Hasbara Buster
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2010
- Messages
- 4,612
- Reaction score
- -7
Protest To Your Own War Criminals?
Call For Their Arrest Prosecution Punishment!
By Jay Janson
October 06, 2012 "Information Clearing House" -Those intending to stop fellow Americans in Armed Forces uniform and in CIA disguise from continuing to mass murder in vulnerable or defenseless nations with the full cooperation, collaboration or acquiescence of most citizens, must no longer be silent about our fellow peace advocates forever protesting to divert the rest of us from calling for the immediate prosecution of those responsible for the millions slaughtered.
Perpetrators of homicidal crimes are not normally protested to. Unless cowed or complicit, people call for their arrest by the police, that society be protected. Did people in Chicago complain to Al Capone about his murderous protection racket? If folks find out the identity of a serial killer, do they write to him in protest?
How many want to be seen protesting the wars in order to feel good about themselves? How many veterans protest in order to be seen as reformed after having killed for the Military Industrial Complex? How many activists feel they are bringing honor to themselves when making a show of protesting in front of their own elected and reelected public servants, protesting though they realize every war will go on until investors signal government officials to end it? How many protesting to their own reelected war criminals would never go so far as to demand their arrest and prosecution?
When crime is investigated, whoever paid for the crime to be done is/are considered most guilty. It is no longer a secret that President Franklin Delano Roosevelt confided in a note to a colleague that all US governments since Andrew Jackson have been owned by a financial element in the centers of power.[1] Do antiwar activists address their protests to bankers Ben Shalom Bernanke, Henry Merritt Paulson, Timothy F. Geithner, Lawrence Henry Summers, or investors William Henry Gates, Warren Edward Buffett, Larry Ellison, Charles and Ed Koch, Christy, Jim, Alice, Robson and Ann Walton, Michael Bloomberg, George Soros, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission or the Bilderberg Group?
No, 'stop the war' calls are most always directed at the US president, sometimes with vituperation. In a recent widely republished article by a widely read antiwar leader, the metaphysical term 'Evil' was used, perhaps for dramatic effect. It is of course expressive and emotional and appropriate to call the continual murdering of Afghans under false pretenses 'Evil.' At first reading of this calling the wars Evil, I was grateful. However, 'Evil' is an abstract term denoting a metaphysical force to blame real untoward circumstances on and is not recognized anywhere in the scientific world, not in Biology, Anthropology, Sociology, not in the study of illnesses both physical and mental, and of no use in logically explaining anything at all or of any use in a court of law.
But 'illegal,' 'crime,' 'criminal.' legally insane,' 'crimes against humanity,' crimes against peace,' are all useful terms of actual explanation and are still used in courts of law and in discussions of violations of law prosecutable both by courts or in the court of public opinion (which very often leads to unignorable calls for arrest and charges to be filed).
Getting pushed around by Secret Service agents for asking the president to stop killing Afghans or uncovering signs like 'Hands Off Iran,' is no substitute for calling for his prosecution. When we hear that someone has stood up and told a murdering President that we will prosecute him as a war criminal, we'll know that we are on the right track and that our intention to end the killing will be taken seriously.
What is the purpose of sending salaried officials of peace organizations to visit Pakistan or Afghanistan to apologize for the kills of our elected government's military, composed of fellow American citizens daily murdering designated suspected enemies of the US along with a much greater number of collaterally murdered unsuspected Pakistani citizens and their children?
Is it to make those of us protesting look good? That it is not our fault? To make America look like it is divided in two, the guilty and the innocent, which it is most certainly not. To make it look as if protestors are doing something to stop the murders?
Pakistanis should respond, 'Why don't you tell your friends to stop murdering us? Why don't you arrest those that do as criminals? Why don't you? Do you even call for the law be enforced and prosecute those murdering us?'
But not to worry, the visiting veterans of other US illegal wars on humanity will probably not hear this. The Veterans For Peace are most likely apologizing to the very Pakistanis that are in cahoots with, and receiving money from, the US criminals respecting the wishes of the investment community led from Wall Street - otherwise it would be dangerous for ex-US soldiers to visit US hating Pakistan.
