Cynthia Chung -- Secret Wars, Forgotten Betrayals, Global Tyranny. Who Is Really in Charge of the U.S. Military?

Secret Wars, Forgotten Betrayals, Global Tyranny. Who Is Really in Charge of the U.S. Military?

It should be no surprise to anyone in the world at this point in history, that the CIA holds no allegiance to any country.

by Cynthia Chung

January 19, 2020

Authored by Cynthia Chung via The Strategic Culture Foundation:

“There is a kind of character in thy life, That to the observer doth thy history, fully unfold.”

– William Shakespeare

Once again we find ourselves in a situation of crisis, where the entire world holds its breath all at once and can only wait to see whether this volatile black cloud floating amongst us will breakout into a thunderstorm of nuclear war or harmlessly pass us by. The majority in the world seem to have the impression that this destructive fate totters back and forth at the whim of one man. It is only normal then, that during such times of crisis, we find ourselves trying to analyze and predict the thoughts and motives of just this one person.  The assassination of Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani, a true hero for his fellow countrymen and undeniably an essential key figure in combating terrorism in Southwest Asia, was a terrible crime, an abhorrently repugnant provocation. It was meant to cause an apoplectic fervour, it was meant to make us who desire peace, lose our minds in indignation. And therefore, that is exactly what we should not do.

In order to assess such situations, we cannot lose sight of the whole picture, and righteous indignation unfortunately causes the opposite to occur. Our focus becomes narrower and narrower to the point where we can only see or react moment to moment with what is right in front of our face. We are reduced to an obsession of twitter feeds, news blips and the doublespeak of ‘official government statements’.

Thus, before we may find firm ground to stand on regarding the situation of today, we must first have an understanding as to what caused the United States to enter into an endless campaign of regime-change warfare after WWII, or as former Chief of Special Operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff Col. Prouty stated, three decades of the Indochina war.

An Internal Shifting of Chess Pieces in the Shadows

Ramona Wadi -- Chilean Military Violence – a Legacy at Home and Abroad

Chilean Military Violence – a Legacy at Home and Abroad

Ramona Wadi

January 16, 2020

Chilean human rights and memory organisations have long pointed out that the Chilean military is one main factor obstructing the course of justice with regard to dictatorship-era crimes. The pact of silence has provided impunity for the many officials, agents and soldiers involved in torturing, murdering and disappearing dictatorship opponents between 1973 and 1990.

The military’s crimes against humanity have not receded from Chile’s memory. As the country maintains its mobilisation against the dictatorship-era constitution and President Sebastian Pinera’s neoliberal politics, the violence meted out against protestors has reignited the importance of looking at history to define the present. Since the protests started, the UN has recorded at least 130 cases of abuse and 24 cases of sexual violence against women, men and children. As a result of the military shooting at protestors in the face, 350 people have lost an eye. In all, 28,000 Chileans have been detained since the start of the demonstrations. There is nothing to suggest that the Chilean government will be investigating the crimes committed against civilians rejecting the neoliberal model and calling for an inclusive society.

James ONeill -- The West’s Present Misconduct Has a Long History

28.12.2019 Author: James ONeill

The West’s Present Misconduct Has a Long History

Column: Politics

Region: USA in the World

One of the persistent themes of western political leaders is that they support the notion of “the rule of law”. By this they generally mean the system of law as developed by western nations, and in the international context the formulation over the past 120 years or so of international law.

By this of course, they mean “their law”. Any deviation from this by non-western nations is to be deplored and where appropriate punished.
The epitome of this approach was to be found in the Nuremberg trials and their Japanese equivalent that followed victory in the Second World War. The waging of war was declared to be the supreme international crime. The chief American counsel at the Nuremberg Tribunal, Robert Jackson, stated that the Nuremberg trials placed “international law squarely on the side of peace as against aggressive warfare.”

The Nuremberg and Tokyo trials may be seen in retrospect as the apogee of the concept that waging war was an offence against humanity. Since 1945 the major western powers, notably but not exclusively limited to the United States, have waged almost continuous war.

Valery Kulikov -- British “Liberators” are in Fact War Criminals

22.12.2019 Author: Valery Kulikov

British “Liberators” are in Fact War Criminals

Column: Politics

Region: Middle East

Country: Iraq

The bloody wounds UK has inflicted around the world through its all too often vile foreign policy are still raw. This can not only be said of colonial-era foreign policy, but also of Britain’s contemporary foreign policy.

British troops have remained committed to the principles of colonial occupation. It was after the turn of the millennium, not so long ago, when they last committed war crimes, and they have been continuing to commit war crimes with impunity during military campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan. Various British media outlets reported on this in 2004, accusing British soldiers of murder, torture, sexual abuse and other crimes.

