Inderdaad dergelijke censuur en verbod op zich te informeren op andere bronnen, wordt tegenwoordig gedaan met het blokkeren van die informatie middels logaritmes..... Als 'het even meezit' zullen een groot aantal mensen wellicht over een jaar of tien in de EU een verbod krijgen opgelegd om nog langer gebruik te mogen maken van elektronica die het mogelijk maakt om op het internet meningen en boodschappen achter te laten..... (en dan heb ik het niet over boodschappen van AH of Jumbooooo) Moet je nagaan als je het voorgaande hebt gelezen over Julian (plus alle andere info over Julian in acht genomen) en daarbij denkt aan alle andere onafhankelijke journalisten die in het westen of worden vervolgd dan wel die niet meer in de reguliere media mogen publiceren: dan heeft men in het westen het gore lef een grote bek te hebben over de journalistiek in Rusland en andere het westen niet welgevallige landen >> de hypocrisie ten top!!
In feite was Julian Assange met het door hem geïnstalleerde WikiLeaks een doorgeefluik voor klokkenluiders en ondanks dat westerse regeringen de vuilbek vol hebben dat klokkenluiders moeten worden beschermd, doen ze in de praktijk het tegenovergestelde >> men zit deze mensen dwars en als ze niet oppassen worden ze zelfs vastgezet, zoals in de VS al meermaals is gebeurd.... Veel andere klokkenluiders zijn simpelweg ontslagen en raken niet meer aan de bak, daar ze als onbetrouwbaar worden gezien, terwijl iedereen en zeker de overheid deze mensen zou moeten eren en beschermen, immers ze brengen heel foute zaken aan het licht, waarbij het zelfs kan gaan om gevaren voor de volksgezondheid.....
In Nederland hebben we het klokkenluidershuis, een aanfluiting van jewelste en een gigantische mislukking, niet zo vreemd als je de voorwaarden leest waaraan je moet voldoen wil je beschermd worden door dat flut-instituut. Zo moet je ervoor tekenen dat alles wat je aanbrengt geheim blijft, je mag er met niemand over spreken >> zelfs niet met je partner als die hebt..... Terwijl klokkenluiders meestal al heel lang gefrustreerd rondlopen over de misstanden die ze zien, maar waartegen ze niets kunnen uitrichten, anders dan de 'klok luiden' door één en ander te openbaren in de media.... Hoe kan je dan verwachten dat ze zich zullen onderwerpen aan het klokkenluidershuis en hun mond verder houden??!!! Te zot voor woorden!!
Het hieronder weergegeven artikel over het laatste beroep dat Julian nog rest in GB werd geschreven door Chris Hedges,eerder gepubliceerd op Substack en daaronder volgt een artikel van Freddy Brewster, eerder gepubliceerd op The Lever, waarin deze ingaat op het grote aantal oorlogsmisdaden die door het Pentagon onder de pet worden gehouden. Oorlogsmisdaden van de VS, zoals de oorlogsmisdaden die Julian Assange heeft geopenbaard en waarvoor hij wordt vervolgd door de VS..... Dezelfde VS die met succes van het Internationaal Strafhof (International Criminal Court >> ICC) heeft geëist dat Rusland en dan met name Putin moet worden vervolgd voor oorlogsmisdaden, die hij noch zijn leger hebben begaan, terwijl er bewezen een groot aantal oorlogsmisdaden is begaan door de VS..... (en vergeet niet dat de VS niet eens lid is van het ICC.....)
Oorlogsmisdaden begaan door de VS als het bombarderen met witte fosforbommen van steden als het Iraakse Mosul en de Syrische stad Raqqa, terwijl de VN de VS meermaals heeft gesmeekt te stoppen met de bombardementen op die steden vanwege het enorme aantal burgerdoden, smeekbeden waar de VS lak aan had..... Het is nog steeds niet bekend hoeveel slachtoffers er precies zijn gevallen in die steden en dat geldt vooral voor Mosul, waar men de gebombardeerde huizen waarin de burgerslachtoffers nog lagen heeft gebulldozerd, zodat men niet kan weten hoeveel slachtoffers daar zijn vermoord met die oorlogsmisdaden maar dat moeten er vele tienduizenden, zo niet veel meer dan honderdduizend zijn..... (bovendien werd daarbij het grootste deel van het bijzonder oude stadscentrum plat gebombardeerd.....)
