12-minute video: expert lawyers explain US War Crimes; Americans: demanding arrests yet?

Arrest: “to cause to stop” in etymology. To take or hold a suspected criminal. To be held or detained to answer a criminal charge, and/or to prevent further criminal offense.

In 2012, the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission found the following guilty of War Crimes:

  • Former US President, George W. Bush
  • Former US Vice President, Dick Cheney
  • Former US Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld
  • Former US Attorney General, Alberto Gonzalez
  • Former Chief of Staff to Cheney, David Attington
  • Former General Counsel for the Department of Defense, William Haynes
  • Former Assistant Attorney General, Jay Bybee
  • Deputy Assistant U.S. Attorney General, John Yoo

For explanation, documentation, and Emperor’s New Clothes obvious proof of the most important War Crime, US Wars of Aggression, read here.

The lawful response to obvious commission of ongoing War Crimes is to arrest the apparent criminal leaders.

The above video has the former president of the National Lawyers Guild, and current law professor Marjorie Cohn state that she limited her book (Cowboy Republic) documenting US War Crimes to six categories, or face encyclopedic length. An example of one point of the War Crime of torture I’ve previously documented: US political and corporate media “leadership” for “waterboarding” (see hyperlink for footnotes):

Let’s briefly consider allegations of US torture to detainees/claimed “unlawful enemy combatants.” Remember, a “detainee” hasn’t been charged with a crime; the person’s habeas corpus right has been destroyed, and the US government currently claims authority to imprison the detainee indefinitely or simply assassinate anyone claimed to be a “terrorist.”

The US applies interrogation techniques to “unlawful enemy combatants/terrorists” that previous case law found were torture.

For example, President Bush and Vice President Cheney have both admitted to authorizing “waterboarding,” (14) found by courts to be unlawful violation of rights and/or torture in all previous case law in the US and internationally (15).

When previous US courts are unanimous in their findings, (16) that means the legal definition of an act is absolutely certain. In this case, waterboarding, or more accurately “controlled drowning,” is unconstitutional.

The US Constitution expressly forbids cruel punishment in the 8th Amendment. United States Federal Law forbids torture under Code 18 section 2340. The US is bound by several treaties to never torture: the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (legally defining the meaning of the UN Charter treaty, and the most-translated document in world history), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (an interesting study of the US saying one thing and doing the opposite), the Geneva Conventions, and the UN Convention Against Torture.

Importantly, these laws do not say there are exceptions to allow torture; that is, the torturer cannot use the specious “ticking time bomb” excuse that torture was required to save lives. For example, one US treaty to end torture is the UN Convention Against Torture. It states under Article 2: (17)

“No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat or war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.”

Convention III of the Geneva Conventions defines torture in Article 3 as, “outrages upon human dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment.”

The US refused the UN’s request to inspect the US prison at Guantanamo Bay to evaluate claims of torture (18). The US refused to release to the press the International Red Cross’ findings of the treatment of detainees (19).

The US claims under MCA that the US can remove all protections of persons under interrogation: US Constitution, Geneva Convention, and other applicable treaties. This is in Orwellian contradiction to the US Constitution being the definition of American law (and what it means to “defend America”) and in Article 6 that US treaties are the “Supreme Law of the Land.” The word “supreme” means “highest in rank or authority…greatest, utmost…last or final.”

So let’s pause and digest this. It is as simple, I assert, as our baseball analogy of a runner being out at first base by twenty feet, and an umpire/announcer conspiracy trying to get away with the lie of calling the runner safe. Let’s look:

  1. By any and all understanding of professional legal practice, waterboarding is defined in the present as unlawful and/or torture because it was so determined in all previous cases.
  2. The US has legally bound itself in its Constitution, Federal Law, and four treaties to never torture.
  3. Presidents Bush and Obama, along with corresponding leaders, claim that upon their unquestionable word that someone is a “terrorist,” those laws no longer apply.
  4. When government is no longer limited by law, that form of government is no longer a Constitutional Republic. Government based upon what the leader says at any given time is the very definition of dictatorship.
  5. US corporate media does not clearly explain the above legal facts. I mean, this issue is also news to you, yes?

Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney are welcome to argue for waterboarding’s reclassification as a legal practice, of course, but the legally-demanded place under a constitutional republic is in a Federal criminal courtroom, not book or speaking tours earning tens of millions (20).

For an expert legal analysis, you might consider Jonathan Turley, voted among the editors of the American Bar Association Journal as having the US’ top legal blog: (21)

“The United States has a clear obligation to prosecute those responsible for our torture program. However, President Obama has promised to block any investigation of torturers and has stopped any investigation of those who ordered the war crime.”

