Saturday, June 8, 2013


OMNI WAR CRIMES NEWSLETTER #5,  June 8, 2013.     Compiled by Dick Bennett for a Culture of Peace.  (#1 Oct. 8, 2011; #2 Nov. 25, 2011; #3 March 7, 2012; #4 Oct. 4, 2012). 

"To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime, it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."

- Robert H. Jackson, U.S. Prosecutor, Nuremberg Military Tribunal

See: International Justice Day/ICC Newsletter, War on Terror, Victims, individual wars, and other newsletters.
Dick’s blog:   War Department/Peace Department
My Newsletters:
Peace, Justice, Ecology Birthdays
See OMNI’s Bulletin “Happening”
See INMOtion OMNI’s monthly newsletter.
Visit OMNI’s Library.

Nos. 2 and 3 at end.

Contents of #4
Why do people attack US soldiers, embassies, and civilians?  How might we stop it?
Afghan Wedding Airstrike Murders to 2010
Afghan Wedding Airstrikes 2012
New Film on Indicting Cheney for Torture
Yoder:   Bush and Obama
Vets for Peace vs. Condoleeza Rice
Hedges: Murder and Sgt. Bales
Poem by Kolki
About War Crimes Times
Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Trial
Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal

Here is the link to all OMNI newsletters:

Contents of #5

Film: Indict Cheney for War Crimes

US War Crimes Google Search

Reporting Child Victims of War

Prosecute US War Crimes

McNamara:  Afghanistan War Crimes, Sgt. Bales, and US Leaders

Chemical War, Vietnam War, Agent Orange, US Troops and Their Children

No to Naming Freeway After Bush II

Shanley:  Madeleine Albright, “we think the price is worth it”

Sudan Burns Villages in Southern Provinces


THE LAST WAR CRIME - Dick Cheney Torture Indictment Film - NEWSFLASH!

Last War Crime Movie Production In Home Stretch
At long last . . . we are now a couple weeks away for the first film festival submissions for "The Last War Crime", the new full length, independent feature film about indicting Cheney for torture. We should have no problem at this point making the submission deadlines for Slamdance, Santa Barbara, SXSW, Ann Arbor, San Francisco International, Tribeca, Cinequest and others, perhaps not with the very final cut, but with something pretty close.
One of the things we are still working on is getting some union musicians to perform the already completed score, real strings, etc. So keep an eye and an ear out and we'll keep you posted.
After you submit the action page above you can request one of the new bumper stickers for the movie, and there is no charge, not even shipping, unless you want to voluntarily make a contribution to help us finish the production. Or you can get one directly here, where you can also see and video clip from the movie's dramatic closing argument to the grand jury.
Last War Crime Bumper Stickers:
And here is the Facebook link for End ALL The Wars Immediately action page further above.
[Facebook] Action Page:




·                                 HomeHuman RightsPublished: Wednesday 11 July 2012
“In spite of strong evidence identifying Dick Cheney as the mastermind behind this torture regime–the subject remains taboo, both in the ‘news’ business and in Hollywood–that is until Hollywood executives watched trailers for the anti-war documentary.”

During this summer of Occupy and subsequent police brutality, the subject of torture is hotly denounced by protesters and conveniently ignored by candidates. Like that ostrich diving head first into the sand of political expediency–Americans want to focus on the alleged debt crisis or gay marriage–anything that absolves us from the messy subject of tortures committed in our names by the Bush/Cheney administration and which continue under Obama to the present day. The entire Bradley Manning debacle speaks volumes to this accusation.
In spite of strong evidence identifying Dick Cheney as the mastermind behind this torture regime–the subject remains taboo, both in the ‘news’ business and in Hollywood–that is until Hollywood executives watched trailers for the anti-war documentary–The Last War Crime.
Written, produced and directed by a new talent known only as ‘The Pen,’ this film documents the torture protocol ordained by the Bush-Cheney administration. Since it first circulated a trailer on the web; it has been heavily censored and cyber attacked. You Tube has removed it at intermittent intervals and MTV (which is owned byViacom) has refused to sell air time for a commercial.
Apparently, there are some things that Viacom won’t accept money for—namely any film or story which exposes the regular torture ordered by Vice-President Cheney. Curious about this documentary and the blatant censorship–(I couldn’t download it)–I contacted the artist aka The Pen. Here is the interview.
JM : What are you hoping this film will accomplish in terms of genuine political change?
The Pen:” The Last War Crime Movie is about indicting Cheney for torture. And isn’t that something billions of people want to see? They say sometimes life can imitate art. But first we felt it was important that we retrace our country’s steps as to how torture was used to get the false intelligence to sell us on a war with Iraq. The real story of how this happened has been buried under an avalanche of pseudo history. They want people to forget the Downing Street minutes and the foreknowledge that the British had that Cheney and Bush were determined to invade Iraq, even if they had to “fix the facts around the policy” to do so. They want to obliterate the memory of the flimsy legal arguments in the torture memos. So we dig out all the true facts, and put them on the big screen, together with an entertaining narrative story about what it would have been like if justice had already prevailed.
The people who committed these war crimes believe they can escape accountability by changing the way people think, by selling the American people on the idea that torture was a great thing that got us wonderful intelligence to protect us. But the only people making these arguments are the torturers themselves and their propaganda advocates. All other percipient witnesses confirm the opposite, which we knew already, that torture does not even work, and that any actionable intelligence they got was obtained before they started torturing people. So part of the mission of this movie is to counter their ongoing lies initiative, to change the way people think back to the truth, and then we can have good policy change, which is political change.
JM : Do you expect more interference, and if so–in what form?
Article image
The Pen: Based on what we have run into already, the attempted YouTube censorship (which we forced them to reverse after more than 7,000 direct protests), the rejection of the ad submitted to MTV (Viacom Inc.), it is clear that we are encountering serious censorship interference from the very beginning. Obviously we are telling a story that certain people don’t want heard. The American people believe that we have free speech. It was on that justification that the Supreme Court said in the Citizens United decision that the gloves were off, and that corporations with unlimited war chests should be permitted to flood our political process with money favoring their point of view. But now we see that the other side of that bargain was a fraud, that these same corporations believe they can discriminate against points of view they disagree with. So for the actual people, we find that even if we have the money, we cannot even BUY “free” speech.
This is not a tolerable situation. Must we generate thousands of protests every time we want to run an ad when it is rejected for political reasons?
Already Viacom has received over 12,000 protest messages in response to our call to action there, and in that situation apparently they think “we the people” can just be ignored. We are seriously considering a federal lawsuit, the argument has to be made, that if they accept political advertising of any kind, at least in that case, it must be some kind of 14th Amendment equal protection violation to practice what we would call “speech discrimination”. Only by bringing such a case can we determine if we actually have free speech or not.
JM: Has there been any direct retaliation or threats connected with the release of this film aimed at you? Any suspected retaliation?
The Pen : Gandhi is reputed to have said, “First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, and then you win”. At this point we are still mostly at the attempted “ignore you” stage.
JM: What has Hollywood’s reaction been to this film’s coming debut? Are you encountering the same kind of cowardice that Michael Moore experienced after his Oscar night comments about the war?
The Pen: We are just starting to get the word out about this film. The censorship attempts are doomed to fail, but we still don’t have enough visibility to where the rest of the Hollywood film community would be called on to react. It would not surprise me if some of the censorship we’ve been talking about was based in part on cowardice. Of course we all remember when Michael Moore called out the fiction of the basis for the war in Iraq at the Oscars. But in that case another reasonable possible explanation is that those who booed him then would object to any attempt to politicize the Academy Awards ceremony. The problem is that when you say you don’t want to hear about this political issue here, and you don’t want to hear about it there, you may end up with the dynamic we are confronting now with The Last War Crime movie, that the corporations that dominate our media really don’t want these issues talked about anywhere.
JM: Anything else you would want to add?
The Pen: “The soul of America is on trial right now. We have thrown not just international law overboard, we have repudiated our own long established law. We have always considered waterboarding to be torture. We have always prosecuted waterboarding in the past as torture. So what’s the difference now, that the war criminals have a big “R” after their names? We are called by history, the real history, to stand up and speak out about this, to bring America back to its highest calling. So if your readers are interested in participating in the Viacom action they can go to , where you can also see the ad that MTV
rejected. And there is a Facebook page  where we are posting video clips, still shots from the movie, including behind the scenes shots, and more on a daily basis, so you can follow our progress and help get this movie out in real theaters where it belongs and deserves to be.”
It should be noted that as of May 22nd, 2012, The Last War Crime was presented at the Cannes Film Festival. There was no refusal to air the film, no censorship–corporate or otherwise. Apparently the independent artistic community in Cannes and similar venues knows something that evades the vapid corporate offices of Hollywood.

Get Email Alerts from NationofChange

Jeanine Molloff is a veteran urban educator specializing in communications disorders.  She moonlights as a political commentator on various issues including civil liberties in an age of ‘terrorism’, ecological justice, collateral damage in war zones, economic equity and education.  Jeanine has published with Huffington Post, OpEdNews, FireDogLake, Counterpunch and Huffington Post Union of Bloggers.  In an era of state and corporate sanctioned censorship; she believes that journalism which demands answers to the tough questions is the last remaining bulwark of democracy.  Now more than ever we need the likes of I.F. Stone over the insipid voices of celebrity infotainment.  Jeanine works and lives in St. Louis, Missouri.


1.                             The Last War Crime movie
PREVIEW VIDEO CLIPS Here are some great clips from the new full length feature film,The Last War Crime. Watch the clips and then demonstrate that you ...

