PRESIDENT OBAMA INVOLVED IN WAR CRIMES & CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY

PRESIDENT OBAMA INVOLVED IN WAR CRIMES & CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY.
THE ANSWERS DEMANDED TO OBAMA by THE HOUSE SPEAKER BOEHNER ARE RIGHT BUT LATE.

HAZ, March 23, 2011

Professors at different Universities in the US are taking the initiative to indict Obama an related cabinet for war crimes and crimes against humanity before the UN ICC and International Courts in relation to the recent bombing of Libya. This initiative should be spread to most Universities in the world if we really think seriously on the risk of escalation of current wars in the Middle East into a nuclear confrontation. The UN need to stop the current war in Libya, and take strong stand on peace. The UNSC Res # 1973 has been violated in the most cynical and brutal way by the US-NATO allies in Libya. The fact that there is not recall for emergency UNSC meeting or the UN international Assembly to correct this dynamic, indicates that the UN has been captured by imperial powers of the West. The war against China and Russia is the next, said a top US commander in chief. The US-NATO has already set up all its military mighty to attack these countries and is sure that they will respond. If we do nothing to prevent the escalation of this war, there will not be tomorrow for the whole global society. The only way to stop current war and prevent its escalation is to call an emergency meeting of the UN and the indictment of the leaders of the world that are committing war crimes and crimes against humanity. According to the Geneva Convention of 1949 and other international Protocols signed by the US, the following war crimes and crimes against humanity have been committed in recent attacks on Libya:


1. MAKING USE OF POISONED or OTHERWISE FORBIDDEN ARMS or MUNITIONS. This refers to the uses of 140 missiles launched by the US on Libya that contains DU and other poison chemicals. Such act violates also international agreements on “just war” (Jus in Bello) and related its principles of proportionality (use of weapons vastly disproportional to any military aim to be achieved by using them. They do have lethal effects on the civilian population and their future healthy existence) , and the principle of discrimination (the right to life of noncombatants should be protected even in war-time according to European and American conventions on Human Rights and International Covenants on Civil and Political Rights).

2. FIRING ON LOCALITIES WHICH ARE UNDEFENDED and WITHOUT MILITARY SIGNIFICANCE. This refers to the bombing of the compound where civilian supporters of the regimen were having a meeting. More than a hundred civilian were assassinated in this attack. The same situation happens with the hospital and other public buildings.

3. PURPOSELESS DESTRUCTION. It is being reported that Libyan civilian infrastructure (electricity, water, sanitation equipment) have been already destroyed in Tripoli.

4. KILLING or WOUNDING MILITARY PERSONNEL WHO HAVE LAID DOWN ARMS, SURRENDERED, or ARE DISABLED BY WOUNDS or SIKNESS. The US-NATO allies knew that the Libyan army ceasefire immediately after the Res 1973 was approved by the UNSC. Libya demanded from the UN a committee to check that they deposed arms against the armed rebels. They were killed anyway by US-NATO allies.

5. KILLING or ATTACKING HARMLESS CIVILIANS. Most of the casualties in Libya are harmless civilians. The US-NATO knew that the life of civilian that they rhetorically said is going to respect will be violated by the indiscriminate air attacks and bombing, they anyway proceed with the "no-fly zone” strategy, without informing about the military operations and its effects. The request of the “no-fly zone” came from Arab League bureaucrats representing authoritarian regimes and royalties who are attacking their own civilian population. All they said is that the Gaddafi planes that fly to bomb the rebels in Libya will be destroyed and peace will be restored. Now, some members of the Arab League regret and are claiming that they were deceived and are demanding immediate stop of UN-NATO bombing.

6. BOMBARDMENT FROM THE AIR FOR THE EXCLUSIVE PURPOSE OF TERRORIZING or ATTACKING CIVILIAN POPULATION. This is now a fact and this terrorist attack on the civilian population reveal a deep xenophobic attitude in the part of the US-NATO allies. There is a hate crime and a crime against peace. Arab’s political organization from right to left are naming the current attack on Libya as attack on the Muslims and Arabs of the world. So, even if US-NATO allies kill Gaddafi, the war in Libya just started. This war contains a grave breach of the core of the UNSC resolution #1973: protect the civilian population and restore peace.

Source: The six point above were selected from the 30 points on International Laws on war crimes in "Law Among Nations" by Gerhard von Glahn. Reproduced in Peace Against War by Francis Beer.

7. This war also violates international principles of “just war”: “Not proper authority” in the case of the US, France, Italy and other nations who did not consult and get the approval of their own senate. There is not “just cause”, the current bombing of the civilian population reveals that the so called “humanitarian intervention” and the defense of Human Rights was only the smoke screen to hide their real agenda: divide Libya and plunder their oil. There was not “right intent” , the US-NATO allies hide the fact that they planned to kill the Arab civilian population indiscriminately. And they neither design a “peaceful end” to this crisis. Libya is just one more business of war with not more than ten transnationals as main profiteers of this human catastrophe. Who will pay the consequences of this terrorist war?. First, the civilian population of Libya, and second the tax payers inside the US-NATO allies.

Source: The Doctrine of Just War in Francis Beer: "Peace Against War'. According to this author this doctrine has two major branches: 1. Justification for going to war, jus ad bellum, and 2. justifiable acts in wartime, jus in bello. The justificatrion for going to war, jus ad bellum,depends on four principal elements (Johson, 1975:26): A. Proper authority; B.Just cause; C. Right intent; and D. Peaceful end. In the case of Libya, as in previous US-NATO war interventions, all these principles has been violated. They still covered with impunity, though the international context is now in favor of peace, and all these case are about to go to the UN International Criminal Court ICC, to which UN-NATO are now recognizing it to bring their case on Gaddafi.

=============================

REGARDING THE QUESTIONS OF THE HOUSE SPEAKER JOHN BEHNER, BELOW:

1. The fact is that Obama administration signed a UNSC Res 1973 that contradict the “US political and Military strategy”, as noted by Behner. Once the US-NATO agreed with the UNSC Resolution they should have respect the Res 1973, abided by it and subordinate their political military agenda to the UN resolution. Otherwise their excuses for intervention in Libya would have been totally illegal, un-ethical and a mock to the international community. The other fact is that today the UN-NATO violated the UNSC Resolution and this has two menings:

A. the US signature on the UN Res 1973 carried not real intention to be respected. So, the official rhetoric on HR and expressed concerns about the life of the Libyan civilian population and the restoring of peace was a scam, a lie, an intentional deceit to the national and international community. In soft words, the US signature on the UN Res 1973 was a mean to an end, a charade to cover up hidden agendas.

B. the “US political and Military strategy" was either undestood wrongly by President Obama as "gaddafi removal from power” or intentionally misrepresented to cover up a hidden real end-objective of the US mission on Libya: oil and geo-politics. In both cases the intention to remove Gaddafi = kill him, has nothing to do with the UNSC 1973 Res. Such intention is just a mean for a hidden end. Obama lie to the nation when he said that “US political and Military strategy" is the removal of Gaddafi from power or its assesination, as other members of his Cabinet put it. Why Obama did not say the truth to the nation, that is the real main question of the House Speaker John Boehner.

The British counterpart was clear in this regard: they go over Libya to save the BP company, the UK main corporation, that invested billions of pounds in the Libyan oil industry and this is the chance to break with this "friend" plunder their resources. So they send their soldier to die for what they consider a “good cause”: defend the BP company.

C. What about the US?. Obama cannot say that our soldiers will die to save the nasty business of the US weapons manufacturers, the usual profiteers of war and also usual tax-evaders. Will Obama say that the other US end-objective is to take the big chunk of the oil-cake in Libya?. Will he say that this hidden end-objective means to take control of the main source of energy that feeds Europe?. Of course Germany disagrees on that and soon the others will disagree too. Will Obama say that in geo-political terms Libya is the key place to control other oil producers in the Arab region and that is the reason to kill Gaddafi?.

Saying so means that the US prefer to have alliance with the most retardatario and authoritarian rulers of the Arab League (Kaliphas and monarchies included) to whom the secular Gaddafi is the bad apple that subvert the region by investing oil profits in free education, health and human development. This picture is clear: a decadent empire siding with the most decadent rulers of the region (including Al Qaeda anti-Gaddafi rebels in Benghazi). Is there any consistency between this policy and the rhetoric on freedom, democracy and peace in the region?.

Obama double speaking was destined to fail: he lost credibility inside the US and now at international level (Brazil case). In the middle East: so far, members of the Arab League do not want the US intervention in Libya and some European countries are ready to reconsider the NATO alliance. For China and Russia this is the best chance to stop unilateralism and put an end to US bulling. If the US insist in attacking China and Russia (as publicly it was said) they will respond and the US cannot sustain one more war. The US have the big problem of financial insolvency and dollar sustainability.

For Gaddafi, all that he has to do is transfer political power to the decentralized regional Committee (including the opposition in Benghazi) while preserving the unity of the nation and reinventing the army and relations with the Arab League and European nations. If the war in Libya continues and the US lead the destruction of this nation, the ICC will put Obama and Mrs Clinton in trial for war crimes & crimes against humanity.

===============================

The Speaker's letter to the President:
OPEN: http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2011/03/23/letter_boehner_demands_answers_from_obama_on_libya