Bush and Blair found guilty of war crimes for Iraq attack - Glenn Greenwald - Salon.com

Bush and Blair found guilty of war crimes for Iraq attack - Glenn Greenwald - Salon.com: A tribunal in Malaysia, spearheaded by that nation’s former Prime Minister, yesterday found George Bush and Tony Blair guilty of “crimes against peace” and other war crimes for their 2003 aggressive attack on Iraq,

- Sent using Google Toolbar

Bush and Blair found guilty of war crimes for Iraq attack

By Glenn Greenwald

• 
  

Former President Bush and then British Prime Minister Tony Blair  (Credit: AP)

(updated below)
A tribunal in Malaysia, spearheaded by that nation’s former Prime Minister, yesterday found George Bush and Tony Blair guilty of “crimes against peace” and other war crimes for their 2003 aggressive attack on Iraq, as well as fabricating pretexts used to justify the attack. The seven-member Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal — which featured an American law professor as one of its chief prosecutors — has no formal enforcement power, but was modeled after a 1967 tribunal in Sweden and Denmark that found the U.S. guilty of a war of aggression in Vietnam, and, even more so, after the U.S.-led Nuremberg Tribunal held after World War II. Just as the U.S. steadfastly ignored the 1967 tribunal on Vietnam, Bush and Blair both ignored the summons sent to them and thus were tried in absentia.

The tribunal ruled that Bush and Blair’s name should be entered in a register of war criminals, urged that they be recognized as such under the Rome Statute, and will also petition the International Criminal Court to proceed with binding charges. Such efforts are likely to be futile, but one Malaysian lawyer explained the motives of the tribunal to The Associated Press: “For these people who have been immune from prosecution, we want to put them on trial in this forum to prove that they committed war crimes.” In other words, because their own nations refuse to hold them accountable and can use their power to prevent international bodies from doing so, the tribunal wanted at least formal legal recognition of these war crimes to be recorded and the evidence of their guilt assembled. That’s the same reason a separate panel of this tribunal will hold hearings later this year on charges of torture against Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and others.
Here’s what I find striking about this. Virtually every Serious political and media elite in America, by definition, would scoff at this tribunal; few things are considered more fringe or ludicrous than the notion that George Bush and Tony Blair should be punished as war criminals just because they aggressively attacked another nation and caused the deaths of at least 150,000 innocent people and the displacement of millions more. But the only thing this Malaysian tribunal is doing is applying the clear principles of the Nuremberg Tribunal as enunciated by lead prosecutor and former U.S. Attorney General Robert Jackson in his Opening and Closing Statements at Nuremberg:

The central crime in this pattern of crimes, the kingpin which holds them all together, is the plot for aggressive wars. The chief reason for international cognizance of these crimes lies in this fact. . . .
What makes this inquest significant is that these prisoners represent sinister influences that will lurk in the world long after their bodies have returned to dust. . . . . And let me make clear that while this law is first applied against German aggressors, the law includes, and if it is to serve a useful purpose it must condemn aggression by any other nations, including those which sit here now in judgment.

The “kingpin” crime of the German defendants was not genocide or ethnic cleansing, but rather “the plot for aggressive war,” and the only way that the Nuremberg Tribunal will “serve a useful purpose” is if it applies equally in the future to “aggression by any other nations, including those which sit here now in judgment.” Who do you think history will (and should) look more favorably upon? Those in this Kuala Lumpur tribunal who objected to the heinous war crime that is the attack on Iraq and attempted to hold the responsible leaders accountable under the Nuremberg principles, or those in America and Britain who mocked those efforts (when they weren’t ignoring them) and demanded that they and their leaders be fully exempted from the principles they imposed and decreed as universal after World War II?

UPDATE: Andrew Sullivan, who yesterday expressed angry bafflement over the fact that many liberals do not swoon for President Obama the way Jon Chait does, today noted that the U.S. under Obama imposes even less accountability for abuse of power and war crimes than does Bahrain:

Bahrain’s Sunni government promised “no immunity” for anyone suspected of abuses and said it would propose creating a permanent human rights watchdog commission. “All those who have broken the law or ignored lawful orders and instructions will be held accountable,” said a government statement, which says the report acknowledges that the “systematic practice of mistreatment” ended shortly after martial law was repealed on June 1.