2.                             The Last War Crime (2012) - IMDb
 Rating: 7.7/10 - 5 votes
... tell the story of a heroic assistant U.S. attorney, who uncovers evidence of war crimes, and a suspenseful race . ... Test your knowledge of The Last War Crime.

3.                             Grand Jury Closing Argument Part 1 (The Last War Crime) - YouTube
Apr 7, 2011 - Uploaded by itsup2usalone
This is the first half of the closing argument to the grand jury from the new feature length dramatic film, "The ...

4.                             The Last War Crime movie - PeaceTeam.Net
Dec 28, 2011
DICK CHENEY'S EXTRAORDINARY VACATION Remember when the former VP was always in some secret ...
5.                              More videos for The Last War Crime film »

6.                             The Last War Crime | Facebook
In The Last War Crime movie they have the integrity to follow the trail of torture, but who knows where it will lead? You'll have to see the movie to find out, and ...

7.                             Bush-Cheney Torture Protocol: “The Last War Crime” Debuts at ...
Jul 13, 2012 – The Pen:” The Last War Crime Movie is about indicting Cheney for torture. And isn't that something billions of people want to see? They say ...

8.                             'The Last War Crime' Debuts at Cannes--but Censored in US ...
Apr 4, 2013 – Announcing: two screenings for The Last War Crime movie on Saturday, May 25th, 2013 at The Delancey Street Screening Room, 600 The ...

9.                             THE LAST WAR CRIME - Dick Cheney Torture Indictment Film ... › General Open Forum
At long last . . . we are now a couple weeks away for the first film festival submissions for "The Last War Crime", the new full length, independent feature film ...
Searches related to The Last War Crime film


United States war crimes, Google Research Page One

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is incomplete. Please help to improve the article, or discuss the issue on the talk page. (February 2011)
The armed forces of the United States of America have committed war crimes throughout every war they had been involved in. Most - but not all - contemporary war crimes are defined by the International Criminal Court (ICC), the Geneva Conventions, and the associated laws of war under international law.[1] War crimes can be prosecuted through the War Crimes Act of 1996 in the United States, but the US government does not accept the jurisdiction of the ICC over its military forces.[2] United States violations of the laws of war falling under the rubric of jus in bello are discussed in the present article, while US violations of jus ad bellum, such as crimes against peace or wars of aggression under the Nuremberg Principles,[3] are discussed elsewhere[where?].


·                                 1 Philippine–American War
·                                 2 World War II
o                                        2.1 Air raids on civilian population
o                                        2.2 Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
o                                        2.3 Prisoners of war
o                                        2.4 Rape
·                                 3 Korean War
o                                        3.1 No Gun Ri Massacre
·                                 4 Vietnam War
o                                        4.1 My Lai Massacre
o                                        4.2 Agent Orange
·                                 5 Yugoslavia
·                                 6 War on Terror
o                                        6.1 Command responsibility
·                                 7 See also
·                                 8 References
·                                 9 Further reading
o                                        9.1 General
o                                        9.2 By nation
§                                                 9.2.1 Iraq
§                                                 9.2.2 Vietnam
§                                                 9.2.3 Yugoslavia
·                                 10 External links

Philippine–American War [edit]

The Committee on the Philippines was a standing committee of the United States Senate from 1899 to 1921.[1] The committee was established by Senate resolution on 15 December 1899, to oversee administration of the Philippines, which Spain had ceded to the United States as part of the settlement of the Spanish-American War. The committee was established by Senate resolution on 15 December 1899, even though the treaty of 10 December 1899 had not yet been ratified.[2] In 1921, the Committee was terminated and jurisdiction over legislative matters concerning the Philippines was transferred to the newly createdCommittee on Territories and Insular Possessions.[3]

World War II [edit]

Air raids on civilian population [edit]

During World War II, both Axis and Allied aerial forces conducted air raids on civilian populations in Europe and over Japan. These actions have been (retrospectively) called crimes by some historians.[4] At a conference of top Nazi leaders in Klessheim on 6 June 1944, the German Minister of Foreign AffairsJoachim von Ribbentrop tried to introduce a resolution to define air raids on civilians as acts of terror, but his motion was rejected,[5] for the bombing of cities prior to invasion was an integral part of Nazi Germany's Blitzkrieg concept since the beginning of World War II.

Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki [edit]

In 1963, the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the subject of a judicial review in Ryuichi Shimoda et al. v. The State.[6] In this case, the District Court of Tokyo declined to rule on the legality of nuclear weapons in general, but found that "the attacks upon Hiroshima and Nagasaki caused such severe and indiscriminate suffering that they did violate the most basic legal principles governing the conduct of war."[7] In the opinion of the court, the act of dropping an atomic bomb on cities was then governed by international law found in the Hague Regulations on Land Warfare of 1907 and the Hague Draft Rules of Air Warfare of 1922–1923[8] and was, therefore, illegal.[9] Francisco Gómez points out, in an article published in the International Review of the Red Cross, that with respect to the "anti-city" or "blitz" strategy, "in examining these events in the light of international humanitarian law, it should be borne in mind that during the Second World War there was no agreement, treaty, convention or any other instrument governing the protection of the civilian population or civilian property."[10] The possibility that attacks like the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings could be considered war crimes is one of the reasons given by George H.W. Bush's U.N. ambassador John R. Boltonfor the United States not agreeing to be bound by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court[11] while he was Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security. It is noteworthy, however, that they would not in any case be prosecutable, due to their having occurred prior to the ratification of the treaty.

Prisoners of war [edit]

SS concentration camp guards being executed at Dachau concentration campduring its day of liberation
(US Army soldier photograph/National Archives)
The "Canicattì massacre" involved the killing of Italian civilians by Lieutenant Colonel Herbert McCaffrey. A confidential inquiry was made, but McCaffrey was never charged with an offense relating to the massacre. He died in 1954. This fact remained virtually unknown in the U.S.A until 2005, when Joseph S. Salemi of New York University, whose father witnessed it, reported it.[12]
The "Dachau massacre" involved the killing of German prisoners of war and surrendering SS soldiers at the Dachau concentration camp.[13]
In the "Biscari massacre", which consisted of two instances of mass murder, U.S. troops of the 45th Infantry Divisionkilled roughly 75 unarmed prisoners of war, most of whom were Italian.[14][15]
"Operation Teardrop" involved eight surviving captured crewmen from the sunken German submarine U-546 being tortured by US military personnel. Historian Philip K. Lundeberg has written that the beating and torture of U-546's survivors was a singular atrocity motivated by the interrogators' need to quickly get information on what the US believed were potential missile attacks on the continental US by German submarines.[16]
In the aftermath of the 1944 Malmedy massacre, in which 80 unarmed US military personnel were tortured by their German captors, a written order from Headquarters of the 328th US Army Infantry Regiment, dated 21 December 1944, stated: "No SS troops or paratroopers will be taken prisoner but [rather they] will be shot on sight."[17] Major-General Raymond Hufft (U.S. Army) gave instructions to his troops not to take prisoners when they crossed the Rhine in 1945. "After the war, when he reflected on the war crimes he authorized, he admitted, 'if the Germans had won, I would have been on trial at Nuremberg instead of them.'"[18] Stephen Ambrose related: "I've interviewed well over 1000 combat veterans. Only one of them said he shot a prisoner... Perhaps as many as one-third of the veterans...however, related incidents in which they saw other GIs shooting unarmed German prisoners who had their hands up."[19]
Near the French village of Audouville-la-Hubert, 30 German Wehrmacht prisoners were massacred by U.S. paratroopers.[20]
Historian Peter Lieb has found that many US and Canadian units were ordered to not take enemy prisoners during the D-Day landings in Normandy. If this view is correct, it may explain the fate of 64 German prisoners (out of the 130 captured) who did not make it to the POW collecting point on Omaha Beach on the day of landings.[21]
According to an article in Der Spiegel by Klaus Wiegrefe, many personal memoirs of Allied soldiers have been willfully ignored by historians until now because they were at odds with the "Greatest Generation" mythology surrounding World War II. However, this has recently started to change, with books such as "The Day of Battle", by Rick Atkinson, where he describes Allied war crimes in Italy, and "D-Day: The Battle for Normandy," by Antony Beevor.[21] Beevor's latest work is currently discussed by scholars, and should some of them be proven right, it suggests that Allied war crimes in Normandy were much more extensive "than was previously realized".[20]
American soldiers in the Pacific sometimes deliberately killed Japanese soldiers who had surrendered, according to Richard Aldrich (Professor of History atNottingham University). Aldrich published a study of diaries kept by United States and Australian soldiers, wherein it was stated that they sometimes massacred prisoners of war.[22] According to John Dower, in "many instances ... Japanese who did become prisoners were killed on the spot or en route to prison compounds."[23] According to Professor Aldrich, it was common practice for U.S. troops not to take prisoners.[24] His analysis is supported by British historianNiall Ferguson,[25] who also says that, in 1943, "a secret [U.S.] intelligence report noted that only the promise of ice cream and three days leave would ... induce American troops not to kill surrendering Japanese."[26]
Ferguson states such practices played a role in the ratio of Japanese prisoners to dead being 1:100 in late 1944. That same year, efforts were taken by Allied high commanders to suppress "take no prisoners" attitudes[26] among their own personnel (as these were affecting intelligence gathering), and to encourage Japanese soldiers to surrender. Ferguson adds that measures by Allied commanders to improve the ratio of Japanese prisoners to Japanese dead resulted in it reaching 1:7, by mid-1945. Nevertheless, "taking no prisoners" was still "standard practice" among U. S. troops at the Battle of Okinawa, in April–June 1945.[27]
Ulrich Straus, a U.S. Japanologist, suggests that troops on the front line intensely hated Japanese military personnel and were "not easily persuaded" to take or protect prisoners, as they believed that Allied personnel who surrendered got "no mercy" from the Japanese.[28] Allied soldiers believed that Japanese soldiers were inclined to feign surrender in order to make surprise attacks.[28] Therefore, according to Straus, "Senior officers opposed the taking of prisoners on the grounds that it needlessly exposed American troops to risks ..."[28] When prisoners nevertheless were taken at Gualdacanal, Army interrogator Captain Burden noted that many times POW's were shot during transport because "it was too much bother to take [them] in".[29]
Ferguson suggests that "it was not only the fear of disciplinary action or of dishonor that deterred German and Japanese soldiers from surrendering. More important for most soldiers was the perception that prisoners would be killed by the enemy anyway, and so one might as well fight on."[30]
U. S. historian James J. Weingartner attributes the very low number of Japanese in U.S. prisoner of war compounds to two important factors, namely (1) a Japanese reluctance to surrender, and (2) a widespread American "conviction that the Japanese were 'animals' or 'subhuman' and unworthy of the normal treatment accorded to prisoners of war.[31] The latter reason is supported by Ferguson, who says that "Allied troops often saw the Japanese in the same way that Germans regarded Russians — as Untermenschen" (i.e. "subhuman").[32]