In the face of so much dishonesty within the peace movement, activists really intending to stop the illegal and undeclared atrocity 'wars' (officially police actions, or defensive preempting military responses), by calling for their prosecution should make joint cause - joint cause to promote an intention to prosecute these military atrocities under the full force of the law, actually many laws: Nuremberg Principles Six and Seven adhered to by all signers of the UN Charter, Treaty for the Renunciation of War, World Peace Act , previously Kellogg-Briand Pact, which became part of the US Constitution (as did the Nuremberg Principles) upon being approved by a US Senate vote of 85-1 Constitutional Law, and Common Law - the laws of humanity as handed down and recorded over the ages. There are, in addition, revered laws written in religious scripture, even if their implementation be presently blocked by corrupted organized clergy - cooperating with the devil so to speak.
When a law is not being enforced, it does not mean the law no longer exists. The law continues to exist in the hearts and minds of the people being victimized and will eventually be used to prosecute, sooner better than later in scholarly entries within documented histories.
The founders of the King Condemned US Wars International Awareness Campaign ,[2] Rev. Dr. King himself, and most of those who have endorsed his condemnations, are sure of the eventual prosecution of US wars against humanity.
What on earth can be more obvious than the need to call for prosecution, if a even a highly respected conservative Republican US Congressman candidate for president states over and over again that all these wars from Korea on were illegal and unconstitutional, often adding that they were therefore criminal because of the loss of so much life incurred, doubly criminal for being conducted under media promoted false pretenses.
Did a great roar of approval go up all from the hundreds of organizations that have the word 'peace' in their titles? Did they take the ball from Ron Paul and run with it? Most groups have multiple priorities, not only being in favor of and speaking about peace and opposing war either in particular or in general. Peace is often not the issue their members are focusing on. Those that have protecting the Obama presidency as a prime objective might have pretended not to have heard Ron Paul.
King quoted the words of the Italian poet Dante, that those who sit on the fence in times of moral crisis and maintain neutrality have the hottest fires in Hell reserved for them. Protesting while one is aware that wars have never been brought to an end or prevented through protest yet not calling for their prosecution can be seen as in effect only trying to look like one is not sitting on the fence.
In the nation made superpower through its wealthy, its banks, and its major corporations, having heavily invested in Adolph Hitler for years in full awareness of Nazi calls for Jews and communists to be brutally punished, [3] continuous US wars and militarism at home has long become second nature and 'working for peace' has become a lucrative business and profession.
Their are all kinds of organizations that feature the word 'peace.' At the extreme end of hypocrisy exist a veritable pleathora of well established organizations funded by groups of wealthy members of the wars creating corporatist class or the US government and CIA. The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace is a foreign-policy think tank with centers in Washington, D.C., Moscow, Beirut, Beijing, and Brussels. The organization describes itself as being dedicated to advancing cooperation between nations and promoting active international engagement by the United States.[Wikipedia] The Church Center building across from the UN, in the past, a venue for many antiwar speeches by former US Attorney General Ramsey Clark, is filled with of the offices NGOs in the peace business. Last week security advised me, "you just can't go up to visit. You need an appointment!" That day there was not even a roster of the offices listed in the lobby. One might suspect that the main purpose of most peace organizations affiliated with the UN, is to promote the media fostered idea that the UN, across the street, is maintaining peace in the world, and not facilitating the deadly foreign policy of its single world superpower member. But the purpose of this article is not to cast insinuation, so no further names will be mentioned here. Suffice to say, that there at least hundreds if not thousands of organizations pro peace in a way like all the presidents from Truman on, while they ordered covert mayhem, assassinations, bombings and invasions of smaller nations. Some good many of these organizations even hold to the idea that most of these president were paragons of virtue - a widespread and continuing affection for JFK, 'Ike' and Reagan, in spite of documentation they ordered crimes against humanity, comes to mind.