Je kan het trouwens ook een oorlogsmisdaad noemen dat de VS nog steeds een groot deel van Syrië bezet houdt, een gebied waar de belangrijkste olie- en gasvelden liggen, een gebied ook dat de graanschuur is van dat land, de olie en graan uit het gebied worden aan het buitenland verkocht door de VS..... Daardoor verloopt de wederopbouw van het vooral door het westen platgebombardeerde land uiterst moeizaam.....
Daarnaast hebben de VS, Canada, GB en de EU het land ook nog eens sancties opgelegd zodat er een groot tekort is ontstaan aan eerste levensbehoeften en medicijnen, één van de redenen waarom nog steeds Syriërs naar het westen vluchten..... Alleen het opleggen van sancties aan landen zonder een VN-resolutie zou eindelijk eens moeten worden erkend als een zware misdaad, te vergelijken met een oorlogsmisdaad van formaat.....
Nog even dit >> het is een schande dat men zich zo druk maakt om de fascistische misdadiger Navalny en daarvoor de straat opgaat, terwijl Julian Assange kan wegrotten in een cel zonder dat men althans in Nederland er zelfs niet aan denkt om de straat op te gaan..... (enkele uitzonderingen daar gelaten, maar die vallen in het niet vergeleken met de demo's voor de fascisten in Oekraïne en de demo in Amsterdam van afgelopen zaterdag....)
Julian Assange is onschuldig, de kroongetuige in het proces, een veroordeelde IJslandse Pedofiel, heeft al toegegeven te hebben gelogen..... Julian zit zoals gezegd al 5 jaar in eenzame opsluiting (daarvoor zat hij al jaren in feite gevangen in de Ecuadoraanse ambassade te Londen) en had al een herseninfarct tijdens zijn gevangenschap...... Het gevangenhouden van mensen in eenzame opsluiting is een wel heel smerige vorm van marteling, waar men geestelijk en lichamelijk aan kapotgaat, niet voor niets ook dat dit wordt aangeduid als isolatiefolter..... Julian heeft zelfs de meeste van zijn proceszittingen niet mogen bijwonen...... Genoeg is genoeg:
#FreeAssange (NOW!!)
(als je het Engels niet machtig bent, zet dan de tekst om in Nederlands met behulp van Google translate dat je rechts bovenaan deze pagina ziet staan, klik eerst in het menu op 'Engels', waarna je weer kan klikken op die vertaalapp, daarna zie je bovenaan in het menu 'Nederlands' staan >> klik daarop en de hele tekst staat vervolgens in het Nederlands, de vertaling is van een redelijk goede kwaliteit.)
Julian
Assange will make his final appeal this week to the British courts to
avoid extradition. If he is extradited it is the death of
investigations into the inner workings of power by the press.
Chris Hedges,
Februari 18, 2024
Assange
- by Mr. FishLONDON
— If Julian Assange is denied permission to appeal his extradition
to the United States before a panel of two judges at the High Court
in London this week, he will have no recourse left within the British
legal system. His lawyers can ask the European Court of Human Rights
(ECtHR)
for a stay of execution under Rule
39, which is given in “exceptional circumstances” and “only
where there is an imminent risk of irreparable harm.” But it is far
from certain that the British court will agree. It may order Julian’s
immediate extradition prior to a Rule 39 instruction or may decide to
ignore a request from the ECtHR to allow Julian to have his case
heard by the court.
The nearly 15-year-long
persecution of Julian, which has taken a heavy toll on his physical
and psychological health, is done in the name of extradition to the
U.S. where he would stand trial for allegedly violating 17 counts of
the 1917 Espionage Act, with a potential sentence of 170 years.
Julian’s
“crime” is that he published classified documents, internal
messages, reports and videos from the U.S.
government and U.S.
military in
2010, which were provided by U.S. army whistleblower Chelsea Manning.
This vast trove of material revealed massacres of
civilians, torture, assassinations,
the list of
detainees held at Guantanamo Bay and the conditions they
were subjected to, as well as the Rules
of Engagement in
Iraq. Those who perpetrated these crimes — including the U.S.
helicopter pilots who gunned
down two
Reuters journalists and 10 other civilians and severely injured two
children, all captured in
the Collateral
Murder video
— have never been prosecuted.
Julian exposed what the
U.S. empire seeks to airbrush out of history.
