By CHRISTINE HONG
1. Victors’ Justice?
In February 2014, upon completing a several-month investigation into “human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea [DPRK, or North Korea]” – an investigation initiated in the sixtieth anniversary year of the 1953 Korean War Armistice Agreement that halted combat but did not end the war – the three-member Commission of Inquiry (COI) established by the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) concluded that North Korea had committed crimes against humanity. Such “unspeakable atrocities,” in the framing account of Commission chair Michael Kirby, “reveal a totalitarian State [without] parallel in the contemporary world.” Analogies to the “dark abyss” of North Korea, the Australian jurist maintained, could be found only in the brutality of the Third Reich, South African apartheid, and the Khmer Rouge regime. Reproduced in news reports around the world, Kirby’s markedly ahistorical examples may have succeeded in inflaming global public opinion yet they failed to contextualize the issue of North Korean human rights in a way that might generate peaceful structural resolution. Indeed, insofar as the 372-page COI report singularly identified the North Korea government as the problem – both as “a remaining and shameful scourge that afflicts the world today,” in Kirby’s jingoistic phrase, and as the primary obstacle to peace in Korea – the Commission gave new life to the vision of regime change that has animated post-9/11 North Korean human rights campaigns. By recommending that North Korea and its high officials be brought up before the Hague-based International Criminal Court (ICC), it continued the hostilities of the unresolved Korean War “by means purporting to be judicial.” The urgent question of a long-deferred peace relative to the Korean peninsula, which the Commission incoherently addressed, bedeviled its conclusions, rendering its findings partial, its recommendations in some instances uneasily one-sided, and its premise of impartiality suspect. Moreover, that the COI proceedings and report aligned the United Nations with the United States, South Korea, Japan, and Great Britain while singling out North Korea and, to a far lesser degree, China, for blame performed an unsettling restaging of the Korean War on the agonistic terrain of human rights, suggesting an encrypted “victor’s justice” with regard to an unending war that up to now has had no clear winners. Continue reading
It is very distressing to many Canadians to see the Minister of Canadian Heritage Mélanie Joly and Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Navdeep Bains twittering like tweens from Washington with those they clearly consider to be the heroes of modern American history, war criminals Henry Kissinger and Colin Powell. It brings the Trudeau government no honour to portray people such as these as someone to emulate. Continue reading
‘Leaks” have their own backstory. Coming just before Netayanhu’s appearance in front of a US Congress presided over by the greatest liars, can we believe it is all mere coincidence? – TS
Zero Hedge (Feb. 23) – It was just over 12 years ago when then Secretary of State Colin Powell spoke to the U.N. Security Council on February 5, 2003, and lied to a packed auditorium of world leaders and the entire world, making the case that Saddam Hussein’s Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Continue reading
Barack Obama is increasingly referred to as Commander in Chief, as Gen Colin Powell, former Secretary of State and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, did in the recent election. Obama must make certain the public treasury can be utilized for U.S. war aims in conditions where the economy is not recovering. His regime is also paying first rate attention to the home front, as the revelations of the broad scope of spying on Americans illustrate. Obama also drew support from Michel Bloomberg, Republican mayor of New York, which boasts what he openly called one of the “largest armies” in the country, referring to the highly armed New York Police Department (NYPD) and large bureaucracy of city government. The NYPD, which also works directly with the CIA, has its own tanks, helicopters and missiles. Obama thus has his forces in control of both Chicago and New York City and their massive police forces. The following two items illustrate how, as the current cold civil war within the USA between factions within the ruling circles is going hot, the American state is preparing its military and police forces on the home front to keep the people repressed while keeping the union whole. Or at least that is what the rulers hope.
Pentagon prepares doctrine on using force on American soil
Secrecy News – THE Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 generally prohibits military forces from performing ordinary civilian law enforcement functions such as arrest, surveillance, interdiction, search and seizure.
But a newly updated Department of Defense doctrinal publication notes that, despite this prohibition, “There are several forms of direct assistance to civilian law enforcement by military personnel that are permitted under the Military Purpose Doctrine. The Military Purpose Doctrine provides that law enforcement actions that are performed primarily for a military purpose, even when incidentally assisting civil authorities, will not violate the PCA [Posse Comitatus Act].” Continue reading
IN THE WAKE of Hurricane Sandy, political pundits have been agog over the volte-face by New Jersey republican governor Chris Christie towards President Barack Obama, and the seeming shift in electoral polls in the week before the U.S. election due to the stage that the hurricane provided Obama “to look presidential.” The Vancouver Province headlined a CP article, “Political world abuzz over Obama/Christie bro-mance”(November 5). Gov. Christie “said Obama had been ‘outstanding,’ while tersely dismissing questions about when Romney might be welcome to come to New Jersey, as the president did, to survey the damage.” It seems that more than federal relief funds and hurricane gawking were at play. For the information of our readers, we are providing an incisive news analysis of the secret deal-making amongst the U.S. ruling factions in the wake of the superstorm from TML Weekly Information Project, which has published a complete edition on the U.S. electoral fraud.
Commentary, The Marxist-Leninist Daily, 18 March 2003
Protest against the deployment to the Persian Gulf of the HMCS Iroquois, Halifax, on February 24, 2003
SPEAKING in the House of Commons as it reconvened March 17 after a two week break, Prime Minister Jean Chrétien stated that “Canada will not participate” in the U.S.-led aggression against Iraq. At the same time Chrétien stated that Canada will be part of “rebuilding” a post-war Iraq. He stated that Canada will not pull its three ships out of the region saying they are needed to fulfill this country’s commitment to the war on terror. They are essentially protecting ships of the U.S., its allies and other powers in the area, he said. He also stated that 31 Canadian soldiers on exchange with British and American units in the Gulf region will be allowed to remain with their units, but would be unlikely to see battle in Iraq. Continue reading
By SANDRA L. SMITH*
WHAT prompted Canada to give the U.S. the “statement of support” it demanded to launch aggression against Iraq? Canadian opposition to Bush’s war is so widespread that even Liberal MPs admit that their constituency offices are flooded with calls and e-mails from their own Liberal supporters enraged by Canada’s announcement that it is prepared to join Bush’s war without UN sanction.
While these MPs claim to oppose Canada’s participation in such a war, the Canadian working class and people must be very clear that every conceivable argument is being put forward to conciliate with Bush’s war. One Liberal MP who claims to oppose going to war says it can only be justified “in two extreme cases”: if the UN is deadlocked and thereby unable to make a decision, and if there is indisputable proof that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. Continue reading