CYNTHIA MCKINNEY IN LONDON MARCH 8
Venue now fixed: SOAS in central London, 7.30pm
Please forward to green, peace, Palestinian, black and women’s networks
1,000 ENGINEERS AND ARCHITECTS DEMAND NEW 9/11 INVESTIGATION
Official 9/11 story not scientific and cannot be true, say experts
REINVESTIGATE ACTIVISTS MEETING TOMORROW THURSDAY FEB 18
UK GENERAL ELECTION PLANS
Kick out the neocons in all parties
CYNTHIA MCKINNEY IN LONDON MARCH 8
7.30 PM
School of Oriental and African Studies,
Russell Square,
London WC1H 0XG
Room B111, Brunei Building
Directions: Russell Square tube in Central London.
Walk west along north side of Russell Square to Thornhaugh Street.
Please forward to green, peace, Palestinian, black and women’s networks
Good news for UK human rights, peace movement, greens and 9/11 activists. Cynthia McKinney, for many years a congressional representative from Atlanta Georgia, and most recently US Green Party candidate for president, will be addressing a parliamentary meeting and later a public meeting on March 8 (International Women’s Day) at London University’s prestigious School of African and Oriental Studies.
The meetings have been organised by Reinvestigate 911 but Cynthia will be heard by people active in many campaigns. For many years Cynthia used her seat in Congress to give a platform to many disadvantaged groups, but in the end the Washington oligarchy was able to remove her. A vicious media campaign, lack of support from the Democratic leadership, massive funding of her local opponents and a well organised Republican crossover vote saw her removed in a primary in her Georgia constituency.
As well as supporting the rights of women, native Americans and others at home, Cynthia is a supporter of the Palestinian cause and risked her life on a boat that tried to lift the blockade of Gaza last year. She was arrested and held incommunicado in Israel for nearly a week.
Like the US Green Party, the UK Green Party, Reinvestigate 911 and most sensible 9/11 sceptics, Cynthia does not claim to know exactly how the 9/11 attacks really happened or exactly who was behind them – just that the event has gravely suspicious features, fitted in perfectly with the pre-existing neocon plans to seize Iraq, and that a real investigation has never been mounted. Cynthia was the only representative to ask public questions in Congress about the Pentagon’s “anti-hijack exercise” that was running at the time the 9/11 attacks took place.
Other speakers include Nafeez Ahmed a terrorism expert who has investigated the links between the CIA and “Al Qaeda”.
In addition organisers are planning a slideshow and videos including leading French humorist Jean-Marie Bigard making fun of the official 9/11 story. There will also be a surprise speech by The Queen. (It’s on a rather fuzzy video but it’s been reliably authenticated by the CIA and their friends over at the BBC Conspiracy Files) .
1,000 ENGINEERS AND ARCHITECTS DEMAND NEW 9/11 INVESTIGATION
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth are holding a major press conference in San Francisco this Friday Feb. 19th, at 11:00 AM to mark the 1000th expert to sign up to the demand for an independent scientific investigation into the rapid and symmetrical collapse of three high rise buildings on September 11 2001, buildings which were expressly designed to withstand an impact with a fully laden passenger jet.
AE are calling on cities all around the world organize mini press conferences, so that the information will spontaneously gel everywhere at once. Even if the press does not come, A&E are asking people to gather in front of an official building, read out the announcement, and take a photograph, and send it to A&E for their website..
Already in many parts of the world few believe the official story of 9/11, but the corporate media blackout of 9/11 evidence is crumbling even in places like Canada, Denmark, Holland, Germany and France. http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17624
REINVESTIGATE ACTIVISTS MEETING TOMORROW THURSDAY FEB 18
This working meeting is by invitation. Please contact info@reinvestigate911.org for the details. Anyone offering concrete help is welcome. We will be planning publicity for the Cynthia McKinney visit and discussing election strategy
UK GENERAL ELECTION PLANS
If you know of any candidates who are calling for a new investigation into the 9/11 attacks, please contact info@reinvestigate911.org. Here is a quick guide to the political landscape, based on our lobbying experience. There are 9/11 sceptics in all parties, as we know from organising our meetings in Parliament. The Green Party has voted for a new 9/11 investigation but in the teeth of fierce opposition form the careerist wing, led by Darren Johnson, their candidate in Lewisham. Libdems are widely sceptical but many are nervous of going public until after the election. Labour and the Tories have very mixed views. Some on the Left quietly welcomed 9/11 as payback for US policies, others support us. Libertarian tories (including at least one one-time Thatcherite) are more suspicious of 9/11 than mainstream tories.
