Blair admits "legal" basis for Iraq war an Orwellian lie; psychopathic monster then threatens Iran

hyperlinks and video live at source: http://www.examiner.com/x-18425-LA-County-Nonpartisan-Examiner~y2010m1d29-Blair-admits-legal-basis-for-Iraq-war-an-Orwelli...

The UK Chilcot inquiry of the Iraq war previously disclosed unanimous legal opinion in the Foreign Office that the war is unlawful. Today former Prime Minister Tony Blair testified that he authorized war when his Attorney General “changed his mind” to embrace an "interpretation" of UN Security Council Resolution 1441 that any objective legal analysis definitively proves as an obvious Orwellian lie.

Please invest a few minutes of your attention to understand the law created after two world wars that makes war lawful or unlawful. Please engage your citizenry against a lie accurately characterized as “emperor has no clothes” self-evident fact, a Hitler-sized “Big Lie,” Machiavellian, literally psychopathic, and exactly what eminent philosopher Harry Frankfurt explained in his bestseller, On Bullshi*.

I state the above as a Harvard-educated instructor of college-level law classes with 25 years experience in teaching. I’m professionally comfortable that the explanation of war law I’m summarizing is what the law has meant since its creation, what the law is intended, and what academic classes have taught for 65 years (a more complete explanation is here). I also assert this recognition of fact requires only an elementary-school understanding of what a simple rule means, what rules are for, and how a rule should apply to the easiest of examples.

In this case, the breakthrough to public recognition of the obvious requires overcoming cognitive dissonance: embracing disturbing fact over blind belief that no emperor of ours would ever goose-step naked in public with uncovered bare assertions. Without cognitive dissonance, one would indeed have to be literally blind, retarded, or a shill for the liars to fail a test to identify if the man parading before you was clothed or naked.

The “Big Lie” of war law: Sir Michael Wood, the UK’s highest legal advisor in 2003, previously testified that Prime Minister Tony Blair’s office responded to his legal department’s unanimous legal conclusion from their 27 lawyers that war with Iraq would by unlawful with chastisement for creating evidence against the war in writing.

Sir Michael testified that Foreign Secretary Jack Straw rejected the view that the law against war should be interpreted as having any power to actually stop a war. In Orwell-speak: "He (Straw) took the view that I was being very dogmatic and that international law was pretty vague and that he wasn't used to people taking such a firm position.”

Mr. Straw, Attorney General Lord Goldsmith, and Mr. Blair are lying. The UN Charter that outlawed wars of choice in 1945 is crystal-clear in the letter and spirit of law. The UN Charter forbids all use of force except when authorized by explicit permission of the UN Security Council, or in a narrow definition of self-defense when an armed attack occurs by another nation’s government. This is arguably the single most important and clear law on the planet, the victory of the generation who sacrificed during World War 2, and damning criminal testimony for anyone in government to claim this law is vague.

UK Attorney General Lord Goldsmith testified he sided with the US legal argument at the time that UN Security Council Resolution 1441 authorized use of force at the discretion of any nation’s choice. Mr. Bliar, as he’s called among those in agreement Mr. Blair is a liar about the clear letter and spirit of the UN Charter and 1441, testified he agreed with this legal analysis.

This testimony is criminally damning.

The UN Charter and 1441 places sole authority for war within the Security Council, with the express purpose of the Charter and its resolutions to prevent individual nations from engaging in wars. Moreover, the US and UK “legal argument” is in further Orwellian lies to their UN Ambassadors’ statements when 1441 was passed that this did not authorize any use of force:

John Negroponte, US Ambassador to the UN:
[T]his resolution contains no "hidden triggers" and no "automaticity" with respect to the use of force. If there is a further Iraqi breach, reported to the Council by UNMOVIC, the IAEA or a Member State, the matter will return to the Council for discussions as required in paragraph 12.

Sir Jeremy Greenstock, UK Ambassador to the UN:
We heard loud and clear during the negotiations the concerns about "automaticity" and "hidden triggers" -- the concern that on a decision so crucial we should not rush into military action; that on a decision so crucial any Iraqi violations should be discussed by the Council. Let me be equally clear in response... There is no "automaticity" in this resolution. If there is a further Iraqi breach of its disarmament obligations, the matter will return to the Council for discussion as required in paragraph 12.

Perhaps this analogy will help in one paragraph of allegorical history, one paragraph of allegorical legal history, and one paragraph of legal analysis:

Tony and his Uncle Sam had a Machiavellian history of 40 years with Saddam; a history that included mutually-agreed political assassinations and business transactions worth billions in profits. Sam supplied material assistance to Saddam in attacking his neighbor, Mahmoud, from 1980-1988 after Mahmoud refused further dictatorship from Sam over billions in product profits. Sam and Tony had previously unlawfully taken over Mahoud’s business from 1953-1979. After further complex history between Sam and Saddam, Saddam began selling his product for currencies other than exclusively for Sam’s currency.

In response, Tony and Sam claimed Saddam has deadly weapons with the intent to use them. Saddam had a previous conviction and was forbidden to possess such weapons, but had refused to be searched after Sam made public statements that “someone” should assassinate Saddam. When Sam and Tony threatened to attack Saddam because of his alleged weapons and refusal to be legally searched, Saddam agreed to be searched. While the police were searching Saddam, with no weapons found and when the search was almost complete, Tony and Sam shoot and kill Saddam.

Tony and Sam claim legal self-defense. They claim that the law allows the police to shoot dangerous people with weapons. They say because they had “credible intelligence” Saddam had weapons he was certain to use, Tony and Sam are justified in killing Saddam and “making the world a safer place.” The facts that Saddam was being searched by the police, that the police have the authority to do the shooting and not Tony and Sam (unless they are under reasonable imminent threat of Saddam shooting, which both agree was not the case) is immaterial. Tony says Saddam was a psychopath and a monster. Sam says people like Saddam hate Tony and Sam “for our freedoms.”

Looking further, Sam and then Tony begin threatening to attack Mahmoud because they claim he has secret deadly weapons with the intent to use them. The police regularly search Mahmoud and have never found evidence of any weapon. Tony and Sam also say Mahmoud threatens to destroy his friend, Benjamin, to “wipe him off the map.” The source of the accusation is a speech Mahmoud made about Benjamin’s abuses of his neighbor, with the transcript proving Mahmoud made no threat, that Sam apparently is again looking for unlawful control over Mahmoud’s business, and that Tony and Sam are obviously lying. Despite the facts, Tony and Sam continue their allegations that Mahmoud is dangerous, saying “the clock is ticking,” and the time for talk is coming to an end.

Back to reality and concerning US investigation into claims to justify war with Iraq, US Senate and House Committee investigation has shown through all disclosed evidence that the justifications for war with Iraq were known to be lies at the time they were presented to the public. You will be an irresponsible citizen if you do not verify these easily-understood facts from the disclosed evidence. A colluding corporate media for unlawful wars is a lame excuse for inaction when the facts are in front of you now.

This article concludes with the PuppetGov 8-minute video, "How you ended the war."

Please share this article with all who can benefit. If you appreciate my work, please subscribe by clicking under the article title (it’s free). Please use my archive of work to help build a brighter future.

Local perspective: Part of my professional duties as a teacher of economics and government is to produce competent adult citizenry. This includes realization that our nation’s policies and money are managed at a broad community level, and these issues have tremendous local impact. Of course, we all want human beings to be individually successful and enjoy their unique, beautiful and powerful self-expressions. Concurrently, we recognize our commitment to local success is strongly dependent upon the success of the community, and that government policy and economics are drivers.

Our status in early 21st Century human history is that we suffer from a long history in government and money of human interrelationship well-described as vicious antagonism. Governments frequently use war as a foreign policy, despite its illegality and dependent upon public ignorance, with horrific consequences. Economic policy is still created within a “Robber Baron” paradigm to concentrate money to an elite few families. For example:

National taxes effect you dearly, especially the tax to pay interest on the national debt. This costs the American public over $400 billion every year. This is $4,000 per year for every $50,000 of income. Do the math to understand your household’s tax burden for a monetary policy invented by banks for banks to create our money supply as debt. Your competence in this area contributes to our collective voice to simply shift monetary policy to easily pay the national debt, enjoy full employment, collectively save us over a trillion dollars every year, and finally realize what our brightest American minds have been advocating for centuries beginning with Benjamin Franklin. This would have unprecedented local benefits, and requires collective power to accomplish.
Ending poverty everywhere on our planet would cost just 0.7% of our income and save a million children’s lives every month. This human accomplishment will cause unimaginable joy at our local level.

To consider:

"If we are to have peace on earth, our loyalties must become ecumenical rather than sectional. Our loyalties must transcend our race, our tribe, our class, and our nation; and this means we must develop a world perspective. No individual can live alone, no nation can live alone and as long as we try, the more we are going to have war in the world. Now the judgment of God is upon us and we must either learn to live together as brothers or we are all going to perish together as fools."
--Inscription on Dr. Martin Luther King’s statue, Moorehouse College, Atlanta

"The day that hunger is eradicated from the earth, there will be the greatest spiritual explosion the world has ever known. Humanity cannot imagine the joy that will burst into the world on the day of that great revolution." -- poet Federico García Lorca

I appreciate your attention to these facts and encourage your further study and action consistent with your own self-expression. My recommendations:

Policy response: Gandhi and Martin Luther King advocated public understanding of the facts and non-cooperation with evil. I’m among hundreds who advocate:

1.Understand the laws of war. These were legislated after WW2 and are crystal-clear that only self-defense, in a narrow legal meaning, can justify war. The current US wars are not even close to being lawful. Those involved with US military, government, and law enforcement have an oath to protect and defend the US Constitution, not “always place the mission first.” To fulfill their oath they must immediately refuse and end all orders associated with unlawful wars and military-related constant violation of treaties.
2.End the transfer of trillions of American taxpayer money to banksters and admitted as “lost” by our military. End poverty through global cooperation to achieve the UN Millennium Goals by developed countries investing 0.7% of their income. Support global security through cooperation, dignity, justice, and freedom. Create a US Department of Peace to help.
3.Communicate. Trust your unique, beautiful, and powerful self-expression to share as you feel appropriate. Understand that while many people are ready to embrace difficult facts, many are not. Anticipate that you will be attacked and prepare your virtuous response in the spirit of competition, just as you do in other fields.
4.Prosecute the war leaders for obvious violation of the letter and spirit of US war laws. Because the crimes are so broad and deep, I recommend Truth and Reconciliation (T&R) to exchange full truth and return of stolen US assets for non-prosecution. This is the most expeditious way to understand and end all unlawful and harmful acts. Those who reject T&R are subject to prosecution.

Comments policy: I welcome questions and comments that are civil and pertain to the article topic. Impolite and impertinent comments will be deleted.

Please consider that I’m among hundreds of writers who have documented our own government’s disclosure of propaganda programs to support their wars. I suspect my articles are under such propagandistic attack from comments that use typical rhetorical fallacies to distract readers from the facts. I invite readers to sharpen their ability to discern such propaganda. They are characterized by a combination of: never addressing the facts, diverting attention through unsubstantiated belief in an alleged expert, irrelevant data, straw-man attack that distorts the facts, ad hominem attack of insults to the messenger, vile comments to repulse readers, and lies of omission and commission.

I will use such comments to point-out the propaganda or delete them at my discretion. Again, all relevant and polite questions, and factually accurate comments are welcome. As a professional educator I’m in agreement with my experience and research: we learn best from multiple perspectives in mutual commitment to understand the facts, see those facts from diverse points-of-view, and consider various policy proposals of what we should do.

For those involved in support of US government-sponsored disinformation, I invite you to consider the quality of human relationships you wish to work toward. National security and a brighter future is not a function of fear, manipulation, and control. Our best security follows cooperation, justice under the law, dignity, and freedom. Working for your best imagined self-expression of virtue may include a unique contribution from the inside of your agency. Public attraction to the stories of Star Wars and the Harry Potter books/movies recognize that our society’s jump to civilized relations for all of us might require support from people within the “dark side” acting as covert agents for building a brighter future. Another option is becoming a whistle-blower; Project Camelot is a popular venue for people in sensitive positions. Ultimately, I recommend a Truth and Reconciliation process to exchange full truth for no prosecution, explained in detail at the link. Please consider the wisdom of your own “Scrooge conversion” to act for the benefit of all humanity rather than your self-proclaimed controlling, manipulating, and loveless “masters.”

“Scrooge was better than his word. He did it all, and infinitely more; and to Tiny Tim, who did not die, he was a second father. He became as good a friend, as good a master, and as good a man, as the good old city knew, or any other good old city, town, or borough, in the good old world. Some people laughed to see the alteration in him, but he let them laugh, and little heeded them; for he was wise enough to know that nothing ever happened on this globe, for good, at which some people did not have their fill of laughter in the outset; and knowing that such as these would be blind anyway, he thought it quite as well that they should wrinkle up their eyes in grins, as have the malady in less attractive forms. His own heart laughed: and that was quite enough for him.”