WAR CRIMES ALERT: VIDEO EVIDENCE US ADMITS NO LEGAL GROUNDS FOR 'DEFENSIVE' COMBINED AIR & GROUND WAR IN SYRIA (05.08.2015)

It is the final death rattle of the US snake that it should even try to dare to stand before humanity and admit it wants to wage war on Syria without any legal grounds.

 

The video evidence of US State Department ‘spokesman’ Mark Toner is enough for a jury, in a court of law to lock him up for life for war crimes (including conspiracy to commit war crimes) 

 

0.07: the war criminal's brow furrows immediately he is asked the most straightforward starting point question there is, which is to produce the legal basis (i.e: put up or shut up)

 

Of course Rupert Murdoch does not and will never pass muster as the official public record of the US regime who know there are no legal grounds for the US to call the combined actions of they and their mercenaries in Syria, defensive. 

_______________________

 

The UK is desperately trying to not leave a paper trail at the UN or anywhere else that could be picked up and dropped in many courts of law.

 

The US are therefore trying to begin what the UK cannot join, that in an unprecedented show of cowardice, has seen the British Brutus Cameron try and claim he can act under the military command of the US, to try and keep it all out of EU courts.

 

The British Parliament could not even 'vote' on such blatant nonsense.

_____________________

 

A jury in a court of law could only conclude that:

 

the video is damning evidence against the us regime


a) the US State Department spokesman Toner who acted as a hostile witness, illegally refused in what is a public role, to physically produce the (signed, sealed and dated) legal grounds behind what would be combined air and ground actions by the US and their mercenaries in Syria against the Syrian government, that could not possibly be called defensive

because

b) he knew no legal grounds existed...

...so the US State Department spokesman Mark Toner is shown on public record lying in his role as a public official because his intention is that civilians will be murdered because of his criminal actions...

In fact the video is evidence that the US regime are admitting there are no legal grounds because given the opportunity to provide them, the US State Department could not, while very obviously and blatantly just putting out bluster.

 

22.07.2015 NATO FACE DEFEAT IN SYRIA AS UK ‘FOREIGN’ SECRETARY CONFIRMS PRIMARY MILITARY OBJECTIVE IS TO OVERTHROW SYRIAN GOVERNMENT (NOT ‘ISLAMIC STATE’)

 

deranged: nato 'governments' and 'news' media pretend the biggest fool on the hill doesn't know what his smaller fool on the hill has just admitted about the war on...syria

 

25.07.2015 QUESTION: WHY DO US & TURKEY WANT A 'NO-FLY ZONE' IN SYRIA, WHEN THE 'ENEMY' DOESN'T OWN A SINGLE AIRCRAFT ??!!

 

03.08.2015 NATO ASSETS DEMIRTAS & BARZANI’S FAUSTIAN PACT REPEATS “HOT PURSUIT” & “NO FLY ZONE” MANTRAS USED IN GENOCIDAL IRAQ WAR, TO TRY & INVADE SYRIA

 

04.08.2015 UK SUNDAY EXPRESS TRIES TO COVER-UP CAMERON IS NOT UNDER 'US MILITARY COMMAND' AS NATO’S SAS 'ISLAMIC STATE' MERCENARY IN SYRIA

 

04.08.2015: WHERE IS THE OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORD OF PRESIDENT OBAMA AUTHORIZING US AIR STRIKES AGAINST SYRIAN GOVERNMENT IN SYRIA ?

 

04.08.2015: US, TURKEY, KURDS &...RUPERT MURDOCH DISHONESTLY CLAIM THEY HAVE ‘WIGGLE’ ROOM OVER JOINT & SEVERAL CRIMINAL LIABILITY IN WAR ON SYRIA

 

05.08.2015 RT: US STATE DEPT. 'FRANKLY DOES NOT KNOW' LEGAL AUTHORITY BEHIND US AIRSTRIKES SUPPORTING US 'REBEL' (TERRORISTS) IN SYRIA

 

 

The US has been carrying out airstrikes against ISIS in Syria for almost a year, and the latest decision to bomb Syrian government forces in order to “protect” US-trained “moderate rebels” does not require any additional legal justification, the State Department believes.


