Architect John Young has spent over a decade of being pain the ass to the US Gov. His website Cryptome is an excellent source for all things of government secrecy. Here is a sampling of current affairs.
fac012811.htm Cuban Assets Control Regulations January 29, 2011
dodi-3305-02.pdf DoD General Spy Training January 29, 2011
dodi-3305-11.pdf DoD Counterspy Training January 29, 2011
dodi-3305-12.pdf DoD Spy-Counterspy Training for Non-US Spies January 29, 2011
dodi-3305-14.pdf DoD Joint Spy Training January 29, 2011
DTM-10-004.pdf DoD Guide for Civil Aviation Spying January 29, 2011
fbi-search-zc.zip FBI Search Warrant-Seizure for 1/40 Anonymous January 28, 2011 (1.2MB)
obama-protect40.htm Obama Protection 40 January 28, 2011
tor-exits-edu.htm Tor Exits in .edu Space January 27, 2011
openleaks-sec.htm OpenLeaks Security January 27, 2011
nyt-robs-wl.htm New York Times Robbery of Wikileaks January 27, 2011
dod-wikileaks.htm DoD on Manning, Assange and Wikileaks January 26, 2011
openleaks-leak.pdf OpenLeaks Leak January 26, 2011
wikileaks-pud.htm Wikileaks Pudding January 25, 2011
wh-74-0917.pdf Prez Ford Cabinet on Leaks of Covert Actions January 24, 2011 (742KB)
us-ciphers.htm American Peace Commissioners Ciphers 1781-89 January 24, 2011
ja-spy-twice.htm Julian Assange: The spy who billed me twice January 24, 2011
wajac-spy.zip Covert US Army Spying Dossier January 24, 2011 (57MB)
mp-spy-ops.pdf Covert US Army Spy Operations Manual FOUO January 24, 2011 (1.6MB)
towery-comments.htm John Towery Spy Dossier Comments January 24, 2011
towery-spy1.zip John Towery Covert Army Spy Official Dossier 1 January 24, 2011 (16MB)
towery-spy2.zip John Towery Covert Army Spy Official Dossier 2 January 24, 2011 (593KB)
grewe-04-0820.zip Barriers to Info Sharing Between Spies and Cops January 23, 2011 (3.2MB)
wh-75-1013.pdf Prez Ford Kissinger et al on NSA Domestic Spying January 23, 2011 (1.5MB)
wh-75-0220.pdf Kissinger et al on CIA Domestic Spying January 23, 2011 (749KB)
wh-75-0104.pdf Prez Ford ex-DCI Helms On CIA Domestic Spying January 23, 2011 (569KB)
wh-74-1111.pdf Prez Ford ex-DCI McCone on Spying Policy January 23, 2011 (435KB)
state-04-1219.pdf Ex-CIA Helms On Spy Use of Iran Drug Informants January 23, 2011
tacoma-demosec.zip City of Tacoma Demonstrations Security January 22, 2011 (1.5MB)
tacoma-homesec.zip ok City of Tacoma Homeland Security Reports January 22, 2011 (10MB)
vs-tech-001.pdf Twitter Sued for Patent Infringment January 21, 2011 (1MB)
state-03-1022.pdf ok State Top Spy on Worthless Intelligence January 20, 2011 (936KB)
spitler-001.pdf iPad Hack Complaint v. JacksonBrown and weev January 19, 2011 (731KB)
spy-directory.htm Spy Directory January 18, 2011
CNSSP-26.pdf Reducing the Risk of Removable Media January 18, 2011
CNSSAM_IA-01-10.pdf Reducing the NatSec Risk of Removable Media January 18, 2011
CNSS-002-11.pdf NatSec Vendors Equipment Approval Memos January 18, 2011
democracy-true.htm True Democracy Without Secrecy January 18, 2011
dol011811.htm Energy Whistleblower Protection January 18, 2011
dod-03-0818.pdf DoD Feith Gins War on Terrorism for 9-11 CYA January 17, 2011 (604KB)
cia-03-0602.pdf CIA Precursored SIPRNET Then Got It January 17, 2011 (436KB)
cia-03-1009.pdf CIA FBIS Struggled with Open Source INT January 17, 2011 (578KB)
cia-04-0420.pdf CIA Secret Peek at EU Counterterrorism January 17, 2010 (454KB)
feinstein-04-0601.pdf Senator Feinstein: Spies Oversight Poor CIA Bad January 17, 2011 (227KB)
durbin-04-0427.pdf Senator Durbin: Spies Evade Oversight January 17, 2011 (379KB)
dea-03-1016.pdf DEA Says We Are Cops Not Spies January 17, 2011 (639KB)
siemens-pcs7-sec.pdf Siemens Process Control System 7 Security January 16, 2011
siemens-pcs7.pdf Siemens Process Control System 7 Specs January 16, 2011 (431KB)
fbi-04-0204.pdf FBI Computer Patheticism January 15, 2011 (995KB)
dod-04-0110.pdf DoD Domestic HUMINT Spying January 15, 2011 (684KB)
coned-04-0226.pdf NYC ConEd on 9-11 Power Outage and Restoration January 15, 2011 (869KB)
wikileaks-rats.htm Wikileaks Rats January 15, 2011
wtc7-04-0116.pdf WTC 7 Collapse Described January 15, 2011 (308KB)
state-03-1125.pdf US Government Underestimated the Taliban January 15, 2011 (725KB)
bens-03-0910.pdf Business Executives for National Security Spies January 15, 2011 (307KB)
dod-03-0205.pdf DoD on Al Qaeda and Iraq Link via DocEx January 15, 2011 (534KB)
dodd-3300-03.pdf DoD Document and Media Spying via DoMex January 15, 2011
DTM-11-002.pdf Counterinsurgency Training and Reporting AFPAK January 15, 2011
[More]
O f f s i t e
ocp51 Egypt As A Failing State: US NatSec Implications January 29, 2011
PIH Butaro Hospital Opens in Rwanda January 29, 2011
L4VP The L4 Verified Project January 28, 2011
2 Holer Top Asshole: Assange Over Keller January 28, 2011
ocp15 Nonlethal Weapons: Terms and References January 28, 2011
ocp63 Information Warfare Arms Control January 28, 2011
ocp32 Cyberterrorism and Computer Crimes January 28, 2011
ocp9 Legal Implications of Information Warfare January 28, 2011
INSS National Security Studies Publications January 28, 2011
NSS National Security Studies Grants 2011 January 28, 2011
MAC Military Academic Community January 28, 2011
MZ Mark Zuckerberg’s New Home January 28, 2011
LL 1400 Localeaks 1400 Drop Boxes January 27, 2011
OLO OpenLeaks Opens: Read And Feed Back January 27, 2011
ISPies ISPs Are the New Secret Police January 27, 2011
EL EnviroLeaks January 26, 2011
Army SM Army Social Media Handbook January 21, 2011
SEC Out SEC Misconduct Investigations Revealed January 21, 2011
MD Murder Grand Jury Report on Doctor Baby Killing January 21, 2011
Spy Lies 12,000 Canadian Spies Liars For Life January 21, 2011
WL Tact Wikileaks Good Manners January 21, 2011
WL v WL Wikileaks Beyond Wikileaks January 21, 2011
Po Pu Polonium Putin: Russia's New Stalin January 21, 2011
MC Wash Monaco Money Launderers January 21, 2011
CN BS Not Made In China US Bullshit Manufacturing January 20, 2011
P2P Did Wikileaks Use P2P to Siphon Documents? January 20, 2011
Goat Sec Goatse Security Interview on ATT iPad Hack January 19, 2011
Putin Pad RuLeaks Offers Alleged Putin Palace Eyeball January 19, 2011
Cut Funds Fundamental Secrecy Review Defied As Usual January 18, 2011
IV EN Indignez-Vous! (Get Angry!) in English January 17, 2011
DDDD Dark Disappearance of Dancho Danchev January 14, 2011
Kuh v. David Superkuh v. David Pitchford v. Assange January 14, 2011
Brad v JA NY Times Compares Manning Loss with Assange Gain January 14, 2011
IL Streets Jerusalem and Israel Street Level Photos January 13, 2011
QC Qatari Corruption January 13, 2011
Dot Mil Stochastic Terrorism: Triggering the shooters January 13, 2011
MC Shh Is Monaco Silencing Its Critics January 13, 2011
It can be accessed here;
http://cryptome.org/
Saturday, January 29, 2011
We will never be silenced
This is what a revolution is!
"We will not be silenced, whether you're a Christian or a Muslim, whether you're an atheist, you will demand your god damned rights, and we will have our rights, one way or the other! We will never be silenced!" (0:45)
This is the beginning of a worldwide awakening of which has never been seen before. US foreign policy of propping up petty dictators under the guise of democracy is crashing down. Watch this video and stand with these brave souls who dare to stand and fight the despicable front of that policy. Powerful.
"We will not be silenced, whether you're a Christian or a Muslim, whether you're an atheist, you will demand your god damned rights, and we will have our rights, one way or the other! We will never be silenced!" (0:45)
This is the beginning of a worldwide awakening of which has never been seen before. US foreign policy of propping up petty dictators under the guise of democracy is crashing down. Watch this video and stand with these brave souls who dare to stand and fight the despicable front of that policy. Powerful.
Friday, January 28, 2011
Egypt Alert
We can make this an EARTH event, We have the power we have taken control. The ptb (powers that be) ARE SHAKIN' IN THEIR KNOWLEDGE THAT WE KNOW THEIR AGENCA. Nine years of struggle is but a mere hapstance. I am new to this. We have started those fuckers on the run! Do Not Stop, Do Not Hesitate, beat these fascist rat bastards to the ground. If you give one iota of slack they will strike back and hard. All civil liberties will be suspended. Stand by the protests on the Middle East and it will spread like it did for the Soviet Union. The American Empire is on the verge of failure. WE JUST HAVE TO GIVE IT A NUDGE! Fight DAMN IT FIGHT! Information spread is most important. I am not afraid to die for this.... are you??????? For this is FREEDOM! Bring it on MF'S!
you know where to find me. I am waitng. I fear no one. FUCK YOU!
Red Alert: Mubarak Asks Egyptian Government to Step Down
January 28, 2011
Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, speaking live on television Jan. 28, said he had asked the government to step down and would designate a new government as of Jan. 29 to “shoulder new duties” and account for the priorities of the upcoming era.
By Dr. Ashraf Ezzat / from Alexandria, Egypt.
“Without beating around the bush or postponing or playing us for fools and without more false promises, we, the people of Egypt, demand all of our long forgotten rights to be granted and this time there is no turning back … we have learned our lesson …we have finally broken free of all fears
you know where to find me. I am waitng. I fear no one. FUCK YOU!
Red Alert: Mubarak Asks Egyptian Government to Step Down
January 28, 2011
Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, speaking live on television Jan. 28, said he had asked the government to step down and would designate a new government as of Jan. 29 to “shoulder new duties” and account for the priorities of the upcoming era.
By Dr. Ashraf Ezzat / from Alexandria, Egypt.
“Without beating around the bush or postponing or playing us for fools and without more false promises, we, the people of Egypt, demand all of our long forgotten rights to be granted and this time there is no turning back … we have learned our lesson …we have finally broken free of all fears
Egypt, shit's going south fast.
Internet cut off, government building on fire, army in the streets. This from Businessline;
EGYPT LIVE BLOG: Government Buildings On Fire, President Mubarak Still Hasn't Spoken
Gregory White | Jan. 28, 2011, 9:22 AM | 5,486 | 31
A A A x
Email Article
From
To
Email Sent!
You have successfully emailed the post. inShare0 12:50 PM ET: The Egyptian government just extended the curfew to the entirety of Egypt, according to The Guardian.
12:45 PM ET: Al Jazeera just showed a hysterical split screen of Al Jazeera TV, and State TV, and what each is showing. Check it out here >
12: 30 PM ET: It has now been roughly two hours, and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak has not adressed his people.
12:15 PM ET: Military troops have arrived in Alexandria. They have been welcomed to Alexandria by the public, according to Al Jazeera.
12:10 PM ET: U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton just spoke. She is urged the Egyptian authorities to allow peaceful protests, and refrain from using violence. She is backing President Obama's previous statements on the need for reform in Egypt. "The Egyptian government needs to engage immediately with the Egyptian people in...reforms."
THE LATEST 12:06 PM ET: Protests continue on Cairo's streets well after the government's curfew. The headquarters of the National Democratic Party, the party of President Hosni Mubarak, is burning. The Radio and Television building is being bombarded with what Al Jazeera describes as "molotov cocktails."
President Mubarak, who was meant to speak more than an hour ago, still has not addressed his people.
The Army has been brought into the capital of Cairo in order to assist the police in quelling protests. Whether or not they are supporting the government still, or are starting to back the protesters is still in some doubt.
In the background, the NASDAQ is now down over 2.7%. More on why it might be a flash crash here >
11:58 AM ET: AL Jazeera reporting continued shooting, fires, use of tear gas. Police are "not very visibly present."
11:40 AM ET: Rumors again that President Hosni Mubarak's family has fled to London (CNN via Twitter). No confirmation of that yet.
11:34 AM ET: Large explosions, buildings burning, plumes of smoke in the air in Cairo. National Democratic Party building still in flames. No word on Mubarak's speech.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/if-youve-just-tuned-in-heres-whats-happening-in-egypt-2011-1?utm_source=fanpage&utm_medium=social&utm_term&utm_content&utm_campaign=fanpage#ixzz1CM02OZ7U
Violence escalated on Thursday at protests outside the capital. In the flashpoint city of Suez, along the strategic Suez Canal, protesters torched a fire station and looted weapons that they then turned on police. The Interior Ministry said in a statement that more than 90 police officers were injured in those clashes. There were no immediate figures on the number of injured protesters.
In the northern Sinai area of Sheik Zuweid, several hundred Bedouins and police exchanged gunfire, killing a 17-year-old. About 300 protesters surrounded a police station from rooftops of nearby buildings and fired two rocket-propelled grenades at it, damaging the walls.
EGYPT LIVE BLOG: Government Buildings On Fire, President Mubarak Still Hasn't Spoken
Gregory White | Jan. 28, 2011, 9:22 AM | 5,486 | 31
A A A x
Email Article
From
To
Email Sent!
You have successfully emailed the post. inShare0 12:50 PM ET: The Egyptian government just extended the curfew to the entirety of Egypt, according to The Guardian.
12:45 PM ET: Al Jazeera just showed a hysterical split screen of Al Jazeera TV, and State TV, and what each is showing. Check it out here >
12: 30 PM ET: It has now been roughly two hours, and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak has not adressed his people.
12:15 PM ET: Military troops have arrived in Alexandria. They have been welcomed to Alexandria by the public, according to Al Jazeera.
12:10 PM ET: U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton just spoke. She is urged the Egyptian authorities to allow peaceful protests, and refrain from using violence. She is backing President Obama's previous statements on the need for reform in Egypt. "The Egyptian government needs to engage immediately with the Egyptian people in...reforms."
THE LATEST 12:06 PM ET: Protests continue on Cairo's streets well after the government's curfew. The headquarters of the National Democratic Party, the party of President Hosni Mubarak, is burning. The Radio and Television building is being bombarded with what Al Jazeera describes as "molotov cocktails."
President Mubarak, who was meant to speak more than an hour ago, still has not addressed his people.
The Army has been brought into the capital of Cairo in order to assist the police in quelling protests. Whether or not they are supporting the government still, or are starting to back the protesters is still in some doubt.
In the background, the NASDAQ is now down over 2.7%. More on why it might be a flash crash here >
11:58 AM ET: AL Jazeera reporting continued shooting, fires, use of tear gas. Police are "not very visibly present."
11:40 AM ET: Rumors again that President Hosni Mubarak's family has fled to London (CNN via Twitter). No confirmation of that yet.
11:34 AM ET: Large explosions, buildings burning, plumes of smoke in the air in Cairo. National Democratic Party building still in flames. No word on Mubarak's speech.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/if-youve-just-tuned-in-heres-whats-happening-in-egypt-2011-1?utm_source=fanpage&utm_medium=social&utm_term&utm_content&utm_campaign=fanpage#ixzz1CM02OZ7U
Violence escalated on Thursday at protests outside the capital. In the flashpoint city of Suez, along the strategic Suez Canal, protesters torched a fire station and looted weapons that they then turned on police. The Interior Ministry said in a statement that more than 90 police officers were injured in those clashes. There were no immediate figures on the number of injured protesters.
In the northern Sinai area of Sheik Zuweid, several hundred Bedouins and police exchanged gunfire, killing a 17-year-old. About 300 protesters surrounded a police station from rooftops of nearby buildings and fired two rocket-propelled grenades at it, damaging the walls.
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Crumbling Empire
In Yemen protests are following the fall of Tunisia. Thousands rally to oust US backed regime. In Egypt more rioting to topple US backed Mubarack. The government of Lebanon has fallen with Hezbollah there to take control. All great empires throughout history have fallen starting with the smallest of outposts going first. For the Soviets it started with East Berlin then Eastonia, Lithuania and Latvia. With the US the rebuke that the South American countries turning their backs on the US by recognizing the Palestinian state was the first slap in the face. Now petty dictators under US control face open revolt. With the US military streched to breaking point they face the same fate as the Roman Empire and all other empires that have fallen since. There is no money left to fight their illegal wars of aggression the US is insolvent with a real debt of $202 Trillion, with no hope of repaying it with hyperinflation kicking off. By the summers end so too will be the U.S.A.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgTsASj2agc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgTsASj2agc
Dugway Proving Grounds Lockdown
Last night the US Army base at Utah's was in total lockdown. The base is used for biological and chemichal weapons training. The reason for the lockdown has not been confirmed. a vial of missing nerve agent "VX" is apparently rumoured to be the cause. Internet sites linking to the Salt Lake Tribune are being blocked. I managed to get a copy before being blocked. Here is the report (with credits)
"
Dugway Proving Ground. (U.S. Army photo)
Missing vial of nerve agent shuts down Dugway
By bob mims
The Salt Lake Tribune
First published 5 hours ago
Updated 3 minutes ago Updated Jan 27, 2011 10:46AM
An overnight lockdown, triggered when vial of the deadly VX nerve agent went temporarily missing, was lifted early Thursday morning at Utah’s sprawling, 801,000-acre Dugway Proving Ground.
Officials at the remote Army installation, 90 miles southwest of Salt Lake City in Utah’s western desert, abruptly ordered gates closed at 5:24 p.m. Wednesday. Up to 1,500 employees of Dugway — military personnel, contractors and civilian workers — were forced to stay the night.
Dugway spokeswoman Paula Nicholson said Thursday that the lockdown was ordered after a “routine inventory of sensitive material in the chemical laboratory. . . discovered a discrepancy between the records and the agent on-hand. As a precaution, the commander immediately locked down the installation and began efforts to identify the cause of the discrepancy. “
The vial was located, uncompromised, at 3 a.m. Thursday within the facility. Dugway officials did not specify exactly where the vial, containing less than 1 milliliter, or roughly a quarter-teaspoon of the agent, was found — nor did they detail how the vial had gone missing in the first place, or whether anyone was being disciplined as a result of the incident.
“All personnel are uninjured and safe. The public is safe as well,” Nicholson stressed.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, VX is within a family of toxic and potentially deadly chemical warfare nerve agents. An amber oily substance in its liquid form, severe VX exposure can induce convulsions and respiratory failure.
Dugway houses small amounts of various chemical and biological warfare agents for defense testing purposes; it also is a prime Army base for testing of an array of conventional military weaponry and ammunition.
Dugway also serves as a training site for Army Special Forces and Reserve and National Guard units and encompasses expansive swatches of wastelands used for bombing and tactics training by fighter jets based at Hill Air Force Base.
By 4:30 a.m. Thursday, normal traffic in and out of Dugway had resumed, though several hundred employees reportedly remained restricted inside the facility.
In a statement issued Wednesday evening, Dugway Post commander Col. William E. King had said only that, “We are working as quickly and as thoroughly as possible to resolve a serious concern within the Test Area’ and that “measures like these are not taken lightly. No one is in immediate danger but these steps are required.”
Copyright 2011 The Salt Lake Tribune. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
"
Dugway Proving Ground. (U.S. Army photo)
Missing vial of nerve agent shuts down Dugway
By bob mims
The Salt Lake Tribune
First published 5 hours ago
Updated 3 minutes ago Updated Jan 27, 2011 10:46AM
An overnight lockdown, triggered when vial of the deadly VX nerve agent went temporarily missing, was lifted early Thursday morning at Utah’s sprawling, 801,000-acre Dugway Proving Ground.
Officials at the remote Army installation, 90 miles southwest of Salt Lake City in Utah’s western desert, abruptly ordered gates closed at 5:24 p.m. Wednesday. Up to 1,500 employees of Dugway — military personnel, contractors and civilian workers — were forced to stay the night.
Dugway spokeswoman Paula Nicholson said Thursday that the lockdown was ordered after a “routine inventory of sensitive material in the chemical laboratory. . . discovered a discrepancy between the records and the agent on-hand. As a precaution, the commander immediately locked down the installation and began efforts to identify the cause of the discrepancy. “
The vial was located, uncompromised, at 3 a.m. Thursday within the facility. Dugway officials did not specify exactly where the vial, containing less than 1 milliliter, or roughly a quarter-teaspoon of the agent, was found — nor did they detail how the vial had gone missing in the first place, or whether anyone was being disciplined as a result of the incident.
“All personnel are uninjured and safe. The public is safe as well,” Nicholson stressed.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, VX is within a family of toxic and potentially deadly chemical warfare nerve agents. An amber oily substance in its liquid form, severe VX exposure can induce convulsions and respiratory failure.
Dugway houses small amounts of various chemical and biological warfare agents for defense testing purposes; it also is a prime Army base for testing of an array of conventional military weaponry and ammunition.
Dugway also serves as a training site for Army Special Forces and Reserve and National Guard units and encompasses expansive swatches of wastelands used for bombing and tactics training by fighter jets based at Hill Air Force Base.
By 4:30 a.m. Thursday, normal traffic in and out of Dugway had resumed, though several hundred employees reportedly remained restricted inside the facility.
In a statement issued Wednesday evening, Dugway Post commander Col. William E. King had said only that, “We are working as quickly and as thoroughly as possible to resolve a serious concern within the Test Area’ and that “measures like these are not taken lightly. No one is in immediate danger but these steps are required.”
Copyright 2011 The Salt Lake Tribune. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Sunday, January 23, 2011
Amerithrax
They lied to you. It was a government sponsered psyop. The FOIA, Freedom is not free. Fight for it!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Do not give up the fight, we can win.
http://foia.fbi.gov/amerithrax/847443.PDF
motherfuckers.
http://foia.fbi.gov/amerithrax/847443.PDF
motherfuckers.
Wikileaks fraud
As I have raged about Wikileaks is an out and out Intelligence Operation perpetuated by the US and Mossad. Cognitive infiltration is at the crux of the matter. From Webster Tarpley...
" Awareness is growing around the world that the Wikileaks-Julian Assange theater of the absurd is radically inauthentic – a psyop. Wikileaks and its impaired boss represent a classic form of limited hangout or self-exposure, a kind of lurid striptease in which the front organization releases doctored and pre-selected materials provided by the intelligence agency with the intent of harming, not the CIA, nor the UK, nor the Israelis, but rather such classic CIA enemies’ list figures as Putin, Berlusconi, Karzai, Qaddafi, Rodriguez de Kirchner, etc.
In Tunisia, derogatory material about ex-President Ben Ali leaked by Wikileaks has already brought a windfall for Langley in the form of the rare ouster of an entrenched Arab government."
I was onto these clowns last year when the agenda was only what was good for Israel. DO NOT TAKE THIS SHIT AS REAL NEWS! It only advances Israels apatheid regime. We can shut down the agenda. WIKILEAKS AND JULIAN ASSANGE IS PROPAGANDA FOR ISRAEL!!!!!
Wikileaks: No Serious Derogatory Information about US, UK, Israel
It is illuminating that none of Assange’s document dumps have revealed any notable scandals involving Great Britain or Israel. No US public figures have had to resign because of anything Wikileaks has done. No major ongoing covert operation or highly placed agent of influence has been blown. After all these months, there are still no US indictments against Assange, even though we know that a US grand jury will readily indict a ham sandwich if the US Attorney demands it. If the CIA had wanted to silence Assange, they could have subjected him to the classic kidnapping aka rendition, meaning that he would have been beaten, drugged, and carted off to wake up in a black site prison in Egypt, Poland, or Guantanamo Bay. Otherwise, the CIA could have had recourse to the usual extralegal wetwork. We must also assume that the new US Cybercommand with its vast resources would have little trouble shutting down the Wikileaks mirror sites, no matter how numerous they might be. The same goes for Anonymous and other flanking organizations of Wikileaks. But these considerations are purely fantastic. Assange emerges today as the pampered darling and golden boy of The New York Times, Der Spiegel. The Guardian, El Pais — in short, of the entire Anglo-American official media Wurlitzer. He reclines today in baronial splendor in the country house of a well-connected retired British officer who should be quizzed by the media about his ties to British intelligence. The radical-chic world, from Bianca Jagger to Michael Moore, is at Assange’s feet.
" Awareness is growing around the world that the Wikileaks-Julian Assange theater of the absurd is radically inauthentic – a psyop. Wikileaks and its impaired boss represent a classic form of limited hangout or self-exposure, a kind of lurid striptease in which the front organization releases doctored and pre-selected materials provided by the intelligence agency with the intent of harming, not the CIA, nor the UK, nor the Israelis, but rather such classic CIA enemies’ list figures as Putin, Berlusconi, Karzai, Qaddafi, Rodriguez de Kirchner, etc.
In Tunisia, derogatory material about ex-President Ben Ali leaked by Wikileaks has already brought a windfall for Langley in the form of the rare ouster of an entrenched Arab government."
I was onto these clowns last year when the agenda was only what was good for Israel. DO NOT TAKE THIS SHIT AS REAL NEWS! It only advances Israels apatheid regime. We can shut down the agenda. WIKILEAKS AND JULIAN ASSANGE IS PROPAGANDA FOR ISRAEL!!!!!
Wikileaks: No Serious Derogatory Information about US, UK, Israel
It is illuminating that none of Assange’s document dumps have revealed any notable scandals involving Great Britain or Israel. No US public figures have had to resign because of anything Wikileaks has done. No major ongoing covert operation or highly placed agent of influence has been blown. After all these months, there are still no US indictments against Assange, even though we know that a US grand jury will readily indict a ham sandwich if the US Attorney demands it. If the CIA had wanted to silence Assange, they could have subjected him to the classic kidnapping aka rendition, meaning that he would have been beaten, drugged, and carted off to wake up in a black site prison in Egypt, Poland, or Guantanamo Bay. Otherwise, the CIA could have had recourse to the usual extralegal wetwork. We must also assume that the new US Cybercommand with its vast resources would have little trouble shutting down the Wikileaks mirror sites, no matter how numerous they might be. The same goes for Anonymous and other flanking organizations of Wikileaks. But these considerations are purely fantastic. Assange emerges today as the pampered darling and golden boy of The New York Times, Der Spiegel. The Guardian, El Pais — in short, of the entire Anglo-American official media Wurlitzer. He reclines today in baronial splendor in the country house of a well-connected retired British officer who should be quizzed by the media about his ties to British intelligence. The radical-chic world, from Bianca Jagger to Michael Moore, is at Assange’s feet.