A word might be added that although churches and all houses of worship are by tradition peace promoting institutions, the Martin Luther King International Awareness campaign has as yet found no congregation in America that will endorse Rev. Dr. Kings condemnations of US wars and predatory investments, [*] although every Baptist church in America of predominately African-America congregation with listed email was contacted. Outside the US is a different story, yesterday the head of a congregation in Cameroon telephoned to endorse, and Archbishop Desmond Tutu early on sent his best wishes for King Condemned US Wars, [2] calling for its widest possible propagation.
When the King Condemned US Wars International Awareness Campaign [2] was kicked off at the venue of Martin Luther King Jr.' sermon, Beyond Vietnam - a Time to Break Silence, some fourteen months ago, yours truly, was quite naive about well known peace organizations and expected most of them to be enthusiastic about endorsing Martin Luther King Jr.' condemnation of US wars. At first I was taken aback by the many cold shoulders (even from the very organization that had pensioned Rev. Dr. King). It has become an important gain of information for this peoples historian in sorting out responses , i.e., flat rejection, "not our policy," "not at this time," "have already positioned ourselves against the Iraq war," "all our constituent members not in agreement with King's broad view," "the person who could make that decision is not ever available", etc. On the other hand, if one reviews the list of some seventy endorsers on the King Condemned US Wars web site[2] it is easy to imagine the thrill had in welcoming and thanking the wonderfully dedicated various both clergy connected and secular organizations, groups, and celebrities sincerely devoted to activities intended to bring an end to ongoing crimes against humanity.
This past spring, a week-end national conference of antiwar and justice organizations at a Hilton Hotel in a large metropolis in New England saw the introduction of a prescient proposed resolution by a Korean war veteran, long a member of Veterans For Peace,
The resolution, at last report not yet decided upon, is the same resolution presented at the August yearly Veterans Peace Convention held in Miami, this time by a past president, Elliot Adams, that has likewise not yet been decided upon. Elliot Adams made the newspapers when arrested near the Drone Air Base at Hancock, New York, at the gates of which was read Adam's written indictment of President Obama and all who have obeyed his criminal orders.[4] Adams, a hero for King followers, most often himself is under counter indictment for trespassing or resisting arrest. His exploits in defense of humanity are described on the educational web site Prosecute US Crimes Against Humanity Now . http://prosecuteuscrimesagainsthumanitynow.blogspot.com / [5]
Appended below is the text of the resolution which caused and is apparently is still causing much consternation among the committee members that steered both these past conventions and continue to have responsibilities that carry forward. The resolution calling for the promotion of public awareness that American presidents (there are five still alive), should be prosecuted for crimes against humanity, can be quite uncomfortable for those enjoying a socializing peace and justice vocation or avocation, and not looking for disapproval from the mass of the war supporting population. (Veterans For Peace was an early endorser of King Condemned US Wars ,and most of the Steering Committee of that national conference held in that Hilton Hotel were also endorsers, though the conference weekend activities had almost nothing to do with ending US wars.
The resolution:
"Whereas during WW II and the Allied occupation of Germany afterward, we soldiers, our folks back home and the citizens of the Germany invaded, bombed, and occupied nations in their hearts, to a great degree, held the German people responsible for the crimes of their soldiers and government, and
- whereas there be few adult Americans, who are not in some way or another complicit in the crimes committed by Americans against their brothers and sisters in colonially impoverished nations since WW II,
Be it resolved - - that those here assembled will seek to make the public aware of its power to end war acceptance; end war capability in our society; be aware of our citizen responsibility for the crimes against humanity illegally ordered by our elected public servants; and consider the shame of our participation. For during the year before his assassination, Martin Luther King Jr. demanded Americans take responsibility for the wars that were atrocities, agonizing over his own previous silence."
furthermore:
"whereas Martin Luther King Jr. finding no court willing to prosecute racist crimes, successfully led their prosecution in the court of public opinion;
- whereas Mahatma Gandhi finding no court would prosecute the crimes of the British Empire, successfully led their prosecution in the court of public opinion;
-and whereas the people of Iran finding their courts unwilling to prosecute the crimes of the Shah, successfully led their peoples prosecution in the court of public opinion;
- be it resolved that law-abiding Americans, finding that US courts will not bring the force of common law, statutory law, Constitutional law and Nuremberg Principles law down upon perpetrators of illegal wars on poor people in colonially impoverished nations, that we citizens of all walks of life will seek to lead prosecution of these illegal and homicidal wars in the court of public opinion to punish these crimes against humanity and prevent them from further happening until our courts can do so."