Since the US-backed rebel groups in Syria are operating in the “lawless area” of the country, they are under the pressure from “a lot of different forces,” US State Department deputy spokesperson Mark Toner told RT’s Gayane Chichakyan while trying to explain the legal basis for the change in US policy.


“I frankly don’t know what the legal authority is,” Toner said, adding that the situation in Syria remains “complex and fluid.”


He clarified that Washington did not authorize itself to “go after Assad government forces,” insisting that such bombings would take place only in the “hypothetical” case that the US-backed militants would come under fire from Syrian forces.

“We’ve been carrying out airstrikes in that region for many months now, almost a year – and the same – in defense of these groups, but also to help them gain territory back from ISIL,” the spokesman stated, referring to Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) by the administration’s standard acronym for the militants.


“Any type of effort to protect them from Syrian forces would be defensive in nature,” he claimed. "But I’m not going to talk about the legal framework for it.”

When pressed to admit that the latest announcement is a major change in US policy in Syria, Toner said he would “respectfully disagree.”


“There’s no change in the legal framework,” he said. “Our main goal is to take the fight against ISIL. Nothing’s changed in that regard.”

According to US officials the Pentagon was authorized by President Obama to protect Syrian rebels trained by Washington by bombing any force attacking them, including Syrian regular troops. However, neither the Pentagon nor the White House officially commented on the decision about the new broader rules of engagement. So far the US has been avoiding direct confrontation with the forces of President Bashar Assad


Pentagon has been planning to have 3,000 fighters trained by the end of 2015, but according to WSJ finding “moderate” enough applicants without ties to hardline groups turned out to be a heavy task. Reportedly, fewer than 60 fighters so far have been trained. However, at least five of them were captured or killed in an Al-Nusra Front attack last week.


September will mark one year that the US-led coalition started bombing the positions of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. Still, some commentators claim that the US anti-IS campaign in Syria as nothing more than a move to eventually allow the US military to oust President Assad through less direct means.

 

 

05.08.2015 RT: PROTECTING US-TRAINED SYRIAN REBELS (TERRORISTS)? THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS 'DEFENSIVE AIRSTRIKES'

 

 

The State Department is having a hard time explaining a US policy shift in Syria because there is no legal justification for organizing mercenary forces in order to overturn a legitimate government – and then backing them with fictional “defensive airstrikes,” activists and experts told RT.

The entire idea of “defending” mercenary forces, armed and trained by the US, on a territory of sovereign nations is an aggressive and criminal act against Syria, believes Sara Flounders, Co-director of the International Action Center.

RT: In 2013, President Obama made it clear he didn't need the approval of Congress in his quest to destroy Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL). Now the decision to expand the campaign has been taken while Congress is on its summer break. What do you make of that?


Sara Flounders: This is completely illegal, illegitimate on every basis of the US constitution, of international law, of the UN Charter, for the US to be bombing Syria on any basis. And also it should be recognized that the arming, the training, the organizing of mercenary forces in an effort to overturn the legitimate government in Syria is also completely illegal. The whole policy though, and this is the quandary that the US government finds itself in, has been a hauling disaster.


They have failed, now going into the fifth year, to overturn the government of Syria, even though they have organized all kind of mercenary forces and now carrying out bombings under the cover of making a war on ISIS. But of course at the same time they are coordinating and playing quite a role through Saudi Arabia, through Jordan, through Israel, through Turkey, through Qatar, through all the countries in the region and organizing a huge range of different mercenary reactionary forces. The great majority of them who are not Syrians in any way at all, they are a force gathered from anywhere around the world of mercenary and fanatical forces.

So the bombing is just a cover for continued US orchestrated attempts and coordinated attempts to overturn the government of Syria. And the latest excuse is one more totally illegal step. And at the same time it shows that they are not succeeding – every step of the way they have failed.


RT:The State Department's spokesperson basically noted today, that any action to protect US-backed rebels would be defensive only. Do you believe that?


SF: Well, the whole idea of them defending their own mercenary armed and trained forces as if that is a defensive act is a wholly aggressive, criminal act against Syria. So to go a step further and then say we’ve organized this force and now we are going to protect this illegal force and its further attempt against Syria – this is one criminal step after another. It is one disastrous step that has really created enormous destabilization and havoc in the whole region, has left hundreds of thousands of people displaced in Syria, in Iraq, and is taking really a harrowing toll.


And it is important to recognize that the US is playing the primary force, even though the Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Jordan, Israel, Qatar are all involved in this. But none of this could take place without the US determination to bring down the government of Syria. And also in an effort to try to maintain its completely lost position in Iraq. So there is no legality to it at all and as the reporter asking the state department (really very good) sharp questions clearly showed, there is no basis and law for this.

 

It is criminal and it is illegal.


No such thing as ‘defensive airstrikes’


Moreover, as a retired US Air Force officer Karen Kwiatkowski told RT, despite the US State Department claims the airstrikes are never about defense or protection – they are always “offensive” or at the very least retaliatory.


“I don't think I can agree with their use of defensive,” Kwiatkowski said. “When you talk about airstrikes, you really are talking about offensive or retaliative, you are not talking about defensive...And the number of US-trained forces that might be engaging with ISIS in Syria is so small that to have air force cover them defensively – this does not make any sense at all.”


Kwiatkowski believes the policy change was made for “covering somebody’s butt one way or the other.”

“We don't really know who is fighting whom and who is doing what in Syria,” she said. “Maybe we have already done something that we should not have done under the previous rules of engagement so they have to expand it, or as the Pentagon requested they need more freedom to hit more targets. And some of those targets may include Syrian government targets.”


Technically the US has been at war with Syria for a while now, Kwiatkowski says, because “bombing inside the territory of any sovereign nation is an act of war.”


“What is clear is [that] the policy shift is probably reflecting either anticipation or covering up, or preparing to make an excuse for something that has already happened,” she concluded. “I don't really trust anything the US government says when it comes to legal or illegal in terms of interventions and wars overseas because we don't follow any particular rules and have done so for some time.

 


The reason that the Rupert Murdoch media ‘empire’ who first unquestioningly published the US regime's latest lies, must be smashed through courts of law, is because they knowingly allow and facilitate public officials to behave in an illegal manner that both Murdoch lawyers and the US regime know none of them could do in any court of law, before any jury.

The subject matter of civilians dying in illegal wars cannot be mocked by ’news’ media knowingly hiding behind what becomes criminal propaganda, because the purpose is civilians should die because of deliberate lies.

Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street briefings are evidence of his involvement in the criminal conspiracy because both he and his lawyers know that Genie Israel has no recognised legal authority in the Syrian Golan Heights either.

It is a matter of fact that Rupert Murdoch’s Syria propaganda is criminal because he makes personally financial gain if Genie Israel illegally seize land in the Syrian Golan Heights.

There is an identifiable direct connection between what Murdoch’s Genie Israel criminal front company are trying to do and what the US regime are trying to do.

 

The latest illegal US sanctions (below) expose that direct financial link further.

Murdoch got his green card to the US because he used his ‘media’ role to help the CIA (and MI6) illegally establish military bases in Australia, with the coup against the Whitlam government, before he was given a further leg up from Marc Rich with Fox. Marc Rich was behind what grew into the Glencore/Trafigura/Vitol Oil triumvirate that now includes Genie Israel.

Having failed when asked to provide any legal grounds the US regime needs to be shut down, and thrown out of the Middle East and Europe.

04.08.2015 HURRIYET DAILY NEWS: US ADDS TURKISH COMPANIES, INDIVIDUALS TO SYRIA SANCTIONS LIST

 

The NATO run stasi on the Turkish propaganda sheet Hurriyet Daily News look silly unquestioningly repeating the US 'Treasury' lies verbatim.

 

03.08.2015: US TREASURY.GOV: TREASURY 'TARGETS' SYRIAN 'REGIME'...ENERGY NETWORKS

 

 

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control today took action against the international networks responsible for providing energy products used by the Assad regime to continue fueling the ongoing conflict in Syria.  OFAC today designated seven entities and four individuals pursuant to Executive Order (E.O.) 13582 and identified seven vessels as blocked property; many of these entities are front companies that the Government of Syria and its supporters have used in an attempt to evade [illegal] U.S. and E.U. sanctions.  In addition, also pursuant to E.O. 13582, OFAC identified six Government of Syria entities and three vessels that are property in which the Government of Syria has an interest.  As a result of today’s action, all assets of those listed today that are in the United States or in the possession or control of U.S. persons are frozen, and U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with them.

 

 

The latest illuminating US oil 'sanctions' are transparently an isolationist trading 'policy' of limited use, in a world, where the US trade empire increasingly really is not what it was or would like to be.

 

 

As happened with Iran, 'sanctions' will weave their way into European courts and be finished.

 

 

It's like when they steal your umbrella, you get another one, and carry on, because all the Genocidal US & EU regimes are ever trying to do is buy time to try and prevent legal proceedings against them.

 

23.02.2015 IRANIANS CORNER BRITISH PARLIAMENT IN COURTS, WHILE NEW ZEALAND CHEESE SELLING SURRENDER MONKEYS SELL OUT TO EU TERROR...AGAIN.

 

It is small world sometimes, with 'lawyers' who opt for the easy life of dirty money from criminal nato wars, surprisingly a little too close to 'home':

illegal sanctions

 

 shameful: that would be a 'delete request'

 

let me see...2009...mass murdering...war criminal...robert gates...hmmm

 

The announcement in Turkey that some of NATO's 'Islamic State' mercenaries (who I bet are being paid out of NATO's 'Rapid Force' budget) are being re-deployed to try and save the US-Kiev regime's bacon in Ukraine, is obviously no co-incidence.

 

03.08.2015 EUROMAIDAN PRESS: MUSTAFA DZEMILEV: FOREIGN NATIONALS (TERRORISTS) SEEK TO JOIN OUR 'MUSLIM' BATTALION

 

 

Mustafa Dzemilev, Deputy of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, special representative on Crimean issues under the President of Ukraine, declared that Ukraine has decided to create a Muslim battalion under the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

“It has been decided to establish a Muslim battalion, which will be subordinated to the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine, and which will be mainly deployed along the Crimean border in the Kherson Oblast. A fairly large number of Chechens, Ingush, Azerbaijanis, Uzbeks and other nationalities have expressed their desire to serve in this battalion. They wish to do their part and help defend the independence and territorial integrity of Ukraine.” said Dzhemilev in Ankara (Turkey) at the World Congress of Crimean Tatars.

 

 

The US mercenary wars are characterized by the fact the US and it's 'full spectrum' technicolor rainbow of 'allies' only have the ability to recruit people from an ever diminishing circle of the grubbiest and most opportunistic vicious criminals.

 

the whole truth and nothing but the truth

 

05.08.2015 PRESS TV: NO SUCH THING AS MODERATE MILITANTS IN SYRIA FOR U.S TO BACK: FM MUALLAM. 

 

There is no selling point in being a mercenary for the US regime.

 

Please note: Our long-standing civilian resistance that began on June 2nd 2001 is not a 'news' media outlet. We only publish information to help save civilian lives.

 

Blowjob