Archive for November, 2009

Shock Horror! Peace Prize awared to a real man of Peace

John Pilger - Documentaries that changed the world

I refer to the Sydney Peace Prize awarded to John Pilger. When what seems like a month or two ago I heard he had won it, I was very extremely happy. Not just because he, unlike others or late, thoroughly deserve it, but because it meant he would have to give another speech and I LOVE the words and revelations of Mr. John Pilger. His denouncement of wars, the people and power behind them and the global misery it causes, are an oasis of journalism in an utterly corrupted world of filthy journalistic pretenders.

I wasn’t disappointed.

Take it away John…


Exclusive!!!! Prototype of todays BBC website leaked!

BBC newly vamped website


Even Al Jazeera’s at it!

Al Jazeera is in my opinion, one of the better news… errmmmm…  ‘organisations’. However it’s English branch (AJE) quite often displays the foul of a particular type of westerism which willing media whores like Faux News, CNN and the BBC take pride in chruning out whilst at the same time having the audacity of calling themselves ‘fair and balanced’.

AJE once broadcast David Frost asking his guest (I think the wife of Daniel Perle) “are we winning the war on terror?” What a thoughtess idiot to say something like that. Frost carved out his career by giving the appearance that he thought the establishment should be challenged – or at least that what Frosts cheerleaders say.

Is Frost a charleton? perhaps he tailcoated, or maybe age really does mutate Brits into conservative racists (now a days in the process of being engineered into ‘conservative bar-homosexulaity’ racists.). It could even be that others created Frost’s ‘image’, and the guy himself just ambled through life propelled by some self serving spin manchine. Who knows.

Anyway, as for AJE, some might say it has to appeal to it’s target audience – and as many, perhaps most English speakers will have a western outlook, then it may explain such westernisms, but I reject that view and think that it’s the foot in the door for money to begin to creep into journalism – a pandemic partly responsible for much misery on the planet today, and as I suggested earlier, it’s a particular brand of westernism – i.e. a bizzare mix of (economic)neoliberalism, neoconservatism, neofascism and philosophical ultraliberalism with a lashings of social darwinism, garnished with mind rotting entertainment. Eeeeew. It’s a FAR FAR cry from things the west should be about, yet pretends in its fullest capacity to support, like the Magna Carta, the US Bill of Rights, the supposed (popularly purported) Christian Reformist movements or La révolution.

Lets look at the evidence to hand:

A story on AJE: Indian Muslims denounce terrorism

Would Fascist xenophobic scum like Hitchens, Wilders, Melon E Philips, Aaronovich and all the mini-me’s out there, take note that ONCE AGAIN there are Muslims doing what you have for years accused what them of not doing, and that is denouncing terroism which the (wh/c)or(e)porate mainstream media calles “Islamic terrorism” flush in oxymoron glory. Got that you pork chop suckers? Not that facts and truth have ever been much concern to you before, and No, Hannity lovers, you aren’t that clever, we know your secret glee at when Muslims actually do this, for reasons a child could figure out.


miserable possible side issue story from AJE spun as a global problem

Freedom fighters Terrorists going to chop our heads while we sleep at night. Be scared!!! Mullah Omar had a training camp, e i e i o, and on that camp he had some taliban, e i e i o. With a a taliban here, and a taliban there, here a taliban, there a taliban everywhere a taliban… Mullah Omar had a training camp e i e i o.

And now there’s Taliban 2! Yes, that’s right… Your favourite taliban boogie man comes in a variety of packages, each one specially designed to feed upon your fears of whoever or whatever target population you want.


baby small

The beef here is that in the report NOT ONE SINGLE journaistic elaboration on the story is given to the greatest terrorists of all times over the entire history of the planet: STATE TERROTISTS!!!! And isn’t it TOTALLY FRIGGING AMAZING THAT THERE HAS NEVER BEEN (AND WILL NEVER) BE A FALSE FLAG OPERATION CONDUCTED BUT THE PAKISTANI ARMY/AUTHORITIES, THE AFGHANI PUPPETS, OR THE NORTHER ALLIANCE, THE FILIPINO ARMY, ETC… WHICH HAS BEEN INVESTIGATED AND REPORTED BY THE MEDIA… And those of you with a brain can probably recall some of the horrors of what happened in Algeria. ALL the fault of the Islamists of course (-rolls eyes-) – (pssst… lets not mention the people voted for an Islamic government – oh no!)

The second bit of journo junk is here: The Goldstone report: A Jewish view – By Rachel Barenblat

Goldstone - so obviously biased agaisnt Israel as he's not dreaming up ways how to massacre Palestinians
Goldstone, so obviously biased against israel, in fact he’s quite obviously Pro-Palestinian according to conventional eyes, as he’s not dreaming up ways on how to exterminate them!

The report starts off well enough but as is ALMOST ALWAYS the case, descends into pushing Zionist ideals.

The First element of Zionism one needs to realise, if one is to try and understand Zionism, is that the fundamental principle of it is that of a percieved God given licence to the persuit of supremacy. God looks on in indifference to the great  human crimes committed to the others along the way.

The second is the: need for Zionist state. Not you must realise, ‘a Jewish state’, as any serious analysist of Israyhell will concurr that Israyhell is absolutely NOT a Jewish state. If you believe otherwise then please, go away.

All Zionist and budding Zionists will push these points. Nearly EVERY discussion of Israel by people subscribing to Zionist ideals will contain either one or both of these elements. And this article: “The Goldstone report: A Jewish view” By Rachel Barenblat is no exception.

“Like many Jews, I want to believe that the one nation which was founded by adherents to my religious tradition will naturally be just and righteous. When the state fails to live up to that ethical mandate, my heart is broken.”

There you go. ANY discussion of Israyhell is OK, even ‘helpful’ suggestions as to how Israyhell can be brought into line with international law are permissible, and the premise underlying all this – sometimes on the subconscious level –  is that Israyhell has a right to exist. Well let me tell you something… It has absolutely no right to exist!! This fake state of Israyhell should be scuppered. Pronto!

And in direct reposnse to Ms. Barenblat, Israyhell has NEVER been the Glorious Israel of old, the magnificient state you yearn for. The old state (only for a very short period of time) – which was a state of immaculate manefesstion of mankinds love and obedience towards God. That Israel all of the Abrahamic (and Adamic!) faith would welcome the reemergence of Israel of Glory, and it IS coming again. It will be born when this filthy imposter is obliterated by the one the Zionists du jour desperately wanted to kill. ALL Abramahic doctrines show this Israel is coming and it’s shown perfectly clearly in the scriptures (apart from the scriptures you fiddled  e.g. Deuteronomy 23:20), but this piece of crap, modern Israyhell, the regime of tyrrany that feels the need to purpetrate at least one gross crime per day upon humble Palestinians, is an imposter state of the utmost evil.

Ms. Barenblat, Israyhell was founded by Zionists, some who hated the Jews, some who killed the Jews on ships, some who murdered British (to the indifference of the servile British govt), nearly all Israyhells founders were terrorists who then went on with a Satanic extermination of the Palestinian people that persists to this day. Ms. Barenblat, you are an utter muppet! Sorry but you are a muppet – your words say so. You heart should NEVER have have been anything other than broken. Israyhell is a secualar state of Zionism.

Jews against Zionism

And the ‘bad hair day’ (the height of banes some westerners have to deal with) for AJE just doesn’t end…

‘Afghan policeman’ kills UK troops

Here is Al Jazeera in it’s finest “BBC lite” mode. Only the Coalition of the killing get a mention. Only British soldiers lives are counted. The Taliban or whoever the courageous freedom fighter is, gets portrayed as ‘the baddies’.