Activists who insist on simply protesting is the way to go, can point to Martin Luther King Jr. demanding "Everyone must protest" in the two US war condemning sermons he gave before he was shot dead.
However, King had only just begun his fight to bring an end to these wars for predatory investment profits of the capitalism he also denounced as unjust. During that year before he was silenced, after being vilified by corporate owned mass media as a traitor (with intention to reduce his popularity through intimidation), King witnessed a whole panoply of military actions illustrating those crimes against humanity by Americans, in the name of all Americans, as continuing and increasing in number, volume and spread.
Had King lived, he surely would have turned to demanding that US leaders responsible be indicted as war criminals in order to stop this worldwide reach of US crimes against humanity and the crimes of media deception he so detailed in his world shaking sermon Beyond Vietnam.[*]
King, and other activists, coming out of the civil rights movement and turning their attention to Vietnam, were realizing that there was already a body of laws, humane laws, on the books that clearly spoke to US invasions, bombings and and CIA activity as crimes against humanity. These were clear and simple laws, protective laws, unlike the weird, tricky and phony laws that had enforced a segregation so contrary to common law and human nature.
A month after King's assassination, during the trial for conspiracy to violate the Military Service Act of King's favored running mate as candidate for president, pacifist pediatrician Dr. Benjamin Spock, defense lawyers sought to introduce the UN Charter's Nuremberg Principles that describe what constitutes crimes against humanity.
Already the year before, British philosopher and playwright Bertrand Russell and French philosopher and playwright Jean-Paul Sartre, immediately following publication of Russell's book, War Crimes in Vietnam, had put together an International War Crimes Tribunal. The establishment of this investigative body was justified by quoting Nuremberg War Crimes Trials Chief Prosecutor Robert Jackson, speaking into the record at Nuremberg, "If certain acts and violations of treaties are crimes, they are crimes whether the United States does them or whether Germany does them. We are not prepared to lay down a rule of criminal conduct against others which we would not be willing to have invoked against us." The tribunal judges unanimously found the US and its allies guilty of genocide in Vietnam.
The fact that this attempt by eminent world citizens to indict had failed to gain much momentum, blacked-out of the news as it was by war investor owned mass media, would not have deterred King from planning an effort on his own.[6]
Loud and ostentatious protest to one's own reelected public servants? Looking good protesting wars run by our own reelected officials and those they appoint? Laudable expression of free speech in a nation in which few make use of this freedom can be appreciated. But, does anyone expect protest to end or prevent the massive killing from happening? What incentive do investors in war have to end what is extremely profitable in their portfolios? What might deter anyone planing to have people killed for money? The answer: only future imprisonment or worse punishment.
As impossible as it sounds now in this present era of Orwellian mass-media psyop deception successfully leading the gullible majority to support, condone, or acquiesce to taking part in continuos mass-murder by one's own countrymen on a previously unimaginable scale, a minority of Americans and citizens abroad, still capable of the kind of discerning independent thinking that can penetrate the worldwide reaching screen of calculated lies, will constitute that segment of the US and world population that will somehow bring Martin Luther King Jr.' and Gandhi's courageous call for moral responsibility and the prosecution of our businesslike war criminals. Convict and imprison them in time to prevent the mega-profitable use of the frightening amount of weapons of mass destruction they are massively investing in.
Internet access mitigates in humanity's favor. Each of us can now assure our media victimized friends that free subscriptions to Global Research and Information Clearing House daily newsletters would be enough to soon make listening to Wolf Blizter, Judy Woodruff and Charlie Rose turn one's stomach. Each friend telling more friends will build the critical mass of the informed necessary to force prosecutions.
Two towns in Vermont have shown us the way by passing city ordinances for the arrest of the President and Vice President of their country should they dare to put foot in their town's jurisdiction.
