26 April 2005
Useless self investigations
It was interesting to read about US military investigators "clearing" their soldiers of wrongfully killing Italian agent, Nicola Calipari. I'm sure this will accepted unquestioningly by an Italian public who opposed their government's involvement in Iraq in the first place! To survive politically, PM Berlusconi will have to add Italy's name to the incredible shrinking Coalition of the Willing soon.
Another interesting piece of politico-military farce was the US military Inspector-General's report "clearing" top brass of any knowledge, involvement and wrongdoing in the disgraceful abuses and deaths of prisoners detained in Iraq and Afghanistan; the most publicly notorious of which was Abu Ghraib. I'm sure this report will erase any doubts we all have of a cover up.
Did I also mention that Dubya is a card carrying member of the Democrat Party working under cover?
The events mentioned above, are but just two examples where the US military is a law unto itself; answerable in theory, only to the commander-in-chief, the president. But of course, we know how anxious he is for accountability to be laid at his doorstep. That must have been why he re-appointed Rummie as Secretary of Defence!
Take the prison abuses and murders issue for example.
Do we not think it a little far-fetched that identical methods of torture, abuse and murder across prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan operated by the US military aren't the results of an official policy? Is it possible for independent and separate groups of half-witted hill billy hick junior GIs to systematically implement identical techniques across so many facilities? Do we really believe that all these activities can occur for so long without the knowledge of the top brass, and not be under their orders?
The US military loves to brag about its water-tight chain of command and of the professionalism of its personnel. Yet, in the above cases, the top brass claim not to know a skerrit of what happened! How can they have it both ways?
In truth, the US military's history is less than stellar. Just ask the families of women and girls raped and murdered by US troops in modern day Okinawa and Korea. Despite protests from the local courts, the US military spirited the accused soldiers out of those countries to avoid trial. In most legal systems around the world, including that of the US, helping a suspect to flee legal action for a crime, is itself, a crime. And it's punishable with a jail sentence.
The question is why does the US government not allow its personnel to be tried for crimes committed in a civilian jurisdiction of a foreign country?
Is it because it doesn't believe their personnel will get a fair trial? Are the Japanese and Korean legal systems not good enough for US military personnel? If this is true, then the US government is really saying that Japan and Korea aren't democracies, are they? So why not go spread neo-con freedom and democracy there too?
It is a fact that the Bush regime also refuses to join the International Criminal Court (ICC). The refusal is based upon the belief that to do so, would invite "groundless" charges of war crimes against US military personnel. That would be fine provided the US military is capable of holding its own accountable. But cases of Nicola Calipari, Abu Ghraib and of many Japanese and Korean women raped by US soldiers suggest otherwise.
In 1945, the US liberated concentration camp prisoners, actively prosecuted war crimes committed by German and Japanese officials and military personnel in an international court. In many cases, senior officials were hanged even though they did not commit the actual murders of their victims.
In 2005, Bush refuses to join the ICC, launches a illegal war (an act identical to war crimes charges made against Germany and Japan), maintains concentration camps, and refuses to jail a Cabinet Secretary and any general for prisoners who were abused and murdered.
Bush has really changed America, hasn't he?
Another interesting piece of politico-military farce was the US military Inspector-General's report "clearing" top brass of any knowledge, involvement and wrongdoing in the disgraceful abuses and deaths of prisoners detained in Iraq and Afghanistan; the most publicly notorious of which was Abu Ghraib. I'm sure this report will erase any doubts we all have of a cover up.
Did I also mention that Dubya is a card carrying member of the Democrat Party working under cover?
The events mentioned above, are but just two examples where the US military is a law unto itself; answerable in theory, only to the commander-in-chief, the president. But of course, we know how anxious he is for accountability to be laid at his doorstep. That must have been why he re-appointed Rummie as Secretary of Defence!
Take the prison abuses and murders issue for example.
Do we not think it a little far-fetched that identical methods of torture, abuse and murder across prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan operated by the US military aren't the results of an official policy? Is it possible for independent and separate groups of half-witted hill billy hick junior GIs to systematically implement identical techniques across so many facilities? Do we really believe that all these activities can occur for so long without the knowledge of the top brass, and not be under their orders?
The US military loves to brag about its water-tight chain of command and of the professionalism of its personnel. Yet, in the above cases, the top brass claim not to know a skerrit of what happened! How can they have it both ways?
In truth, the US military's history is less than stellar. Just ask the families of women and girls raped and murdered by US troops in modern day Okinawa and Korea. Despite protests from the local courts, the US military spirited the accused soldiers out of those countries to avoid trial. In most legal systems around the world, including that of the US, helping a suspect to flee legal action for a crime, is itself, a crime. And it's punishable with a jail sentence.
The question is why does the US government not allow its personnel to be tried for crimes committed in a civilian jurisdiction of a foreign country?
Is it because it doesn't believe their personnel will get a fair trial? Are the Japanese and Korean legal systems not good enough for US military personnel? If this is true, then the US government is really saying that Japan and Korea aren't democracies, are they? So why not go spread neo-con freedom and democracy there too?
It is a fact that the Bush regime also refuses to join the International Criminal Court (ICC). The refusal is based upon the belief that to do so, would invite "groundless" charges of war crimes against US military personnel. That would be fine provided the US military is capable of holding its own accountable. But cases of Nicola Calipari, Abu Ghraib and of many Japanese and Korean women raped by US soldiers suggest otherwise.
In 1945, the US liberated concentration camp prisoners, actively prosecuted war crimes committed by German and Japanese officials and military personnel in an international court. In many cases, senior officials were hanged even though they did not commit the actual murders of their victims.
In 2005, Bush refuses to join the ICC, launches a illegal war (an act identical to war crimes charges made against Germany and Japan), maintains concentration camps, and refuses to jail a Cabinet Secretary and any general for prisoners who were abused and murdered.
Bush has really changed America, hasn't he?