Some piece of scum called Dr Aminullah Habibi, suppsedly a “research fellow at the UK Defence Academy, a training facility for the country’s ministry of defence” gets to pimp the western ideals. What the hell does the defence of the UK have to do with Afghanistan. Absolutely NOTHING AT ALL.

And we have this pile of poo…

Gordon Brown, Britain’s prime minister, said the deaths were a “terrible loss”.

“They fought to make Afghanistan more secure, but above all to make Britain safer from the terrorism and extremism which continues to threaten us from the border areas of Afghanistan and Pakistan,” he said.

How sickening! Garden Broom’s lies get parroted without the slighest hint of a challenge.

Earlier on it was ‘reported’ (i.e. parroted) about the freedom fighter: “Every effort is being put into hunting him down.” – which makes me think the Nobel Prize Commission is being a bit pro-active this year.

Gorgon BrNWO contined his spiel…

“Addressing the UK parliament, Brown said: “It appears that they were targeted because they were engaged in what our enemies fear most – they were mentoring and training Afghan forces.”

Hahahahahaha! What a loser, and as if he gives a stuff about British cannon fodder. There’s a saying the people get the leaders they deserve. In which case almost the entire planet has some serious soul searching to do.

In conclusion:

Al Jazeera English – Your moment of shame!


Case study: Randomly pulled up lessons in proto-Zionism


Frankie boy’s at it again.

Establishment hack and ex-spy, Frank Gard(i)ner, – a man who used to walk around Saudi occupied Arabia with mini Qur’ans in his ass pocket, (now I guess is an Mi5/Mi6 liason officer), sympathises with Briton Simon Mann, who is linked  with  mercenary terroism (apparently with state involvement!) via the rather dirty Sandline International.

web addrerss

Frankie boy whitewashes over Mann’s activities describing poor Mann as suffering “four hellish years in prison.”

Said Frank:

“He’s going to see a son he’s never seen, who was born when he was in prison. This is a man, who if he had served his whole sentence, would have come out in his 90s,”

Awwww. the little diddums!

Read this excellently written book:

  You won’t regret it.

And watch this:


BBC 3 Investigates – Thatcher and the Coup that Failed:
This film uncovers the attempted coup in Equatorial Guinea, meeting the key players and dishing the dirt that no-one else knows. It tells the inside story of international power play, oil-fuelled greed, men with guns and the son of the former British Prime Minister

News you won’t find on the BBC (or CNN or Faux News)

The Voting for Sharia in Somalia

April 20, 2009 – الاثنين 25 ربيع الثاني 1430 by Anwar alAwlaki  
Filed under Imam Anwar’s Blog

The Somali parliament has voted unanimously for the implementation of Sharia which is seen as good news by many in the Muslim world – and it is – as it reflects the desire of the Somali people to live by the laws of Allah. However there are some issues that need to be highlighted… – source.

lw says: I hope they find a way to destroy the pimping of sex/porn into their society. Strong moralistic societies automatically bring about with them, a better level of a cleaner society. And at this point, I’m going to end with a smidgeon of a moan… lets hope it brings with it cleaner public toiets! General Muslim toilet hygene and mentality is highly shameful! 

-P.S. Anwar alAwlaki ‘s wiki says: 23 August 2009, Awlaki was banned by local authorities in Kensington and Chelsea, London, from speaking via videolink to a fundraiser for Guantanamo detainees. source

Judith Miller, anthrax biological warfare, Dr David Kelly and the documentary Anthrax war.

Rewritten (I previously clicked ‘publish’ instead of ‘save draught’!)

The Passionate Eye Anthrax War clip0of6  10:01
The Passionate Eye Anthrax War clip1of6

The Passionate Eye Anthrax War clip2of6

The Passionate Eye Anthrax War clip3of6

The Passionate Eye Anthrax War clip5of6

In case of possible discontinuity above, the links below should ‘patch it’:

Anthrax War part 6

Anthrax War part 7

Reading about the world, it’s history, economics, and struggles for power is I guess, kind of an obsession.

I’ve already ‘woken up’ (or is there another awakening to go through that I’m not yet aware of?). From time to time, in conversation with various people in various locations, I make reference to aspects of the stuff I’ve learned over the years i.e. the stuff I’ve come across (which in the mind of the rationally-paranoid, one might elaborrate: stuff that I have been allowed to learn) to probe their perceptions and hopefully throw out a few seeds to open a path of ‘awakening’ in them.

When discussing 9-11 with my father, I told him to keep an open mind. He said something like “I [he was refering to me] didn’t have an open mind on the issue, to which I said I had assessed the evidence and arrived at a conclusion. Overall w.r.t. 9-11 tt is one of the ultra rare occasions where I feel I ‘bettered’ my father in one of our late night conversations.

What is it achieving?

Perhaps very little, but I can be secure in the knowledge that I’ve done my bit to make people aware of the problem that we are facing.

I’m pretty savvy on dirty international politics, it’s getting to the point where often, ‘none can touch me’, although admittedly the occasional banana skin comes my way at times on issues where I think I have a strong handle, forcing a rethink.

I have moments where the mention of an individial brings their ‘life-network’ (and all it’s baggage) into my mind. I’m  not bragging, just telling it like how it is. I also have moments where things are blank, w.r.t fringe players, but this isn’t very often. The nett effect is that I feel I’m pretty sharp on noticing disinformation.

And so to the main focus of the post. It’s about a Canadian 2009 documentary: “The Passionate Eye – Anthrax War.”  CBC (Canada)

I have doubts as to whether this documentary is legit or a work of disinformation. Those suspicions nagged on as I watched, there was no analysis of Bruce Ivins’s life to cement down a powder puff claim that Ivins’s was innocent.. Hatfill was exhonerated and the program made not mention of any other suspect.

The program was heading off into the direction that the spores weren’t from Fort Detrick (despite the Aimes strain being genetically specific to that laboratory). No mention of the biohazard inventory logs were mentioned either. The report developed what the investigation was ‘uncovering’ and suggested a bioweapons mafia but provided NO clear explanation of what this meant or who exactly this Mafia was, Instead lying on some quite loose information from some South African guy involved in bioengineering.

But wen Judith Miller, a willing Jezebel of a lady – a journalistic whore for the who pushed false rubbish through the press for the agenda of the Bush regime, then I jumped through the roof.

Like all good disinformation, truth is mixed with fiction to conceal the real story…  

Extracts from the 2009 program: “The Passionate Eye – Anthrax War.”  CBC (Canada)
Judith Miller
Investigative journalist

Judith Miller, Investigative journalist:

I’m always worried about what we don’t know, in an area that is so inherently secret and secretive. And work that is so politically sensitive, um, potentially diplomatically explosive.

One week before 9/11, a puliter prize winning journalist, Judith miller and two NY times colleagues broke a front page story revealing the US had been weaponising anthrax as part of several secret programs.

One such program, project Jeffereson, involved the CAI and Battelle, a private natioanl sevurity lab that sought to enjineer a potent new anthrax weapon.

The Battelle lab was a contracter on project Jefferson and what they were trying to do was to, once again, figure out whether or not the Sovitest had combined two agents to make an anthrax that would resist our vaccine. And so for many years (laugh) they struggled to do this at this top secret labatory on the outskirts of Columbus Ohio.

Miller revealed that private contracters were capable of weaponising anthrax. But her report had been overshadowed by 9-11 and the anthrax attacks.

Ken Alibek the No 2 man in the Soviet biowarfare program before he defected to the west. Alibek went on to consult with the US government and assisted in the FBI’s [post 9-11] anthrax investigation.

He worries about the disappering line between bio defense, and bio offense.

The Unites states is spending a huge amount of money, billions and billions of dollars for so called “bio defense”, they say.