We are calling on all anti-war activists, those worried about the emerging global oligarchy and those who support civil liberties at home to unite around a viable election strategy. One possibility, modelled on the highly successful Israel lobby, would be to target the worst candidates, the warmongers, for removal, and try to achieve a hung parliament as the next best thing to kicking out the scoundrels who we can’t remove.
We will support any new investigation of the 9/11 attacks so long as
*it is run by uncompromised people with a range of opinion including those inclined to disbelieve the official 9/11 story,
*it has full legal authority to demand immediate access to any evidence and any witness it chooses
*it follows the evidence wherever it leads
*it is given all the resources it requires to carry out its investigation
Reinvestigate 911 is supported by Coffee Plant (www.coffee.uk.com) suppliers of organic and Fairtrade coffees to caterers and retail customers. Phone 0208 453 1144
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)
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.
(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
3.45 pm PANEL SESSION
(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)
SPEECH BY TUN DR MAHATHIR BIN MOHAMAD AT THE CRIMINALISE WAR CONFERENCE AND WAR CRIMES TRIBUNAL 2009 AT PUTRA WORLD TRADE CENTER, KUALA LUMPUR ON WEDNESDAY, 28 OCTOBER 2009
WAR AND CRIME
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.
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: www.youtube.com/
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.
Muhammad Umar, Chairman of the Ramadhan Foundation on Peace And Justice, War Crimes International Conference & Exhibition 2009, Kuala Lumpur Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prQhHTOLPK4
Muhammad Umar, Chairman of the Ramadhan Foundation on Peace And Justice, War Crimes International Conference & Exhibition 2009, Kuala Lumpur Part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgIKKZGFZ5Y
Muhammad Umar, Chairman of the Ramadhan Foundation on Peace And Justice, War Crimes International Conference & Exhibition 2009, Kuala Lumpur Part 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nozlh404EAw
Muhammad Umar, Chairman of the Ramadhan Foundation on Peace And Justice, War Crimes International Conference & Exhibition 2009, Kuala Lumpur Part 4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1ilK37I-hs
9)World Tribunal On Iraq – The New York Hearings”… http://www.blip.tv/file/293217(something similar to the KL conference to Criminalize war) Special thanks to George Dutton, on Craig Murrays website Synopsys:http://www.deepdishtv.orgPart 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 http://www.deepdishtv.org. 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.
It’s been a great week. Despite having a headache (it’s caused somehow by my eyes, I know that) for about 3 days over the last week, I had the opportunity to meet the Palestinian Ambassador on Tuesday and today I got to meet Cynthia McKinney.
Before the event got started I had a quick chat with her about a number of things. Knowing time was scarce, I asked her if she had heard of the Kellogg-Briand pact. She seemed to have heard the name before, so I told her its alternative name:
I gave her a brief description of it, and scribbled her a note about it, including Chris Coverdale’s “Make War History” website. It seemed like the substance of the treaty/pact was new to her, so I felt happy that I was able to personally give a high profile and influential figure like Cynthia, some new and hopefully useful information. This only happened because of The Antagonist who along with the boys at iraqwar.mirror-world.ru who first brought this to my attention. My warm Thanks to them. It’s a testament to what could be called ‘the resistance’.
We had a bit of chat about Gaza. Those with global eagle-eyes will know the Israyhelli army rammed the boat she was on trying to deliver aid to the Palestinians. Cynthia can see and denounces Zionism in her country and occupied Palestine.
–
–
McKinney being interviewed on CNN standing beside the rammed boat. Since when can a ship in international waters take illegal potentially homocidal action OUTSIDE their maratime borders to prevent what they THINK MAY be an attempting to entering those borders. And what’s the big deal about a worning? If the Israyhelli’s did issue a warning, does that make the attempted homocide ok? Bloody Zionist dogs.