Rape [edit]

It has been claimed that some U.S. soldiers raped Okinawan women during the Battle of Okinawa in 1945.[33]
Based on several years of research, Okinawan historian Oshiro Masayasu (former director of the Okinawa Prefectural Historical Archives) writes:
Soon after the U.S. Marines landed, all the women of a village on Motobu Peninsula fell into the hands of American soldiers. At the time, there were only women, children, and old people in the village, as all the young men had been mobilized for the war. Soon after landing, the Marines "mopped up" the entire village, but found no signs of Japanese forces. Taking advantage of the situation, they started "hunting for women" in broad daylight, and women who were hiding in the village or nearby air raid shelters were dragged out one after another.[34]
However, many other authors have noted that Japanese civilians "were often surprised at the comparatively humane treatment they received from the American enemy."[35][36] According to Islands of Discontent: Okinawan Responses to Japanese and American Power by Mark Selden, the Americans "did not pursue a policy of torture, rape, and murder of civilians as Japanese military officials had warned."[37]
There were also 1,336 reported rapes during the first 10 days of the occupation of Kanagawa prefecture after the Japanese surrender.[33]
Secret wartime files made public only in 2006 reveal that American GIs committed 400 sexual offences in Europe, including 126 rapes in England, between 1942 and 1945.[38] A study by Robert J. Lilly estimates that a total of 14,000 civilian women in England, France and Germany were raped by American GIs during World War II.[39][40] It is estimated that there were around 3,500 rapes by American servicemen in France between June 1944 and the end of the war and one historian has claimed that sexual violence against women in liberated France was common.[41]

Korean War [edit]

No Gun Ri Massacre [edit]

The No Gun Ri Massacre refers to an incident of mass killing of undetermined numbers of South Korean refugees conducted by U.S. Army forces of the 7th Cavalry Regiment (and in a U.S. air attack) between 26 July and 29 July 1950 at a railroad bridge near the village of No Gun Ri, 100 miles (160 km) southeast of Seoul. In 2005, the South Korean government certified the names of 163 dead or missing (mostly women, children and old men) and 55 wounded. It said many other victims' names were not reported.[42] Over the years survivors' estimates of the dead have ranged from 300 to 500. This episode early in the Korean War gained widespread attention when the Associated Press (AP) published a series of articles in 1999 that subsequently won a Pulitzer Prize for investigative reporting.[43]

Vietnam War [edit]

The Vietnam War Crimes Working Group Files is a collection of (formerly secret) documents compiled by Pentagon investigators in the early 1970s, confirming thatatrocities by U.S. forces during the Vietnam War were more extensive than had been officially acknowledged.[44][45] The documents are housed by the United States National Archives and Records Administration, and detail 320 alleged incidents that were substantiated by United States Army investigators (not including the 1968 My Lai Massacre). (See also Winter Soldier Investigation).

My Lai Massacre [edit]

Main article: My Lai Massacre
The My Lai Massacre was the mass murder of 347 to 504 unarmed citizens in South Vietnam, almost entirely civilians, most of them women and children, conducted by U.S. Army forces on 16 March 1968. Some of the victims were raped, beaten, tortured, or maimed, and some of the bodies were found mutilated. The massacre took place in the hamlets of Mỹ Lai and My Khe of Sơn Mỹ village during the Vietnam War.[46][47] Of the 26 US soldiers initially charged with criminal offenses or war crimes for actions at My Lai, only William Calley was convicted. Calley only served 3 years & a half in 'House Arrest' instead. The incident prompted widespread outrage around the world, and reduced US domestic support for the Vietnam War. Three American Servicemen (Hugh Thompson, Jr., Glenn Andreotta, and Lawrence Colburn), who made an effort to halt the massacre and protect the wounded, were sharply criticized by U.S. Congressmen, and received hate mail, death threats, and mutilated animals on their doorsteps.[48] Thirty years after the event their efforts were honored.[49]

Agent Orange [edit]

Main article: Agent Orange
A panel of legal and political activists calling themselves the International Tribunal of Conscience in Support of the Vietnamese Victims of Agent Orange formed in France have claimed that the use of Agent Orange during Operation Ranch Hand during the Vietnam War was a violation of laws regarding the use of chemical weapons in the 1907 Hague Convention, the 1927 Geneva Convention, and the 1949 Geneva Convention.[50][51][52] In 2005 a suit filed against the United States and several companies who produced Agent Orange was rejected by a United States District Court in Brooklyn. The court found that "No treaty or agreement, express or implied, of the United States, operated to make use of herbicides in Vietnam a violation of the laws of war or any other form of international law until at the earliest April of 1975."[53] In 2007 the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the Court in Brooklyn saying that "Agent Orange and similar U.S. herbicides cannot be considered poisons banned under international rules of war" and that the lack of large-scale research made it impossible to show what caused illnesses.[54]

Yugoslavia [edit]

Amnesty International has condemned the 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia, which they confirm killed 400 civilians (some sources place this figure at over 1,000 or as high as 5,000) in what it claims were violations of international law and war crimes, due to deliberate targeting of civilian infrastructure and indiscriminate attacks, with lack of precautionary measures taken to prevent civilian casualties[55]
Human Rights Watch documented approximately 500 civilian deaths as a result of the NATO bombing campaign. They reported "no evidence of war crimes" but cited violations of international humanitarian law.[56]
The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia reviewed these events, including HRW's report, as well as that alleged by the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. It concluded "either the law is not sufficiently clear or investigations are unlikely to result in the acquisition of sufficient evidence."[57]

War on Terror [edit]

Main article: War on Terror
As a reaction to the September 11, 2001 attacks the U.S. Government adopted several controversial measures (e.g., invading Iraq, applying "unlawful combatant" status to prisoners, conducting extraordinary renditions, enhanced interrogation methods, kill list and Drone attacks in Pakistan[58]).

Command responsibility [edit]