They create viruses like Spanish flu virus again. What would be the purpose for this? In some countries mind, it could look like say, like a work to create some new biological weapons.

Today, Alibek runs a botech company in Kiev in  Ukraine. He is shadowed by a bodyguard.

Miller files two reports before 9-11 (the documentary only mentions one) where Miller broke a story about Anthrax. The documentary said two other journalists but the report from the NYT only yields Millers name (Perhaps Geff Gannon and his ‘brother’ were the other two – who knows) 

When Is Bomb Not a Bomb? Germ Experts Confront U.S.
Published: Wednesday, September 5, 2001

A former senior government lawyer yesterday vigorously disputed the Bush administration’s assertion that the global treaty banning biological weapons permits nations to test such arms for defensive purposes.

The lawyer, Mary Elizabeth Hoinkes, who was general counsel of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency from 1994 to 1999, said such an interpretation of the 1972 treaty was a “gross misrepresentation” that “risks doing serious violence” to an accord the United States has long championed.

The New York Times reported yesterday that the United States had made and tested a model of a small Soviet-designed biological bomb as part of a series of secret research projects that officials said were aimed at defending against a growing threat of a germ attack.

The projects were begun under the Clinton administration and approved then by Pentagon and Central Intelligence officials, but Ms. Hoinkes said she did not know details of the project at the time. She refused to discuss it further.

The treaty bars nations from developing, acquiring or stockpiling biological weapons to be used for “hostile purposes or in armed conflict.” It permits experiments on microbes, provided that quantities are small and the purpose is defensive.

An administration official contended this week that the treaty also allows such experiments as long as the aim is “protective,” not hostile.

The distinction, Ms. Hoinkes said, was “too cute by half.”

She said the treaty was intended to bar even initial research on munitions that spread disease. The Bush administration’s interpretation — apparently shared by the Clinton adminstration — gives nations too much latitude to research offensive weapons in the name of defense, Ms. Hoinkes asserted. “You see a room full of people manufacturing bombs, and they say, `I’m only doing this for defensive purposes and I have no intention of ever doing it for real because my heart is pure,’ ” she said.

State Department and other administration officials describe Ms. Hoinkes as a leading expert on the germ weapons treaty. She joined the State Department in 1976 and began working in 1981 at the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, which was merged into the State Department in 1999.

She was not alone in her dismay.

Spurgeon M. Keeny Jr., a deputy director of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency from 1977 to 1981, expressed similar concerns about the interpretation of the treaty and how such an assertion would be perceived abroad.

“In the eyes of the world, it’s going to look like we’ve been clandestinely violating the treaty,” said Mr. Keeny, who is president of the Arms Control Association, nonpartisan experts who support efforts to curb weapons of mass destruction.

Bill Harlow, spokesman for the Central Intelligence Agency, which tested the bomb model, said yesterday that the device was not a weapon because it lacked a fuse and did not contain dangerous germs. “Everything we did was in full compliance with the treaty,” he said.

The State Department declined to discuss the experts’ arguments. A spokesman said the administration had found that the research programs were “in compliance” with existing treaties and that appropriate legal “mechanisms” were in place to conduct such reviews.

An international conference to discuss how to strengthen the germ treaty is scheduled for November, and Mr. Keeny said the administration could expect accusations that Washington had ignored a treaty that most nations have signed.

“If any other country was found to be doing what we were supposedly doing, they would call it a dangerous violation of the treaty, and it surely appears to be a violation of the treaty in terms of common interpretation,” he added.

Victoria Clarke, a Pentagon spokeswoman, also confirmed yesterday that the Defense Department had drawn up plans to produce small amounts of genetically modified anthrax, a deadly toxin, but that the project had been “put on hold” earlier this year to make sure it did not violate international treaties and domestic laws.

Still, she said, the Pentagon intends to press ahead with the anthrax project. Pentagon officials have said that producing the stronger poison would aid in developing vaccines and other defenses.

‘Germ-Making Plant’
Published: September 4, 2001

– What I am suggesting is that Miller was told to pimp these stories out before 9-11 (an even Bush and gang knew was coming) so that if necessary, Millers story cold then be called upon to cast suggestions that private institutions were to blame for the anthrax attacks – that would be private institutions that the US government itself had ceeded licence to produce.

The documentary on one hand suggested Fort Detrick could not have manufactured this grade, yet they show and invertiew woth some guy who said they made it to that 1×10-6 m size. And to suggest a US Funded weapons lab was outperformed by a private company (who the US govt knew the identies of and would OBVIOUSLY have imposed strick seccurity conditions on them) to do something astounding as the near nano sized AIMES strain is just ridiculous.

I must say the Jewish element was flagged ( from which I will say an unscientific straw poll of the possibility of Zionist influence could be speculated upon – and that’s the only thing that should be infered by this statement!). And the program (although I had a bout of heavy-eye in the middle of it) didn’t mention Dr. Philip Zack a reported racist sporting Zionist attributes or the lady who tried to implace Hatfill with no evidence whatsoever – Ms. Rosenberg etc. etc

In summary, I believe this program has presented a piece of highly questionable work, peppering it with officials to legitimize it. 

The program also completely failed to suggest WHO could have killed these men involved in the bioweapons field. And WHY the US govt was subcontracting out this weapons research too and WHO owned those companies.

Was Israyhell mentioned once in the documentary? I really don’t think so. South Africa was, but not that South Africa and the Zionist regime had worked closely on nuclear arms making coperation in the development of biological weapons a possibility also.




Fall of the Republic

Please kindly shut your mouth about Alex Jones, and watch his finest documentary yet:

Fall Of The Republic – The Presidency Of Barack H Obama – The Full Movie

then, if you must, you can open your mouth and compare his movie with yours.


Conference to Criminalize War and War Crimes Tribunal.

Contents (will change as time goes on)
appeal: does anyone know how to ‘bookmark/paragraph’ a wordpress post?

Updated Mon 30th Nov 2009. See links or CTRL+F  “World Tribunal On Iraq – The New York Hearings”…
Thanks to George Dutton, on Craig Murrays website

NEW (updated Nov 12th 2009) : Criminalise War YOU TUBE channel

1) Schedule/Programme (**updated Nov 8th 2009 Programme booklet scans [jpg] embedded in powerpoint**)
1.0) Opening video…
1.1) Dr Mahatir’s speech (Video link) and text **updated Nov 6th 2009 **
1.2) George Galloway MP speech (Video link) **updated Nov 6th 2009 **
1.3) Cynthia Mc Kinney’s speech (text only, but video on the Criminalise war YouTube link above)

2) ** Updated Nov 8th 2009 ** >>  Proceedings and Hearing of KL War Crimes Commission and Tribunal respectively Bookelt

3) Notes on torture victims testimony, and international law pertaining to the execution of war crimes by Bush, Blair et al. (patchy)

4) Links.  Updated Nov 12th 2009=Matthias Chang’s Future Fastforward website contains many other pages about the conference.

# $ # $ # $ # $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $ # $ # $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $#

The inbedded media (in bed with the filthy politiians, corporations and those who control them) have done a ‘good’ job at being silent about another step to drag some justice, kicking and screaling out of this world.

The Conference to Criminalize War and War Crimes Tribunal was held over four days in the Putra World trade Centre, Kuala Lumpur.

KL is well known for it’s efforts for global peace as is the movements head – ex primeminister Tun Dr. Mahatir Mohammad.