Julian’s persecution is
an ominous message to the rest of us. Defy the U.S. imperium, expose
its crimes, and no matter who you are, no matter what country you
come from, no matter where you live, you will be hunted down and
brought to the U.S. to spend the rest of your life in one of the
harshest prison systems on earth. If Julian is found guilty it will
mean the death of investigative journalism into the inner workings of
state power. To possess, much less publish, classified material —
as I did when I was a reporter for The New York Times — will be
criminalized. And that is the point, one understood by The New York
Times, Der Spiegel, Le Monde, El País and The Guardian, who issued a
joint letter calling on the U.S. to drop the charges against him.
Australian
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and other federal lawmakers voted on
Thursday for the United States and Britain to end Julian’s
incarceration, noting that it stemmed from him “doing his job as a
journalist” to reveal “evidence of misconduct by the U.S.”
The legal case against
Julian, which I have covered from the beginning and will cover again
in London this week, has a bizarre Alice-in-Wonderland quality, where
judges and lawyers speak in solemn tones about law and justice while
making a mockery of the most basic tenants of civil liberties and
jurisprudence.
How
can hearings go forward when the Spanish security firm at the
Ecuadorian Embassy, UC Global, where Julian sought refuge for seven
years, provided videotaped
surveillance of meetings between Julian and his lawyers to the CIA,
eviscerating attorney-client privilege? This alone should have seen
the case thrown out of court.
How can the Ecuadorian
government led by Lenin Moreno violate international law by
rescinding Julian’s asylum status and permit London Metropolitan
Police into the Ecuadorian Embassy — sovereign territory of Ecuador
— to carry Julian to a waiting police van?
Why did the courts accept
the prosecution’s charge that Julian is not a legitimate
journalist?
Why
did the United States and Britain ignore Article 4 of
their Extradition
Treaty that
prohibits extradition for political offenses?
How
is the case against Julian allowed to go ahead after the key witness
for the United States, Sigurdur Thordarson - a convicted fraudster
and pedophile - admitted to
fabricating the accusations he made against Julian?
How can Julian, an
Australian citizen, be charged under the U.S. Espionage Act when he
did not engage in espionage and wasn’t based in the U.S when he
received the leaked documents?
Why
are the British courts permitting Julian to be extradited to the U.S.
when the CIA — in addition to putting Julian
under 24-hour video and digital surveillance while in the Ecuadorian
Embassy — considered kidnapping
and assassinating him,
plans that included a
potential shoot-out on the streets of London with involvement by the
Metropolitan Police?
How
can Julian be condemned as a publisher when he did not, as Daniel
Ellsberg did, obtain
and leak the
classified documents he published?
Why is the U.S.
government not charging the publisher of The New York Times or The
Guardian with espionage for publishing the same leaked material in
partnership with WikiLeaks?
Why is Julian being held
in isolation in a high-security prison without trial for nearly five
years when his only technical violation of the law is breaching bail
conditions when he sought asylum in the Ecuadorian Embassy? Normally
this would entail a fine.
Why was he denied bail
after he was sent to HM Prison Belmarsh?
Upgrade
to paid
If
Julian is extradited, his judicial lynching will get worse. His
defense will be stymied by U.S. anti-terrorism laws, including the
Espionage Act and Special Administrative Measures (SAMs).
He will continue being blocked from speaking to the public — except
on a rare occasion — and being released on bail. He will be tried
in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia where
most espionage cases have been
won by
the U.S. government. That the jury pool is largely
drawn from
those who work for or have friends and relatives who work for the
CIA, and other national security agencies that are headquartered not
far from the court, no doubt contributes to this string of court
decisions.
The
British courts, from the inception, have made the case notoriously
difficult to cover, severely limiting seats in the courtroom,
providing video links that have been faulty, and in the case of the
hearing this week, prohibiting anyone
outside of England and Wales, including journalists
who had previously covered the hearings, from accessing a link to
what are supposed to be public proceedings.
As
usual, we are not informed about schedules or timetables. Will the
court render a decision at the end of the two-day hearing on Feb. 20
and Feb. 21? Or will it wait weeks, even months, to render a ruling
as it has previously? Will it permit the ECtHR to hear the case or
immediately railroad Julian to the U.S.? I have my doubts about the
High Court passing the case to the ECtHR, given that
the parliamentary
arm of
the Council of Europe, which created the ECtHR, along
with their
Commissioner for Human Rights, oppose Julian’s “detention,
extradition and prosecution” because it represents “a dangerous
precedent for journalists.” Will the court honor Julian’s request
to be present in the hearing, or will he be forced to remain in the
high-security HM Prison Belmarsh in Thamesmead, south east London, as
has also happened before? No one is able to tell us.