Power of Nightmares
The War On Terror is a SCAM!
The Power of Nightmares
This highly revealing BBC documentary digs deep into the roots of the war on terror, only to find that much of the widespread fear in the post-9/11 world has been fabricated by those in power for their own interests. The intrepid BBC team presents highly informative interviews with experts and top officials in combating terrorism who raise serious questions about who is behind all of the fear-mongering. These experts and riveting footage also show how the media have been manipulated to support secret power agendas.
This eye-opening documentary shows that, especially after 9/11, fear has been used widely in the media to manipulate the public into giving up civil liberties and turning over power to elite groups with their own hidden agendas. The Power of Nightmares clearly demonstrates that the nightmare vision of a powerful, united terrorist organization waiting to strike our societies is largely an illusion. Wherever the BBC team looked for al-Qaeda, from the mountains of Afghanistan to the sleeper cells in America, they found that we are chasing a phantom enemy. For all citizens who care about the future of our world, this is a must-watch video.
View Free: All Three Parts of the BBC Documentary Power of Nightmares
Each episode is one hour. Part 3 is the most revealing. A 22-minute summary is also available.
For 22 minutes of the best excerpts from this three-hour documentary, click here
For a high quality version of part three of Power of Nightmares: The Rise of the Politics of Fear, click here.
Click here to watch and read reviews of Power of Nightmares on archive.org.
Click here to watch all three episodes Power of Nightmares on Google Video.
For the downloaded copy of an excellent review of Power of Nightmares in the Los Angeles Times, click here.
For a full written transcript of each part of Power of Nightmares: Part 1 Part 2 Part 3
For transcripts, audio and video downloads, and other excellent information on the series, click here.
To order all three parts of Power of Nightmares on one DVD, click here.
Another excellent, highly revealing BBC/Adam Curtis documentary, Century of the Self, delves into the history of mass propaganda and its power to shape public perception. Click here to purchase. Click here to watch it free.
The Power of Nightmares
This highly revealing BBC documentary digs deep into the roots of the war on terror, only to find that much of the widespread fear in the post-9/11 world has been fabricated by those in power for their own interests. The intrepid BBC team presents highly informative interviews with experts and top officials in combating terrorism who raise serious questions about who is behind all of the fear-mongering. These experts and riveting footage also show how the media have been manipulated to support secret power agendas.
This eye-opening documentary shows that, especially after 9/11, fear has been used widely in the media to manipulate the public into giving up civil liberties and turning over power to elite groups with their own hidden agendas. The Power of Nightmares clearly demonstrates that the nightmare vision of a powerful, united terrorist organization waiting to strike our societies is largely an illusion. Wherever the BBC team looked for al-Qaeda, from the mountains of Afghanistan to the sleeper cells in America, they found that we are chasing a phantom enemy. For all citizens who care about the future of our world, this is a must-watch video.
View Free: All Three Parts of the BBC Documentary Power of Nightmares
Each episode is one hour. Part 3 is the most revealing. A 22-minute summary is also available.
For 22 minutes of the best excerpts from this three-hour documentary, click here
For a high quality version of part three of Power of Nightmares: The Rise of the Politics of Fear, click here.
Click here to watch and read reviews of Power of Nightmares on archive.org.
Click here to watch all three episodes Power of Nightmares on Google Video.
For the downloaded copy of an excellent review of Power of Nightmares in the Los Angeles Times, click here.
For a full written transcript of each part of Power of Nightmares: Part 1 Part 2 Part 3
For transcripts, audio and video downloads, and other excellent information on the series, click here.
To order all three parts of Power of Nightmares on one DVD, click here.
Another excellent, highly revealing BBC/Adam Curtis documentary, Century of the Self, delves into the history of mass propaganda and its power to shape public perception. Click here to purchase. Click here to watch it free.
Saturday, January 22, 2011
The Big Bang thing
30 reasons to dispute the bb,
thanks to Meta Research.
[reprinted from Meta Research Bulletin 11, 6-13 (2002)]
Abstract. Earlier, we presented a simple list of the top ten problems with the Big Bang. [[1]] Since that publication, we have had many requests for citations and additional details, which we provide here. We also respond to a few rebuttal arguments to the earlier list. Then we supplement the list based on the last four years of developments – with another 20 problems for the theory.
(1) Static universe models fit observational data better than expanding universe models.
Static universe models match most observations with no adjustable parameters. The Big Bang can match each of the critical observations, but only with adjustable parameters, one of which (the cosmic deceleration parameter) requires mutually exclusive values to match different tests. [[2],[3]] Without ad hoc theorizing, this point alone falsifies the Big Bang. Even if the discrepancy could be explained, Occam’s razor favors the model with fewer adjustable parameters – the static universe model.
(2) The microwave “background” makes more sense as the limiting temperature of space heated by starlight than as the remnant of a fireball.
The expression “the temperature of space” is the title of chapter 13 of Sir Arthur Eddington’s famous 1926 work, [[4]] Eddington calculated the minimum temperature any body in space would cool to, given that it is immersed in the radiation of distant starlight. With no adjustable parameters, he obtained 3°K (later refined to 2.8°K [[5]]), essentially the same as the observed, so-called “background”, temperature. A similar calculation, although with less certain accuracy, applies to the limiting temperature of intergalactic space because of the radiation of galaxy light. [[6]] So the intergalactic matter is like a “fog”, and would therefore provide a simpler explanation for the microwave radiation, including its blackbody-shaped spectrum.
Such a fog also explains the otherwise troublesome ratio of infrared to radio intensities of radio galaxies. [[7]] The amount of radiation emitted by distant galaxies falls with increasing wavelengths, as expected if the longer wavelengths are scattered by the intergalactic medium. For example, the brightness ratio of radio galaxies at infrared and radio wavelengths changes with distance in a way which implies absorption. Basically, this means that the longer wavelengths are more easily absorbed by material between the galaxies. But then the microwave radiation (between the two wavelengths) should be absorbed by that medium too, and has no chance to reach us from such great distances, or to remain perfectly uniform while doing so. It must instead result from the radiation of microwaves from the intergalactic medium. This argument alone implies that the microwaves could not be coming directly to us from a distance beyond all the galaxies, and therefore that the Big Bang theory cannot be correct.
None of the predictions of the background temperature based on the Big Bang were close enough to qualify as successes, the worst being Gamow’s upward-revised estimate of 50°K made in 1961, just two years before the actual discovery. Clearly, without a realistic quantitative prediction, the Big Bang’s hypothetical “fireball” becomes indistinguishable from the natural minimum temperature of all cold matter in space. But none of the predictions, which ranged between 5°K and 50°K, matched observations. [[8]] And the Big Bang offers no explanation for the kind of intensity variations with wavelength seen in radio galaxies.
(3) Element abundance predictions using the Big Bang require too many adjustable parameters to make them work.
The universal abundances of most elements were predicted correctly by Hoyle in the context of the original Steady State cosmological model. This worked for all elements heavier than lithium. The Big Bang co-opted those results and concentrated on predicting the abundances of the light elements. Each such prediction requires at least one adjustable parameter unique to that element prediction. Often, it’s a question of figuring out why the element was either created or destroyed or both to some degree following the Big Bang. When you take away these degrees of freedom, no genuine prediction remains. The best the Big Bang can claim is consistency with observations using the various ad hoc models to explain the data for each light element. Examples: [[9],[10]] for helium-3; [[11]] for lithium-7; [[12]] for deuterium; [[13]] for beryllium; and [[14],[15]] for overviews. For a full discussion of an alternative origin of the light elements, see [[16]].
(4) The universe has too much large scale structure (interspersed “walls” and voids) to form in a time as short as 10-20 billion years.
The average speed of galaxies through space is a well-measured quantity. At those speeds, galaxies would require roughly the age of the universe to assemble into the largest structures (superclusters and walls) we see in space [[17]], and to clear all the voids between galaxy walls. But this assumes that the initial directions of motion are special, e.g., directed away from the centers of voids. To get around this problem, one must propose that galaxy speeds were initially much higher and have slowed due to some sort of “viscosity” of space. To form these structures by building up the needed motions through gravitational acceleration alone would take in excess of 100 billion years. [[18]]
(5) The average luminosity of quasars must decrease with time in just the right way so that their average apparent brightness is the same at all redshifts, which is exceedingly unlikely.
According to the Big Bang theory, a quasar at a redshift of 1 is roughly ten times as far away as one at a redshift of 0.1. (The redshift-distance relation is not quite linear, but this is a fair approximation.) If the two quasars were intrinsically similar, the high redshift one would be about 100 times fainter because of the inverse square law. But it is, on average, of comparable apparent brightness. This must be explained as quasars “evolving” their intrinsic properties so that they get smaller and fainter as the universe evolves. That way, the quasar at redshift 1 can be intrinsically 100 times brighter than the one at 0.1, explaining why they appear (on average) to be comparably bright. It isn’t as if the Big Bang has a reason why quasars should evolve in just this magical way. But that is required to explain the observations using the Big Bang interpretation of the redshift of quasars as a measure of cosmological distance. See [[19],[20]].
By contrast, the relation between apparent magnitude and distance for quasars is a simple, inverse-square law in alternative cosmologies. In [20], Arp shows great quantities of evidence that large quasar redshifts are a combination of a cosmological factor and an intrinsic factor, with the latter dominant in most cases. Most large quasar redshifts (e.g., z > 1) therefore have little correlation with distance. A grouping of 11 quasars close to NGC 1068, having nominal ejection patterns correlated with galaxy rotation, provides further strong evidence that quasar redshifts are intrinsic. [[21]]
(6) The ages of globular clusters appear older than the universe.
Even though the data have been stretched in the direction toward resolving this since the “top ten” list first appeared, the error bars on the Hubble age of the universe (12±2 Gyr) still do not quite overlap the error bars on the oldest globular clusters (16±2 Gyr). Astronomers have studied this for the past decade, but resist the “observational error” explanation because that would almost certainly push the Hubble age older (as Sandage has been arguing for years), which creates several new problems for the Big Bang. In other words, the cure is worse than the illness for the theory. In fact, a new, relatively bias-free observational technique has gone the opposite way, lowering the Hubble age estimate to 10 Gyr, making the discrepancy worse again. [[22],[23]]
(7) The local streaming motions of galaxies are too high for a finite universe that is supposed to be everywhere uniform.
In the early 1990s, we learned that the average redshift for galaxies of a given brightness differs on opposite sides of the sky. The Big Bang interprets this as the existence of a puzzling group flow of galaxies relative to the microwave radiation on scales of at least 130 Mpc. Earlier, the existence of this flow led to the hypothesis of a "Great Attractor" pulling all these galaxies in its direction. But in newer studies, no backside infall was found on the other side of the hypothetical feature. Instead, there is streaming on both sides of us out to 60-70 Mpc in a consistent direction relative to the microwave "background". The only Big Bang alternative to the apparent result of large-scale streaming of galaxies is that the microwave radiation is in motion relative to us. Either way, this result is trouble for the Big Bang. [[24],[25],[26],[27],[28]]
(8) Invisible dark matter of an unknown but non-baryonic nature must be the dominant ingredient of the entire universe.
The Big Bang requires sprinkling galaxies, clusters, superclusters, and the universe with ever-increasing amounts of this invisible, not-yet-detected “dark matter” to keep the theory viable. Overall, over 90% of the universe must be made of something we have never detected. By contrast, Milgrom’s model (the alternative to “dark matter”) provides a one-parameter explanation that works at all scales and requires no “dark matter” to exist at any scale. (I exclude the additional 50%-100% of invisible ordinary matter inferred to exist by, e.g., MACHO studies.) Some physicists don’t like modifying the law of gravity in this way, but a finite range for natural forces is a logical necessity (not just theory) spoken of since the 17th century. [[29],[30]]
Milgrom’s model requires nothing more than that. Milgrom’s is an operational model rather than one based on fundamentals. But it is consistent with more complete models invoking a finite range for gravity. So Milgrom’s model provides a basis to eliminate the need for “dark matter” in the universe at any scale. This represents one more Big Bang “fudge factor” no longer needed.
(9) The most distant galaxies in the Hubble Deep Field show insufficient evidence of evolution, with some of them having higher redshifts (z = 6-7) than the highest-redshift quasars.
The Big Bang requires that stars, quasars and galaxies in the early universe be “primitive”, meaning mostly metal-free, because it requires many generations of supernovae to build up metal content in stars. But the latest evidence suggests lots of metal in the “earliest” quasars and galaxies. [[31],[32],[33]] Moreover, we now have evidence for numerous ordinary galaxies in what the Big Bang expected to be the “dark age” of evolution of the universe, when the light of the few primitive galaxies in existence would be blocked from view by hydrogen clouds. [[34]]
(10) If the open universe we see today is extrapolated back near the beginning, the ratio of the actual density of matter in the universe to the critical density must differ from unity by just a part in 1059. Any larger deviation would result in a universe already collapsed on itself or already dissipated.
Inflation failed to achieve its goal when many observations went against it. To maintain consistency and salvage inflation, the Big Bang has now introduced two new adjustable parameters: (1) the cosmological constant, which has a major fine-tuning problem of its own because theory suggests it ought to be of order 10120, and observations suggest a value less than 1; and (2) “quintessence” or “dark energy”. [[35],[36]] This latter theoretical substance solves the fine-tuning problem by introducing invisible, undetectable energy sprinkled at will as needed throughout the universe to keep consistency between theory and observations. It can therefore be accurately described as “the ultimate fudge factor”.
Anyone doubting the Big Bang in its present form (which includes most astronomy-interested people outside the field of astronomy, according to one recent survey) would have good cause for that opinion and could easily defend such a position. This is a fundamentally different matter than proving the Big Bang did not happen, which would be proving a negative – something that is normally impossible. (E.g., we cannot prove that Santa Claus does not exist.) The Big Bang, much like the Santa Claus hypothesis, no longer makes testable predictions wherein proponents agree that a failure would falsify the hypothesis. Instead, the theory is continually amended to account for all new, unexpected discoveries. Indeed, many young scientists now think of this as a normal process in science! They forget or were never taught that a model has value only when it can predict new things that differentiate the model from chance and from other models before the new things are discovered. Explanations of new things are supposed to flow from the basic theory itself with at most an adjustable parameter or two, and not from add-on bits of new theory.
Of course, the literature also contains the occasional review paper in support of the Big Bang. [[37]] But these generally don’t count any of the prediction failures or surprises as theory failures as long as some ad hoc theory might explain them. And the “prediction successes” in almost every case do not distinguish the Big Bang from any of the four leading competitor models: Quasi-Steady-State [16,[38]], Plasma Cosmology [18], Meta Model [3], and Variable-Mass Cosmology [20].
For the most part, these four alternative cosmologies are ignored by astronomers. However, one web site by Ned Wright does try to advance counterarguments in defense of the Big Bang. [[39]] But his counterarguments are mostly old objections long since defeated. For example:
(1) In “Eddington did not predict the CMB”:
a. Wright argues that Eddington’s argument for the “temperature of space” applies at most to our Galaxy. But Eddington’s reasoning applies also to the temperature of intergalactic space, for which a minimum is set by the radiation of galaxy and quasar light. The original calculations half-a-century ago showed this limit probably fell in the range 1-6°K. [6] And that was before quasars were discovered and before we knew the modern space density of galaxies.
b. Wright also argues that dust grains cannot be the source of the blackbody microwave radiation because there are not enough of them to be opaque, as needed to produce a blackbody spectrum. However, opaqueness is required only in a finite universe. An infinite universe can achieve thermodynamic equilibrium (the actual requirement for a blackbody spectrum) even if transparent out to very large distances because the thermal mixing can occur on a much smaller scale than quantum particles – e.g., in the light-carrying medium itself.
c. Wright argues that dust grains do not radiate efficiently at millimeter wavelengths. However, efficient or not, if the equilibrium temperature they reach is 2.8°K, they must radiate away the energy they absorb from distant galaxy and quasar light at millimeter wavelengths. Temperature and wavelength are correlated for any bodies in thermal equilibrium.
(2) About Lerner’s argument against the Big Bang:
a. Lerner calculated that the Big Bang universe has not had enough time to form superclusters. Wright calculates that all the voids could be vacated and superclusters formed in less than 11-14 billion years (barely). But that assumes that almost all matter has initial speeds headed directly out of voids and toward matter concentrations. Lerner, on the other hand, assumed that the speeds had to be built up by gravitational attraction, which takes many times longer. Lerner’s point is more reasonable because doing it Wright’s way requires fine-tuning of initial conditions.
b. Wright argues that “there is certainly lots of evidence for dark matter.” The reality is that there is no credible observational detection of dark matter, so all the “evidence” is a matter of interpretation, depending on theoretical assumptions. For example, Milgrom’s Model explains all the same evidence without any need for dark matter.
(3) Regarding arguments against “tired light cosmology”:
a. Wright argues: “There is no known interaction that can degrade a photon's energy without also changing its momentum, which leads to a blurring of distant objects which is not observed.” While it is technically true that no such interaction has yet been discovered, reasonable non-Big-Bang cosmologies require the existence of entities many orders of magnitude smaller than photons. For example, the entity responsible for gravitational interactions has not yet been discovered. So the “fuzzy image” argument does not apply to realistic physical models in which all substance is infinitely divisible. By contrast, physical models lacking infinite divisibility have great difficulties explaining Zeno’s paradoxes – especially the extended paradox for matter. [3]
b. Wright argues that the stretching of supernovae light curves is not predicted by “tired light”. However, one cannot measure the stretching effect directly because the time under the lightcurve depends on the intrinsic brightness of the supernovae, which can vary considerably. So one must use indirect indicators, such as rise time only. And in that case, the data does not unambiguously favor either tired light or Big Bang models.
c. Wright argued that tired light does not produce a blackbody spectrum. But this is untrue if the entities producing the energy loss are many orders of magnitude smaller and more numerous than quantum particles.
d. Wright argues that tired light models fail the Tolman surface brightness test. This ignores that realistic tired light models must lose energy in the transverse direction, not just the longitudinal one, because light is a transverse wave. When this effect is considered, the predicted loss of light intensity goes with (1+z)-2, which is in good agreement with most observations without any adjustable parameters. [ NOTEREF _Ref4051228 \h \* MERGEFORMAT 2,[40]] The Big Bang, by contrast, predicts a (1+z)-4 dependence, and must therefore invoke special ad hoc evolution (different from that applicable to quasars) to close the gap between theory and observations.
By no means is this “top ten” list of Big Bang problems exhaustive – far from it. In fact, it is easy to argue that several of these additional 20 points should be among the “top ten”:
· "Pencil-beam surveys" show large-scale structure out to distances of more than 1 Gpc in both of two opposite directions from us. This appears as a succession of wall-like galaxy features at fairly regular intervals, the first of which, at about 130 Mpc distance, is called "The Great Wall". To date, 13 such evenly-spaced "walls" of galaxies have been found! [[41]] The Big Bang theory requires fairly uniform mixing on scales of distance larger than about 20 Mpc, so there apparently is far more large-scale structure in the universe than the Big Bang can explain.
· Many particles are seen with energies over 60x1018 eV. But that is the theoretical energy limit for anything traveling more than 20-50 Mpc because of interaction with microwave background photons. [[42]] However, this objection assumes the microwave radiation is as the Big Bang expects, instead of a relatively sparse, local phenomenon.
· The Big Bang predicts that equal amounts of matter and antimatter were created in the initial explosion. Matter dominates the present universe apparently because of some form of asymmetry, such as CP violation asymmetry, that caused most anti-matter to annihilate with matter, but left much matter. Experiments are searching for evidence of this asymmetry, so far without success. Other galaxies can’t be antimatter because that would create a matter-antimatter boundary with the intergalactic medium that would create gamma rays, which are not seen. [[43],[44]]
· Even a small amount of diffuse neutral hydrogen would produce a smooth absorbing trough shortward of a QSO’s Lyman-alpha emission line. This is called the Gunn-Peterson effect, and is rarely seen, implying that most hydrogen in the universe has been re-ionized. A hydrogen Gunn-Peterson trough is now predicted to be present at a redshift z » 6.1. [[45]] Observations of high-redshift quasars near z = 6 briefly appeared to confirm this prediction. However, a galaxy lensed by a foreground cluster has now been observed at z = 6.56, prior to the supposed reionization epoch and at a time when the Big Bang expects no galaxies to be visible yet. Moreover, if only a few galaxies had turned on by this early point, their emission would have been absorbed by the surrounding hydrogen gas, making these early galaxies invisible. [34] So the lensed galaxy observation falsifies this prediction and the theory it was based on. Another problem example: Quasar PG 0052+251 is at the core of a normal spiral galaxy. The host galaxy appears undisturbed by the quasar radiation, which, in the Big Bang, is supposed to be strong enough to ionize the intergalactic medium. [[46]]
· An excess of QSOs is observed around foreground clusters. Lensing amplification caused by foreground galaxies or clusters is too weak to explain this association between high- and low-redshift objects. This apparent contradiction has no solution under Big Bang premises that does not create some other problem. It particular, dark matter solutions would have to be centrally concentrated, contrary to observations that imply that dark matter increases away from galaxy centers. The high-redshift and low-redshift objects are probably actually at comparable distances, as Arp has maintained for 30 years. [[47]]
· The Big Bang violates the first law of thermodynamics, that energy cannot be either created or destroyed, by requiring that new space filled with “zero-point energy” be continually created between the galaxies. [[48]]
· In the Las Campanas redshift survey, statistical differences from homogenous distribution were found out to a scale of at least 200 Mpc. [[49]] This is consistent with other galaxy catalog analyses that show no trends toward homogeneity even on scales up to 1000 Mpc. [[50]] The Big Bang, of course, requires large-scale homogeneity. The Meta Model and other infinite-universe models expect fractal behavior at all scales. Observations remain in agreement with that.
· Elliptical galaxies supposedly bulge along the axis of the most recent galaxy merger. But the angular velocities of stars at different distances from the center are all different, making an elliptical shape formed in that way unstable. Such velocities would shear the elliptical shape until it was smoothed into a circular disk. Where are the galaxies in the process of being sheared?
· The polarization of radio emission rotates as it passes through magnetized extragalactic plasmas. Such Faraday rotations in quasars should increase (on average) with distance. If redshift indicates distance, then rotation and redshift should increase together. However, the mean Faraday rotation is less near z = 2 than near z = 1 (where quasars are apparently intrinsically brightest, according to Arp’s model). [[51]]
· If the dark matter needed by the Big Bang exists, microwave radiation fluctuations should have “acoustic peaks” on angular scales of 1° and 0.3°, with the latter prominent compared with the former. By contrast, if Milgrom’s alternative to dark matter (Modified Newtonian Dynamics) is correct, then the latter peak should be only about 20% of the former. Newly acquired data from the Boomerang balloon-borne instruments clearly favors the MOND interpretation over dark matter. [[52]]
· Redshifts are quantized for both galaxies [[53],[54]] and quasars [[55]]. So are other properties of galaxies. [[56]] This should not happen under Big Bang premises.
· The number density of optical quasars peaks at z = 2.5-3, and declines toward both lower and higher redshifts. At z = 5, it has dropped by a factor of about 20. This cannot be explained by dust extinction or survey incompleteness. The Big Bang predicts that quasars, the seeds of all galaxies, were most numerous at earliest epochs. [[57]]
· The falloff of the power spectrum at small scales can be used to determine the temperature of the intergalactic medium. It is typically inferred to be 20,000°K, but there is no evidence of evolution with redshift. Yet in the Big Bang, that temperature ought to adiabatically decrease as space expands everywhere. This is another indicator that the universe is not really expanding.] [[58]]
· Under Big Bang premises, the fine structure constant must vary with time. [[59]]
· Measurements of the two-point correlation function for optically selected galaxies follow an almost perfect power law over nearly three orders of magnitude in separation. However, this result disagrees with n-body simulations in all the Big Bang’s various modifications. A complex mixture of gravity, star formation, and dissipative hydrodynamics seems to be needed. [[60]]
· Emission lines for z > 4 quasars indicate higher-than-solar quasar metallicities. [[61]] The iron to magnesium ratio increases at higher redshifts (earlier Big Bang epochs). [[62]] These results imply substantial star formation at epochs preceding or concurrent with the QSO phenomenon, contrary to normal Big Bang scenarios.
· The absorption lines of damped Lyman-alpha systems are seen in quasars. However, the HST NICMOS spectrograph has searched to see these objects directly in the infrared, but failed for the most part to detect them. [[63]] Moreover, the relative abundances have surprising uniformity, unexplained in the Big Bang. [[64]] The simplest explanation is that the absorbers are in the quasar’s own environment, not at their redshift distance as the Big Bang requires.
· The luminosity evolution of brightest cluster galaxies (BGCs) cannot be adequately explained by a single evolutionary model. For example, BGCs with low x-ray luminosity are consistent with no evolution, while those with high x-ray luminosity are brighter on average at high redshift. [[65]]
· The fundamental question of why it is that at early cosmological times, bound aggregates of order 100,000 stars (globular clusters) were able to form remains unsolved in the Big Bang. It is no mystery in infinite universe models. [[66]]
· Blue galaxy counts show an excess of faint blue galaxies by a factor of 10 at magnitude 28. This implies that the volume of space is larger than in the Big Bang, where it should get smaller as one looks back in time. [[67]]
Perhaps never in the history of science has so much quality evidence accumulated against a model so widely accepted within a field. Even the most basic elements of the theory, the expansion of the universe and the fireball remnant radiation, remain interpretations with credible alternative explanations. One must wonder why, in this circumstance, that four good alternative models are not even being comparatively discussed by most astronomers.
Acknowledgments
Obviously, hundreds of professionals, both astronomers and scientists from other fields, have contributed to these findings, although few of them stand back and look at the bigger picture. It is hoped that many of them will add their comments and join as co-authors in an attempt to sway the upcoming generation of astronomers that the present cosmology is headed nowhere, and to join the search for better answers.
thanks to Meta Research.
[reprinted from Meta Research Bulletin 11, 6-13 (2002)]
Abstract. Earlier, we presented a simple list of the top ten problems with the Big Bang. [[1]] Since that publication, we have had many requests for citations and additional details, which we provide here. We also respond to a few rebuttal arguments to the earlier list. Then we supplement the list based on the last four years of developments – with another 20 problems for the theory.
(1) Static universe models fit observational data better than expanding universe models.
Static universe models match most observations with no adjustable parameters. The Big Bang can match each of the critical observations, but only with adjustable parameters, one of which (the cosmic deceleration parameter) requires mutually exclusive values to match different tests. [[2],[3]] Without ad hoc theorizing, this point alone falsifies the Big Bang. Even if the discrepancy could be explained, Occam’s razor favors the model with fewer adjustable parameters – the static universe model.
