…by Gordon Duff … and Press TV
Thursday, October 17th, 2013 | Posted by Gordon Duff
Since its inception in 2002, there have been hundreds of attempts to present evidence to the ICC over 9/11, the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq and the tens of thousands of subsequent war crimes, whose origins were proven a “false flag” attack, could lead to a cascade of historic indictments. Considering the timing of the ratification of the 1998 Treaty of Rome, just after 9/11, the signing of the treaty by President Clinton and the failure of the US to ratify the treaty, the chain of events, in itself, is more than coincidental.
Currently, Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto stand indicted for inciting violence during the 2007 elections. Both deny the allegations. Kenyatta has characterized the court as a “toy of the declining imperial powers.”
At a meeting on Friday, the Ethiopian Foreign Minister Tedros Adhanom characterized the court as a “political instrument.”
This was an understatement, the court is, in actuality a weapon. The Foreign Minister went on, “We should not allow the ICC to continue to treat Africa and Africans in a condescending manner.”
“Far from promoting justice and reconciliation, and contributing to the advancement of peace and stability in our continent, the court has transformed itself into a political instrument targeting Africa and Africans.”
With the UN General Assembly voting overwhelmingly in 2012 to award Palestine non-member observer status, that nation was then afforded the right to join the ICC and file war crimes charges against Israeli leaders who have openly attacked civilian populations with white phosphorous and cluster bombs, prohibited weapons whose use is designated a “war crime.”
Israel’s response was to threaten more attacks, more war crimes, in response to initiating proceedings. The ICC chose to turn a blind eye to this open act of obstruction which is, in itself, also a “war crime.”
Similarly, the ICC has failed to act on hundreds of charges brought before it by member states demanding the prosecution of George W. Bush and Tony Blair for countless well-documented charges.
Thus far, the ICC has only indicted Africans. Major nations, India, China, Russia and the United States are not signatories.
Israel, a non-signatory to the Treaty of Rome, is seeking prosecution of Iranian officials tied to the 1994 bombing of the AMIA Jewish Center in Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Israel’s efforts are ongoing despite recent developments in the case that have, in actuality, cited Israel as the offending party in what is now characterized as a “false flag” attack.
According to the Israeli news service JTA, “The Jewish ex-interior minister of Argentina will be investigated for his ties to the AMIA Jewish center bombing.”
Telleldin, who allegedly provided the car bomb that blew up the Jewish center, has not been indicted.
The three Appeals Court justices called on Federal Judge Ariel Lijo to investigate “the existence of concrete allegations involving Carlos Vladimir Corach, which have not been investigated until now” regarding the illegal payment to Telleldin.
Corach was interior minister during the Carlos Menem government in the 1990s. He was responsible for obtaining the building for the Holocaust Museum of Buenos Aires and was the main speaker at its inauguration.”
Why would Israel, a non-signatory to the Treaty, a nation cited nearly 200 times for war crimes by the UN General Assembly, believe the ICC would choose to ignore facts in order to serve their political aims?
What do they know about the ICC that we should? – 9/11
Despite the 2005 9/11 Commission inquiry, those involved have distanced themselves from or openly debunked, the events of 9/11, perhaps the most documented and investigated in history.
As the events of 9/11 can be directly tied to the onset of the War on Terror, now clearly an expression of the goals set by the Project for a New American Century, any evidence that associates “means, motive and opportunity” involving 9/11 to perpetrators other than “cave trained super-pilots” should be of interest to the ICC.
In fact, since its inception in 2002, there have been hundreds of attempts to present evidence to the ICC over 9/11, the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq and the tens of thousands of subsequent war crimes, whose origins were proven a “false flag” attack, could lead to a cascade of historic indictments.
Considering the timing of the ratification of the 1998 Treaty of Rome, just after 9/11, the signing of the treaty by President Clinton and the failure of the US to ratify the treaty, the chain of events, in itself, is more than coincidental.
Plans to “burn down the world” were coming together in the 1998/1999 time frame, culminating with a predetermined plan to stage a “Pearl Harbor” type attack to bring the US into a war we now know, according to statements revealed by General Wesley Clark.
Seven nations were targeted for destruction and a criminal conspiracy was entered into that involved, among others, the governments of Britain and Israel.
Thus, the greatest war crimes, the greatest abuses of power, aggressive war, ethnic cleansing, torture and kidnapping, planned economic and social devastation, would remain “untouched” as the only potential mechanism for prosecution was, in itself, designed to facilitate these acts and, in fact, sanctify them.
As of this writing, the ICC manages to continue its myopic practices, a lens on Africa alone.
African Union Urges International Court to Delay Kenyan President’s Trial
Uhuru Kenyatta, center, Kenya’s president, is expected to stand trial at The Hague next month.
By NICHOLAS KULISH and BENNO MUCHLER – Published: October 12, 2013
NAIROBI, Kenya — The members of the African Union said Saturday that no sitting head of state should be prosecuted by an international tribunal and that the trial of Kenya’s president at the International Criminal Court should be postponed, according to the group’s chairman, who spoke after the closed-door session.
Though the African Union has no official standing to effect change at the court, the African countries’ stance could complicate the tribunal’s work by providing backing for heads of state who refuse to cooperate. Most immediately, the request to postpone the trial of President Uhuru Kenyatta of Kenya could provide him with additional political cover should he choose to skip his court date….
The African Union should withdraw from this kangaroo court. Speaking of kangaroo’s I read where Australia are withdrawing their monetary support. Enough of the Global Corporatist courts already since they use it (after all they created it) for their own enrichment aka stealing resources from other countries. Africa is currently in their cross-hairs. Cecil Rhodes redux.