Americans can prosecute their own war criminals or wait until the world prosecutes Americans.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article32661.htm
Call For Their Arrest Prosecution Punishment!
By Jay Janson
October 06, 2012 "Information Clearing House" -Those intending to stop fellow Americans in Armed Forces uniform and in CIA disguise from continuing to mass murder in vulnerable or defenseless nations with the full cooperation, collaboration or acquiescence of most citizens, must no longer be silent about our fellow peace advocates forever protesting to divert the rest of us from calling for the immediate prosecution of those responsible for the millions slaughtered.
Perpetrators of homicidal crimes are not normally protested to. Unless cowed or complicit, people call for their arrest by the police, that society be protected. Did people in Chicago complain to Al Capone about his murderous protection racket? If folks find out the identity of a serial killer, do they write to him in protest?
How many want to be seen protesting the wars in order to feel good about themselves? How many veterans protest in order to be seen as reformed after having killed for the Military Industrial Complex? How many activists feel they are bringing honor to themselves when making a show of protesting in front of their own elected and reelected public servants, protesting though they realize every war will go on until investors signal government officials to end it? How many protesting to their own reelected war criminals would never go so far as to demand their arrest and prosecution?
When crime is investigated, whoever paid for the crime to be done is/are considered most guilty. It is no longer a secret that President Franklin Delano Roosevelt confided in a note to a colleague that all US governments since Andrew Jackson have been owned by a financial element in the centers of power.[1] Do antiwar activists address their protests to bankers Ben Shalom Bernanke, Henry Merritt Paulson, Timothy F. Geithner, Lawrence Henry Summers, or investors William Henry Gates, Warren Edward Buffett, Larry Ellison, Charles and Ed Koch, Christy, Jim, Alice, Robson and Ann Walton, Michael Bloomberg, George Soros, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission or the Bilderberg Group?
No, 'stop the war' calls are most always directed at the US president, sometimes with vituperation. In a recent widely republished article by a widely read antiwar leader, the metaphysical term 'Evil' was used, perhaps for dramatic effect. It is of course expressive and emotional and appropriate to call the continual murdering of Afghans under false pretenses 'Evil.' At first reading of this calling the wars Evil, I was grateful. However, 'Evil' is an abstract term denoting a metaphysical force to blame real untoward circumstances on and is not recognized anywhere in the scientific world, not in Biology, Anthropology, Sociology, not in the study of illnesses both physical and mental, and of no use in logically explaining anything at all or of any use in a court of law.
But 'illegal,' 'crime,' 'criminal.' legally insane,' 'crimes against humanity,' crimes against peace,' are all useful terms of actual explanation and are still used in courts of law and in discussions of violations of law prosecutable both by courts or in the court of public opinion (which very often leads to unignorable calls for arrest and charges to be filed).
Getting pushed around by Secret Service agents for asking the president to stop killing Afghans or uncovering signs like 'Hands Off Iran,' is no substitute for calling for his prosecution. When we hear that someone has stood up and told a murdering President that we will prosecute him as a war criminal, we'll know that we are on the right track and that our intention to end the killing will be taken seriously.
What is the purpose of sending salaried officials of peace organizations to visit Pakistan or Afghanistan to apologize for the kills of our elected government's military, composed of fellow American citizens daily murdering designated suspected enemies of the US along with a much greater number of collaterally murdered unsuspected Pakistani citizens and their children?
Is it to make those of us protesting look good? That it is not our fault? To make America look like it is divided in two, the guilty and the innocent, which it is most certainly not. To make it look as if protestors are doing something to stop the murders?
Pakistanis should respond, 'Why don't you tell your friends to stop murdering us? Why don't you arrest those that do as criminals? Why don't you? Do you even call for the law be enforced and prosecute those murdering us?'
But not to worry, the visiting veterans of other US illegal wars on humanity will probably not hear this. The Veterans For Peace are most likely apologizing to the very Pakistanis that are in cahoots with, and receiving money from, the US criminals respecting the wishes of the investment community led from Wall Street - otherwise it would be dangerous for ex-US soldiers to visit US hating Pakistan.
In the face of so much dishonesty within the peace movement, activists really intending to stop the illegal and undeclared atrocity 'wars' (officially police actions, or defensive preempting military responses), by calling for their prosecution should make joint cause - joint cause to promote an intention to prosecute these military atrocities under the full force of the law, actually many laws: Nuremberg Principles Six and Seven adhered to by all signers of the UN Charter, Treaty for the Renunciation of War, World Peace Act , previously Kellogg-Briand Pact, which became part of the US Constitution (as did the Nuremberg Principles) upon being approved by a US Senate vote of 85-1 Constitutional Law, and Common Law - the laws of humanity as handed down and recorded over the ages. There are, in addition, revered laws written in religious scripture, even if their implementation be presently blocked by corrupted organized clergy - cooperating with the devil so to speak.
When a law is not being enforced, it does not mean the law no longer exists. The law continues to exist in the hearts and minds of the people being victimized and will eventually be used to prosecute, sooner better than later in scholarly entries within documented histories.
The founders of the King Condemned US Wars International Awareness Campaign ,[2] Rev. Dr. King himself, and most of those who have endorsed his condemnations, are sure of the eventual prosecution of US wars against humanity.
What on earth can be more obvious than the need to call for prosecution, if a even a highly respected conservative Republican US Congressman candidate for president states over and over again that all these wars from Korea on were illegal and unconstitutional, often adding that they were therefore criminal because of the loss of so much life incurred, doubly criminal for being conducted under media promoted false pretenses.
Did a great roar of approval go up all from the hundreds of organizations that have the word 'peace' in their titles? Did they take the ball from Ron Paul and run with it? Most groups have multiple priorities, not only being in favor of and speaking about peace and opposing war either in particular or in general. Peace is often not the issue their members are focusing on. Those that have protecting the Obama presidency as a prime objective might have pretended not to have heard Ron Paul.
King quoted the words of the Italian poet Dante, that those who sit on the fence in times of moral crisis and maintain neutrality have the hottest fires in Hell reserved for them. Protesting while one is aware that wars have never been brought to an end or prevented through protest yet not calling for their prosecution can be seen as in effect only trying to look like one is not sitting on the fence.
In the nation made superpower through its wealthy, its banks, and its major corporations, having heavily invested in Adolph Hitler for years in full awareness of Nazi calls for Jews and communists to be brutally punished, [3] continuous US wars and militarism at home has long become second nature and 'working for peace' has become a lucrative business and profession.
Their are all kinds of organizations that feature the word 'peace.' At the extreme end of hypocrisy exist a veritable pleathora of well established organizations funded by groups of wealthy members of the wars creating corporatist class or the US government and CIA. The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace is a foreign-policy think tank with centers in Washington, D.C., Moscow, Beirut, Beijing, and Brussels. The organization describes itself as being dedicated to advancing cooperation between nations and promoting active international engagement by the United States.[Wikipedia] The Church Center building across from the UN, in the past, a venue for many antiwar speeches by former US Attorney General Ramsey Clark, is filled with of the offices NGOs in the peace business. Last week security advised me, "you just can't go up to visit. You need an appointment!" That day there was not even a roster of the offices listed in the lobby. One might suspect that the main purpose of most peace organizations affiliated with the UN, is to promote the media fostered idea that the UN, across the street, is maintaining peace in the world, and not facilitating the deadly foreign policy of its single world superpower member. But the purpose of this article is not to cast insinuation, so no further names will be mentioned here. Suffice to say, that there at least hundreds if not thousands of organizations pro peace in a way like all the presidents from Truman on, while they ordered covert mayhem, assassinations, bombings and invasions of smaller nations. Some good many of these organizations even hold to the idea that most of these president were paragons of virtue - a widespread and continuing affection for JFK, 'Ike' and Reagan, in spite of documentation they ordered crimes against humanity, comes to mind.