Julian
was saved from extradition in January 2021 when District Judge
Vanessa Baraitser at Westminster Magistrates’ Court refused to
authorize the extradition request. In her 132-page ruling,
she found that there was a “substantial risk” Julian would commit
suicide due to the severity of the conditions he would endure in the
U.S. prison
system.
But this was a slim thread. The judge accepted all the charges
leveled by the U.S. against Julian as being filed in good faith. She
rejected the arguments that his case was politically motivated, that
he would not get a fair trial in the U.S. and that his prosecution is
an assault on the freedom of the press.
Baraitser’s
decision was overturned after
the U.S. government appealed to
the High Court in London. Although the High
Court accepted Baraitser’s
conclusions about Julian’s “substantial risk” of suicide if he
was subjected to certain conditions within a U.S. prison, it
also accepted four assurances in
U.S. Diplomatic Note no. 74, given to the court in February 2021,
which promised Julian would be treated well.
The
U.S. government claimed in the diplomatic note that its assurances
“entirely answer the concerns which caused the judge [in the lower
court] to discharge Mr. Assange.” The “assurances” state that
Julian will not be subject to SAMs. They promise that Julian, an
Australian citizen, can serve his sentence in Australia if the
Australian government requests his extradition. They promise he will
receive adequate clinical and psychological care. They promise that,
pre-trial and post-trial, Julian will not be held in the
Administrative Maximum Facility (ADX)
in Florence, Colorado.
It sounds reassuring. But
it is part of the cynical judicial pantomime that characterizes
Julian’s persecution.
No
one is held pre-trial in ADX Florence. ADX Florence is also not the
only supermax prison in the U.S. where Julian can be imprisoned. He
could be placed in one of our other Guantanamo-like facilities in a
Communications Management Unit (CMU). CMUs are highly restrictive
units that replicate the near total isolation imposed by SAMs. The
“assurances” are not legally binding. All come with escape
clauses.
Should Julian do
“something subsequent to the offering of these assurances that
meets the tests for the imposition of SAMs or designation to ADX”
he will, the court conceded, be subject to these harsher forms of
control. If Australia does not request a transfer it “cannot be a
cause for criticism of the USA, or a reason for regarding the
assurances as inadequate to meet the judge’s concerns,” the
ruling reads. And even if that were not the case, it would take
Julian 10 to 15 years to appeal his sentence up to the U.S. Supreme
Court, which would be more than enough time to destroy him
psychologically and physically. Amnesty International said the
“assurances are not worth the paper they are written on.”
Julian’s lawyers will
attempt to convince two High Court judges to grant him permission to
appeal a number of the arguments against extradition which Judge
Baraitser dismissed in January 2021. His lawyers, if the appeal is
granted, will argue that prosecuting Julian for his journalistic
activity represents a “grave violation” of his right to free
speech; that Julian is being prosecuted for his political opinions,
something which the U.K.-U.S. extradition treaty does not allow; that
Julian is charged with “pure political offenses” and the
U.K.-U.S. extradition treaty prohibits extradition under such
circumstances; that Julian should not be extradited to face
prosecution where the Espionage Act “is being extended in an
unprecedented and unforeseeable way”; that the charges could be
amended resulting in Julian facing the death penalty; and that Julian
will not receive a fair trial in the U.S. They are also asking for
the right to introduce new evidence about CIA plans to kidnap and
assassinate Julian.
If the High Court grants
Julian permission to appeal, a further hearing will be scheduled
during which time he will argue his appeal grounds. If the High Court
refuses to grant Julian permission to appeal, the only option left is
to appeal to the ECtHR. If he is unable to take his case to the ECtHR
he will be extradiated to the U.S.
The
decision to seek Julian’s extradition, contemplated by
Barack Obama’s administration, was pursued by Donald Trump’s
administration following WikiLeaks’ publication of
the documents known as Vault 7, which exposed the
CIA’s cyberwarfare programs, including those designed to monitor
and take control of cars, smart TVs, web browsers and the operating
systems of most smart phones.
The Democratic Party
leadership became as bloodthirsty as the Republicans following
WikiLeaks’ publishing of tens of thousands of emails belonging to
the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and senior Democratic
officials, including those of John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s
campaign chairman during the 2016 presidential election.