As Andrew put it: “So a Middle East dictatorship has more democratic accountability for abuse of power, including torture, than the US under Obama.” Beyond things like this and the facts set forth in the last paragraph here, perhaps Andrew could use today’s post of his to help clear up the towering mystery he raised yesterday of liberal disenchantment with Obama. That American war criminals are being aggressively shielded from any and all accountability is not an ancillary matter but one of enduring historical significance.

Mobile Text Messaging Software for Conferences, Events + Meetings

Mobile Text Messaging Software for Conferences, Events + Meetings | Text to Screen | SMS Polling | Voting | Text Alerts | Mobile Websites for Events | Conferences | Meetings:
Mobile Text Messaging for Conferences, Events and Meetings

Simple and effective event technology for all mobile phones, not just smart ones.

We help organizations take advantage of the growing use of texting and mobile technologies. Using Mosio, event organizers can offer custom interactive experiences that are easy to implement with technical support critical to producing a successful event.
#1 - Offer your attendees more engaging experiences and real-time information updates.

#2 - Provide technology accessible to everyone, backed by a great support team.

#3 - Benefit from significant cost savings over mobile apps or audience response systems.

Text Message (SMS) Polls and Voting, Audience Response System | Poll Everywhere

Text Message (SMS) Polls and Voting, Audience Response System | Poll Everywhere:

What is Poll Everywhere?

The fastest way to create stylish real-time experiences for events using mobile devices

Poll Everywhere replaces expensive proprietary audience response hardware with standard web technology. It's the easiest way to gather live responses in any venue: conferences, presentations, classrooms, radio, tv, print — anywhere. It can help you to raise money by letting people pledge via text messaging. And because it works internationally with texting, web, or Twitter, its simplicity and flexibility are earning rave reviews.

Official reports

Official reports: Olivier De Schutter | United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food
Official reports

Please look in ‘Areas of work’ in the main menu for the most updated lists of documents on each topic. 2012 ReadPDF 03/06/2012: "The right to an adequate diet: the agriculture-food-health nexus”, Report presented at the 19th Session of the United Nations Human Rights Council, also available in French, Spanish, Chinese, Arabic and Russian. ReadPDF 06/03/2012: "Guiding Principles on Human Rights Impact Assessments of Trade and Investment Agreements”, Report presented at the 19th Session of the United Nations Human Rights Council, also available in French, Spanish, Chinese, Arabic and Russian. ReadPDF 06/03/2012: "Mission to China", Report presented at the 19th Session of the United Nations Human Rights Council, also available in Chinese, French, and Spanish

- Sent using Google Toolbar

PEOPLES AGREEMENT - Climate Justice Now!

PEOPLES AGREEMENT - Climate Justice Now!:
Apr 26

World People’s Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth
April 22nd, Cochabamba, Bolivia

Today, our Mother Earth is wounded and the future of humanity is in danger.
If global warming increases by more than 2 degrees Celsius, a situation that the “Copenhagen Accord” could lead to, there is a 50% probability that the damages caused to our Mother Earth will be completely irreversible. Between 20% and 30% of species would be in danger of disappearing. Large extensions of forest would be affected, droughts and floods would affect different regions of the planet, deserts would expand, and the melting of the polar ice caps and the glaciers in the Andes and Himalayas would worsen. Many island states would disappear, and Africa would suffer an increase in temperature of more than 3 degrees Celsius. Likewise, the production of food would diminish in the world, causing catastrophic impact on the survival of inhabitants from vast regions in the planet, and the number of people in the world suffering from hunger would increase dramatically, a figure that already exceeds 1.02 billion people.
The corporations and governments of the so-called “developed” countries, in complicity with a segment of the scientific community, have led us to discuss climate change as a problem limited to the rise in temperature without questioning the cause, which is the capitalist system.
We confront the terminal crisis of a civilizing model that is patriarchal and based on the submission and destruction of human beings and nature that accelerated since the industrial revolution.

