http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=6638
Saturday 25th June 2005 (18h41) :
Beyond Impeachment: The Bush Administration as War Criminals
1 comment(s).
In the wake of the Downing Street Memo and other leaked British documents
created before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, many have begun to question the
legality of the Bush administration’s actions. In particular, families of
soldiers, a few Democratic senators, and hundreds of thousands of outraged
Americans, are calling for an independent investigation of the Bush
administration’s manipulation and outright fabrication of intelligence to
justify the invasion of Iraq. The word "impeachment" is even being bandied
about.
While it is certainly appropriate to demand an independent investigation of
the Bush administration’s pre-invasion shenanigans, as well as to pursue
bringing articles of impeachment against the President for his official
misconduct, there is something larger at stake. There is the matter of the
Bush administration’s post-invasion atrocities.
Pursuant to U.N. Security Council Resolution 1483, adopted on May 22, 2003,
the U.S. and the United Kingdom identified themselves and were recognized as
the occupying powers of Iraq. As an occupying power, the U.S. accepted duties
that were coextensive with its area of occupation. That is, the greater its
degree of control, the greater its degree of responsibility.
With the creation of the Coalition Provisional Authority, headed by men
hand-picked by the Bush administration, the U.S. clearly and undeniably took
control over every aspect of what remained of Iraq. Likewise, the CPA, by and
through the U.S. military, provided the security (such that it was), created
and enforced the laws (such as they were), and provided any semblance of
infrastructure following the ouster of Saddam. In short, the U.S., and its
coalition of the willing, assumed total control of post-Saddam Iraq.
The so-called handover of "authority" to the Iraqi transitional government did
not change the status of the U.S. as an occupying force. The transitional
government has no authority over the U.S. military or its civilian
contractors. Indeed, without the presence of the U.S. military, there would be
no transitional government. Furthermore, the transitional government operates
under laws and regulations created and promulgated by the CPA. Therefore, the
Iraqi transitional government is itself governed by the law of the occupying
force, rendering it little more than a facade.
Having assumed control as an occupying power, the U.S. also assumed
responsibility for what occurred during its occupation of Iraq. Among its
responsibilities to the people of Iraq is the duty to ensure against violence
to life and person, including cruel treatment and torture, as required under
Article 3 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Article 3 establishes a minimum set
of rights for all persons under occupation, regardless of their status as
civilian, unprivileged belligerent, terrorist, or war criminal. (The United
States is not only a signatory to the Fourth Convention, but also expressly
recognizes the requirements of Article 3 via the War Crimes Act of 1996.)
Furthermore, under Article 31 of the Fourth Convention, "No physical or moral
coercion shall be exercised against protected persons [those subject to
occupation], in particular to obtain information from them or from third
parties." Article 147 expressly eliminates the defense of military necessity.
In his report regarding the investigation of prisoner abuse by and
interrogation techniques of the U.S. military at Abu Ghraib, Major General
Antonio M. Taguba found "numerous incidents of sadistic, blatant, and wanton
criminal abuses," which were "systemic" and "intentionally perpetrated." Aside
from the acts of "physical and moral" coercion graphically depicted in the
notorious Abu Ghraib photographs, Gen. Taguba found credible evidence of
"breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees," as
well as "sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom
stick."
The interrogation tactics were imported from Guantanamo Bay where they were
already known to be in violation of the Geneva Conventions and international
law. Such tactics included the use of dogs, stripping prisoners naked, causing
physical pain, exploiting Islamic concerns for modesty, sleep deprivation,
isolated confinement, and chaining detainees to the floor for extended periods
of time. All of these techniques were approved by the Bush administration,
developed at Guantanamo, exported to Abu Ghraib, and known to be in violation
of the Geneva Conventions.
Indeed, the interrogation techniques developed at Guantanamo and subsequently
employed at Abu Ghraib were created pursuant to President Bush’s declaration
in February 2002 that those detained at Guantanamo were outside the
protections of the Geneva Conventions. At the same time that the Bush
administration was openly declaring the Geneva Conventions inapplicable to its
war on terror, it was requesting legal justification from the Departments of
Justice and Defense for interrogation involving physical abuse. Therefore,
while the Bush administration might not have expressly authorized the more
barbaric abuses which occurred at Abu Ghraib, by so radically changing and
rejecting the laws of war, the Bush administration most certainly knew that
the systemic sadism at Abu Ghraib was likely, if not certain.
As recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court in the decision In re Yamashita, "the
law of war presupposes that its violation is to be avoided through the control
of the operations of war by commanders who are to some extent responsible for
their subordinates." It is clear from another decision by the U.S. Supreme
Court, Madsen v. Kinsella, that President Bush, as Commander-in-Chief of the
military, is the commander of the military force by which the occupation of
Iraq is held. Thus, Bush is responsible for the criminal acts of his
subordinates in Iraq. Furthermore, based upon the "torture memos" commissioned
by the White House, Bush certainly should have known that torture and abuse
would be perpetrated at Abu Ghraib. For the White House to claim otherwise
strains credulity.
As the occupying power, the U.S. is also obligated under Article 3 of the
Fourth Convention to ensure that "the wounded and sick shall be collected and
cared for." Thus, the intentional failure to provide adequate medical
treatment, or a policy of denial and neglect involving foreseeable
consequences, would be a clear violation of this duty.
Nevertheless, as repeatedly reported by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty
International, as well as by the BBC and the New York Times, and as recently
documented by journalist Dahr Jamail in his report, "Iraqi Hospitals Ailing
Under Occupation," the U.S. is in gross violation of Article 3.
For instance, on November 6, 2004, as a prelude to its invasion of Fallujah,
the U.S. military razed Nazal Emergency Hospital, the city’s only healthcare
facility for trauma victims. U.S. forces also detained doctors and patients,
and prevented any surgeons from entering the besieged city. At Fallujah
General Hospital, U.S. forces closed off all access roads and surrounded the
hospital with troops and vehicles, preventing patients from getting medical
care. Additionally, U.S. snipers targeted civilian ambulances and medical
clinics, and intentionally prevented physicians from entering hospitals to
treat patients. U.S. troops also prohibited the delivery of necessary
medicines or supplies into Fallujah. Similar incidences occurred during the
U.S. military’s recent offensive in Al Qa’im. Not only do these actions
constitute gross violations of the Fourth Geneva Convention, they also
constitute war crimes under Article 8 of the Rome Statute of the International
Criminal Court. Under the Rome Statute, it is a war crime to attack personnel
or objects (i.e., ambulances and hospitals) involved in humanitarian
assistance. It is also a war crime to attack "protected objects," including
"hospitals or placed where the sick and wounded are collected."
As Commander-in-Chief of the military, Bush is liable for the acts of his
subordinates in Fallujah and Al Qa’im. Bush meets regularly with the Joint
Chiefs of Staff and is fully briefed on military operations in Iraq. He
authorizes military operations (or at least acquiesces to them) and knows or
should know something about what they entail. As such, he cannot reasonably
plead ignorance of the consequences of his orders and decisions.
Moreover, Bush and his administration knowingly and deliberately created a
climate in which it is presumed that the Geneva Conventions and international
law are inapplicable to the crusade against terror. Not only did Bush issue
his presidential memorandum declaring the Geneva Conventions inapplicable to
terrorists (or alleged terrorists, as is more often the case), but his
administration has been openly hostile to international bodies and laws which
could hold him and his administration accountable.
For instance, aside from its obsessive denigration of the United Nations, the
Bush administration is zealously opposed to the International Criminal Court
and has even gone so far as to withhold aid from nations who refuse to sign
agreements immunizing suspected U.S. war criminals from ICC prosecution. In
some cases, the immunity agreements are reciprocal and the U.S. has agreed not
to turn over to the ICC accused war criminals from Georgia, Sierra Leon,
Tajikistan, Uganda, Israel, and Nicaragua, among others. Not exactly a group
that staunchly protects and respects human rights and international law.
In such a climate, is it any wonder U.S. forces in Iraq torture prisoners,
shoot at ambulances, and reduce hospitals to rubble? It certainly shouldn’t be
to Bush and his partners in crime.
http://www.politicalaffairs.net/art...
by : Ken Sanders
Saturday 25th June 2005
'The Lies Of War Can No Longer Be Ignored By The Press'
http://www.rense.com/general66/lies.htm
WHO OWNS THE US CONGRESS?!
And check out how much money Dick Durbin takes from pro-Israel PACS.
http://www.wrmea.com/archives/July_Aug_2004/0407027.html
Dump Bush And The Congress He Rode In On
http://colorado.indymedia.org/newswire/display/11221/index.php
'Protection Racket for Cheney'
The burning questions in Washington and in world capitals today are: Why
hasn't Vice President Dick Cheney, the leading chicken-hawk behind the
suicidal perpetual-war push of the Bush Administration, been forced to resign
yet—even after he has been implicated in the use of known forged documents to
manipulate Presidential and Congressional support for the Iraq War?
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2003/3026dlc_n_cheney.html
A Look At The Powerful Jewish Lobby In America
http://www.rense.com/general27/jlobby.htm
Spotlight on AIPAC
http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=news_international&Number=293723510&page=&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=21&vc=1&t=0#Post293723510
Al-Qaeda, Iran and the next 9/11
The propaganda from the U.S. has been growing at an increasing rate against
Iran, with attempts to tie them to al-Zarqawi, Osama bin Laden, other
terrorists that hide there and of course nuclear weapons.
http://www.profindpages.com/news/2005/06/16/MN983.htm
US Troops Plant Weapons On Civillian Kills In Order To Claim They Are
Insurgents!
Just Like The Police Do !
http://cryptome.org/bkz/buhriz-kill02.htm
Israel Targeted female Marines in a False Flag Psy-Op
http://www.libertyforum.org/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=news_members&Number=293730863
THE TOWER:PART5
http://hometown.aol.com/oldhipchic1959/page3.html
"Generals Gathered In Their Masses
Just like Witches At Black Masses
Evil Minds That Plot Destruction
Sorcerers of Deaths Construction
In The fields the bodies burning
as the War Machine Keeps Turning
Death and Hatred to Mankind
Poisoning their Brainwashed Minds
Oh Lawd Yeah"
OZZY OSBOURBE&BLACK SABBATH
"WARPIGS" Lyrics
Main Page -
Tuesday, 06/28/05
Message Board by American
Patriot Friends Network [APFN]
APFN MESSAGEBOARD
ARCHIVES