The
Podesta emails exposed that
Clinton and other members of Obama’s administration knew that Saudi
Arabia and Qatar — which had both donated millions of dollars to
the Clinton Foundation — were major funders of the Islamic State of
Iraq and Syria. They revealed transcripts
of three private talks Clinton gave to Goldman Sachs — for which
she was paid $675,000 — a sum so large it can only be considered a
bribe. Clinton was seen in the emails telling the financial elites
that she wanted “open trade and open borders” and believed Wall
Street executives were best positioned to manage the economy, a
statement that contradicted her campaign promises of financial
reform. They exposed the
Clinton campaign’s self-described “Pied
Piper” strategy which used their press contacts to influence
Republican primaries by “elevating” what they called “more
extreme candidates,” to ensure Trump or Ted Cruz won their party’s
nomination. They exposed Clinton’s
advance knowledge of questions in a primary debate. The emails also
exposed Clinton as one of the architects of the war and destruction
of Libya, a war she believed would burnish her credentials as a
presidential candidate.
Journalists can argue
that this information, like the war logs, should have remained
secret. But if they do, they can’t call themselves journalists.
The
Democratic leadership, which attempted to blame Russia for its
election loss to Trump — in what became known
as Russiagate
— charged that the Podesta emails and the DNC leaks were obtained
by Russian government hackers, although an investigation headed
by Robert Mueller, the former FBI director, “did not develop
sufficient admissible evidence that WikiLeaks knew of — or even was
willfully blind to” any alleged hacking by the Russian state.
Julian is persecuted
because he provided the public with the most important information
about U.S. government crimes and mendacity since the release of the
Pentagon Papers. Like all great journalists, he was nonpartisan. His
target was power.
He made
public the
killing of nearly 700 civilians who had approached too closely to
U.S. convoys and checkpoints, including pregnant women, the blind and
deaf, and at
least 30
children.
He made
public the
more than 15,000 unreported deaths of Iraqi civilians and the torture
and abuse of some 800 men and boys, aged between 14 to 89, at
Guantánamo Bay detention camp.
He showed
us that
Hillary Clinton in 2009 ordered U.S. diplomats to spy on U.N.
Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and other U.N. representatives from
China, France, Russia, and the U.K., spying that included obtaining
DNA, iris scans, fingerprints, and personal passwords.
He exposed that
Obama, Hillary Clinton and the CIA backed the June 2009 military coup
in Honduras that overthrew the
democratically-elected president Manuel Zelaya, replacing him with a
murderous and corrupt military regime.
He revealed that
the United States secretly launched missile, bomb and drone attacks
on Yemen, killing scores of civilians.
No other contemporary
journalist has come close to matching his revelations.
Julian is the first. We
are next.
Share
The
Chris Hedges Report is a reader-supported publication. To receive new
posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid
subscriber.
Upgrade to paid
=======================================
Is
The Pentagon Hiding War Crimes?
By
Freddy Brewster
A
declassified government report says documents about alleged
atrocities have gone missing — and officials are flouting
recordkeeping rules.
The
Pentagon is not retaining comprehensive records of alleged war crimes
in its global military operations as required by the Defense
Department’s own policies, according to a declassified version of a
government report reviewed by The
Lever.
The
report found that an entire year’s worth of records that could
include such allegations has gone missing from the military’s
command center overseeing operations in the Middle East — a period
that coincides with an independent watchdog group’s claims of war
crimes committed in the region.
Government
investigators found evidence of at least 47 allegations of U.S.
military war crimes between 2012 and 2022 as the United States waged
an air and ground war against
the Islamic State in the Middle East and Africa. But a significant
portion of information about alleged war crimes during that time was
missing.
Military
personnel were not able to provide records of potential war-crime
allegations from the sub-command center overseeing operations in Iraq
and Syria for all of 2015, when President Barack Obama
oversaw thousands
of airstrikes in
the countries. And records that would have detailed allegations in
2017 were missing from the military’s Middle East command center.
That
year, Amnesty International accused pro-Iraqi
government forces — led by the U.S. military under the direction of
President Donald Trump — of potentially committing war crimes amid
the deaths of hundreds if not thousands of civilians in the Iraqi
city of Mosul.
“While
we have not yet had an opportunity to review the GAO report, we find
it concerning if [the Defense Department] does not track or report on
commission of war crimes,” said Daphne Eviatar, Director for
Security with Human Rights at Amnesty International USA. “While in
some cases [the Defense Department] has acknowledged civilian harm,
it almost never acknowledges whether war crimes were committed or
whether the incidents were investigated as potential war crimes.”
The
revelations come from the nonpartisan Government Accountability
Office (GAO)’s investigation
of military recordkeeping.
The analysis looks at a time period that began during Obama’s
second term, as his administration created a “kill
list” and ramped
up drone strikes,
whose casualty rates were shrouded
in secrecy.
GAO investigators also looked at Trump’s term and the first half of
President Joe Biden’s term.
The
GAO report honed in on Africa and the Middle East due to the “kinetic
strike operations” that the U.S. military conducted in the regions
from January 2012 through December 2022 as part of its war against
the Islamic State.
The
probe was a response to a Defense
Department Inspector General investigation and
a New
York Times report that
found deficiencies in how — and whether — the Pentagon tracked
alleged war crimes.
The Times report
focused on a 2019 U.S. bombing in Syria that killed
more than 60 civilians —
mostly women and children — that was actively covered up and never
independently investigated by the U.S. military.
GAO
investigators noted that while they found scores of war-crime
allegations inside the military bureaucracy, the major military
commands admitted they do not keep comprehensive records providing a
full picture of the situation.
“Several
components have not retained reports of alleged law of war violations
as required by [Defense Department] guidance because there is no
system to comprehensively retain such reports,” the report said.
“Without a system to comprehensively retain records of allegations
of law of war violations, [Defense Department] leadership may not be
well positioned to fully implement the law of war.”
The
GAO report found key failures in two Defense Department command
centers — CENTCOM, which oversees the Middle East and parts of
Asia, and AFRICOM, which oversees Africa.
Between
2014 and 2023, the Defense Department launched nearly 40,000
airstrikes in the two command areas. Those two command centers
provided GAO records of at least 47 documented allegations of
potential war crimes that took place between January 2012 and
December 2022.
Investigators
did not try to determine the validity of those alleged “law-of-war
violations,” and noted that there could be other allegations that
weren’t identified.
“We
found that the alleged law-of-war violations obtained may not
represent the entire universe of alleged violations, but we are not
able to determine what that universe is,” the report stated.
The
Department of Defense notes
that the law of war is based on treaties and international laws
applicable to the United States. The United Nations defines
war crimes as,
among other activities, killing civilians, torture, sexual violence,
wanton destruction of civilian property, and taking hostages.
According
to the report, key information was missing from the office overseeing
military operations in Iraq and Syria, which has reportedly
seen nearly
35,000 airstrikes from U.S.-led forces since
the U.S. began bombing the area in 2014.
GAO
noted that multiple Defense Department policies require proper
war-crime recordkeeping. That includes the Defense
Department’s Law of War Program,
which requires the military to “maintain a central collection of
information on reportable incidents.”
The
report did not find instances of retaliation against military members
who reported potential war crimes in the AFRICOM and CENTCOM areas.
But it did note that the Defense Department’s Inspector General
reported one case of retaliation during the timeframe.
“An
investigation found that both the alleged reprisal and overarching
alleged law of war violation were not substantiated,” the report
noted.
CENTCOM
The
Defense Department divides
the world into six separate command zones and
assigns a call name to each.
Of
the 47 total reports of alleged war crimes the GAO found in its
report, all but one took place under CENTCOM, which oversees
operations in the “central” area of the globe, including
interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria. According to
investigators, CENTCOM officials appeared to routinely lose or
misplace records of war-crime allegations.
The
sub-command center overseeing operations in Iraq and Syria faced 17
reported allegations of war crimes between 2012 and 2022, but only
had summary-level records of two of the allegations on hand. In fact,
the sub-command center couldn’t find any reports at all from 2015.
“Officials
said that they could not locate [the] records and their current
existence and locations are unknown,” the report found. “As a
result we could not determine the circumstances of the two
allegations or if they were committed by U.S. personnel.”
Officials
said they did not know why there were no records from 2015, but said
it may be due to a limited military presence in the area before 2016.
In
October 2015, amid growing revelations
and outcry over
Obama’s drone war, U.S.
forces bombed a Doctors without Borders-run hospital in
Afghanistan, killing 22 people. The incident was later described as a
“mission
that went wrong from start to finish,”
and resulted in 16 U.S. military personnel being punished via
“administrative actions.”
CENTCOM
was also missing documents tracking potential war crimes for 2017,
for which officials provided no explanation.
“CENTCOM
retained records of alleged law of war violations for 2012 through
2016 and 2018 through 2022, but did not have all records for 2017,”
noted the GAO report.“CENTCOM officials did not know why a document
tracking potential alleged law of war violations for 2017 was
unavailable.”