Owe Aku International Justice Project

Owe Aku International Justice Project: Owe Aku International Justice Project

Owe Aku International Justice Project Goal, Mission, Guiding Principles, Methods, Program Priorities

THE GOAL


The goal of Owe Aku International Justice Project is to secure human and environmental rights for and by Indigenous peoples. In the Lakota language, “owe aku” means “bring back the way.”


THE MISSION

The mission of Owe Aku International Justice Project (“IJP”) is to be a resource to traditional Indigenous leaders and communities who are preserving ancient Indigenous wisdom and a world view that honors and respects the earth and all her descendants That is, we seek to bring back the way.


GUIDING PRINCIPLES

1. In all of our efforts IJP recognizes that reliance upon Indigenous wisdom has resulted in the survival of Indigenous peoples against overwhelming odds while still managing to preserve and protect the last pristine environments on Earth. In the 21st century, we must be equally resilient and irrepressible

2. IJP relies upon our ancestors and elders because they have preserved generations of Indigenous knowledge, we receive our direction from leaders who stand on traditional cultural values, and we attempt to imitate the historical and contemporary courage demonstrated daily by our communities to whom we are always accountable.

3. IJP develops strategies for projects harnessing international human rights standards that compliment the efforts and address the concerns expressed from within Indigenous communities and nations. This is maintained by allegiance to identifiable Indigenous leaders and communities, in particular, we look to Owe Aku, a traditional cultural, social, environmental and educational organization of the Lakota Oyate (Sioux Nation).

4. IJPʼs mission, goal and principles are clearly defined. However, IJP does not set the agenda. Although we are active in all processes involving our efforts, we rely upon Indigenous leaders and communities to provide the framework for IRAPʼs activities and programs.


METHOD

•To provide logistical, organizational, and developmental assistance to traditional Indigenous leaders and communities, especially Owe Aku, Bring Back the Way,1 and its allies.

•Research, write and submit organizational plans and strategies for execution of projects and program work as requested by IJPʼs constituency.

•Preparation and submittal of reports on all projects and program work that meet Indigenous standards of accountability as well as those of supporters and funders. These reports are to include quantitative data as well as objective narratives of progress and/or challenges that have been encountered.

•Preparation of multimedia publications and presentations designed to inform, educate and recruit allies and support for projects and program work.

•Recruit and supervise specialized expertise and resources required for projects and program work.

•Facilitate and be present for projects and program work in a way that is consistent with individual responsibility and community accountability.


PROGRAM WORK PRIORITIES

•Support and advocacy on behalf of the Black Hills Sioux Nation Treaty Councilʼs International Court of Justice Project under the leadership of Chief Oliver Red Cloud and Alexander White Plume, Eyapaha.

•Owe Akuʼs Sacred Water Project protecting the Lakota Nation and people from uranium mining and its environmental devastation.

•Educational materials for Owe Akuʼs Unite to Fight with particular attention to international mechanisms for Indigneous peoples.


STAFF

Kent Lebsock, Coordinator

Professor Maivân Clech Lâm, Consultant on International Law and Relations


BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Alexander White Plume

Rosalie Little Thunder

Kent Lebsock


The Owe Aku International Justice Project (“IJP”) was formed by Lakota people who received direction from traditional leaders. IJP was launched to expand Owe Aku’s cultural, educational and environmental work to include international human rights as an additional level of advocacy to preserve the Lakota land-based way of life for future generations.


International human rights work provides us with the opportunity to join with other Indigenous nations and communities as well as allies around the world to ensure the preservation and revitalization of Lakota lifeways. These cultures have preserved wisdom that will sustain and protect Mother Earth, sacred water and all of the relatives upon which we rely for existence.


IJP’s specific mission is to educate all peoples about the critical value of our land-base and continue with strategies that utilize international human rights standards that recognize our sovereignty. Lakota sovereignty, an inherent human right of all peoples to determine their destiny, is also preserved in our treaties with the United States and its people. We have developed strategies that bring our traditional leaders into international forums, not just to those mechanisms assigned to Indigenous peoples, but all of the resources available. This is also a means to assert our inherent sovereignty and, as a result, bring well-needed encouragement and empowerment to the members of our communities within the Lakota nation.


We also carefully monitor and utilize international standards to advocate for issues such as health care concerns on the reservations to enforcing Lakota treaties and conserving treaty territory. As a result of this direct participation in the process by our leadership, with the technical support of IJP, new strategies are constantly examined, ensuring that evolving trends in international law from such places as the Organization of American States and the International Court of Justice are employed to maximize the benefit to our communities. Increasingly, human rights based strategies apply pressure on the United States and other countries resulting in more just and equitable resolutions of Indigenous issues. Many of these issues have been ignored for more than 500 years and working outside of a single domestic authority, historically committed to denying our rights, permits us to build a framework dedicated to the continuation of future generations within the wisdom and tradition of the Lakota way of life.


The Owe Aku International Justice Project is guided daily by traditional leaders and elders who speak our language and live our Lakota way of life. This approach has preserved our nation for 170 years against unyielding attempts to annihilate, assimilate and legislate us out of existence. Our goal is to do nothing more than continue the process left to us by our ancestors.


Owe Aku International Justice Project strives to secure human and environmental rights for and by Indigenous peoples. In the Lakota language, “owe aku” means “bring back the way.”

For more information please contact Kent Lebsock, director, oweakuinternational@me.com

Is Gluten Ruining Your Health

Well daaa... avoid all the fake white crap: GMO wheat, soy and sugar and 90% of the American illness will vanish!!! But don't tell your Dr, FDA, Big Pharm or Big Ag since this will end their high profits

Is Gluten Ruining Your Health (Or Are We Way Too Paranoid?)

Is Gluten Ruining Your Health (Or Are We Way Too Paranoid?) By Anneli Rufus, AlterNet Posted on March 6, 2012, Printed on March 6, 2012 Is gluten killing us or not? A $2 billion gluten-free food industry says yes. Science obligingly bolsters this boom with a raft of recent studies linking gluten consumption with health woes far worse than the cramps and diarrhea with which it is usually linked. Not that cramps and diarrhea are a walk in the park. Who could be grateful for having only those? But recent studies connect the consumption of gluten -- a protein found in wheat, barley and rye -- with autism, schizophrenia, lymphoma, lupus, multiple sclerosis, infertility, chronic numbness, severe balance problems and more. So even if you think you're not gluten-sensitive or that you don't have celiac disease, the best-known gluten-triggered disorder, gluten might still be ravaging your brain. A 2002 study affiliated with the UK's Royal Hallamshire Hospital linked gluten consumption with the loss of brain cells in the white matter of the cerebellum. A 2009 Duke University study followed the case of a schizophrenic woman who for decades had been assailed by hallucinatory skeletons and daily voices in her head. She had survived five suicide attempts. For this woman, the study reads, "a typical day's diet consisted of the following: egg and cheese sandwich, diet soda, water, pimento cheese, barbequed pork, chicken salad, hamburger helper, macaroni and cheese, and potatoes." In hopes that going gluten-free might help her, "she was instructed how to follow a dietary regimen consisting of unlimited meats and eggs, 4 ounces of hard cheese, 2 cups of salad vegetables, and 1 cup of low-carbohydrate vegetables per day" -- but no grains. Within a week, "she was feeling well, and noted an increase in energy." Three weeks hence, "she was no longer hearing voices or seeing skeletons. ... She had had no change in medication. The only change had been in her dietary intake." Sans gluten, "the abrupt resolution of longstanding schizophrenic symptoms was observed." Past studies cited decreased hospital admissions for schizophrenia in areas where bread consumption was reduced during World War II, as well as the rarity of schizophrenia on South Pacific islands where grains are scarce. A Penn State study published just last week in the journal Nutritional Neuroscience found that diets free of both gluten and the milk protein casein improved behavioral, social and physiological symptoms among children on the autism spectrum. Citing improvements in language production, eye contact, social responsiveness, request making and attention span, the study suggests strong links between autism and the gastrointestinal tract. But in a randomized, double-blinded 2010 University of Rochester study, autistic children on a gluten- and casein-free diet showed no improvements whatsoever. As with most health issues, it's impossible to find 100 percent consensus here. Meanwhile, some in the media -- including myself -- have hailed gluten, aka seitan, aka textured vegetable protein, as God's gift to vegetarians and vegans: a chewy, tasty, versatile, nutritious faux meat that you can make at home for pennies. Is gluten's cheap deliciousness -- and also that of most breads, cakes, cereals, pasta and crackers -- worth the risk, when researchers can't agree what that risk is, or to whom? Wheat allergies exist, but in fewer than 1 percent of children, according to a University of Maryland study published just last month -- "and most outgrow it by age five." Celiac disease, the autoimmune disorder in which gluten-triggered antibodies flatten structures lining the intestines, leading to diarrhea, malnutrition and other potentially lethal conditions, can be diagnosed only after extensive tests entailing biopsies. Affecting one in every 133 Americans, CD has increased fourfold in the last 50 years, according to the Maryland study, and is now "being diagnosed in people as old as 70 who have eaten gluten safely all their lives." So what are we to make of this? "We are observing another interesting phenomenon that is generating great confusion among healthcare professionals," reads the UM study. "The number of individuals embracing a gluten-free diet appears much higher than the projected number of celiac disease patients. ... It is now becoming clear that ... there are cases of gluten reactions in which neither allergic nor autoimmune mechanisms can be identified." This amorphous mass of cases is defined as non-celiac gluten sensitivity and it has become a new niche for food producers. The GF-products market grew by 28 percent from 2004 to 2011. But the Maryland study asks how many people go gluten-free for no medical reason at all -- e.g., because it seems trendy. "There are a number of misconceptions about the gluten-free diet: that it's a new version of the Atkins Diet, that it's a low- or no-carb diet, that it's a weight-loss diet, that it's a fad diet, that it's inherently healthier than a 'standard' diet," says Peter Bronski, founder of the blog, No Gluten, No Problem and coauthor of The Gluten-Free Edge, Artisanal Gluten-Free Cooking and Artisanal Gluten-Free Cupcakes. Although "people are jumping onto the gluten-free bandwagon for these or other reasons ... it's critically important to emphasize that for millions of Americans, the gluten-free diet is medically necessary. For them it is not a fad; it's a lifelong commitment." Bronski says he was "de facto diagnosed with celiac disease" in 2007: A holistic practitioner whom he told about the "terrible daily diarrhea, fatigue, and acute abdominal pain" that were wrecking his life advised him to go gluten-free. The result? "The seemingly miraculous resolution of symptoms." "I broke the rules in the sense that I never got formally tested for celiac disease. I felt so good on a gluten-free diet, and was so sick eating gluten, that I never went back to gluten in order to obtain positive test results," explains Bronski, who is also a champion triathlete and spokesperson for the National Foundation for Celiac Awareness. "Going gluten-free was an unbelievably and dramatically positive change. Within weeks I felt better than I had in years. I've described it as a deafening silence; the complete absence of debilitating symptoms was conspicuous." Bronski advocates "focusing on the positive," on what can be cooked and enjoyed while staying gluten-free. He also advocates stronger truth in labeling. "The FDA is finally making progress in this regard, after being stalled for years. We need a unified gluten-free standard, product labeling protocols, and ingredient and manufacturing transparency. When a manufacturer makes a GF claim on a product label or packaging, does 'gluten-free' mean zero gluten? Less than twenty parts per million? Some other standard? Has the product been tested to verify gluten levels? Has the product been manufactured in a dedicated facility? Or in a shared facility? Or on a shared production line?" He's in it for life. Others -- how many? -- will jump off this bandwagon when the next one pulls up. Anneli Rufus is the author of several books, most recently The Scavenger's Manifesto (Tarcher Press, 2009). Read more of Anneli's writings on scavenging at scavenging.wordpress.com. © 2012 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.