Human Rights Watch had claimed in 2005 that the principle of "command responsibility" could make high-ranking officials within the Bush administration guilty of war crimes allegedly committed during the War on Terror, either with their knowledge or by persons under their control.[59]
A presidential memorandum of September 7, 2002 authorized U.S. interrogators of prisoners captured in Afghanistan to deny the prisoners basic protections required by the Geneva Conventions, and thus according to Jordan J. Paust, professor of law and formerly a member of the faculty of the Judge Advocate General's School, "necessarily authorized and ordered violations of the Geneva Conventions, which are war crimes."[60] Based on the president's memorandum, U.S. personnel carried out cruel and inhumane treatment on the prisoners,[61] which necessarily means that the president's memorandum was a plan to violate the Geneva Convention, and such a plan constitutes a war crime under the Geneva Conventions, according to Professor Paust.[62]
Alberto Gonzales and others argued that detainees should be considered "unlawful combatants" and as such not be protected by the Geneva Conventions in multiple memoranda regarding these perceived legal gray areas.[63]
Gonzales' statement that denying coverage under the Geneva Conventions "substantially reduces the threat of domestic criminal prosecution under the War Crimes Act" suggests, to some authors, an awareness by those involved in crafting policies in this area that US officials are involved in acts that could be seen to be war crimes.[64] The US Supreme Court challenged the premise on which this argument is based in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, in which it ruled that Common Article Three of the Geneva Conventions applies to detainees in Guantanamo Bay and that the Military Tribunals used to try these suspects were in violation of US and international law.[65]
On April 14, 2006, Human Rights Watch said that Secretary Donald Rumsfeld could be criminally liable for his alleged involvement in the abuse of Mohammad al-Qahtani.[66] On November 14, 2006, invoking universal jurisdiction, legal proceedings were started in Germany – for their alleged involvement of prisoner abuse – against Donald Rumsfeld, Alberto Gonzales, John Yoo, George Tenet and others.[67]
The Military Commissions Act of 2006 is seen by some as an amnesty law for crimes committed in the War on Terror by retroactively rewriting the War Crimes Act[68] and by abolishing habeas corpus, effectively making it impossible for detainees to challenge crimes committed against them.[69]
Luis Moreno-Ocampo has told the Sunday Telegraph he is willing to start an inquiry by the International Criminal Court (ICC), and possibly a trial, for war crimes committed in Iraq involving British Prime Minister Tony Blair and American President George W. Bush.[70] Though under the Rome Statute, the ICC has no jurisdiction over Bush, since the USA is not a State Party to the relevant treaty—unless Bush were accused of crimes inside a State Party, or the UN Security Council (where the USA has a veto) requested an investigation. However Blair does fall under ICC jurisdiction as Britain is a State Party.[71]
Nat Hentoff wrote on August 28, 2007, that a leaked report by the International Committee of the Red Cross and the July 2007 report by Human Rights First andPhysicians for Social Responsibility, titled "Leave No Marks: Enhanced Interrogation Techniques and the Risk of Criminality", might be used as evidence of American war crimes if there was a Nuremberg-like trial regarding the War on Terror.[72][unreliable source?]
Shortly before the end of President Bush's second term, newsmedia in countries other than the U.S. began publishing the views of those who believe that under the United Nations Convention Against Torture the US is obligated to hold those responsible for prisoner abuse to account under criminal law.[73] One proponent of this view was the United Nations Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (Professor Manfred Nowak) who, on January 20, 2009, remarked on German television that former president George W. Bush had lost his head of state immunity and under international law the U.S. would now be mandated to start criminal proceedings against all those involved in these violations of the UN Convention Against Torture.[74] Law professor Dietmar Herz explained Nowak's comments by saying that under U.S. and international law former President Bush is criminally responsible for adopting torture as interrogation tool.[74]
Michael Ignatieff, then leader of the Liberal Party of Canada and former director of the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy said that the threat of terrorism requires serious and possibly permanent abridgement of civil liberties. He stated that governments are justified in combating terrorism with "lesser evils", ranging from suspension of civil liberties, through secret uses of executive power, to torture of suspects, as well as targeted killing, right up to pre-emptive war to destroy terrorist bases and also to prevent the development or deployment of weapons which may be used by terrorists or states that support terrorist aims.[75]
Tomas Young, an Iraq War veteran wounded during that conflict, is one of the more recent critics of the Bush administration's actions during the War on Terror, accusing Bush and his former vice-president, Dick Cheney, of committing war crimes in a letter he wrote to them in March 2013.

See also [edit]

Crystal Clear app kedit.svg
This article may be in need of reorganization to comply with Wikipedia's layout guidelines. Please help byediting the article to make improvements to the overall structure. (January 2013)

·                    American mutilation of Japanese war dead
·                    Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse
·                    Command responsibility
·                    Destruction of Iran Air Flight 655
·                    Human rights in the United States
·                    Indian massacre
·                    Operation Wheeler/Wallowa
·                    Operation Speedy Express
·                    Operation Menu
·                    Phoenix Program
·                    Russell Tribunal
·                    United States and the International Criminal Court
·                    Tiger Force
·                    Torture and the United States
·                    The International Criminal Court and the 2003 invasion of Iraq
·                    Vietnam War Crimes Working Group Files
·                    American Service-Members' Protection Act
·                    United States and state terrorism

References [edit]

1.                 ^ Tarik Kafala (2009-10-21). "What is a war crime?". BBC. Retrieved 2010-05-27.
2.                 ^
3.                 ^ International Committee of the Red Cross, "Principles of International Law Recognized in the Charter of the Nüremberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal, 1950," ICRC Home page Français International Humanitarian Law - Treaties & Documents
4.                 ^ Bloxham, David "Dresden as a War Crime", in Addison, Paul & Crang, Jeremy A. (eds.). Firestorm: The Bombing of Dresden. Pimlico, 2006. ISBN 1-84413-928-X. Chapter 9 p. 180
5.                 ^ Trial of German Major War Criminals, vol. 10, pp. 382-383
6.                 ^ Shimoda et al. v. The State, Tokyo District Court, 7 December 1963
7.                 ^ Falk, Richard A. (1965-02-15). "The Claimants of Hiroshima". The Nation.reprinted in Richard A. Falk, Saul H. Mendlovitz eds., ed. (1966). "The Shimoda Case: Challenge and Response". The Strategy of World Order. Volume: 1. New York: World Law Fund. pp. 307–13.
8.                 ^ Boyle, Francis A. (2002). The Criminality of Nuclear Deterrence. Atlanta: Clarity Press. p. 58.
9.                 ^ Falk, op. cit., p. 308.
12.             ^ Giovanni Bartolone, Le altre stragi: Le stragi alleate e tedesche nella Sicilia del 1943–1944
13.             ^ Albert Panebianco (ed). Dachau its liberation 57th Infantry Association, Felix L. Sparks, Secretary 15 June 1989. (backup site)
14.             ^ Weingartner, James J. A Peculiar Crusadee: Willis M. Everett and the Malmedy massacre, NYU Press, 2000, p. 118. ISBN 0-8147-9366-5
15.             ^ James J. Weingartner, "Massacre at Biscari: Patton and an American War Crime", Historian, Volume 52 Issue 1, Pages 24–39, 23 Aug 2007
16.             ^ Lundeberg, Philip K. (1994). "Operation Teardrop Revisited". In Runyan, Timothy J. and Copes, Jan M. To Die Gallantly : The Battle of the Atlantic. Boulder: Westview Press. ISBN 0-8133-8815-5., pp. 221–226; Blair, Clay (1998). Hitler's U-Boat War. The Hunted, 1942–1945 (Modern Library ed.). New York: Random House. ISBN 0-679-64033-9., p. 687.
17.             ^ Bradley A. Thayer, Darwin and international relations p.186
18.             ^ Bradley A. Thayer, Darwin and international relations p.189
19.             ^ Bradley A. Thayer, Darwin and international relations p.190
20.             ^ a b The Horror of D-Day: A New Openness to Discussing Allied War Crimes in WWII, Spiegel Online, 05/04/2010, (part 1), accessed 2010-07-08
21.             ^ a b The Horror of D-Day: A New Openness to Discussing Allied War Crimes in WWII, Spiegel Online, 05/04/2010, (part 2), accessed 2010-07-08
22.             ^ Ben Fenton, "American troops 'murdered Japanese PoWs'" (Daily Telegraph (UK), 06/08/2005), accessed 26/05/2007.
23.             ^ John W. Dower, 1986, War Without Mercy, p.69.
24.             ^ Ben Fenton, "American troops 'murdered Japanese PoWs'" (Daily Telegraph (UK), 06/08/2005), accessed 26/05/2007
25.             ^ Niall Ferguson, "Prisoner Taking and Prisoner Killing in the Age of Total War: Towards a Political Economy of Military Defeat", War in History, 2004, 11 (2): 148–192
26.             ^ a b Niall Ferguson, "Prisoner Taking and Prisoner Killing in the Age of Total War: Towards a Political Economy of Military Defeat", War in History, 2004, 11 (2): p.150
27.             ^ Ferguson 2004, p.181
28.             ^ a b c Ulrich Straus, The Anguish Of Surrender: Japanese POWs of World War II (excerpts) (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2003 ISBN 978-0-295-98336-3, p.116
29.             ^ Ulrich Straus, The Anguish Of Surrender: Japanese POWs of World War II(excerpts) (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2003 ISBN 978-0-295-98336-3, p.117
30.             ^ Niall Ferguson, "Prisoner Taking and Prisoner Killing in the Age of Total War: Towards a Political Economy of Military Defeat", War in History, 2004, 11 (2): p.176.
31.             ^ James J. Weingartner, “Trophies of War: U.S. Troops and the Mutilation of Japanese War Dead, 1941–1945” Pacific Historical Review (1992) p. 55
32.             ^ Niall Ferguson, "Prisoner Taking and Prisoner Killing in the Age of Total War: Towards a Political Economy of Military Defeat", War in History, 2004, 11 (2): p.182
33.             ^ a b Schrijvers, Peter (2002). The GI War Against Japan. New York City: New York University Press. p. 212. ISBN 0-8147-9816-0.
34.             ^ Tanaka, Toshiyuki. Japan's Comfort Women: Sexual Slavery and Prostitution During World War II, Routledge, 2003, p.111. ISBN 0-203-30275-3
35.             ^ Molasky, Michael S. (1999). The American Occupation of Japan and Okinawa: Literature and Memory. p. 16. ISBN 978-0-415-19194-4.
36.             ^ Molasky, Michael S.; Rabson, Steve (2000). Southern Exposure: Modern Japanese Literature from Okinawa. p. 22. ISBN 978-0-8248-2300-9.
37.             ^ Sheehan, Susan D; Elizabeth, Laura; Selden, Hein Mark. Islands of Discontent: Okinawan Responses to Japanese and American Power. p. 18.
38.             ^ David Wilson (27 March 2007). "The secret war". The Guardian (London). Retrieved 22 November 2008.
39.             ^ Lilly, Robert J. (2007). Taken by Force: Rape and American GIs in Europe During World War II. Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 0-230-50647-X.
40.             ^ Morrow, John H. (October 2008). "Taken by Force: Rape and American GIs in Europe during World War II By J. Robert Lilly". The Journal of Military History72 (4): 1324. doi:10.1353/jmh.0.0151.
41.             ^ Schofield, Hugh (5 June 2009). "Revisionists challenge D-Day story". BBC News. Retrieved 6 January 2010.
42.             ^ Committee for the Review and Restoration of Honor for the No Gun Ri Victims (2009). No Gun Ri Incident Victim Review Report. Seoul: Government of the Republic of Korea. pp. 247–249, 328, 278. ISBN 978-89-957925-1-3.
43.             ^ "War's hidden chapter: Ex-GIs tell of killing Korean refugees". The Associated Press. September 29, 1999.
44.             ^ Kill Anything That Moves : U.s. War Crimes And Atrocities In Vietnam, 1965-1973, a doctoral dissertation, by Nick Turse, Columbia University 2005
45.             ^ Nick Turse, “A My Lai a Month: How the US Fought the Vietnam War”, The Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol. 47-6-08, November 21, 2008
46.             ^ Summary report from the report of General Peers.
47.             ^ Department of the Army. Report of the Department of the Army Review of the Preliminary Investigations into the My Lai Incident (The Peers Report), Volumes I-III (1970).
48.             ^ "Moral Courage In Combat: The My Lai Story". USNA Lecture. 2003.
49.             ^ My Lai Pilot Hugh Thompson
50.             ^ Churchill, Ward (2003). On the justice of roosting chickens. AK Press. p. 139. ISBN 978-1-902593-79-1.
51.             ^ "Executive Summary of the Decision", International Peoples' Tribunal of Conscience In Support of the Vietnamese Victims of Agent Orange, May 18, 2009
52.             ^ Cohn, Marjorie (15 June 2009). "Agent Orange Continues to Poison Vietnam". Truthout.
53.             ^ William Glaberson (March 10, 2005). "Agent Orange Case for Millions of Vietnamese Is Dismissed". New York Times.
54.             ^ Larry Neumeister (June 18, 2007). "Agent Orange victims get no support in war crimes push". New York Daily News.
56.             ^ Civilian Deaths in the NATO Air Campaign: Summary, Human Rights Watch, February 2000
58.             ^ Prisoner abuse
·                              Command's Responsibility: Detainee Deaths in U.S. Custody in Iraq and Afghanistan by Human Rights First
·                              Command Responsibility? by Jeremy Brecher and Brendan Smith,Published by Foreign Policy In Focus (FPIF), a joint project of theInternational Relations Center (IRC, online at and theInstitute for Policy Studies (IPS, online at, January 10, 2006
·                              Abu Ghraib is a Command Responsibility By Ray McGovern Former CIA analyst, CounterPunch, October 1 / 2, 2005
59.             ^ Getting Away with Torture? Command Responsibility for the U.S. Abuse of Detainees Human Rights Watch, April 2005 Vol. 17, No. 1
60.             ^ Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, 43:811, Jordan J. Paust, 2005 May 20, page 828 "Executive Plans and Authorizations to Violate International Law Concerning Treatment and Interrogation of Detainees,
61.             ^ Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, 43:811, Jordan J. Paust, 2005 May 20, page 845 "Executive Plans and Authorizations to Violate International Law Concerning Treatment and Interrogation of Detainees,
62.             ^ Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, 43:811, Jordan J. Paust, 2005 May 20, page 861 "Executive Plans and Authorizations to Violate International Law Concerning Treatment and Interrogation of Detainees,
63.             ^ Parsing pain By Walter Shapiro, Salon
64.             ^ War Crimes warnings
·                              Torture and Accountability by Elizabeth Holtzman article in The Nationposted June 28, 2005 (July 18, 2005 issue) about The Geneva Convention
·                              Former NY Congress member Holtzman Calls For President Bush and His Senior Staff To Be Held Accountable for Abu Ghraib Torture Thursday, June 30, 2005 on Democracy Now
·                              Memos Reveal War Crimes Warnings By Michael Isikoff Newsweek May 19, 2004
·                              US Lawyers Warn Bush on War Crimes Global Policy Forum January 28, 2003
65.             ^ The Gitmo Fallout: The fight over the Hamdan ruling heats up—as fears about its reach escalate. By Michael Isikoff and Stuart Taylor Jr., Newsweek, July 17, 2006
67.             ^ Universal jurisdiction
·                              Charges Sought Against Rumsfeld Over Prison Abuse By ADAM ZAGORIN, Time
·                              War Crimes Suit Prepared against Rumsfeld Democracy Now, November 9th, 2006
·                              War Criminals, Beware by Jeremy Brecher and Brendan Smith, The Nation, November 3, 2006
68.             ^ Pushing Back on Detainee Act by Michael Ratner is president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, The Nation, October 4, 2006
69.             ^ Military Commissions Act of 2006
·                              Why The Military Commissions Act is No Moderate Compromise By MICHAEL C. DORF, FindLaw, Oct. 11, 2006
·                              The CIA, the MCA, and Detainee Abuse By JOANNE MARINER, FindLaw, November 8, 2006
·                              Europe's Investigations of the CIA's Crimes By JOANNE MARINER, FindLaw, Februari 20, 2007
·                              Nat Hentoff (December 8, 2006). "Bush's War Crimes Cover-up". Village Voice. Archived from the original on August 13, 2009. Retrieved April 2, 2007.
70.             ^ Court 'can envisage' Blair prosecution By Gethin Chamberlain, Sunday Telegraph, March 17, 2007
71.             ^ Coalition for the International Criminal Court, 18 July 2008. States Parties to the Rome Statute of the ICC PDF. Accessed 12 November 2010.
73.             ^ Other countries may start prosewcution
·                              Overseas, Expectations Build for Torture Prosecutions By Scott Horton, No Comment, January 19, 2009
Von Wolfgang Kaleck Süddeutschen Zeitung, January 19, 2009 (German)
74.             ^ a b Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment calls for prosecution
·                              UN torture investigator calls on Obama to charge Bush for Guantanamo abuses Ximena Marinero, JURIST, January 21, 2009
·                              UN Rapporteur: Initiate criminal proceedings against Bush and Rumsfeld now By Scott Horton, No Comment, January 21, 2009
75.             ^ Ignatieff, Michael. The Lesser Evil: Political Ethics in an Age of TerrorPrinceton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2004 ISBN 0-691-11751-9, pp. 1–24