(2) The microwave “background” makes more sense as the limiting temperature of space heated by starlight than as the remnant of a fireball.
The expression “the temperature of space” is the title of chapter 13 of Sir Arthur Eddington’s famous 1926 work, [[4]] Eddington calculated the minimum temperature any body in space would cool to, given that it is immersed in the radiation of distant starlight. With no adjustable parameters, he obtained 3°K (later refined to 2.8°K [[5]]), essentially the same as the observed, so-called “background”, temperature. A similar calculation, although with less certain accuracy, applies to the limiting temperature of intergalactic space because of the radiation of galaxy light. [[6]] So the intergalactic matter is like a “fog”, and would therefore provide a simpler explanation for the microwave radiation, including its blackbody-shaped spectrum.
Such a fog also explains the otherwise troublesome ratio of infrared to radio intensities of radio galaxies. [[7]] The amount of radiation emitted by distant galaxies falls with increasing wavelengths, as expected if the longer wavelengths are scattered by the intergalactic medium. For example, the brightness ratio of radio galaxies at infrared and radio wavelengths changes with distance in a way which implies absorption. Basically, this means that the longer wavelengths are more easily absorbed by material between the galaxies. But then the microwave radiation (between the two wavelengths) should be absorbed by that medium too, and has no chance to reach us from such great distances, or to remain perfectly uniform while doing so. It must instead result from the radiation of microwaves from the intergalactic medium. This argument alone implies that the microwaves could not be coming directly to us from a distance beyond all the galaxies, and therefore that the Big Bang theory cannot be correct.
None of the predictions of the background temperature based on the Big Bang were close enough to qualify as successes, the worst being Gamow’s upward-revised estimate of 50°K made in 1961, just two years before the actual discovery. Clearly, without a realistic quantitative prediction, the Big Bang’s hypothetical “fireball” becomes indistinguishable from the natural minimum temperature of all cold matter in space. But none of the predictions, which ranged between 5°K and 50°K, matched observations. [[8]] And the Big Bang offers no explanation for the kind of intensity variations with wavelength seen in radio galaxies.
(3) Element abundance predictions using the Big Bang require too many adjustable parameters to make them work.
The universal abundances of most elements were predicted correctly by Hoyle in the context of the original Steady State cosmological model. This worked for all elements heavier than lithium. The Big Bang co-opted those results and concentrated on predicting the abundances of the light elements. Each such prediction requires at least one adjustable parameter unique to that element prediction. Often, it’s a question of figuring out why the element was either created or destroyed or both to some degree following the Big Bang. When you take away these degrees of freedom, no genuine prediction remains. The best the Big Bang can claim is consistency with observations using the various ad hoc models to explain the data for each light element. Examples: [[9],[10]] for helium-3; [[11]] for lithium-7; [[12]] for deuterium; [[13]] for beryllium; and [[14],[15]] for overviews. For a full discussion of an alternative origin of the light elements, see [[16]].
(4) The universe has too much large scale structure (interspersed “walls” and voids) to form in a time as short as 10-20 billion years.
The average speed of galaxies through space is a well-measured quantity. At those speeds, galaxies would require roughly the age of the universe to assemble into the largest structures (superclusters and walls) we see in space [[17]], and to clear all the voids between galaxy walls. But this assumes that the initial directions of motion are special, e.g., directed away from the centers of voids. To get around this problem, one must propose that galaxy speeds were initially much higher and have slowed due to some sort of “viscosity” of space. To form these structures by building up the needed motions through gravitational acceleration alone would take in excess of 100 billion years. [[18]]
(5) The average luminosity of quasars must decrease with time in just the right way so that their average apparent brightness is the same at all redshifts, which is exceedingly unlikely.
According to the Big Bang theory, a quasar at a redshift of 1 is roughly ten times as far away as one at a redshift of 0.1. (The redshift-distance relation is not quite linear, but this is a fair approximation.) If the two quasars were intrinsically similar, the high redshift one would be about 100 times fainter because of the inverse square law. But it is, on average, of comparable apparent brightness. This must be explained as quasars “evolving” their intrinsic properties so that they get smaller and fainter as the universe evolves. That way, the quasar at redshift 1 can be intrinsically 100 times brighter than the one at 0.1, explaining why they appear (on average) to be comparably bright. It isn’t as if the Big Bang has a reason why quasars should evolve in just this magical way. But that is required to explain the observations using the Big Bang interpretation of the redshift of quasars as a measure of cosmological distance. See [[19],[20]].
By contrast, the relation between apparent magnitude and distance for quasars is a simple, inverse-square law in alternative cosmologies. In [20], Arp shows great quantities of evidence that large quasar redshifts are a combination of a cosmological factor and an intrinsic factor, with the latter dominant in most cases. Most large quasar redshifts (e.g., z > 1) therefore have little correlation with distance. A grouping of 11 quasars close to NGC 1068, having nominal ejection patterns correlated with galaxy rotation, provides further strong evidence that quasar redshifts are intrinsic. [[21]]
(6) The ages of globular clusters appear older than the universe.
Even though the data have been stretched in the direction toward resolving this since the “top ten” list first appeared, the error bars on the Hubble age of the universe (12±2 Gyr) still do not quite overlap the error bars on the oldest globular clusters (16±2 Gyr). Astronomers have studied this for the past decade, but resist the “observational error” explanation because that would almost certainly push the Hubble age older (as Sandage has been arguing for years), which creates several new problems for the Big Bang. In other words, the cure is worse than the illness for the theory. In fact, a new, relatively bias-free observational technique has gone the opposite way, lowering the Hubble age estimate to 10 Gyr, making the discrepancy worse again. [[22],[23]]
(7) The local streaming motions of galaxies are too high for a finite universe that is supposed to be everywhere uniform.
In the early 1990s, we learned that the average redshift for galaxies of a given brightness differs on opposite sides of the sky. The Big Bang interprets this as the existence of a puzzling group flow of galaxies relative to the microwave radiation on scales of at least 130 Mpc. Earlier, the existence of this flow led to the hypothesis of a "Great Attractor" pulling all these galaxies in its direction. But in newer studies, no backside infall was found on the other side of the hypothetical feature. Instead, there is streaming on both sides of us out to 60-70 Mpc in a consistent direction relative to the microwave "background". The only Big Bang alternative to the apparent result of large-scale streaming of galaxies is that the microwave radiation is in motion relative to us. Either way, this result is trouble for the Big Bang. [[24],[25],[26],[27],[28]]
(8) Invisible dark matter of an unknown but non-baryonic nature must be the dominant ingredient of the entire universe.
The Big Bang requires sprinkling galaxies, clusters, superclusters, and the universe with ever-increasing amounts of this invisible, not-yet-detected “dark matter” to keep the theory viable. Overall, over 90% of the universe must be made of something we have never detected. By contrast, Milgrom’s model (the alternative to “dark matter”) provides a one-parameter explanation that works at all scales and requires no “dark matter” to exist at any scale. (I exclude the additional 50%-100% of invisible ordinary matter inferred to exist by, e.g., MACHO studies.) Some physicists don’t like modifying the law of gravity in this way, but a finite range for natural forces is a logical necessity (not just theory) spoken of since the 17th century. [[29],[30]]
Milgrom’s model requires nothing more than that. Milgrom’s is an operational model rather than one based on fundamentals. But it is consistent with more complete models invoking a finite range for gravity. So Milgrom’s model provides a basis to eliminate the need for “dark matter” in the universe at any scale. This represents one more Big Bang “fudge factor” no longer needed.
(9) The most distant galaxies in the Hubble Deep Field show insufficient evidence of evolution, with some of them having higher redshifts (z = 6-7) than the highest-redshift quasars.
The Big Bang requires that stars, quasars and galaxies in the early universe be “primitive”, meaning mostly metal-free, because it requires many generations of supernovae to build up metal content in stars. But the latest evidence suggests lots of metal in the “earliest” quasars and galaxies. [[31],[32],[33]] Moreover, we now have evidence for numerous ordinary galaxies in what the Big Bang expected to be the “dark age” of evolution of the universe, when the light of the few primitive galaxies in existence would be blocked from view by hydrogen clouds. [[34]]
(10) If the open universe we see today is extrapolated back near the beginning, the ratio of the actual density of matter in the universe to the critical density must differ from unity by just a part in 1059. Any larger deviation would result in a universe already collapsed on itself or already dissipated.
Inflation failed to achieve its goal when many observations went against it. To maintain consistency and salvage inflation, the Big Bang has now introduced two new adjustable parameters: (1) the cosmological constant, which has a major fine-tuning problem of its own because theory suggests it ought to be of order 10120, and observations suggest a value less than 1; and (2) “quintessence” or “dark energy”. [[35],[36]] This latter theoretical substance solves the fine-tuning problem by introducing invisible, undetectable energy sprinkled at will as needed throughout the universe to keep consistency between theory and observations. It can therefore be accurately described as “the ultimate fudge factor”.
Anyone doubting the Big Bang in its present form (which includes most astronomy-interested people outside the field of astronomy, according to one recent survey) would have good cause for that opinion and could easily defend such a position. This is a fundamentally different matter than proving the Big Bang did not happen, which would be proving a negative – something that is normally impossible. (E.g., we cannot prove that Santa Claus does not exist.) The Big Bang, much like the Santa Claus hypothesis, no longer makes testable predictions wherein proponents agree that a failure would falsify the hypothesis. Instead, the theory is continually amended to account for all new, unexpected discoveries. Indeed, many young scientists now think of this as a normal process in science! They forget or were never taught that a model has value only when it can predict new things that differentiate the model from chance and from other models before the new things are discovered. Explanations of new things are supposed to flow from the basic theory itself with at most an adjustable parameter or two, and not from add-on bits of new theory.
Of course, the literature also contains the occasional review paper in support of the Big Bang. [[37]] But these generally don’t count any of the prediction failures or surprises as theory failures as long as some ad hoc theory might explain them. And the “prediction successes” in almost every case do not distinguish the Big Bang from any of the four leading competitor models: Quasi-Steady-State [16,[38]], Plasma Cosmology [18], Meta Model [3], and Variable-Mass Cosmology [20].
For the most part, these four alternative cosmologies are ignored by astronomers. However, one web site by Ned Wright does try to advance counterarguments in defense of the Big Bang. [[39]] But his counterarguments are mostly old objections long since defeated. For example:
(1) In “Eddington did not predict the CMB”:
a. Wright argues that Eddington’s argument for the “temperature of space” applies at most to our Galaxy. But Eddington’s reasoning applies also to the temperature of intergalactic space, for which a minimum is set by the radiation of galaxy and quasar light. The original calculations half-a-century ago showed this limit probably fell in the range 1-6°K. [6] And that was before quasars were discovered and before we knew the modern space density of galaxies.
b. Wright also argues that dust grains cannot be the source of the blackbody microwave radiation because there are not enough of them to be opaque, as needed to produce a blackbody spectrum. However, opaqueness is required only in a finite universe. An infinite universe can achieve thermodynamic equilibrium (the actual requirement for a blackbody spectrum) even if transparent out to very large distances because the thermal mixing can occur on a much smaller scale than quantum particles – e.g., in the light-carrying medium itself.
c. Wright argues that dust grains do not radiate efficiently at millimeter wavelengths. However, efficient or not, if the equilibrium temperature they reach is 2.8°K, they must radiate away the energy they absorb from distant galaxy and quasar light at millimeter wavelengths. Temperature and wavelength are correlated for any bodies in thermal equilibrium.
(2) About Lerner’s argument against the Big Bang:
a. Lerner calculated that the Big Bang universe has not had enough time to form superclusters. Wright calculates that all the voids could be vacated and superclusters formed in less than 11-14 billion years (barely). But that assumes that almost all matter has initial speeds headed directly out of voids and toward matter concentrations. Lerner, on the other hand, assumed that the speeds had to be built up by gravitational attraction, which takes many times longer. Lerner’s point is more reasonable because doing it Wright’s way requires fine-tuning of initial conditions.
b. Wright argues that “there is certainly lots of evidence for dark matter.” The reality is that there is no credible observational detection of dark matter, so all the “evidence” is a matter of interpretation, depending on theoretical assumptions. For example, Milgrom’s Model explains all the same evidence without any need for dark matter.
(3) Regarding arguments against “tired light cosmology”:
a. Wright argues: “There is no known interaction that can degrade a photon's energy without also changing its momentum, which leads to a blurring of distant objects which is not observed.” While it is technically true that no such interaction has yet been discovered, reasonable non-Big-Bang cosmologies require the existence of entities many orders of magnitude smaller than photons. For example, the entity responsible for gravitational interactions has not yet been discovered. So the “fuzzy image” argument does not apply to realistic physical models in which all substance is infinitely divisible. By contrast, physical models lacking infinite divisibility have great difficulties explaining Zeno’s paradoxes – especially the extended paradox for matter. [3]
b. Wright argues that the stretching of supernovae light curves is not predicted by “tired light”. However, one cannot measure the stretching effect directly because the time under the lightcurve depends on the intrinsic brightness of the supernovae, which can vary considerably. So one must use indirect indicators, such as rise time only. And in that case, the data does not unambiguously favor either tired light or Big Bang models.
c. Wright argued that tired light does not produce a blackbody spectrum. But this is untrue if the entities producing the energy loss are many orders of magnitude smaller and more numerous than quantum particles.
d. Wright argues that tired light models fail the Tolman surface brightness test. This ignores that realistic tired light models must lose energy in the transverse direction, not just the longitudinal one, because light is a transverse wave. When this effect is considered, the predicted loss of light intensity goes with (1+z)-2, which is in good agreement with most observations without any adjustable parameters. [ NOTEREF _Ref4051228 \h \* MERGEFORMAT 2,[40]] The Big Bang, by contrast, predicts a (1+z)-4 dependence, and must therefore invoke special ad hoc evolution (different from that applicable to quasars) to close the gap between theory and observations.
By no means is this “top ten” list of Big Bang problems exhaustive – far from it. In fact, it is easy to argue that several of these additional 20 points should be among the “top ten”:
· "Pencil-beam surveys" show large-scale structure out to distances of more than 1 Gpc in both of two opposite directions from us. This appears as a succession of wall-like galaxy features at fairly regular intervals, the first of which, at about 130 Mpc distance, is called "The Great Wall". To date, 13 such evenly-spaced "walls" of galaxies have been found! [[41]] The Big Bang theory requires fairly uniform mixing on scales of distance larger than about 20 Mpc, so there apparently is far more large-scale structure in the universe than the Big Bang can explain.
· Many particles are seen with energies over 60x1018 eV. But that is the theoretical energy limit for anything traveling more than 20-50 Mpc because of interaction with microwave background photons. [[42]] However, this objection assumes the microwave radiation is as the Big Bang expects, instead of a relatively sparse, local phenomenon.
· The Big Bang predicts that equal amounts of matter and antimatter were created in the initial explosion. Matter dominates the present universe apparently because of some form of asymmetry, such as CP violation asymmetry, that caused most anti-matter to annihilate with matter, but left much matter. Experiments are searching for evidence of this asymmetry, so far without success. Other galaxies can’t be antimatter because that would create a matter-antimatter boundary with the intergalactic medium that would create gamma rays, which are not seen. [[43],[44]]
· Even a small amount of diffuse neutral hydrogen would produce a smooth absorbing trough shortward of a QSO’s Lyman-alpha emission line. This is called the Gunn-Peterson effect, and is rarely seen, implying that most hydrogen in the universe has been re-ionized. A hydrogen Gunn-Peterson trough is now predicted to be present at a redshift z » 6.1. [[45]] Observations of high-redshift quasars near z = 6 briefly appeared to confirm this prediction. However, a galaxy lensed by a foreground cluster has now been observed at z = 6.56, prior to the supposed reionization epoch and at a time when the Big Bang expects no galaxies to be visible yet. Moreover, if only a few galaxies had turned on by this early point, their emission would have been absorbed by the surrounding hydrogen gas, making these early galaxies invisible. [34] So the lensed galaxy observation falsifies this prediction and the theory it was based on. Another problem example: Quasar PG 0052+251 is at the core of a normal spiral galaxy. The host galaxy appears undisturbed by the quasar radiation, which, in the Big Bang, is supposed to be strong enough to ionize the intergalactic medium. [[46]]
· An excess of QSOs is observed around foreground clusters. Lensing amplification caused by foreground galaxies or clusters is too weak to explain this association between high- and low-redshift objects. This apparent contradiction has no solution under Big Bang premises that does not create some other problem. It particular, dark matter solutions would have to be centrally concentrated, contrary to observations that imply that dark matter increases away from galaxy centers. The high-redshift and low-redshift objects are probably actually at comparable distances, as Arp has maintained for 30 years. [[47]]
· The Big Bang violates the first law of thermodynamics, that energy cannot be either created or destroyed, by requiring that new space filled with “zero-point energy” be continually created between the galaxies. [[48]]
· In the Las Campanas redshift survey, statistical differences from homogenous distribution were found out to a scale of at least 200 Mpc. [[49]] This is consistent with other galaxy catalog analyses that show no trends toward homogeneity even on scales up to 1000 Mpc. [[50]] The Big Bang, of course, requires large-scale homogeneity. The Meta Model and other infinite-universe models expect fractal behavior at all scales. Observations remain in agreement with that.
· Elliptical galaxies supposedly bulge along the axis of the most recent galaxy merger. But the angular velocities of stars at different distances from the center are all different, making an elliptical shape formed in that way unstable. Such velocities would shear the elliptical shape until it was smoothed into a circular disk. Where are the galaxies in the process of being sheared?
· The polarization of radio emission rotates as it passes through magnetized extragalactic plasmas. Such Faraday rotations in quasars should increase (on average) with distance. If redshift indicates distance, then rotation and redshift should increase together. However, the mean Faraday rotation is less near z = 2 than near z = 1 (where quasars are apparently intrinsically brightest, according to Arp’s model). [[51]]
· If the dark matter needed by the Big Bang exists, microwave radiation fluctuations should have “acoustic peaks” on angular scales of 1° and 0.3°, with the latter prominent compared with the former. By contrast, if Milgrom’s alternative to dark matter (Modified Newtonian Dynamics) is correct, then the latter peak should be only about 20% of the former. Newly acquired data from the Boomerang balloon-borne instruments clearly favors the MOND interpretation over dark matter. [[52]]
· Redshifts are quantized for both galaxies [[53],[54]] and quasars [[55]]. So are other properties of galaxies. [[56]] This should not happen under Big Bang premises.
· The number density of optical quasars peaks at z = 2.5-3, and declines toward both lower and higher redshifts. At z = 5, it has dropped by a factor of about 20. This cannot be explained by dust extinction or survey incompleteness. The Big Bang predicts that quasars, the seeds of all galaxies, were most numerous at earliest epochs. [[57]]
· The falloff of the power spectrum at small scales can be used to determine the temperature of the intergalactic medium. It is typically inferred to be 20,000°K, but there is no evidence of evolution with redshift. Yet in the Big Bang, that temperature ought to adiabatically decrease as space expands everywhere. This is another indicator that the universe is not really expanding.] [[58]]
· Under Big Bang premises, the fine structure constant must vary with time. [[59]]
· Measurements of the two-point correlation function for optically selected galaxies follow an almost perfect power law over nearly three orders of magnitude in separation. However, this result disagrees with n-body simulations in all the Big Bang’s various modifications. A complex mixture of gravity, star formation, and dissipative hydrodynamics seems to be needed. [[60]]
· Emission lines for z > 4 quasars indicate higher-than-solar quasar metallicities. [[61]] The iron to magnesium ratio increases at higher redshifts (earlier Big Bang epochs). [[62]] These results imply substantial star formation at epochs preceding or concurrent with the QSO phenomenon, contrary to normal Big Bang scenarios.
· The absorption lines of damped Lyman-alpha systems are seen in quasars. However, the HST NICMOS spectrograph has searched to see these objects directly in the infrared, but failed for the most part to detect them. [[63]] Moreover, the relative abundances have surprising uniformity, unexplained in the Big Bang. [[64]] The simplest explanation is that the absorbers are in the quasar’s own environment, not at their redshift distance as the Big Bang requires.
· The luminosity evolution of brightest cluster galaxies (BGCs) cannot be adequately explained by a single evolutionary model. For example, BGCs with low x-ray luminosity are consistent with no evolution, while those with high x-ray luminosity are brighter on average at high redshift. [[65]]
· The fundamental question of why it is that at early cosmological times, bound aggregates of order 100,000 stars (globular clusters) were able to form remains unsolved in the Big Bang. It is no mystery in infinite universe models. [[66]]
· Blue galaxy counts show an excess of faint blue galaxies by a factor of 10 at magnitude 28. This implies that the volume of space is larger than in the Big Bang, where it should get smaller as one looks back in time. [[67]]
Perhaps never in the history of science has so much quality evidence accumulated against a model so widely accepted within a field. Even the most basic elements of the theory, the expansion of the universe and the fireball remnant radiation, remain interpretations with credible alternative explanations. One must wonder why, in this circumstance, that four good alternative models are not even being comparatively discussed by most astronomers.
Acknowledgments
Obviously, hundreds of professionals, both astronomers and scientists from other fields, have contributed to these findings, although few of them stand back and look at the bigger picture. It is hoped that many of them will add their comments and join as co-authors in an attempt to sway the upcoming generation of astronomers that the present cosmology is headed nowhere, and to join the search for better answers.
Big Bang unhinged?
Credit Mike Rivero from
Whatreallyhappened.com
THE "BIG BANG" IS JUST RELIGION DISGUISED AS SCIENCE
by Michael Rivero
Once upon a time, a long time ago, there was this guy named Aristotle. Pretty sharp fellow; he thought up a lot of good things. But, occasionally he made a mistake.
One mistake he made was to toss an orange up in the air and watch it come straight back down to his hand. Aristotle reasoned that if he was moving, the orange would have flown off to one side as soon as it left his hand. Because the orange did not do so, Aristotle concluded he was not moving. On the basis of this one observed fact, and the assumption that there was no other explanation for what he observed, Aristotle concluded that the Earth does not move and that therefore the rest of the universe had to move around it.
Aristotle was a very sharp guy, but the fact is that there was another explanation for why the orange fell back into his hand, and it would wait about another 2000 years before another smart man, Sir Isaac Newton, explained just what it was Aristotle had overlooked, set forth in Newton's laws of motion.
But for the early church, Aristotle's conclusions fit in rather well with their theology, which had the Earth created as the center of the universe, unmoving, with the rest of the cosmos spinning about it.
Of course, there was empirical evidence available to all that cast doubt on the church-approved version of the Cosmos. One could see during eclipses that the Earth was not flat. The curved shape of the Earth's shadow as it crossed the moon was the same no matter which place in the sky the eclipse took place. A spherical Earth was the only shape that could produce such a result. Ships sailing over the horizon clearly vanished over a subtle curve ( an observation which eventually inspired Columbus' voyages). Nobody could explain the behavior of a Foucault's Pendulum other than by the Earth spinning beneath it.
But by far the most troubling problem for the geocentric (earth centered) universe was the strange behavior of the planets. In an age before TV, or even books, the night sky was something every person was quite familiar with, even those who were not sailors or fortune tellers. Watching the night sky over time, the paths of the planets were easily seen to occasionally pause, move in reverse for a time, then proceed forward. This behavior was called retrograde motion. Ah, but this was a problem. The church did not have an explanation for this behavior. Indeed in the King James Version of the Bible, the word "planet" appears only once, and then only as an object to be sacrificed to.
There is a very simple explanation for retrograde motion. As the Earth, moving in its inner orbit, overtakes an outer planet, it will appear to hesitate, reverse its path across the sky, then resume its normal path. But the idea that the Earth moved was contrary to Church Dogma and to Aristotle. What education was tolerated by the church was "encouraged" to find some way to explain retrograde motion in a way that did not conflict with the religious needs for a universe centered on an unmoving Earth. Rather than re-examine Aristotle's basic claim, the learned men of the day grabbed onto a suggestion made by Claudius Ptolemy called "epicycles". This theory explained retrograde motion around a motionless Earth by suggesting that the planets moved in large orbits called deferents, upon which were superimposed smaller orbits called epicycles which produced a "wobble" as seen from Earth.
Epicycles were extremely popular with the church, and scholars at universities with religious affiliations were "encouraged" to refine this theory. And it needed refinement, badly, because the epicycle theory did not accurately predict what was being seen in the sky. Generations of effort was expended trying to figure out why the models did not predict the actual motions of the planets. At one point, it was even suggested that the epicycles had epicycles. No matter how many times the observed results did not match the predictions, the approved course of action was to refine the theory, but never to question the basic assumption. Those who dared point to the evidence suggesting that Aristotle (and by extension the church) were in error in postulating a geocentric universe were "discouraged". Galileo was tortured into recanting his conclusions that the Earth moved. Giordano Bruno was burned alive at the stake for suggesting that the sun was really just another star, only close up, and that the other stars had their own planets.
In recent times, our expanding technology has confirmed that Galileo and Bruno were right, and Aristotle and the church were flat out wrong. The Earth does move. There are no deferents or epicycles, or even epicycles on the epicycles. The models of the universe which are based on a moving Earth are quite accurate and able to predict the behaviors of the planets as evidence by the fact that we send spacecraft to those planets on a regular basis.
The theory of a geocentric universe and the theory of epicycles were not science. It was religious doctrine masked as science.
The church has never really dealt with the reality of the universe very well. They only apologized for their treatment of Galileo recently and still refuse to discuss Bruno. The Bible, presumed to be the perfect word of a perfect God, still teaches that the Earth is flat, rests on pillars (Job 26:11), and does not move (Psalms 19:5-6 93:1 96:10 104:5).
It seems that some mistakes are destined to be repeated again, despite our technological prowess.
In 1929, a Cal-Tech astronomer named Edwin Hubble observed that objects which appeared to be much further away showed a more pronounced shift towards the red end of the spectrum. Scientists building on Hubble's discovery concluded that the farther an object was away from Earth, the faster it was receding, and calculated the relationship between distance and velocity, called the "Hubble Constant" and concluded on the basis of this one observed fact and the assumption that there was no other explanation for that observed fact that the universe was expanding.
Religious circles embraced the idea of an expanding universe because for the universe to be expanding, then at some point in the past it had to originate from a single point, called the "Big Bang". Indeed, the concept of the Big Bang did not originate with Edwin Hubble but was proposed by a Catholic Monk, Georges Lema�tre in 1927, two years before Hubble published his observations of the Red Shift. The "Big Bang" coincided nicely with religious doctrine and just as had been the case with epicycles (and despite the embarrassment thereof) religious institutions sought to encourage this new model of the universe over all others, including the then prevalent "steady state" theory.
Then history repeated itself. Evidence surfaced that the "Big Bang" might not really be a workable theory in the form of General Relativity, and its postulation that super massive objects would have gravity fields so strong that even light could not escape, nor would matter be able to differentiate. Since the entire universe existing in just one spot would be the most super massive object of all, the universe could not be born.