A word might be added that although churches and all houses of worship are by tradition peace promoting institutions, the Martin Luther King International Awareness campaign has as yet found no congregation in America that will endorse Rev. Dr. Kings condemnations of US wars and predatory investments, [*] although every Baptist church in America of predominately African-America congregation with listed email was contacted. Outside the US is a different story, yesterday the head of a congregation in Cameroon telephoned to endorse, and Archbishop Desmond Tutu early on sent his best wishes for King Condemned US Wars, [2] calling for its widest possible propagation.
When the King Condemned US Wars International Awareness Campaign [2] was kicked off at the venue of Martin Luther King Jr.' sermon, Beyond Vietnam - a Time to Break Silence, some fourteen months ago, yours truly, was quite naive about well known peace organizations and expected most of them to be enthusiastic about endorsing Martin Luther King Jr.' condemnation of US wars. At first I was taken aback by the many cold shoulders (even from the very organization that had pensioned Rev. Dr. King). It has become an important gain of information for this peoples historian in sorting out responses , i.e., flat rejection, "not our policy," "not at this time," "have already positioned ourselves against the Iraq war," "all our constituent members not in agreement with King's broad view," "the person who could make that decision is not ever available", etc. On the other hand, if one reviews the list of some seventy endorsers on the King Condemned US Wars web site[2] it is easy to imagine the thrill had in welcoming and thanking the wonderfully dedicated various both clergy connected and secular organizations, groups, and celebrities sincerely devoted to activities intended to bring an end to ongoing crimes against humanity.
This past spring, a week-end national conference of antiwar and justice organizations at a Hilton Hotel in a large metropolis in New England saw the introduction of a prescient proposed resolution by a Korean war veteran, long a member of Veterans For Peace,
The resolution, at last report not yet decided upon, is the same resolution presented at the August yearly Veterans Peace Convention held in Miami, this time by a past president, Elliot Adams, that has likewise not yet been decided upon. Elliot Adams made the newspapers when arrested near the Drone Air Base at Hancock, New York, at the gates of which was read Adam's written indictment of President Obama and all who have obeyed his criminal orders.[4] Adams, a hero for King followers, most often himself is under counter indictment for trespassing or resisting arrest. His exploits in defense of humanity are described on the educational web site Prosecute US Crimes Against Humanity Now . http://prosecuteuscrimesagainsthumanitynow.blogspot.com / [5]
Appended below is the text of the resolution which caused and is apparently is still causing much consternation among the committee members that steered both these past conventions and continue to have responsibilities that carry forward. The resolution calling for the promotion of public awareness that American presidents (there are five still alive), should be prosecuted for crimes against humanity, can be quite uncomfortable for those enjoying a socializing peace and justice vocation or avocation, and not looking for disapproval from the mass of the war supporting population. (Veterans For Peace was an early endorser of King Condemned US Wars ,and most of the Steering Committee of that national conference held in that Hilton Hotel were also endorsers, though the conference weekend activities had almost nothing to do with ending US wars.
The resolution:
"Whereas during WW II and the Allied occupation of Germany afterward, we soldiers, our folks back home and the citizens of the Germany invaded, bombed, and occupied nations in their hearts, to a great degree, held the German people responsible for the crimes of their soldiers and government, and
- whereas there be few adult Americans, who are not in some way or another complicit in the crimes committed by Americans against their brothers and sisters in colonially impoverished nations since WW II,
Be it resolved - - that those here assembled will seek to make the public aware of its power to end war acceptance; end war capability in our society; be aware of our citizen responsibility for the crimes against humanity illegally ordered by our elected public servants; and consider the shame of our participation. For during the year before his assassination, Martin Luther King Jr. demanded Americans take responsibility for the wars that were atrocities, agonizing over his own previous silence."
furthermore:
"whereas Martin Luther King Jr. finding no court willing to prosecute racist crimes, successfully led their prosecution in the court of public opinion;
- whereas Mahatma Gandhi finding no court would prosecute the crimes of the British Empire, successfully led their prosecution in the court of public opinion;
-and whereas the people of Iran finding their courts unwilling to prosecute the crimes of the Shah, successfully led their peoples prosecution in the court of public opinion;
- be it resolved that law-abiding Americans, finding that US courts will not bring the force of common law, statutory law, Constitutional law and Nuremberg Principles law down upon perpetrators of illegal wars on poor people in colonially impoverished nations, that we citizens of all walks of life will seek to lead prosecution of these illegal and homicidal wars in the court of public opinion to punish these crimes against humanity and prevent them from further happening until our courts can do so."