This would be as if the school principal’s son were a student here and would take tests while having notes on his desk with the test’s content and answers. We know that in all previous “case law” that when a student is caught taking a test with notes that contain test content, that is called “cheating.” However, the principal, son, teacher, and local media call it an “enhanced studying technique,” that while controversial, is necessary for school security against terror-tests that might infiltrate the school from people who hate education. They say this with a straight face. You know that if you did what the principal’s son did, it’s cheating and you’re busted.

Let’s consider US corporate media’s “reporting” in more detail.

This is essential because if American’s access to accurate information is compromised by government propaganda, then Americans will not have easy access to the facts. This is what the California Framework means when it asks you to guard against propaganda. Doing so requires your real-world critical thinking skills.

Torture at Times: Waterboarding in the Media,” a paper published from Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government that studied the US’ four most-read newspapers, found from the 1930s to 2004 that The New York Times reported waterboarding as torture 82% of the time, and The Los Angeles Times did so 96%. After stories broke that the US was waterboarding “detainees” in current US wars, the papers’ reporting of waterboarding as torture dropped to 1% and 5%, respectfully. In addition, after the US admitted to waterboarding, The Wall Street Journal called it torture in just 1 of 63 articles (2%), and USA Today never called it torture.

You should ask and answer: is this legal issue of torture really this objectively clear? Although I’m perfectly free to assert the preceding as facts, you’re perfectly free to determine the facts, their meaning, and what we should do about it for yourself. In professional academics, these factual claims lead to an obvious next move: anyone is welcome to refute the claimed facts to help public understanding on this issue.

But wait, there’s more.

We have verified history of official government propaganda having infiltrated corporate media. The Church Senate Committee hearings had the cooperation of CIA Director William Colby’s testimony that over 400 CIA operatives were controlling US corporate media (22) reporting on specific issues of national interest in what they called Operation Mockingbird. This stunning testimony was then confirmed by Pulitzer Prize reporter Carl Bernstein’s research (23) and reporting. Of course, corporate media refused to publish Bernstein’s article and it became the cover-story for Rolling Stone. For a 13-minute video that includes the President of CBS admitting that their news agency accepted and communicated CIA-generated and planted stories, the CIA Director admitting to the Senate that this is true, examples of widely-reported “news” stories that were total lies from the CIA to foment war support from the US public, watch here (24).

So which conclusion seems most plausible to you:

  1. US corporate media stopped calling waterboarding “torture” because leading and professional reporters of law somehow forgot or found basic legal definitions based on case law no longer important. I like to characterize this as the “Homer Simpson” or “SpongeBob defense.”
  2. US corporate media were ordered to change their reporting. Professional writers in law are very aware of looking at case law, and independent legal experts they interview affirm this as basic legal analysis especially when case law is unanimous in verdicts. It’s impossible to explain this removal of reporting waterboarding as legally-defined torture unless the corporate media editors made that conscious decision.

Corporate media won’t report the following polling data, but the American public have noticed something is very wrong with their “news” both as reported by government and regular media.

In 2010, only one in five Americans reported trust and satisfaction with their government (25) (and here [26]). In 2014, Gallup reported (27) Americans’ confidence in Congress at the historic low of 7%, while 7% reported their confidence level at “none” and half as “very little.”

Americans also perceive corporate media disinformation and are rejecting their “reporting.” According to a 2007 poll by the Pew Research Center (28), the majority of the American public see the US major media news organizations as politically biased, inaccurate, and uncaring. Among those who use the Internet, two-thirds report that major media news do not care about the people they report on, 59% say the news is inaccurate, 64% see bias, and 53% summarize their view on major media news as, “failing to stand up for America.” In their 2009 poll (29), “just 29% of Americans say that news organizations generally get the facts straight, while 63% say that news stories are often inaccurate.” Gallup’s 2014 poll (30) recorded the lowest ever US public confidence in accurate news reporting from corporate media’s television news: 18%.

A June 2010 Rasmussen poll (31) found 66% of voters “angry” at the media, with 33% “very angry.” Rasmussen also found 70% “angry” at current federal government policies. The most current Gallup poll in 2012 (32) shows Americans’ distrust at an all-time high in the reporting from “mass media — such as newspapers, TV, and radio”: 60% have either “not very much” trust and confidence or “none at all” to “reporting the news fully, accurately, and fairly.”

A possible genesis of oligarchic control of American major media was reported in the US Congressional Record in 1917 (33). US Congressperson Oscar Callaway claimed evidence that J.P. Morgan had purchased editorial control over 25 of the nation’s most influential publications in order to create public support for US entry into World War 1 and his new banking legislative victory: creation of the Federal Reserve system. Mr. Callaway’s colleagues voted down an official investigation.

Related corporate reporting history is summarized and documented in this brief article, “The news media at war (34).”


Note: I make all factual assertions as a National Board Certified Teacher of US Government, Economics, and History, with all economics factual claims receiving zero refutation since I began writing in 2008 among Advanced Placement Macroeconomics teachers on our discussion board, public audiences of these articles, and international conferences. I invite readers to empower their civic voices with the strongest comprehensive facts most important to building a brighter future. I challenge professionals, academics, and citizens to add their voices for the benefit of all Earth’s inhabitants.


Carl Herman is a National Board Certified Teacher of US Government, Economics, and History; also credentialed in Mathematics. He worked with both US political parties over 18 years and two UN Summits with the citizen’s lobby, RESULTS, for US domestic and foreign policy to end poverty. He can be reached at Carl_Herman@post.harvard.edu

Note: Examiner.com has blocked public access to my articles on their site (and from other whistleblowers), so some links in my previous work are blocked. If you’d like to search for those articles other sites may have republished, use words from the article title within the blocked link. Or, go to http://archive.org/web/, paste the expired link into the box, click “Browse history,” then click onto the screenshots of that page for each time it was screen-shot and uploaded to webarchive. I’ll update as “hobby time” allows; including my earliest work from 2009 to 2011 (blocked author pages: here, here).

This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.
  • Southern

    Another quality article, bookmarked — Keep em coming and I’ll keep sending the links out.

    • Carl_Herman

      Awesome, Southern; thanks. We’ll do our part to at least provide clear choice of what world people will work to have.

  • Here is a golden nugget of news to start this morning off!
    May 27, 2015 Department Of Justice Flying Secret Airplane Fleet Over American Cities

    An independent journalist discovered a fleet of at least 100 secret Department of Justice airplanes after his friend saw one perform what appeared to be a surveillance flight over Minneapolis.



  • Follow the drug money and the CIA!

    Jan 9, 2015 Opium Production in Afghanistan Sets Record – America Soldiers Helping Heroin Production


  • Michelle Lee

    This video is from almost 2 years ago, guess once again, nothing will be done about these psychopaths

    • Carl_Herman

      Maybe, Michelle Lee, maybe. That said, we have 100% control over what we will think, say, and do. At the very least, we can be proud of our choices for justice.

      And, we have no idea what other forces are at play for justice.

      Are you a person of some kind of spiritual, philosophical, and/or religious faith, Michelle? If so, and your faith informs you that Trust in Life is real, it’s time to exercise your faith fully in trust that love and justice prevail, no matter what we seem to perceive 🙂

      Enjoy dancing to this interesting music at this time on our beautiful and dominated planet.

  • May 27, 2015 “Terrorists” Take Over the Stage (Extra Scene from ‘Rearming Iraq’)

    VICE News traveled to this year’s International Defense Exhibition and Conference in the United Arab Emirates capital of Abu Dhabi to examine the competition between arms manufacturers vying for a greater portion of the lucrative market. From Abu Dhabi we traveled to Iraq, where US weapons have fallen into the hands of non-state actors such as the so-called Islamic State militant group, Kurdish Peshmerga, and militias aligned with the Iraqi government. Rather than block sales, the US government and others actively promote them — ensuring there will be enough arms to fuel the region’s wars and revolts for years to come.


  • Mike Meyer

    Carl,Please walk me through a hypothetical play by play on the first day of arrests of the apparent criminal leaders
    [convicts !.. in the jurisdiction of Kalua Lampur ].
    What is the most effective and efficient scenario that you can envision at this time?A chronology of the choreography,if you will.
    Who would give the order? Congress?….the
    Sergeant at Arms of the United States House ?
    I will call my congressional representative on 5/29/15 and petition
    him to introduce legislation or some sort of emergency motion
    authorising THE ARRESTS.

    Will you do the same or have you already ?

    Why not a petition on RootsAction.org or Creedo petition services?
    I’d do it but i’m only a semi-literate techno peasant ….Please advise.

    • Carl_Herman

      Hi Mike. My best guess is a grass-roots uprising among many of the officers, informal conversations of what to do, then an “Emperor’s New Clothes” awakening. At that point, there will be many options 🙂

      Nah, I’m done asking for anything other than arrests or Truth and Reconciliation.

      • Mike Meyer

        Thanks for the reply Carl.You are one of the few people I know that demonstrate
        proper email ‘call and response’ [jazz] etiquette.
        -“a grass-roots uprising among many of the officers”….that would be a popular,law enforcement based, military coup in an effort to restore constitutional government?

        Which officers would you support?I presume some of those that have since the 2001 Bush coup been discharged or fired/retired,Eh? Where is Smedley Butler?What about Special Ops General Stan McChrystal[joe Biden critic] described by former Defense Secretary Robert Gates as, “perhaps the finest warrior and leader of men in combat I ever met.”
        Regarding”nah”,re-understand….PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE circulate a petition to congress for ‘arrests or Truth and Reconciliation’ .It is not “asking”.THE Petition must be

        a formal negotiating step offer before an a more abrupt mass countrywide reaction to ‘a long train of abuses’……..We The People need a list of which Reps did not sign the petition to arrest “W” et al.

        If you write it I will circulate it !…
        C’mon buddy……Let’s GET IT ON Carl baby!
        Email it to me ; mr114@verizon.net

        • Carl_Herman

          You’re welcome Mike. Because the wars are unlawful that means officers are simply doing the job they’re sworn to do in arresting those who issue obviously unlawful orders. There are no lawful orders in unlawful war of aggression.

          I support anyone fulfilling their Oath.

          And still nah for petitions. I’m friends with Dennis Kucinich and staff: the work for impeachment received almost zero support in Congress so I’ll leave petitions to others.

          • Mike Meyer

            Thanks for all you do.
            I consider you to be a great leader.
            I’d vote for you……and Francis Boyle and Ellen Brown;What a troika ticket!
            Have you considered filing in Ca.[at least]
            as a write in candidate/2016?
            Also,What percentage of your students stay “awakened”?

            The Military Police are really derelict of Duty….
            I still do not understand you completely….
            Script and screenplay development department;
            One awake officer refusing an order and then detaining
            the superior that gave the order ?…..to go viral within the ranks?
            …or what dadio?

          • Carl_Herman

            You’re welcome, Bro, and likewise!

            Ellen Brown has run for public office; I’ll wait to see what’s best after arrests.

            Once the “Emperor’s New Clothes” breakthrough occurs, then it doesn’t matter how the endgame plays out, Mike. This will happen organically within the ranks; predictably, this will have some dramatic confrontations (and likely already has that we’ll learn of later to honor all our heroes).

            All of us are operating at “human” abilities to forecast the future, Bro, so I operate on good-faith effort on the openings I find are best.

            Have fun dancing to this music 🙂

  • davol

    If we give in to these war crimes allegations and start prosecuting our leaders for war crimes then our own leaders will essentially become ‘terrorized’ away from starting new wars. This makes the work of this law professor actually an act of terrorism. I think we are officially at war on terrorism so perhaps this guy needs to be taken to Guantanamo. We should not negotiate with terrorists. We have a war to fight people!

    • Carl_Herman

      davol: thank you for declaring your support for unlawful Wars of Aggression by the “reason that upholding the law is the exact same as “being a terrorist.”

      We also appreciate your claim that “we” are somehow “officially at war” on “terrorism,” therefore people should just keep fighting that “terrorism.”

      Your “reasoning” helps people choose whether your path is more attractive, or ours. Thank you for this contribution, davol.

    • Julie Crory Telgenhoff

      OMG YOUR taxes in American are funding those terrorist. A simple youtube search and Hillary Clinton herself admits they created al CIA da and that was a long time ago. I would only add this current POTUS and the Clintons on that list. Obama had AMERICAN ANWAR AL-AWLAKI ASSASSINATED THEN HIS INNOCENT AMERICAN 16 YR OLD SON WHILE EATING OUT WITH FRIENDS A MONTH LATER JUST DRONED DOWN DEAD. al-Awlaki’s death set the precedence for ALL AMERICANS to now be legally assassinated by drone if Government says so. Don’t believe me?????? Here’s the ACLU’s response to the news. Wake the fuck up. “The release of this memo represents an overdue but nonetheless crucial step towards transparency. “There are few questions more important than the question of when the government has the authority to kill its own citizens,” American Civil Liberties Union Deputy Legal Director Jameel Jaffer said in a statement released by the ACLU on Monday.”

      “The release of this memo will allow the public to better understand the scope and implications of the authority the government is claiming,” added Jaffer, who argued for the release of this memo and other documents before the Second Circuit. – CONT HERE: http://asheepnomore.net/2014/09/15/case-justifies-killing-americans-constitutional/