Tuesday, October 25, 2011

VAU Afgh 101: Collective Punishment

This is part of a series of eight "virtual teachins" on U.S. war crimes in Afghanistan.

The crime of Collective Punishment is described on the website for Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes. Here, we will look at the specific legal basis for charging perpetrators as war criminals for Collective Punishment , and list sources reporting relevant U.S. actions in Afghanistan.

Viewers of this page are strongly encouraged to contribute comments and additional sources in the comments section!

If the American public knew the nature of the crimes that its government was committing in Afghanistan, could it possibly sit still and not force an end to the war, and the removal of U.S. military, intelligence, and contractors from Afghanistan?

LEGAL BASIS
THIS TOPIC is described on the website for Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes.

REPORTS FROM AFGHANISTAN

Return to the main VAU Afghanistan 101 page.


Related posts

Virtual Antiwar University (VAU) 101 focuses on eight categories of U.S. war crimes, selected from Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes.

(See VAU Afghanistan 101: US War Crimes )

VAU Afgh 101: Discrimination Based on Nationality, Race, or Religion

This is part of a series of eight "virtual teachins" on U.S. war crimes in Afghanistan.

The crime of Discrimination Based on Nationality, Race, or Religion is described on the website for Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes. Here, we will look at the specific legal basis for charging perpetrators as war criminals for Discrimination Based on Nationality, Race, or Religion, and list sources reporting relevant U.S. actions in Afghanistan.

Viewers of this page are strongly encouraged to contribute comments and additional sources in the comments section!

If the American public knew the nature of the crimes that its government was committing in Afghanistan, could it possibly sit still and not force an end to the war, and the removal of U.S. military, intelligence, and contractors from Afghanistan?

LEGAL BASIS
The crime of Discrimination Based on Nationality, Race, or Religion is described on the website for Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes.

REPORTS FROM AFGHANISTAN

Return to the main VAU Afghanistan 101 page.


Related posts


Virtual Antiwar University (VAU) 101 focuses on eight categories of U.S. war crimes, selected from Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes.

(See VAU Afghanistan 101: US War Crimes )














The biggest idea coming out of the 2013 Drone Summit? We will only deal successfully with the crimes being committed using drones when we understand them as part of the much larger war against communities of color . . . .

(See Drone Gaze, Drone Injury: The War on Communities of Color )










VAU Afgh 101: Failure to Prevent Torture

This is part of a series of eight "virtual teachins" on U.S. war crimes in Afghanistan.

The crime of Failure to Prevent Torture is described on the website for Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes. Here, we will look at the specific legal basis for charging perpetrators as war criminals for Failure to Prevent Torture, and list sources reporting relevant U.S. actions in Afghanistan.

Viewers of this page are strongly encouraged to contribute comments and additional sources in the comments section!

If the American public knew the nature of the crimes that its government was committing in Afghanistan, could it possibly sit still and not force an end to the war, and the removal of U.S. military, intelligence, and contractors from Afghanistan?

LEGAL BASIS
The crime of Failure to Prevent Torture is described on the website for Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes.

REPORTS FROM AFGHANISTAN

Return to the main VAU Afghanistan 101 page.


Related posts


Virtual Antiwar University (VAU) 101 focuses on eight categories of U.S. war crimes, selected from Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes.

(See VAU Afghanistan 101: US War Crimes )

VAU Afgh 101: Torture

M. Cherif Bassiouni, The Institutionalization
of Torture by the Bush Administration:
Is Anyone Responsible?
This is part of a series of eight "virtual teachins" on U.S. war crimes in Afghanistan.

The crime of Torture is described on the website for Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes. Here, we will look at the specific legal basis for charging perpetrators as war criminals for Torture, and list sources reporting relevant U.S. actions in Afghanistan.

Viewers of this page are strongly encouraged to contribute comments and additional sources in the comments section!

If the American public knew the nature of the crimes that its government was committing in Afghanistan, could it possibly sit still and not force an end to the war, and the removal of U.S. military, intelligence, and contractors from Afghanistan?

LEGAL BASIS
The crime of Torture is described on the website for Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes.

REPORTS FROM AFGHANISTAN
Read this important blog post on U.S. complicity in torture in Afghanistan as captured prisoners are turned over to prisons that are known to torture them. "[E]ven though our coalition partners had already stopped transferring detainees to Afghans known to use torture in interrogations, the US continued doing so until last month."

Torture and other outrages against detainees is the focus of the mass action in Washington, D.C. and around the country on the 10th anniversary of the establishment of the detention center at Guantanamo - taking place January 11, 2012.


Related posts

What is the total number of prisoners held in the detention archipelago set up by the U.S. in Afghanistan? Five thousand? Ten thousand? More?

(See THE ARCHIPELAGO: U.S./NATO's Parting Gift to Afghanistan)


Virtual Antiwar University (VAU) 101 focuses on eight categories of U.S. war crimes, selected from Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes.

(See VAU Afghanistan 101: US War Crimes )















It is perhaps the signal achievement of the film "Beneath the Blindfold" that it portrays four different survivors, each of whose experience of torture was distinct from that of any of the others, and each of whom has an otherwise unique personality, and yet each makes clear that they share a long-lasting trauma. One leaves the film with a deeply-felt sense of the lasting trauma caused by torture of any kind.

(See The Revelations of "Beneath the Blindfold" )



Chicago was the site of major protests against U.S. detention practices in Guantanamo, as well as in Bagram, other prisons throughout Afghanistan, and elsewhere in the world, on and around January 11, 2012. We called for an end to indefinite detention, unfair trials, and torture.

(See Chicago Protests Guantanamo Detention)

VAU Afgh 101: Outrages Upon Personal Dignity

This is part of a series of eight "virtual teachins" on U.S. war crimes in Afghanistan.

The crime of Outrages Upon Personal Dignity is described on the website for Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes. Here, we will look at the specific legal basis for charging perpetrators as war criminals for Outrages Upon Personal Dignity, and list sources reporting relevant U.S. actions in Afghanistan.





Viewers of this page are strongly encouraged to contribute comments and additional sources in the comments section!

If the American public knew the nature of the crimes that its government was committing in Afghanistan, could it possibly sit still and not force an end to the war, and the removal of U.S. military, intelligence, and contractors from Afghanistan?

LEGAL BASIS
The crime of Outrages Upon Personal Dignity is described on the website for Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes.

Of the array of war crimes considered as part of VAU Afghanistan 101, this particular one challenges all of our platitudes about being "civilized." Do we really need to argue over whether it is an outrage on human dignity to engage in sexual humiliation? To taunt someone on account of and by way of their religion? To threaten them with attack by an animal? Not to mention the infliction of physical pain . . . .

REPORTS FROM AFGHANISTAN

It was outrages upon personal dignity that first shocked a broad swath of the American public into confronting our country's criminal behavior: Abu Ghraib.

Most recently, we have seen the conviction of members of U.S. Army "kill teams" that murdered and otherwise engaged in outrages upon Afghanistan people, including "playing with the corpse of [a murdered] teenager 'as if it was a puppet'" . . . keeping a "victim's skull as a trophy" . . . "slicing off body parts from Afghans, including the fingers of a man, and keeping them or giving them to other soldiers as trophies."

Is there any way that we can begin to estimate the magnitude of the crimes that have been committed in-between? More important, do we think for one minute that the commanders and leaders who have fomented, welcomed, and covered up ALL of these outrages have been held responsible?

Return to the main VAU Afghanistan 101 page.


Related posts


Virtual Antiwar University (VAU) 101 focuses on eight categories of U.S. war crimes, selected from Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes.

(See VAU Afghanistan 101: US War Crimes )














"This act was aimed at suppressing the power of the organisation by demoralising the activists, but turned out to be counter-productive as it undermined the moral authority of the government. The Act was viewed as violating basic human rights, not only of the suffragettes but of other prisoners. The Act's nickname of Cat and Mouse Act, referring to the way the government seemed to play with prisoners as a cat may with a captured mouse, underlined how the cruelty of repeated releases and re-imprisonments turned the suffragettes from targets of scorn to objects of sympathy."

(See Obama: Just the Latest "Cat" in a Cynical and Long-running "Cat and Mouse" Game? )

VAU Afgh 101: Geneva Convention Obligations

This is part of a series of eight "virtual teachins" on U.S. war crimes in Afghanistan.

The crime of Failure of Commanding Officers to Ensure That Subordinates Understand Geneva Convention Obligations Regarding the Conduct of Warfare is described on the website for Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes.


The U.S. Army * Marine Corps
Counterinsurgency Field Manual


Here, we will look at the specific legal basis for charging perpetrators as war criminals for Failure of Commanding Officers to Ensure That Subordinates Understand Geneva Convention Obligations Regarding the Conduct of Warfare, and list sources reporting relevant U.S. actions in Afghanistan.

Viewers of this page are strongly encouraged to contribute comments and additional sources in the comments section!

If the American public knew the nature of the crimes that its government was committing in Afghanistan, could it possibly sit still and not force an end to the war, and the removal of U.S. military, intelligence, and contractors from Afghanistan?

LEGAL BASIS
The crime of Failure of Commanding Officers to Ensure That Subordinates Understand Geneva Convention Obligations Regarding the Conduct of Warfare is described on the website for Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes.

I recently re-read Mike Haas' book. What struck me was that the Bush Administration adopted a policy of saying, in essence, "we don't think the existing rules of war should apply anymore, and we expect that view to be ratified in American law, and we're going to just go ahead based on that expectation." In other words, they openly proceeded in a course that led to crimes of many kinds, without apology, because they thought they would be affirmed in their behavior.

One consequence has been that, unfortunately, although the United States has not changed its legal adherence to the Geneva Conventions and other laws governing war, something just as bad has happened. We have failed to prosecute the crimes that have been committed. In effect, we have affirmed by acquiescence that we accept the Bush position that the old laws no longer apply.

I hasten to add that this has all continued -- and accelerated -- under the Obama administration!

A second consequence has been that leaders and commanders failed to inform those under their command of their obligations under the Geneva Conventions. How could it be otherwise? Having asserted to the American people that the Geneva Conventions don't apply, what sense would it make to make an effort to inform the troops of their Geneva Conventions obligations?

Both of these consequences place us -- you and me -- in grave moral peril, and the two consequences are deeply entwined.

REPORTS FROM AFGHANISTAN
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld issued a memo to combatant commanders that told them that Geneva Convention obligations with respect to prisoners did not exist in Afghanistan:

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld determines that Al Qaida and Taliban detainees "are not entitled to prisoner of war status for purposes of the Geneva Conventions of 1949." However, detained individuals are to be treated "humanely, and to the extent appropriate and consistent with military necessity, in a manner consistent with the principles of the Geneva Conventions of 1949." (Source: Jan 19, 2002 - Secretary of Defense Memo for Combatant Commanders, "Status of Taliban and Al Qaida".)

(The whole chain of related memos is available on The National Security Archive's webpage "The Interrogation Documents: Debating U.S. Policy and Methods.")

Readers are invited to see for themselves how this has trickled down into a very confused statement of Geneva Convention obligations in the U.S. military's Counterinsurgency Field Manual (2010). To be more specific, the part of the statement we can see is confused; significant portions of the statement (p. D-4 and D-5, the section on Detention and Interrogation) are not even available in the public preview on Google Books.

A specific example of "failure to inform" is provided in an account of U.S. DOD detention centers in Afghanistan by Scott Horton: "Facility rules and relevant Geneva Conventions rules/rights [are] not posted."

(Please supply additional specific examples in the comments section below!)

**********************************************************

Return to the main VAU Afghanistan 101 page.

Photo Credit: Bibliovault

**********************************************************


Related posts

Virtual Antiwar University (VAU) 101 focuses on eight categories of U.S. war crimes, selected from Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes.

(See VAU Afghanistan 101: US War Crimes )













Eric Holder addressed a group of Northwestern Law students and others. Afterward one audience member summed up the speech as he left: "He pretty much said he can kill anyone he wants." The details of that speech will turn you more topsy-turvy than anything Alice experienced when she ventured through the looking glass.

(See Eric Through the Looking Glass)

VAU Afgh 101: Extrajudicial Executions

This is part of a series of eight "virtual teachins" on U.S. war crimes in Afghanistan.

[UPDATE: As reported in the Chicago Tribune in its June 19, 2012 article entitled U.N. investigator decries U.S. use of killer drones, Christof Heyns, U.N. special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions has said, "The Special Rapporteur again requests the Government to clarify the rules that it considers to cover targeted killings ... (and) reiterates his predecessor's recommendation that the government specify the bases for decisions to kill rather than capture 'human targets' and whether the State in which the killing takes places has given consent."]

The crime of Extrajudicial Executions is described on the website for Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes. Here, we will look at the specific legal basis for charging perpetrators as war criminals for Extrajudicial Executions, and list sources reporting relevant U.S. actions in Afghanistan.

Viewers of this page are strongly encouraged to contribute comments and additional sources in the comments section!





If the American public knew the nature of the crimes that its government was committing in Afghanistan, could it possibly sit still and not force an end to the war, and the removal of U.S. military, intelligence, and contractors from Afghanistan?

LEGAL BASIS
The crime of Extrajudicial Executions is described on the website for Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes.

Why does the law prohibit extrajudicial execution? In my view, the ultimate reason is that extrajudicial execution always undermines confidence in the functioning of all law. Thus, it is even simpler and less controversial than moral arguments. Consider:

EVEN IF a person is objectively "guilty" of some crime, i.e. no organized finding of fact is necessary (a condition which, if you think about it, is in fact virtually impossible to meet -- do we really know the facts before we establish the facts?); and . . .

EVEN IF the death penalty is accepted as an appropriate penalty for a crime of which the person is known objectively to be guilty (a condition which is rapidly becoming inoperable); in other words . . .

EVEN IF the machinery of state power is operating from a basis of truth and legitimate authority, still . . .

THE PROBLEM REMAINS that extrajudicial execution lacks due process, and thus has little if any chance of being seen as legitimate in the eyes of the public (where "the public" inevitably consists of any and all people who lack some kind of magical safeguards against being victims of state power).

All war crimes have the effect of de-legitimizing the entire basis of the State; extrajudicial execution de-legitimizes the State with extreme speed and thoroughness.

REPORTS FROM AFGHANISTAN
Two well-publicized examples of extrajudicial executions in the past year have been the assassination of Osama bin Laden by a commando team in May, and the assassination of Anwar al-Awlaki by drone attack at the end of September. There have been countless others, including a very large number carried out by drones.

The Noam Chomsky evaluation of the bin Laden assassination is a very good assessment of the problem of extrajudicial execution.

Michael Ratner discussed the Awlaki assassination in The Guardian: "The law on the use of lethal force by executive order is specific. This assassination broke it – that creates a terrifying precedent." A report in the NY Times established that the Obama White House developed a justification for the Awlaki assassination a year prior to the event in a secret memo. This means that all people were subject to lethal force by the United States government on a basis that the United States government intended to claim as legitimate and lawful, but which was unknown and unknowable by anyone.

**********************************************************

Return to the main VAU Afghanistan 101 page.

Photo credit: Al Hayat wa Dounia newspaper

**********************************************************

Related posts


Virtual Antiwar University (VAU) 101 focuses on eight categories of U.S. war crimes, selected from Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes.

(See VAU Afghanistan 101: US War Crimes )













If the public will join us in asking the question "Who decides?" about drone executions, I believe they will rapidly come to realize that they are utterly dissatisfied with what the government is saying.

(See Who Decides? (When Drones are Judge, Jury, and Executioner) )











Eric Holder addressed a group of Northwestern Law students and others. Afterward one audience member summed up the speech as he left: "He pretty much said he can kill anyone he wants." The details of that speech will turn you more topsy-turvy than anything Alice experienced when she ventured through the looking glass.

(See Eric Through the Looking Glass)












By now, everyone knows about the New York Times article describing Barack Obama's personal administration of drone killing around the world. What few people are willing to face up to is that Obama 2012 partisans actually see this as a way to get a lot of Americans to like Obama: "This is the candidate; you MUST support him!"

(See Being a Team Player for "Mr. Forceful": Obama and the Dems )


"My advisers have run the numbers and they have indicated that, at the current rate of decrease, U.S. war crimes could reach zero by 2015, or 2016 latest . . . . "

(See Obama on Drones: The Democrats Respond )







Yet another Iranian scientist has been assassinated. In an environment in which the U.S. is beating the drums of war against Iran, we do not have the option of closing our eyes and acting as if we don't know what's going on.

(See Congress: Who Is Behind Assassinations In Iran? )




VAU Afgh 101: Attacks Against Civilians

This is part of a series of eight "virtual teachins" on U.S. war crimes in Afghanistan.

The crime of Indiscriminate Attacks Against Civilians is described on the website for Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes. Here, we will look at the specific legal basis for charging perpetrators as war criminals for Indiscriminate Attacks Against Civilians, and list sources reporting relevant U.S. actions in Afghanistan.

Viewers of this page are strongly encouraged to contribute comments and additional sources in the comments section!





If the American public knew the nature of the crimes that its government was committing in Afghanistan, could it possibly sit still and not force an end to the war, and the removal of U.S. military, intelligence, and contractors from Afghanistan?

LEGAL BASIS
The crime of Indiscriminate Attacks Against Civilians is described on the website for Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes. The basis is Geneva Conventions Protocol 1, 1977, "relating to the protection of victims of international armed conflicts," specifically Art. 51(4).

In my view, the important point for ordinary American citizens to understand is that a state of warfare does not give the warring parties the right to harm civilians. We may be confused by the fact that the U.S. has famously engaged in war against civilians without being tried for war crimes - particularly in the fire bombing of Tokyo and the use of atomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It should be remembered that Curtis LeMay, the author of those campaigns, remarked, "If we lose, we'll be tried as war criminals." Willfully harming civilians constitutes a war crime.

REPORTS FROM AFGHANISTAN
A listing of atrocities against civilians in Afghanistan is provided at the Voices for Creative Non-Violence website. The most recent is from August, 2011: "Another NATO air strike has killed a number of civilians today in the Logar Province. The attack, which took place shortly after midnight, came after a clash between NATO troops on the ground and Taliban in the Baraki Barak District, and left six civilians dead. This latest attack came after the firefight with Taliban but was termed a “retaliation” attack. That the attack retaliated against a civilian home and killed an entire family appears to them only a minor detail." (See also report at Antiwar.com.)

It's instructive to scroll to the bottom of the page and start with the first account recorded by VCNV (from April 2009, obviously far from the first such occurence of violence against civilians in Afghanistan!): "U.S. forces were positioned on the rooftop opposite the home of Brigadier Artillery officer Awal Khan. In a night raid, U.S. forces burst into Awal Khan’s home. Awal Khan was away from home. His family members ran to the rooftop, believing that robbers had entered the home. When they emerged on their rooftop, U.S. forces on the opposite roof opened fire, killing Awal Khan’s wife, his brother, his 17 year-old daughter Nadia, and his fifteen year-old son, Aimal and his infant son, born just a week earlier."

Now ask, "Does this occurrence constitute a war crime, or just a sad mistake?"

Then read the next one up the page, from May 2009: "Mainstream media reports estimate that between 86 and 140 people, mostly children, died in a US air attack. According to Reuters, only 22 of the victims were adult males."

Ask again, "Does this occurrence -- particularly taken in combination with the previous occurence(s) -- constitute a war crime, or just a sad mistake?"

Now read the next one ... and the next ... and the next ....

How many occurrences does it take before you are sure that the U.S. is engaging in a pattern of war crimes?

ISAF Data show night raids by U.S. Special Operations Forces (SOF) killed over 1,500 Afghan civilians in 10 months during 2010 and early 2011.


Return to the main VAU Afghanistan 101 page.

Photo credit: The Ugly Truth


Related posts


Virtual Antiwar University (VAU) 101 focuses on eight categories of U.S. war crimes, selected from Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes.

(See VAU Afghanistan 101: US War Crimes )













A September 5, 2013, U.S. drone strike in Pakistan killed six people - including Sangeen Zadran -- a "senior militant commander" who was "implicated in a long-running kidnapping drama involving an American soldier."

(See September 5 in Pakistan: Another Day, Another Drone Killing)











With drones, people become just dots. "Bugs." People who no longer count as people . . . .

(See Drone Victims: Just Dots? Just Dirt? )











A new U.N. report makes it clear that the U.S. has to report fully on all its drone attacks.

(See 2014: The Year of Transparency (for U.S. Drone Use)?)














"When dictators commit atrocities, they depend upon the world to look the other way until those horrifying pictures fade from memory. But these things happened. The facts cannot be denied. The question now is what the United States of America, and the international community, is prepared to do about it. Because what happened to those people -- to those children -- is not only a violation of international law, it’s also a danger to our security."

(See OK, You Have Our Attention. Let's Put a Stop to ALL These Criminal Weapons! )

VAU Afghanistan 101: US War Crimes

George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush
Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes

by Mike Haas
Thinking about the idea of a "Virtual Antiwar University (VAU)" -- or, as @PeaceCouple refers to it, "Virtual Peace University" -- I asked myself, "What would be a practical way to start?"

It struck me that we could tackle a single topic each week -- on #AfghanistanTuesday! -- and over the course of eight weeks or so we could try out some teach-in materials. In other words, both learn and contribute to the development of a curriculum.

In thinking about what would be worth covering, I remembered the urging of my friends at Voices for Creative Non-Violence: start with the experience of the victims of war. Too often we focus on the cynical arguments about the costs to ourselves, but isn't the real question the harm we are doing to others?

I also thought of the focus over the next several months on indefinite detention and the crimes of the U.S. government with respect to Guantanamo, Bagram, and other detention sites. We should be sure to tie in to that.

It then occurred to me that perhaps the right framework would be to look at eight different categories of U.S. war crimes in Afghanistan (of which detention is one). This would allow me to make use of some research I've already been doing.

Below are eight categories of U.S. war crimes, selected from Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes. I have suggested a series of #AfghanistanTuesday dates for looking at them. I propose to set up a separate page covering each topic, and the comment section on each page will be actively used by others to contribute ideas, comments, etc.

VAU Afghanistan 101: US War Crimes

If the American public knew the nature of the crimes that its government was committing in Afghanistan, could it possibly sit still and not force an end to the war, and the removal of U.S. military, intelligence, and contractors from Afghanistan?

Tuesday, November 1 -- Indiscriminate Attacks Against Civilians

Tuesday, November 8 -- Extrajudicial Executions

Tuesday, November 15 -- Failure of Commanding Officers to Ensure That Subordinates Understand Geneva Convention Obligations Regarding the Conduct of Warfare

Tuesday, November 22 -- Outrages Upon Personal Dignity

Tuesday, November 29 -- Torture

Tuesday, December 6 -- Failure to Prevent Torture

Tuesday, December 13 -- Discrimination Based on Nationality, Race, or Religion

Tuesday, December 20 -- Collective Punishment

To repeat, these are just eight war crimes selected for attention from among a long list provided at the websites for George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes.


Related posts

It would be good if we could present this whole collection of learning opportunities -- this "virtual antiwar university" -- in a way that captures the public's imagination. Particularly since the occupy movement has done so much to mobilize people, to wake them up, and to lead them. Is there an opportunity to elevate this into something bigger than isolated teaching events? How could we make something like this happen?

(See Virtual Antiwar University )




Can there be any doubt that Obama and his administration, who think it is their right to wage war in secret, kill anyone they want to, and destroy whole societies, took their cues from Kissinger and Nixon and their "Imperial (and criminal) Presidency"?

(See No Statute of Limitations for War Crimes (Henry Kissinger in Chicago) )











The crime of Extrajudicial Execution is described on the website for Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes. Here, we will look at the specific legal basis for charging perpetrators as war criminals for Extrajudicial Executions, and list sources reporting relevant U.S. actions in Afghanistan.

(See VAU Afgh 101: Extrajudicial Executions )


It's time to face the truth. Whatever NATO stood for in the past, today NATO aids and abets the aggressive wars and other militarism driven by the United States. So when you think "NATO," don't think "peace alliance" -- think "war crimes alliance"!

(See NATO: A War Crimes Alliance )


Sunday, October 23, 2011

Virtual Antiwar University

We had a great series of antiwar teach-ins in the Chicago area in the run-up to Oct 8. More are happening - on an ad hoc basis, and with particular reference to the approaching Guantanamo anniversary, and of course a LOT oriented to NATO ... etc etc ....

And even more are needed. Each day brings new revelations and new outrages. Drones ... Pakistan ... Libya ... and on and on ....


U.S./NATO OUT of AFGHANISTAN
Teach-in prior to demonstration on 10th anniversary of the invasion


It would be good if we could present this whole collection of learning opportunities -- this "virtual antiwar university" -- in a way that captures the public's imagination. Particularly since the occupy movement has done so much to mobilize people, to wake them up, and to lead them to ask, "How can I use the months ahead in a way that allows us to come back even stronger in the spring?"

Is there an opportunity to elevate this into something bigger than isolated teaching events? How could we make something like this happen?


Related posts

Virtual Antiwar University (VAU) 101 focuses on eight categories of U.S. war crimes, selected from Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes.

(See VAU Afghanistan 101: US War Crimes )














"It's not enough to remember this just once a year; it's not enough that we make a single book -- Hiroshima -- required reading, and never go beyond that. There should be a whole canon that people study progressively, year by year, to grasp and retain the horror of this."

(See FIRE AND BLAST: A Curriculum that Confronts Nuclear Danger?)












Re-reading George Orwell's 1984 recently made me see at least 15 ways 2013 is like the world he describes in the book . . . .

(See 2013 = 1984 ? )













There's a lot more to Iran than we've been exposed to by the U.S. foreign policy narrative.

(See Feb 4 - Resources about Iran )

Friday, October 21, 2011

ANTIWAR: Spread the Word

How can we get more people spreading the antiwar message?

Not "how can we get more people to agree that we need to stop these wars" but how do we get more people actively spreading the antiwar message?

One of the things I realized as the #AfghanistanTuesday conversations have progressed, is that everyone needs to be spreading message. Not only that: everyone needs to be spreading the message that everyone needs to be spreading the message!

In other words, the antiwar message needs to be recursive. Only if the message has a high reproduction rate can it go viral and effect real change.





I attempted to achieve this with the concept of the "Tuesdayista" - a person who participates in #AfghanistanTuesday and also gets others to understand the importance of participating (and getting others to understand ((and .... )) ).

But whatever the specific means used to get the message to go viral, we must focus on spreading it! It's all about transmission . . . .

Remember: no one expects you to end war all by yourself; your job is to spread the idea of ending war -- more precisely by "spreading the idea of spreading the idea" of ending war. Everybody can do that!


Related posts


I've realized that when we ask ourselves, "What is it that we hope people will do?" we must include an element of recursivity: One of the things we want people to do is to involve more people in doing it. In a way, that element of recursivity -- dare I say "evangelism"? -- defines what it means for people to really become part of a movement.

(See Invite More People into Activism! (Pass It Along!) )












Tuesdayistas are people who (a) take time each week to participate in a national (and now global) conversation about ending the war in Afghanistan; AND (b) help spread the word by reaching out to others (who will reach out to others (who will reach out to others .... to do the same!

(See I'm a Tuesdayista!)








Is it possible that scripture is telling us that it's no longer acceptable to passively nod in agreement -- -- to murmur inwardly, "I'm with you in spirit" -- and then to go back to our other concerns?

(See Afghanistan: Where is the Church?)

Wednesday, October 19, 2011

#AfghanistanTuesday - Top Tweets - Oct 18

As in other weeks,we had a very busy day on #AfghanistanTuesday! This week saw the continuation of the Occupy movement ... and the continuation of the war.


These are some of the #AfghanistanTuesday tweets from Tuesday, October 18, 2011, that were most highly retweeted:

WHAT'S IT ALL ABOUT?
From @MidwestAntiwar : WHAT'S IT ALL ABOUT? #AfghanistanTuesday >>> http://bit.ly/AfTuALL Please join us!

ELECTION 2012
From @Scarry : IT'S TIME: Stop re-electing politicians who can't get #USout #Afghanistan #Guantanamo #No2ndTerm #Obama #election2012 #AfghanistanTuesday

From @MidwestAntiwar : NOTICE: #election2012 has been CANCELLED. Pls report instead to #Afghanistan101: #war #economy #waste #greed #FAIL! #AfghanistanTuesday

From @MoralOutrage1 : Fact: A vote for any "viable" POTUS candidate is a vote for perpetual war. If they aren't pro-war, they can't be POTUS #AfghanistanTuesday

OUR MORAL FAILURE
From @volksmenner : United States has occupied Afghanistan and attacked her people for 10 years for profit. Every hour is an atrocity. #AfghanistanTuesday #ows

From @MoralOutrage1 : War is for the financial benefit of corporations. It is paid for, and fought by, you and me. We aid and abet. #ows #AfghanistanTuesday

From @MidwestAntiwar : “Stop! Stop the money. Stop the killing. Stop.” What more is there to say? #AfghanistanTuesday @info_from_vcnv http://shar.es/btzxH #endwar

VICTIMS OF WAR
From @info_from_vcnv : Killing Children in #Afghanistan « http://Antiwar.com Blog: http://bit.ly/rfJ3cG #AfghanistanTuesday

BECAUSE . . .
From @khaake : Because it would be more effective to simply scatter $300M/day in cash over the Afghan fields... bring the troops home. #AfghanistanTuesday

From @khaake : Because our children have never known a time when we were not at war... bring the troops home. #AfghanistanTuesday

From @khaake : Because war is not a viable jobs program... bring the troops home. #AfghanistanTuesday

From @khaake : Because there is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people... bring the troops home. #AfghanistanTuesday

EVEN THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA IS SAYING "IT'S TIME"
From @MylaReson : #AfghanistanTuesday RT @TIME: The U.S. will never save Afghanistan | ti.me/rqfTyF

"SUPPORT OUR TROOPS"
From @MoniqueFrugier : US Troop Deaths in Afghan War Under Obama Now Twice That Under Bush http://tinyurl.com/3gq7kqd //End the war #AfghanistanTuesday

From @Human___Rights : Armless,legless,homeless-->these are America's #afghanistan war veterans. #afghanistantuesday

From @TRTears : To anyone who has a beloved one who's been sent to fight for a lost cause, RT #AfghanistanTuesday #AntiWar

PROTESTS CONTINUE
From @Zwicky3 : Hundreds join Minneapolis protest to mark 10 years of U.S. war in Afghanistan http://alturl.com/55sbq #AfghanistanTuesday #endwar #peace

"HELPING" AFGHANISTAN
From @bboyblue : In late 2001 when the US invaded #Afghanistan they accounted for 12% of the world's opium production #AfghanistanTuesday

From @bboyblue : By 2008 it accounted for 93%, the UN reported this week that Afghanistan opium production is set to rise 61% this year #AfghanistanTuesday

Thanks to these tweeps, and here's to all of our #Tuesdayistas! THANK YOU!

PLUS . . . Check out the master list of #AfghanistanTuesday blog posts!

Monday, October 17, 2011

#AfghanistanTuesday - ALL LINKS

Now we find out why #AfghanistanTuesday is so important.

The 10th anniversary of the start of the Afghanistan War is behind us, with massive protests in Chicago and elsewhere. Occupy Wall Street has gotten people into the streets in cities across the country and around the world. In short succession, we will confront the 10th anniversary of Guantanamo, the anniversary of the Iraq invasion and the that of the Libyan intervention, the NATO/G8 protests in Chicago, and the 2012 presidential election. And on top of all of this, daily outrages continue, like the Awlaki extrajudicial execution and the introduction of U.S. military "advisors" into Uganda.

But our work with respect to Afghanistan is far from over. Now, more than ever, we need to assemble every week -- in growing numbers -- to lift our voices together in opposition to continued U.S. occupation of Afghanistan.





It may get loud . . . .

To facilitate the discussion, I am assembling links to past #AfghanistanTuesday blog posts and other resources here:

My Key Blog Posts About #AfghanistanTuesday
Other Key #AfghanistanTuesday Blog Posts
#AfghanistanTuesday - Top Tweets
The hard core: Tuesdayistas!

MY KEY BLOG POSTS ABOUT #AfghanistanTuesday
Making an Impact on #AfghanistanTuesday
Six Outcomes from #AfghanistanTuesday
AfghanistanHour: Speak Now Or ...
#OWS + #ANTIWAR on #AfghanistanTuesday

OTHER KEY #AfghanistanTuesday BLOG POSTS
(US) Peace Couple: Occupy #AfghanistanTuesday
(US) Come Home America: Another #AfghanistanTuesday
(US) Come Home America: Who to Tweet for #AfghanistanTuesday
(US) Anthony's Blog: My Appeal To Ending These Wars
(US) Inciting Thought: Think About Peace
(UK) Reigate & Redhill CDN & STW: American activists using Twitter to encourage action for Afghanistan Tuesday
AfghanistanTuesday on TUMBLR

#AfghanistanTuesday - TOP TWEETS
#AfghanistanTuesday - Top Tweets - September 13, 2011
#AfghanistanTuesday - Top Tweets - September 20, 2011
#AfghanistanTuesday - Top Tweets - September 27, 2011
#AfghanistanTuesday - Top Tweets - October 4, 2011
#AfghanistanTuesday - Top Tweets - October 11, 2011
#AfghanistanTuesday - Top Tweets - October 18, 2011
#AfghanistanTuesday - Top Tweets - November 8, 2011
#AfghanistanTuesday - Top Tweets - November 22, 2011
#AfghanistanTuesday - Top Tweets - November 29, 2011
#AfghanistanTuesday - Top Tweets - December 6, 2011
#AfghanistanTuesday - Top Tweets - December 13, 2011
FULL LIST - including main tags and top tweeps

... and here is an overview of all those top tweets!


THE HARD CORE: TUESDAYISTAS!
I'm a Tuesdayista!
Never Try to Silence a Tuesdayista
Tuesdayistas Own the Streets
Tuesdayistas Are Gonna Throw the Bums Out


Related posts

Read about the #AfghanistanTuesday campaign - in which people made time every week to remember what's happening in Afghanistan and push for change.

(See Making an Impact on #AfghanistanTuesday)













Tuesdayistas are people who (a) take time each week to participate in a national (and now global) conversation about ending the war in Afghanistan; AND (b) help spread the word by reaching out to others (who will reach out to others (who will reach out to others .... to do the same!

(See I'm a Tuesdayista!








With the NATO summit in Chicago just weeks away, now is the time to get EVERYBODY joining the weekly #AfghanistanTuesday virtual demonstrations. What will you be talking about on #AfghanistanTuesday?

(See On #AfghanistanTuesday, Tell NATO to DEMILITARIZE Afghanistan )




This week I'm encouraging all the top #AfghanistanTuesday tweeters to focus on getting the word out about #NoIranWar. Here's why . . .

(See #NoIranWar: #AfghanistanTuesday times TEN! )


Sunday, October 16, 2011

#OWS + #ANTIWAR on #AfghanistanTuesday

The fact that Occupy Wall Street bloomed into a global phenomenon in little more than a week, and that it all happened at the beginning of October, 2011 -- coinciding with the 10th anniversary of the Afghanistan War -- has given tremendous hope to everyone who has been working to get the U.S. out of Afghanistan. People are in the streets, talking to each other, and that is how we're going to find answers.

Especially important is the fact that the Occupy movement understands the systemic nature of the problems our country is mired in. And they have a determination to go to the root of those systemic problems. That's essential to the antiwar movement. We don't just have a war problem ... we have a war economy problem!


"It's 6am here in Los Angeles. Why not talk about
Un-Occupying Afghanistan? #AfghanistanTuesday"
(from @antiwar2)


For several months now, people on Twitter have been gathering weekly to spread awareness of the need to get out of Afghanistan AND to figure out solutions to the larger problem of American militarism. It's exciting that the hashtag #antiwar has now been joined with the hashtag #ows.

What do you think we should be doing to make the #ows + #antiwar connection?

See you on Twitter on #AfghanistanTuesday.


Related posts



In my post about the Occupy movement, I pointed out that standing against U.S. aggression toward Iran was a position that not many people wanted to take, and that luckily a movement had arisen consisting of people who were willing to go beyond the conventional wisdom and were not afraid to take unpopular positions. For me, it boiled down to the "courage to think different." Today, when people in Gaza are once again being slaughtered by an Israeli state that operates with the full backing and material support of the U.S. government, who has the "courage to think different"?
(See Should OWS lead the overthrow of the U.S. support of Israeli crimes? )


If the Occupy movement has taught me one thing, it is that every time I hear some person or group of people being described as "different," I should stop and think. And think again. Would it really be possible for U.S. leaders to be talking about war with Iran if people here stopped to think about how different people there aren't?

(See Why OWS Should Lead the "No Iran War!" Resistance)







A large contingent participated in creative resistance activities at the 2012 Air and Water Show - including a series of "mic check"/die-ins by members of Occupy Chicago.

(See Taking the NO DRONES! Message to the Masses at Chicago's Air & Water Show on the No Drones Illinois website.)