Activists who insist on simply protesting is the way to go, can point to Martin Luther King Jr. demanding "Everyone must protest" in the two US war condemning sermons he gave before he was shot dead.
However, King had only just begun his fight to bring an end to these wars for predatory investment profits of the capitalism he also denounced as unjust. During that year before he was silenced, after being vilified by corporate owned mass media as a traitor (with intention to reduce his popularity through intimidation), King witnessed a whole panoply of military actions illustrating those crimes against humanity by Americans, in the name of all Americans, as continuing and increasing in number, volume and spread.
Had King lived, he surely would have turned to demanding that US leaders responsible be indicted as war criminals in order to stop this worldwide reach of US crimes against humanity and the crimes of media deception he so detailed in his world shaking sermon Beyond Vietnam.[*]
King, and other activists, coming out of the civil rights movement and turning their attention to Vietnam, were realizing that there was already a body of laws, humane laws, on the books that clearly spoke to US invasions, bombings and and CIA activity as crimes against humanity. These were clear and simple laws, protective laws, unlike the weird, tricky and phony laws that had enforced a segregation so contrary to common law and human nature.
A month after King's assassination, during the trial for conspiracy to violate the Military Service Act of King's favored running mate as candidate for president, pacifist pediatrician Dr. Benjamin Spock, defense lawyers sought to introduce the UN Charter's Nuremberg Principles that describe what constitutes crimes against humanity.
Already the year before, British philosopher and playwright Bertrand Russell and French philosopher and playwright Jean-Paul Sartre, immediately following publication of Russell's book, War Crimes in Vietnam, had put together an International War Crimes Tribunal. The establishment of this investigative body was justified by quoting Nuremberg War Crimes Trials Chief Prosecutor Robert Jackson, speaking into the record at Nuremberg, "If certain acts and violations of treaties are crimes, they are crimes whether the United States does them or whether Germany does them. We are not prepared to lay down a rule of criminal conduct against others which we would not be willing to have invoked against us." The tribunal judges unanimously found the US and its allies guilty of genocide in Vietnam.
The fact that this attempt by eminent world citizens to indict had failed to gain much momentum, blacked-out of the news as it was by war investor owned mass media, would not have deterred King from planning an effort on his own.[6]
Loud and ostentatious protest to one's own reelected public servants? Looking good protesting wars run by our own reelected officials and those they appoint? Laudable expression of free speech in a nation in which few make use of this freedom can be appreciated. But, does anyone expect protest to end or prevent the massive killing from happening? What incentive do investors in war have to end what is extremely profitable in their portfolios? What might deter anyone planing to have people killed for money? The answer: only future imprisonment or worse punishment.
As impossible as it sounds now in this present era of Orwellian mass-media psyop deception successfully leading the gullible majority to support, condone, or acquiesce to taking part in continuos mass-murder by one's own countrymen on a previously unimaginable scale, a minority of Americans and citizens abroad, still capable of the kind of discerning independent thinking that can penetrate the worldwide reaching screen of calculated lies, will constitute that segment of the US and world population that will somehow bring Martin Luther King Jr.' and Gandhi's courageous call for moral responsibility and the prosecution of our businesslike war criminals. Convict and imprison them in time to prevent the mega-profitable use of the frightening amount of weapons of mass destruction they are massively investing in.
Internet access mitigates in humanity's favor. Each of us can now assure our media victimized friends that free subscriptions to Global Research and Information Clearing House daily newsletters would be enough to soon make listening to Wolf Blizter, Judy Woodruff and Charlie Rose turn one's stomach. Each friend telling more friends will build the critical mass of the informed necessary to force prosecutions.
Two towns in Vermont have shown us the way by passing city ordinances for the arrest of the President and Vice President of their country should they dare to put foot in their town's jurisdiction.
Americans can prosecute their own war criminals or wait until the world prosecutes Americans.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article32661.htm