In
July 2017, Amnesty
International claimed it
had documented more than 400 civilian deaths in 45 attacks that year
in Mosul by the Iraqi government or U.S.-backed forces, and noted
that its tally was “very likely to be an underestimate.”
When
GAO first requested documents from CENTCOM, investigators received 37
reports of war crime allegations. Later, the Defense Department’s
Inspector General later provided five more reports, explaining they
had not been included because CENTCOM joint operation centers do not
usually receive those kinds of reports. Four additional reports were
sent to the GAO from two other command centers.
AFRICOM
GAO
investigators also scrutinized AFRICOM, a Germany-based command of
2,000 people that has spearheaded incursions in Libya and Somalia as
part of war on the Islamic State, and found a single allegation of
war crimes between 2012 and 2022.
According
to the GAO report, that allegation was related to an unspecified
incident that occurred in August 2017.
In
2017, U.S. bombing
in Somalia reportedly
became “excessive”
after Trump signed an executive order that March declaring the
southern portion of Somalia an “area of active hostilities.”
“U.S.
forces carried out 34 strikes in Somalia in the last nine months of
2017 – more than in the entire five years from 2012 to 2016,”
Amnesty International wrote.
The
human rights group claimed that the U.S. bombing in Somalia may be
considered war crimes.
“Amnesty
International uncovered compelling evidence that US air strikes
killed a total of 14 civilians and injured eight more, in five
attacks that may have violated international humanitarian law and
could, in some cases, constitute war crimes,” wrote the
group.
The
GAO report also noted that AFRICOM’s policy on war-crime reporting
“does not fully align” with Defense Department requirements.
Among
other concerns, the report noted that current AFRICOM policy failed
to define what exactly would qualify as “credible information”
about a potential war crime violation, justifying an investigation
into the matter. AFRICOM also failed to define “reportable
incidents,” or initial reports of potential wartime law
violations.
GAO
investigators also called out the command center’s convoluted and
inefficient process for reporting war crimes allegations.
“By
waiting for formal investigations to conclude before determining
whether an allegation is supported by credible information, AFRICOM
risks failing to report reportable incidents in a timely manner,”
the report states.
AFRICOM
command last updated its war crime-reporting policies in 2014, and
AFRICOM officials admitted that they had failed to update it because
“other priorities took precedence over updating its policy,” the
report stated.
AFRICOM
officials said that although their current policy is outdated, it
still abided by the proper Defense Department policies. The GAO
report disagreed.
“Without
a current policy aligned to DOD requirements, AFRICOM officials may
not be reporting all alleged law-of- war violations as required,”
the report stated. “As a result, AFRICOM leadership may not be
fully aware of all such allegations within their command or be in a
position to forward reportable incidents to senior DOD leadership as
required.”
No
“Comprehensive Set Of Records”
The
new GAO report, released Feb. 13, is based on a classified report the
agency provided to the Department of Defense in December 2023 after
it scrutinized records and interviewed officials from across the
Defense Department.
GAO
investigators didn’t just limit their criticisms to specific
command centers. They found that the Defense Department as a whole
lacked a unified system to track potential war crimes across the
entire agency, instead leaving tracking to individual operations
across the world.
“No
single entity above the combatant commands retains a comprehensive
set of records for either reportable incidents or those found to be
unsupported by credible information,” noted their report.
A
core part of the GAO report focused on law-of-war training for
military members from each branch.
According
to the Pentagon’s wartime
engagement policies,
all military members must receive training on when to engage with a
potential enemy threat and how to minimize civilian deaths.
One
official from the CENTCOM sub-command center overseeing Iraq and
Syria told GAO representatives that the pre-deployment training was
“not the best, but it covered all of the necessary points,” and
that military members deployed for war “would know how to identify
and report a law-of-war violation.”
As
part of its report, the GAO issued just two recommendations to the
Defense Department: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that
AFRICOM updates its guidance on reporting allegations of war crimes;
and that the Secretary of Defense ensures the implementation of a
comprehensive recordkeeping system for all war-crime allegations.
=======================================
Zie ook: 'Navalny: de waarheid over deze fascistische-misdadiger, geëerd als vrijheidsstrijder en oppositieleider van Rusland: alweerdesinformatie van westerse massamedia op topniveau' Uiteraard met aandacht voor Julian Assange.
'De Israëlische oorlog tegen journalisten en daarmee tegen de waarheid......' Ook in dit bericht aandacht voor Julian.