Needless to say, this suggestion that the Big Bang could not happen provoked the same exact reaction as the suggestion that the Earth might not be the center of everything. Instead of questioning the basic assumption, great effort was made to find a way to evolve the new data in terms acceptable to the assumption of a universe spawned in a single moment of creation. A complex Cosmology theory sprang up, encouraged by those invested in the "Big Bang" to explain why the basic foundational principles of physics behaved differently in the first few milliseconds of time. The math work is impressive, as impressive as that which supported the theory of the epicycles, but it is really just a polite way of saying "The rules just didn't apply when we need them not to apply".
An attempt was made to prove the Big Bang by searching for the "Cosmic Background Radiation", the presumed energy echo from the primordial explosion. and indeed a radio noise signal was picked up. Like Aristotle, and like Hubble, the discoverers of the Cosmic Background Radiation assumed the signal meant what they thought it did and could have no alternative explanation. The discovery of the Cosmic Background Radiation was then heralded as final proof of the Big Bang theory, and those institutions invested in that theory celebrated.
But just as the theory of epicycles did not accurately predict the observed motion of the planets, the Big Bang Theory turned out to be less than accurate about the radiation signal detected in space.
For one thing, there is the "Horizon Problem". At present, the known universe spans 28 billion light years and is assumed to be 14 billion years old. (Obviously unless we actually ARE the center of the universe, it may be assumed that the universe probably extends even further in at least one direction). Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light, so there is no way heat radiation could have traveled between the two horizons to even out the hot and cold spots created in the big bang and leave the thermal equilibrium we see now.
When the satellite COBE was sent up to analyze the Cosmic Background Radiation, it discovered instead of the smooth featureless glow predicted by the cosmologists a highly complex and detailed structure. Yet again, rather than question the prime assumption that the signal being analyzed was actually from a supposed "Big Bang", research was encouraged to find a way to fit the data into the existing theory, again on the assumption that the signal detected could not be from any other source. And yet, an alternative explanation for the signal was right at hand, indeed literally on all sides.
Our Solar System and planets have heavy elements (without which you would not be here) because at some time prior to the creation of our Solar System another star in the immediate vicinity exploded, creating the heavy elements and scattering them into the universe. Every star that explodes creates a planetary nebula, such as the one easily seen with amateur telescopes in the constellation Lyra. A planetary nebula is a bubble of debris in space, and given the presence of heavy elements in our own Solar System, then somewhere out in space there must be the tenuous remains of a billions of years old planetary nebula, the result of the not-so-very-big bang, viewable from our unique point of view near the center. This model of Earth lying at the center of the remains of a supernova predicts exactly the sort of structure that COBE found in the presumed Cosmic Background Radiation. But as was the case with Galileo and Bruno, challengers to the "approved" creation myths face a tough time, albeit funding cuts have replaced torture and being burned alive at the stake.
So pervasive is this bias to see the universe as created in a Biblical-consistent "Big Bang" that when William G. Tifft submitted his first article on the quantization of the observed Red Shift to Astrophysical Journal, the Journal published it because they could not find errors in it, yet still felt compelled to editorially distance themselves from the conclusions.
The conclusions derived from quantized red shift are devastating to the conventional view of the universe created in a single Big Bang, as devastating as Galileo's first telescope was to the theory that the Earth was the center of the universe.
Georges Lemaître (like Aristotle) assumed there was no other explanation for the red shift he observed than the motion of the observed objects relative to Earth. But given the theory that the universe is expanding uniformly, the amount of red shifts would have to be uniformly and randomly distributed.
But they aren't.
The observed red shifts in the sky are quantized, falling into discreet intervals. This is not explained by the theory that the red shift is produced solely by relative velocity. Some other effect is at work. And that means that the assumption that the universe is expanding based solely on the red shift is invalidated. Some other effect IS at work that explains the observations, quite possibly one that triggers a quantized red shift over vast distances without respect to relative velocity.
Which means the universe is not expanding. Which means there was no moment of creation, no "Big Bang" with an epicycle-esque cosmology to explain why the greatest black hole of all didn't behave like a black hole. Which means that the background radiation mapped by COBE which didn't quite fit the Big Bang model is probably the remnant of the stellar explosion that created the heavy elements making up that computer you are reading this on.
But the lesson for our time of just how much our society remains dominated by religious superstitions is revealed by the fact that the quantized red-shift is NOT a new discovery. The first article regarding the observed data appeared in 1976, a quarter of a century ago. Since then, scientists as much in the service of superstition as were those scientists who "studied" epicycles have repeatedly tried to disprove the observations of Tifft and Cocke, only to confirm and re-confirm the truth, that there is a quantized red-shift, which casts doubt on the theory of an expanding universe and a "Big bang" creation.
Yet even though hard evidence exists to warrant a full re-examination of the basic assumption of the expanding universe, our science classes and TV programs still promote the "Big Bang" view, just as the erroneous theory of Aristotle continued to be promoted even after Galileo proved it wrong, because one theory fits into a theology, and the other does not.
Man's progress is not measured by the reaches of his science but by the limits of his superstition. The truth is known. But the truth is unpopular.
The assumption that there must be a beginning to the universe is merely a human invention. We believe that we see things have beginnings and ends before us, but in truth we are seeing matter change form. A particular configuration may have a beginning and an end, but that the actual matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed is an axiom of physics. Miss April may be only 20 years old, but the atoms in her heavenly body are indeed heavenly bodies, being the remains of ancient exploded stars, and in THAT form for billions of years.
Ancients believed that the Earth was the center of the universe. But while we grudgingly admit that Earth orbits the sun and that our sun is nowhere near the center of the milky way, the idea that Earth is the center of all remains at the heart of the assumptions of the Big Bang theory. The "Bangers" describe the furthest objects we can detect (currently 13 billion light years) and from that calculate the age of the universe (currently set at 14 billion years).
But that only works if we ASSUME that the Earth is the center for all the cosmos that we can see. It is true that we are seeing objects out to the edge of our technological limits
and we are seeing them in all directions. We do not see an obvious end to the universe. Logically, the odds are far greater than what we can actually see is really just a tiny bubble in a far larger universe, rather than we just happen to be that one in googleplex worlds that wound up at the exact center for the expanding field of debris from the Big Bang (i.e. the location of the original singlularity). And if we abandon the assumption that we see most of the the universe from a fortunate position near the location of the original singlularity, then we cannot really know how large the universe really is, and the mathematics by which we claim to know the age based on the size break down completely. We truly are trying to calculate the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin.
PROOF THE BIG BANG DID NOT HAPPEN
Perhaps the biggest contradiction with the Big Bang Theory is the question of the singularity. The "primordial egg" had to be a super-massive black hole. Therefore no amount of "bang", no matter how big, is going to thrust the universe out into, well, the universe.
Cosmologists eager to promote the Big Bang Theory have hit upon the "explanation" that the laws of physics, gravity., etc. simply did not apply in those first few moments of the universe. The present Cosmology theory is that the universe enjoyed a period of "rulelessness" of about 3 seconds, after which the elements formed and the fundamental forces of the universe, gravity included, were functioning as we see them today.
Ah, but there is a problem. The singularity formed by the primordial egg turns out to be rather large.
Estimates of the total mass of the universe vary wildly, given that the ends of the universe have not yet been determined. One estimate is found at http://www.rostra.dk/louis/quant_11.html of 2.6*1060.
From the mass, you can calculate the diameter of the event horizon by finding the distance from a point mass that will have an escape velocity of c. Use sqrt(2GM/r) where M is the mass of the hole (the entire universe in this case) and r is the radius (classical), and G is the gravitational constant. Work it backward starting at c and you get c^2=2GM/r.
This works out to an event horizon light years across!
In short, at the moment in time when the Big Bang theorists claim the universe was functioning as it does today, complete with all fundamental forces, the entirety of the universe's mass was still well within the event horizon of its own gravity well. That the well was not the product of a true singularity is irrelevant, Newton's equation provides an equivalent gravity field for a singularity or a super dense mass in a localized region.
Therefore the Big Bang, as currently described, could not have produced the universe as we see it today. At three seconds, the time the theorists claim the universe started operating as we know it, it would have come under the influence of its own gravity and unable to reach an escape velocity exceeding that of light, collapsed back into itself.
ANOTHER PROOF THE BIG BANG DID NOT HAPPEN
For the purposes of this thought experiment, let us assume that God waved a magic wand and the universe popped into existence from a Big Bang, and that "somehow" the universe escaped from it's own gravity well. With the entire 2.6*1060 mass/energy of the universe confined to that small region, the temperatures and pressures amount to a super-supernova. We already know that in the cataclysm of a supernova, the heavier elements are created. That is where all the heavy elements in your body were created; inside an exploding star. Therefore, in that moment of super-creation called the Big Bang, as the universe started to operate by the rules we know today, the expanding universe should be creating all the known heavy elements.
So, how to explain the Population II stars?
Population II stars are stars with no heavy elements in them. When they explode at the end of their life cycles, heavy elements are created. These are swept up by stars that form afterwards creating Population I stars, usually with planets around them. Population I stars have heavy elements. Population II stars do not.
If the Big Bang had happened, the universe would be filled with heavy elements created in those first few moments the universe started to operate under the rules of physics we know today. There should not be any stars in existence devoid of those heavy elements. And yet there are.
The existence of Population II stars, devoid of heavy elements, directly contradicts the theory of the Big Bang.
YET ANOTHER PROOF THE BIG BANG DID NOT HAPPEN
The Big Bang is currently imagined to have occurred 14 billion years ago.
The farthest object seen in the sky by the Hubble and Keck Telescopes is 13 billion light-years distant, and is assumed to have been created when the universe was just 750 million years old. It would take at least that long (if not longer) for the material from the theorized Big Bang to coalesce into stars and for those stars to form a rotating galaxy.
But here is the problem. We are seeing that object 13 billion light-years distant not as it is today and where it is today but as it was and where it was, 13 billion years ago, 13 billion light-years distant from earth.
In other words, for this galaxy to lie 13 billion light-years away from Earth only 750 million years after the Big Bang, it would have had to travel 13 billion light years in just 750 million years' time. That requires the galaxy in question to travel more than 17 times faster than the speed of light, a speed limit which according to the Big Bang supporters was in effect from the moment the universe was 3 seconds old.
do the findings of Tifft and Cocke undermine the redshift-distance relationship? The answer might be YES
Report on confirmations of the observations. Note the reluctance to follow the data through to a conclusion.
"The Big Bang Never Happened" (Book ad at Amazon)
"Seeing Red" (Book ad at Amazon)
Discovery By UCSD Astronomers Poses A Cosmic Puzzle: Can A 'Distant' Quasar Lie Within A Nearby Galaxy?
Whatreallyhappened.com
THE "BIG BANG" IS JUST RELIGION DISGUISED AS SCIENCE
by Michael Rivero
Once upon a time, a long time ago, there was this guy named Aristotle. Pretty sharp fellow; he thought up a lot of good things. But, occasionally he made a mistake.
One mistake he made was to toss an orange up in the air and watch it come straight back down to his hand. Aristotle reasoned that if he was moving, the orange would have flown off to one side as soon as it left his hand. Because the orange did not do so, Aristotle concluded he was not moving. On the basis of this one observed fact, and the assumption that there was no other explanation for what he observed, Aristotle concluded that the Earth does not move and that therefore the rest of the universe had to move around it.
Aristotle was a very sharp guy, but the fact is that there was another explanation for why the orange fell back into his hand, and it would wait about another 2000 years before another smart man, Sir Isaac Newton, explained just what it was Aristotle had overlooked, set forth in Newton's laws of motion.
But for the early church, Aristotle's conclusions fit in rather well with their theology, which had the Earth created as the center of the universe, unmoving, with the rest of the cosmos spinning about it.
Of course, there was empirical evidence available to all that cast doubt on the church-approved version of the Cosmos. One could see during eclipses that the Earth was not flat. The curved shape of the Earth's shadow as it crossed the moon was the same no matter which place in the sky the eclipse took place. A spherical Earth was the only shape that could produce such a result. Ships sailing over the horizon clearly vanished over a subtle curve ( an observation which eventually inspired Columbus' voyages). Nobody could explain the behavior of a Foucault's Pendulum other than by the Earth spinning beneath it.
But by far the most troubling problem for the geocentric (earth centered) universe was the strange behavior of the planets. In an age before TV, or even books, the night sky was something every person was quite familiar with, even those who were not sailors or fortune tellers. Watching the night sky over time, the paths of the planets were easily seen to occasionally pause, move in reverse for a time, then proceed forward. This behavior was called retrograde motion. Ah, but this was a problem. The church did not have an explanation for this behavior. Indeed in the King James Version of the Bible, the word "planet" appears only once, and then only as an object to be sacrificed to.
There is a very simple explanation for retrograde motion. As the Earth, moving in its inner orbit, overtakes an outer planet, it will appear to hesitate, reverse its path across the sky, then resume its normal path. But the idea that the Earth moved was contrary to Church Dogma and to Aristotle. What education was tolerated by the church was "encouraged" to find some way to explain retrograde motion in a way that did not conflict with the religious needs for a universe centered on an unmoving Earth. Rather than re-examine Aristotle's basic claim, the learned men of the day grabbed onto a suggestion made by Claudius Ptolemy called "epicycles". This theory explained retrograde motion around a motionless Earth by suggesting that the planets moved in large orbits called deferents, upon which were superimposed smaller orbits called epicycles which produced a "wobble" as seen from Earth.
Epicycles were extremely popular with the church, and scholars at universities with religious affiliations were "encouraged" to refine this theory. And it needed refinement, badly, because the epicycle theory did not accurately predict what was being seen in the sky. Generations of effort was expended trying to figure out why the models did not predict the actual motions of the planets. At one point, it was even suggested that the epicycles had epicycles. No matter how many times the observed results did not match the predictions, the approved course of action was to refine the theory, but never to question the basic assumption. Those who dared point to the evidence suggesting that Aristotle (and by extension the church) were in error in postulating a geocentric universe were "discouraged". Galileo was tortured into recanting his conclusions that the Earth moved. Giordano Bruno was burned alive at the stake for suggesting that the sun was really just another star, only close up, and that the other stars had their own planets.
In recent times, our expanding technology has confirmed that Galileo and Bruno were right, and Aristotle and the church were flat out wrong. The Earth does move. There are no deferents or epicycles, or even epicycles on the epicycles. The models of the universe which are based on a moving Earth are quite accurate and able to predict the behaviors of the planets as evidence by the fact that we send spacecraft to those planets on a regular basis.
The theory of a geocentric universe and the theory of epicycles were not science. It was religious doctrine masked as science.
The church has never really dealt with the reality of the universe very well. They only apologized for their treatment of Galileo recently and still refuse to discuss Bruno. The Bible, presumed to be the perfect word of a perfect God, still teaches that the Earth is flat, rests on pillars (Job 26:11), and does not move (Psalms 19:5-6 93:1 96:10 104:5).
It seems that some mistakes are destined to be repeated again, despite our technological prowess.
In 1929, a Cal-Tech astronomer named Edwin Hubble observed that objects which appeared to be much further away showed a more pronounced shift towards the red end of the spectrum. Scientists building on Hubble's discovery concluded that the farther an object was away from Earth, the faster it was receding, and calculated the relationship between distance and velocity, called the "Hubble Constant" and concluded on the basis of this one observed fact and the assumption that there was no other explanation for that observed fact that the universe was expanding.
Religious circles embraced the idea of an expanding universe because for the universe to be expanding, then at some point in the past it had to originate from a single point, called the "Big Bang". Indeed, the concept of the Big Bang did not originate with Edwin Hubble but was proposed by a Catholic Monk, Georges Lema�tre in 1927, two years before Hubble published his observations of the Red Shift. The "Big Bang" coincided nicely with religious doctrine and just as had been the case with epicycles (and despite the embarrassment thereof) religious institutions sought to encourage this new model of the universe over all others, including the then prevalent "steady state" theory.
Then history repeated itself. Evidence surfaced that the "Big Bang" might not really be a workable theory in the form of General Relativity, and its postulation that super massive objects would have gravity fields so strong that even light could not escape, nor would matter be able to differentiate. Since the entire universe existing in just one spot would be the most super massive object of all, the universe could not be born.
Needless to say, this suggestion that the Big Bang could not happen provoked the same exact reaction as the suggestion that the Earth might not be the center of everything. Instead of questioning the basic assumption, great effort was made to find a way to evolve the new data in terms acceptable to the assumption of a universe spawned in a single moment of creation. A complex Cosmology theory sprang up, encouraged by those invested in the "Big Bang" to explain why the basic foundational principles of physics behaved differently in the first few milliseconds of time. The math work is impressive, as impressive as that which supported the theory of the epicycles, but it is really just a polite way of saying "The rules just didn't apply when we need them not to apply".
An attempt was made to prove the Big Bang by searching for the "Cosmic Background Radiation", the presumed energy echo from the primordial explosion. and indeed a radio noise signal was picked up. Like Aristotle, and like Hubble, the discoverers of the Cosmic Background Radiation assumed the signal meant what they thought it did and could have no alternative explanation. The discovery of the Cosmic Background Radiation was then heralded as final proof of the Big Bang theory, and those institutions invested in that theory celebrated.
But just as the theory of epicycles did not accurately predict the observed motion of the planets, the Big Bang Theory turned out to be less than accurate about the radiation signal detected in space.
For one thing, there is the "Horizon Problem". At present, the known universe spans 28 billion light years and is assumed to be 14 billion years old. (Obviously unless we actually ARE the center of the universe, it may be assumed that the universe probably extends even further in at least one direction). Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light, so there is no way heat radiation could have traveled between the two horizons to even out the hot and cold spots created in the big bang and leave the thermal equilibrium we see now.
When the satellite COBE was sent up to analyze the Cosmic Background Radiation, it discovered instead of the smooth featureless glow predicted by the cosmologists a highly complex and detailed structure. Yet again, rather than question the prime assumption that the signal being analyzed was actually from a supposed "Big Bang", research was encouraged to find a way to fit the data into the existing theory, again on the assumption that the signal detected could not be from any other source. And yet, an alternative explanation for the signal was right at hand, indeed literally on all sides.
Our Solar System and planets have heavy elements (without which you would not be here) because at some time prior to the creation of our Solar System another star in the immediate vicinity exploded, creating the heavy elements and scattering them into the universe. Every star that explodes creates a planetary nebula, such as the one easily seen with amateur telescopes in the constellation Lyra. A planetary nebula is a bubble of debris in space, and given the presence of heavy elements in our own Solar System, then somewhere out in space there must be the tenuous remains of a billions of years old planetary nebula, the result of the not-so-very-big bang, viewable from our unique point of view near the center. This model of Earth lying at the center of the remains of a supernova predicts exactly the sort of structure that COBE found in the presumed Cosmic Background Radiation. But as was the case with Galileo and Bruno, challengers to the "approved" creation myths face a tough time, albeit funding cuts have replaced torture and being burned alive at the stake.
So pervasive is this bias to see the universe as created in a Biblical-consistent "Big Bang" that when William G. Tifft submitted his first article on the quantization of the observed Red Shift to Astrophysical Journal, the Journal published it because they could not find errors in it, yet still felt compelled to editorially distance themselves from the conclusions.
The conclusions derived from quantized red shift are devastating to the conventional view of the universe created in a single Big Bang, as devastating as Galileo's first telescope was to the theory that the Earth was the center of the universe.
Georges Lemaître (like Aristotle) assumed there was no other explanation for the red shift he observed than the motion of the observed objects relative to Earth. But given the theory that the universe is expanding uniformly, the amount of red shifts would have to be uniformly and randomly distributed.
But they aren't.
The observed red shifts in the sky are quantized, falling into discreet intervals. This is not explained by the theory that the red shift is produced solely by relative velocity. Some other effect is at work. And that means that the assumption that the universe is expanding based solely on the red shift is invalidated. Some other effect IS at work that explains the observations, quite possibly one that triggers a quantized red shift over vast distances without respect to relative velocity.
Which means the universe is not expanding. Which means there was no moment of creation, no "Big Bang" with an epicycle-esque cosmology to explain why the greatest black hole of all didn't behave like a black hole. Which means that the background radiation mapped by COBE which didn't quite fit the Big Bang model is probably the remnant of the stellar explosion that created the heavy elements making up that computer you are reading this on.
But the lesson for our time of just how much our society remains dominated by religious superstitions is revealed by the fact that the quantized red-shift is NOT a new discovery. The first article regarding the observed data appeared in 1976, a quarter of a century ago. Since then, scientists as much in the service of superstition as were those scientists who "studied" epicycles have repeatedly tried to disprove the observations of Tifft and Cocke, only to confirm and re-confirm the truth, that there is a quantized red-shift, which casts doubt on the theory of an expanding universe and a "Big bang" creation.
Yet even though hard evidence exists to warrant a full re-examination of the basic assumption of the expanding universe, our science classes and TV programs still promote the "Big Bang" view, just as the erroneous theory of Aristotle continued to be promoted even after Galileo proved it wrong, because one theory fits into a theology, and the other does not.
Man's progress is not measured by the reaches of his science but by the limits of his superstition. The truth is known. But the truth is unpopular.
The assumption that there must be a beginning to the universe is merely a human invention. We believe that we see things have beginnings and ends before us, but in truth we are seeing matter change form. A particular configuration may have a beginning and an end, but that the actual matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed is an axiom of physics. Miss April may be only 20 years old, but the atoms in her heavenly body are indeed heavenly bodies, being the remains of ancient exploded stars, and in THAT form for billions of years.
Ancients believed that the Earth was the center of the universe. But while we grudgingly admit that Earth orbits the sun and that our sun is nowhere near the center of the milky way, the idea that Earth is the center of all remains at the heart of the assumptions of the Big Bang theory. The "Bangers" describe the furthest objects we can detect (currently 13 billion light years) and from that calculate the age of the universe (currently set at 14 billion years).
But that only works if we ASSUME that the Earth is the center for all the cosmos that we can see. It is true that we are seeing objects out to the edge of our technological limits
and we are seeing them in all directions. We do not see an obvious end to the universe. Logically, the odds are far greater than what we can actually see is really just a tiny bubble in a far larger universe, rather than we just happen to be that one in googleplex worlds that wound up at the exact center for the expanding field of debris from the Big Bang (i.e. the location of the original singlularity). And if we abandon the assumption that we see most of the the universe from a fortunate position near the location of the original singlularity, then we cannot really know how large the universe really is, and the mathematics by which we claim to know the age based on the size break down completely. We truly are trying to calculate the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin.
PROOF THE BIG BANG DID NOT HAPPEN
Perhaps the biggest contradiction with the Big Bang Theory is the question of the singularity. The "primordial egg" had to be a super-massive black hole. Therefore no amount of "bang", no matter how big, is going to thrust the universe out into, well, the universe.
Cosmologists eager to promote the Big Bang Theory have hit upon the "explanation" that the laws of physics, gravity., etc. simply did not apply in those first few moments of the universe. The present Cosmology theory is that the universe enjoyed a period of "rulelessness" of about 3 seconds, after which the elements formed and the fundamental forces of the universe, gravity included, were functioning as we see them today.
Ah, but there is a problem. The singularity formed by the primordial egg turns out to be rather large.
Estimates of the total mass of the universe vary wildly, given that the ends of the universe have not yet been determined. One estimate is found at http://www.rostra.dk/louis/quant_11.html of 2.6*1060.
From the mass, you can calculate the diameter of the event horizon by finding the distance from a point mass that will have an escape velocity of c. Use sqrt(2GM/r) where M is the mass of the hole (the entire universe in this case) and r is the radius (classical), and G is the gravitational constant. Work it backward starting at c and you get c^2=2GM/r.
This works out to an event horizon light years across!
In short, at the moment in time when the Big Bang theorists claim the universe was functioning as it does today, complete with all fundamental forces, the entirety of the universe's mass was still well within the event horizon of its own gravity well. That the well was not the product of a true singularity is irrelevant, Newton's equation provides an equivalent gravity field for a singularity or a super dense mass in a localized region.
Therefore the Big Bang, as currently described, could not have produced the universe as we see it today. At three seconds, the time the theorists claim the universe started operating as we know it, it would have come under the influence of its own gravity and unable to reach an escape velocity exceeding that of light, collapsed back into itself.
ANOTHER PROOF THE BIG BANG DID NOT HAPPEN
For the purposes of this thought experiment, let us assume that God waved a magic wand and the universe popped into existence from a Big Bang, and that "somehow" the universe escaped from it's own gravity well. With the entire 2.6*1060 mass/energy of the universe confined to that small region, the temperatures and pressures amount to a super-supernova. We already know that in the cataclysm of a supernova, the heavier elements are created. That is where all the heavy elements in your body were created; inside an exploding star. Therefore, in that moment of super-creation called the Big Bang, as the universe started to operate by the rules we know today, the expanding universe should be creating all the known heavy elements.
So, how to explain the Population II stars?
Population II stars are stars with no heavy elements in them. When they explode at the end of their life cycles, heavy elements are created. These are swept up by stars that form afterwards creating Population I stars, usually with planets around them. Population I stars have heavy elements. Population II stars do not.
If the Big Bang had happened, the universe would be filled with heavy elements created in those first few moments the universe started to operate under the rules of physics we know today. There should not be any stars in existence devoid of those heavy elements. And yet there are.
The existence of Population II stars, devoid of heavy elements, directly contradicts the theory of the Big Bang.
YET ANOTHER PROOF THE BIG BANG DID NOT HAPPEN
The Big Bang is currently imagined to have occurred 14 billion years ago.
The farthest object seen in the sky by the Hubble and Keck Telescopes is 13 billion light-years distant, and is assumed to have been created when the universe was just 750 million years old. It would take at least that long (if not longer) for the material from the theorized Big Bang to coalesce into stars and for those stars to form a rotating galaxy.
But here is the problem. We are seeing that object 13 billion light-years distant not as it is today and where it is today but as it was and where it was, 13 billion years ago, 13 billion light-years distant from earth.
In other words, for this galaxy to lie 13 billion light-years away from Earth only 750 million years after the Big Bang, it would have had to travel 13 billion light years in just 750 million years' time. That requires the galaxy in question to travel more than 17 times faster than the speed of light, a speed limit which according to the Big Bang supporters was in effect from the moment the universe was 3 seconds old.
do the findings of Tifft and Cocke undermine the redshift-distance relationship? The answer might be YES
Report on confirmations of the observations. Note the reluctance to follow the data through to a conclusion.
"The Big Bang Never Happened" (Book ad at Amazon)
"Seeing Red" (Book ad at Amazon)
Discovery By UCSD Astronomers Poses A Cosmic Puzzle: Can A 'Distant' Quasar Lie Within A Nearby Galaxy?
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Arrest Blair
From: R
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 1:29 PM
To:
Subject: http.doc tony blair.doc
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3524133.stm
http://www.zpub.com/un/un-tb.html
http://antiwar.com/laughland/
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9021
http://pixelisation.wordpress.com/2008/02/06/tony-blair-under-invesitgation-for-war-crimes/
Officers from Scotland Yard have commenced a criminal investigation into the deaths of Iraqi citizens killed during the armed invasion and occupation of Iraq. The Metropolitan Police are acting in response to crimes reported by peace activists from We Are Change UK and The Campaign to Make War History. In an unprecedented step, the case was handed to the War Crimes division of the Counter Terrorism branch who are now investigating allegations of 14 criminal offences committed by Tony Blair, Lord Goldsmith and others. The offences are under the International Criminal Court Act 2001, which came into effect under English common law, just two days before 9/11.
http://www.911blogger.com/node/13360
A 22 March memo from Ricketts to Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said,
But even the best survey of Iraq's WMD programmes will not show much advance in recent years on the nuclear, missile or CW/BW (chemical or biological weapons) fronts: the programmes are extremely worrying but have not, as far as we know, been stepped up. U.S. scrambling to establish a link between Iraq and al-Qaida is so far frankly unconvincing. To get public and Parliamentary support for military action, we have to be convincing that: the threat is so serious/imminent that it is worth sending our troops to die for; it is qualitatively different from the threat posed by other proliferators who are closer to achieving nuclear capability (including Iran).
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?feature=related&v=l3vsI9j7bSA
http://nasir-khan.blogspot.com/2007/06/pm-tony-blair-war-criminal-and-serial.html
Will a Bahamian judge order the arrest of ex-British PM Tony Blair for war crimes?
The former UN secretary general said the Iraq war was illegal, the cheif prosecutor at the international criminal court has said Bush and Blair could face war crimes charges when Iraq signs up to the court.
No mention of an Iraq war crimes tribunal from the present hand picked UN general secretay Ban Ki Moon.
August 1st, 2008 - 4:39 pm ICT by ANI -
Kuala Lumpur, Aug.1 (ANI): Former Malaysian Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir Mohamad has labelled former British Prime Minister Tony Blair a war criminal, and criticised the present government for extending an invitation to Blair to visit Malaysia.
http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/india-news/blair-is-a-war-criminal-mahathir-mohamad_10078694.html
The group Legal Action Against War have submitted a petition to the international criminal court in the Hague today, asking them to investigate alleged offences by Mr Blair, Jack Straw, Geoff Hoon, and the attorney general, Lord Goldsmith.
The group said "a principal charge" was "intentionally launching an attack knowing that it will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians". The legal team said the reasons given for the war - from weapons of mass destruction to the violation of UN resolutions and regime change - were not justified under the UN charter. Michael Mansfield QC, who is leading the campaign, said "The consensus of international legal opinion suggests the basis for the war was illegal."
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/attack/law/2003/0729greeks.htm
Tony Blair and other British ministers are accused of crimes against humanity in prosecuting the war against Iraq in a case lodged with the international criminal court by Greek lawyers yesterday.
The Athens Bar Association accuses the government of breaching almost every international treaty and the entire spectrum of human rights in the 47-page complaint.
"The repeated, blatant violations by the United States and Britain of the stipulations of the four 1949 Geneva conventions, the 1954 convention of the Hague as well as the charter of the international criminal court, constitute war crimes and crimes against humanity," the lawyers said in a statement.
"[The accused] intended to cause severe psychological distress or major physical or psychological damage to individuals who enjoy the protection of the Geneva conventions."
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14393.htm
08/06/06 "Sunday Herald" -- -- THE Lebanese government is working behind the scenes to bring Tony Blair before the Scottish courts, charged with war crimes for aiding and abetting the Israeli onslaught against Lebanon.
Ali Berro, the Lebanese government’s special adviser on legal affairs, is assisting Lebanese nationals living in Scotland, and their legal team, in their attempt to take the Scottish Executive and the UK government to court for allowing US aircraft to fly “bunker-buster bombs” from America to Israel via Scottish airports.
Berro is providing the legal team, led by the Glasgow-based human rights lawyer Aamer Anwar, with detailed information about alleged Israel war crimes, and also forwarding information on the casualty rates of Lebanese civilians and the type of weapons being deployed by the Israeli army. In total, some 30 lawyers, including QCs, in Scotland and England are helping prepare the case against the government.
Along with his briefing, Berro sent Anwar and his clients this message: “We are laying before you all these facts and we count on you to use all possible means of pressure to put an end to the destruction targeting civilians. We are counting on you and thank you.”
The team is accusing Blair of assisting Israel in carrying out war crimes against civilians, citing various pieces of international legislation, including the Geneva Conventions, which say that it is a war crime to aid and abet a nation carrying out attacks targetted against civilians.
Berro has said he is “angry and astonished” that the UK is “assisting” Israel, claiming the UK can no longer be seen as an “honest broker” in the Middle East.
http://www.worldproutassembly.org/archives/2005/06/military_famili.html
Military Families Charge Blair with War Crimes - Will Take Case to International Criminal Court
It has been widely reported that release of war documents from Downing Street finished Tony Blair in the last election. While that is true enough, the tide turned in the May 5th election when 10 bereaved families of British soldiers killed in Iraq confronted Tony Blair face to face, charging him with war crimes. .
All the documentary evidence of Bush/Blair war crimes is now laid out for judicial review before the International Criminal, and, thanks to the BBC and the Sunday Times, for the inspection and review before the court of public opinion. This evidence is only now surfacing in the US -- through Knight-Ridder, the Washington Post, the New York Times, and the Chicago Tribune. This is the beginning of the end of the war in Iraq, and the beginning of the end of George Bush, Alberto Gonzales, & the whole criminal gang.
http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/2005/06/27_jury-of-conscience-declaration.htm
27th June 2005, Istanbul
In February 2003, weeks before an illegal war was initiated against Iraq, millions of people protested in the streets of the world. That call went unheeded. No international institution had the courage or conscience to stand up to the threat of aggression of the US and UK governments. No one could stop them. It is two years later now. Iraq has been invaded, occupied, and devastated. The attack on Iraq is an attack on justice, on liberty, on our safety, on our future, on us all. We, people of conscience, decided to stand up. We formed the World Tribunal on Iraq (WTI) to demand justice and a peaceful future.
The legitimacy of the World Tribunal on Iraq is located in the collective conscience of humanity. This, the Istanbul session of the WTI, is the culmination of a series of 20 hearings held in different cities of the world focusing on the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq. The conclusions of these sessions and/or inquiries held in Barcelona, Brussels, Copenhagen, Genoa, Hiroshima, Istanbul, Lisbon, London, Mumbai, New York, Östersund, Paris , Rome, Seoul, Stockholm, Tunis, various cities in Japan and Germany are appended to this Declaration in a separate volume.
We, the Jury of Conscience, from 10 different countries, met in Istanbul. We heard 54 testimonies from a Panel of Advocates and Witnesses who came from across the world, including from Iraq, the United States and the United Kingdom.
The World Tribunal on Iraq met in Istanbul from 24-26 June 2005. The principal objective of the WTI is to tell and disseminate the truth about the Iraq War, underscoring the accountability of those responsible and underlining the significance of justice for the Iraqi people.
I. Overview of Findings
1. The invasion and occupation of Iraq was and is illegal. The reasons given by the US and UK governments for the invasion and occupation of Iraq in March 2003 have proven to be false. Much evidence supports the conclusion that a major motive for the war was to control and dominate the Middle East and its vast reserves of oil as a part of the US drive for global hegemony.
2. Blatant falsehoods about the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and a link between Al Qaeda terrorism and the Saddam Hussein régime were manufactured in order to create public support for a “preemptive” assault upon a sovereign independent nation.
3. Iraq has been under siege for years. The imposition of severe inhumane economic sanctions on 6 August 1990, the establishment of no-fly zones in the Northern and Southern parts of Iraq, and the concomitant bombing of the country were all aimed at degrading and weakening Iraq’s human and material resources and capacities in order to facilitate its subsequent invasion and occupation. In this enterprise the US and British leaderships had the benefit of a complicit UN Security Council.
4. In pursuit of their agenda of empire, the Bush and Blair governments blatantly ignored the massive opposition to the war expressed by millions of people around the world. They embarked upon one of the most unjust, immoral, and cowardly wars in history.
5. Established international political-legal mechanisms have failed to prevent this attack and to hold the perpetrators accountable. The impunity that the US government and its allies enjoy has created a serious international crisis that questions the import and significance of international law, of human rights covenants and of the ability of international institutions including the United Nations to address the crisis with any degree of authority or dignity.
6. The US/UK occupation of Iraq of the last 27 months has led to the destruction and devastation of the Iraqi state and society. Law and order have broken down, resulting in a pervasive lack of human security. The physical infrastructure is in shambles; the health care delivery system is in poor condition; the education system has virtually ceased to function; there is massive environmental and ecological devastation; and the cultural and archeological heritage of the Iraqi people has been desecrated.
7. The occupation has intentionally exacerbated ethnic, sectarian and religious divisions in Iraqi society, with the aim of undermining Iraq’s identity and integrity as a nation. This is in keeping with the familiar imperial policy of divide and rule. Moreover, it has facilitated rising levels of violence against women, increased gender oppression and reinforced patriarchy.
8. The imposition of the UN sanctions in 1990 caused untold suffering and thousands of deaths. The situation has worsened after the occupation. At least 100,000 civilians have been killed; 60,000 are being held in US custody in inhumane conditions, without charges; thousands have disappeared; and torture has become routine.
9. The illegal privatization, deregulation, and liberalization of the Iraqi economy by the occupation regime has coerced the country into becoming a client economy that is controlled by the IMF and the World Bank, both of which are integral to the Washington Consensus. The occupying forces have also acquired control over Iraq’s oil reserves.
10. Any law or institution created under the aegis of occupation is devoid of both legal and moral authority. The recently concluded election, the Constituent Assembly, the current government, and the drafting committee for the Constitution are therefore all illegitimate.
11. There is widespread opposition to the occupation. Political, social, and civil resistance through peaceful means is subjected to repression by the occupying forces. It is the occupation and its brutality that has provoked a strong armed resistance and certain acts of desperation. By the principles embodied in the UN Charter and in international law, the popular national resistance to the occupation is legitimate and justified. It deserves the support of people everywhere who care for justice and freedom.
II. Charges
On the basis of the preceding findings and recalling the Charter of the United Nations and other legal documents indicated in the appendix, the jury has established the following charges.
A. Against the Governments of the US and the UK
1. Planning, preparing, and waging the supreme crime of a war of aggression in contravention of the United Nations Charter and the Nuremberg Principles.
Evidence for this can be found in the leaked Downing Street Memo of 23 rd July, 2002, in which it was revealed: “Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.” Intelligence was manufactured to willfully deceive the people of the US, the UK, and their elected representatives.
2. Targeting the civilian population of Iraq and civilian infrastructure by intentionally directing attacks upon civilians and hospitals, medical centers, residential neighborhoods, electricity stations, and water purification facilities. The complete destruction of the city of Falluja in itself constitutes a glaring example of such crimes.
3. Using disproportionate force and weapon systems with indiscriminate effects, such as cluster munitions, incendiary bombs, depleted uranium (DU), and chemical weapons. Detailed evidence was presented to the Tribunal by expert witnesses that leukemia had risen sharply in children under the age of five residing in those areas that had been targeted by DU weapons.
4. Using DU munitions in spite of all the warnings presented by scientists and war veterans on their devastating long-term effects on human beings and the environment. The US Administration, claiming lack of scientifically established proof of the harmful effects of DU, decided to risk the lives of millions for several generations rather than discontinue its use on account of the potential risks. This alone displays the Administration’s wanton disregard for human life. The Tribunal heard testimony concerning the current obstruction by the US Administration of the efforts of Iraqi universities to collect data and conduct research on the issue.
5. Failing to safeguard the lives of civilians during military activities and during the occupation period thereafter. This is evidenced, for example, by “shock and awe” bombing techniques and the conduct of occupying forces at checkpoints.
6.Actively creating conditions under which the status of Iraqi women has seriously been degraded, contrary to the repeated claims of the leaders of the coalition forces. Women’s freedom of movement has severely been limited, restricting their access to the public sphere, to education, livelihood, political and social engagement. Testimony was provided that sexual violence and sex trafficking have increased since the occupation of Iraq began.
7.Using deadly violence against peaceful protestors, including the April 2003 killing of more than a dozen peaceful protestors in Falluja.
8. Imposing punishments without charge or trial, including collective punishment, on the people of Iraq. Repeated testimonies pointed to “snatch and grab” operations, disappearances and assassinations.
9. Subjecting Iraqi soldiers and civilians to torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. Degrading treatment includes subjecting Iraqi soldiers and civilians to acts of racial, ethnic, religious, and gender discrimination, as well as denying Iraqi soldiers Prisoner of War status as required by the Geneva Conventions. Abundant testimony was provided of unlawful arrests and detentions, without due process of law. Well known and egregious examples of torture and cruel and inhuman treatment occurred in Abu Ghraib prison as well as in Mosul, Camp Bucca, and Basra. The employment of mercenaries and private contractors to carry out torture has served toundermine accountability.
10. Re-writing the laws of a country that has been illegally invaded and occupied, in violation of international covenants on the responsibilities of occupying powers, in order to amass illegal profits (through such measures as Order 39, signed by L. Paul Bremer III for the Coalition Provisional Authority, which allows foreign investors to buy and takeover Iraq’s state-owned enterprises and to repatriate 100 percent of their profits and assets at any point) and to control Iraq’s oil. Evidence was presented of a number of corporations that had profited from such transactions.
11. Willfully devastating the environment, contaminating it by depleted uranium (DU) weapons, combined with the plumes from burning oil wells, as well as huge oil spills, and destroying agricultural lands. Deliberately disrupting the water and waste removal systems, in a manner verging on biological-chemical warfare. Failing to prevent the looting and dispersal of radioactive material from nuclear sites. Extensive documentation is available on air and water pollution, land degradation, and radioactive pollution.
12. Failing to protect humanity’s rich archaeological and cultural heritage in Iraq by allowing the looting of museums and established historical sites and positioning military bases in culturally and archeologically sensitive locations. This took place despite prior warnings from UNESCO and Iraqi museum officials.
13. Obstructing the right to information,including the censoring of Iraqi media, such as newspapers (e.g., al-Hawza, al-Mashriq, and al-Mustaqila) and radio stations (Baghdad Radio), the shutting down of the Baghdad offices of Al Jazeera Television, targeting international journalists, imprisoning and killing academics, intellectuals and scientists.
14. Redefining torture in violation of international law, to allow use of torture and illegal detentions, including holding more than 500 people at Guantánamo Bay without charging them or allowing them any access to legal protection, and using “extraordinary renditions” to send people to be tortured in other countries known to commit human rights abuses and torture prisoners.
15. Committing a crime against peace by violating the will of the global anti-war movement. In an unprecedented display of public conscience millions of people across the world stood in opposition to the imminent attack on Iraq. The attack rendered them effectively voiceless. This amounts to a declaration by the US government and its allies to millions of people that their voices can be ignored, suppressed and silenced with complete impunity.
16. Engaging in policies to wage permanent war on sovereign nations. Syria and Iran have already been declared as potential targets. In declaring a “global war on terror,” the US government has given itself the exclusive right to use aggressive military force against any target of its choosing. Ethnic and religious hostilities are being fueled in different parts of the world. The US occupation of Iraq has further emboldened the Israeli occupation in Palestine and increased the repression of the Palestinian people. The focus on state security and the escalation of militarization has caused a serious deterioration of human security and civil rights across the world.
B. Against the Security Council of the United Nations
1. Failing to protect the Iraqi people against the crime of aggression.
2. Imposing harsh economic sanctions on Iraq, despite knowledge that sanctions were directly contributing to the massive loss of civilian lives and harming innocent civilians.
3. Allowing the United States and United Kingdom to carry out illegal bombings in the no-fly zones, using false pretenses of enforcing UN resolutions, and at no point allowing discussion in the Security Council of this violation, and thereby being complicit and responsible for loss of civilian life and destruction of Iraqi infrastructure.
4. Allowing the United States to dominate the United Nations and hold itself above any accountability by other member nations.
5. Failure to stop war crimes and crimes against humanity by the United States and its coalition partners in Iraq.
6. Failure to hold the United States and its coalition partners accountable for violations of international law during the invasion and occupation, giving official sanction to the occupation and therefore, both by acts of commission and acts of omission becoming a collaborator in an illegal occupation.
C. Against the Governments of the Coalition of the Willing
Collaborating in the invasion and occupation of Iraq, thus sharing responsibility in the crimes committed.
D. Against the Governments of Other Countries
Allowing the use of military bases and air space, and providing other logistical support, for the invasion and occupation, and hence being complicit in the crimes committed.
E. Against the Private Corporations which have won contracts for the reconstruction of Iraq and which have sued for and received “reparation awards” from the illegal occupation regime
Profiting from the war with complicity in the crimes described above, of invasion and occupation.
F. Against the Major Corporate Media
1. Disseminating the deliberate falsehoods spread by the governments of the US and the UK and failing to adequately investigate this misinformation, even in the face of abundant evidence to the contrary. Among the corporate media houses that bear special responsibility for promoting the lies about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction, we name the New York Times, in particular their reporter Judith Miller, whose main source was on the payroll of the CIA. We also name Fox News, CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, the BBC and ITN. This list also includes but is not limited to, The Express, The Sun, The Observer and Washington Post.
2. Failing to report the atrocities being committed against Iraqi people by the occupying forces, neglecting the duty to give privilege and dignity to voices of suffering and marginalizing the global voices for peace and justice.
3. Failing to report fairly on the ongoing occupation; silencing and discrediting dissenting voices and failing to adequately report on the full national costs and consequences of the invasion and occupation of Iraq; disseminating the propaganda of the occupation regime that seeks to justify the continuation of its presence in Iraq on false grounds.
4. Inciting an ideological climate of fear, racism, xenophobia and Islamophobia, which is then used to justify and legitimize violence perpetrated by the armies of the occupying regime.
5. Disseminating an ideology that glorifies masculinity and combat, while normalizing war as a policy choice.
6.Complicity in the waging of an aggressive war and perpetuating a regime of occupation that is widely regarded as guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
7.Enabling, through the validation and dissemination of disinformation, the fraudulent misappropriation of human and financial resources for an illegal war waged on false pretexts.
8.Promoting corporate-military perspectives on “security” which are counter-productive to the fundamental concerns and priorities of the global population and have seriously endangered civilian populations.
III. Recommendations
Recognizing the right of the Iraqi people to resist the illegal occupation of their country and to develop independent institutions, and affirming that the right to resist the occupation is the right to wage a struggle for self-determination, freedom, and independence as derived from the Charter of the United Nations, we the Jury of Conscience declare our solidarity with the people of Iraq.
We recommend:
1. The immediate and unconditional withdrawal of the Coalition forces from Iraq.
2. That Coalition governments make war reparations and pay compensation to Iraq for the humanitarian, economic, ecological, and cultural devastation they have caused by their illegal invasion and occupation.
3. That all laws, contracts, treaties, and institutions established under occupation, which the Iraqi people deem inimical to their interests, be considered null and void.
4. That the Guantánamo Bay prison and all other offshore US military prisons be closed immediately, that the names of the prisoners be disclosed, that they receive POW status, and receive due process.
5. That there be an exhaustive investigation of those responsible for the crime of aggression, war crimes and crimes against humanity in Iraq, beginning with George W. Bush, President of the United States of America, Tony Blair, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, those in key decision-making positions in these countries and in the Coalition of the Willing, those in the military chain-of-command who master-minded the strategy for and carried out this criminal war, starting from the very top and going down; as well as personalities in Iraq who helped prepare this illegal invasion and supported the occupiers.
We list some of the most obvious names to be included in such investigation:
prime ministers of the Coalition of the Willing, such as Junichiro Koizumi of Japan, Jose Maria Anzar of Spain, Silvio Berlusconi of Italy, José Manuel Durão Barroso and Santana Lopes of Portugal, Roh Moo Hyun of South Korea, Anders Fogh Rasmussen of Denmark ;
public officials such as Dick Cheney, Donald H. Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Colin L. Powell, Condoleezza Rice, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Alberto Gonzales, L. Paul Bremer from the US, and Jack Straw, Geoffrey Hoon, John Reid, Adam Ingram from the UK;
military commanders beginning with: Gen. Richard Myers, Gen. Tommy Franks, Gen. John P. Abizaid, Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, Gen. Thomas Metz, Gen. John R. Vines, Gen. George Casey from the US; Gen. Mike Jackson, Gen. John Kiszely, Air Marshal Brian Burridge, Gen. Peter Wall, Rear Admiral David Snelson, Gen. Robin Brims, Air Vice-Marshal Glenn Torpy from the UK; and chiefs of staff and commanding officers of all coalition countries with troops in Iraq.
Iraqi collaborators such as Ahmed Chalabi, Iyad Allawi, Abdul Aziz Al Hakim, Gen. Abdul Qader Mohammed Jassem Mohan, among others.
6. That a process of accountability is initiated to hold those morally and personally responsible for their participation in this illegal war, such as journalists who deliberately lied, corporate media outlets that promoted racial, ethnic and religious hatred, and CEOs of multinational corporations that profited from this war;
7. That people throughout the world launch nonviolent actions against US and UK corporations that directly profit from this war. Examples of such corporations include Halliburton, Bechtel, The Carlyle Group, CACI Inc., Titan Corporation, Kellog, Brown and Root (subsidiary of Halliburton), DynCorp, Boeing, ExxonMobil, Texaco, British Petroleum. The following companies have sued Iraq and received “reparation awards”: Toys R Us, Kentucky Fried Chicken, Shell, Nestlé, Pepsi, Phillip Morris, Sheraton, Mobil. Such actions may take the form of direct actions such as shutting down their offices, consumer boycotts, and pressure on shareholders to divest.
8. That young people and soldiers act on conscientious objection and refuse to enlist and participate in an illegal war. Also, that countries provide conscientious objectors with political asylum.
9. That the international campaign for dismantling all US military bases abroad be reinforced.
10. That people around the world resist and reject any effort by any of their governments to provide material, logistical, or moral support to the occupation of Iraq.
We, the Jury of Conscience, hope that the scope and specificity of these recommendations will lay the groundwork for a world in which international institutions will be shaped and reshaped by the will of people and not by fear and self-interest, where journalists and intellectuals will not remain mute, where the will of the people of the world will be central, and human security will prevail over state security and corporate profits.
Arundhati Roy, India, Spokesperson of the Jury of Conscience
Ahmet Öztürk, Turkey
Ayşe Erzan, Turkey
Chandra Muzaffar, Malaysia
David Krieger, USA
Eve Ensler, USA
François Houtart, Belgium
Jae-Bok Kim, South Korea
Mehmet Tarhan, Turkey
Miguel Angel De Los Santos Cruz, Mexico
Murat Belge, Turkey
Rela Mazali, Israel
Salaam Al Jobourie, Iraq
Taty Almeida, Argentina
International Law Appendix
Explanatory Note
This international law appendix is intended to back up the Jury Statement that rests its assessments primarily on a moral and political appraisal of the Iraq War. The Statement relies upon the extensive testimony given in written and oral form by international law experts who have a world-class scholarly reputation during the Istanbul Culminating Session of the World Tribunal on Iraq (WTI). It also reflects the testimony and submissions on related issues of war crimes and the failure of the United Nations to protect Iraq against aggression.
The Jury of Conscience was not a body composed of jurists or international law experts. It did not hear arguments supporting the legality of the invasion of Iraq as would have been made before a judicial body under the authority of either the state or an international institution acting on behalf of the international community. The World Tribunal on Iraq throughout all of its session proceeded from a sense of moral and political outrage of concerned citizens from all over the world, with respect to the war. The Tribunal was not interested in a debate solely as to legality. The legal issues were relevant to the extent that they added weight to the moral and political purpose of the Tribunal, which was to expose the Iraq War as the crime it is, appealing to and drawing upon the deep bonds that link us all in our humanity. Therefore the Tribunal sought testimony and evidence to call into question the mantle of respectability thrown over the Iraq War by the aggressors, and the false impression disseminated by mainstream media, that the Iraq War was in any sense justified by political circumstances, moral considerations, or legal analysis.
The WTI is a worldwide process dedicated to reclaiming justice on behalf of the peoples of the world. It aims to record the severe wrongs, crimes, and violations that were committed in the process leading up to the aggression against Iraq, during the war, and throughout the ensuing occupation, continuing with unabated fury to this day. The role of international law is understood in light of these WTI goals.
The concerns of the WTI range much further than the demand for the implementation of international law, especially as much of this law currently serves the interests of wealth and power. Nevertheless, international law with respect to the use of force and recourse to war is important in relation to the work of the WTI. International law is useful for the WTI for the following reasons:
International law grounds the political and moral demand for the criminal indictment and prosecution of those responsible for the Iraq War, and it clarifies the extent of criminal accountability as extending to corporate and media participation;
International law rejects the dangerous imperialist claims of the United States and the United Kingdom to be exempt from international legal obligations.
In addition, the WTI makes use of international law to fulfill its mission:
The WTI connects a call for global justice with the demand for the implementation of international law, but also for a rethinking of the premises and operations of international law so that it might be of greater relevance to the achievement of human security in the future;
The WTI demands an interrogation as to why international institutions, particularly the United Nations, proved powerless against US unilateralism and aggression;
The WTI insists that United Nations exercise its constitutional responsibility to protect its Members from aggression and illegal occupation;
The WTI possesses the authority, as representing civil society, to declare and seek enforcement of international legal obligations when states and the United Nations fail to uphold international law in matters of war and peace.
It is important to distinguish:
violations of international law, including the UN Charter, by a state; and
crimes associated with these violation committed by political and military leaders, government officials, corporations and their officers, soldiers and private contractors, journalists and media personnel.
Legal Analysis
International law consists of (1) international treaties, including the UN Charter [see list of documents]; (2) international customary law [especially in relation to the conduct of states in war]; (3) international criminal law [a sub-category of (1) resting on treaties and agreements among states, based on the framework of the Nuremberg Judgment in 1945, unanimously affirmed by the UN General Assembly’s adoption of the Nuremberg Principles in 1946, Res. 95(I)].
In the War on Iraq the three principles of customary international law have been violated: (1) Principle of Proportionality: force can only be used to attain permissible legal objectives, and then only to the extent required by ‘military necessity’; (2) Principle of Discrimination: force and weaponry can only be used if confined to military targets; indiscriminate weapons and tactics are prohibited; (3) Principle of Humanity: force must never be used to cause unnecessary suffering and maximum care must be taken to protect civilian society, including its cultural heritage.
The War on Iraq violates the Nuremberg Principles that set forth thefollowingessential guidelines (as formulated by the International Law Commission of the UN in 1950 in response to request from General Assembly):
Principle I
Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefore and liable to punishment.
Principle II
The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act, which constitutes a crime under international law, does not relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under international law.
Principle III
The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible Government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law.
Principle IV
The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.
Principle V
Any person charged with a crime under international law has the right to a fair trial on the facts and law.
PrincipleVI
The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under; international law:
a) Crimes against peace:
i. Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
ii. Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).
b) War crimes:
Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill treatment or deportation to slave-labor or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or ill treatment of prisoners of war, of persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.
c) Crimes against humanity:
Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhuman acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.
