Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: The Erosion Universal Jurisdiction

Un articolo un po' lungo, ma vale la pena leggerlo per avere una idea 
più precisa dei risultati ottenuti dalla lobby "sionista".
 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Part I - The Erosion Universal Jurisdiction
 
Back on 12 February 2011 I put out an analysis on the subject of 
Universal Jurisdiction. Here is the first paragraph from the piece:
 
     "One of the really progressive acts that followed the end of World 
War II was the establishment of the principle of universal jurisdiction 
(UJ). UJ is a legal process that allows states that are signatories to 
various international treaties and conventions (such as the Geneva 
conventions) to prosecute alleged violators of these treaties, even when 
these violations are committed outside the country’s borders. This is 
particularly so if it can be demonstrated that the home government of 
the accused has no intention of bringing them to trial for the alleged 
offense. The assumption behind this principle is that the crime 
committed is so egregious as to be seen as a crime against humanity at 
large. In the wake of the Nazi Holocaust and other such crimes against 
humanity, UJ was accepted as a necessary and positive legal step by 
almost all Western nations."
 
It has been 66 years since the end of World War II and the memory of the 
concentration camps has faded (except when invoked as a political tool 
by Zionists). Nor has the subsequent holocausts such as those in 
Cambodia, Rwanda and Bosnia been sufficient to keep the issue of crimes 
against humanity front and center in the governmental minds of the great 
powers. The historical fact is that such truly horrible crimes committed 
at the edges of the European world or beyond have never been seen as 
symbolically important in the same way the Nazi holocaust was. And so we 
cease to pay attention. That allows for the erosion of the safeguards 
against these crimes such as UJ.
 
Now we have proof of this process of erosion. On 15 September 2011 Great 
Britain changed its UJ law to allow the government, in the person of the 
Director of Public Prosecutions, to veto any arrest warrant referencing 
universal jurisdiction issued by a British judge. What that means is 
that when crimes against humanity are committed by representatives of a 
power friendly to Britain, the government can negate any risk of arrest 
for those persons while visiting British soil. This happens to be the 
British government’s response to warrants issued for the arrest of 
Israeli personages such as former foreign minister Lzipi Livni in 2009. 
The British UJ law exists by virtue of Great Britain being a signatory 
to the Fourth Geneva Convention but that does not seem to matter. For 
the sake of friendly relations with Israel, the British government is 
willing to render its obligations under international law moot.
 
Of course the British government does not explain its actions that way. 
Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke insists that the government is "clear 
about our international obligations." This change in the law is simply 
designed to "ensure...that universal jurisdiction cases are only 
proceeded with on the basis of solid evidence that is likely to lead to 
successful prosecution." The fact that Israeli crimes against the 
Palestinians are among the best documented seems not to be part of 
Clarke’s judicial world. Indeed, according to Matthew Gould, Britain’s 
ambassador to Israel, warrants issued against Israelis for war crimes 
and crimes against humanity are only "abuses" of Britain’s judicial 
system carried out "for political reasons."
 
     Part II - Double Standards
 
In truth, what the British government has done is institutionalize 
double standards. Just imagine what would happen if the head of the Izz 
ad-Din al-Qassem Brigades (Hamas’s military wing) flew into Heathrow to 
see some sick friend. The British Zionists would have a judge issue a 
warrant within the hour and the British government would enforce it 
without question. Now imagine that at about the same time Israeli Major 
General Yoav Galant arrived. Galant was Israel’s Chief of Staff during 
Operation Cast Lead and publically stated that the operation turned Gaza 
into an "ideal training zone" to test new weapons that were often 
themselves banned under international law. With this new qualification 
of the UJ law, nothing at all would happen to Galant. And that double 
standard is absolutely in place "for political reasons."
 
This is a disastrous precedent because other countries will almost 
certainly follow the British example. However, it is not the only case 
of erosion of international law. The international law referencing 
behavior on the high seas has recently been called into question and 
guess who forced that issue. Israel again. This is function of the fact 
that all the major powers, and the UN as well, proved willing to let the 
Israelis off the hook for attacking an unarmed Turkish vessel in 
international waters and killing nine passengers. Only Turkey has taken 
a stand for international law. Then there is the U.S. corruption of the 
International Criminal Court (see my analysis "International Law and the 
Problem of Enforcement" posted on 4 June 2011) and finally the repeated 
use of a U.S. veto at the Security Council to protect its ally–again 
Israel–when that country violates international law by moving its own 
population into occupied territory and commits daily crimes against the 
Palestinians.
 
Part II - Conclusion
 
Generally speaking, if it is a great power or allied to one, a 
government can do just about any horrible thing it wants as long as it 
does it to its own citizens and within its own borders. Thus, if Hitler, 
as chancellor of a great power, had just stuck to killing every last 
German Jew, communist, retarded person, etc. he almost certainly would 
have gotten away with it. That is the power of sovereignty. If Saddam 
Hussein, as a U.S. ally, had confined himself to killing Iraqi Kurds and 
Shiites by the tens of thousands no one would have intervened. But in 
both of these cases the dictators made the mistake of incurring the 
wrath of great powers by crossing a border for reasons other than 
blatant self-defense. Now the Israelis have shown that this criterion 
(sticking to your own territory when you do your killing) to be an 
arbitrary one. They cross borders all the time (as does their great 
power patron). My guess is that, unlike Iraq, the Israelis could have 
invaded Kuwait and gotten away with it! That is because they are more 
than just protected by the United States. Washington does not control 
its ally, its ally controls Washington. Israeli front organizations such 
as AIPAC control the information flow and dictate relevant Middle East 
foreign policy to the government of the "greatest power on earth." That 
is why joint resolutions, standing ovations for the likes of Netanyahu, 
and such stupid proclamations as "Israel has the right to annex the West 
Bank" flow uninterrupted from the halls of Congress.
 
It is odd. The only thing that stands between all of us and the next 
holocaust is international law and treaty provisions such as universal 
jurisdiction. But who cares? Not the U.S. or British governments and not 
the Zionists. No.. Memory fades and double standards are, after all, a 
universal human failing. So it is just a matter of time before it 
happens all over again. Not in some far away place like the Balkans or 
Africa or the Far East, but once more right here in the West. Just as if 
the primary civilian disaster of World War II never happened.
 
* Lawrence Davidson is professor of history at West Chester University. 
He is the author of numerous books, including Islamic Fundamentalism and 
America's Palestine: Popular and Official Perceptions from Balfour to 
Israeli Statehood.
 
http://sabbah.biz/mt/archives/2011/09/23/goodbye-international-law/
 
-- 
Sostieni Rete ECO
 
http://rete-eco.it/it/sostienici.html
 
 

Il prossimo a visitare l'UK grazie alla modifica della legge, fortemente 
voluta dalla Lobby "sionista", sembra sarà questo simpaticone (la foto 
lo conferma) del generale Doron.
 
Forse farà da apripista a quell'altro simpatico generale che è Yoav 
Galant, quello che definì Gaza, durante Cast Lead, una ideale zona di 
sperimentazione per nuove armi.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Israeli general to test universal jurisdiction reform
 
By Jennifer Lipman, October 4, 2011
 
The Israeli army general whose planned visit to Britain five years ago 
sparked a campaign to change the law on universal jurisdiction is 
finally to complete his aborted journey.
 
In 2005 former General Doron Almog was unable to leave a plane at 
Heathrow because pro-Palestinian campaigners had applied for a warrant 
for alleged war crimes and he would have faced arrest if he had stepped 
on to UK soil.
 
Gen Almog, regarded as a hero in Israel for his bravery during the raid 
on Entebbe, had been due to speak at an event in aid of Aleh, a charity 
working with children with severe physical and cognitive disabilities. 
Gen Almog's severely disabled son, in whose memory the charity is named, 
died in 2007.
 
His case was the first but not the last, with other high-profile 
Israelis unable to visit Britain because of concerted efforts by 
anti-Israel activists using the law on universal jurisdiction. Among 
them were Opposition leader Tzipi Livni, Defence Minister Ehud Barak and 
Transport Minister Shaul Mofaz.
 
Last month the reform of the law finally received Royal Assent, meaning 
that activists now have to seek the consent of the Director of Public 
Prosecutions for such warrants.
 
Gen Almog is now set to visit Britain early next year. He said he was 
awaiting the trip with "tremendous anticipation".
 
During his visit he will address another Aleh event. Gail Seal, a 
trustee of Aleh UK, said she was delighted he would at last be able to 
attend. "It will certainly be an event that is not to be missed," she said.
 
http://www.thejc.com/news/israel-news/55752/israeli-general-test-universal-jurisdiction-reform
 


 Il prossimo a visitare
 
non gli va proprio giu', al pirla.

 * Lawrence Davidson is
 
proprio un bel pirla:
 
The main theme in Davidson's writing is self-deception. According to
Davidson, Israel is responsible for Palestinian terrorism but doesn't
realize it because "(t)he Israelis see their situation in terms of a…
closed information environment… the Israelis… have adhered to a
mythologized and self-centered interpretation of events"[v] . Davidson
describes Israeli society as smothered by Nazi-like propaganda, when
in fact the Israeli government allows for complete freedom of speech
and welcomes criticism. Davidson follows his arguments to their
logical conclusion and declares that U.S. aggression resulted in the
World Trade Center attacks on September 11, 2001, a fact not evident
to the rest of us because of our instinctive denial.
 
In October 2003, Davidson delivered a lecture to the Middle East Study
Group of the Episcopal Diocese of Pennsylvania. Davidson described
terrorism to the Episcopalians as a natural and understandable action
caused and encouraged by the Israelis: "What you want is what you
get." He denied that Israeli security efforts had any beneficial
effects, characterizing them as "pure, mean harassment in order to
make life as miserable as possible" Davidson glossed over all past
Arab aggression and summed up Israel's fight for independence thus:
"Zionists waged war against poorly armed and trained Arab nations."
 
http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/2185
 


L'ha presa maluccio. Eppure dovrebbe esserci abituato.
-- 
recoil is insignificant when there is a tiger on the head of your elephant