We also had a brief chat about what I called “Fiscal Year 2006 review committee”. I could tell Cynthia was searching her mind as to what I was talking about. It was actually a fiscal year 2006 Defence Dept. Budget session by the House Armed Services Committee. When I mentioned her hard quizzing of Rumsfeld and General Meyers she twigged. I told her how shocked I was that they just fobbed her off with npn-answers.
After, we chatted v. briefly about torture, and I mentioned John Yoo (a major SHITHEAD), ‘Professor’ of law at Berkely, who was saying it would be OK to crush the testicles of a child (to make the childs parents ‘spill the beans’ whilst under interrogation) because there was not law prohibiting it.
Whilst “on torture” I asked her if she had heard about the wonderful Craig Murray. She hadn’t so I gave her a 20 second summary of Craig and gave her details of how to look up our ex-Ambassador to Uzbekistan. Craig, meet Cynthia, Cynthia meet Craig :)
Poor Cynthia. She had been asked to do so much public speaking over the last few days that she was pretty close to losing her voice. And we had to end out chat as the ‘event’ was about to officially start.
We took our seats.
First off was some of the Honourable Doctors who had treated the incoming victims of the late 2008 / early 2009 Israyhelli holocaust of Gaza. They mentioned dreadful facts about their mission there. The said they [Israyhelli] official they had to speak to in order to negotiate a passage to the hospital, but them all together so that they could be targeted. Zionazi scumbags!
they then mentioned conditions and the injuries of the patients including babies who had been carbonised by white phosphorous and injuries from DIME.
The Palestinian Ambassador a few days ago mentioned DIME too. DIME is a new type of armament/weapon that when it explodes sends minute particles of shrapnel into the body of its victim. The particles are too numerous and small to enable successful and effective removal by surgery. What a disgusting weapon. Perhaps there are more humane weapons than others – when we look at the treatment of survivors, and DIME isn’t one of them! His Excellency Mr AbdulAziz Abughosh said the children die of cancer a number of months later (from that I surmised the weapons has been used prior to the Christmas 2008 Shoah).
A number of the pictures shown (in the presentation) of the victims from all the methodologies employed to obliterate them, were FAR worse than anything I had seen before. I could hear a number of people sniffing close to tears. The gentleman beside me seemed to be wiping away tears also.
The worlds silence – i.e. the GOVERNMENTS of the world, not so much the peoples, is an utter disgrace. Venezuela, Mauritania and Bolivia (Qatar?) excepted.
The amazing Doctors had to go to a different meeting so we bid them farewell. What superb examples of human beings they were.
The doctors said the Norwegians (largely perceived as an ‘honest’ country – guess they’ve managed to avoid Zionism) doctors took samples of the results of white phosphorous upon people (and other samples too I think) for analysis which naturally will help form a legal case against these EVIL killers.
Then Cynthia spoke.
Mentioning how she started to get in trouble with the Zionist lobby. As part of her committee work she came across documents that showed US taxpayers were funding the emigration of self-declared Jews form ANYWHERE in the world to Israyhell. She pursued this asking why this was so and that for a number of years the money was used as a slush fund and that the amount grew due to lack of claims. It was something like $4m a year, every year.
she also talked about the US attendance at Durban which was portrayed as a walk out in the global media, but Cynthia said it wasn’t that at all, just the US delegation had to leave. She spoke highly of the Durban conference.
Despite her sore throat, Cynthia didn’t tire of informing us about that was happening.
I think she said the biggest no-no she trespassed against was 9-11. She made reference to what’s known as the ‘dancing Israelies’ and the impossible failure of the multi billion dollar ‘defence’ industry which had ‘fail-safe’s’ to intercept (and stop?) hijacked planes. She also mentioned Able Danger.
Most people in the room seemed to be well informed of the so called ‘conspiracy’ side of things including of course the official conspiracy of the 9-11 report.
The British ‘report’ on 9-11 which she said at the end said the document wasn’t a legal document, i.e. a dossier of conjecture got a mention.