British troops have a long history of getting involved in military conflicts being waged by the United States. Their operations are sometimes limited to airstrikes and the military operations conducted by small groups of special forces, while others involve imposing occupying contingents on the territory of certain countries. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were the largest conflicts where the United States and UK heavily deployed their ground forces.

The UK invaded Iraq as an ally of the United States to take part in Operation Iraqi Freedom, which began in March 2003. The evidence and photographs of war crimes committed by soldiers from the United Kingdom published in 2004 by the British media shocked the Arab world and the British public. British Army General Sir Mike Jackson, who headed the British Army as Chief of the General Staff (CGS) at the time, and Adam Ingram who was serving as the Armed Forces Minister at the Ministry of Defense even came out with an official announcement that they were launching an investigation, but its results were never made public. Observers watching the United Kingdom at the time noted: “The liberating army transformed into an occupying army within a few hours.”

Vladimir Platov -- USA and Political Assassinations

20.12.2019 Author: Vladimir Platov

USA and Political Assassinations

Column: Politics

Region: USA in the World

Politicians are people who not only live in the public eye but also encounter disapproval because of their decisions and actions. Hence, from time to time, the world is shaken by front-page news about the death or tragic demise of yet another prominent politician. It is also worth noting that an overwhelming majority of already solved political assassinations is linked to the United States. And nowadays, such a state of affairs is hardly surprising.

We can recall many famous American national politicians, i.e. senators, congressmen, district prosecutors, federal judges, governors and a director of the CIA, who were either killed or found dead under suspicious circumstances after they had raised issues of corruption or caused trouble for the leaders of the US oligarchy. And this has been the case since the assassination of John F. Kennedy in 1963.

Naming such victims clearly shows that any prosecutors, judges or politicians can find themselves in mortal danger when they go against the wishes of American political dynasties. Let us take an example of United States District Judge John Roll, who was shot dead in Tucson, Arizona, on 8 January 2011 soon after he had announced that he was about to rule against Barack Obama’s administration. In order to appease the public, a lone gunman and drug user was quickly identified as the culprit. He then “confessed” to his crimes “never to be seen again”. Media outlets practically “killed” this story. After all, its main aim was to intimidate all of the other U.S. judges by proving to them that they could be mercilessly killed and not many people would ever know the reason for their death.

There are other examples from America’s modern history that lend further proof to this theory. For instance, Thelma Colbert from the Justice Department (DOJ) in Fort Worth, Texas and Shannon Ross, the criminal chief of the United States attorney’s office in Dallas died under suspicious circumstances while investigating crimes linked to the Bush family. The two supposedly “committed suicide” within weeks of each other. Apparently, Thelma Colbert “drowned in her own pool” in July 2004 while Shannon Ross was found dead in her home on 13 September 2004. And the case against the Bush family was essentially “buried” with them. Any attempts by U.S. media outlets to discuss the story also suffered the same fate.

The last 10 Presidents of the United States were targets of political and character assassinations, aimed at replacing the leadership with more suitable individuals. Two Presidents have been shot at, John F. Kennedy was assassinated in 1963, and in 1981, Ronald Reagan was wounded by a shooter with connections to then Vice President George H. W. Bush.

Jacob G. Hornberger -- Why Aren’t Hiroshima and Nagasaki War Crimes?

Why Aren’t Hiroshima and Nagasaki War Crimes?

by Jacob G. Hornberger

May 12, 2016

original size of this picture 

HERE

I don’t get it. On the one hand, we’re told that the intentional targeting of civilians in wartime is a war crime. On the other hand, we’re told that the intentional targeting of Hiroshima and Nagasaki with nuclear bombs was not a war crime.

Which is it?

The issue is back in the news with President Obama’s decision to visit Hiroshima. The question that is being debated is whether he should apologize for President Truman’s decision to order U.S. troops to drop nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II.

If the targeting of civilians in wartime is okay, then clearly the decision to nuke the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was not a war crime.

But if that’s the case, then why was U.S. Army Lt. William Calley prosecuted during the Vietnam War? He’s the officer who intentionally killed several defenseless women and children in a Vietnamese village. The military prosecuted and convicted him of a war crime. Why? If it’s not a war crime to intentionally kill women and children in wartime, then why was Calley prosecuted and convicted of war crimes?

The fact is that it is a war crime for troops to intentionally target non-combatants in wartime. Nobody disputes that. But then given such, why the pass on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Everyone agrees that Truman was targeting non-combatants — mainly women, children, and seniors — when he ordered the nuking of those two cities. How do defenders of Truman’s decision avoid the inexorable conclusion that Truman’s action constituted a war crime?