Here was the schedule/Programme: {Criminalise War – International Converence and Exhibition – Programme Booklet for the jpg scans of the booklet inside a powerpoint file}

Oct 28th, 2009

8.30 am Arrival of Guests

9.30 am Keynote Speech by Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad

Expose War Crimes – Criminalise War

(Venue:  Merdeka Hall, Level 4, PWTC, Kuala Lumpur)

10.30 am Launching of War Crimes Exhibition Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad

(Venue:  Exhibition Hall, Level 4, PWTC KL)

Coffee Break

11.30 am Session 1

(Venue:  Merdeka Hall, Level 4, PWTC, Kuala Lumpur)

Flouting International Law  

• George Galloway (British MP)

• Cynthia McKinney (Former U.S Congresswoman)

• Gajendra Singh (former Indian Ambassador)

• Question and Answer Session

Moderator: Tan Sri Razali Ismail

1.00 pm Lunch

(Venue: Dewan Tun Razak, PWTC KL)

2.00 pm Session 2

(Venue:  Merdeka Hall, Level 4, PWTC, Kuala Lumpur)

Economic Warfare

• Michel Chossudovsky (Prof of Economics, University of Ottawa)

• Hans Von Sponeck (Former UN Asst Secretary General)

• Khudair Waheed Hussein (Dean, Medical College, Syria)

• Question and Answer Session

Moderator: Mr. Zainul Ariffin

4.00 pm Session 3

(Venue:  Merdeka Hall, Level 4, PWTC, Kuala Lumpur)

War and Civil Society

• Dato’ Mukhriz Mahathir (Deputy Minister of International Trade & Industries, Malaysia)

• General Dato’ Seri Azumi (rtd), (Executive Director, Perdana Global Peace Organisation)

• Dirk Adriaensens (Anti-War Activist)

• Question and Answer Session

Moderator: Tan Sri Hasmy Agam

5.30 pm Ends


Oct 29th, 2009

9.30 am Session 4

(Venue:  Merdeka Hall, Level 4, PWTC, Kuala Lumpur)

War and the Mass Media

• Dato Seri Utama Rais Yatim (Information, Communications and Culture Minister, Malaysia)

• Sami Al’ Hajj (Aljazeera Reporter)

• Dato’ Ahmad Talib (Media Prima)

• Question and Answer Session

Moderator: Datuk A. Kadir Jasin

11.30 Session 5

(Venue:  Merdeka Hall, Level 4, PWTC, Kuala Lumpur)

War and Banned Weapons

• Denis Halliday (Former U.N Asst. Secretary General)

• Leuren Moret (Uranium Expert)

• Dr. Souad Naji (VC, University of Syria)

Moderator: Shamsul Akmar

1.15 pm Lunch

(Venue: Dewan Tun Razak, PWTC KL)

2.00 pm Session 6

(Venue:  Merdeka Hall, Level 4, PWTC, Kuala Lumpur)

Peace and Justice

• Tan Sri Sanusi Junid (Former International Islamic University, President)

• Hana Bayati (Freelance Film Maker)

• Muhammad Umar (Ramadhan Foundation)

• Question and Answer Session

Moderator: Tun Dr Siti Hasmah


(Venue:  Merdeka Hall, Level 4, PWTC, Kuala Lumpur)

Panel Session, to be chaired by YAB. Tun Dr. Mahathir

• Dato Seri Utama Rais Yatim (Information, Communications and Culture Minister, Malaysia)

• Michel Chossudovsky (Prof of Economics, University of Ottawa)

• Hans Von Sponeck (Former UN Secretary General)

• Denis Halliday (Former U.N Secretary General)

• George Galloway (British MP)

• Cynthia McKinney (Former U.S Congresswoman)

5.45 pm Group Photography Session  

Ends 6.00 pm Press Conference


Oct 30th, 2009

(Venue:  Tun Dr Ismail Hall, Level 2, PWTC, Kuala Lumpur)

9.30 am –1.00 pm Witness from Iraq Testimonies (7 witnesses)    

1.00 pm LUNCH

2.00 pm – 5.00 pm Continuation of Testimonies


Oct 31st, 2009

(Venue:  Tun Dr Ismail Hall, Level 2, PWTC, Kuala Lumpur)

9.30 am – 1.00 pm Continuation of Testimonies

Further testimony of witness.

1.00 pm LUNCH

2.00 pm – 5.00 pm Tribunal Deliberations

Hearing and decision of an Application for An Advisory Opinion filed by the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission to determine if a Head of State or Government can unilaterally exempt itself from complying with any provisions of any International Treaties/Conventions duly ratified by the State without first abrogating the relevant treaty/convention.


Oct 28 – 31st, 2009

10.00 am – 6.00 pm EXHIBITION (Expose War Crimes – Criminalise War:  Failure of International Law)

(Venue: Exhibition Hall, Level 4,PWTC KL)

# $ # $ # $ # $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $ # $ # $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $#

 Opening Video By Matthais and Christopher Chang

# $ # $ # $ # $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $ # $ # $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $#

Dr, Mahatir Mohammads speech:

 Read it below or watch it here:



1. As one of the convenors of this conference on the Criminalisation of War, I must express my appreciation for the number of people who have shown enough interest to attend it.

2. I hope and pray that we can take yet another step towards a war-free world, toward making war no longer a solution for disputes between nations, by making it into a crime instead, making those who resort to aggressive war as criminals who must be punished for the crime of the mass killing of people, which is what war is about. If the killing of one person is murder, a crime deserving of the most severe punishment, why must we regard the mass killing of people as legitimate and proper? There is something wrong in a creed that regards the killing of one person as different from the killing of people in their thousands and millions of people. The thousands and millions are made up of single individuals in the final analysis. The mass killing in war cannot be regarded as anything other than the mass murder of individuals who make up the masses. Since individuals are being killed, the fact that the individuals are killed together doesn’t alter the fact that individuals are killed and therefore the killing must still be regarded as the killing of individuals which constitutes murder. And those responsible for the murder of these individuals must therefore be murderers and must be regarded as criminals and punished accordingly.

3. But the vast majority in this so-called modern civilization of ours still distinguish between the killing of an individual and the killings of millions of individuals in the situation called war.

4. One very intelligent individual when asked to join the movement to make war a crime, replied that we have had war for 7000 years and therefore we must accept wars. It is mind-boggling that there can be intelligent people who believe that since something had been done for 7000 years, then it should continue to be done.

5. There must be a lot of things which we have been doing for thousands years which we don’t believe should be done now. Abuse of human rights in its various forms are now not acceptable. Discrimination against women, child labour, public execution, the gibbets, torture, slavery etc etc are no longer acceptable now.

6. It is admitted that there are places where some of these practices are still carried out but generally the civilized world rejects them even if they had been common for thousands of years of their history.

7. So why cannot we reject war? Why cannot we make war a crime, a dastardly crime deserving of the most severe punishment.

8. Because we do not regard war as a crime, the mass killings have not stopped. In the 1st and 2nd World Wars 70 million people were killed. But the world today accepts this with equanimity. They were wars, so the killings were justified.

9. And today we are still seeing people being killed in wars, as the great military powers resort to it to resolve any problem, big and small which they may have with other countries, especially those which are no match for them.

10. 7000 years ago the number of people killed in any war must be very small. This is because the capacity to kill was limited. The weapons would be wooden clubs or sharpened sticks.

11. Then the more “civilized” began to invent new weapons. From stick to stone to ever harder metals. Knives, swords were invented. Sharp edges or points made killing much easier.

12. Bows and arrows followed, extending the reach of the weapons of war. The Chinese invented gun-power but not for killing. Mostly the explosives were for chasing imaginary devils and dragons, which threaten to swallow the moon.

13. The Europeans came across the gun-powder and immediately thought that it could be used in war for throwing projectiles a longer distance than the catapult or bows and arrows.