She mentioned how the Zionist lobby had conspired to get rid of her and that in Senate only 5(or 4) good eggs were present and 0 eggs Congress (or it could have been the other way around – actually I’ve never really bothered to learn the simple structure of US government so I get the two confused).
Cynthia also told us that Obama was ‘given’ his senate seat in Illinois. The opposing candidate ‘conveniently’ was involved in a divorce scandal.
It seems like Obama is a Manchurian candidate. Webster Tarple’s New book was on sale there. I didn’t buy it on purpose despite a 50-30% reduction as I’ve still got large numbers of books gathering dust which I still need to read. Saw a superb{I read a few pages} other book at my friends house Bilal Philips – The Fundamentals of Tawheed ISBN 9960-9648-0-9 – glad I brought my little notebook and pencil along!
Cynthia mentioned the people who voted for her in her presidential candidature, were hard-core people of conscience and that she keeps on going because she believes in the {paraphrase:} ability of the people to being a stop to what’s happening.
Every word she said had my fullest attention and I found NO difference of opinion as to what she was saying and my analysis of the situation. She was a but dismissive of Al Franken though. Al is a comedian and as things stands he is 225 votes ahead of Neocon Norm Coleman (I said 300 in the meeting) but of course, that lection is under legal deliberation. But the point was a comedian (who IMHO is likely to have Zionist connections) looks likely to win, which Cynthia was kind of saying sums the branches of government – its full of comedians.
Actually I read one of Al Franken’s book. Lies more Lies and the liars that tell them. In fact I read the updated version with “more lies and more liars”. Well, I read about half of it until I got a bit bored with Franken who had early on managed to get his whole point across – so from what I saw of his book, Franken does seem to have a brain (or perhaps that’s c/o his editors?)
Cynthia then went on to field a number of questions. One was about Obama. Cynthia in essence said “no change” at which point I wanted to interject saying “the only change is that instead a of white jackass of a man lying to you, a suave black man will do it instead” but it would be perceived as being interpreted as racist.
One lady in the crowd said she watched the inauguration and in case people had sussed out Obama and decided to assassinate him, she wanted to be the first to see it. I think what she said wasn’t expressed that well, but I’m sure you know what she meant.
Other things were said in which again I got the feeling almost everyone was in agreement with, such as it seemed to her the only way what’s happening in occupied Palestine is to break US support of Israyhell. That meant the US resistance movement must be supported.
I agree.
We must all try and help. She asked for support from those who could provide it, inc financial support. She’s right. Resistance DOES require funds, it is daft to poo-poo those who request financial help as being in the take. There is NO good reason to suspect anything malicious about CMK. Any serious resistance movement needs to spread info and rally support.
In a number of instances she mentioned the power of the Zionist lobby stems very much from their financial clout, and that she REFUSES to accept their money and give in. She said the Congress/Senate (?which?) had to take a pledge of loyalty to Israel.
About the reborn Bolivarian revolution sweeping South and Latin America, that support of the Chavez administration is vital to nurture opposition to the US. She said the 4th(?) fleet had been mobilised and that the US interference in Haiti was a geopolitical geostrategic work in progress in context of the Monroe doctrine to act as a kind of future gateway into Southern America.
Cynthia mentioned about her new resistance movement DIGNITY. Please check it out. Please consider lending your support to it.
Cynthia was just fantastic, despite tirelessly campaigning for a few days already she did splendidly today.
I met up with a number of new nice people as well as some old friends and it was great. Not as many young people in the Save the Palestinians meeting, but this a private invitation only.
Thank you Doctors, thank you Cynthia, and to the people for who my love and respect grows every day – my friends who organised it, provided the venue, food and the transport, thank you once more for allowing me the chance to try and do something to stop this madness.
And of course to the horrendously oppressed, butchered, dispossessed and traumatised people of Palestine you will always be my in my heart.
Sadly, I don’t think she can win. There are too many C&J Zionists and they are financially powerful and exert undue influence on the MSM.
Perhaps her bid will bring some (not so)common decency back to USans that still believe that might is right.
Anyway, here’s t short videos from the fantastic site Snowshoe films ( http://www.snowshoefilms.com/ ) for you to learn a little something about this courageous soul.
Living with the Conspiracy 24-7 
Recent Comments