Years from now when the East resumes world leadership after five centuries of savage European racist domination and the UN is free of colonial powers control, people will look back in astonishment to UN debates in which nations bombed and invaded by the US and NATO were unable call for justice under the Nuremberg Principles of international law. Syria allowing the US to get away genocide in 2015 one example.
Truth (as in documented history of the United State of America and Syria)
“Assad Must Go, Obama Says” ((Washington Post, August 18, 2011.))
Four years later the United States is still openly funding various organizations committed to this purpose, most of which consists of armed invaders of Syria, all the while the CIA has been reported to be helping train various morphing groups, even before being reported to be behind, along with Pentagon, ISIS, the latest such anti Syrian government group to to have entered into Syria. ((When was Isis formed?
Under its former name Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (Isis), it was formed in April 2013, growing out of al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI). It has since been disavowed by al-Qaeda, but has become one of the main jihadist groups fighting government forces in Syria and Iraq.??
Which country created Al Qaeda?
In this video Hillary Clinton admits that the US government created and funded Al-Qaeda in order to fight the soviet union, and she even considers that as a good thing.
“While the U.S. officially condemns ISIS, it has routinely been caught funding them.” — U.S. General: West Created ISIS, American Free Press. Theodore Shoebat, “ISIS Leader Admits: We Are Being Funded By The Obama Administration,” Shoebat.com, February 20, 2015. Seaumas Milne, “??How the US fuelled the rise of Isis in Syria and Iraq?,” Guardian??, June 3, 2015.))
All this most certainly constitutes crimes against peace and crimes against humanity under Nuremberg Principles of International law. ((The UN Charter: Article 2
The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles.
1. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.
2. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations. (Article 1. of Purposes of the United Nations reads: To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace.) )), ((Principles of International Law Recognized in the Charter of the Nürnberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal, subsequently part of the Charter of the United Nations, and by the way by Article II of the US Constitution, a integral part of that constitution (“In the United States…, our constitution declares a treaty to be the law of the land. It is, consequently, to be regarded in courts of justice as equivalent to an act of the legislature, whenever it operates of itself, without the aid of any legislative provision.” — Chief Justice Marshall in 1829:)
Principle I
Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefor and liable to punishment.
Principle II
The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes a crime under international law does not relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under international law.
Principle III
The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible Government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law.
Principle IV
The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.
Principle V
Any person charged with a crime under international law has the right to a fair trial on the facts and law.
Principle VI
Crimes punishable as crimes under international law include:
a) Crimes against peace
b) War crimes
c) Crimes against humanity))
Diplomatic Truth
Instead of settling regional and international conflicts by peaceful means, some known countries continue pursuing aggressive policies against certain nations. Political hypocrisy increases to intervene in the domestic affairs of States under the pretext of humanitarian intervention or the responsibility to protect. And when those aggressive policies did not prove beneficial for some countries, like Syria, those well-known States reveal their true face and threaten with blatant military consensus. Those same countries were supporting terrorism in Syria. ((Spoken by Syria’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Walid al Moualem during the UN General Assembly Debate.))
Note the absence of naming the US, Britain, France, NATO, Turkey, Israel, Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Instead: “some known countries continue pursuing aggressive policies against certain nations”
Since President Obama passed on the decision of the ruling financial element in the centers of power that have owned the US government since the early 1930s, ((“The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson.” — President Franklin Roosevelt in a letter to his close confidant Colonel House in 1932.)) almost a quarter of a million Syrians have met violent death and millions have been made refugees.
QUESTION: With so many of his country’s people already dead and millions fleeing to Europe, why was Syria’s Foreign Minister unable to call a spade a spade. Is it fear? Will it make US leaders less likely to bomb and finish the job as they have threatened to do twice.
Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al Moualem:
The international community should act in accordance with the relevant resolutions on counter-terrorism and take measures to compel the countries financing, arming, training and providing safe havens and passage for terrorists.
A quarter million dead, and no call for prosecution of what the Foreign Minister certainly described as crimes against peace and crimes against humanity in the Nuremberg Principles of international law in the UN Charter.
Also embarrassing, was the Foreign Minister’s use of the term “the international community,” long used as a euphemism for the colonial powers. These now neocolonial powers still dictate to the rest of the world, which is the real international community of more than two hundred nations that make up the United Nations.
Syrian Foreign Minister continued:
We were the ones targeted by poisonous gases in Khan al-Assal, near Aleppo,” he said. Syria had requested an investigation mission and demanded the inclusion in its mandate the ability to determine who had used chemical weapons, but the United States, France and the United Kingdom had limited the [UN] mission’s functions to deciding whether chemical weapons had been used. The mission had been awaited for more than five months and then withdrawn before completing its work.
The Syrian delegate pointing out what appears to be a UN Secretariat’s insidious cooperation with the Syrian government’s self-announced enemies, might well have been expected to call for a criminal investigation of that mission’s impartiality, but none was called for though Syria had been put in great danger, being falsely condemned in corporate media and targeted for US air strikes while the UN mission’s stonewalled on releasing its findings.
Syrian Foreign Minister:
There remains the challenge that is facing all of us whether those who are supplying terrorists with these types of weapon will abide by their legal commitments, since terrorists who used poisonous gases have received chemical agents from regional and Western countries that are well known to us…
Perhaps for overly diplomatic language, there appears to be a confusion here. “Those supplying terrorists with weapons” are prosecutable as criminals. What legal commitment could be expected from investors in terrorism? Moreover, what else but prosecution with lawsuits for indemnity could possibly dissuade profit intended investment?
The Foreign Minster clearly identified the US and it allies as having committed a crime against humanity in Syria. But when there is accusation of crime, usually and logically there follows a demand for prosecution and justice for victims. But illogically, the Foreign Minister’s statement contains no such demand, and what he said next was tantamount to a weak plea for Syria’s attackers US and EU to “refrain” from breaking the law:
The United States and the European Union should refrain from imposing immoral economic measures that contradicted the rules of international law and the principles of free trade, and accordingly lift the embargo on Cuba, as well as all unilateral coercive measures imposed on Syria, Venezuela, Belarus, Iran and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.
Sadly, the Foreign Minister when speaking of support for the US-Iran nuclear deal inexplicably used words that seemed to put another US victim, Iran, on a par with its deadly attacker: “Syria looked positively upon efforts by the United States and Iran to bridge the gap of mistrust and hoped it would reflect constructively on the stability of international relations.”
The Foreign Minister citing a “gap of mistrust” seemed to minimize the criminal sanctions and threats of nuclear attack of the US, as if the constantly popularized “mistrust” of Iran was something other than an excuse for continuing US actions to dominate Iran as it has done since its CIA with British secret services organized the violent conditions for the bloody overthrow of Iran’s democratic government in 1953.
And in confirming his country’s support for the right of the Palestinian people to an independent State, Foreign Affairs Minister Walid al Moualem paid the same lip service line as almost every other delegate that spoke at this 2015 General Debate, while Iran, Syria’s closest ally, calls for one democratic state for all the inhabitants of Palestine, as did Yehudi Menuhin, Albert Einstein, and Martin Buber. They, as perhaps as much as million orthodox Jews the world over today look back on a a typical British Empire joint Anglo-American colonial crime against humanity that used the survivors of a Holocaust and WW II made possible by enormous American investment in, and joint venturing with, a prostate Nazi Germany that built Hitler’s Wehrmacht up to world number one military in five years, all the while Hitler was targeting Communists, Jews, Roma, and others in Europe.
The incipient colonial powers created the UN, with only one quarter of the members of today’s UN members, and pressured the UN into approving a phony and insane never meant to be implemented UN partition plan that would as expected torch the “holy land into permanent civil war that would allow for the right Zionists funded by Wall Street to force a brave international socialist Zionist majority to fight for their lives and at the same time be used conquer out a military state to serve as a Western outpost in the oil rich Arab lands.
By calling for a two-state solution of Palestine, in opposition to its ally Iran’s calling for a single democratic state, the Syrian foreign minister seems to have Syria backing the continued division of Palestine as most everyone else does while sleepwalking through reality. Your archival research peoples historian has written about the same colonial powers, who forced through passage of the pretentious United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine intended to torch the British ruled and occupied Holy Land, having, for sixty-seven years, kept up a murderously deceitful pretense of trying to bring peace to Palestine and the oil rich Middle East. ((Jay Janson, “US Economic Facilitation of Holocaust and Middle East Destabilizing Partition,” Minority Perspective, 6 December, 2012.))
There has been for decades an atmosphere of appeasement in the UN General Assembly’s yearly General Debate. Years from now when the East resumes it world leadership in political economy and the arts and sciences after five centuries of savage European racist domination and after the United Nations is reconstituted and free of colonial powers control, people will look back in astonishment to UN General Debates in which nations bombed and invaded by the US and NATO merely complained at first and then were silent for years, unable for fear of more punishing sanctions, to logically call for justice under the Nuremberg Principles of international law.
Devastated Syria, allowing the US to get away with genocide again during the 2015 General Debate of the UN General Assembly, is just one example in a field, which Martin Luther King described as atrocity wars and covert violence on three continents since 1945 meant to maintain unjust predatory investments that Americans refuse to give up the immense profits therefrom bringing privileges and pleasures. (( “Beyond Vietnam – a Time to Break Silence,” sermon of Martin Luther King April 1967.))