'VS is mede hoofdverantwoordelijk voor de dood van een VS-Chileense journalist (Gonzalo Lira) in een geheime Oekraïense gevangenis..... Leve de democratie en de vrijheid....' En dan maakt men zich in de westerse media en politiek druk om de dood van fascist Navalny en laat daarbij Assange wegrotten in een Britse cel >> als het even 'meezit' straks in een VS cel wat is te vergelijken met de hel........
'De
beste journalisten worden vervolgd en uitgekotst, of hoe de
westerse volkeren worden gemanipuleerd'
'DeBVD (voormalige Nederlandse geheime dienst) zag overlevenden vanconcentratiekampen als een communistisch gevaar.......' Ook in dit bericht aandacht voor Julian.
'De
oorlog tegen de echte journalist Julian Assange, plus die tegen
de journalisten in de Gazastrook en Oekraïne'
'Als
persvrijheid echt zo belangrijk is voor de VS en GB dient men
Julian Assange vrij te laten en de belachelijke aanklachten te laten
vallen'
'Internationale
Dag van de Persvrijheid een aanfluiting en weer niets in de reguliere
media over (het martelen van) journalist Julian Assange'
(3 mei 2023)
'Sacharovprijs
voor Navalny, betaald door het Europees parlement en Stoltenberg
stelt dat de NAVO een aanval op Rusland zal winnen'
De neonazi en misdadiger Navalny krijgt een prijs en klokkenluider
Assange, die deze prijs had moeten krijgen zit in isolatiefolter voor
het openbaren van ernstige misdaden >> schande!!!
'Antony
Blinken (VS minister BuZa) leest de wereld de les over persvrijheid
terwijl zijn eigen regering deze zwaar geweld aandoet'
Waarvan Julian Assange wel het grootste slachtoffer is!! Afgelopen
zondag (het is tijdens deze toevoeging dinsdag 4 mei 2022/////) vond
het White House Correspondents' Dinner plaats en ook daar deed men
net alsof de pers volkomen vrij is in de VS, waaraan zelfs 'komiek'
Trevor Noah van The Daily Show meewerkte, een leugen van enorme
proporties, zie wat dat betreft ook het artikel dat Caitlin Johnstone
over dit diner heeft geschreven: 'A
Weird, Stupid Dystopia'
'Het
USA justitieel- en gevangenissysteem: een vergelijking met De Goelag
Archipel van Solzjenitsyn'
En zie berichten onder de links in dat artikel.
'Navalny
slachtoffer? Assange is het echte slachtoffer!!'
'Navalny
wordt geprezen terwijl Assange wordt gemarteld'
'Het
westen vervolgt journalist Assange, Rusland laat journalist vrij na
onrust over diens gevangenschap' En
nog hadden de reguliere media een grote bek over Rusland, media die
niet anders hebben gedaan dan collega Assange
besmeuren.....
'VS
rechtszaak tegen klokkenluider Daniel Hale: ondanks het feit dat hij
ook volgens de Biden administratie niemand in gevaar bracht'
'Assange
(nog) niet uitgeleverd aan de VS tegen een hoge prijs: het
verpletteren van de persvrijheid'
'Internationale
Dag van de Persvrijheid: geen aandacht voor de isolatiefolter die
onderzoeksjournalist Julian Assange al 3 jaar ondergaat'
en zie wat betreft Julian ook de berichten onder de volgende links:
'Rijk
en regering wantrouwen burgers: massale controles op personen, plus
druk op grote techbedrijven voor censuur op sociale media.......'
(en
zie de links in dat bericht!!)
'Drone
slachtoffers door VS ingrijpen: ook de klokkenluiders die één en
ander openbaarden'
'Instagram
censureert berichten die niet passen in het buitenlandbeleid van de
VS'
'Julian
Assange: als het fascisme haar vermommingen laat vallen // Julians
herseninfarct als teken van zijn onmenselijke behandeling'
(en zie de links in dat bericht)
'10
december 2021: Dag van de Mensenrechten, Julian Assange mag worden
uitgeleverd zelfs nadat de kroongetuige toegaf te hebben
gelogen'
(!!!!)
------------------------------------
Let
op!!
De ruimte om reacties weer te geven werkt niet altijd. Als je
commentaar hebt en het lukt niet op de normale manier, doe dit dan
via het mailadres trippleu@gmail.com, ik zal deze dan opnemen
onderaan in het bewuste artikel, althans als je geen geweld predikt,
voorts plaats ik jouw reactie ook al staat deze diametraal tegenover
dat bericht. Alvast mijn dank voor jouw eventuele reactie, Willem.
