, this is “small potatoes” compared to what Hillary Clinton did! So unfair Jeff, Double Standard” [14]

…that will not be done. Trump doesn’t get that Jeff Sessions is a Mike Pence fraternal brother (Coe cult radical Christian Zionist) ‘Never Trump’ personality who purposely allows this charade to go forward in a process supported by Sanders. At this point Trump is expendable to the Israelis, having moved the American embassy to Jerusalem and torn up the Iran agreement, all that is left to do is get an American war with Iran going, to push Netanyahu’s support for Yinon forward, and the chances of that go up with an American President in deep trouble. How odd it would seem to the uninitiated but clear eyed observer, were one to perceive Bernie Sanders ultimately responsible for a President in hard hitting war with Iran and ayatollahs showing no inclination whatsoever to ‘make a deal.’

“Oded Yinon … 1982 paper for Kivunim (Directions) entitled “A Strategy for Israel in the 1980s”, is often used as a reference point for evidence of an Israeli aim to balkanise the surrounding Arab and Muslim world into ethnic and sectarian mini-states” [15]

It follows, Vladimir Putin, the man standing in the way of Syria’s breakup and working to keep the Iran agreement intact and avert a war, must be demonized to realize Bibi Netanyahu’s goals. In fact, Israel’s intelligence services focus has historically prioritized Russia, first, and the USA second [16]. Relevant to this, I had begun this series with an Alastair Crooke quote from his excellent essay ‘The Metaphysics of our Present Global Anguish’ where he details the failures of secularism resulting in pushing people away from enlightenment inspired thinking and towards renewed focus on national religion, national patriotism and national ethnic identity rooted in diverse ancient memories of origin, all things despised by neoliberal globalists. Here is a bit more complete quote:

“500 years ago, the Enlightenment crushed the brief impulse from the Ancient world in Europe, known as the Renaissance. Now the shoe is on the other foot, and it is the world of today’s élites which is imploding. What had been imagined as defeated, beyond recovery, is cautiously arising out from our crumbled ruins. The wheel of time turns, and comes around, again. It may all fare badly – the mode of linear one-track thinking implanted in the West does have an inbuilt propensity towards totalitarianism. We shall see” –Alastair Crooke [17]

The paradox of Crooke’s essay in relation to this series is, at the heart of this circumstance, at this stage of the game it is difficult to distinguish between the neoliberal Zionist and the authentic Nazi; where on either party’s part the actual ‘identity’ is behind a mask. But if you were the MOSSAD people manipulating or instructing Bernie Sanders (not to speak of Jared Kushner!), the reader never guessing Sanders’ present program perfectly merges with the treason of faux followers of Jesus at the Pentagon, would be part and parcel of the intelligence agency plan.

*

A former Special Forces Sergeant of Operations and Intelligence, Ronald Thomas West is a retired investigator (living in exile) whose work focus had been anti-corruption. Ronald is published in International Law as a layman (The Mueller-Wilson Report, co-authored with Dr Mark D Cole) and has been adjunct professor of American Constitutional Law at Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany (for English credit, summer semester 2008.) Ronald’s formal educational background (no degree) is social psychology. His therapeutic device is satire.

Contact: penucquemspeaks@googlemail.com

2018 Summer Notes

“Yahoo is now part of Oath…

“By choosing “I accept” below, you agree to Oath’s new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy…

“This includes: analyzing content and information when you use our services (including emails, instant messages, posts, photos, attachments, and other communications)…

Yep, folks, if you have a Yahoo mail account, the actual ‘oath’ appears to be a promise they are allowed to read your mails with impunity. I didn’t care to spend a lot of time on this but you also appear to give up your right to sue (including class action waiver, indicating real worry about the legality) and accept ‘arbitration’ if, for instance, some ‘oath’ employee(s) were to, let’s say, steal your girlfriend’s nude photos and hand them over to some ‘dark web’ virtual masturbation chat room populated with gang rapists (or whatever.) Oh, and then there’s the ever-present government interest in accessing anyone’s mail…

*

The Balkans attracts spies like poop attracts flies:

http://www.minareport.com/2018/08/13/montenegro-accuses-ex-cia-officer-of-participating-in-attempted-coup/

*

Facile Haspel‘s torture memos released, now it is confirmed, the USA’s CIA is run by a documented war criminal. The joke line in the story?

“Blanton says the release of the Haspel cables “shows the power of the Freedom of Information Act to bring accountability even to the highest levels of the CIA””

https://www.pri.org/stories/2018-08-10/cia-director-gina-haspels-memos-detailing-torture-declassified

Of course there will be no accountability, zero, zip, nada.

*

North Korea deal unraveling on Trump, no surprises here:

http://globalintelhub.com/north-korea-us-summit-agreement-unravelling/

*

On ‘the Russians did it’ (but actually the Israelis did it)’ front, Julian Assange is deservedly rotting in what amounts to (at this point) Ecuadorian solitary confinement. The incredible irony goes like this: The USA’s intelligence information operations claim Assange was a conduit for Russian hackers release of the DNC mails, immensely damaging Hillary’s chances (however deservedly so.) Recalling former CIA clandestine services officer Robert Steele stating “Assange has MOSSAD connections”, who actually benefited from Trump becoming president? Clearly the Israelis. No one else had been willing to move the USA embassy to Jerusalem on top of tearing up the Iran agreement so despised by Netanyahu. Meanwhile, when otherwise astute observers like Vanessa Beeley, Caitlin Johnstone and Raúl Ilargi Meijer cry over Assange’s confinement, I just scratch my head in wonder; how is it these people miss Wikileaks had been key in cooperating with the intelligence services that had set the so-called “Arab Spring” in motion, resulting in (among other things) the Syrian civil war? Oops. Nevertheless, this following is worth a read, even if it’s only about half right, at least the article manages to competently poke holes in ‘the Russians did it’ propaganda, even if the author can’t wrap his head around it’s more than likely (almost certainly) it was the Israel’s MOSSAD actually stole the DNC mails with a thumb drive via (the promptly assassinated) Seth Rich:

https://www.theautomaticearth.com/2018/07/julian-assange-and-the-dying-of-the-light/

Added perspective HERE & HERE

*

Speaking of Russians and Israelis, how about Russia saving Israel from Bibi Netanyahu (who needs saved from himself.) Assessment by Ft Russ News Joaquin Flores is quite insightful and interesting:

https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/08/israels-strategic-collapse-how-putin-sandbagged-netanyahu/

*

Meanwhile, my readers of Jewish persuasion might find the photo of a Bibi Netanyahu government minister posing with a top Ukrainian Azov Battalion Nazi interesting…

http://novaresistencia.org/2018/08/09/na-ucrania-batalhao-azov-recebe-armamentos-de-israel/

…relevant to Ron Unz at American Pravda authoring an essay on the history of Zionist cooperation with Nazis, which provides a larger context to the photo:

http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-jews-and-nazis/

*

“The Problem With Alex Jones” is the subject of an interesting take published at zerohedge and poses the question of why Jones had been allowed to live, let alone go on with his rants to now (they do raise the possibility Jones could be a useful idiot)…

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-08-10/problem-alex-jones

Well, Jones probably went too far and got himself kicked off youtube, facebook and twitter for calling out Robert Mueller as a pedophile:

https://www.newsweek.com/alex-jones-threatens-shoot-pedophile-robert-mueller-accuses-zuckerberg-1038500

…but my take has been for a long time it’s the useful idiot scenario, Jones does a great job of discrediting a lot of valid stories and facts by associating with David Icke and lizard DNA, example given, that’s where the moron had long served the shadow government’s interest. When Alex Jones takes a story and runs with it, it’s like the story has been consigned to nutjobville, not much worry many people looking for alternative to mainstream will buy in what’s presented at the ranting lunatic’s fringe media, not to mention the obvious: why didn’t Jones go after Mueller with Mueller’s sordid history of corruption? That’d have maybe gotten him killed…

https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2018/02/07/bob-manson-charlie-mueller/

*

The bonus link; a long suppressed book discovered where it can be read online:

https://www.wanttoknow.info/plottoseizethewhitehouse

The Plot to Seize the White House. Think it hadn’t been attempted already? By now, people should understand, with time, subterfuge and subsequent attempt, it has actually happened, perhaps subject of my next (end of Summer) post.

*

A former Special Forces Sergeant of Operations and Intelligence, Ronald Thomas West is a retired investigator (living in exile) whose work focus had been anti-corruption. Ronald is published in International Law as a layman (The Mueller-Wilson Report, co-authored with Dr Mark D Cole) and has been adjunct professor of American Constitutional Law at Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany (for English credit, summer semester 2008.) Ronald’s formal educational background (no degree) is social psychology. His therapeutic device is satire.

Contact: penucquemspeaks@googlemail.com

 

 

Why recent moves promoting Mike Pompeo to head up Department of State, and Gina Haspel taking over at CIA, point to the generals consolidating power for a man in the shadow of Donald Trump, Mike Pence. These promotions are element of contest between vying factions where the generals are winning. We begin with the promotion of torturer Haspel at CIA, to arrive at understanding of where this is presently pointed in a convoluted series of contested maneuvers from behind the curtain. First, some information warfare background.

A good analogy for a ‘limited hangout’ is a tax cheat. Information is the wealth one hides, in the ‘limited hangout context’ of declaring ‘yeah, I have wealth’ for the fact there is no denying the obvious but a great deal of this wealth is deliberately kept concealed. The main difference between the Central Intelligence Agency and the tax cheat is, if you’re Gina Haspel hiding a wealth of incriminating information, you’ll enjoy ‘sovereign immunity’ from disclosure of that wealth of criminality in the so-called ‘justice’ system; whereas if you’re Paul Manafort who’d laundered income to conceal it and then been dumb enough to invite scrutiny by becoming a high profile personality associated with Trump, there is no legal mechanism to save your butt short of a presidential pardon, meanwhile yourself & concealed wealth can be ‘hung out to dry.’

Building on the tax cheat analogy per the American neoliberal democracy, little different to the income of the individual or corporation must be declared to the Income Revenue Service, the acts of our institutions must be declared to the citizen via congressional oversight; but we should know our ‘public servants’ have a history of cheating.

Example given, when it was Dick Cheney concealing his Central Intelligence Agency run murder program (hit squads) with instruction to CIA not to inform Congress, and Obama’s “Look forward, not back” excusing Cheney’s extra-judicial murder program and much more (when considering the related renditions program), from investigative scrutiny and prosecution. Cheney and Obama are major corporate ‘tax cheats’ in a quid pro quo relationship; we know multiple millions (billions?) were expended pursuing grossly criminal acts by the intelligence agencies but the taxpayer footing the bill is kept in the dark except in the case of a ‘limited hangout’ divulging ‘just enough’ information to satisfy some Orwellian ‘new speak’ sense of ‘accountability’ (but certainly not justice.) Such a ‘limited hangout’ is the Feinstein ‘torture report.’

What the Feinstein Report Doesn’t Tell Us

The 1st thing is, how many actual renditions took place. Recalling certain ‘allied’ intelligence agencies are looking after #1, there is a ‘Sword of Damocles’ hanging over the CIA renditions report in the form of MOSSAD ‘assets’ Reprieve (a British ‘human rights’ NGO) and The Guardian. We’ll come back to this aspect, but first:

To now, Reprieve (in a project endorsed by The Guardian) has identified 11,000 flights by known CIA renditions aircraft. How many of those flights were to ‘outsourced’ torture? (sites other than CIA run ‘black sites’.) Related to this, Obama’s CIA Director John Brennan had been up to his armpits in the Bush torture program:

MARGARET WARNER: “So is it — are you saying both in two ways — both in getting terrorists off the streets and also in the interrogation?

JOHN BRENNAN: “Yes. The rendition is the practice or the process of rendering somebody from one place to another place. It is moving them and the U.S. Government will frequently facilitate that movement from one country to another. . . .