Further reading [edit]

General [edit]

·        Jeremy Brecher, Jill Cutler, Brendan Smith, ed. (2005). In the name of democracy: American war crimes in Iraq and beyond. Macmillan. ISBN 978-0-8050-7969-2.
·        Michael Haas (2008). George W. Bush, war criminal?: the Bush administration's liability for 269 war crimes. ABC-CLIO. ISBN 978-0-313-36499-0.
·        Jordan J. Paust (2007). Beyond the law: the Bush Administration's unlawful responses in the "War" on Terror. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-71120-3.
·        Mark Selden, Alvin Y. So, ed. (2004). War and state terrorism: the United States, Japan, and the Asia-Pacific in the long twentieth century. Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 978-0-7425-2391-3.
·        Frederick Henry Gareau (2004). State terrorism and the United States: from counterinsurgency to the war on terrorism. Zed Books. ISBN 978-1-84277-535-6.
·        Vincent Bugliosi (2008). The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder. Vanguard. ISBN 978-1-59315-481-3.
·        "Leave No Marks: Enhanced Interrogation Techniques and the Risk of Criminality". Physicians for Human Rights / Human Rights First. August 2007.

By nation [edit]

Iraq [edit]

·        Richard A. Falk, Irene L. Gendzier, Robert Jay Lifton, ed. (2006). Crimes of war: Iraq. Nation Books. ISBN 978-1-56025-803-2.
·        Ramsey Clark (1992). War crimes: a report on United States war crimes against Iraq. Maisonneuve Press. ISBN 978-0-944624-15-9.
·        Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed (2003). Behind the war on terror: western secret strategy and the struggle for Iraq. New Society Publishers. ISBN 978-0-86571-506-6.
·        Marjorie Cohn (November 9, 2006). "Donald Rumsfeld: The War Crimes Case". The Jurist.
·        Ulrike Demmer (2007-03-26). "Wanted For War Crimes: Rumsfeld Lawsuit Embarrasses German Authorities". Der Spiegel.
·        Patrick Donahue (2007-04-27). "German Prosecutor Won't Set Rumsfeld Probe Following Complaint". Bloomberg L.P.

Vietnam [edit]

·        Greiner, Bernd; Anne Wyburd (2009). War Without Fronts: The USA in Vietnam. New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press. ISBN 0-300-15451-8.
·        Deborah Nelson (2008). The war behind me: Vietnam veterans confront the truth about U.S. war crimes. Basic Books. ISBN 978-0-465-00527-7.
·        Nick Turse (2013). Kill Anything That Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam. New York: Metropolitan Books. ISBN 0-8050-8691-9.

Yugoslavia [edit]

·        Michael Parenti (2000). To kill a nation: the attack on Yugoslavia. Verso. ISBN 978-1-85984-776-3.
·        Michael Parenti The Rational Destruction of Yugoslavia
·        Balkans region archives, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting

External links [edit]

·                    War crimes committed by the United States
·                    War crimes committed by country
·                    Edit links
·                    This page was last modified on 30 May 2013 at 13:56.
·                    Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. 
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit 



1.                             New report documents US war crimes over three administrations ...
Apr 17, 2013 – On Tuesday, the Constitution Project, a Washington, DC think tank, issued a report by its “Task Force on Detainee Treatment” on decades of ...

2.                             GEORGE W. BUSH, WAR CRIMINAL?
There are two basic types of war crimes. The most basic is aggression. In contrast with the aggression conducted by the United States in Afghanistan after 9/11, ...

3.                             Top Ten American War Criminals Living Freely Today - Rense
Presided during Waco Massacre and Oklahoma City Bombing, thinly-disguised war crimes against US citizens.. Elder Statesman, walking around freely today, ...

4.                             PressTV - Obama committing war crimes: US Analyst
May 25, 2013
A political analyst tells Press TV that US President Barack Obama is committing war crimes by defending his ...

5.                             George Galloway : The United States War Crimes throughout history ...
May 8, 2013 - Uploaded by ISLAMICHISTORYTUBE
George Galloway : The United States War Crimes throughout history.
6.                              More videos for US War Crimes »

7.                             International War Crimes Tribunal: US War Crimes against ... - Deoxy
Includes use of outlawed weapons; intentionally bombing schools, hospitals, mosques and churches; killing after a cease-fire; and starvation of citizens.

8.                             DailyTech - Pakistani Court Accuses U.S. of War Crimes for Drone ...
May 13, 2013 – Unsatisifed with "grief payments" of a few thousand dollars per dead civilian, Pakistanis demand action.

9.                             18 USC § 2441 - War crimes - Legal Information Institute › USC  Title 18  Part I  Chapter 118
Whoever, whether inside or outside the United States, commits a war crime, in any of the circumstances described in subsection (b), shall be fined under this title ...

10.                         OpEdNews - Article: A litany of US war crimes exposed
Apr 22, 2013 – Article: A litany of US war crimes exposed - By projecting its own evil onto its intended targets, USA 'gets away' with war crime after war crime.

11.                         News for US War Crimes

1.                  The Geneva Suspension
Slate Magazine ‎- 1 day ago
Perhaps the most famous convicted U.S. war criminal, William Calley, was prosecuted under the UCMJ for his role in the 1968 My Lai massacre...
2.                  Bradley Manning's Legal Duty to Expose War Crimes
Huffington Post‎ - 3 days ago
3.                  War Crimes Suspect Extradited to Bosnia From NY
ABC News‎ - 5 days ago
Searches related to US War Crimes



War Crimes Times Seeking Stories:  Children as Victims of War
The War Crimes Times(WCT) is seeking submissions for its summer issue.  WCT wants to present an emotional appeal to the (missing) American conscience through empathy for children as victims of war.
Consider submitting articles, poetry, artwork, or photos to



>On the Prosecute US Crimes Against Humanity Now website appears the following paragraph: (Would be nice to have quote from Cindy, not just her name.)

>Noam Chomsky-"America must prosecute its own war criminals"; Former US Att. Gen. Ramsey Clark, author of "US War Crimes in the Gulf"; Ed Herman, 1999-"A strict application of international law would,( I believe,) have given every U.S. president of the past 50 years Nuremberg treatment"; Elliot Adams, former President, Veterans For Peace, author of "The indictment of President Obama and all who follow his criminal orders"-read at the US Air Force Drone Base, Hancock, NY; Rev. Jeremiah Wright-"God Damn America for her crimes against humanity"; Cornel West, "Drones [Bombings]are War Crimes!"; Cindy Sheehan; Bill Blum of the AntiEmpire Report; Tom Feeley, publisher of Information Clearing House; Angela Keaton, editor of and publisher of Come Home America’"; Ron Fisher, Chair,VFP Workshop Prosecute War Criminals and We the; peoples historian jay janson, coordinator, King Condemned US Wars International Awareness and writing
the documented history of US crimes in nineteen and counting nation that follows this list. Full list at very bottom of site.Suggestions welcome at

 Tue Dec 4, 2012 8:14 am (PST) . Posted by:
A Double Standard of Justice 

The War Crimes of a Sergeant, the War Crimes of a Nation by TOM McNAMARA 

"Whatever grievances a nation may have, however objectionable it finds the status quo, aggressive warfare is an illegal means for settling those grievances or for altering those conditions"
Statement by US Justice Robert Jackson at the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg, Germany.Rennes, France. 
It is alleged that on the evening of March 10-11, 2012, US Army Staff Sgt. Robert Bales left his base in Kandahar Province, Afghanistan, fully armed and loaded, and murdered 16 civilians in a nearby village. At a pretrial hearing, the prosecution stated that Sgt. Bales went from house to house, firing his weapon with intent to kill. Children were shot through the thighs or in the head. At one point during the massacre 11 bodies, mostly women and children, were "put in a pile and put on fire." The prosecutor said that the carnage was so violent that when Sgt. Bales finally returned to base, the blood of his victims had seeped all the way through his uniform and down to his underwear.
Witnesses from the camp reported that Sgt. Bales, a decorated veteran of four combat tours in Afghanistan and Iraq, had been upset over an incident that occurred 2 days earlier, when an improvised explosive device (IED) exploded, resulting in one US soldier losing the lower part of a leg.
The murder of the local Afghans is the worst case of civilian slaughter to be blamed on a single U.S. soldier since the Vietnam War. For this hideous and blatant war crime, the prosecution is asking for the death penalty.
A key component of US strategy in the Afghanistan / Pakistan theatre, or "AfPak" as the area is commonly known, is drones. The Pentagon has about 7,000 at its disposal, with not all of them being for attack purposes. For several years now, a sustained targeted drone campaign has been carried out in an effort to weaken the "insurgents" (i.e. local Afghan resistance). It has been estimated that over the past decade somewhere between 1,800 to 3,100 people have been killed in the region by US drone strikes. And while the US government would argue that the vast majority of these people were militant combatants, some estimates show that for every "insurgent" killed, 10 civilians were also killed.
The US has taken the position that all of this is legal, with Attorney-General Eric Holder arguing that the use of "technologically advanced weapons" (i.e. drones) is based on "adherence to the law." But Article 2(4) of the UN Charter should give us reason to pause. It expressly prohibits the threat or use of force by one state against another. One argument that proponents for drone attacks use is that since the attacks are being carried out on militants and insurgents, and mostly in regions where the rule of law has broken down, the phrase "state" doesn
t apply and therefore nullifies this section of the Charter. But this argument is dubious at best. If it were Iran, China, or Russia engaging in this type of behavior closer to US shores, say in Central or South America, there is no doubt that the US government would be in an uproar over the legality, and morality, of their use.
Compounding all of this is the controversial policy known as "the double tap." This involves striking an initial target and then following up, in quick succession, with repeated attacks on the same site as people arrive to give aid to the original victims. There are reports that innocent bystanders and non-combatants have been intentionally killed as a result. There are also reports that funerals have been deliberately hit by targeted drone strikes as well. In almost any other circumstances these events would be recognized for what they are. War crimes of the highest order. But somehow, for the US, they only raise "contentious legal questions" to quote the New York Times.
16 civilians (including 9 children) were murdered in cold blood in Afghanistan. For that, Sgt. Bales is facing the possible loss of his life. America
s drone policy alone has reportedly killed between 474 and 881 civilians in the region, including 176 children. For this, no one is on trial.
But to even talk of war crimes in Afghanistan is a farce. The whole war, in addition to being undeclared and unfunded, can be considered as a war crime. That is, if one chooses to respect the principles put forth at the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg and the founding charter of the UN. To talk about the individual atrocities committed by one lonely Sergeant (if that, indeed, is the case. 2 US soldiers are testifying for the Government under immunity) while ignoring the war crimes committed by a Nation, screams of hypocrisy and a double standard of justice.
After 11 years of fighting, the US has now been in Afghanistan longer than the Soviet Union. 2,000 soldiers have died in combat, with over 17,000 wounded. The cost of the war is well over $1 trillion, and still counting. While combat operations are scheduled to cease by the end of 2014, NATO has stated that it is committed to maintaining a presence in Afghanistan well after that. The results will inevitably be more innocent deaths and more war crimes. Another inevitability will most likely be that only front line soldiers will be held accountable for their actions, not the senior military commanders and the leaders in Washington who should ultimately be held responsible for this senseless and bloody quagmire.
When it comes to America
s war crimes it would appear that some get punished. Most, however, get ignored.
Tom McNamara is an Assistant Professor at the ESC Rennes School of Business, France, and a Visiting Lecturer at the French National Military Academy at Saint-Cyr Co
tquidan, France. 
"2,000 Dead: Cost of War in Afghanistan" By Amy Bingham, October 1, 2012, ABC News. Accessed at:
"Afghanistan: Green-on-blue attacks show there
s no easy way out" By Sajjan Gohel, September 18, 2012, CNN. Accessed at:
"Afghanistan forces prepared for NATO withdrawal, Karzai says" by Ned Parker, October 18, 2012, Los Angeles Times. Accessed at:
"Army Seeks Death Penalty in Afghan Massacre" by Kirk Johnson, November 13, 2012, The New York Times. Accessed at:
revives attacks on rescuers in Pakistan" by Chris Woods, June 4th, 2012, The Bureau of Investigative Journalism. Accessed at:
"Death from afar" The Economist, November 3rd-9th, 2012. Accessed at:
"Do Targeted Killings Work?" By Daniel L. Byman, Senior Fellow Foreign Policy, Saban Center for Middle East Policy, July 14, 2009, The Brookings Institute. Accessed at:
"Dodging the drones: How militants have responded to the covert US campaign" By Aaron Y. Zelin, August 31, 2012, Foreign Policy. Accessed at:
"Get the Data: Obama
s terror drones" by Chris Woods, February 4, 2012, The Bureau of Investigative Journalism. Accessed at:
"Living Under Drones: Death, Injury, and Trauma to Civilians From US Drone Practices in Pakistan" the International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic (Stanford Law School) and the Global Justice Clinic (NYU School of Law), September 2012. Accessed at:
"Second Day, Wednesday, 11/21/1945, Part 04?, in Trial of the Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal. Volume II. Proceedings: 11/14/1945-11/30/1945. [Official text in the English language.] Nuremberg: IMT, 1947. pp. 98-102. Accessed at:
"Predator Drones and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs)" September 26, 2012, The New York Times. Accessed at:
"Pretrial Hearing Starts for Soldier Accused of Murdering 16 Afghan Civilians" by Kirk Johnson, November 5, 2012, The New York Times. Accessed at:
"Prosecutors seek death for U.S. soldier charged in Afghan rampage" by Bill Rigby, November 5, 2012, Reuters. Accessed at:
"Prosecution Cites Revenge as Motive for Afghan Massacre" by Neal Karlinsky and Luis Martinez, November 5, 2012, ABC News. Accessed at:
"Principles of International Law Recognized in the Charter of the N
remberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal, 1950" Report of the International Law Commission covering its Second Session, 5 june 29 July 1950, Document A/1316. Accessed at:
"The Moral Case for Drones" by Scott Shane, July 14, 2012, The New York Times. Accessed at:
"The Charter of the United Nations" June 26, 1945. Accessed at:
"U.S. hearing on Kandahar massacre to include video testimony from Afghans" by Laura L. Myers, October 12, 2012, Reuters. Accessed at:

 Tue Dec 4, 2012 8:14 am (PST) . Posted by:
Chuck Palazzo
Agent Orange Action Group
Hoa Binh Chapter, Veterans For Peace

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Children Of Vietnam Veterans Health Alliance <>
Sent: Tuesday, December 4, 2012 7:14 AM
Subject: Children Of Vietnam Veterans Health Alliance

VIDEO: The Lingering Effects of Agent Orange
Posted: 03 Dec 2012 01:59 PM PST
This video explores the perspectives of three generations of Agent Orange survivors offering a rare insight into non-Vietnamese survivors highlighting the global scale of this issue. Additionally, Jon Mitchell, a Welsh born journalist now residing in Yokohama explains his groundbreaking work in helping to uncover the use, storage and burial of Agent Orange on the Japanese islands of Okinawa. Through the video, viewers can see how these inspiring individuals used their time aboard Peace Boat to spread the messages of this issue as well as their time on land in Da Nang, Vietnam; where they were able to visit a support center for Vietnamese victims of Agent Orange.
Special thanks to
Heather Bowser (Children Of Vietnam Veterans Health Alliance), Kenneth H. Young, Jenna Mack, Jon Mitchell
Da Nang
for Agent Orange and Disadvantaged Children
The lingering effects of Agent Orange from Peace Boat on Vimeo. 

 Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:14 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
quister1789   Veterans for Peace

Sent: 3/12/2013 10:08:02 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: [campcaseyalumni] Say NO in poll to name freeway in Dallas after War 
Criminial George W. Bush

Please vote NO to change the name of Central Freeway in Dallas to George 
W. Bush freeway!!!

Ann Wright
Twitter: annwright46
"Dissent: Voices of Conscience"

--- On Tue, 3/12/13, <> wrote:

From: <>
Subject: [codepinkhouse] SO embarrassing for Dallas! Please help us say 
Date: Tuesday, March 12, 2013, 1:32 PM

As if the soon-to-be-dedicated shrine to Bush's presidency weren't enough, 
now this. Help us Dallasites keep our sanity! 

Please vote in the WFAA poll, share, and make calls. The hearing in the 
House may be set for today.


There's already one major highway in DFW named after Daddy Bush. :(


...and don't forget to join us in April for this: 
_www.thepeoplesresponse.org_ ( . 

Who Will Speak If We Don’t?
Madeleine Albright at St. John’s
High School, Worcester
by Suzanne Belote Shanley.
When I learned last January,
that former Secretary of
State, Madeleine Albright,
would be a keynote speaker at St. John’s High
School in Worcester, addressing the annual
Abdella Center for Ethics Lecture Series, I was
stunned, outraged, my mind spinning back to
the first Gulf War, and Albright’s infamous 60
Minutes interview in 1996. Responding to a
pointed question by Leslie Stahl, who compared
the US sanctions in Iraq to the catastrophic
killing of civilians during the US atomic
bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Albright
asserted: “I think this is a very hard choice, but
the price—we think the price is worth it.”
Albright’s reply, later revised and regretted,
(distinct from repented) but never spoken of in
terms of sorrow for the slow starvation of a
civilian population, decimation of infrastructure
through US bombing and embargo, and the
preventable deaths of children, became a
benchmark for self-delusion and the re-writing
of history to gratify the ends of empire.
Albright, now on a national lecture tour,
was to address an audience of over a thousand
people, including high school students,
unbelievably, on the subject of “The Courage
to Listen”, with the enlightened task of “civility
in discourse, discussion and decision-making.”
Alternately baffled and enraged, I attempted
calling headmaster, Michael Welsh, who was
out of town and unavailable, and proceeded to
write an open letter to him and a private letter to
Worcester’s Bishop McManus who, months
earlier, had dis-invited, Vicki Kennedy, Ted
Kennedy’s widow, from a graduation address
at Anna Maria, a local Catholic College, because
of her pro-choice position. Yet, unlike the
negativity around Kennedy, St. John’s webpage,
glowingly announced Albright’s (strong prochoice, if not pro-abortion proponent) arrival at
St. John’s, elevating her to the celebrity status
of Paul Farmer, a previous Abdella lecturer.
In my letter to Bishop McManus, I outlined
the fact that “as Secretary of State during the
Clinton Administration, Albright presided over
the US led United Nations sanctions against
Iraq,” resulting in what former Attorney General
Ramsey Clark described as a “war crime,” a
charge supported by The International Court on
Crimes Against Humanity. Unless “Albright’s
purpose in coming to a Catholic high school
was to repent her participation in such an
unspeakable carnage,” I wrote “,using Catholic
Social Teaching as a guideline,” how could the
diocese and the headmaster ignore, Cardinal
Etchegaray’s, (President of the Pontifical
Council for Justice in 1998) condemnation of
the sanctions as “destroying the soul of the Iraqi
After my initial letters, which I emailed to
local peace groups and peacemakers, inviting
them to begin a letter-writing campaign, I called
Diocesan Director of Communication, Ray
Deslile, to clarify that Agape was not asking
that Albright be disinvited, (even though some
letter writers did). Rather, I proposed that a
spokesperson for the extended Agape peace
community, preferably a woman, be invited to
speak on nonviolence and Catholic Social
teaching on war, at the forum with Albright. I
knew, with less than a week before her talk, this
might be all but impossible, but I had hoped to
stir a debate from a gospel-peacemaking
perspective on the Iraq war, its consequences
and Madeleine Albright’s role. Ray and I found
common ground in the perspective that the
Diocese would do well after Albright’s talk, to
initiate a district-wide study of Catholic Social
teaching, with a primary emphasis on Jesus’
teachings on revenge.
Over the years, Albright held to the validity
of sanctions “for dealing with such tyrannies as
North Korea, Zimbabwe or Myanmar, formerly
Burma.” In a commentary after the invasion of
Iraq, David Rieff, suggested that “these
observations do not answer the question of
whether any policy, no matter how strategically
sound, is worth the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi
children — a figure that originated in a Unicef
report on infant mortality in sanctions-era Iraq
and became the rallying cry of anti-sanctions
campaigners.” (NYT, 7/23/03; “Were the
Sanctions Right?”) Albright’s response to Rieff:
“It was a genuinely stupid thing to say,” in what
Rieff remarked was Albright’s search “for the
lesser evil.” Over the years, it appeared that
“stupid thing to say” never translated into an
apology to the Iraqi people, or, as a former
Catholic, now Episcopalian, into any public
expression of remorse. Instead, she gets major
billing, creates a minor stir, appears at a Catholic
institution, which publicly acclaims its
commitment to peace and justice. Albright,
many of us in the peace community agreed,
could not come to Worcester and go
Scott and Claire Schaeffer-Duffy, of St.
Therese and St. Francis Catholic Worker in
Worcester, joined with me in planning a protest
vigil. Letters to Headmaster Welsh came from
people who had observed first-hand, the effects
of the sanctions on Iraqi children. John
Schuchardt of the House of Peace in Ipswich,
wrote: “In 1991 and 1995 I was in the hospitals
of Iraq holding the tiny hands of infants dying
from the naval blockade imposed by the U.S.
in August, 1990 and continued by Madeline
Albright during her 4 years of refusal to listen
to the cries of pain and suffering.” Albright’s
view of this suffering, seems appallingly bland
compared to the horrors reported by John:
“What was so terrible for me was that I did see
the faces of the people who were suffering —
even if I thought then and think now that the
sufferings of the Iraqi people were Saddam’s
doing, not ours. There’s a terrible price you pay.
A terrible price.’’ (Ibid.)
That price was further described by another
first-hand account by George Capaccio, also
present during “Saddam’s doings”: “These little
ones, with their parents beside them, lay on filthy
mattresses in public hospitals where broken
windows could not be repaired, where overhead
lights were often missing and not replaceable,
where oxygen tanks lacked the necessary valves,
where a lack of disinfectants left hospital wards
and corridors smelling rank… in a country that
once had a healthcare system that was the pride
of the Middle East. … Denis Halliday and Hans
von Sponek— stationed in Baghdad, resigned
their posts concluding that the sanctions were
Scott Schaeffer-Duffy, summed it all up:
“I asked an exhausted doctor, who worked
without electricity, clean water, medications, or
sterile supplies, what the life expectancy was in
the Basra hospital, and he replied tearfully, ‘I
have not saved a patient in 6 months.’”
These letters went to the Worcester
chancery, and to administrators at St. John’s from
priests, women religious, and area peacemakers,
including the renowned scholar on Catholic
Social Teaching, David O’Brien, who lamented
the lack of dialogue within the “Catholic
community… of how Catholic Social teaching”
is “best applied in the practice of our country’s
foreign and national security policy.”
Tom Cornell, Catholic Worker elder and
author, who lived and worked with Dorothy Day,
delivered a one sentence chastisement: “Please
let His Excellency know that many people will
be scandalized if Madeleine Albright’s views
on war are not counter-balanced by
representatives of authentic Catholic Social
January Witness at John’s High School
About twenty of us, having purchased hand
warmers and alert to possible frost-bite, arrived
at St. John’s with banners asking for repentance
of the “Sin of Violence”, and a brief leaflet
with the facts and figures of the death toll on
Iraqi children and a picture of a dying Iraqi child.
With the strong police presence and their
apologetic warnings, we knew that any thoughts
of leafleting were doomed. ACatholic Free
Press headline, after the vigil proclaimed:
“Albright calls for listening; opponents seek to
be heard” lending truth to the cliché, “frozen
out”. Albright’s remarks to several standing
ovations went unchallenged, except for a
handful of fliers that Pax Christi members Pat
Ferrone, (Regional Director of Pax Christi,
MA), and Sue Malone, who were inside, were
able to distribute.
Pat had written before the talk of their
intention as attendees: “We will listen carefully
to what Dr. Albright may say, hoping that she is
forthright and self-reflective about the moral
implications of her part in events that resulted
in ‘perverse and uncontrollable effects’ during
Iraq’s embargo.” After the lecture, Pat shared
her reactions to Albright’s presence and the
dilemma of being an “observer” at such a forum,
where history goes unnoted and collective
amnesia is in full display: “We are up against
‘civilized power’ that disarms and entices, uses
words like humility, harmony, listening; takes
advantage of the cultivation of nice boys and
girls and, despite the fact that it talks about critical
thinking, doesn’t present the truth of historical
events (500,000 dead Iraqi children) so that
critical thinking can be applied. She who holds
the power, who ‘graces’ the audience, who is
applauded and lauded by a full-house
contingent, is certainly not held under scrutiny.
We’re bamboozled, laugh at the jokes, pulled
in when she, like a master comic, plays with us
and gives us tidbits of ‘inside’ gossip. Civility,
in myriad unspoken ways, invites silence.”
AVisit with Headmaster Michael Welsh
I carried in my heart, a strong desire to
follow-up after a terse phone conversation with
Mr. Welsh, the day of Albright’s lecture, when
he stated that leafleting or a presence near the
auditorium would not be welcome or
“allowable”. Brayton and I wanted to represent
the compassionate listening side of nonviolent
communication. After cordial exchanges, I
began by expressing my sadness that we didn’t
have enough time to meet personally before
the public witness, a Gandhian and Kingian
approach of stating objections, heading for
compromise, and only after these options are
exhausted, a public demonstration or civil
I recalled, but didn’t share in the meeting,
how I was drawn to interrupting Albright as she
spoke, but prayed about the implications of such
a stance, and decided against it, though in
retrospect, I wish there had been time to
coordinate a silent presence with banners inside
the auditorium. I shared with Mike, that as a
Catholic woman, I believed that someone had
to speak for the dead children. I related the
story of Mrs. Shibama, a survivor of the atom
bomb, who, having been spared the incineration
deaths of her entire elementary school at
Hiroshima, lamented before an audience of
students at Brookline High School: “My
children have no voices, so now I must speak.”
The Iraqi children had no voices, I said: “So we
had to speak.” Mike Welsh was a good and
respectful listener, granting my concerns
uninterrupted time.
Headmaster Welsh maintained about
Madeleine Albright that like St. Paul, everyone
has committed some sin in life, and none of us
would want to be judged by that sin alone.
Conversely, Brayton and I pointed out that when
one opens a Catholic School forum to the author
of a policy opposed by the Vatican, considered
an unindicted war crime, we are into an arena
of accountability, not a tidy lecture on civility.
Welsh’s notion that past sins of public
personages should not condemn them to a
lifetime of ostracism in public speaking seemed
a dodge from the heart of the matter—the lies
of empire presented as truth, a clean return to
public life, without mention of the horrific deaths
of children.
We weighed and considered each other’s

