5-minute video: WikiLeaks ‘Top 10’ released documents of .01% lie-started and illegal Wars of Aggression, Crimes Against Humanity, only and always lying. Demanding arrests yet, or still ‘Hoping for Change’ from ‘leaders’ with ‘Compassionate conservatism’?

WikiLeaks’ sharp 5-minute “Top 10” released documents:

The powerful choice to We the People is relatively easy to present for anyone caring to exercise basic education to see:

  • The US is a literal rogue state empire led by neocolonial looting liars. The history is uncontested and taught to anyone taking comprehensive courses. If anyone has any refutations of this professional academic factual claim for any of this easy-to-read and documented content, please provide it.
  • US ongoing lie-started and Orwellian-illegal Wars of Aggression require all US military and government to refuse all war orders because there are no lawful orders for obviously unlawful wars. Officers are required to arrest those who issue obviously unlawful orders. We the People should demand this be done to stop the (again) obvious US rogue state. And again, those of us working for this area of justice are aware of zero attempts to refute this with, “War law states (a, b, c), so the wars are legal because (d, e, f).” All we receive is easy-to-reveal bullshit (an academic term).
  • When Americans are told an election is defined by touching a computer screen without a countable receipt that can be verified, they are being told a criminal lie to allow election fraud. This is self-evident, but PrincetonStanford, and the President of the American Statistical Association are among the leaders pointing to the obvious (and herehereherehereherehereherehereherehereherehereherehereherehereherehere). Again, no professional would/can argue an election is legitimate when there is nothing for anyone to count.

Americans must add their thoughts, voices, and actions to the demand for justice of these obvious crimes. When the facts are so clear to anyone exercising basic intellectual integrity and moral courage, what is the counter-argument to not demand .01% arrests for annually killing millions, harming billions, and looting trillions?

Please consider Dr. King’s 2-minute message to you asking for your support to end obvious crimes of state because “silence is betrayal” (full 1967 speech to end the Vietnam War):

Demanding arrests as the required and obvious public response:

The categories of crime include:

  1. Wars of Aggression (the worst crime a nation can commit).
  2. Likely treason for lying to US military, ordering unlawful attack and invasions of foreign lands, and causing thousands of US military deaths.
  3. Crimes Against Humanity for ongoing intentional policy of poverty that’s killed over 400 million human beings just since 1995 (~75% children; more deaths than from all wars in Earth’s recorded history).

US military, law enforcement, and all with Oaths to support and defend the US Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, face an endgame choice:

In just 90 seconds, former US Marine Ken O’Keefe powerfully states how you may choose to voice “very obvious solutions”: arrest the criminal leaders (video starts at 20:51, then finishes this episode of Cross Talk):

George Washington’s final public message was for “We the People” to recognize if the US devolved into a rogue state:

In the cumulating message of his 45 years of service with his Farewell Address, George Washington wrote an open letter to the American public.

Please give George two minutes of your attention:

“All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests.

However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion…

In offering to you, my countrymen, these counsels of an old and affectionate friend, I dare not hope they will make the strong and lasting impression I could wish; that they will control the usual current of the passions, or prevent our nation from running the course which has hitherto marked the destiny of nations. But, if I may even flatter myself that they may be productive of some partial benefit, some occasional good; that they may now and then recur to moderate the fury of party spirit, to warn against the mischiefs of foreign intrigue, to guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism; this hope will be a full recompense for the solicitude for your welfare, by which they have been dictated.”

George’s admonition of “impostures of pretended patriotism” to “direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities” is exactly what the US has become: a rogue state, and requires public voice for lawful arrests to end its vicious destruction.

It is also what Benjamin Franklin predicted would be the eventual outcome of the United States. On September 18, 1787, just after signing the US Constitution, Ben met with members of the press. He was asked what kind of government America would have. Franklin warned: “A republic, if you can keep it.” In his speech to the Constitutional Convention, Franklin admonished: 

“This [U.S. Constitution] is likely to be administered for a course of years and then end in despotism… when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic government, being incapable of any other.”  – The Quotable Founding Fathers, pg. 39.

These warnings extend to all social science teachers of the present:

“As educators in the field of history–social science, we want our students to… understand the value, the importance, and the fragility of democratic institutions. We want them to realize that only a small fraction of the world’s population (now or in the past) has been fortunate enough to live under a democratic form of government.” – History-Social Science Framework for California Public Schools, pgs. 2, 7-8

Do you have the intellectual integrity and moral courage to at least act with the honesty of a child to speak the Emperor’s New Clothes truth?

Or do you prefer stupefied denial to challenges despite available expert evidence, blind belief in President Clinton/Trump’s dictates, and sheepish existence?

Choose carefully. Life will honor your choices.


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 (and here). 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: herehere).

This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.
  • a guest

    julian assange says he is “annoyed” by those that question the official account of 9/11.

    • Carl_Herman

      Fair enough. That said, let’s consider two possible causes:

      a. Assange is a “limited hangout.”
      b. Assange, as most of us, has blind spots.

      Now let’s consider the best use of the 5-minute video and documents:

      a. Use them to optimal advantage for justice as evidence of .01% lie-started and illegal Wars of Aggression, Crimes Against Humanity, and constant lying.
      b. Reject the evidence because Assange omits 9/11 Truth.

      Which is our best use, no matter if Assange is at least partially controlled or blind in areas?

      And, perhaps, the most important point is exactly what this article titles: demand arrests of .01% “leaders” for OBVIOUS crimes so easily proved in war, looting, and lying.


      • a guest

        gday Carl,
        assange released the collateral damage video.

        nothing in it was any real surprise or shock to anyone who was paying attention, the whole world was aware of the USAs war crimes, or they were hiding under some rock. Nothing came of it, no wars ended. Nothing he has “leaked” has made a scrap of difference, in fact, things have only gotten worse.

        doesnt matter if assange is controlled or just stupid, if he had been telling the truth about 9/11from the start, given he has a lot of supporters, they may have been enough to do something about 9/11. the reasons he didnt dont matter, he didnt, and i wouldnt trust him as far as I could kick him. ( i put his mate john pilger in the same basket )

        like you say, the crimes are obvious, we dont need to, and we shouldnt rely on such an obvious liar to help make the casee for prosecuting the .01%, it is solid enough without any “assistance” from assange.

        youre a lot more optomistic than me I think, if the has been no prosecution to date, i dont believe there will ever be any justice, the people committing the crimes are the ones in charge of bringing any sort of prosecution.. but I appreciate what you do.

        • Carl_Herman

          Thanks, mate, for your engagement for the facts, and for justice.

          Under the current powers, you’re correct: all they’ll ever do is bullshit their way from one psychopathic plot to another. That said, to what extent do you see these two overarching conditions:

          1. We have an “Emperor’s New Clothes” situation that will cause the minions protecting the .01% to abandon their “masters”. Academic paper on this: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/05/seizing-an-alternative-recognizing-the-emperors-new-clothes-as-the-story-of-today-1-of-7.html

          2. Our role on Earth here and now is NOT to win anything, but to provide choice to humanity. This taps into our fundamental stands of what Earth is, how we got here, and the meaning of Life. After 40 years of working with the best humanity has beginning with attempts to end poverty that went to two UN summits, this is my own conclusion: we’re not here to win, but are here in enough numbers that humanity can’t pretend they weren’t offered full and informed choice. I express this as best I can here: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/08/rescuing-goddess-earth-creations-people-warriors-truth-love-justice-analogy.html

          • a guest

            “That said, to what extent do you see these two overarching conditions:”

            ive just deleted everything i wrote in response, i just cant do concise and coherent, it ends up in a big ramble.. might be because im not even clear with what i think about everything.

            but thanks for the links, i enjoyed what ive read so far, need more time to go through it all, very interesting reading for me of little faith.

            thanks again. cya.