Jump to navigation
[url=http://rabble.ca/babble/international-news-and-politics/natos-canadian-c... from this thread-chunk[/url]
[quote=Postmedia News, November 19,]A UN commission is now looking into whether pro-Gadhafi, rebels or NATO forces committed war crimes or crimes against humanity. The International Criminal Court could investigate if it deems there is enough evidence to support any allegation.
Bouchard is adamant war crimes were not committed under his command, including the killing of civilians. He says pro-Gadhafi forces dug bodies up from graves and brought them to places that had been bombed, where they then claimed NATO bombs were responsible.
“I set three standards that the team followed: Was this legal? Was this moral? And was this ethical?” he says. “And if we crossed those three lines, we wouldn’t do it.”[/quote]
I guess crossing just one of those lines was OK.
War Criminals Are Not Welcome in Halifax - by Tony Seed
"...From Panetta on down, the participants (300 in all) have been summoned from a select handful of countries: the US, Canada, Germany and those who wish to subordinate national sovereignty to the strategic interests of the imperialists and NATO...
The Harper government is sending Lieutenant General Charles ['The Butcher'] Bouchard to the HISF as its star representative and saviour of the Libyan people. Bouchard should also be put on trial for war crimes; he was commander of the overthrow of the country's government and the extrajudicial killing of Gadhafi and others.
Bouchard made clear he held final authority for approving all targets. On November 6, CBC Newsworld interviewed Bouchard about the need for 'action' against Syria with the Libyan war as 'a template'.
In short the US and Canadian governments remain committed to varying forms of interference and intervention throughout the world in order to safeguard the interests of the big monopolies and financial institutions in the same measure that foreign intervention in the internal affairs of Canada as exemplified by the HSIF is escalating.
It is in these circumstances that all democratic people must take a stand..."
20 Minutes For Peace
"20 Minutes for Peace was founded on Nov 17, 2011, as a response to the Canadian government announcement to hold a special day of celebration in Ottawa to honour the role of Canada's military during NATO's War in Libya.
A number of Canadian citizens dedicated to the cause of Peace and against War are amongst the initial sponsors. If you would like to assist us with this project, please contact us at firstname.lastname@example.org
See 'Events in Your Community':
Toronto - Queen's Park (South Entrance), November 24, 11:10 ET
Will the UN Insist on Fair Trials For Ex Regime Loyalists in Libya? - by Franklin Lamb
"What the White House and NATO want is for former key Gadhafi loyalists like Seif al Islam to be silenced (reminding one of Saddam, Osama ande Muammar) before they can reveal criminal dealings by NATO country leaders. Chances are the jailed defendants will be killed unless the UN Security Council, which allowed the destruction of Libya via UNSC Resolution 1973, intervention to uphold UN humanitarian principles.."
NATO's Great Victory: Destroying Libya's Welfare State - by Dan Kovalik
"...This without tongue in cheek, or any note of irony, NPR, in its November 14 report entitled, 'Libya's Economy Faces New Tests After Gadhafi Era', explained that the biggest impediment to the new economic era is the Libyan worker who was simply too coddled by Gaddafi.
NPR thus cited a 2007 book on the Libyan economy by authors Otman and Karlberg who called 'the Libyan worker under Gadhafi one of the most protected in the world,' receiving job tenure, government subsidies of around $800 a month for the average Libyan household, and gasoline at a mere 60 cents a gallon.
NPR, citing the same book, explained that woerkers now freed from such a tyrannical world by NATO bombs, have been left with a 'subsidy mentality' and a 'job for life outlook which has ill prepared Libyans for the more aggressive and cutthroat world of competition.
For NATO, its corporate allies and its media mouthpieces, such prosperity for workers simply will not do..."
Harper Government Snubs Afghan Veterans With His Large-Scale Celebration of Canada's Libyan War 'Heroes' Say Afghan Veterans - by David Pugliese
"There seems to be a growing anger - maybe resentment is a better word - about the celebrations scheduled for Thursday for the Libya mission. The Harper government has planned a full-on extravaganza with a flyby of 10 aircraft over Parliament Hill and a medal award ceremony, attended by the Prime Minister himself for Lt. Gen Charles Bouchard who oversaw the NATO mission..."
What's the point of this? Some veterans of the Afghanistan war are pissed off because they aren't getting the heroes' celebration they think they deserve?
And Harper promises the Afghanistan vets will have their triumphant celebration in 2014 when the Afghan "mission" [i]really[/i] ends?
Have I got that right?
Former Libyan PM Exposes US-NATO Machinations - by Oliver Campbell
"Revealing comments by the former prime minister of Libya's National Transitional Council (NTC) government, Mahmoud Jibril, have further exposed the predatory character of the US-NATO campaign in Libya. Far from being a humanitarian mission to 'save the Libyan people' the war to oust Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi was aimed at seizing control of the country's oil wealth...
Not surprisingly, Jibril's revealing comments have largely gone unnoticed by those who aligned themselves with the US-NATO attack, falsely claiming that it was a humanitarian mission to protect the Libyan people. A significant layer of liberals, former pacifists and ex-lefts openly sided with the attack on Libya, strenuously denying that imperialist interests were at play.
Not that the predatory character of the war is increasingly exposed, they maintain a deafening silence..."
Pro-Gaddafi Report Resulted From Privately-Funded Canadian Fact-Finding Mission - by Stewart Bell
"According to sources who have seen it, a private Canadian report claims that NATO forces and anti-Gaddafi rebels committed atrocities and war crimes. The Vanier Consulting study was impartially titled 'Fact Finding Report - Mission Date July 17, 2011 - July 26, 2011', but several people who have seen it called it pro-Gaddafi and said it claimed NATO forces and Libyan rebels had committed atrocities and war crimes...
Following the fact-finding mission, the consultant, Cynthia Vanier, was mysteriously arrested in Mexico city along with two partners of the retired US Marine who supplied the plane for the Libya trip. The RCMP has also questioned at least two of those who took part in the expedition.."
obviously the consultants' report was not 'on message'
'Victory in Libya No Cause for Celebration - by Scott Taylor
"If your technological advantage over the enemy allows you to hover for two hours with impunity over an air defense system, before destroying it at your leisure, then it is not really war - it's murder.
If a world champion boxer climbed into the ring against a blind paraplegic in a wheelchair and proceeded to pound the helpless victim to death, we would not consider it a sport. It would be equally laughable if it took eight full rounds - or in the case of combating Libya, eight full months - to pulverize the opponent into submission..
In recognition of Canada's not-yet-fully-disclosed special forces role played in Libya, members of the Canadian Special Operations Regiment also had a colour party in the parade.
Singled out for personal recognition was Lt.-Gen. Charles Bouchard, the Canadian air force officer who had been in overall command of the NATO mission in Libya. 'He was tough, he was able, he took no prisoners,' claimed US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta..."
Not only must Bouchard stand trial for war crimes, but all those senior officers who willingly and knowingly assisted him in planning and committing those crimes.
It Was An Operation to Eliminate the Libyan Leader Planned by NATO (and vid)
Convoy of Leader Moammar Al Gaddafi After NATO Humanitarian Intervention (and vid)
Anatomy Of A NATO War Crime - by Franklin Lamb
"...Later as I learned more about Khaled's family and saw their most expressive and revealing photos, I came to believe that with respect to the wanton criminal aggression that caused thousands of needless deaths of innocents over the period of nearly nine months against this simple, gentle society that Najia, Safa, Salam, Khaleda and Kheweldi and the others slaughtered at Sorman are forever iconic representatives of all the innocent civilians who were slaughtered in Libya since March 2011
What our General Bouchard and his NATO bombing wrought
What Moammar Gaddafi wrought (among many incl disco bombings etc)
CDN_FORCES, this thread is about the war crimes NATO and its constituents enacted or in which they are complicit. Your decontextualized propaganda is not constructive or welcome here. Not to mention that one war crime does not justify another. Such a mindset is antithetical to babble policy and culture. Please keep that in mind if you are going to continue to post here.
No one ever said tit-for-tat is kosher, but if Libya hadn't been ruled by a deranged man for 42 years it's probable that the relations between it and the world would never have resulted in Berlin disco bombings, followed by Gulf of Sidra/Gaddhafi compound, followed by Lockerbie, followed by Operation Unified Protector. The chain of events seems to be one of action and re-action with larger and larger body counts.
I find the unrelenting focus on alledged Canadian war crimes in Libya to be offensive, considering that:
1. Canada did not target any weapons on civilians, or in areas where there was a valid military target but the blast would have placed civilians in danger;
2. Canada did not drop any weapons inside built up urban areas or use DU or other nastier weapons (and yes a 500 lb bomb is nasty enough);
3. LGen Bouchard was acting under a legal mandate (i.e. the UN, and yes the original rationale of "protecting civilians" soon morphed into "get Gaddafi" by the politicians); and
4. [and this is important] every effort was made by NATO as a whole to limit civilian casualties, as opposed to certain leaders who desired maximum civilian deaths.
Now, it would be a waste of time to start a new thread calling for the trial of Gaddafi on war crimes charges. But if someone would post information showing that Canada deliberately targeted civilians, or targeted a military site knowing civilians would also be killed, I'd be the first to condemn those involved.
I find the unrelenting focus on alledged (sic) Canadian war crimes in Libya to be offensive...[/quote]
I find your attempts to justify war crimes offensive.
[quote=Col. Klink]1. Canada did not target any weapons on civilians, or in areas where there was a valid military target but the blast would have placed civilians in danger;
2. Canada did not drop any weapons inside built up urban areas or use DU or other nastier weapons (and yes a 500 lb bomb is nasty enough);[/quote]
[quote=Chris Hedges]The besieging of Sirte by NATO warplanes, which are dropping huge iron fragmentation bombs that will kill scores if not hundreds of innocents, mocks the justification for intervention laid out in a UN Security Council resolution. We have, as always happens in war become the monster we sought to defeat. Our intervention, as in Iraq and Afghanistan, has probably claimed more victims than those killed by the former regime.[/quote][url=http://rabble.ca/babble/international-news-and-politics/natos-canadian-c...
[quote=Col. Klink]3. LGen Bouchard was acting under a legal mandate (i.e. the UN, and yes the original rationale of "protecting civilians" soon morphed into "get Gaddafi" by the politicians);[/quote]
Bouchard's mandate came from NATO, not the UN. And if the "protecting civilians" mission changed into war crimes in pursuit of regime change, Bouchard was responsible. "I was only following orders from politicians" has not been a defence since Nuremberg.
[quote=Col. Klink]4. [and this is important] every effort was made by NATO as a whole to limit civilian casualties, as opposed to certain leaders who desired maximum civilian deaths.[/quote]
I'm sure Qaddafi claimed the same thing, only he wasn't dropping bombs from 10 km up in the air.
[quote]According to NATO figures, coalition aircraft delivered 415 key strikes on the town of Sirte between Sunday 28th August and Thursday 20th October. We have compared this to the bombing of Guernica and other comparisons have been made to the widely condemned levelling of Grozny.
In addition, the rebels, described in NATO circles as a "proxy army” were allowed by NATO to indiscriminately shell the town with tank fire, heavy mortar fire and artillery....It is crystal clear that NATO, who were patrolling the skies above and bombing the town, purportedly to protect civilians, were making no attempt to protect the civilians of Sirte from this indiscriminate use of heavy weaponry.
NATO has declined to comment on why it did nothing to protect the civilians of Sirte and why it has been complicit in these war crimes.[/quote][url=http://humanrightsinvestigations.org/2011/10/27/responsibility-to-protec...
Is the "Col Klink" moniker necessary, M. Spector?
Whether or not it's necessary, it certainly isn't sufficient. Props to Spector for self-restraint.
I suppose it appeals to those who like to make Nazi allusions.
It was a [b]TV[/b] allusion, to a pompous, self-important object of ridicule, who had no inkling of the moral implications of the system he was working for.
If I got the rank wrong, I apologize.
Of course Gaddafi was deranged. He was the Bad Guy after all! They're always deranged! Now, George Bush, Tony Blair who between them butchered thousands more than Gaddafi aspired to - NOT deranged.
And Obama - he who rains Hellfire from the sky, terrorizing Pakistan and a few other nations besides, who in his still unfinished first term has also despatched more innocent mortals to their maker than one Moammar - also not deranged, I'm sure.
That Canada did not target civilians is IRRELEVANT. The undeniable reality of modern warfare - as practiced by Nato, including Canada - GUARANTEES 'collateral damage', such as the tragedy described in Franklin Lamb's account. Even if you dismiss its credibility there are far too many other such reports to be able to deny, in good conscience, that modern warfare is anything but a sordid and disgusting business that destroys innocents as readily as 'the enemy' - whatever brown person in an oil-bearing nation that happens to be. ENOUGH of this shrugging of the shoulders and fumbling for rationalization! War is a criminal enterprise, far surpassing the most bestial of civilian crimes in the scale and depth of the misery and suffering it visits upon the innocent. Think of kidnapping, raping and killing a small child. THAT is the substance of war, its flesh and bone - the repulsive Stephen Harpers' hapless 'Highway of Heroes' notwithstanding.
The criminality of the act must then be in the very decision to go to war, because it is then that hundreds or thousands of innocents are condemned to die. This is an important point. This is why Bouchard, and ultimately Stephen Harper, will burn in hell for the obscenities they have instigated and been party to.
The 'legality' of the war criminal Bouchard's mandate is immaterial. It is obscene to use the term 'war' and 'legality' in the same sentence. The stuff of war is contrary to the very concept of law, it is by its very nature transgressive, using overwhelming violence to impose one party's order upon another. Bouchard oversaw the systematic destruction of a sovereign state's ability to defend itself before going on to pursue the Bad Guy so relentlessly they tracked him down to a culvert, stuck a carving knife up his arse and murdered him. (Yeah, Oopsie! That one's on NATO too, even if they didn't hold the knife. Extra-judicial killings'r'us!)
Would that the problems of Attawaspikat inspired such determined response! (And at @ $100,000 a pop, each of those Raytheon bombs takes the place of one domestic Attawaspikat dwelling!) But I'm sure it's a lot less fun than flying over someone else's country and blowing stuff - and thousands of human beings - to bits.
The trouble is, to the powerful western nations war is something WE do to other people. We're never at risk of anything worse than missing lunch. It is too easy for our imaginations to shrink from the task of picturing the reality of 'war' and in truth, few in the west have much of a clue, Hollywood and the MSM have seen to that.
I note you've provided a fine picture of presumably the hole left by one of the planes destroyed over Lockerbie - as an example of the sort of violent transgression of civilized behavior that meritted the Nato response.
Which was to produce a whole lot of similar holes across the once-sovereign land of Libya. Do you not see the folly in that?
You should check UN Security Council resolution 1973 (17 Mar 2011). NATO was the means, but the UN gave the authority.
And calling me a NAZI? So much for respectful discourse from you I guess...
Nothing ever happens without a reason. The West was eager to normalize relations with Gaddafi once he turned his Lockerbie bomber over. So was Gaddafi because he'd have normal international recognition again. And the West's oil and construction companies were making big fat profits (Quebec-based SNCLavelin was actually buildding Gaddafi a prison). Everyone was content with the situation. It wasn't until he made clear his desire to wipe out the civilian rebels in Benghazi that the UN was pushed to act.
As for war being immoral, at least one party will always be in the wrong, but I don't see any moral requirement to categorically state that all participants are. I don't think there's any need to get into specifics about which wars have been "just".
No one ever said tit-for-tat is kosher, but if Libya hadn't been ruled by a deranged man for 42 years it's probable that the relations between it and the world would never have resulted in Berlin disco bombings, followed by Gulf of Sidra/Gaddhafi compound, followed by Lockerbie, followed by Operation Unified Protector. The chain of events seems to be one of action and re-action with larger and larger body counts.[/quote]
There is probably more evidence that Al-Qaeda-linked terrorist groups bombed the Berlin disco and leading to the US blitzkrieg attack in Libya. That was one of the first times the West tried to murder Gadaffi. And one of the accused Berlin disco bombers confessed to working for Mossad. Later the US and MI6 would recruit London-based cleric Sheikh Omar Bakri Mohammed, the "emir" of the al-Qaeda-linked Islamist group al-Muhajiroun, in the U.S. and NATO's drive to create a militant Islamic base in 1990s Bosnia.
See William Bowles copy of a wsws.org essay: German TV exposes CIA, Mossad links to 1986 Berlin disco bombing By a German correspondent
And there is little evidence that Gadaffi was behind the Lockerbie bombing. A key witnesses for the prosecution in that trial admitted to perjury.
Gadaffi was innocent of most of the West's frame-ups of him. They wanted Libya's oil, CD_FORCEs. And your fellow Canadian Forces comrades have helped to prop-up Al-CIA'duh militants tin Tripoli.
I'm afraid it's true, CDN_FORCES. Your comrades in arms are merely errand boys, sent by grocery clerks, to collect a bill. Our boys in green should put in for pensions with Conoco and BP.
[url=http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article30024.htm]Anatomy Of A NATO War Crime[/url] - by Franklin Lamb[/quote]
This article should not be overlooked. Here are some more excerpts:
[quote]At NATO’s Control and Command Center, the 49 bombing missions planned for early morning of June 20, included a target at Sorman, which would push the number of NATO reconnaissance sorties over Libya to 11,930. This number would become 26,500 by midnight on October 31, when NATO would end its air campaign. The day’s bombing sorties would also bring the tally of rocket and bombing targets to 4,521. This figure would increase to more than 11,781 by late fall, when NATO was instructed to end OUP (Operation Unified Protector).
Before the bombs were fired at Khaled K. al-Hamedi compound, NATO staff conducted a six-step process, the first of which was surveillance using the MQ-9 Reaper UAV, which sometimes is also used to fire missiles. Also above Sorman was a Predator drone with full-motion video. During June 19 and the early hours of June 20, the drones locked on the Hamedi homestead target and relayed updated information to NATO’s command center.
The Hamedi home was not what NATO labels a “time-critical target” so there was plenty of time for its staff to transmit information about the site from unmanned reconnaissance aircraft to intelligence analysts. [b]Almost certainly, according to a source at Jane’s Weekly, NATO UAV’s watched the Hamedi compound over a period of days and presumably observed part of the birthday party being held for three [year] old Huweldi, the day before the order to bomb was issued.[/b]
NATO Rules of Engagement for Operation United Protector, constitute a set of classified documents which present specific and detailed instructions about what is a legitimate target and who can approve the target, whether pre-planned or “on the fly” when a pilot happens upon a target of opportunity. The Sorman attack on the Hamedi home was planned as part of what NATO calls its “Joint Air Tasking Cycle" (JATC). [b]A target development team put the Hamedi home on the June 20 daily list of targets.[/b] The team used a report from NATO intelligence analysts who determined that retired officer Khaled al Huweldi, Hamedi, one of the original members of the Gadhafi-led 1969 coup against King Idris in 1969, and a former member of the Al Fatah Revolution’s Revolutionary Command Council was living on the property. [b]His assassination had been ordered by NATO because they hoped to weaken the regime in some way even though the senior Hamedi was retired and had no decision making role in Libya.[/b]
On June 19, the day before the bombing attack on the Hamedi family at Sorman, [b]NATO was obliged by its own regulations and by the international law of armed conflict to conduct a “potential for collateral damage review” of this mission.[/b]
[b]There is no evidence that this was ever done.[/b]
A requested US Congressional NATO Liaison Office review of the Sorman bombing, initially requested from Libya on August 2, was completed in early September 2011 and found [b]no documentary evidence or other indication that anyone in NATO’s Target Selection Unit, evaluated, discussed, or even considered the subject of potential civilian casualties at the Hamedi home in Sorman.[/b]
Following the green light to bomb the Hamedi home, the coordinates were fixed at 32°45'24"N 12°34'18"E . Specific aim points on the Hamedi property were chosen and [b]eight bombs and missiles[/b] were readied and attached to the strike aircraft.
At Sorman, NATO used a variety of bombs and missiles including the “bunker busting” BLU-109 (Bomb Live Unit) which is designed to penetrate 18 feet of concrete. NATO also used the American MK series of 500 lb, (MK 81) 1000 lb, (MK-82) and the 2000 lb (MK-84) that Israel used so widely during its 2006 invasion of Lebanon.
Following the inferno at Sorman, NATO denied responsibility but the next day NATO admitted carrying out an air strike somewhere in Sorman but [b]denied that there were civilian deaths even as its drones filmed the scene close up. NATO’s media office in Naples issued a statement claiming “A precision air strike was launched against a high-level command and control node in the Sorman area without collateral damage.”[/b] NATO spokespersons also told Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch that [b]“the facility was a legitimate military target and that all necessary precautions were taken before conducting the strike which minimized any potential risk of causing unnecessary casualties”....[/b]
Oddly, NATO records for June 20 as well as subsequent reports of bombing attacks listed for June 20th and June 21st in its daily logs have never included the bombing attack on Sorman or the attack on the Al-Hamedi residence which [b]indisputably killed 15 civilians[/b].
Just before the bombs hit, eye witnesses, reported seeing red specks in the sky and then flashes of intense light, immediately followed by thunderous ear splitting blasts as eight American bombs and rockets pulverized their neighbor’s homestead.
In an instant Khaled El-Hamedi’s family was dead. The children were crushed, blown apart or shredded into pieces, along with friends and extended family members who had slept overnight....
[b]Canadian Lieutenant General Charles Bouchard insists to this day that only Libya’s military was targeted:[/b] "This important strike will greatly degrade Gadhafi regime forces' ability to carry on their barbaric assault against the Libyan people,” he told the media from his office in Brussels.[/quote]
He gets few things correct.
1. "as eight American bombs and rockets pulverized their neighbor’s homestead".
The US had stopped dropping any weapons by about the end of April, and Canada certainly never dropped weapons there.
2. "NATO records for June 20 as well as subsequent reports of bombing attacks listed for June 20th and June 21st in its daily logs have never included the bombing attack on Sorman or the attack on the Al-Hamedi residence".
That's because NATO aircraft never dropped any bombs on Sorman.
3. There were "other", non-NATO airforces involved in Libya. I'll let you fill in the blanks.
Col. Klink wrote:
I find the unrelenting focus on alledged (sic) Canadian war crimes in Libya to be offensive...
Yes, what admirable restraint. Address CDN_FORCES by his proper babble ID M. Spector.
Blanks? You must be referring to our old allies in the anticommunist jihad made new again after 1992...
Congressman Kucinich on the Al-Qa'eda flag now flying over Libya & Langley YouTube Nov.
Russia Urges UN Probe of Libya Killing
"Russia has renewed a call on the UN Security Council to launch an investigation into the killing of dozens of civilians during NATO's bombing campaign in Libya..."
NATO's Depraved Disregard for Libya - by Glen Ford
"By the standard of international law, the entire NATO chain of command, civilian and military, should face trial for war crimes.."
Tougher Foreign Policy Vital to Canada: Baird
"...It took a solid, personal relationship at the top between the prime minister and the president in order to initiate something, successfully see its conclusion and announce it, Baird says. 'The same is true with the mission in Libya,' he adds. 'I think Libya's a big success because of strong leadership on behalf of the prime minister, Baird says, though he also praises Gen. Charles Bouchard, the Canadian commander who oversaw the NATO operation.
In fact, the foreign affairs minister describes Libya as Canada's biggest diplomatic accomplishment in the past year. 'No doubt the diplomatic work, the coalition-building and the military success in Libya was a big one for Canada,' he says. 'How many thousands, tens of thousands, of civilian lives were saved? It's just a remarkable accomplishment. Gadhafi was just the worst of the worst.'
The Canadian military has emerged as a major player in Canadian foreign policy in recent years, bolstered by the fact the Defence Department budget has increased nearly $5.6 billion to $20.3 billion since the Conservative government came into power. This includes the purchase of new aircract, ships and armoured vehicles, as well as heavy combat roles in Afghanistan and Libya..."
Charles the Butcher has just been made an [url=http://www.gg.ca/document.aspx?id=14390]Officer of the Order of Canada[/url] in recognition of his crimes, along with his colleague, Gen Rick "scumbags" Hillier.
"For his contribution to global peacekeeping and security, and for his support for the protection of human rights."
And so we continue to live and support a system of official lies of which this is just the latest. Lt. Gen Charles Bouchard (RCAF) is an unindicted mass murdering warcriminal who killed Libyans for Canada and NATO's dirty blood-money.
'Victory' In Libya A Stretch - by Scott Taylor
"I noted with interest that in the latest crop of Order of Canada recipients was none other than recently retired Lt. Gen. Charles Bouchard...
After a major firefight between two militia groups in Tripoli last week, Mustafa Abdul-Jalil, the NTC leader, had to concede that Libya is on the brink of civil war. According to Jalil, the two options available are to either have the fledgling national security force attempt to disarm the militias and 'put the Libyans in a military confrontation, which we don't accept, or we split and there will be civil war.'
As neither of these options precludes further senseless bloodshed in Libya, one has to wonder what medal Harper will next present to Bouchard in the Conservative government's continuing attempts to polish an ever stinkier turd."
US Medal to Canadian NATO Commander
"Minister MacKay congratulates Lieutenant General Bouchard upon his receipt of the US Legion of Merit.
The US Legion of Merit is the sixth highest in order of precedence in the US, and may be awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by exceptionally meritorious conduct in performing outstanding service to the United States..."
and that, without a doubt, is what it's really all about.
Rumor and Anger Mount in Libya - by Franklin Lamb
"...The population today in Libya is increasingly furious because more and more cases are coming to light concerning the high number of children who have been killed by NATO.."
'We did our part. We did important work. We are proud of the work done by our soldiers. We are proud of their actions. I would like to personally thank them for their excellent work and I know that all of my colleagues of all political stripes, join me in thanking them.." NDP
Human Rights Groups Charge NATO With War Crimes in Libya - by Bill Van Auken
"There is strong evidence that NATO carried out warcrimes in its eight-month war for regime change in Libya, according to a report released Thursday by Middle East human rights groups. 'We have reason to think that there were some warcrimes perpetrated by NATO,' Raji Sourani, the head of the Palestinian Center for Human Rights told the British Independent newspaper.
The mission's report noted that the effort to determine the scale of these crimes was hindered by the 'apparent desire' among the anti- Gaddafi elements who have taken control 'to protect NATO, or avoid any direct or indirect criticism.'
The report concludes that the evidence of warcrimes in the military intervention for regime change in Libya 'necessitates' effective investigation including, where appropriate, THE PROSECUTION OF THOSE RESPONSIBLE.'
Would it be too much to expect, given that these warcrimes were at the least, presided over, if not orchestrated, by RCAF Lt. Gen. Charles 'The Butcher' Bouchard, NATO's Canadian Commander, that our parliamentary opposition, immediately call for further inquiries? Should there not be immediate responses from the opposition leadership? Is Mr Dewar, the Foreign Affairs critic in particular, going to maintain his obscene silence on a matter of such critical concern to Canadians?
NATO's Grisly Crimes in Libya
"...The report exposes the human rights and democratic pretexts employed by the US, France, Britain, [Canada] and other NATO accomplices to carry out a colonial style war of conquest. It makes clear that UN Security Council Resolution 1973, imposing a 'no-fly zone' and arms embargo on Libya supposedly to protect civilians from repressive actions by Muammar Gaddafi, was in fact used to carry out a ruthless air war waged in coordination with 'rebel' forces on the ground.
The report on US-NATO war crimes is also a further indictment of the assortment of 'left' parties, intellectuals and academics who parroted the human rights pretexts of Washington and NATO and thus gave open or backhanded support to the invasion of Libya.."
Paul Dewar is away campaigning for the leadership, isn't he? If so, he's conveniently ducking his "foreign critic" (aka cheerleader) responsibilities.
Should we even bother to write to him?
yes, just so they can't claim they didn't know. Send them this as well..
Blame NATO For the Mess in Libya - by Ramzy Baroud
"...As for the accused, it is no other than the NTC, which itself was a NATO political construct aimed at leading the political transition in Libya to serve Western interests. It turned out that 'mission accomplished' in Libya was yet another hoax. The result is no less devastating than what transpired in Iraq.
The NATO war on Libya was commanded by a Canadian, Lt. Gen. Charles ['The Butcher'] Bouchard. Last June, Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird was quoted as saying that Libya should not be expected to go from 'Gaddafi to Thomas Jefferson'. He failed to elaborate on what kind of democracy NATO intended to achieve with its 9,600-strike mission.
To berate Libyans for failing to adhere to human rights is brazen hypocrisy, especially as many of NATO's victims are still not fully accounted for. The behaviour of militias, and the unrepresentative NTC are simply a continuation of the very violent legacy set forth by the very NATO countries that are demanding accountability, democracy and the rule of law."
Canada Needs More Accurate Bombs, Says Head of Libyan Mission
"...Bouchard would not comment on the allegations of NATO-caused civilian casualties
'I'm aware of investigations into allegations of civilian casualties,' he said. 'There are allegations and I look forward to the conduct of these investigations and I look forward to the results.'..Bouchard warned military planners, politicians and the public against becoming too beholden by the success in Libya.."
Canadian Commander in Libya Warns of Tough Transition
"The Canadian commander of the NATO-led military mission in Libya says the West should lower expectations for full fledged democracy in that country. 'Our western standards must be tempered by the cultural and social experiences,' Bouchard said, adding he is aware of reports of torture in Libya. He stressed the country appears to be moving toward what he called a 'Libyan democracy'."
However, before Bouchard the butcher and NATO bombed it back into the stone age, and put their NTC proxy NATO-RATS in charge, the UN put Libya 54th on its Human Development Index, and in January 2011 noted that:
'Protection of human rights were guaranteed in the Libya Arab Jamahiriya; this included not only political rights, but also economic, social and cultural rights. The Libyan Arab Jamahiriya referred to its pioneering experience in the field of wealth distribution and labor rights.."
All you global legalists who want to put Bush or Bouchard on trial are living in some kind of totalitaian utopia. Why has so much of the Left such deference for this ICC created by Western powers to serve their interests in Africa. To niavely accuse NATO of WAR CRIMES in Libya is to politically sanction the intervention EXCEPT FOR the children killed. The ICC is a kangaroo court with no real legitamcy except in its name and its not even supported by the four largest powers. Now African pro-Western elites are using it in their interest (Ivory Coast and Kenya)
Nobody here has deference for the ICC.
The ICC is a kangaroo court with no legitimacy mainly because scofflaw war criminals like Bouchard are immune to its jurisdiction. Putting Bouchard and the other NATO criminals on trial would be at least a start at levelling the playing field in international humanitarian and war law.
Besides, what better way to expose the illegitimacy and built-in bias of the ICC than to demonstrate that white, western war criminals are getting a free pass?
Of course - a fixed game. And the ICC especially is purely for official enemies not their own, Butchers like Bouchard or Bush. However...
'a trial is never a binary operation that can be completely programmed like a computer. What you might call the 'Frankenstein syndrome' is ever present, especially in international affairs...'
international lawyer Jacques Verges on his 'Rupture' defence strategy
So you both are global legalists after all, hoping for some totalitarian utopia (world government?) where the Bushes and Bouchards WILL BE put on trial (along with Kaddafi and the others). And the Clintons and Obamas and Blairs? You've accepted the dream of William Pace, President of the World Federalists of the USA, who, with a coalition of NGO's, after the Western triumph in the Cold War, launched the idea of LEGAL, not POLITICAL, solutions to the problem of violence in the New World Order.
What are you on about, anyway?
You don't think the ICC is above all else POLITICAL?
If I'm opposed to impunity for western war criminals does that make me a world federalist or a global legalist?
What do you think should be done with criminals like Bouchard? He's not going to face a Canadian court, so I guess you want him to go scot free. How does that solve the "problem of violence" in the New World Order?
And what innovative ideas do you have for making Canadians aware of the criminal role their military and political leaders play in foreign wars?
no world federalist here.
no justice no peace
Unlike the ICC, our domestic courts, judges and judicial system, however imperfect, do have essential democratic legitimacy. They are under the control of our democratic government, its executive and legislative bodies.
The UN Security Council and General Assembly, created largely by the USA and other powers after WWII, are not a democratic world legislature or government. Lacking a democratic legislature, the ICC is much more totalitarian than democratic and its "justice" is selective to a degree that certainly no normal jurisdiction would ever accept.
The ardent founders of the ICC took much of their inspiration from the 1945/46 Nuremberg Tribunal, usually seen as a triumph of "justice", and a welcome precedent. At the time this was far from the opinion of some observers. One was Hannah Arendt; another, the award-winning journalist Paul Soriol writing in the Devoir (Montreal) on October 1, 1946. Under the headline "A dangerous jurisprudence for civilization" he recalls that the Allies' position of "unconditional surrender/no impunity", announced in early 1943, prolonged WWII
into the deadly years of 1944/45 which saw the firebombing of German and Japanese cities, their civilians and children and Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
The Nuremburg and Japan tribunals are still seen by critics as "victors' justice".
The Libya war may prove to be a serious setback for R2P (Responsibility to Protect) so beloved by much of the "Humanitarian Left" but not by Margaret Wente (G&M)
This XXIth century neo-colonialism should remind us of XIXth century colonialism (White Man's Burden) which often used R2P (« Protectorates ») and often found elites ready to collaborate.
There was no ICC when the USA pulled out of Vietnam. Public pressure played a large role. It was "LBJ how many kids did you kill today?" NOT "LBJ to the World Court.¨
The highly-paid director of Amnesty International wants Canada to arrest George Bush. This is ridiculous. What about Clinton and Obama?
UK Government Lies About Use of DU in Libya
"...Do you think we will again use these WMDs on Syria and Iran? You bet.."