Civil Liberties, Climate Change, Human Rights, Truth to Power, U.S. Militarism, Violations of U.S. and International Law, War Resister
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
US Petitions The ICC For War Crimes
As the war in Ukraine continues to rage, the U.S. Senate passed a resolution that “encourages member states to petition the [International Criminal Court] or other appropriate international tribunal to take any appropriate steps to investigate war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by the Russian Armed Forces.” Yet the United States has consistently undermined the ICC. The U.S. government thinks the ICC is reliable enough to try Russians but not U.S. or Israeli officials.
Today on Law and Disorder we will examine the matter of what constitutes war crimes, whether war crimes have been committed by either side in Russia’s war in Ukraine, and the role of the International Criminal Court in adjudicating whether or not war crimes have in fact been committed.
Guest – Marjorie Cohn – Law and Disorder co-host, professor emerita at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, former president of the National Lawyers Guild, a member of the advisory board of Veterans for Peace, and the bureau of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers. She writes a regular column on Truthout and provides frequent legal and political commentary for local, national and international media. Her books include Drones and Targeted Killing: Legal, Moral and Geopolitical Issues.
—-
Beyond Fossil Law: Climate, Courts, and the Fight for a Sustainable Future
The technology exists to halt and reverse the ongoing catastrophe of climate change. What is lacking is the political will to do it.
It is legal in the United States to put millions of tons of poison into the air but it is illegal to disrupt this ecocide. Our courts and Congress defend this ecocide. What is to be done?
In 2016, four people known as “the valve turners“ shut down four pipelines in the states of Washington, Montana, Minnesota, and North Dakota. They were arrested and tried. How did the valve turners defend themselves? They mounted the defense of necessity.
The necessity defense is the legal concept that a person can commit a minor crime in order to prevent a larger one. In this case the valve turners admitted to trespass on oil pipeline company property in order to prevent their ongoing contribution to the crisis of climate change.
Guest – Attorney Ted Hamilton, author of the just-published book, “Beyond Fossil Law: Climate, Courts, and the Fight for a Sustainable Future.“ Bill McKibben describes Ted Hamilton book as “a sweeping account of how the legal system enables the ongoing destruction of the planet.“. Ted Hamilton is a climate movement lawyer, writer, and literary scholar. After law school, he co-founded the Climate Defense Project, which provides legal assistance to climate justice activists including the valve turners. He lives in Worcester, Massachusetts.
—————————————-
Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Human Rights, Political Prisoner, Supreme Court, U.S. Militarism, War Resister
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Federal Case Against Donald Trump
There is a great deal of speculation as to whether former president Donald Trump will eventually be indicted for crimes allegedly committed while he was the president. Well, in what might prove to be the most serious blow yet to Trump’s effort to stay out of jail, on March 28th, a federal judge ruled that both former president Trump and Atty. John Eastman who had advised him on how to overturn the 2020 election had most likely committed felonies, including obstructing the work of Congress and conspiring to defraud the United States. The ruling represents a highly significant breakthrough for the House committee investigating the January 6th attack on the Capitol. Judge David O. Carter found that the actions taken by Trump and Eastman amounted to “a coup in search of a legal theory.”
The judge’s ruling may be the House committee’s biggest win to date, as it suggests that the investigators have already built a case strong enough to convince a federal judge of Trump’s culpability in the January 6th insurrection.
Specifically, the ruling means that the House committee will now receive more than 100 emails related to the legal strategy proposed by Eastman to pressure Vice President Mike Pence not to certify electors from swing states when Congress convened on January 6, and thus to not certify the electoral vote. In making his ruling Judge Carter said, “Dr. Eastman and President Trump launched a campaign to overturn a democratic election, an action unprecedented in American history.”
Just how significant is this federal court ruling? What would a federal prosecutor need to show a judge and jury to be able to hold Trump liable for his actions around January 6th? And what about other actions by the former president while in office that many criminal law experts claim were illegal? And, of course, what role will politics ultimately play in determining whether Trump ever stands trial and is convicted by a jury?
Guest – Attorney Michael Tigar. Michael Tigar has been acting professor of law at UCLA, the Jos. D. Jamil Chair of Law at the University of Texas, and the holder of an endowed professorship at Washington College of Law. He is the author of numerous books, including Thinking About Terrorism: The Threat to Civil Liberties in Times if National Emergency and most recently, Sensing Injustice: A Lawyer’s Life in the Battle for Change. He has also represented such notable clients as The Washington Post, Rep. Ron Dellums, and Lynne Stewart.
—-
Russia, Ukraine War Analysis
And now to the matter of Russia’s war in Ukraine and the role of a free press in war time. Today, much is made of the fact that in Putin’s Russia, little or no accurate news of the war is reaching the Russian people. Instead, what they read in their newspapers or hear on their radios and see on their televisions is no more or less than what Putin wants them to read or see or hear. Meanwhile, here in the United States, the American people are provided with virtually non-stop newspaper and live eve-witness television coverage of the war in Ukraine; “coverage” that comes from reporters and others, often in real time, and on the ground in the middle of Putin’s war. Surely the dramatically contrasting way in which the Russian people and the American people are experiencing the war via the media must play a major role in how the two peoples feel about the war. So, too, how the US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were covered by the US media must have played a role in how we, the American people, felt about those wars. Well, today we look at the role a nation’s media can play in shaping public support for or against a war that is being fought by that nation.
Guest – Norman Solomon is truly one of America’s true champions of a free and honest press, free and honest in war time as well as in peacetime. Mr. Solomon is one of the founders of F.A.I.R., or Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, which has proved to be a powerful watchdog of the US media. Norman Solomon is also the co-founder of the internet news and opinion source, RootsAction.org. He is, of course, the author of too many articles to recite here. He is also the author of a number of books, including “War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death;” and “Made Love, Got War: Close Encounters with America’s Warfare State.”
——————————-
CIA Sponsored Terror, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Human Rights, U.S. Militarism, Violations of U.S. and International Law, War Resister
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Russia, Deescalation And Nuclear Disarmament
If the U.S. nuclear policy doesn’t change immediately and rapidly we are in a lot of trouble. Seventy-seven years ago, the United States became the first, and so far the only, country to use nuclear bombs when we destroyed the two Japanese cities of Hiroshima and then Nagasaki to frighten the Russians and secure an immediate and unconditional surrender of Japan in World War II. The dropping of these bombs was the first move against Russia that would devolve two years later in 1947 into the Cold War.
The threat of nuclear war has never eased and it is now imminent with the fighting in the Ukraine which could draw the U.S. and NATO into a direct conflict with Russia. We are now in a new stage of this war. It has become hot and so perilous it threatens all of humanity, all of earth’s creatures, with annihilation. Any mistake, any miscalculation would quickly and irretrievably doom us all. This almost happened during the Cuban Missile Crisis where nuclear war was avoided, according to scholars, by luck and decent leadership.
What has been the history of attempts to contain and roll back the threat of nuclear war? What has been tried and what is failed? What will it take to get the nine countries who possess nuclear weapons to give them up?
The Veterans for Peace organization spelled it out clearly. There should be a “no first use” policy and nuclear missiles must be taken off hair trigger alert. The United States should rejoin the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, from which George W. Bush and Donald Trump withdrew, respectively. The U.S. should sign the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. Our country should initiate negotiations to reduce and eventually eliminate all nuclear weapons, as required by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, to which the U.S. is a party.
To start, there must be a cease-fire in the Ukraine, the withdrawal of Russian forces, and guarantees of Ukrainian sovereignty and Russian security.
Peter’s recent article – Beijing should help mediate to end the Russia-Ukraine crisis
Guest – Peter Kuznick is a professor of history at American University and directs the Nuclear Studies Program. at that institution. Peter and Oliver Stone wrote The Untold History of the United States and also produced a showtime documentary series based on the book.
—-
World Peace Through Law: Replacing War with the Global Rule Of Law
In 1945, following World War I and World War II, wars that claimed millions of lives, the nations of the world enacted the United Nations Charter “to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war.” The Charter prohibits the use of military force except in self-defense after an armed attack by another state or when the Security Council approves it. The five victors of World War II, who became the permanent members of the Security Council, agreed to the Charter because they each received a veto over matters of war and peace.
The United States is a party to the 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Nevertheless, it continues to violate the provision of that treaty that requires the parties to move toward the elimination of nuclear weapons. Although he won the Nobel Peace Prize, Barack Obama’s administration advanced a policy, which Donald Trump and Joe Biden continued, to develop leaner and meaner nuclear weapons. The proposed U.S. budget calls for nearly $2 trillion over the next 30 years to build two new bomb factories, missiles, planes, submarines and redesigned warheads. In spite of the UN Charter and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, we are now facing the most dangerous threat of nuclear war in the last 60 years.
Guest – James Ranney is a retired Adjunct Professor at Widener Law School, co-founder of the Jeanette Rankin Peace Center, a legal consultant to the UN International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, and a board member of the Project for Nuclear Awareness. Professor Ranney has written a book called “World Peace Through Law: Replacing War with the Global Rule of Law.” In this book, he calls for arms reduction, including the abolition of nuclear weapons, and global alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, with enforcement mechanisms.
—————————
CIA Sponsored Terror, Civil Liberties, Human Rights, U.S. Militarism, Violations of U.S. and International Law, War Resister
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Ukraine, Russia, NATO and United States Conflict Analysis
As attacks escalate in Ukraine, the push for a no-fly zone over the country grows stronger. However last week there were indicators that top Ukrainian negotiators are moving toward a cease-fire deal. This comes as we’ve reported last week that the United States has baited the Russian bear repeatedly, starting in 1990 with the breakup of the Soviet Union. At that time, US Secretary of State James Baker promised the Russian leader Mikhail Gorbachev that the US-led NATO organization would not move “one inch” east towards Russia. This promise was broken.
The Russians were betrayed.Since then, NATO has recruited 11 former Soviet bloc and Warsaw Pact countries into its military organization. Led by the United States, NATO is an organization has played an aggressive role, having carried out the bombings of Serbia, Iraq, Syria, Somalia, and Libya.
NATO has placed missiles in Poland within 100 miles of the Russian border. Missiles on the long border between Ukraine and Russia could hit Moscow in 10 minutes making it impossible for Russia to defend itself. Russia’s attempts to make United States understand that they have crossed a red line has been consistently rejected.
This is not to defend Russia’s actions but to place them in historical context. The world now has come to the edge of an abyss. A nuclear war could easily be started, annihilating all of humanity. The rule of law must be restored.
Russia must honor a cease-fire and withdraw. The United States must forswear arming Ukraine and recruiting the Ukraine into NATO. Ukraine must go forward as a neutral country like Austria or Finland.
Guest – Chris Hedges spent two decades as a foreign correspondent, 15 of them with The New York Times, covering conflicts in Central America, the Middle East, Africa and the former Yugoslavia. He learned overseas that the evils of empire are the external expression of white supremacy, just as mass incarceration, which he describes as the civil rights issue of our age, is the most brutal internal expression of white supremacy. Prisons , he writes, are the modern iteration of slave plantations. Hedges is the author of 14 books, The winner of a Pulitzer Prize for journalism, a graduate of Harvard Divinity school, and an ordained Presbyterian minister. chrishedges.substack.com
—-
Assata Taught Me: State Violence, Racial Capitalism, and the Movement for Black Lives
Assata Shakur is an inspiration to many young Black and brown activists today. She was a Black Panther Party member in New York in 1968 when FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover said that the Panthers were the single “greatest threat to the internal security of the country.“ Hoover launched the Cointelpro program to eliminate the Black Panthers.
When the Panthers broke up, Assata became a member of the Black Liberation Army. She was seriously wounded and apprehended in 1973 by state troopers in a shoot-out on a New Jersey highway. She was tried and convicted of murdering a state trooper even though the medical evidence showed that she was badly injured and could not have fired a gun.
Assata escaped from prison in 1979 and five years later, she was given political asylum in revolutionary Cuba where she lives today. The FBI has put a $2 million bounty on her head. She has a target on her back inasmuch as she is wanted dead or alive.
Guest – Donna Murch, associate professor of history at Rutgers University in New Jersey. Professor Murch, who specializes in African-American and US History, Black Radicalism, and History of Mass Incarceration, is known as the historian of the Black Panther Party. She has recently written the book “Assata Taught Me: State Violence, Racial Capitalism, and the Movement for Black Lives” published by Haymarket Books. In it, she analyzes the forces giving rise to Black Power and Black radicalism, mass incarceration, the militarization of the police who target people of color, and the genesis of Black Lives Matter.
————————————–
CIA Sponsored Terror, Human Rights, Violations of U.S. and International Law, War Resister
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Russia, Deescalation And War Crimes
The Nuremberg tribunal called aggression “the supreme international crime” because it contains within it all other crimes. German Nazi leaders were tried, convicted, and hung at Nuremberg for the German war of aggression they began in September of 1939 when they invaded Poland and started World War II.
The guilty verdicts at Nuremberg were not merely “victors’ justice.” Its precepts were incorporated into the UN Charter. The Charter, which is a treaty ratified by the countries of the world, established a process for keeping the peace and “to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war.” War is outlawed with the only exception being self-defense after an armed attack or with the permission of the Security Council.
Russia is guilty of aggression against Ukraine. But that being said, the United States has baited the Russian bear repeatedly, starting in 1990 with the breakup of the Soviet Union. At that time, US Secretary of State James Baker promised the Russian leader Mikhail Gorbachev that the US-led NATO organization would not move “one inch” east towards Russia. This promise was broken.
The Russians were betrayed.
Since then, NATO has recruited 11 former Soviet bloc and Warsaw Pact countries into its military organization. Led by the United States, NATO is an organization has played an aggressive role, having carried out the bombings of Serbia, Iraq, Syria, Somalia, and Libya.
NATO has placed missiles in Poland within 100 miles of the Russian border. Missiles on the long border between Ukraine and Russia could hit Moscow in 10 minutes making it impossible for Russia to defend itself. Russia’s attempts to make United States understand that they have crossed a red line has been consistently rejected.
This is not to defend Russia’s actions but to place them in historical context. The world now has come to the edge of an abyss. A nuclear war could easily be started, annihilating all of humanity. The rule of law must be restored.
Russia must honor a cease-fire and withdraw. The United States must forswear arming Ukraine and recruiting the Ukraine into NATO. Ukraine must go forward as a neutral country like Austria or Finland.
Guest – Peter Kuznick is a professor of history at American University and directs the Nuclear Studies Program. at that institution. Peter and Oliver Stone wrote The Untold History of the United States and also produced a showtime documentary series based on the book.
—-
Ukraine Invasion Economic Analysis
Horrific images of the war in Ukraine and the now more than 2 million displaced persons streaming over Ukraine’s border continue to emerge. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is calling for a no-fly-zone over Ukraine and the corporate media is hyping more punishing sanctions against Russia.
So far, Joe Biden has resisted calls for a no-fly-zone, apparently mindful that enforcing a no-fly-zone would mean the US Air Force shooting down Russian planes and bombing Russian ground installations that provide Russian forces with anti-aircraft support. That could well devolve into a nuclear confrontation.
The United States and other Western countries have imposed sanctions against Russia, including expelling some Russian banks from the SWIFT financial messaging system, essentially barring them from international transactions and effectively blocking Russian exports and imports, as well as banning imports of Russian oil and gas. But these sanctions harm not the Russian oligarchs, but the Russian people while raising gas prices for people in the United States.
The prospect of cyberwarfare lurks in the background, which could redound to the detriment of people around the world, including those of us in the United States. Meanwhile, the U.S. and its allies continue to send massive armaments to Ukraine, to the delight of the huge military contractors.
While Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine constitutes illegal aggression prohibited by the UN Charter, it is necessary to analyze the history and geopolitics as well as the role NATO has played in the region, in order to understand both the context for the conflict and how it could have been prevented.
Guest – Corinna Mullin, an organizer and professor of political science and political economy at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice and Brooklyn College-CUNY in New York. Corinna is also a member of the steering committee of the International People’s Tribunal on U.S. Imperialism: Sanctions, Blockades, and Economic Coercive Measures.
——————————
Censorship, Civil Liberties, Human Rights, U.S. Militarism, Uncategorized, Violations of U.S. and International Law, War Resister
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Russian Invasion of Ukraine Analysis
We turn to the on-going war between Russia and Ukraine. Let me introduce this topic by sharing, briefly, a few of my own thoughts on the matter. I believe the Russian invasion and its on-going deadly and destructive military assault in Ukraine is, of course, just plain wrong. I believe it mirrors, albeit to a much lesser extent, America’s deadly and destructive military assaults on Iraq and Afghanistan, to say nothing of Vietnam, Central America and too many other places to recount here. I believe Russia should end its war before its impact spreads far beyond the current conflict; before it provides an even greater opportunity than it already has to the capitalist war profiteers in America, and further emboldens the imperial designs of America, thereby radically changing the future in ways too dire to contemplate.
I believe the severe sanctions imposed on Russia will have little impact on Putin and the Russian oligarchs but will have a devastating impact on the working-class people of Russia, and of the entire world. I believe that the United States bears at least as much blame for the war as does Russia, and probably more. That may, at first blush, seem an odd thing to believe. But if you stay tuned, today’s guest on the war will explain why he and I believe this to be true. Lastly, I am personally saddened, beyond adequate description, over the fact of this new war. It, like America’s illegal and devastating wars in other countries, tells me that since the days of the cave man wielding his club, while the weapons used by warring sides to resolve their differences have advanced and become far more deadly and sophisticated, we humans have not, ourselves, found the way we resolve our disputes beyond that of the cave man with his hand-wielding club.
Guest – Richard Becker is the Western Region Coordinator of the ANSWER Coalition; that is Act Now to Stop War and End Racism. Richard Becker is a regular contributor to The Liberation newspaper, a publication of the Party for Socialism and Liberation, of which he is a member. And Mr. Becker is the author of Palestine, Israel and the US Empire, as well as of the book, The Myth of Democracy and the Rule of the Banks.
—-
A New Wave Of Book Banning
Book banning is the most widespread form of censorship in the United States. It’s when government officials, private individuals, or organizations remove books from libraries, school reading lists, or bookstores because they object to the content or themes contained therein. Children’s books are the main targets.
Often, complaints are that the book contains is sexually explicit, contains graphic violence, has offensive language, or shows disrespect for parents and family. Censors claim they’re afraid the contents are dangerous for kids, or that they’ll cause young people to raise questions, and incite critical inquiry among children that parents, political groups, or religious organizations deem inappropriate or aren’t ready to address.
Before the 1970s book bans typically focused on obscenity. Lady Chatterley’s Lover by D. H. Lawrence and Ulysses by James Joyce were often banned. From the late 1970s on, attacks focused on ideologies. To Kill A Mockingbird, The Color Purple, The Catcher in the Rye, and Harry Potter are among the 50 of the top banned books in this country.
A new wave of book banning in public and school libraries is sweeping the nation in 2022. It’s been under way since debates have percolated over critical race theory and what students should learn in the classroom. Several states are cutting funding for books written by authors in specific communities.
Guest – Christopher Finan, executive director of the National Coalition Against Censorship. He previously served as president of the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression, the bookseller’s voice in the fight against censorship. Before that, he was executive director of Media Coalition, a trade association that defends the First Amendment rights of producers and distributors of media. Christopher is the author of From the Palmer Raids to the Patriot Act: A History of the Fight for Free Speech in America by Beacon Press, which won the 2008 Eli Oboler Award of the American Library Association. His forthcoming book is How Free Speech Saved Democracy.
———————————