14. From then on the search for ways to hurl weapons further and further has never stopped. Apart from that the killing power of the missiles had been enhanced continually.

15. Now we can literally throw, shoot or rocket the most destructive weapons right round the globe and beyond. We now have the capacity to literally blow up this whole planet and every living soul on it.

16. The search for the most powerful weapon should really be over. Everyone should now know that a war can actually exterminate the whole of humanity, including the very people who use the nuclear weapons. Using it would amount to mass suicide. Both the victors and their victims would perish. War would therefore be totally counter productive.

17. Imagine a nuclear war with bombs and nuclear warheads being hurled at each other. If there are survivors, radiation would kill them all.

18. Truly war should no longer be an option in the settlement of disputes between nations.

19. But the fact is that the powerful nations of the world were not affected by the devastations in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Mostly they see nuclear weapons as deterrents against attacks against themselves. Far from outlawing nuclear weapons as they did with poison gas, they began developing ever more powerful nuclear weapons and delivery systems.

20. As a result the United States and Soviet Union, France and Britain rushed to acquire the knowledge and the capacities to produce nuclear weapons. During the Cold War years the United States and USSR built up huge arsenals of nuclear warheads. Between them there are more than 20,000 nuclear warheads sufficient to destroy the whole world many times over. China, France and Britain also have huge arsenals of nuclear weapons.

21. Germany and Japan are not allowed to posses nuclear weapons. But Israel, India and Pakistan have nuclear capabilities.

22. There seems to be some basis for the idea of nuclear deterrents. Although the United States appeared ready to use nuclear weapons during the Cuban crisis, in the end it decided to compromise by removing its nuclear missiles in Turkey which was obviously threatening Russia.

23. It was fortunate that both the leaders of these two nuclear powers came to their senses in time. Otherwise the world would have been devastated by nuclear weapons in the arsenals of these two countries.

24. We cannot afford to have this kind of brinkmanship. We cannot live in fear of one or two persons destroying this world and its 6 ½ billion people. We cannot allow our civilization to be terminated by some crazy President.

25. A nuclear deterrent is just too risky and too very dangerous. Maybe it was this thought that prompted the idea of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation.

26. But all these international resolutions were non-starters because the big nuclear powers blatantly ignored them. As a result we see other countries developing their own nuclear weapons. There is much ado about these countries having nuclear weapons. These countries would be mad to use the few primitive nuclear weapons that they have. Should they do so the powerful nuclear countries would wipe out these countries from the surface of this earth?

27. The real danger is still from the rich and powerful nuclear powers. It is they who must reduce and finally eliminate their nuclear weapons if they want to have the moral ground to enforce the non-proliferation treaty.

28. Unfortunately these great nuclear powers are still developing, testing and producing more nuclear weapons. They talk of safe nuclear bombs, of small nuclear bombs and tactical nuclear bombs. Already they are using depleted uranium in their bombs and missiles which are causing diseases like cancer to spread among hundreds of thousands who had survived their attacks.

29. But they are not stopping there. They have developed bombs to penetrate deep into the ground so that bomb shelters buried deep in the ground would provide no protection.

30. New weapons are being developed as the industrialists see profits in the research and developments of weapons. In this their military has cooperated and played a big role as they would be the only organisation to need and use the new weapons.

31. The industrialists not only produce sophisticated new weapons but they invariably follow up with the defences against the weapons they have developed. Nations, rich and poor have been forced to buy and equip their armed forces with these offensive and defensive weapons or systems.

32. After this the industrialists would come up with a new weapon that could penetrate the defence system they had sold previously.

33. Should the country refuse to buy these the producers would hint at offering the weapons to the potential enemy of the country. Fearing the enemy would posses the weapon, which could penetrate its defence, the country would be forced to acquire the new weapon.

34. Then the industrialist would come up with a new defence system against the weapon they had just sold. Again the buyer would be forced to buy this defence system.

35. And so this would go on endlessly. The industrialist would wax rich even if the weapons would not be used. This is not my imagination. It is happening now even to Malaysia. We have to buy expensive aircrafts and submarines although we don’t expect to go to war with anyone. And we have to upgrade them every now and then.

36. The weapons merchants would try to create an arms race between neighbouring countries or rival countries in order to be able to sell the arms that they produce. The arms race would create fear and tension between countries, yet fearing mutual destruction few of these countries would go to war with each other. Not being used the expenditure on arms would be wasted. The urge to try out these weapons in real life situation would be irresistible. And so proxy wars and wars against weaker nations would be started.

37. But the countries of the world never learn. They would upgrade their weaponry continuously even though they know they have very seldom any use for the weapons.

38. Along the way the industrialists and the military have developed a symbiotic relation. Always desirous of becoming more and more powerful, the military would build a case for the need to develop new weapons against the possibility of attacks by potential enemies whose weapon might be superior.

39. Unable to recoup the money spent the industrialist marketed their weapons to the world. They work hand-in-hand with their Governments, the military, the banks and the media. Together they and their sales talk would be irresistible.

40. The weapons trade has developed and grown until it has become a big part of world trade. The effect of this trade is to impoverish countries which have to continually upgrade their weaponry at considerable cost and the arms race which invariably follows as neighbouring countries compete in upgrading their weaponry.

41. The weapons producing countries are still spending trillions of dollars conceiving, inventing, developing, testing and producing weapons. This is being done at the behest of the military, but often the defence industries would come up with frightening scenarios which could be handled by their latest multimillion dollar weapons. It is not the defence of their countries which they care about. It is the money to be made.

42. Any new scientific discoveries would be thoroughly studied for use in weapons. Thus firecrackers, noxious gases, bacteria, chemicals, metal alloys, new metals, lasers, radio waves, electrical and electronic devices, composite material, carbon fibres, and just about anything would be examined, analysed, studied, tested for applications in weapons, to make the killing of people more efficient.

43. Almost without exception some application would be found for use in killing people. Radio control toy cars and model aeroplanes have now evolved into remotely controlled, unmanned aircrafts, land and sea vehicles to deliver bombs and other explosives and even biological and chemical weapons without risking the lives of the attackers.

44. The technology for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) which could carry cameras and radio transmitters has now been applied to full-size military aircrafts. The pilot would be on the ground facing their numerous consoles, monitoring and controlling the aircrafts by radio, programming their flight and releasing their murderous cargo of bombs or firing their rockets. The pilots are not exposed to any danger by the bombs and rockets they fire from hundreds and thousands of miles away. Without the risk of being killed the urge to war and kill is enhanced.

45. The pilot of Enola Gay had to fly his plane thousands of miles to be over Hiroshima city in order to drop his beloved Little Boy to kill 100,000 people and destroy the whole city. He ran the risk of being attacked by enemy fighters and being shot down and killed.

46. The modern pilot can now fly the more sophisticated radio controlled bombers from his base in his country to drop the atomic bomb precisely over the target city. 100,000 people or even a million people would be killed and the whole city totally destroyed, just as was done by the pilot of Enola Gay. And all this can now be done between games of cards or watching a football match over a glass of beer. The pilot risks nothing at all yet the men, women, children, the aged, the sick and the disabled would all be killed and many thousands more wounded, losing their arms and legs, having their abdomen ripped open and their guts spilling on the ground.

47. Hospitals, schools, markets, shopping complexes and buildings of all kinds would be pulverised. Fires would start and a fire-storm would suck up all the oxygen, suffocating the survivors.

48. Even if no nuclear material is used, the power of modern explosives and the size of the mega bombs – each weighing more than 15 tons would do enough damage to devastate whole cities.

49. There would be nowhere to hide. The new bombs and rockets have the ability to pierce through earth and concrete to great depths before exploding so that those in bomb shelters would no longer be safe, be protected from the new weapons.

50. Noxious gases and radiation would kill rescuers, and would be blown for hundreds of miles, killing and spreading diseases of all kinds.

51. The great military powers have all these destructive weapons and delivery systems. They know that they don’t need huge armies to launch their attacks. All they need is a few men manning the consoles and they can literally wipe out hundreds of thousands or millions even of people, devastate whole countries and render them no longer habitable.

52. They have this capacity, they have this power. But they are still researching, developing, testing and producing more and more lethal weapons, gleefully predicting their use in future wars. They cannot conceive of a world at peace.

53. They believe that only they can be trusted with these weapons. The world need not fear them. They are reasonable people, caring people whose respect for human lives cannot be questioned. But are they?

54. They may not use the nuclear weapons and other WMD in their possession yet. But knowing that they have and knowing that no one would dare to attack them, they have shown their willingness to provoke weaker nations and to attack them with their so-called conventional but no less destructive weapons.

55. They claim their use of the power to kill people indiscriminately as making the world safe for democracy. They seem to think that only they as democrats have a right to live, to be safe and secure. It is right and proper to make those who are not democratic unsafe and insecure. It is proper to kill other people in order to promote democracy.

56. They fail to appreciate that the people who are not democratic are also people, are human beings whose right to live are no less than those who are democratic. The people who would be killed are innocent of any crimes against the democratic people, even if their leaders may be dictators. To deprive them of their rights to life must constitute as heinous a crime as the deprivation of the rights to life of innocent democrats.

57. Human rights is not for democratic people only. Every human life is sacred; every person has a right to live. Those who say that only democrats have a right to live in security are no less authoritarian than the dictators the democrats condemn. In fact in many cases authoritarian leaders or rulers have given their people a better life than some democrats whose countries have been made unstable and insecure because of the weaknesses and uncertainties of the democratic systems.

58. What I am saying is sacrilege of course. But if we look at recent events we would not fail to notice that it is the democratic countries which have been quick to use violence, who have violated international laws and shown disregard for the very human rights they so strongly advocated. It is they who resort to wars, to killing people to achieve their national agenda. Truly they are hypocrites.

59. Irrespective of whether the warmongers are democrats or not, we must regard war as a crime. No matter how just may the cause be, wars of aggression must still be regarded as crimes, crimes on a grand scale for that is what war means.

60. I am aware that in struggling to make war a crime we are calling for a radical change in the human mindset and value system. War had been with us since prehistoric times. Whenever human communities came into conflict with each other, they would resort to what we call “war” to resolve their conflicts i.e. they would kill each other so that one of the other of them would be defeated or cease to exist.

61. The primitive people of the past knew no other way but to kill and exterminate the opponents.

62. But today we claim to be no longer primitive. We claim to be civilise. We look upon killing as a heinous crime. We want every country to uphold human rights and the Rule of Law.

63. Besides today the population of the world is ten or more times bigger than the primitive populations of just a few centuries ago. Modern wars kill vast numbers of people. In the two World Wars 70 million people were killed. The number of seriously wounded and maimed for life is countless. And the devastation wrought is beyond imagination as whole cities were wiped out.

64. In the wars of the past, battles were fought on battle fields. The people killed were largely soldiers who had been trained to kill and were equipped to defend themselves.

65. Today everyone, combatants and non-combatants, male or female, the old, the young, the children and the new born, the sick and the incapacitated – all of them would be killed and wounded. They have no means to defend themselves.

66. They may not seek shelter underground even because diabolical new bombs have been designed to penetrate deep into the earth, to pierce concrete and to explode and to destroy the shelter and all in it.

67. Besides killing everyone, the whole country would be devastated, reduced to rubble. Water pipes, barrage and dams, power lines, and power generating plants would all be destroyed.

68. Those who survive the bombs and the missiles would have no food and water, no electricity, no toilets and no shelter of any kind. Disease would spread to decimate more of the survivors.

69. Truly modern war is total war sparing nothing and no one. Our capacities for killing and destroying have passed the limit that the world and its population can bear. We are now capable of wiping out the whole human race and render this planet uninhabitable.

70. Even if the war is limited i.e. confined to a pair of countries or region, it would still be inhuman as in most instances the aggressors would have such superior capacities to kill and destroy that gross injustice would be done. The weaker countries would not be able to defend themselves. Frequently they would be the only one to suffer while the aggressors continue to live in peace and security.

71. And when the war ends with victory for the powerful, only the vanquished would be blamed and punished. The victors would demand reparations although the vanquished had suffered more.

72. There is a need, to uphold justice, a need for the people including the leaders who launch the wars to be made accountable for the death and destruction resulting from their decision, their instruction and their command. It does not matter whether the aggressors win or not. They must be regarded as guilty and their leaders must be tried and punished, punished severely. Only this would deter the aggressive from resorting to war.

73. The United Nations was set up by the victors of 60 years ago and they still control and direct the Untied Nations today. Even the courts are under the control of the victors, in particular the veto powers.

74. For so long as the United Nations and its agencies are under the direction of the victors of 60 years ago, we cannot expect fairness and justice from them for the crimes of killing people in wars.

75. We can only expect fairness and justice if the agencies, in particular the Security Council and the international courts are made up of truly neutral people with no stake in the matters being decided. In particular the courts must be free and independent and must hear all complaints by both the victors and the vanquished without fear or favour.

76. Because we are not going to see such an independent court in the foreseeable future PGPO (the Perdana Global Peace Organization) has taken the initiative to set up a tribunal. We may be accused of being biased but we find reluctance on the part of neutralists to participate in our initiative. There is evidence that even those who are neutral fear retaliation by the powerful.

77. Since we cannot wait for the neutralists the tribunal we have set up is made up of judges who have been trusted to be impartial, fair and just. They will act in accordance with the rules and regulations which have been drawn up and be subjected to international laws as well as natural justice.

78. If the accused persons fail to present themselves then they may appoint counsel to represent them or failing that we will appoint counsels for them.

79. The proceedings of the courts will, as far as possible follow the usual court procedures under the British Common Law System.

80. The Commissioners will determine whether there is a case to be heard. Only if they find that there is will they submit their findings to the Tribunal. Then the victims or their proxies and representatives will present their cases.

81. The rest is up to the tribunal.

82. We may not be able to carry out the sentence passed by the Tribunal. But we hope Governments and NGO’s world wide will take note and try to make the punishment meaningful at least by ostracising the guilty ones.

83. We seek moral force as physical force will not be available to us. But the important thing is to make people everywhere appreciate the horrors of war and the criminal who without fear of any retribution have so carelessly issued orders for hundreds of thousands of innocent people to be killed, many to be tortured and for whole countries to be devastated.

84. We believe that eventually the peoples of the world will come to accept that war is a crime and will condemn the warmongers and regard them as criminals. And when this happens we may see the world becoming a more peaceful place.

85. That is our hope. It will take time for the mindset of the denizens of this planet to change with regard to the nature of war.

86. We may not see this happen in our lifetime, at least for most of us.

87. But the fact that we are not likely to see it in our lifetime must not stop us from this noble struggle. As Confucius said, a journey of thousand miles begins with the fist step. Without taking the first step the journey will never be made at all.

88. What we are doing is to take that first step.

89. God willing other steps will follow. Man must come to their senses some day. It will be a journey worth starting even if it takes a thousand years.

90. May God give us strength to struggle to eliminate the killing of people in the quest for solutions to human conflicts.

91. May Allah help us make war a crime, the worse crime that the human race can be guilty of.


# $ # $ # $ # $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $ # $ # $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $#

George Galloway MP speech (VIDEO): Please watch on this other site:

# $ # $ # $ # $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $ # $ # $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $#

Cynthia McKinney’s speech:

Cynthia McKinney
Flouting International Law and the Failure of International Institutions
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

October 28, 2009
To all of you here, I continue to be amazed by Tun Dr. Mahathir and Tun Dr. Siti for their vision, understanding of politics in the real world, and their willingness to confront the purveyors of evil in order to make the world better for all of us.

This Conference and Tribunal are the culmination of thousands of hours of hard work and is an incredible investment on behalf of justice.

Everyone in this room today is hungry for justice.  We are impatient for peace.

War is criminal and leaders who take their countries to war must be held accountable.

But sadly, we need Dr. Mahathir’s leadership even more than ever now because of the abject failure of national and international institutions to hold accountable those who have the power to call nations to arms.

It was Haris Silajdzic who said, “”If you kill one person, you’re prosecuted. If you kill ten people, you’re a celebrity; if you kill a quarter of a million people, you’re invited to a peace conference.”

That, I believe is an indication of the total and complete collapse of the system of accountability that is supposed to mark the progress of man.  Rogue operators are able to foment death and destruction, murder and torture, and general sociopathic recklessness and get away with it.

Sometimes, those rogue operators are Presidents and Heads of State.

What are the people to do when their justice system fails to render justice?

I believe we have seen a proliferation of People’s Tribunals because it is clear that many national justice systems and our international justice system rarely deliver justice.

Shortly after the outbreak of the “War on Terror,” the people of Japan came together and correctly saw that, amid the failure of international institutions to hold the United States accountable for war crimes in Afghanistan, they, themselves would have to do it.  So, the International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan was born.

The Japanese Tribunal found President George W. Bush guilty of war crimes for attacking civilians with indiscriminate weapons and other arms and also issued recommendations for banning depleted uranium munitions and other weapons that could indiscriminately harm people.  The Tribunal recommended compensating the victims in Afghanistan and reforming the United Nations for its failure to stop the U.S.-led operation there.

Even in the domestic setting, those seeking justice seldom find it inside U.S. courts.  In the U.S. setting, injustice is all too often reserved for those without money, without power, and without white skin.

One need only look at the plight of Hurricane Katrina survivors who still want to go home, but they have no right of return.  That’s because the developers, facilitated by weak or ineffective elected leadership, swooped in early and quickly and staked their claim to the people’s land.  Only the financial crisis has slowed the pace of the organized theft.

Consequently, Hurricane Katrina survivors, themselves, organized a People’s Tribunal to try U.S. elected leaders for committing multiple crimes against their own people.  I was a Co-Convener of this Tribunal, and we found all levels of government, including President George W. Bush’s Executive Branch of government guilty of Crimes Against Humanity.

The Brussels Tribunal, about which we will hear more later, has filed a brief in Spanish courts against U.S. Presidents and other Heads of Government responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity in Iraq.  Unfortunately, under tremendous pressure from the rich and the guilty, Spain is in the process of changing its universal jurisdiction laws and that removes that venue that was available for the people to get even a hearing.

So, rather than survey the juridical landscape with despair, some have gone one step further and attempted to serve warrants on the obviously guilty in their capacity as citizens.  One such individual is John Boncore, also known as Splitting-the-Sky.

Splitting-the-Sky is a Mohawk, member of the American Indian Movement, that was targeted by the United States government in its infamous and illegal Counter-Intelligence Program, known as COINTELPRO.  On March 17th of this year, Splitting-the-Sky was arrested in Calgary, Alberta, Canada where he tried to serve a citizen’s warrant for the arrest of President George W. Bush who had been invited to Canada to give a speech.  Splitting-the-Sky has asked me to testify at his March 2010 trial and I intend to be there.

In the advent of this War on Terror, it is clear that governments are straying far away from the wishes of the very people who elect them.  I served twelve years in the United States Congress and while I was there, I:

1.  Filed articles of impeachment against George Bush, Dick Cheney, and Condoleeza Rice;

2.  Voted against every Pentagon appropriation, considering it immoral to spend so much money on war when millions of our children go to bed hungry every night;

3.  Wrote legislation to ban the use of depleted uranium munitions;

4.  Was the first Member of Congress to ask the Bush Administration of the September 11, 2001 attack on the United States, what did it know and when did it know it;

5.  Led the Congressional Black Caucus Task Force at the 2001 World Conference Against Racism, defying President Bush’s boycott.

In December of 2007, I tried to take humanitarian supplies to the people of Gaza after the outbreak of Operation Cast Lead and the Israeli military rammed and destroyed our Free Gaza boat.

In June of this year, I tried to take crayons to the children of Gaza and the Israelis hijacked our boat, kidnapped us, took us to Israel, where I spent seven days in an Israeli prison because I wanted the people of Gaza to live–as I have been given life.

George Galloway finally got me into Gaza with Viva Palestina, U.S.A.

But my point of view was a decided minority in the powerful halls of Washington, D.C.

I left Washington, not because I chose to, but because the Israel Lobby inside the United States targeted me.  They targeted me because I dared to believe that all human beings, including Palestinians, have human rights.

In 2007, at a peace rally in front of the Pentagon, I declared my independence from a national leadership that had caused my country to become complicit in war crimes, torture, crimes against humanity, and crimes against the peace.

I joined the Green Party and in 2008, ran for President of the United States.  I traveled the length and breadth of my country and went around the world carrying the message of truth, justice, peace, and dignity.

That is how I arrived here.  Because people who want peace are drawn to Kuala Lumpur.  The people of Malaysia long ago learned that there can be no peace where there is no justice.

As the coup in Honduras unfolds, and countries are able to kill, maim, and attack other people with impunity, we must not give a pass to the new President of the United States whose slogans were “hope” and “change.” Sadly, “Yes We Can” has become “But he didn’t mean that he would.”

The people of the United States await action on jobs, the  economy, the war, the budget, education, and health care.  Yet, President Obama is responsible for overseeing the largest and swiftest transfer of wealth out of the hands of the middle class in the history of mankind:  over $12 trillion gone and another commitment for an additional $12 trillion whenever the bankers need it.

Meanwhile, the people of the U.S. scrape by on food stamps, unemployment, while they pray not to get sick, because that will bankrupt them.

The situation continues to deteriorate even as Nobel Peace Prize winner President Obama waits to announce his decision to increase the already 68,000-strong U.S. troop presence in Afghanistan.

Adding insult to injury, President Obama has sent his Justice Department officials into courtrooms across America to defend the illegal acts of the Bush Administration.  I have warned the President that he risks becoming an accessory to Bush’s crimes if this continues.  Now, the New York Times has picked up on the theme headlining:  “Bush’s Cover-Up of Abuse Turning into Obama’s Cover-Up.”

But, it was President Kennedy who reminded us that we do not want a Pax Americana enforced by U.S. weapons of war; he said, “What we seek is a genuine peace, that makes life on earth worth living—the kind of peace that enables nations to grow and build a better life for their children.”

If we had democracy in the U.S., we would not have war.

All of this is why we are now in Kuala Lumpur.  If Kuala Lumpur is the peace capital of the world, then it is to here that we must come for justice.

I’d like to introduce a song now that has been banned in South Africa, but that deserves to be heard all over the world.  It is a song about war and Gaza.

Thank you.

(The song can be found on the internet on youtube at:

# $ # $ # $ # $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $ # $ # $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $#

Proceedings and Hearing of KL War Crimes Commission and Tribunal respectively Bookelt



# $ # $ # $ # $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $ # $ # $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $#

Notes on International law pertaining to the execution of war crimes by Bush, Blair et al.

Some of these notes are patchy. sorry about that, they will remain so until I have time to fully expand upon all of them.

Carl von Clausewitz theory of war. Frankfurter. When the judiciary engage in illegal acts, the only appeal is to the conscinece and condemnation of the people. War OF Terror torture victim said to his captors, I don’t know what you want of me. “We’ll fill in the blanks, you just sign the confession document’ said his captors. In Guantanamo a War OF  Terror torture victim was brought a written confession and was told if he didn’t sign it he would be executed. He signed the confession as that he may get to a court (intested of being stuck in the current torture camp). He said there was no end to this. A physchaitrist went to him and gave him detailed instructions as to how to commit suicide. Tazi to the dark side – a movie includes US soldiers testimony about the things they did to their victims. Musharraff’s book ‘in the line of fire’ said he received millions in payment of counties from the capture and selling of al Quaida / Taleban ‘suspects’.  The psychological effects {of torture} were worse than the physical effects. Every 6 months we were forced to take injections. They didn’t know what was in them but they were told it was influenza jabs. They felt drowsy, lazy and sleepy. Sami al Hajj: After injections they became dizzy, some when insane. They promised him american citizenship and care(/education?) for his family if he agreed to work for the CIA. Abu Graib female torture victim (Ms. Abas Hamidi?) was arrensted for apparently being linked to (funding) the Iraqi Resistance. Offers of clothing was used for leverage for compliance by the Americans. They had women and children at Abu Graib which they attempted to keep hidden from the occasional media ‘tour’ then Abu Graib became known. She was placed at the open doors of a US helicopter on the way to Abu Ghraib and was told it was so that if there was any firing on the helicopter they would be hit and not the US soldiers. The US tried to get info from her about Dr. Huda Hamash.

1977 treaty covered the supression of terrorist bombings. Judge F. Boyle, Judge Shad Saleem. 1984 Torture convention says NOBODY can be subjected to torture. 1977 treaty protocol 1 and 2 dealt with terrorism < Judge F. Boyle. Female judge = Niloufer Bhagwat.  Proceedings from London peace conference 8th August 1945. US Army field manual. Nuremberg may have been ‘victors justice’ but after Nuremberg, the law used in Nurembers was unamamously (globally) agreed upon.

# $ # $ # $ # $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $ # $ # $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $# $ # $ # $#


0.01) This link was added Nov 12th 2009 : Criminalise War YOU TUBE channel

0.1) Matthais Chang The links below are in effect stolen from the superb Matthais Chang – in fact his website: Future Fast Forward website. I’m putting them here for continuity and in case they one day vanish from his website.



Opening Ceremony, War Crimes International Conference & Exhibition 2009, Kuala Lumpur

Multimedia Presentation, War Crimes International Conference & Exhibition 2009, Kuala Lumpur Part 1
Keynote Address By Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, War Crimes International Conference & Exhibition 2009, Kuala Lumpur Part 1

Keynote Address By Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, War Crimes International Conference & Exhibition 2009, Kuala Lumpur Part 2

Keynote Address By Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, War Crimes International Conference & Exhibition 2009, Kuala Lumpur Part 3

Keynote Address By Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, War Crimes International Conference & Exhibition 2009, Kuala Lumpur Part 4

Keynote Address By Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, War Crimes International Conference & Exhibition 2009, Kuala Lumpur Part 5

Muhammad Umar, Chairman of the Ramadhan Foundation on Peace And Justice, War Crimes International Conference & Exhibition 2009, Kuala Lumpur Part 1

Muhammad Umar, Chairman of the Ramadhan Foundation on Peace And Justice, War Crimes International Conference & Exhibition 2009, Kuala Lumpur Part 2

Muhammad Umar, Chairman of the Ramadhan Foundation on Peace And Justice, War Crimes International Conference & Exhibition 2009, Kuala Lumpur Part 3

Muhammad Umar, Chairman of the Ramadhan Foundation on Peace And Justice, War Crimes International Conference & Exhibition 2009, Kuala Lumpur Part 4

Video Interview with Muhammad Umar, Chairman of the Ramadhan Foundation, on Astro Awani Malaysia

George Galloway, British MP At The War Crimes International Conference and Exhibition, Kuala Lumpur


Is Tony Blair Fit To Become The President Of The European Council? – Is It Possible That He Should Be Tried For War Crimes? – By Peter Eyre (9/11/09)

Former UK Ambassador: CIA Sent People To Be ‘Raped With Broken Bottles’ – By Daniel Tencer (6/11/09)


1) “Illegal In Any Circumstances Whatsoever”
By Hon. Douglas Roche, O.C.
Chairman, Middle Powers Initiative
Address to Nuclear Age Peace Foundation Symposium
Nuclear Weapons and
the Abandonment of International Law



4) Torture exhibition photo gallery:

5) Brief summaries from some of the speakers at the Conference:

6) News about the Conference and Tribunal & Ruhal Ahmed’s story –,

7) Indonesian students soc blogpost Note:  damam bahasa Indon (In Indonesian/Malaysian language)

8) Touching upon the Jurisdiction of civilian courts: Bush and Blair accused of War Crimes:
Kuala Lumpur Tribunal: Criminalize War by Professor Shad Saleem Faruqi

9) World Tribunal On Iraq – The New York Hearings”… (something similar to the KL conference to Criminalize war)  Special thanks to George Dutton, on Craig Murrays website
Synopsys: Part of Deep Dish TV’s extensive video coverage of the war on Iraq. See also our 12 part series “Shocking and Awful” and our coverage from the final session in Istanbul of “The World Tribunal on Iraq” at Have leaders of the United States committed war crimes in Iraq? The evidence is beyond doubt or questiiom. The verdict is YES. The World Tribunal on Iraq was a global citizens inqiry of conscience that examined the charges of criminality in the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq. Modeled after the Satre-Bertrand Russell Vietnam War Tribunal, the WTI held 16 sessions around the world and assembled outstanding panels of jurists and witnesses to expolre and expose the ugly reality and intentionality of the American destruction of Iraq. Hearings were held in Genoa, Rome, Barcelona, Seoul, Mumbai, Brussels, Hiroshima, Copenhagen, New York City, with the concluding session in Istanbul, Turkey. In New York witnesses included Peter Weiss, Ayca Cubukca, Roger Normand, Mike Hoffman, Jenifer Ridah, Dr. Gert Van Moorter, Asil Bali and John Buroughs. Jurists included Eve Ensler, Hamdi Dabashi and Ibrahim Ramey. The film is overwhelming. Do not be complicit with the U.S. goverments war crimes. Show this evidence to as many people as possible.





Viva Palestina – break the siege:

Viva Palestina - break the siege

This blog supports victims of western aggression

This blog supports victims of western aggression

BooK: The Hand of Iblis. Dr Omar Zaid M.D.

Book: The Hand of Iblis
An Anatomy of Evil
The Hidden Hand of the New World Order
Summary Observations and History

Data on Fukushima Plant – (NHK news)

Fukushima Radiation Data

J7 truth campaign:

July 7th Truth Campaign - RELEASE THE EVIDENCE!

Recommended book: 3rd edition of Terror on the Tube – Behind the Veil of 7-7, An Investigation by Nick Kollerstrom:

J7 (truth) Inquest blog

July 7th Truth Campaign - INQUEST BLOG
Top rate analysis of the Inquest/Hoax

Arrest Blair (the filthy killer)

This human filth needs to be put on trial and hung!


JUST - International Movement for a Just World


Information Clearing House - Actual News and global analysis

John Pilger:

John Pilger, Journalist and author

Media Lens

My perception of Media Lens: Watching the corrupt corporate media, documenting and analysing how it bends our minds. Their book, 'Newspeak' is a gem.

Abandon the paper $cam:

Honest and inflation proof currency @ The Gold Dinar
November 2009