George Clooney: Sudan Village Burnings A War Crime

George Clooney Sudan
American actor George Clooney attends voting ceremonies during the first day of voting for the independence referendum in the southern Sudanese city of Juba January 9, 2011 in Juba, Sudan. (Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)
NAIROBI, Kenya — Actor George Clooney and a group of U.S. genocide scholars in the United States are warning that war crimes are taking place in an obscure conflict in Sudan's southern region.
Clooney has long worked to prevent conflict in Sudan and South Sudan, and he co-founded a group that uses satellite imagery to monitor acts of war there. That group, the Satellite Sentinel Project, said Thursday that 26 villages were intentionally set on fire last month by Sudanese forces.
"Razing a village is a war crime, and the torching of now at least 26 Nuban villages, plus the systematic destruction of crops and grasslands for cattle, is a crime against humanity, Clooney said. "What we're seeing here is a widespread campaign of village and crop burning. We've seen this in Darfur, and it's happening again in South Kordofan and Blue Nile," he said, referring to two states in southern Sudan that border the separate country of South Sudan.
"The international community must act more robustly to counter and create a consequence for these crimes," he said.
Sudanese troops are fighting rebels in the Nuba Mountains who were once aligned with what is now South Sudan. When South Sudan peacefully broke away from Sudan last year, following decades of civil war, the rebels' region was placed in the Sudan side, though many there say they wish they would have been put with South Sudan.
Antonov airplanes have routinely bombed the rebels' region over the last year, resulting in farmers fleeing their fields. John Prendergast, a co-founder of the satellite project, said Sudan is carrying out a strategy of "starvation warfare." More than 100,000 Nuba residents have fled across the border to refugee camps in South Sudan.
The United States under President George W. Bush played a large role in ending decades of conflict between Sudan and what is now South Sudan. But the fighting in Sudan's South Kordofan and Blue Nile states – between Sudanese forces and rebels known as the SPLM-North – is not generating much international attention by comparison.
Samuel Totten, a professor at the University of Arkansas and the author of "Genocide by Attrition: The Nuba Mountains of Sudan," leads an online discussion with scholars and human rights activists about events in Sudan. On Wednesday he submitted a letter signed by more than 70 scholars to the Atrocities Prevention Board, a U.S. government panel. President Barack Obama created the board in August 2011, when he declared that the prevention of mass atrocities and genocide to be a "core national security interest and core moral responsibility."
Totten's letter said Sudan is carrying out attacks in Nuba much like it once did in Darfur, a region in western Sudan that benefited from an international outcry against atrocities committed there. The letter said the U.S. and international community are doing little or nothing to prevent the violence, despite Obama's 2011 directive.
"There is a point, we believe, when it should become self-evident that the continuation of talk, talk and more talk with a state that has engaged in serial crimes against humanity, genocidal-like actions, ethnic cleansing ... is all but a total waste of time," Totten wrote. "As hundreds of thousands of innocents needlessly suffer, there is a moral imperative that the continual `diplomatic' talking, negotiating, pleading, and ultimately begging with leaders of such openly deceptive and destructive strategies must be replaced by concrete and effective action ... ."
Preventing a return to war between Sudan and South Sudan appears to be the international community's first priority. A border has not yet been defined, and major oil disagreements over the last year have seen the South half its oil production, costing its own government and that of Khartoum's millions of dollars in lost revenue. Border skirmishes broke out in April.
The U.S. special envoy to Sudan and South Sudan, Princeton Lyman, traveled to the region in late November. Lyman said that without ending the conflict in the Nuba Mountains it will be hard for Sudan and South Sudan to sort their outstanding issues. Khartoum accuses South Sudan of aiding the SPLM-N rebels, a charge officials in Juba, South Sudan's capital, deny.
"There has to be, and I think everybody really recognizes this, a political channel inside Sudan between the government and the SPLM-N, to bring this conflict to a close. And the first step has to be a cessation of hostilities," Lyman said.
E.J. Hogendoorn, a Horn of Africa expert at the International Crisis Group, a think tank that tracks conflicts, said Sudanese forces aren't strong enough to take the Nuba Mountains without heavy casualties, and the SPLM-N isn't strong enough to push outside of Nuba.
"You have a strategic stalemate that if the international community doesn't do anything about it could last for a very long time, and the knock on-effect is that the civilian population is going to get screwed," he said.

Contents of #2 Nov. 25, 2011
Bush and Blair at 2011 Malaysian Tribunal
Bush Should Have Been Impeached
No Statute of Limitations
Nader:   President Obama
Iraq War: Blood on Our Hands
“Kill Anything”:  Vietnam War
Hunt for Nazi War Criminals
ICC Warrant for Ntaganda

Contents of #3
Agent Orange
Hedges and Al Arian, Collateral Damage
Tirman, The Deaths of Others
Haditha Massacre Unpunished
National, Official, Individual Memory of Atrocities
Film:  Al Doura Atrocities
Greenwald: Why High US Officials Are Not Prosecuted
Dixson: US  History of Military Atrocities
Samuel Totten and Rafiki Ubaldo, eds.   We Cannot Forget: Interviews with Survivors of the 1994 Genocide in RwandaRutgers UP, 2011.


No comments: