Seizing an alternative: War lies to hide obviously unlawful wars: propaganda as usual (4 of 7)

The following is my paper for the Claremont Colleges’ conference, Seizing an Alternative Toward an Ecological Civilization, with open registration to the public on June 4-7, 2015.

Paper title:

‘Emperor’s New Clothes’ political collapse: Seizing an alternative to OBVIOUS unlawful wars, bankster looting, lying corporate media

I’ve divided the paper into sections:

Recognizing The Emperor’s New Clothes as THE STORY of today (1 of 7)

Obviously unlawful US/UK wars of the present (2 of 7)

Obviously unlawful Israel wars on Gaza (3 of 7)

War lies to hide obviously unlawful wars: propaganda as usual (4 of 7)

Bankster looting: fundamental fraud that “debt” is “money” (5 of 7)

Lying corporate media: required propaganda trying to hide naked empire (6 of 7)

Integrity for the whole truth, and nothing but the truth (7 of 7)

This section is: War lies to hide obviously unlawful wars: propaganda as usual (4 of 7)


How we know US wars are started with lies known to be false as they are told:

In addition to the illegality of US wars, we know from the disclosed evidence of our own government that all claims for current US wars were known to be lies as they were told to the American public and not “mistaken intelligence.” Read this and this for more complete documentation; here’s the summary for lies to initiate War Crimes on Iraq and Afghanistan:

There were four basic claims of facts presented by US political “leadership” to invade Iraq:

  1. Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD), a scary-sounding name for specific chemical and biological weapons.
  2. The US intercepted aluminum tubes that could only be used to refine nuclear material; irrefutable evidence that Iraq had restarted a nuclear weapons program.
  3. Saddam had attempted to purchase enriched uranium from Niger; more evidence that Iraq had reconstituted nuclear weapons development.
  4. Saddam had links to Al Qaeda, the alleged terrorists who attacked the US on 9/11.

Here’s what we now know about the evidence from which those claims were made:

  1. George Tenet, Director of the CIA, acknowledged that all US intelligence agency reports “never said there was an imminent threat.”  This was based on a long history of intelligence reports, the facts that the chemical and biological weapons under consideration were relatively weak without a delivery system, and that Iraq was highly motivated NOT to use them against the US given their understanding such use would provoke war with the world’s most powerful military. Because all 16 US intelligence agencies stated in writing in their official National Intelligence Estimate report there is no evidence of any imminent threat, and US leaders used an argument of WMD as a reason for war without documentation of evidence while refuted by every US intelligence agency’s official report, that means this claim was a lie known to be false as it was told.
  2. The Bush administration claim of aluminum tubes that could only be used as centrifuges to refine fissionable material for nuclear weapons is directly refuted by the best expert witnesses available, the US Department of Energy (DOE) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Their conclusion is that the tubes in question had diameters too small, the tubes were too thick, using aluminum as the material would be “a huge step backwards,” and the surface was anodized that made them impossible to serve this purpose. They also found that the tubes were easily explained for conventional use, as the specifications perfectly matched tubing for other purposes. The Senate Committee on Intelligence agreed that this claim had no basis from any available evidence. See also here. When the US makes a war-reason without explanation and the evidence is refuted by the two leading expert agencies before the war, that means this claim was a lie known to be false as it was told.
  3. This claim, repeated by President Bush in the 2003 State of the Union Address, was based on the “Niger documents.” These papers were written in grammatically poor French, had a “childlike” forgery of the Niger President’s signature, and had a document signed by a foreign minister who had been out of office for 14 years prior to the date on the document. The forgeries showed-up shortly after the Niger embassy in Rome was robbed, with the only missing items being stationery and Niger government stamps. The same stationery and stamps were used for the forged documents. The CIA warned President Bush on at least three occasions to not make the claim due to the ridiculous evidence. In addition, if Saddam really was making an illegal uranium purchase, it’s likely that both Saddam and the Niger government officials would insist on not having a written record that would document the crime. Republican US Ambassador to Niger, Joseph Wilson, confirmed this information and reported in detail to Vice President Cheney’s office and the CIA. When President Bush and other “leaders” use this claim as a war reason without explanation while analysis of the evidence with all available experts conclude it’s crude forgery, that means this claim was a lie known to be false as it was told.
  4. As to the claim of a relationship between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda, all US intelligence agencies reported that no such relationship existed (and here). When Vice President Cheney makes an unsubstantiated war-reason while all 16 US intelligence agencies officially report no such evidence exists AND compelling evidence exists to refute the claim, that means this claim was a lie known to be false as it was told.

Some war liars argue that UN Security Council Resolution 687 from 1991 authorizes resumption of force from the previous Gulf War. This resolution declared a formal cease-fire; which means exactly what it says: stop the use of force. The resolution was declared by UNSC and held in their jurisdiction; that is, no individual nation has authority to supersede UNSC’s power to continue or change the status of the cease-fire (further explanation here). The idea that the US and/or UK can authorize use of force under a UNSC cease-fire is as criminal as your neighbor shooting one of your family members and claiming that because police have authority to shoot dangerous people he can do it. When US leaders claim authority they clearly and OBVIOUSLY do not have, that means this claim was a lie known to be false as it was told.

War lies for unlawful war on Afghanistan: The US acknowledges the Afghanistan government had nothing to do with 9/11. The UN Security Council issued two Resolutions after 9/11  (1368 and 1373) for international cooperation for factual discovery, arrests, and prosecutions of the 9/11 criminals. The Afghan government said they would arrest any suspect upon presentation of evidence of criminal involvement. The US rejected these Resolutions, and violated the letter and intent of the UN Charter by armed attack and invasion of Afghanistan.

The US government requested the cooperation of the Afghanistan government for extradition of Osama bid Laden to be charged with the 9/11 attacks. The Afghan government agreed, as per usual cooperative international law, as soon as the US government provided evidence of bin Laden’s involvement. The US government refused to provide any evidence. The Afghan government refused US troops entering their country and extradition until evidence was provided, and made their argument to the world press for the rule of law to apply to the US extradition request. The US invaded Afghanistan without providing evidence and without UN Security Council approval. President Bush stated, “There’s no need to discuss evidence of innocence or guilt. We know he’s guilty.” Because the Afghanistan government did not attack the US, there was no evidence of imminent threat, the US violated the UN Security Council’s legal authority, the Afghan government took every reasonable act to cooperate, that means this US war claim of “self-defense” was a lie known to be false as it was told.

In conclusion of this section of Emperor’s New Clothes’ unlawful Wars of Aggression, all based on lies known to be lies as they were told: It’s simple enough for anyone to document the crystal-clear letter and intent of two treaties forbidding military armed attack unless under attack by another nation’s government (or imminent threat).

It’s also simple to document what we now know of “reasons” for war to prove they were all known to be false as they were told, when the facts are available for objective view.

If you’re interested in viewing a history of similar easy cases to establish a history of unlawful/treaty-violating wars started with lies, consider:

A history leading to our world of the present of unlawful wars started with lies is vital for understanding political collapse today. If the motivation for wars includes resources and money, we need to address similar Emperor’s New Clothes’ crimes with what we use for money.


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

Note: 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, 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.
  • The Joint Chiefs are drunk on power!

    May 14, 2015 The Future of the Silent Service

    Please join us for a discussion with Admiral Connor on the U.S. Submarine Forces’ future given changing strategic dynamics, rapidly evolving technologies, and budgetary pressures.

  • fritz

    Even Yearthausend old “Cruel SLAVEDOM” , Hidden in the Most SOPHISTICATED MANNER , could not Hinder the tied up “Spiritual SUBSTANCE , or SOUL” , to break free & Develope their “Imminent PURPOSE” , to become the “Willpowered SELFCONSCIOUSNESS” ! That SPELLS like “Retaliatory TROUBLE” for the Stout SLAVEMASTERS !

  • May 16, 2015 Resurrecting Osama – #NewWorldNextWeek

    The video series from Corbett Report and Media Monarchy that covers some of the most important developments in open source intelligence news.

    • mrfixit123

      Well this page is right but overall it’s wrong. We had 100% absolute right to attack Iraq for violating inspections alone. That alone was UN law and grounds for invasion. We did not need any other reason, regardless of the government issues and truth talking points on your page. The issue is that the UN didn’t want to enforce the law. We convinced other UN countries to uphold the law and to invade with us which they ultimately did though they needed a lot of convincing. It was 100% legal.

      • Carl_Herman

        Nope; you need a history lesson on weapons inspections. The US began rhetoric that “someone” should assassinate Saddam after he began selling oil for currencies other than dollars in 2000. Then they changed the rules to “inspect” his living quarters for weapons, which was a direct threat to plant a bomb in his living quarters. Saddam refused. Documentation:

        In addition, the UN had an official “cease fire” in place, which is up to the UN Security Council to manage, not the US. This is like a person on the street shooting one of your family members with the excuse, “Well, the cops can do it, so can I.”

        The US did not convince the UN; provide your evidence that they did (you won’t find any because it didn’t happen).

        Finally, because we now know all “reasons” for war were lies known to be lies as they were told as documented above, the US is certainly guilty of a War of Aggression. The motive is the petrodollar, the facts are the known lies and violation of both war law and the UN cease fire, and the damages are millions killed (including thousands of US military) with trillions of dollars wasted.

        The category of crimes are treason (lying to attack US soldiers by dropping them into illegal combat), Wars of Aggression, looting through these fraudulent spending claims, and all the crimes associated with war lies.