Principle VII
Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth in Principles VI is a crime under international law.
Violations and Crimes:
I. The invasion of Iraq on March 20, 2003, together with the continuing occupation of Iraq, constitutes a violation of the core obligation of the United Nations Charter:
resolving international conflicts by recourse to force or the threat of force is unconditionally prohibited by Article 2(4) of the Charter;
the only exception to this probation is the right of states to act in self-defense against a prior armed attack as allowed by Article 51, but with the requirement that defending state report its claim to the Security Council;
the claims of the US/UK Governments based on doctrines of ‘preemption’ or ‘preventive war’ have no standing in international law, and reliance on such specious arguments was in any event unsupported by facts; even if weapons of mass destruction had existed in Iraq it would not provide a legal justification for the invasion; nor would the claim that ‘regime change’ would liberate the Iraqi people from dictatorial rule violative of human rights;
with respect to Iraq there existed no basis for claiming self-defense or acting on the basis of a Security Council authorization; the invasion of Iraq and the subsequent occupation of the country constitutes a continuing aggression against a sovereign state and member of the UN in violation of international law;
the cumulative effect of these violations is to create a strong factual and legal foundation for the indictment, prosecution, and punishment of the individuals responsible for planning, initiating, and waging a crime of aggression against Iraq.
II. Iraq War by the invading military forces, principally those of the United States and United Kingdom, and subsequent occupation, violated the law of war such as the Geneva Conventions on the Humanitarian Laws of War (1949), Additional Protocols to Geneva Conventions (1977) and Hague Conventions on the Laws of War (1899, 1907) in numerous respects, including the following:
use of cluster bombs, napalm, depleted uranium;
bombing of civilian targets and areas (e.g. markets, restaurants, media facilities, religious and cultural sites);
intense and indiscriminate military operations against many cities and towns causing massive civilian casualties (e.g. Najaf, Falluja);
repeated and systematic use of torture and degrading treatment of Iraqi civilian and military personnel detained in prison facilities or covertly transferred to foreign countries known for torture and severe prison conditions;
overall failure to protect the civilian population and their property, cultural heritage (shootings at check points; house raids; lootings of museums and other cultural sites; refusal to assess extent of civilian death and damage) [see especially common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions imposing duty to take special measures to protect civilian population to the extent possible) (Also Geneva Convention IV specifies the obligations of the occupying power in Articles 47-78);
the cumulative effect of this pattern of flagrant and extensive violations of the laws of war is to create the foundation for the indictment, prosecution, and punishment of those individuals responsible, as policy makers, leaders, and as implementers at various levels of command;
Article 1 of the Geneva Conventions reads: “The High Contracting Parties, including US/UK, undertake to respect and ensure respect for the present Convention in all circumstances.” The American legal specialists in Office of the Legal Counsel in the White House, in the Justice Department, and Department of Defense who advised on the ‘legality’ of torture and other behavior that violates the law of war are priority targets for indictment and prosecution.
III. The occupation of Iraq has fragrantly violated The Right of Self-Determination of the People of Iraq:
Article 1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights and of the International Covenant on Political and Civil Rights (1966): “(1) All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development”;
It is evident that the occupation, by its decrees, practices, imposition of an interim government, managed elections, and administered constitution-making process has violated the right of self-determination of the Iraqi people, a fundamental element of international human rights law.
IV. The occupation of Iraq has included massive abuses of the Iraqi civilian population, including the widespread and pervasive reliance on torture, the practice of which is unconditionally prohibited by international law:
Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: “No one shall be subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (repeated in Article 7 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), including Article 4(2) that affirms there are no exceptions, even in conditions of war or emergency) and further confirmed by the widely ratified treaty—Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1984).
V. The United Nations has failed to uphold its obligations to protect sovereign states, especially its members, from violations of their legal rights to political independence and territorial integrity, passively allowing Iraq to be threatened and attacked for twelve years prior to the invasion of 2003:
the UNSC maintained sanctions on Iraq that had a demonstrated genocidal effect on the civilian population during the period 1991-2003;
the UNSC refrained from censuring and preventing repeated air strikes within Iraq territory during the period 1991-2003;
the UNSC refrained from censuring and preventing overt calls for the subversion and replacement of the Iraqi government, as well as the financing and training of exiles dedicated to armed struggle;
the UNSC failed to condemn or act to prevent aggressive threats or the actual initiation and conduct of an aggressive war against Iraq in 2003, and has to a limited extent cooperated in the illegal occupation of Iraq since the invasion.
Conclusions
The Jury Statement is consistent with an objective understanding of international law, including the United Nations Charter.
Members of the United Nations and governments of sovereign states have legal obligations to uphold the Charter and act to ensure respect for the laws of war.
All three categories of Nuremberg Crimes are associated with the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
The International Criminal Court should indict, prosecute, and punish the perpetrators and collaborators for this aggression against Iraq and the related international crimes arising from the subsequent occupation of the country.
The ICC should be supplemented by a specially constituted international tribunal with authority to indict, prosecute, and punish for crimes committed before 2002 when the ICC was established and to the extent that crimes associated with states not Parties to the ICC are not addressed.
The UNGA should be encouraged to implement international law with respect to the Iraq War and occupation.
National courts relying on universal jurisdiction should be urged to investigate and prosecute individuals associated with Nuremberg Crimes in Iraq.
Organs of civil society, including the WTI, should act to ensure that the recommendations and conclusions of the Jury Statement are promptly and fairly implemented.
© Nuclear Age Peace Foundation 1998 - 2008 | Powered by Media Temple
Related Articles
Invasion & occupation of Iraq article archives
Hague prosecutor says Bush-Blair could face war crimes charges: 1 million Iraqis killed
By Tom Mellen
Mar 19, 2007, 09:41
International Criminal Court prosecutor announced on Sunday that US President George W Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair could face war crimes charges at the Hague, after it emerged that up to one million Iraqis have been killed since the illegal invasion.
Chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo said that he could envision a situation in which Mr Bush and Mr Blair found themselves in the dock.
"Of course that could be a possibility. Whatever country joins the court can know that whoever commits a crime in their country could be prosecuted by me," Mr Moreno-Ocampo affirmed.
Days before the invasion of Iraq in 2003, then Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein approached lawyers in Britain about signing up to the International Criminal Court, but his effort was overtaken by events.
Had he succeeded, the actions of the occupation forces in Iraq would fall within the court's jurisdiction.
Mr Moreno-Ocampo said that it was still possible for an investigation to be launched, if Iraq signed up.
Iraq's ambassador to the UN Hamid al-Bayati said that Baghdad is actively considering joining.
Respect [Britain political party, ed.] councillor for Birmingham Salma Yaqoob said: "It would be a step forward for the Iraqi people if Baghdad signed up to the ICC, as seeing Bush and Blair face justice for their flagrant violations of international law would help to relieve the sense of hopelessness in Iraq."
With Australia's John Howard and Britain's Tony Blair now out of office and George Bush starting to count his final days as US President, human rights and other international law organisations are beginning to line-up with submissions to the International Criminal Court to have George Bush, Tony Blair and John Howard charged with various international law offences that include Crimes Against Humanity, breaches of the Geneva Convention, Laws of War as well as breaches of numerous other international laws and conventions.
While most of the allegations relate to the illegal invasion of Iraq, a substantial number of other allegations concern the illegal activities of the various intelligence agencies including the CIA at the behest of the US, British and the Australian Governments.
The allegations against George Bush are numerous and they include the same allegations against Secretary of State Rice and former Secretary of Defence Rumsfeld.
They include allegations of knowingly conducting an illegal invasion of an independent State that State being Iraq following which the US, and its two allies Britain and Australia, knowingly failed to comply with the articles of conduct in relation to the duties and responsibilities of an occupying power.
The International Criminal Court Act 2001
Britain’s Parliament ratified the Rome Statute by enacting The International Criminal Court Act 2001. This new law incorporated the crimes of ‘genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes’ into UK criminal law whilst ceding ultimate authority over these crimes to the International Criminal Court in The Hague. The Act holds that:
It is an offence against the law of England and Wales for a person to commit genocide, a crime against humanity or a war crime, or to engage in conduct ancillary to such an act. This applies to acts committed in England or Wales or outside the United Kingdom by a UK national, resident or person subject to UK service jurisdiction .
For the purposes of this Statute “Genocide” means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
For the purposes of this Statute “Crime against humanity” means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population with knowledge of the attack: murder; extermination; enslavement; deportation or forcible transfer of population; imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law; torture; rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity; persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; enforced disappearance of persons; the crime of apartheid; other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.
(a) “Attack directed against any civilian population” means a course of conduct involving the multiple commission of acts referred to in paragraph 1 against any civilian population, pursuant to or in furtherance of a State or organizational policy to commit such attack; (b) “Extermination” includes the intentional infliction of conditions of life, inter alia the deprivation of access to food and medicine, calculated to bring about the destruction of part of a population; (c) “Enslavement” means the exercise of any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership over a person and includes the exercise of such power in the course of trafficking in persons, in particular women and children; (d) “Deportation or forcible transfer of population” means forced displacement of the persons concerned by expulsion or other coercive acts from the area in which they are lawfully present, without grounds permitted under international law; (e) “Torture” means the intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, upon a person in the custody or under the control of the accused; except that torture shall not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions; (f) “Forced pregnancy” means the unlawful confinement of a woman forcibly made pregnant, with the intent of affecting the ethnic composition of any population or carrying out other grave violations of international law; (g) “Persecution” means the intentional and severe deprivation of fundamental rights contrary to international law by reason of the identity of the group or collectivity; (h) “The crime of apartheid” means inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime; (i) “Enforced disappearance of persons” means the arrest, detention or abduction of persons by, or with the authorization, support or acquiescence of, a State or a political organization, followed by a refusal to acknowledge that deprivation of freedom or to give information on the fate or whereabouts of those persons, with the intention of removing them from the protection of the law for a prolonged period of time.
3. For the purpose of this Statute, it is understood that the term “gender” refers to the two sexes, male and female, within the context of society. The term “gender” does not indicate any meaning different from the above.
For the purposes of this Statute “war crimes” means:
(a) Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention: (i) Wilful killing; (ii) Torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments; (iii) Wilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health; (iv) Extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly; (v) Compelling a prisoner of war or other protected person to serve in the forces of a hostile Power; (vi) Wilfully depriving a prisoner of war or other protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial; (vii) Unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement; (viii) Taking of hostages.
(b) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts: (i) Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities; (ii) Intentionally directing attacks against civilian objects, that is, objects which are not military objectives; (iii) Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict; (iv) Intentionally launching an attack in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated; (v) Attacking or bombarding, by whatever means, towns, villages, dwellings or buildings which are undefended and which are not military objectives; (vi) Killing or wounding a combatant who, having laid down his arms or having no longer means of defence, has surrendered at discretion; (vii) Making improper use of a flag of truce, or of the flag or of the military insignia and uniform of the enemy or of the United Nations, as well as of the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions, resulting in death or serious personal injury; (viii) The transfer, directly or indirectly, by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies, or the deportation or transfer of all or parts of the population of the occupied territory within or outside this territory; (ix) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military objectives; (x) Subjecting persons who are in the power of an adverse party to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons; (xi) Killing or wounding treacherously individuals belonging to the hostile nation or army; (xii) Declaring that no quarter will be given; (xiii) Destroying or seizing the enemy’s property unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war; (xiv) Declaring abolished, suspended or inadmissible in a court of law the rights and actions of the nationals of the hostile party; (xv) Compelling the nationals of the hostile party to take part in the operations of war directed against their own country, even if they were in the belligerent’s service before the commencement of the war; (xvi) Pillaging a town or place, even when taken by assault; (xvii) Employing poison or poisoned weapons; (xviii) Employing asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and all analogous liquids, materials or devices; (xix) Employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions; ....... (xxi) Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (xxii) Committing rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy as defined in article 7, paragraph 2(f), enforced sterilisation, or any other form of sexual violence also constituting a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions; (xxiii) Utilizing the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas or military forces immune from military operations; (xxiv) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings, material, medical units and transport, and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions in conformity with international law; (xxv) Intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions; (xxvi) Conscripting or enlisting children under the age of fifteen years into the national armed forces or using them to participate actively in hostilities.
(c) In the case of an armed conflict not of an international character, serious violations of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts committed against persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention or any other cause: (i) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; (ii) Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (iii) Taking of hostages; (iv) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgement pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all judicial guarantees which are generally recognised as indispensable.
(d) Paragraph 2(c) applies to armed conflicts not of an international character and thus does not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence or other acts of a similar nature.
(e) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in armed conflicts not of an international character, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts: (i) Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities; (ii) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings, material, medical units and transport, and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions in conformity with international law; (iii) Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict; (iv) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military objectives; (v) Pillaging a town or place, even when taken by assault; (vi) Committing rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, as defined in article 7, paragraph 2(f), enforced sterilization, and any other form of sexual violence also constituting a serious violation of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions; (vii) Conscripting or enlisting children under the age of fifteen years into armed forces or groups or using them to participate actively in hostilities; (viii) Ordering the displacement of the civilian population for reasons related to the conflict, unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand; (ix) Killing or wounding treacherously a combatant adversary; (x) Declaring that no quarter will be given; (xi) Subjecting persons who are in the power of another party to the conflict to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons; (xii) Destroying or seizing the property of an adversary unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of the conflict.
(f) Paragraph 2(e) applies to armed conflicts not of an international character and thus does not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence or other acts of a similar nature. It applies to armed conflicts that take place in the territory of a State when there is protracted armed conflict between governmental authorities and organized armed groups or between such groups.
“Conduct ancillary” means: aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring the commission of an offence, inciting a person to commit an offence, attempting or conspiring to commit an offence, assisting an offender or concealing the offence.
A person is regarded as committing such an act or crime if the material elements are committed with intent and knowledge. A person has ‘intent’ where he means to engage in the conduct or where he means to cause the consequence or where he is aware that it will occur in the ordinary course of events. ‘Knowledge’ means awareness that circumstances exist or will occur in the ordinary course of events.
http://www.makewarshistory.org.uk/index/implications.html
http://news.perdana4peace.org/?p=431
WAR CRIMINAL BLAIR CONDEMNED BY MALAYSIANS ON HIS VISIT TO MALAYSIA TO SPEAK ON THE RULE OF LAW
Posted in War & Peace by Admin on the August 1st, 2008
Thursday, 31 July 2008
BY MATTHIAS CHANG
War Criminal Blair has been invited by the University of Malaya as the Guest Lecturer of the Sultan Azlan Shah Lectures on the “Rule of Law”. The event is co-sponsored by the British Council. It is mind-boggling, given the fact that this war criminal is responsible for the killings of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine and Lebanon. Is it any wonder that the University of Malaya has slumped in international ranking as a distinguished university?
What is most interesting is that on the invitation cards to lawyers and distinguished jurists, no mention is made that the War Criminal Blair is the Guest Lecturer. On all previous occasions, the name of the Guest Lecturer was prominently printed in the invitation cards. This time, we have a blank!
It may be that the organizers, harbouring a secret agenda, and fearing the anger and contempt that peace loving Malaysians have for this War Criminal, have decided to keep the matter under wraps.
The International Criminal Tribunal for Iraq
Judgment
12 December 2004
Note: Final Judgment covering all charges, including those raised
in supplementary indictment, is to be issued at the final trial
in March 2005.
The International Criminal Tribunal for Iraq (ICTI), sitting from July 17 to 18, 2004 in Kyoto and from December 11 to 12, 2004 in Tokyo, heard the evidences, testimonies and views presented at these trials as well as numerous public hearings held in various places in Japan throughout this period. The judgment delivered today is the unanimous court opinion of the Tribunal composed of four judges of the ICTI, who participated in this Tribunal from Korea, Indonesia and Japan. This judgment will be complemented by individuals opinions by each judge who wishes to record his or her opinion separately.
The defendants before this Tribunal are George W. Bush, the President of the United States, Tony Blair, the prime minister of the United Kingdom, Koizumi Jun-ichiro, the prime minister of Japan, and Gloria M. Arroyo, the President of the Philippines. They are all serving presidents or prime ministers, and under the current framework of international law, crimes committed by serving heads of state or ministers could be appropriately prosecuted at the International Criminal Court (ICC), which came into existence on July 1, 2002. On the other hand, elements including the fact that most of the home countries of these defendants, except for the United Kingdom, have not yet ratified the Statute of the ICC have made the chances of actualizing such path practically improbable. However, even serving heads of state or ministers shall not be above the law, especially international law, and if the realization of the rule of law is being prevented by malfunction of international legal system, it is the role of civil society of the world to speak the law and act in the name of all human beings who share common values and moral conscience. People's Tribunals established to that effect have long history dating back to the Vietnam War Crimes Tribunal (The Russell Tribunal) in the late 1960s, followed notably by the International War Crimes Tribunal on the United States' War Crimes against Iraq in 1992, the Women's International War Crimes Tribunal in 2000 and the International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan in 2003, and this International Criminal Tribunal for Iraq joins such efforts supported by the voices of world opinion, which constitute the essential and genuine basis of the ultimate validity of the body of international law.
Military Families against the War, Stop the War coalition and CND--will lodge a case against Blair at the ICC charging him with war crimes.
ATTEMPTED BELGIAN CASES:
US President George W Bush, General Tommy Franks and other top officials - over 2003 Iraq War
UK Prime Minister Tony Blair - over 2003 Iraq War
Israeli PM Ariel Sharon - over 1982 refugee massacre
The London-based al-Quds al-Arabi said in a front-page commentary the ICC was proving it was politicized and formed precisely to target leaders who "disobey" the U.S. dictates in keeping Israel the main superpower in the Middle East.
It suggested that if the court was seeking real justice, it would also seek to try Bush and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, as well as Israeli leaders, for war crimes against humanity and genocide in Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5972
Former SNP MP Jim Sillars has handed a 10,000-word dossier to Lord Advocate Eilish Angiolini urging her to charge the PM under Scots law.
He claims Blair should be held to account for conspiring to overthrow Saddam Hussein's regime and for starting the war in Iraq.
Both are illegal under international law. An attempt to have Blair hauled before a criminal court in England failed after lawyers said it wasn't the place to deal with international law.
But Sillars claims Scottish courts have the power to try Blair for war crimes if they believe an established offence, such as murder, has been committed in the process.
Sillars said: "There can be no prosecution at the international criminal court because it doesn't have jurisdiction."
"There is no chance of a special court being established by the United Nations because Britain and the United States have the veto at the Security Council. There is no chance of a prosecution in England and Wales."
"But of course Scots law is an entirely different entity, an entirely different jurisdiction with different rules, procedures and instruments available to it."
Sillars said he had been told by legal experts that the Prime Minister has a case to answer.
And he warned: "The Lord Advocate would have to give a very good explanation why, with the evidence presented, she didn't instigate an investigation -- because we have jurisdiction."
Sillars spent six months putting together his complaint, which was lodged last Friday.
In a letter to the Lord Advocate, he said: "I am requesting you to investigate this complaint and prosecute in a Scottish court."
"Although I have a political past, this complaint is based on legal principles and case law, and I shall be obliged if you will examine it in that light and in that light alone."
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/03/286397.html
The Global Women’s Strike with and on behalf of women and men in at least 60 countries serve the following SUBPOENA
TO: Prime Minister Tony Blair & his government, and his master George W Bush
YOU ARE REQUIRED TO APPEAR: AT A WOMEN’S COURT IN TRAFALGAR SQUARE, LONDON Saturday 6 March at 3pm
YOU ARE CHARGED WITH CRIMES AT HOME AND ABROAD, including but not limited to: war crimes including genocide, murder, torture, rape, terrorism, perjury (lying!), supporting coups, perverting the course of justice, poisoning, drug abuse (with pharmaceutical accomplices), environmental offences leading to the destruction of communities, countries and the planet, disability discrimination, incitement to racial hatred, causing mental and physical illness, promoting homophobia, breach of the Sex Discrimination Act, Race Discrimination Act, Equal Pay Act, Human Rights Act (to name a few), extortion, breach of duty of care, detention without trial, endangering people’s safety, criminal negligence, child abuse, conspiracy to cause criminal damage . . .
Congresswoman McKinney is answering a summons to testify before Judge Baltasar Garzon, judge of the Spanish National Court, in his inquiry supporting the prosecution of the 'architects of the Iraq invasion'. Judge Garzon is calling for President Bush and his allies, including former Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar, to be tried for war crimes over their invasion of Iraq. Baltasar Garzon made the accusation on the anniversary of the beginning of the war saying that "Breaking every international law, and under the pretext of the war against terror, there has taken place since 2003 a devastating attack on the rule of law and against the very essence of the international community."
MADRID, March 20, 2007 (Reuters) - The judge who tried to jail Chile's former dictator Augusto Pinochet said on Tuesday it was time to hold U.S. President George W. Bush and his allies to account for waging war in Iraq.
Egyptian rights lawyer wants Bush, Blair tried for war crimes
Cairo, Egypt (PANA) - US President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair should stand trial as "war criminals because of the unjust and barbaric war they are waging on Iraq and the heinous crimes" being committed against civilians by the coalition forces, Egyptian human rights lawyer Mahmoud Kandil said Sunday. 30/03/2003 full text...
By Auslan Cramb, Scottish Correspondent
Last Updated: 1:36AM BST 12 Jun 2007
A former Nationalist MP has called for Tony Blair to be charged in Scotland with war crimes.
The demand was made in a 10,000-word document compiled by Jim Sillars, and backed by his wife Margo MacDonald, an independent MSP.
It has been sent to Eilish Angiolini, the Lord Advocate, and claims that the Prime Minister should face two charges in connection with the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
http://www.stopwar.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=634&Itemid=27
Name of accused: BLAIR, ANTHONY CHARLES LYNTON
D.O.B: 06/05/1953
Address: 10 Downing St, London N.F.A
Occupation: Professional Liar
Religion: Church Of England Catholic
Ethnic Grouping: X1 Lizard
The above named person is hereby charged with the following offence/s:
DATE OF OFFENCE/S: From 2nd May 1997 to 26th June 2007
MURDER: On MARCH 21st 2003 You did conspire with others to murder civilians of Iraq contrary to the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.
KIDNAPPING: From September 11th 2001 you participated in a scheme of abduction and torture known as ‘extraordinary rendition’ contrary to Common Law.
TERRORISM: (i) It is charged that you were an active member of proscribed terrorist group, namely THE COALITION (ii) that you created fear or 'terror' for ideological goals, attempting to force political change with violence, or the threat of violence, and deliberately targetting non-combatants, contrary to the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2000.
FALSE IMPRISONMENT: You knowingly oversaw the construction of 30,000 new prison places and six new detention facilities for refugees, contravening Section 5 of the The Human Rights Act 1998.
CHILD ABUSE: You are charged with incarcerating 3000 children in prison contrary to Section 5 (iv) of the Guardianship of Minors Act 1971.
FRAUD: You are charged that you willfully and knowingly led the country to war on false representation with malice of forethought contrary to Section 2(ii) of the Fraud Act 2006.
THEFT/ATTEMPTED THEFT: Namely that you introduced laws which robbed U.K citizens of basic civil liberties. Furthermore you conspired to introduce a National Identity Register with the intent to permanently deprive all U.K residents of the last shreds of their privacy contrary to Section 2(iii) of the Theft Act 1968.
DAYLIGHT ROBBERY: Namely that you orchestrated the sale of the last remaining public industries contrary to Section 1(i) of the Theft Act 1968.
CONSPIRING TO PERVERT THE COURSE OF JUSTICE: Namely that you intervened in the investigation of the British Aerospace-Saudi Arabia arms deal to enable the destruction of evidence.
CRIMINAL DAMAGE: You authorised the use of incendiary devices (i.e. white phosphorus), in Fallujah, Iraq, contrary to the Criminal Damage Act 1971.
ANTI-SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR: In July 1997 you killed Brit-Pop by schmoozing with Noel Gallagher at Downing Street, contrary to Section 4 of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003.
BAIL CONDITIONS
The defendant is required to immediately surrender himself to the custody of the SchNEWS Kangaroo Court.
Signature of Proscecuting Custody Officer
Jo Makepeace
Lawsuits and courtcases
[Background articles on International Humanitarian Law]
Petition to Arrest George Bush for the Crimes of Murder and Conspiracy ! (May 2008)
ICC to Get Evidence of 'Illegality' of War (February 2004) | UK 'war crimes' claims examined in The Hague (19 December 2004)| Answer of the ICC prosecutor (PDF) (10 February 2006) | Ocampo Turns Down Iraq Case: Implications for the U.S. (PDF) (10 February 2006) | Open Letter to the International Criminal Court of Justice about war crimes committed in Fallujah (14 March 2008) |
Humanitarian Law groups file rights petition at OAS against the United States for attacks on Hospitals, Clinics in Falluja - 2005 (Lawsuit prepared by the Association of Humanitarian Lawyers, partners of the BRussells Tribunal)
Rights groups file French torture case vs Rumsfeld (26 Oct 2007)
Center For Constitutional Rights Seeks Criminal Investigation in Germany into Culpability of U.S. Officials in Abu Ghraib Torture | German prosecutors refuse to investigate Rumsfeld over Abu Ghraib abuse (PDF) - Court Cases: German Prosecutor dismisses case against US commanders over Abu Ghraib (November 2004) - New War Crimes Complaint against Donald Rumsfeld in Germany by Center of Constitutional Rights. (14 Nov 2006) - GERMAN FEDERAL PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE DISMISSES RUMSFELD WAR CRIMES CASE (27 April 2007) - Lawyers taking Rumsfeld war crimes case to Spain after German rejection (29 April 2007)
Court case against General Tommy Franks in Brussels | Belgium Guts Universal War Crimes Law (2003)
International Criminal Court | U.S.: Congress Tries to Undermine War Crimes Court | Iraq drops the ICC (02 March 2005)
Canadian lawyers charge Bush with torture | Canada blocks torture charges against Bush
German court declares Iraq war violated international law (27 September 2005)
Iraqi civilian abuse case in Court of Appeal - UK (10 October 2005)
Spanish court orders arrest of US soldiers for war crime (21 October 2005) - Spanish Judge calls for architects of Iraq invasion to be tried for war crimes (28 March 2007) - Spain prosecutors appeal indictment of US soldiers in Iraq death of journalist (19 May 2007)
www.Bushprosecution.org/modules/news (Canada)
Formal complaint sent to the International Criminal Court over Coalition war crimes in Occupied Iraq & Afghanistan (Dr. Gideon Polya, 21 December 2005)
Criminal Charges Filed Against George H.W. Bush (Sr.) in Iceland (04 July 2006)
Lieutenant Watada's War Against the War (07 Aug 2006)
THE KUALA LUMPUR WAR CRIMES COMMISSION & WAR CRIMES TRIBUNAL
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 1:29 PM
To:
Subject: http.doc tony blair.doc
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3524133.stm
http://www.zpub.com/un/un-tb.html
http://antiwar.com/laughland/
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9021
http://pixelisation.wordpress.com/2008/02/06/tony-blair-under-invesitgation-for-war-crimes/
Officers from Scotland Yard have commenced a criminal investigation into the deaths of Iraqi citizens killed during the armed invasion and occupation of Iraq. The Metropolitan Police are acting in response to crimes reported by peace activists from We Are Change UK and The Campaign to Make War History. In an unprecedented step, the case was handed to the War Crimes division of the Counter Terrorism branch who are now investigating allegations of 14 criminal offences committed by Tony Blair, Lord Goldsmith and others. The offences are under the International Criminal Court Act 2001, which came into effect under English common law, just two days before 9/11.
http://www.911blogger.com/node/13360
A 22 March memo from Ricketts to Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said,
But even the best survey of Iraq's WMD programmes will not show much advance in recent years on the nuclear, missile or CW/BW (chemical or biological weapons) fronts: the programmes are extremely worrying but have not, as far as we know, been stepped up. U.S. scrambling to establish a link between Iraq and al-Qaida is so far frankly unconvincing. To get public and Parliamentary support for military action, we have to be convincing that: the threat is so serious/imminent that it is worth sending our troops to die for; it is qualitatively different from the threat posed by other proliferators who are closer to achieving nuclear capability (including Iran).
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?feature=related&v=l3vsI9j7bSA
http://nasir-khan.blogspot.com/2007/06/pm-tony-blair-war-criminal-and-serial.html
Will a Bahamian judge order the arrest of ex-British PM Tony Blair for war crimes?
The former UN secretary general said the Iraq war was illegal, the cheif prosecutor at the international criminal court has said Bush and Blair could face war crimes charges when Iraq signs up to the court.
No mention of an Iraq war crimes tribunal from the present hand picked UN general secretay Ban Ki Moon.
August 1st, 2008 - 4:39 pm ICT by ANI -
Kuala Lumpur, Aug.1 (ANI): Former Malaysian Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir Mohamad has labelled former British Prime Minister Tony Blair a war criminal, and criticised the present government for extending an invitation to Blair to visit Malaysia.
http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/india-news/blair-is-a-war-criminal-mahathir-mohamad_10078694.html
The group Legal Action Against War have submitted a petition to the international criminal court in the Hague today, asking them to investigate alleged offences by Mr Blair, Jack Straw, Geoff Hoon, and the attorney general, Lord Goldsmith.
The group said "a principal charge" was "intentionally launching an attack knowing that it will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians". The legal team said the reasons given for the war - from weapons of mass destruction to the violation of UN resolutions and regime change - were not justified under the UN charter. Michael Mansfield QC, who is leading the campaign, said "The consensus of international legal opinion suggests the basis for the war was illegal."
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/attack/law/2003/0729greeks.htm
Tony Blair and other British ministers are accused of crimes against humanity in prosecuting the war against Iraq in a case lodged with the international criminal court by Greek lawyers yesterday.
The Athens Bar Association accuses the government of breaching almost every international treaty and the entire spectrum of human rights in the 47-page complaint.
"The repeated, blatant violations by the United States and Britain of the stipulations of the four 1949 Geneva conventions, the 1954 convention of the Hague as well as the charter of the international criminal court, constitute war crimes and crimes against humanity," the lawyers said in a statement.
"[The accused] intended to cause severe psychological distress or major physical or psychological damage to individuals who enjoy the protection of the Geneva conventions."
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14393.htm
08/06/06 "Sunday Herald" -- -- THE Lebanese government is working behind the scenes to bring Tony Blair before the Scottish courts, charged with war crimes for aiding and abetting the Israeli onslaught against Lebanon.
Ali Berro, the Lebanese government’s special adviser on legal affairs, is assisting Lebanese nationals living in Scotland, and their legal team, in their attempt to take the Scottish Executive and the UK government to court for allowing US aircraft to fly “bunker-buster bombs” from America to Israel via Scottish airports.
Berro is providing the legal team, led by the Glasgow-based human rights lawyer Aamer Anwar, with detailed information about alleged Israel war crimes, and also forwarding information on the casualty rates of Lebanese civilians and the type of weapons being deployed by the Israeli army. In total, some 30 lawyers, including QCs, in Scotland and England are helping prepare the case against the government.
Along with his briefing, Berro sent Anwar and his clients this message: “We are laying before you all these facts and we count on you to use all possible means of pressure to put an end to the destruction targeting civilians. We are counting on you and thank you.”
The team is accusing Blair of assisting Israel in carrying out war crimes against civilians, citing various pieces of international legislation, including the Geneva Conventions, which say that it is a war crime to aid and abet a nation carrying out attacks targetted against civilians.
Berro has said he is “angry and astonished” that the UK is “assisting” Israel, claiming the UK can no longer be seen as an “honest broker” in the Middle East.
http://www.worldproutassembly.org/archives/2005/06/military_famili.html
Military Families Charge Blair with War Crimes - Will Take Case to International Criminal Court
It has been widely reported that release of war documents from Downing Street finished Tony Blair in the last election. While that is true enough, the tide turned in the May 5th election when 10 bereaved families of British soldiers killed in Iraq confronted Tony Blair face to face, charging him with war crimes. .
All the documentary evidence of Bush/Blair war crimes is now laid out for judicial review before the International Criminal, and, thanks to the BBC and the Sunday Times, for the inspection and review before the court of public opinion. This evidence is only now surfacing in the US -- through Knight-Ridder, the Washington Post, the New York Times, and the Chicago Tribune. This is the beginning of the end of the war in Iraq, and the beginning of the end of George Bush, Alberto Gonzales, & the whole criminal gang.
http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/2005/06/27_jury-of-conscience-declaration.htm
27th June 2005, Istanbul
In February 2003, weeks before an illegal war was initiated against Iraq, millions of people protested in the streets of the world. That call went unheeded. No international institution had the courage or conscience to stand up to the threat of aggression of the US and UK governments. No one could stop them. It is two years later now. Iraq has been invaded, occupied, and devastated. The attack on Iraq is an attack on justice, on liberty, on our safety, on our future, on us all. We, people of conscience, decided to stand up. We formed the World Tribunal on Iraq (WTI) to demand justice and a peaceful future.
The legitimacy of the World Tribunal on Iraq is located in the collective conscience of humanity. This, the Istanbul session of the WTI, is the culmination of a series of 20 hearings held in different cities of the world focusing on the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq. The conclusions of these sessions and/or inquiries held in Barcelona, Brussels, Copenhagen, Genoa, Hiroshima, Istanbul, Lisbon, London, Mumbai, New York, Östersund, Paris , Rome, Seoul, Stockholm, Tunis, various cities in Japan and Germany are appended to this Declaration in a separate volume.
We, the Jury of Conscience, from 10 different countries, met in Istanbul. We heard 54 testimonies from a Panel of Advocates and Witnesses who came from across the world, including from Iraq, the United States and the United Kingdom.
The World Tribunal on Iraq met in Istanbul from 24-26 June 2005. The principal objective of the WTI is to tell and disseminate the truth about the Iraq War, underscoring the accountability of those responsible and underlining the significance of justice for the Iraqi people.
I. Overview of Findings
1. The invasion and occupation of Iraq was and is illegal. The reasons given by the US and UK governments for the invasion and occupation of Iraq in March 2003 have proven to be false. Much evidence supports the conclusion that a major motive for the war was to control and dominate the Middle East and its vast reserves of oil as a part of the US drive for global hegemony.
2. Blatant falsehoods about the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and a link between Al Qaeda terrorism and the Saddam Hussein régime were manufactured in order to create public support for a “preemptive” assault upon a sovereign independent nation.
3. Iraq has been under siege for years. The imposition of severe inhumane economic sanctions on 6 August 1990, the establishment of no-fly zones in the Northern and Southern parts of Iraq, and the concomitant bombing of the country were all aimed at degrading and weakening Iraq’s human and material resources and capacities in order to facilitate its subsequent invasion and occupation. In this enterprise the US and British leaderships had the benefit of a complicit UN Security Council.
4. In pursuit of their agenda of empire, the Bush and Blair governments blatantly ignored the massive opposition to the war expressed by millions of people around the world. They embarked upon one of the most unjust, immoral, and cowardly wars in history.
5. Established international political-legal mechanisms have failed to prevent this attack and to hold the perpetrators accountable. The impunity that the US government and its allies enjoy has created a serious international crisis that questions the import and significance of international law, of human rights covenants and of the ability of international institutions including the United Nations to address the crisis with any degree of authority or dignity.
6. The US/UK occupation of Iraq of the last 27 months has led to the destruction and devastation of the Iraqi state and society. Law and order have broken down, resulting in a pervasive lack of human security. The physical infrastructure is in shambles; the health care delivery system is in poor condition; the education system has virtually ceased to function; there is massive environmental and ecological devastation; and the cultural and archeological heritage of the Iraqi people has been desecrated.
7. The occupation has intentionally exacerbated ethnic, sectarian and religious divisions in Iraqi society, with the aim of undermining Iraq’s identity and integrity as a nation. This is in keeping with the familiar imperial policy of divide and rule. Moreover, it has facilitated rising levels of violence against women, increased gender oppression and reinforced patriarchy.
8. The imposition of the UN sanctions in 1990 caused untold suffering and thousands of deaths. The situation has worsened after the occupation. At least 100,000 civilians have been killed; 60,000 are being held in US custody in inhumane conditions, without charges; thousands have disappeared; and torture has become routine.
9. The illegal privatization, deregulation, and liberalization of the Iraqi economy by the occupation regime has coerced the country into becoming a client economy that is controlled by the IMF and the World Bank, both of which are integral to the Washington Consensus. The occupying forces have also acquired control over Iraq’s oil reserves.
10. Any law or institution created under the aegis of occupation is devoid of both legal and moral authority. The recently concluded election, the Constituent Assembly, the current government, and the drafting committee for the Constitution are therefore all illegitimate.
11. There is widespread opposition to the occupation. Political, social, and civil resistance through peaceful means is subjected to repression by the occupying forces. It is the occupation and its brutality that has provoked a strong armed resistance and certain acts of desperation. By the principles embodied in the UN Charter and in international law, the popular national resistance to the occupation is legitimate and justified. It deserves the support of people everywhere who care for justice and freedom.
II. Charges
On the basis of the preceding findings and recalling the Charter of the United Nations and other legal documents indicated in the appendix, the jury has established the following charges.
A. Against the Governments of the US and the UK
1. Planning, preparing, and waging the supreme crime of a war of aggression in contravention of the United Nations Charter and the Nuremberg Principles.
Evidence for this can be found in the leaked Downing Street Memo of 23 rd July, 2002, in which it was revealed: “Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.” Intelligence was manufactured to willfully deceive the people of the US, the UK, and their elected representatives.
2. Targeting the civilian population of Iraq and civilian infrastructure by intentionally directing attacks upon civilians and hospitals, medical centers, residential neighborhoods, electricity stations, and water purification facilities. The complete destruction of the city of Falluja in itself constitutes a glaring example of such crimes.
3. Using disproportionate force and weapon systems with indiscriminate effects, such as cluster munitions, incendiary bombs, depleted uranium (DU), and chemical weapons. Detailed evidence was presented to the Tribunal by expert witnesses that leukemia had risen sharply in children under the age of five residing in those areas that had been targeted by DU weapons.
4. Using DU munitions in spite of all the warnings presented by scientists and war veterans on their devastating long-term effects on human beings and the environment. The US Administration, claiming lack of scientifically established proof of the harmful effects of DU, decided to risk the lives of millions for several generations rather than discontinue its use on account of the potential risks. This alone displays the Administration’s wanton disregard for human life. The Tribunal heard testimony concerning the current obstruction by the US Administration of the efforts of Iraqi universities to collect data and conduct research on the issue.
5. Failing to safeguard the lives of civilians during military activities and during the occupation period thereafter. This is evidenced, for example, by “shock and awe” bombing techniques and the conduct of occupying forces at checkpoints.
6.Actively creating conditions under which the status of Iraqi women has seriously been degraded, contrary to the repeated claims of the leaders of the coalition forces. Women’s freedom of movement has severely been limited, restricting their access to the public sphere, to education, livelihood, political and social engagement. Testimony was provided that sexual violence and sex trafficking have increased since the occupation of Iraq began.
7.Using deadly violence against peaceful protestors, including the April 2003 killing of more than a dozen peaceful protestors in Falluja.
8. Imposing punishments without charge or trial, including collective punishment, on the people of Iraq. Repeated testimonies pointed to “snatch and grab” operations, disappearances and assassinations.
9. Subjecting Iraqi soldiers and civilians to torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. Degrading treatment includes subjecting Iraqi soldiers and civilians to acts of racial, ethnic, religious, and gender discrimination, as well as denying Iraqi soldiers Prisoner of War status as required by the Geneva Conventions. Abundant testimony was provided of unlawful arrests and detentions, without due process of law. Well known and egregious examples of torture and cruel and inhuman treatment occurred in Abu Ghraib prison as well as in Mosul, Camp Bucca, and Basra. The employment of mercenaries and private contractors to carry out torture has served toundermine accountability.
10. Re-writing the laws of a country that has been illegally invaded and occupied, in violation of international covenants on the responsibilities of occupying powers, in order to amass illegal profits (through such measures as Order 39, signed by L. Paul Bremer III for the Coalition Provisional Authority, which allows foreign investors to buy and takeover Iraq’s state-owned enterprises and to repatriate 100 percent of their profits and assets at any point) and to control Iraq’s oil. Evidence was presented of a number of corporations that had profited from such transactions.
11. Willfully devastating the environment, contaminating it by depleted uranium (DU) weapons, combined with the plumes from burning oil wells, as well as huge oil spills, and destroying agricultural lands. Deliberately disrupting the water and waste removal systems, in a manner verging on biological-chemical warfare. Failing to prevent the looting and dispersal of radioactive material from nuclear sites. Extensive documentation is available on air and water pollution, land degradation, and radioactive pollution.
12. Failing to protect humanity’s rich archaeological and cultural heritage in Iraq by allowing the looting of museums and established historical sites and positioning military bases in culturally and archeologically sensitive locations. This took place despite prior warnings from UNESCO and Iraqi museum officials.
13. Obstructing the right to information,including the censoring of Iraqi media, such as newspapers (e.g., al-Hawza, al-Mashriq, and al-Mustaqila) and radio stations (Baghdad Radio), the shutting down of the Baghdad offices of Al Jazeera Television, targeting international journalists, imprisoning and killing academics, intellectuals and scientists.
14. Redefining torture in violation of international law, to allow use of torture and illegal detentions, including holding more than 500 people at Guantánamo Bay without charging them or allowing them any access to legal protection, and using “extraordinary renditions” to send people to be tortured in other countries known to commit human rights abuses and torture prisoners.
15. Committing a crime against peace by violating the will of the global anti-war movement. In an unprecedented display of public conscience millions of people across the world stood in opposition to the imminent attack on Iraq. The attack rendered them effectively voiceless. This amounts to a declaration by the US government and its allies to millions of people that their voices can be ignored, suppressed and silenced with complete impunity.
16. Engaging in policies to wage permanent war on sovereign nations. Syria and Iran have already been declared as potential targets. In declaring a “global war on terror,” the US government has given itself the exclusive right to use aggressive military force against any target of its choosing. Ethnic and religious hostilities are being fueled in different parts of the world. The US occupation of Iraq has further emboldened the Israeli occupation in Palestine and increased the repression of the Palestinian people. The focus on state security and the escalation of militarization has caused a serious deterioration of human security and civil rights across the world.
B. Against the Security Council of the United Nations
1. Failing to protect the Iraqi people against the crime of aggression.
2. Imposing harsh economic sanctions on Iraq, despite knowledge that sanctions were directly contributing to the massive loss of civilian lives and harming innocent civilians.
3. Allowing the United States and United Kingdom to carry out illegal bombings in the no-fly zones, using false pretenses of enforcing UN resolutions, and at no point allowing discussion in the Security Council of this violation, and thereby being complicit and responsible for loss of civilian life and destruction of Iraqi infrastructure.
4. Allowing the United States to dominate the United Nations and hold itself above any accountability by other member nations.
5. Failure to stop war crimes and crimes against humanity by the United States and its coalition partners in Iraq.
6. Failure to hold the United States and its coalition partners accountable for violations of international law during the invasion and occupation, giving official sanction to the occupation and therefore, both by acts of commission and acts of omission becoming a collaborator in an illegal occupation.
C. Against the Governments of the Coalition of the Willing
Collaborating in the invasion and occupation of Iraq, thus sharing responsibility in the crimes committed.
D. Against the Governments of Other Countries
Allowing the use of military bases and air space, and providing other logistical support, for the invasion and occupation, and hence being complicit in the crimes committed.
E. Against the Private Corporations which have won contracts for the reconstruction of Iraq and which have sued for and received “reparation awards” from the illegal occupation regime
Profiting from the war with complicity in the crimes described above, of invasion and occupation.
F. Against the Major Corporate Media
1. Disseminating the deliberate falsehoods spread by the governments of the US and the UK and failing to adequately investigate this misinformation, even in the face of abundant evidence to the contrary. Among the corporate media houses that bear special responsibility for promoting the lies about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction, we name the New York Times, in particular their reporter Judith Miller, whose main source was on the payroll of the CIA. We also name Fox News, CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, the BBC and ITN. This list also includes but is not limited to, The Express, The Sun, The Observer and Washington Post.
2. Failing to report the atrocities being committed against Iraqi people by the occupying forces, neglecting the duty to give privilege and dignity to voices of suffering and marginalizing the global voices for peace and justice.
3. Failing to report fairly on the ongoing occupation; silencing and discrediting dissenting voices and failing to adequately report on the full national costs and consequences of the invasion and occupation of Iraq; disseminating the propaganda of the occupation regime that seeks to justify the continuation of its presence in Iraq on false grounds.
4. Inciting an ideological climate of fear, racism, xenophobia and Islamophobia, which is then used to justify and legitimize violence perpetrated by the armies of the occupying regime.
5. Disseminating an ideology that glorifies masculinity and combat, while normalizing war as a policy choice.
6.Complicity in the waging of an aggressive war and perpetuating a regime of occupation that is widely regarded as guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
7.Enabling, through the validation and dissemination of disinformation, the fraudulent misappropriation of human and financial resources for an illegal war waged on false pretexts.
8.Promoting corporate-military perspectives on “security” which are counter-productive to the fundamental concerns and priorities of the global population and have seriously endangered civilian populations.
III. Recommendations
Recognizing the right of the Iraqi people to resist the illegal occupation of their country and to develop independent institutions, and affirming that the right to resist the occupation is the right to wage a struggle for self-determination, freedom, and independence as derived from the Charter of the United Nations, we the Jury of Conscience declare our solidarity with the people of Iraq.
We recommend:
1. The immediate and unconditional withdrawal of the Coalition forces from Iraq.
2. That Coalition governments make war reparations and pay compensation to Iraq for the humanitarian, economic, ecological, and cultural devastation they have caused by their illegal invasion and occupation.
3. That all laws, contracts, treaties, and institutions established under occupation, which the Iraqi people deem inimical to their interests, be considered null and void.
4. That the Guantánamo Bay prison and all other offshore US military prisons be closed immediately, that the names of the prisoners be disclosed, that they receive POW status, and receive due process.
5. That there be an exhaustive investigation of those responsible for the crime of aggression, war crimes and crimes against humanity in Iraq, beginning with George W. Bush, President of the United States of America, Tony Blair, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, those in key decision-making positions in these countries and in the Coalition of the Willing, those in the military chain-of-command who master-minded the strategy for and carried out this criminal war, starting from the very top and going down; as well as personalities in Iraq who helped prepare this illegal invasion and supported the occupiers.
We list some of the most obvious names to be included in such investigation:
prime ministers of the Coalition of the Willing, such as Junichiro Koizumi of Japan, Jose Maria Anzar of Spain, Silvio Berlusconi of Italy, José Manuel Durão Barroso and Santana Lopes of Portugal, Roh Moo Hyun of South Korea, Anders Fogh Rasmussen of Denmark ;
public officials such as Dick Cheney, Donald H. Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Colin L. Powell, Condoleezza Rice, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Alberto Gonzales, L. Paul Bremer from the US, and Jack Straw, Geoffrey Hoon, John Reid, Adam Ingram from the UK;
military commanders beginning with: Gen. Richard Myers, Gen. Tommy Franks, Gen. John P. Abizaid, Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, Gen. Thomas Metz, Gen. John R. Vines, Gen. George Casey from the US; Gen. Mike Jackson, Gen. John Kiszely, Air Marshal Brian Burridge, Gen. Peter Wall, Rear Admiral David Snelson, Gen. Robin Brims, Air Vice-Marshal Glenn Torpy from the UK; and chiefs of staff and commanding officers of all coalition countries with troops in Iraq.
Iraqi collaborators such as Ahmed Chalabi, Iyad Allawi, Abdul Aziz Al Hakim, Gen. Abdul Qader Mohammed Jassem Mohan, among others.
6. That a process of accountability is initiated to hold those morally and personally responsible for their participation in this illegal war, such as journalists who deliberately lied, corporate media outlets that promoted racial, ethnic and religious hatred, and CEOs of multinational corporations that profited from this war;
7. That people throughout the world launch nonviolent actions against US and UK corporations that directly profit from this war. Examples of such corporations include Halliburton, Bechtel, The Carlyle Group, CACI Inc., Titan Corporation, Kellog, Brown and Root (subsidiary of Halliburton), DynCorp, Boeing, ExxonMobil, Texaco, British Petroleum. The following companies have sued Iraq and received “reparation awards”: Toys R Us, Kentucky Fried Chicken, Shell, Nestlé, Pepsi, Phillip Morris, Sheraton, Mobil. Such actions may take the form of direct actions such as shutting down their offices, consumer boycotts, and pressure on shareholders to divest.
8. That young people and soldiers act on conscientious objection and refuse to enlist and participate in an illegal war. Also, that countries provide conscientious objectors with political asylum.
9. That the international campaign for dismantling all US military bases abroad be reinforced.
10. That people around the world resist and reject any effort by any of their governments to provide material, logistical, or moral support to the occupation of Iraq.
We, the Jury of Conscience, hope that the scope and specificity of these recommendations will lay the groundwork for a world in which international institutions will be shaped and reshaped by the will of people and not by fear and self-interest, where journalists and intellectuals will not remain mute, where the will of the people of the world will be central, and human security will prevail over state security and corporate profits.
Arundhati Roy, India, Spokesperson of the Jury of Conscience
Ahmet Öztürk, Turkey
Ayşe Erzan, Turkey
Chandra Muzaffar, Malaysia
David Krieger, USA
Eve Ensler, USA
François Houtart, Belgium
Jae-Bok Kim, South Korea
Mehmet Tarhan, Turkey
Miguel Angel De Los Santos Cruz, Mexico
Murat Belge, Turkey
Rela Mazali, Israel
Salaam Al Jobourie, Iraq
Taty Almeida, Argentina
International Law Appendix
Explanatory Note
This international law appendix is intended to back up the Jury Statement that rests its assessments primarily on a moral and political appraisal of the Iraq War. The Statement relies upon the extensive testimony given in written and oral form by international law experts who have a world-class scholarly reputation during the Istanbul Culminating Session of the World Tribunal on Iraq (WTI). It also reflects the testimony and submissions on related issues of war crimes and the failure of the United Nations to protect Iraq against aggression.
The Jury of Conscience was not a body composed of jurists or international law experts. It did not hear arguments supporting the legality of the invasion of Iraq as would have been made before a judicial body under the authority of either the state or an international institution acting on behalf of the international community. The World Tribunal on Iraq throughout all of its session proceeded from a sense of moral and political outrage of concerned citizens from all over the world, with respect to the war. The Tribunal was not interested in a debate solely as to legality. The legal issues were relevant to the extent that they added weight to the moral and political purpose of the Tribunal, which was to expose the Iraq War as the crime it is, appealing to and drawing upon the deep bonds that link us all in our humanity. Therefore the Tribunal sought testimony and evidence to call into question the mantle of respectability thrown over the Iraq War by the aggressors, and the false impression disseminated by mainstream media, that the Iraq War was in any sense justified by political circumstances, moral considerations, or legal analysis.
The WTI is a worldwide process dedicated to reclaiming justice on behalf of the peoples of the world. It aims to record the severe wrongs, crimes, and violations that were committed in the process leading up to the aggression against Iraq, during the war, and throughout the ensuing occupation, continuing with unabated fury to this day. The role of international law is understood in light of these WTI goals.
The concerns of the WTI range much further than the demand for the implementation of international law, especially as much of this law currently serves the interests of wealth and power. Nevertheless, international law with respect to the use of force and recourse to war is important in relation to the work of the WTI. International law is useful for the WTI for the following reasons:
International law grounds the political and moral demand for the criminal indictment and prosecution of those responsible for the Iraq War, and it clarifies the extent of criminal accountability as extending to corporate and media participation;
International law rejects the dangerous imperialist claims of the United States and the United Kingdom to be exempt from international legal obligations.
In addition, the WTI makes use of international law to fulfill its mission:
The WTI connects a call for global justice with the demand for the implementation of international law, but also for a rethinking of the premises and operations of international law so that it might be of greater relevance to the achievement of human security in the future;
The WTI demands an interrogation as to why international institutions, particularly the United Nations, proved powerless against US unilateralism and aggression;
The WTI insists that United Nations exercise its constitutional responsibility to protect its Members from aggression and illegal occupation;
The WTI possesses the authority, as representing civil society, to declare and seek enforcement of international legal obligations when states and the United Nations fail to uphold international law in matters of war and peace.
It is important to distinguish:
violations of international law, including the UN Charter, by a state; and
crimes associated with these violation committed by political and military leaders, government officials, corporations and their officers, soldiers and private contractors, journalists and media personnel.
Legal Analysis
International law consists of (1) international treaties, including the UN Charter [see list of documents]; (2) international customary law [especially in relation to the conduct of states in war]; (3) international criminal law [a sub-category of (1) resting on treaties and agreements among states, based on the framework of the Nuremberg Judgment in 1945, unanimously affirmed by the UN General Assembly’s adoption of the Nuremberg Principles in 1946, Res. 95(I)].
In the War on Iraq the three principles of customary international law have been violated: (1) Principle of Proportionality: force can only be used to attain permissible legal objectives, and then only to the extent required by ‘military necessity’; (2) Principle of Discrimination: force and weaponry can only be used if confined to military targets; indiscriminate weapons and tactics are prohibited; (3) Principle of Humanity: force must never be used to cause unnecessary suffering and maximum care must be taken to protect civilian society, including its cultural heritage.
The War on Iraq violates the Nuremberg Principles that set forth thefollowingessential guidelines (as formulated by the International Law Commission of the UN in 1950 in response to request from General Assembly):
Principle I
Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefore and liable to punishment.
Principle II
The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act, which constitutes a crime under international law, does not relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under international law.
Principle III
The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible Government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law.
Principle IV
The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.
Principle V
Any person charged with a crime under international law has the right to a fair trial on the facts and law.
PrincipleVI
The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under; international law:
a) Crimes against peace:
i. Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
ii. Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).
b) War crimes:
Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill treatment or deportation to slave-labor or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or ill treatment of prisoners of war, of persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.
c) Crimes against humanity:
Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhuman acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.
Principle VII
Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth in Principles VI is a crime under international law.
Violations and Crimes:
I. The invasion of Iraq on March 20, 2003, together with the continuing occupation of Iraq, constitutes a violation of the core obligation of the United Nations Charter:
resolving international conflicts by recourse to force or the threat of force is unconditionally prohibited by Article 2(4) of the Charter;
the only exception to this probation is the right of states to act in self-defense against a prior armed attack as allowed by Article 51, but with the requirement that defending state report its claim to the Security Council;
the claims of the US/UK Governments based on doctrines of ‘preemption’ or ‘preventive war’ have no standing in international law, and reliance on such specious arguments was in any event unsupported by facts; even if weapons of mass destruction had existed in Iraq it would not provide a legal justification for the invasion; nor would the claim that ‘regime change’ would liberate the Iraqi people from dictatorial rule violative of human rights;
with respect to Iraq there existed no basis for claiming self-defense or acting on the basis of a Security Council authorization; the invasion of Iraq and the subsequent occupation of the country constitutes a continuing aggression against a sovereign state and member of the UN in violation of international law;
the cumulative effect of these violations is to create a strong factual and legal foundation for the indictment, prosecution, and punishment of the individuals responsible for planning, initiating, and waging a crime of aggression against Iraq.
II. Iraq War by the invading military forces, principally those of the United States and United Kingdom, and subsequent occupation, violated the law of war such as the Geneva Conventions on the Humanitarian Laws of War (1949), Additional Protocols to Geneva Conventions (1977) and Hague Conventions on the Laws of War (1899, 1907) in numerous respects, including the following:
use of cluster bombs, napalm, depleted uranium;
bombing of civilian targets and areas (e.g. markets, restaurants, media facilities, religious and cultural sites);
intense and indiscriminate military operations against many cities and towns causing massive civilian casualties (e.g. Najaf, Falluja);
repeated and systematic use of torture and degrading treatment of Iraqi civilian and military personnel detained in prison facilities or covertly transferred to foreign countries known for torture and severe prison conditions;
overall failure to protect the civilian population and their property, cultural heritage (shootings at check points; house raids; lootings of museums and other cultural sites; refusal to assess extent of civilian death and damage) [see especially common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions imposing duty to take special measures to protect civilian population to the extent possible) (Also Geneva Convention IV specifies the obligations of the occupying power in Articles 47-78);
the cumulative effect of this pattern of flagrant and extensive violations of the laws of war is to create the foundation for the indictment, prosecution, and punishment of those individuals responsible, as policy makers, leaders, and as implementers at various levels of command;
Article 1 of the Geneva Conventions reads: “The High Contracting Parties, including US/UK, undertake to respect and ensure respect for the present Convention in all circumstances.” The American legal specialists in Office of the Legal Counsel in the White House, in the Justice Department, and Department of Defense who advised on the ‘legality’ of torture and other behavior that violates the law of war are priority targets for indictment and prosecution.
III. The occupation of Iraq has fragrantly violated The Right of Self-Determination of the People of Iraq:
Article 1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights and of the International Covenant on Political and Civil Rights (1966): “(1) All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development”;
It is evident that the occupation, by its decrees, practices, imposition of an interim government, managed elections, and administered constitution-making process has violated the right of self-determination of the Iraqi people, a fundamental element of international human rights law.
IV. The occupation of Iraq has included massive abuses of the Iraqi civilian population, including the widespread and pervasive reliance on torture, the practice of which is unconditionally prohibited by international law:
Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: “No one shall be subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (repeated in Article 7 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), including Article 4(2) that affirms there are no exceptions, even in conditions of war or emergency) and further confirmed by the widely ratified treaty—Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1984).
V. The United Nations has failed to uphold its obligations to protect sovereign states, especially its members, from violations of their legal rights to political independence and territorial integrity, passively allowing Iraq to be threatened and attacked for twelve years prior to the invasion of 2003:
the UNSC maintained sanctions on Iraq that had a demonstrated genocidal effect on the civilian population during the period 1991-2003;
the UNSC refrained from censuring and preventing repeated air strikes within Iraq territory during the period 1991-2003;
the UNSC refrained from censuring and preventing overt calls for the subversion and replacement of the Iraqi government, as well as the financing and training of exiles dedicated to armed struggle;
the UNSC failed to condemn or act to prevent aggressive threats or the actual initiation and conduct of an aggressive war against Iraq in 2003, and has to a limited extent cooperated in the illegal occupation of Iraq since the invasion.
Conclusions
The Jury Statement is consistent with an objective understanding of international law, including the United Nations Charter.
Members of the United Nations and governments of sovereign states have legal obligations to uphold the Charter and act to ensure respect for the laws of war.
All three categories of Nuremberg Crimes are associated with the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
The International Criminal Court should indict, prosecute, and punish the perpetrators and collaborators for this aggression against Iraq and the related international crimes arising from the subsequent occupation of the country.
The ICC should be supplemented by a specially constituted international tribunal with authority to indict, prosecute, and punish for crimes committed before 2002 when the ICC was established and to the extent that crimes associated with states not Parties to the ICC are not addressed.
The UNGA should be encouraged to implement international law with respect to the Iraq War and occupation.
National courts relying on universal jurisdiction should be urged to investigate and prosecute individuals associated with Nuremberg Crimes in Iraq.
Organs of civil society, including the WTI, should act to ensure that the recommendations and conclusions of the Jury Statement are promptly and fairly implemented.
© Nuclear Age Peace Foundation 1998 - 2008 | Powered by Media Temple
Related Articles
Invasion & occupation of Iraq article archives
Hague prosecutor says Bush-Blair could face war crimes charges: 1 million Iraqis killed
By Tom Mellen
Mar 19, 2007, 09:41
International Criminal Court prosecutor announced on Sunday that US President George W Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair could face war crimes charges at the Hague, after it emerged that up to one million Iraqis have been killed since the illegal invasion.
Chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo said that he could envision a situation in which Mr Bush and Mr Blair found themselves in the dock.
"Of course that could be a possibility. Whatever country joins the court can know that whoever commits a crime in their country could be prosecuted by me," Mr Moreno-Ocampo affirmed.
Days before the invasion of Iraq in 2003, then Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein approached lawyers in Britain about signing up to the International Criminal Court, but his effort was overtaken by events.
Had he succeeded, the actions of the occupation forces in Iraq would fall within the court's jurisdiction.
Mr Moreno-Ocampo said that it was still possible for an investigation to be launched, if Iraq signed up.
Iraq's ambassador to the UN Hamid al-Bayati said that Baghdad is actively considering joining.
Respect [Britain political party, ed.] councillor for Birmingham Salma Yaqoob said: "It would be a step forward for the Iraqi people if Baghdad signed up to the ICC, as seeing Bush and Blair face justice for their flagrant violations of international law would help to relieve the sense of hopelessness in Iraq."
With Australia's John Howard and Britain's Tony Blair now out of office and George Bush starting to count his final days as US President, human rights and other international law organisations are beginning to line-up with submissions to the International Criminal Court to have George Bush, Tony Blair and John Howard charged with various international law offences that include Crimes Against Humanity, breaches of the Geneva Convention, Laws of War as well as breaches of numerous other international laws and conventions.
While most of the allegations relate to the illegal invasion of Iraq, a substantial number of other allegations concern the illegal activities of the various intelligence agencies including the CIA at the behest of the US, British and the Australian Governments.
The allegations against George Bush are numerous and they include the same allegations against Secretary of State Rice and former Secretary of Defence Rumsfeld.
They include allegations of knowingly conducting an illegal invasion of an independent State that State being Iraq following which the US, and its two allies Britain and Australia, knowingly failed to comply with the articles of conduct in relation to the duties and responsibilities of an occupying power.
The International Criminal Court Act 2001
Britain’s Parliament ratified the Rome Statute by enacting The International Criminal Court Act 2001. This new law incorporated the crimes of ‘genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes’ into UK criminal law whilst ceding ultimate authority over these crimes to the International Criminal Court in The Hague. The Act holds that:
It is an offence against the law of England and Wales for a person to commit genocide, a crime against humanity or a war crime, or to engage in conduct ancillary to such an act. This applies to acts committed in England or Wales or outside the United Kingdom by a UK national, resident or person subject to UK service jurisdiction .
For the purposes of this Statute “Genocide” means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
For the purposes of this Statute “Crime against humanity” means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population with knowledge of the attack: murder; extermination; enslavement; deportation or forcible transfer of population; imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law; torture; rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity; persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; enforced disappearance of persons; the crime of apartheid; other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.
(a) “Attack directed against any civilian population” means a course of conduct involving the multiple commission of acts referred to in paragraph 1 against any civilian population, pursuant to or in furtherance of a State or organizational policy to commit such attack; (b) “Extermination” includes the intentional infliction of conditions of life, inter alia the deprivation of access to food and medicine, calculated to bring about the destruction of part of a population; (c) “Enslavement” means the exercise of any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership over a person and includes the exercise of such power in the course of trafficking in persons, in particular women and children; (d) “Deportation or forcible transfer of population” means forced displacement of the persons concerned by expulsion or other coercive acts from the area in which they are lawfully present, without grounds permitted under international law; (e) “Torture” means the intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, upon a person in the custody or under the control of the accused; except that torture shall not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions; (f) “Forced pregnancy” means the unlawful confinement of a woman forcibly made pregnant, with the intent of affecting the ethnic composition of any population or carrying out other grave violations of international law; (g) “Persecution” means the intentional and severe deprivation of fundamental rights contrary to international law by reason of the identity of the group or collectivity; (h) “The crime of apartheid” means inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime; (i) “Enforced disappearance of persons” means the arrest, detention or abduction of persons by, or with the authorization, support or acquiescence of, a State or a political organization, followed by a refusal to acknowledge that deprivation of freedom or to give information on the fate or whereabouts of those persons, with the intention of removing them from the protection of the law for a prolonged period of time.
3. For the purpose of this Statute, it is understood that the term “gender” refers to the two sexes, male and female, within the context of society. The term “gender” does not indicate any meaning different from the above.
For the purposes of this Statute “war crimes” means:
(a) Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention: (i) Wilful killing; (ii) Torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments; (iii) Wilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health; (iv) Extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly; (v) Compelling a prisoner of war or other protected person to serve in the forces of a hostile Power; (vi) Wilfully depriving a prisoner of war or other protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial; (vii) Unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement; (viii) Taking of hostages.
(b) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts: (i) Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities; (ii) Intentionally directing attacks against civilian objects, that is, objects which are not military objectives; (iii) Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict; (iv) Intentionally launching an attack in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated; (v) Attacking or bombarding, by whatever means, towns, villages, dwellings or buildings which are undefended and which are not military objectives; (vi) Killing or wounding a combatant who, having laid down his arms or having no longer means of defence, has surrendered at discretion; (vii) Making improper use of a flag of truce, or of the flag or of the military insignia and uniform of the enemy or of the United Nations, as well as of the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions, resulting in death or serious personal injury; (viii) The transfer, directly or indirectly, by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies, or the deportation or transfer of all or parts of the population of the occupied territory within or outside this territory; (ix) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military objectives; (x) Subjecting persons who are in the power of an adverse party to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons; (xi) Killing or wounding treacherously individuals belonging to the hostile nation or army; (xii) Declaring that no quarter will be given; (xiii) Destroying or seizing the enemy’s property unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war; (xiv) Declaring abolished, suspended or inadmissible in a court of law the rights and actions of the nationals of the hostile party; (xv) Compelling the nationals of the hostile party to take part in the operations of war directed against their own country, even if they were in the belligerent’s service before the commencement of the war; (xvi) Pillaging a town or place, even when taken by assault; (xvii) Employing poison or poisoned weapons; (xviii) Employing asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and all analogous liquids, materials or devices; (xix) Employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions; ....... (xxi) Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (xxii) Committing rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy as defined in article 7, paragraph 2(f), enforced sterilisation, or any other form of sexual violence also constituting a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions; (xxiii) Utilizing the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas or military forces immune from military operations; (xxiv) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings, material, medical units and transport, and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions in conformity with international law; (xxv) Intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions; (xxvi) Conscripting or enlisting children under the age of fifteen years into the national armed forces or using them to participate actively in hostilities.
(c) In the case of an armed conflict not of an international character, serious violations of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts committed against persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention or any other cause: (i) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; (ii) Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (iii) Taking of hostages; (iv) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgement pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all judicial guarantees which are generally recognised as indispensable.
(d) Paragraph 2(c) applies to armed conflicts not of an international character and thus does not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence or other acts of a similar nature.
(e) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in armed conflicts not of an international character, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts: (i) Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities; (ii) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings, material, medical units and transport, and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions in conformity with international law; (iii) Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict; (iv) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military objectives; (v) Pillaging a town or place, even when taken by assault; (vi) Committing rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, as defined in article 7, paragraph 2(f), enforced sterilization, and any other form of sexual violence also constituting a serious violation of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions; (vii) Conscripting or enlisting children under the age of fifteen years into armed forces or groups or using them to participate actively in hostilities; (viii) Ordering the displacement of the civilian population for reasons related to the conflict, unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand; (ix) Killing or wounding treacherously a combatant adversary; (x) Declaring that no quarter will be given; (xi) Subjecting persons who are in the power of another party to the conflict to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons; (xii) Destroying or seizing the property of an adversary unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of the conflict.
(f) Paragraph 2(e) applies to armed conflicts not of an international character and thus does not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence or other acts of a similar nature. It applies to armed conflicts that take place in the territory of a State when there is protracted armed conflict between governmental authorities and organized armed groups or between such groups.
“Conduct ancillary” means: aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring the commission of an offence, inciting a person to commit an offence, attempting or conspiring to commit an offence, assisting an offender or concealing the offence.
A person is regarded as committing such an act or crime if the material elements are committed with intent and knowledge. A person has ‘intent’ where he means to engage in the conduct or where he means to cause the consequence or where he is aware that it will occur in the ordinary course of events. ‘Knowledge’ means awareness that circumstances exist or will occur in the ordinary course of events.
http://www.makewarshistory.org.uk/index/implications.html
http://news.perdana4peace.org/?p=431
WAR CRIMINAL BLAIR CONDEMNED BY MALAYSIANS ON HIS VISIT TO MALAYSIA TO SPEAK ON THE RULE OF LAW
Posted in War & Peace by Admin on the August 1st, 2008
Thursday, 31 July 2008
BY MATTHIAS CHANG
War Criminal Blair has been invited by the University of Malaya as the Guest Lecturer of the Sultan Azlan Shah Lectures on the “Rule of Law”. The event is co-sponsored by the British Council. It is mind-boggling, given the fact that this war criminal is responsible for the killings of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine and Lebanon. Is it any wonder that the University of Malaya has slumped in international ranking as a distinguished university?
What is most interesting is that on the invitation cards to lawyers and distinguished jurists, no mention is made that the War Criminal Blair is the Guest Lecturer. On all previous occasions, the name of the Guest Lecturer was prominently printed in the invitation cards. This time, we have a blank!
It may be that the organizers, harbouring a secret agenda, and fearing the anger and contempt that peace loving Malaysians have for this War Criminal, have decided to keep the matter under wraps.
The International Criminal Tribunal for Iraq
Judgment
12 December 2004
Note: Final Judgment covering all charges, including those raised
in supplementary indictment, is to be issued at the final trial
in March 2005.
The International Criminal Tribunal for Iraq (ICTI), sitting from July 17 to 18, 2004 in Kyoto and from December 11 to 12, 2004 in Tokyo, heard the evidences, testimonies and views presented at these trials as well as numerous public hearings held in various places in Japan throughout this period. The judgment delivered today is the unanimous court opinion of the Tribunal composed of four judges of the ICTI, who participated in this Tribunal from Korea, Indonesia and Japan. This judgment will be complemented by individuals opinions by each judge who wishes to record his or her opinion separately.
The defendants before this Tribunal are George W. Bush, the President of the United States, Tony Blair, the prime minister of the United Kingdom, Koizumi Jun-ichiro, the prime minister of Japan, and Gloria M. Arroyo, the President of the Philippines. They are all serving presidents or prime ministers, and under the current framework of international law, crimes committed by serving heads of state or ministers could be appropriately prosecuted at the International Criminal Court (ICC), which came into existence on July 1, 2002. On the other hand, elements including the fact that most of the home countries of these defendants, except for the United Kingdom, have not yet ratified the Statute of the ICC have made the chances of actualizing such path practically improbable. However, even serving heads of state or ministers shall not be above the law, especially international law, and if the realization of the rule of law is being prevented by malfunction of international legal system, it is the role of civil society of the world to speak the law and act in the name of all human beings who share common values and moral conscience. People's Tribunals established to that effect have long history dating back to the Vietnam War Crimes Tribunal (The Russell Tribunal) in the late 1960s, followed notably by the International War Crimes Tribunal on the United States' War Crimes against Iraq in 1992, the Women's International War Crimes Tribunal in 2000 and the International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan in 2003, and this International Criminal Tribunal for Iraq joins such efforts supported by the voices of world opinion, which constitute the essential and genuine basis of the ultimate validity of the body of international law.
Military Families against the War, Stop the War coalition and CND--will lodge a case against Blair at the ICC charging him with war crimes.
ATTEMPTED BELGIAN CASES:
US President George W Bush, General Tommy Franks and other top officials - over 2003 Iraq War
UK Prime Minister Tony Blair - over 2003 Iraq War
Israeli PM Ariel Sharon - over 1982 refugee massacre
The London-based al-Quds al-Arabi said in a front-page commentary the ICC was proving it was politicized and formed precisely to target leaders who "disobey" the U.S. dictates in keeping Israel the main superpower in the Middle East.
It suggested that if the court was seeking real justice, it would also seek to try Bush and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, as well as Israeli leaders, for war crimes against humanity and genocide in Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5972
Former SNP MP Jim Sillars has handed a 10,000-word dossier to Lord Advocate Eilish Angiolini urging her to charge the PM under Scots law.
He claims Blair should be held to account for conspiring to overthrow Saddam Hussein's regime and for starting the war in Iraq.
Both are illegal under international law. An attempt to have Blair hauled before a criminal court in England failed after lawyers said it wasn't the place to deal with international law.
But Sillars claims Scottish courts have the power to try Blair for war crimes if they believe an established offence, such as murder, has been committed in the process.
Sillars said: "There can be no prosecution at the international criminal court because it doesn't have jurisdiction."
"There is no chance of a special court being established by the United Nations because Britain and the United States have the veto at the Security Council. There is no chance of a prosecution in England and Wales."
"But of course Scots law is an entirely different entity, an entirely different jurisdiction with different rules, procedures and instruments available to it."
Sillars said he had been told by legal experts that the Prime Minister has a case to answer.
And he warned: "The Lord Advocate would have to give a very good explanation why, with the evidence presented, she didn't instigate an investigation -- because we have jurisdiction."
Sillars spent six months putting together his complaint, which was lodged last Friday.
In a letter to the Lord Advocate, he said: "I am requesting you to investigate this complaint and prosecute in a Scottish court."
"Although I have a political past, this complaint is based on legal principles and case law, and I shall be obliged if you will examine it in that light and in that light alone."
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/03/286397.html
The Global Women’s Strike with and on behalf of women and men in at least 60 countries serve the following SUBPOENA
TO: Prime Minister Tony Blair & his government, and his master George W Bush
YOU ARE REQUIRED TO APPEAR: AT A WOMEN’S COURT IN TRAFALGAR SQUARE, LONDON Saturday 6 March at 3pm
YOU ARE CHARGED WITH CRIMES AT HOME AND ABROAD, including but not limited to: war crimes including genocide, murder, torture, rape, terrorism, perjury (lying!), supporting coups, perverting the course of justice, poisoning, drug abuse (with pharmaceutical accomplices), environmental offences leading to the destruction of communities, countries and the planet, disability discrimination, incitement to racial hatred, causing mental and physical illness, promoting homophobia, breach of the Sex Discrimination Act, Race Discrimination Act, Equal Pay Act, Human Rights Act (to name a few), extortion, breach of duty of care, detention without trial, endangering people’s safety, criminal negligence, child abuse, conspiracy to cause criminal damage . . .
Congresswoman McKinney is answering a summons to testify before Judge Baltasar Garzon, judge of the Spanish National Court, in his inquiry supporting the prosecution of the 'architects of the Iraq invasion'. Judge Garzon is calling for President Bush and his allies, including former Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar, to be tried for war crimes over their invasion of Iraq. Baltasar Garzon made the accusation on the anniversary of the beginning of the war saying that "Breaking every international law, and under the pretext of the war against terror, there has taken place since 2003 a devastating attack on the rule of law and against the very essence of the international community."
MADRID, March 20, 2007 (Reuters) - The judge who tried to jail Chile's former dictator Augusto Pinochet said on Tuesday it was time to hold U.S. President George W. Bush and his allies to account for waging war in Iraq.
Egyptian rights lawyer wants Bush, Blair tried for war crimes
Cairo, Egypt (PANA) - US President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair should stand trial as "war criminals because of the unjust and barbaric war they are waging on Iraq and the heinous crimes" being committed against civilians by the coalition forces, Egyptian human rights lawyer Mahmoud Kandil said Sunday. 30/03/2003 full text...
By Auslan Cramb, Scottish Correspondent
Last Updated: 1:36AM BST 12 Jun 2007
A former Nationalist MP has called for Tony Blair to be charged in Scotland with war crimes.
The demand was made in a 10,000-word document compiled by Jim Sillars, and backed by his wife Margo MacDonald, an independent MSP.
It has been sent to Eilish Angiolini, the Lord Advocate, and claims that the Prime Minister should face two charges in connection with the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
http://www.stopwar.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=634&Itemid=27
Name of accused: BLAIR, ANTHONY CHARLES LYNTON
D.O.B: 06/05/1953
Address: 10 Downing St, London N.F.A
Occupation: Professional Liar
Religion: Church Of England Catholic
Ethnic Grouping: X1 Lizard
The above named person is hereby charged with the following offence/s:
DATE OF OFFENCE/S: From 2nd May 1997 to 26th June 2007
MURDER: On MARCH 21st 2003 You did conspire with others to murder civilians of Iraq contrary to the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.
KIDNAPPING: From September 11th 2001 you participated in a scheme of abduction and torture known as ‘extraordinary rendition’ contrary to Common Law.
TERRORISM: (i) It is charged that you were an active member of proscribed terrorist group, namely THE COALITION (ii) that you created fear or 'terror' for ideological goals, attempting to force political change with violence, or the threat of violence, and deliberately targetting non-combatants, contrary to the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2000.
FALSE IMPRISONMENT: You knowingly oversaw the construction of 30,000 new prison places and six new detention facilities for refugees, contravening Section 5 of the The Human Rights Act 1998.
CHILD ABUSE: You are charged with incarcerating 3000 children in prison contrary to Section 5 (iv) of the Guardianship of Minors Act 1971.
FRAUD: You are charged that you willfully and knowingly led the country to war on false representation with malice of forethought contrary to Section 2(ii) of the Fraud Act 2006.
THEFT/ATTEMPTED THEFT: Namely that you introduced laws which robbed U.K citizens of basic civil liberties. Furthermore you conspired to introduce a National Identity Register with the intent to permanently deprive all U.K residents of the last shreds of their privacy contrary to Section 2(iii) of the Theft Act 1968.
DAYLIGHT ROBBERY: Namely that you orchestrated the sale of the last remaining public industries contrary to Section 1(i) of the Theft Act 1968.
CONSPIRING TO PERVERT THE COURSE OF JUSTICE: Namely that you intervened in the investigation of the British Aerospace-Saudi Arabia arms deal to enable the destruction of evidence.
CRIMINAL DAMAGE: You authorised the use of incendiary devices (i.e. white phosphorus), in Fallujah, Iraq, contrary to the Criminal Damage Act 1971.
ANTI-SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR: In July 1997 you killed Brit-Pop by schmoozing with Noel Gallagher at Downing Street, contrary to Section 4 of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003.
BAIL CONDITIONS
The defendant is required to immediately surrender himself to the custody of the SchNEWS Kangaroo Court.
Signature of Proscecuting Custody Officer
Jo Makepeace
Lawsuits and courtcases
[Background articles on International Humanitarian Law]
Petition to Arrest George Bush for the Crimes of Murder and Conspiracy ! (May 2008)
ICC to Get Evidence of 'Illegality' of War (February 2004) | UK 'war crimes' claims examined in The Hague (19 December 2004)| Answer of the ICC prosecutor (PDF) (10 February 2006) | Ocampo Turns Down Iraq Case: Implications for the U.S. (PDF) (10 February 2006) | Open Letter to the International Criminal Court of Justice about war crimes committed in Fallujah (14 March 2008) |
Humanitarian Law groups file rights petition at OAS against the United States for attacks on Hospitals, Clinics in Falluja - 2005 (Lawsuit prepared by the Association of Humanitarian Lawyers, partners of the BRussells Tribunal)
Rights groups file French torture case vs Rumsfeld (26 Oct 2007)
Center For Constitutional Rights Seeks Criminal Investigation in Germany into Culpability of U.S. Officials in Abu Ghraib Torture | German prosecutors refuse to investigate Rumsfeld over Abu Ghraib abuse (PDF) - Court Cases: German Prosecutor dismisses case against US commanders over Abu Ghraib (November 2004) - New War Crimes Complaint against Donald Rumsfeld in Germany by Center of Constitutional Rights. (14 Nov 2006) - GERMAN FEDERAL PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE DISMISSES RUMSFELD WAR CRIMES CASE (27 April 2007) - Lawyers taking Rumsfeld war crimes case to Spain after German rejection (29 April 2007)
Court case against General Tommy Franks in Brussels | Belgium Guts Universal War Crimes Law (2003)
International Criminal Court | U.S.: Congress Tries to Undermine War Crimes Court | Iraq drops the ICC (02 March 2005)
Canadian lawyers charge Bush with torture | Canada blocks torture charges against Bush
German court declares Iraq war violated international law (27 September 2005)
Iraqi civilian abuse case in Court of Appeal - UK (10 October 2005)
Spanish court orders arrest of US soldiers for war crime (21 October 2005) - Spanish Judge calls for architects of Iraq invasion to be tried for war crimes (28 March 2007) - Spain prosecutors appeal indictment of US soldiers in Iraq death of journalist (19 May 2007)
www.Bushprosecution.org/modules/news (Canada)
Formal complaint sent to the International Criminal Court over Coalition war crimes in Occupied Iraq & Afghanistan (Dr. Gideon Polya, 21 December 2005)
Criminal Charges Filed Against George H.W. Bush (Sr.) in Iceland (04 July 2006)
Lieutenant Watada's War Against the War (07 Aug 2006)
THE KUALA LUMPUR WAR CRIMES COMMISSION & WAR CRIMES TRIBUNAL
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
