Count I: Conspiracy to Wage Aggressive War
Count II: Crimes Against Peace
Count III: War Crimes
Count IV: Crimes Against Humanity
Invasion of Iraq, called "Operation Iraqi Freedom" by the US administration, officially began on March 20, 2003.
Excerpts from the Downing Street Memo - a document containing meeting minutes transcribed during the British Prime Minister's meeting on July 23, 2002 will serve as
EXHIBIT 1, giving evidence of
Count I: Conspiracy to Wage Aggressive War; and Count II: Crimes Against Peace.(Excerpts from the Downing Street Memo) EXHIBIT 1: The Foreign Secretary said he would discuss this with Colin Powell this week. It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbors, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force.
The Attorney-General said that the desire for regime change was not a legal base for military action. There were three possible legal bases: self-defense, humanitarian intervention, or UNSC authorization. The first and second could not be the base in this case. Relying on UNSCR 1205 of three years ago would be difficult. The situation might of course change.
Photographs from Abu Ghraib Prison released February 15, 2006 by Australia's Special Broadcasting Service TV will serve as
EXHIBITS 2 – 26, giving evidence of
Count III: War Crimes; and Count IV: Crimes Against Humanity.see appendix “B” for EXHIBITS 2 – 26:APPENDIX B: http://www.guardian.co.uk/gall/0,,1710396,00.htmlAGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES: In an ongoing effort to dismantle basic human liberty – as per Bill of Rights, U.S. Constitution, in collusion with certain members of Congress and Senate, George Herbert Walker, Jr. signed Military Commissions Act
October 17, 2006.May it please Your Honors,
The privilege of opening the first trial in history for crimes against the peace of the world imposes a grave responsibility. The wrongs which we seek to condemn and punish have been so calculated, so malignant and so devastating, that civilization cannot tolerate their being ignored because it cannot survive their being repeated.
Despite the fact that public opinion already condemns their acts, we agree that here they must be given a presumption of innocence, and we accept the burden of proving criminal acts and the responsibility of these defendants for their commission.
When I say that we do not ask for convictions unless we prove crime, I do not mean mere technical or incidental transgression of international conventions. We charge guilt on planned and intended conduct that involves moral as well as legal wrong. And we do not mean conduct that is a natural and human, even if illegal, cutting of corners, such as many of us might well have committed had we been in the defendants positions. It is not because they yielded to the normal frailties of human beings that we accuse them. It is their abnormal and inhuman conduct which brings them to this bar. We will not ask you to convict these men on the testimony of their foes.
These defendants were men of a station and rank which does not soil its own hands with blood. They were men who knew how to use lesser folk as tools. We want to reach the planners and designers, the inciters and leaders without whose evil architecture the world would not have been for so long scourged with the violence and lawlessness, and wracked with the agonies and convulsions, of this terrible war.
The former high station of these defendants, the notoriety of their acts, and the adaptability of their conduct to provoke retaliation make it hard to distinguish between the demand for a just and measured retribution, and the unthinking cry for vengeance which arises from the anguish of war. It is our task, so far as humanly possible, to draw the line between the two. We must never forget that the record on which we judge these defendants today is the record on which history will judge us tomorrow. To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well. We must summon such detachment and intellectual integrity to our task that this trial will commend itself to posterity as fulfilling humanity's aspirations to do justice.
They led their people on a mad amble for domination. They diverted social energies and resources to the creation of what they thought to be an invincible war machine. They overran their neighbors.
They took from their people all those dignities and freedoms that we hold natural and inalienable rights in every human being. The people were compensated by inflaming and gratifying hatreds toward those who were marked as "scape-goats."
They are living symbols of racial hatreds, of terrorism and violence, and of the arrogance and cruelty of power. They are symbols of fierce nationalism and militarism, of intrigue and war- making.
On November 21, 1945, Justice Robert Jackson made the preceding comments during the opening session of the Nuremberg Trial. (also known as the International Military Tribunal)
Justice Jackson served as the United States Representative and Chief of Counsel for the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, Germany, from May 2, 1945, to October 17, 1946. He also served as a United States Supreme Court Justice from 1941 until 1954.
Jackson's work, including his eloquent written and spoken words on matters of enduring principle, is central to U.S. constitutional law and international law to this day. His life and legacy remain vital to the United States and to the world. May it please the court; to show that defendants can be indicted and tried in absence; we offer this legal precedent of binding authority on this day, October 22, 2006:
The International Military Tribunal having been duly constituted and an indictment having been lodged with the Tribunal by the Chief Prosecutors
AND one of the defendants, Martin Bormann, not having been found
IT IS ORDERED that notice be given said Martin Bormann in the following form and manner:
(a) Form of Notice
Take Notice:
Martin Bormann is charged with having committed Crimes against Peace, War Crimes, and Crimes against Humanity all as particularly set forth in an indictment which has been lodged with this Tribunal.
The indictment is available at the Palace of Justice, Nuremberg, Germany.
If Martin Bormann appears, he is entitled to be heard in person or by counsel.
If he fails to appear, he may be tried in his absence, commencing November 20, 1945 at the Palace of Justice, Nuremberg, Germany, and if found guilty the sentence pronounced upon him will, without further hearing, and subject to the orders of the Control Council for Germany, be executed whenever he is found.
By order of
The International Military Tribunal (no signature)
General Secretary
(b) Manner of Notice
This notice shall be read in full once a week for four weeks over the radio, the first reading to be during the week of October 22, 1945. It shall also be published in four separate issues of a newspaper circulated in the home city of Martin Bormann.
The Orders and Forms of Notice above set forth have been adopted by the International Military Tribunal.
/s/ GEOFFREY LAWRENCE
President
October 18, 1945
Attest: / s/ HAROLD B. WILLEY
General Secretary
Letter to Justice Jackson Upon the Conclusion of His Duties With the Nuremberg Tribunal.
October 17th, 1946
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