“Also I think it’s rather arrogant to think we’re the only country that respects human rights. I think that we have a lot of assurances from these countries that we hand over terrorists to that they will, in fact, respect human rights”

“And there are different ways to gain those assurances. But also let’s say an individual goes to Egypt because they’re an Egyptian citizen and the Egyptians then have a longer history in terms of dealing with them, and they have family members and others that they can bring in, in fact, to be part of the whole interrogation process”

Do you suppose Brennan’s cynically referring to this statement in a Human Rights Watch report?

“…[Egyptian] techniques include threats to inflict torture or sexual abuse on detainees’ female family members, including wives, threats to arrest family members, exposure to screams…’

How absolutely unwise of Brennan to use the Egypt example in the cause of renditions to outsourced torture he supported, because his CIA proxy interrogator (torture darling) in Egypt at the time was Omar Sulieman:

“Shortly after 9/11, Australian citizen, Mamdouh Habib, was captured by Pakistani security forces and, under US pressure, tortured by Pakistanis. He was then rendered (with an Australian diplomats watching) by CIA operatives to Egypt, a not uncommon practice. In Egypt, Habib merited Suleiman’s personal attention. As related by Richard Neville, based on Habib’s memoir:

Habib was interrogated by the country’s Intelligence Director, General Omar Suleiman…. Suleiman took a personal interest in anyone suspected of links with Al Qaeda. As Habib had visited Afghanistan shortly before 9/11, he was under suspicion. Habib was repeatedly zapped with high-voltage electricity, immersed in water up to his nostrils, beaten, his fingers were broken and he was hung from metal hooks.

“That treatment wasn’t enough for Suleiman, so:

To loosen Habib’s tongue, Suleiman ordered a guard to murder a gruesomely shackled Turkistan prisoner in front of Habib – and he did, with a vicious karate kick.

“After Suleiman’s men extracted Habib’s confession, he was transferred back to US custody, where he eventually was imprisoned at Guantanamo. His “confession” was then used as evidence in his Guantanamo trial”

Moving forward, how many of the 11,000 flights by known CIA renditions aircraft were made to simply ‘disappear’ people? A British case opened a glimpse into this aspect; the investigation in Britain of the CIA’s rendition of Binyam Mohamed (who was outsourced to torture where his testicles had been brutalized) turned up a MI6 manual instruction to British intelligence officers not to become involved with any CIA rendition where the objective was to kill the target. In the MI6 manual chapter produced for the British court, it is clear the manual instruction’s overall context is intended to keep the British officers clean of and British jurisdiction clear of (and by extension, Her Majesty’s government) certain specified crimes in relation to CIA actions in violation of international law:

“Is it clear that detention, rather than killing, is the objective of the operation?”

It would appear the British are not squeamish about cooperating with CIA in relation to deliveries to torture, rather they are of the ‘if we didn’t see it, it didn’t happen’ philosophy. Where it appears they had drawn a line is in relation to ‘disappearing’ people to die. This inference can be drawn following the preceding MI6 manual language, because everything else in the chapter produced from the MI6 manual for the court is about what the officers would be required to report under British obligations to humanitarian law, if observed; all known CIA renditions practices such as hooding, beating and ‘torture’ (read water-boarding) in relation to any agencies MI6 works in ‘liaison’ with (read CIA.)

With the MI6 manual providing the first hard documentary evidence from allied intelligence there is a concern over renditions to ‘disappear’ people, specifying killing in context of working with the Americans, it follows the Americans involved with renditions should be given a strict scrutiny in regards not only to torture, this is already well documented, but renditions as interim step to targeted killings or ‘disappearing’ kidnapped people. This brings up ‘the ships‘ …

“U.S. PRISON SHIPS: On June 2, 2008 UK’s Guardian reported, “The US has admitted that the Bataan and Peleliu were used as prison ships between December 2001 and January 2002”. According to Reprieve, the U.S. may have used 17 ships as “floating prisons” since 2001. Detainees are interrogated on ships and may be rendered to other, undisclosed locations. Reprieve expressed concern over the time the U.S.S. Ashland spent off Somalia in early 2007. According to The Guardian, “At this time many people were abducted by Somali, Kenyan and Ethiopian forces in a systematic operation involving regular interrogations by individuals believed to be members of the FBI and CIA. Ultimately more than 100 individuals were ‘disappeared’ to prisons in locations including Kenya, Somalia, Ethiopia, Djibouti and Guantanamo Bay. Reprieve believes prisoners may have also been held for interrogation on the USS Ashland and other ships in the Gulf of Aden during this time.”

…leading to the ‘ghost’ prisons & prisoners and Diego Garcia:

“The [ghost] prison’s existence was also confirmed by Dick Marty, a Swiss senator who produced a detailed report on “extraordinary rendition” for the Council of Europe in June 2007 (PDF) and by Manfred Novak, the UN’s Special Rapporteur on Torture, in March this year. Having spoken to senior CIA officers during his research, Marty told the European Parliament, “We have received concurring confirmations that United States agencies have used Diego Garcia, which is the international legal responsibility of the UK, in the ‘processing’ of high-value detainees,” and Manfred Novak explained to the Observer that “he had received credible evidence from well-placed sources familiar with the situation on the island that detainees were held on Diego Garcia between 2002 and 2003.” The penultimate piece of the jigsaw puzzle came in May [2008], when El Pais broke the story that “ghost prisoner” Mustafa Setmariam Nasar, whose current whereabouts are unknown, was imprisoned on the island in 2005, shortly after his capture in Pakistan — although the English-speaking press failed to notice

“Despite these previous disclosures, yesterday’s [2008] article, by Adam Zagorin, is particularly striking because of the high-level nature of the source, and his admission that “the CIA officer surprised attendees by volunteering the information, apparently to demonstrate that the agency was doing its best to obtain valuable intelligence.” In addition, the source noted that “the U.S. may also have kept prisoners on ships within Diego Garcia’s territorial waters, a contention the U.S. has long denied”

Considering the ages old folk proverb ‘leopards don’t shed their spots’, taken together with the history of CIA propping up regimes infamous for ‘disappearing’ people (juntas of Argentina, Brazil & Chile, examples given), the preceding material indicates a tremendous potential for blackmail. Into this potential ‘blackmail soup’ we can add The Guardian NEVER does friendly business with, or promotes, any entity at odds with Israel; bringing up the 11,000 known renditions aircraft flights and Reprieve practically having its hand fondly held by the Guardian when it comes to reporting on CIA renditions. What it would seem we have here is Reprieve’s a ‘limited hangout with potential’ or, that is to say if it favored Israel, it’s possible MOSSAD could arrange to feed Reprieve a ‘leak’ of renditions related documents tomorrow, naming numerous ‘ghost’ prisoners that were ‘disappeared’ and can never be accounted for, and The Guardian would publish the material in a heartbeat. Example would be the removal of David Petraeus (Paula Broadwell is the cover story) as head of CIA via a Guardian/BBC collaboration, to now absent in USA media:

A 15-month investigation by the Guardian and BBC Arabic reveals how retired US colonel James Steele, a veteran of American proxy wars in El Salvador and Nicaragua, played a key role in training and overseeing US-funded special police commandos who ran a network of torture centres in Iraq. Another special forces veteran, Colonel James Coffman, worked with Steele and reported directly to General David Petraeus, who had been sent into Iraq to organise the Iraqi security services”

Why did Petraeus have to go? For the simple reason of religious conviction:

  1. Dominionists celebrate Christian nationalism, in that they believe that the United States once was, and should once again be, a Christian nation. In this way, they deny the Enlightenment roots of American democracy.
  2. Dominionists promote religious supremacy, insofar as they generally do not respect the equality of other religions, or even other versions of Christianity.
  3. Dominionists endorse theocratic visions, insofar as they believe that the Ten Commandments, or “biblical law,” should be the foundation of American law, and that the U.S. Constitution should be seen as a vehicle for implementing Biblical principles.

It was General Petreaus had pushed to a point the USA military’s…

“85 percent of our leadership were active in dynamic Bible study”

…became a problem for MOSSAD, that is, dominionists not only believe in a ‘Greater Israel’, they also believe in literal Armageddon, in which case the Jewish state would certainly be destroyed, have a listen to the USA’s #1 authority on dominionism in the American military…

“You’re telling me 28 to 34 percent of our military want 7 billion people to die” [believe in literal Armageddon] … “The simple answer is affirmative”

…noting the officer corps are a much higher (up to 85%) concentration of dominionism persuasion.

A sample of known dominionists surrounding Trump in the so-called ‘national security’ apparatus would include ‘the generals’ McMaster, Kelly and Mattis, all aligned with known dominionist Mike Pence, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, and now Mike Pompeo at Department of State:

“We make sure that we pray and stand and fight and make sure that we know that Jesus Christ is our savior is truly the only solution for our world” -Mike Pompeo

Insofar as the CIA Pompeo will continue to heavily influence as head of its Siamese twin Department of State, and the intelligence community generally:

“In the intelligence community, we see supervisors wanting to hold Bible studies during duty hours” -Mikey Weinstein

Complicating any attempt at injecting rationality into this scene of necrotic fundamentalism that has been aptly named the American “Christian Taliban” by the Military Religious Freedom Foundation is, superstitious Slovenian villager Melania Trump repeatedly importing scores of priests and pastors to the White House for purpose of exorcism and laying hands on ‘the donald.’

Now, to the recent ‘you’re fired’ to Tillerson, resulting in the promotions of Pompeo and Haspel.

Bloody Gina” appointed to head up the CIA isn’t just a message of ‘anything goes’ but is much more than this, it’s a deliberate side-show setting up media distraction; it is a form of information warfare. This is because, whether Gina Haspel is confirmed to run the CIA or not, nothing changes at CIA leadership where Haspel has been the hands on grunt, as deputy director, for over a year. And it is over this past year the CIA policies described earlier in this article, will have been put in place again, never mind anything Haspel has to say in her confirmation hearing; the woman is a practitioner of narcissistic cruelty, a foot-soldier-sadist in the tradition of dominionist Dick Cheney. It is this last, immediate preceding, or Cheney legacy, should concern us above all.

Prior to the unexpected/unforeseen election of Donald Trump, the Israeli alliance with the American religious right had been a Faustian balancing act; Netanyahu and his ilk politically exploited the Christian right and its belief in a ‘Greater Israel’ but this alliance with a community that holds that ‘Greater Israel’, once established, will necessarily be destroyed, had always been tempered by neoliberals in positions of power, whether the likes of Chuck Schumer, Barack Obama, John Brennan or a whole host of other people supporting the arch-criminal Hillary Clinton, notably Soros. During the time of Bush/Cheney it could be argued Jewish neocons, as viciously aggressive as they are, helped the neoliberals keep the total insanity of these Christian Zionists in check. Corporate neocolonizing (Manifest Destiny 2.0 is where neocons, dominionists and neoliberals are indistinguishable) of the world is one thing, provoking World War Three is another thing altogether. Nearly all of this ‘restraint’ is now tossed out the window, never previously has the White House seen such a near absolute consolidation of power in the hands of theologically driven advocates of total world war.

Previous means of MOSSAD and Shin Bet checking the power of extremists in the ‘Greater Israel’ cause (when politicians weren’t listening), whether Shin Bet presently seeing off the messianic ultra-orthodox allied Bibi with corruption charges, or MOSSAD with news waiting in the wings of American press for the fact of David Petraeus had been directly responsible for torture camps and death squads in Iraq, or possibly Reprieve suddenly inheriting a largesse of information concerning the Cheney era abuses, up to and including numerous cases of ‘disappeared’ via renditions, to send off Gina Haspel, are likely useless in the present circumstance. There’s not enough time. Some context, per Natanyahu’s former MOSSAD chief:

“As Dagan sees it, Netanyahu is incapable of leading Israel and has failed on all fronts. Israel has never been so strong militarily, he argues, yet had such weak political leaders. While he worked together with Netanyahu, Dagan says that the prime minister never informed him of any concrete political or military objectives. It is only when it comes to Iran that Netanyahu has an opinion — and a goal. In order to achieve this goal, Dagan accuses Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak of trying to silence all criticism. The two politicians want to make this decision without involving the rest of the government, Dagan contends. And he views this way of doing things as legally problematic.

“Indeed, Dagan says, this is why he and Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, the chief of staff of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) from 2007 to 2011, were removed from their positions during the first months of this year, and why Yuval Diskin, the head of Shin Bet, Israel’s domestic intelligence agency, was not allowed to succeed him as head of the Mossad. Instead, they were replaced by individuals who reportedly have less critical views on attacking Iran and at least lack enough experience to take a firm stance against such a move.

“Dagan calls this a plot, a clandestine putsch by the politicians against the intelligence agencies. “Diskin, Ashkenazi and I succeeded in blocking all dangerous adventures,” he says, adding that now there is no one left to stand in their way.

“This version is supported by many former military officers, intelligence officials and politicians who defend Dagan and strike similar tones. “Listen to them, in every field,” says Tzipi Livni, the parliamentary opposition leader and head of the centrist Kadima party. Open criticism used to be rare in Israel, but that is no longer the case.

“Danny Yatom and Efraim Halevy, both former Mossad chiefs, say that Dagan is right to speak up — and that he apparently has good reasons for doing so. “The public should hear his opinion on Iran,” Yatom says. Those who know Dagan — and, particularly, generals and former colleagues — confirm he means what he says. They say he is neither interested in launching a political career nor seeking any benefit”

To put this preceding in perspective, it was the neoliberal Obama (believe it or not, with the help of ‘dubya’ warning Netanyahu not to take advantage of Bush Jr’s ‘lame duck’ days in office, to Cheney’s deep disappointment) stopped Bibi attacking Iran via the agreement Congress has effectively since scrapped. As a wag recently put it to me concerning Trump ousting Hillary in this planet’s greatest contest between world class criminals “so, we were better off in the frying pan, after all.”

Recalling former MOSSAD chief Dagan’s stating “Diskin, Ashkenazi and I succeeded in blocking all dangerous adventures” but these type personalities having been swept aside from the top (at least) of Israel’s security apparatus, the question arises over who in the AIPAC from the Jewish side can arrest their American Christian Zionist (dominionist) partners or if it is even possible at this point; where the Israeli lobby had screwed up and we all are faced with what they are responsible for: President Trump partnered with and surrounded by, one might say in the custody of, people willing to take the existential threat beyond all previous threshold or to a deliberate all out war with Russia. Every Trump firing at the national security level, to now, has seen replacements consolidating the dominionist position and increased the threat of civilization ending event. If it is true Israel could not exercise impunity without support of the Americans, it is equally true these American dominionists could never have come to power without decades support of Israel via AIPAC.

That it had been neoliberals who’d attempted to derail the election of Trump with their ‘Steele Dossier’ caper and ‘the Russians did it DNC hack’ information warfare against the American people, have seen their game co-opted, and are now trapped and can’t back out, would be funny if it weren’t for the larger implication. If Shiva is ‘god’, perhaps there is some meaning in all of this, beyond a sense of humor at a cosmic level.

A Criminal Magic Act

Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President –Section Four, 25th Amendment to the USA Constitution

The months long rumor Pompeo would replace Tillerson at Department of State proved correct. More recently, rumor has it Trump is taking aim at the generals, beginning with National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster and intending to fire White House Chief of Staff General John Kelly as well. Meanwhile, General James Mattis, at Department of Defense, has been allowing the Pentagon to provoke Russia in both word and deed.

Donald Trump, who has already been, against his better instinct, coerced and/or manipulated into hostile relationship with Russia, may be the only thing standing between America’s dominionists and World War Three. Will he cave in altogether to the dominionists? No one knows. Will the generals engineer a war with Russia and hand it to Trump as a fait accompli? Certainly it’s possible. Will Mike Pence wait to hear his generals told ‘You’re fired!’ and see them go away? Don’t bet on it.

Pence-Kelly_tweet - 1

This is not the America that went quiet and mourned when JFK was assassinated by a cabal of businessmen aligned with Allen Dulles. Mike Pence, who has openly stated Dick Cheney is his role model, is no Lyndon Johnson. By comparison, the evil of Pence is compounded to a power of ten. What’s going on isn’t rocket science but it is a trap.

%d bloggers like this: