Physicians for Human Rights report CIA doctors, psychologists participated in torture of prisoners

Physicians for Human Rights report
CIA doctors, psychologists participated in torture of prisoners

Tom Eley

4 September 2009 – WSWS

A new report by the medical ethics group Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) charges that medical professionals attached to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) assisted in the torture of terror detainees.  (aiding-torture)

CIA doctors also provided a pseudo-medical rationale for torture and used prisoners as human research subjects to determine the effects and efficacy of various methods of torture, the report states. These acts constitute war crimes according to the Geneva Conventions and are clear violations of medical ethics.

PHR called for an independent investigation of medical personnel in the CIA interrogation program. It is seeking to determine how many doctors participated in torture, and on what scientific and medical basis they conducted their work.

The study, “Aiding Torture,” analyzes the role of doctors, psychologists, and nurses in known instances of torture at prisons where terror suspects were held, including Abu Ghraib in Iraq, Guantánamo Bay in Cuba, and Bagram in Afghanistan. It is based on the 2004 CIA Inspector General’s report on torture, which the Obama administration released two weeks ago, in heavily redacted form and in compliance with a court order.

In a press release accompanying the report, PHR asserted that “the extent to which American physicians and psychologists violated human rights and betrayed the ethical standards of their professions by designing, implementing, and legitimizing a worldwide torture program is greater than previously known.”

“The CIA relied on medical expertise to rationalize and carry out abusive and unlawful interrogations,” the group said. Furthermore, medical personnel experimented on inmates through the “aggregate collection of data on detainees’ reaction to interrogation methods.”

“They were experimenting and keeping records of the results,” said Steven Reisner, co-author of the report. “That in itself is a war crime under the Geneva Conventions. Doctors are certainly guilty of war crimes for permitting torture to go forward and overseeing it while they had the authority to stop it.”

“The required presence of health professionals did not make interrogation methods safer, but sanitized their use, escalated abuse, and placed doctors and psychologists in the untenable position of calibrating harm rather than serving as protectors and healers,” Reisner added. “The fact that psychologists went beyond monitoring, and actually designed and implemented these abuses—while simultaneously serving as ‘safety monitors’—reveals the ethical bankruptcy of the entire program.”

It is all but certain that sections of the CIA Inspector General’s report—completely redacted by the Obama administration—deal with instances in which detainees were killed as a result of abuse they suffered in their interrogations. This raises the possibility that medical personnel not only collaborated in CIA torture, but in murder.

The new report substantiates a lengthy section of an International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) report, leaked earlier this year, on the role of medical personnel in torture. The ICRC concluded that doctors were present during waterboarding sessions to observe the results of the near-drowning technique on the oxygen levels in prisoners’ blood.

Likewise, the PHR report asserts that “medical professionals were directed to meticulously monitor the waterboarding of detainees to try to improve the technique’s effectiveness, essentially using the detainees as human subjects, a practice that approaches unlawful experimentation.”

PHR singles out the role of psychologists in waterboarding, who reportedly gathered data on the amount of water used and the length of time prisoners were exposed. “That is experimentation and as such is a war crime,” Reisner said.

“Medical doctors and psychologists colluded with the CIA to keep observational records about waterboarding,” said PHR Medical Advisor and lead report author Scott Allen, MD. Citing one example, Allen pointed to instances of interrogators placing “a cloth over a detainee’s face to block breathing and induce feelings of fear, helplessness, and a loss of control. A doctor would stand by to monitor and calibrate this physically and psychologically harmful act, which amounts to torture.”

Allen’s reference to doctors observing the fear and helplessness in tortured prisoners is significant. “Learned helplessness” was a central aim of the CIA torture methods.

Medical personnel were involved in the interrogation process from the moment detainees arrived in the prison. The report notes “the role of health professionals in participating in initial psychological and physical assessments of detainees in an intake process closely linked to the process of interrogation [whereby] all interrogations were monitored in real-time by health professionals.”

Medical or scientific experimentation on prisoners of war violates the laws of war and and basic precepts of human rights. It is also a major breach of long-established medical ethics, including the Hippocratic oath, which stipulate that medical personnel must provide care to the sick and wounded and do no harm.

“That health professionals who swear to oaths of healing so abused the sacred trust society places in us by instigating, legitimizing and participating in torture, is an abomination,” states co-author Allen Keller, MD, director of the Bellevue/New York University Program for Survivors of Torture. “Health professionals who aided torture must be held accountable by professional associations, by state licensing boards, and by society. Accountability is essential to maintain trust in our professions and to end torture, which scars bodies and minds, leaving survivors to endure debilitating injuries, humiliating memories and haunting nightmares.”

The experimentation and study of the physical and psychological effects of torture on inmates simultaneously at a number of different CIA prisons could only have occurred if it were organized and ordered by high-ranking Bush administration officials. Taken together with other evidence of torture during the Bush administration, the PHR report leaves no doubt that this was the case.

Bush administration Office of the Legal Counsel (OLC) memos released through court order earlier this year connect the dots. These memos provide detailed descriptions of the physical and psychological impact of various forms of torture on inmates, including waterboarding, exposure to cold water, beatings, extreme isolation, and forced nudity.

The memos noted CIA guidelines that require the presence of doctors and psychologists for some of these methods. But it is clear that the central role of medical personnel at the interrogations was to analyze the “success” of various forms of torture in breaking the resistance of prisoners to interrogators.

“Not only were health professionals involved in designing and monitoring the CIA interrogation program, they also played an indirect but essential role in the legal justifications for the program prepared by the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC),” the report notes. “The OLC was asked by the CIA whether certain techniques constituted torture under [US law] by causing ‘severe physical or mental pain or suffering.’ Since the OLC lawyers had no direct experience of the techniques, they necessarily relied instead on the judgment of health professionals. Yet, in a striking example of bootstrapping, they turned for advice about the pain caused by the techniques to the very health professionals who were implementing them.”

It continues, “In essence, the lawyers were asked if the techniques constituted torture and they replied to the CIA that they only did so if the CIA Office of Medical Services (OMS) informed them that the techniques reached the defined standard of pain. The OMS health professionals obligingly passed on through CIA channels their opinion that the pain was not in fact severe.”

The report notes one OLC memo which concluded that waterboarding is not torture because “however frightening the experience may be, OMS personnel have informed us that the waterboard technique is not physically painful.”

The role of US medical personnel in torturing prisoners and experimenting on their bodies recalls the infamous practices of Nazi doctors on concentration camp inmates in WWII. A number of these doctors were tried and convicted at the Nuremberg war crimes trials in the war’s aftermath.

The Nuremberg Code emerged from the trial of Nazi doctors, who claimed that their experiments were not fundamentally different than those carried out before the war. The first of the 10 principles in the code states that in cases of experimentation on human subjects, the consent of the individual is absolutely necessary. The Nuremberg Code of ethics provided the basis for the US Code of Federal Regulations, Title 45 Volume 46, which regulates all federally funded experiments.

No.10 turns on Obama and Clinton for criticising decision to release Lockerbie bomber

No.10 turns on Obama and Clinton for criticising decision to release Lockerbie bomber

By Simon Walters

obamaWhitehall said US President Obama and Hillary Clinton’s reaction to Abdelbaset Al Megrahi’s release was ‘disingenuous’

Downing Street has hit back at  Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for attacking the decision to release the Lockerbie bomber.

President Obama and the US Secretary of State fuelled a fierce American backlash against Britain, claiming Abdelbaset Al Megrahi should have been forced to serve out his jail sentence in Scotland – but a senior Whitehall aide said their reaction was ‘disingenuous’.

British officials claim Mr Obama and Mrs Clinton were kept informed at all stages of discussions concerning Megrahi’s return.

The officials say the Americans spoke out because they were taken aback by the row over Megrahi’s release, not because they did not know it was about to happen.

‘The US was kept fully in touch about everything that was going on with regard to Britain’s discussions with Libya in recent years and about Megrahi,’ said the Whitehall aide.

‘We would never do anything about Lockerbie without discussing it with the US. It is disingenuous of them to act as though Megrahi’s return was out of the blue.

‘They knew about our prisoner transfer agreement with Libya and they knew that the Scots were considering Megrahi’s case.’

Mr Obama said Megrahi’s release on compassionate grounds was a ‘mistake’ while Mrs Clinton phoned the Scottish administration to complain in person.

Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Foreign Secretary David Miliband are said to have been ‘disappointed’ by the force of Washington’s response.

American politicians claimed the Anglo-US ‘special relationship’ had been damaged ‘for years to come’ because the UK had gone back on a joint pledge that Megrahi would stay behind bars in Scotland.

Former US Justice Department official David Rivkin said it was ‘duplicitous behaviour’.

lockerbie bomberControversy: Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset Al Megrahi (left) arrives in Libya

Sole Informant Guided Decision On Afghan Strike

Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, September 6, 2009

HAJI SAKHI DEDBY, Afghanistan, Sept. 5 — To the German commander, it seemed to be a fortuitous target: More than 100 Taliban insurgents were gathering around two hijacked fuel tankers that had become stuck in the mud near this small farming village.

The grainy live video transmitted from an American F-15E fighter jet circling overhead, which was projected on a screen in a German tactical operations center four miles north of here, showed numerous black dots around the trucks — each of them a thermal

image of a human but without enough detail to confirm whether they were carrying weapons. An Afghan informant was on the phone with an intelligence officer at the center, however, insisting that everybody at the site was an insurgent, according to an account that German officers here provided to NATO officials.

Based largely on that informant’s assessment, the commander ordered a 500-pound, satellite-guided bomb to be dropped on each truck early Friday. The vehicles exploded in a fireball that lit up the night sky for miles, incinerating many of those standing nearby.

A NATO fact-finding team estimated Saturday that about 125 people were killed in the bombing, at least two dozen of whom — but perhaps many more — were not insurgents. To the team, which is trying to sort out this complicated incident, mindful that the fallout could further sap public support in Afghanistan for NATO’s security mission here, the target appeared to be far less clear-cut than it had to the Germans.

One survivor, convalescing from abdominal wounds at a hospital in the nearby city of Kunduz, said he went to the site because he thought he could get free fuel. Another patient, a 10-year-old boy with shrapnel in his left leg, said he went to gawk, against his father’s advice. In Kabul, the Afghan capital, relatives of two severely burned survivors being treated at an intensive-care unit said Taliban fighters forced dozens of villagers to assist in moving the bogged-down tankers.

“They came to everyone’s house asking for help,” said Mirajuddin, a shopkeeper who lost six of his cousins in the bombing — none of whom, he said, was an insurgent. “They started beating people and pointing guns. They said, ‘Bring your tractors and help us.’ What could we do?”

None of the survivors and the relatives dispute that some Taliban fighters were at the scene. But just how many remains unclear, as does the number of civilians. And because many of the bodies were burned beyond recognition, and others were buried in the hours after the explosion, it may be impossible to ascertain.

The decision to bomb the tankers based largely on a single human intelligence source appears to violate the

spirit of a tactical directive aimed at reducing civilian casualties that was recently issued by U.S. Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the new commander of the NATO mission in Afghanistan. The directive states that NATO forces cannot bomb residential buildings based on a sole source of information and that troops must establish a “pattern of life” to ensure that no civilians are in the target area. Although the directive does not apply to airstrikes in the open, NATO officials said it is McChrystal’s intent for those standards to apply to all uses of air power, except when troops are in imminent danger.

McChrystal’s advisers allowed a Washington Post reporter to travel with a NATO fact-finding team and attend its otherwise closed-door meetings with German troops and Afghan officials. Portions of this account are based on those discussions.

// <![CDATA[
if ( show_doubleclick_ad && ( adTemplate & INLINE_ARTICLE_AD ) == INLINE_ARTICLE_AD && inlineAdGraf )
') ;
// ]]>

The incident has generated intense disquiet among Afghans, many of whom say military operations since the fall of the Taliban government in late 2001 have resulted in an unacceptably high number of civilian casualties. Local media reports have been filled with people alleging — some with little proof — that scores of civilians were killed in the airstrike.

Aware that another mass civilian casualty incident could further diminish public support for the multinational mission to combat the Taliban, McChrystal sought to handle

this case differently from his predecessors. The morning after the bombing, as Afghan television and radio stations began airing reports about it, he dispatched the team of senior officers to the area.

His headquarters had only a six-line situation report from the Germans. The team’s assignment was to figure out what had occurred and to help him communicate a forthright message to the Afghan public with the hope that owning up to a potential mistake quickly could help defuse tensions.

// ]]> 2
// <![CDATA[
// ]]>3
// <![CDATA[
// ]]>Next

US experts group opposes sending troops to Afghanistan

US experts group opposes sending troops to Afghanistan

A group of former intelligence officials and security experts have warned against sending additional U.S. troops to insurgency-wracked Afghanistan, according to an American writer, who Sunday urged a multifarious strategy to calm down the Taliban insurgency and improve the regional situation. “Our policy makers do not understand that the very presence of our forces in the Pashtun areas is the problem,” a group of expert said in a statement to Nicholas D Kicholas, who Sunday wrote an opinion piece in The New York Times. “The more troops we put in, the greater the opposition. We do not mitigate the opposition by increasing troop levels, but rather we increase the opposition and prove to the Pashtuns that the Taliban are correct,” the group said. “The basic ignorance by our leadership is going to cause the deaths of many fine American troops with no positive outcome,” the statement added, according to the writer. Examining the declining security situation and expanding Taliban insurgency in several parts of Afghanistan, the writer notes that President Obama has already dispatched an additional 21,000 American troops to Afghanistan and soon will decide whether to send thousands more. “That would be a fateful decision for his presidency, and a group of former intelligence officials and other experts is now reluctantly going public to warn that more troops would be a historic mistake. “The group’s concern “ dead right, in my view “ is that sending more American troops into ethnic Pashtun areas in the Afghan south may only galvanize local people to back the Taliban in repelling the infidels,” he fears. The group cited by Kicholas includes Howard Hart, a former Central Intelligence Agency station chief in Pakistan; David Miller, a former ambassador and National Security Council official; William J. Olson, a counterinsurgency scholar at the National Defense University; and another C.I.A. veteran who does not want his name published but who spent 12 years in the region, was station chief in Kabul at the time the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in 1979, and later headed the C.I.A.’s Counterterrorism Center. “We share a concern that the country is driving over a cliff,” Mr. Miller said. Mr. Hart, who helped organize the anti-Soviet insurgency in the 1980s, cautions that Americans just don’t understand the toughness, determination and fighting skills of the Pashtun tribes. He adds that if the U.S. escalates the war, the result will be radicalization of Pashtuns in Pakistan and further instability there, the writer says. The solution, the writer advocates, is neither to pull out of Afghanistan nor to double down. “Rather, we need to continue our presence with a lighter military footprint, limited to training the Afghan forces and helping them hold major cities, and ensuring that Al Qaeda does not regroup. We must also invest more in education and agriculture development, for that is a way over time to peel Pashtuns away from the Taliban. “This would be a muddled, imperfect strategy with frustratingly modest goals, but it would be sustainable politically and militarily. And it does not require heavy investments of American and Afghan blood.”

US, internal powers behind Zia plane crash: Brig Imtiaz

US, internal powers behind Zia plane crash: Brig Imtiaz

ISLAMABAD: Former chief of the Intelligence Bureau Brigadier (retd) Imtiaz Ahmed has claimed that the US and the “internal powers” were behind the 1988 plane crash, which killed General Zia-ul-Haq.

Talking to a private TV channel, he said the US collaborated with the internal powers in assassinating Zia. “Former Army chief Gen Mirza Aslam Beg also says that Zia’s plane crash was not an accident, but sabotage,” he said.

Meanwhile, reacting to Brig (retd) Imtiaz’s claim, Zia’s son Ejaz-ul-Haq demanded that a thorough criminal investigation should be conducted into the plane crash. Ejaz said former pilot Akram Awan, who was arrested in connection with another case, told a commission that the Israeli intelligence agency — Mossad — “delivered material to destroy the plane”.

Ejaz also claimed that the US prevented a proper investigation into the plane crash. He said the medical personnel, who performed an autopsy on his father’s body, were sent off to far-off areas.

He said he had met former US secretary of state Henry Kissinger with a request to probe into the incident, but received no response from him. Ejaz said a thorough investigation was needed to uncover the truth behind the plane crash.

The U.S. Health Care System – Values and Priorities

The U.S. Health Care System – Values and Priorities

by Brian McAfee

The current battles over the American health-care system are indicative of a wider philosophical and social divide. What is at stake and what is the desired outcome of each side? To answer such an enquiry, we must first look at the current health-care system as it exists in the United States.
The World Health Organization ranks U.S. healthcare well below most of Europe, Canada and Japan. France and Italy rank at number one and two while the U.S. is in the thirty-seventh slot. Most of the countries that rank above the U.S. have some form of socialized medicine. Japan, which ranks tenth on the WHO list, is at number one in life expectancy with 74.5 years being the average while the U.S. is twenty-fourth in life expectancy, again well below much of Europe, Canada and Australia as well.
An oft repeated declaration is that the U.S. has the best healthcare in the world. It is, also, stated that people across the globe come to the U.S. for medical treatments, such as the King of Jordan, who recently went to the Mayo Clinic for surgery. This outcomes happens when people can afford the high costs for travel and care. Likewise, U.S. citizens do the same, but in a reverse sort of fashion.
For example, Richard DeVos, co-founder of AMWAY and a staunch Republican, went to Great Britain for a heart transplant and talk show host Charlie Rose went to France for heart surgery. These sorts of options, of course, do not exist for most Americans and, certainly, very few choices exist at all for the U.S. citizens who cannot afford healthcare coverage altogether.
This in mind, the disturbances and displays of “righteous indignation” at town hall meetings need a closer look. News reports indicate that many of the people disrupting the gatherings of specific Democratic Congressional representatives were largely staged by combinations of HMO employees bussed to the town halls for the purpose of creating distortion of the truth and troubled “FOX NEWS” zealots who believe capitalism and business interests should come before people’s health.
On account, this entire bunch delivered much misinformation and lies about Obama’s health-care plans, swayed lots of opinion polls, as well as showed a lack of knowledge about the benefits of universal health care delivery. Indeed, the right-wingers repeatedly compared Obama’s proposed changes to Nazism, which was especially ridiculous.
The Nazi comparisons are generally a bad idea for public discourse. However, there is an area that somewhat fits. During the Nazi era, particular businesses were given greater privilege and leeway over the well being of people and their rights with the most well known of these being I. G. Farben and Krupp. It was a clear cut idea and system where profit (and, of course, power) took precedence over people’s needs. Like a boomerang, the Nazi comparison notion comes home to roost, but not quite in the way intended by the neocon crowd… Well, you get the idea.
In a recent interview with Dr. James Jackson, a well known Muskegon physician and community activist, he stated that the problem in America’s healthcare is that “it is based on capitalism, it puts people second and money fist”. When asked if HMOs had a legitimate place in American healthcare he said “absolutely not”.
About Obama’s potential health care plans, Dr Jackson, further, said that it has some problems. Specifically he mentioned that “if it does not include single payer, it will continue the same problems that we currently have”.
In the ongoing battle for truth, justice and values, people should always be valued BEFORE and ABOVE lavish profits. If this orientation cannot be the foundation for human care, regardless of the form that the care takes, there is certainly much more that is wrong in the U.S.A. than just healthcare.

At the following links are located data concerning the World Health Organization’s assessment of many nations’ health care systems and life expectancies: The World Health Organization’s ranking of the world’s health … ( and Healthy Life Expectancy By Country ( When the U.S. is compared with and contrasted to other countries, its relative greatness in the broader scheme certainly comes into question. For this reason, American priorities must be carefully evaluated and, without screaming matches at town meetings, reset.

Charity: US troops stormed through Afghan hospital

Afghan men walk in a covered market in Kabul September 7, 2009. ...

Afghan men walk in a covered market in Kabul September 7, 2009.

REUTERS/Ahmad Masood
By KAY JOHNSON, Associated Press Writer Kay Johnson, Associated Press Writer 1 hr 38 mins ago

KABUL – A Swedish charity accused American troops Monday of storming through a hospital in central Afghanistan, breaking down doors and tying up staff in a search for militants. The U.S. military said it was investigating.

The allegation that soldiers violated the neutrality of a medical facility follows the reported deaths of Afghan civilians in a U.S. airstrike in the country’s north last week.

Nearly eight years after the U.S.-led coalition invaded to oust the Taliban, foreign forces are working to persuade the population to support the Afghan government. But civilian deaths and intrusive searches of homes have bred resentment.

The Swedish Committee for Afghanistan said the U.S. Army‘s 10th Mountain Division entered the charity’s hospital without permission to look for insurgents in Wardak province, southwest of Kabul, according to the charity’s country director, Anders Fange.

“This is simply not acceptable,” he said.

The U.S. troops came to the hospital looking for Taliban insurgents late at night last Wednesday, Fange said. He said they kicked in doors,

tied up four hospital employees and two family members of patients, and forced patients out of beds during their search.

When they left two hours later, the unit ordered hospital staff to inform coalition forces if any wounded militants were admitted, and the military would decide if they could be treated, Fange said.

The staff refused, he said. “That would put our staff at risk and make the hospital a target.”

The charity said on its Web site that the troops actions were not only a violation of humanitarian principles but also went against an agreement between NATO forces and charities working in the area.

“We demand guarantees … that such violations will not be repeated and that this is made clear to commanders in the field,” a statement said.

Navy public affairs officer Lt. Cmdr. Christine Sidenstricker confirmed that the hospital was searched last week but had no other details. She said the military was looking into the incident.

“We are investigating and we take allegations like this seriously,” she said. “Complaints like this are rare.”

Violence has surged across much of Afghanistan since President Barack Obama ordered 21,000 more U.S. troops to the country this year. Two foreign troops were killed Sunday when their patrol hit a roadside bomb in the country’s south, NATO said without giving their nationalities. Three civilians also died in a militant rocket attack on the capital.

NATO was also investigating reported civilian deaths in a U.S. airstrike last week. Afghan officials said up to 70 people were killed in the early morning airstrike Friday in the northern province of Kunduz after the Taliban hijacked two fuel tanker. After the trucks became stuck in the mud on the banks of a river, villagers came to siphon off gas and some were reported killed when an American jet dropped two bombs on the stolen tankers.

The increasingly violent Taliban have killed more Afghan civilians in bombings and other attacks. On Monday, the government said three insurgent rockets landed in the capital, Kabul, killing three people when one of them hit a house.

A United Nations report in July said the number of civilians killed in conflict in Afghanistan has jumped 24 percent this year, with bombings by insurgent and airstrikes by international forces the biggest single killers. The report said that 1,013 civilians were killed in the first half of 2009, 59 percent in insurgent attacks and 30.5 percent by foreign and Afghan government forces. The rest were undetermined.

The Truth About The WWII Allied Bombings Of Germany

more about “bombing of dresden“, posted with vodpod

We have suffered long enough by the lies that are being taught in our school system about History. It is time for people to fully understand the truths about our past, and not what the Zionist propagandists want us to know.   Much of our “recorded history” is nothing but a pack of lies!  It is time for people to be fully aware of real history thanks to bloggers and information readily available over the internet.

Here now, I present another article, presented via,  that tells the truth about one of the most heinous crimes of the 20th century; The Allied Bombings of Nazi Germany during World War II, and why Winston Churchill, rather than being hailed as a great hero, should have been implicated for war crimes against humanity for this act of barbarism!

Here is the article:

Churchill’s Most Heinous, Barbaric War Crime

Hamburg firebombing
. . . There is not a doubt in my mind that the Lancaster, the B17 and the B24 were built for the purpose of inflicting massive civilian casualties on the German populace. It was, in my opinion, one the greatest war crimes ever perpetrated. Colonel Robin Olds, surely one of the finest officers and fighter pilots ever to serve in the USAF, stated more than once that the so-called strategic bombing program was ineffective, wasteful and pointless.
The eighth air force lost 80,000 men killed in the skies of Europe.
And, the futility of the so-called strategic bombing program was illustrated very clearly by the fact that Germany reached its highest point of war material production in the last months of the war. Colonel Olds was of the opinion, widely shared I might add, that fighter bombers carrying a single bomb flying low and fast would have been far more effective against German military and strategic targets.
He said that a single Mustang could have dropped a five hundred pound bomb through the window of any factory in Germany. It is very difficult to do that when you are flying in formation at 25,000 feet. He also emphasized that this would have greatly minimized
civilian casualties. His career suffered because of his outspoken criticism. I suspect that he knew the real reason for the so-called “strategic bombing.” It is was GENOCIDE.
Why does it always take 50+ years for truth to surface, and WHY does it usually come from outside this country?
Churchill’s Most Barbaric War Crime
This is an awesome and humbling document. I shall circulate it to non rw people, and will continue to circulate it for years. Every time we find someone writing about the non-existent gas chambers, we should send them this.
I should make one or two alterations- Inserting @ ‘Lindeman’ that he was Jewish, and the architect of the terror bombing. And Re; the Luftwaffe V RAF. The Luftwaffe built only light, maneuverable, low altitude bombers, designed for ground support and unsuitable for genocidal terror-bombing. Whereas, the British and the Americans built huge bombers, which were designed and were being built, well before the war for the express purpose of blanket terror-bombing of civilians – they could have had no other purpose. -JB
Present time – it should be pointed out to all, that this atrocity and even more is what the Jewish state have in store for Iranian civilians soon.
By Randulf Johan Hansen
Who Started the Blitz?
Between 1940 and 1945, sixty-one German cities with a total population of 25 millions were destroyed or devastated in a bombing campaign initiated by the British government. Destruction on this scale had no other purpose than the indiscriminate mass murder of as many German people as possible quite regardless of their civilian status. It led to retaliatory bombing resulting in 60,000 British dead and 86,000 injured. The British and the USA also bombed France, resulting in 60,000 civilian dead.
Hidden from the public
‘It is one of the greatest triumphs of modern emotional engineering that, in spite of the plain facts of the case which could never be disguised or even materially distorted, the British public, throughout the Blitz Period (1940-1941), remained convinced that the entire responsibility for their sufferings rested on the German leaders.’ Advance to Barbarism, F.J.P. Veale.
‘It may be Inconvenient History but England rather than Germany initiated the murderous slaughter of bombing civilians thus bringing about retaliation. Chamberlain conceded that it was “absolutely contrary to International law.” It began in 1940 and Churchill believed it held the secret of victory. He was convinced that raids of sufficient intensity could destroy Germany’s morale, and so his War Cabinet planned a campaign that abandoned the accepted practice of attacking the enemy’s armed forces and, instead made civilians the primary target. Night after night, RAF bombers in ever increasing numbers struck throughout Germany, usually at working class housing, because it was more densely packed.’ The Peoples’ War, Angus Calder. London, Jonathan Cape, 1969.*
Hitler forced to retaliate
‘Hitler only undertook the bombing of British civilian targets reluctantly three months after the RAF had commenced bombing German civilian targets. Hitler would have been willing at any time to stop the slaughter. Hitler was genuinely anxious to reach with Britain an agreement confining the action of aircraft to battle zones… Retaliation was certain if we carried the war into Germany… there was a reasonable possibility that our capital and industrial centres would not have been attacked if we had continued to refrain from attacking those of Germany… We began to bomb objectives on the German mainland before the Germans began to bomb objectives on the British mainland… Because we were doubtful about the psychological effect of propagandist distortion of the truth that it was we who started the strategic bombing offensive, we have shrunk from giving our great decision of May 11th, 1940, the publicity it deserves.’ J.M. Spaight, CB, CBE, Principal Secretary to the Air Ministry, Bombing Vindicated.
‘The attack on the Ruhr was therefore an informal invitation to the Luftwaffe to bomb London. The primary purpose of these raids was to goad the Germans into undertaking reprisal raids of a similar character on Britain. Such raids would arouse intense indignation in Britain against Germany and so create a war psychosis without which it would be impossible to carry on a modern war.’ The Royal Air Force, 1939-1945, The Fight at Odds, p. 122. Dennis Richards, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
High Street, Düren, June 1946. Shown is Victor Gollancz
The most uncivilised form of warfare
The eminent British war historian and strategist Captain Sir Basil Liddell Hart declared that by this strategy victory had been achieved “through practising the most uncivilised means of warfare that the world had known since the Mongol invasions” (The Evolution of Warfare. 1946, p. 75).It was “absolutely contrary to international law” (Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain).
‘The inhabitants of Coventry, for example, continued to imagine that their sufferings were due to the innate villainy of Adolf Hitler without a suspicion that a decision, splendid or otherwise, of the British War Cabinet, was the decisive factor in the case.’ F.J.P. Veale, Advance to Barbarism, p. 169.
Düren, 1946
Slaying in the name of the Lord
‘I am in full agreement [with terror bombing]. I am all for the bombing of working class areas in German cities. I am a Cromwellian I believe in “slaying in the name of the Lord!”‘ Sir Archibald Sinclair, Secretary for Air.
Hamburg, 1946
Industrial workers, wives and children targetted
‘They [the British Air Chiefs] argued that the desired result, of reducing German industrial production, would be more readily achieved if the homes of the workers in the factories were destroyed; if the workers were kept busy arranging for the burial of their wives and children, output might reasonably be expected to fall… It was concentrated on working class houses because, as Professor Lindemann maintained, a higher percentage of bloodshed per ton of explosives dropped could be expected from bombing houses built close together, rather than by bombing higher class houses surrounded by gardens.’ Advance to Barbarism, F.J.P. Veale.
Hamburg, 1946
So cowardly it had to be hidden
‘One of the most unhealthy features of the bombing offensive was that the War Cabinet  and in particular the Secretary for Air, Archibald Sinclair (now Lord Thurso), felt it necessary to repudiate publicly the orders which they themselves had given to Bomber Command.’ R.H.S. Crossman, MP, Labour Minister of Housing. Sunday Telegraph, 1 October 1961.
By weight, more bombs were dropped on the city of Berlin than were released on the whole of Great Britain during the entire war.
All German towns and cities above 50,000 population were from 50% to 80% destroyed. Hamburg was totally destroyed and 70,000 civilians died in the most appalling circumstances whilst Cologne was likewise turned into a moon-scape. As Hamburg burned the winds feeding the three mile high flames reached twice hurricane speed to exceed 150 miles per hour. Trees three feet in diameter on the outskirts of the city were sucked from the ground by the supernatural forces of these winds and hurled miles into the city-inferno, as were vehicles, men, women and children.
‘What we want to do in addition to the horrors of fire is to bring the masonry crashing down on the Boche, to kill Boche and to terrify Boche’ ‘Bomber’ Butch Harris, quoted in the Sunday Times, 10 January 1993.
Hamburg, 1946
Dresden: Children machine-gunned
The strafing of columns of refugees by both American and British fighter planes was par for the course: “it is said that these [zoo] animals and terrified groups of refugees were machine-gunned as they tried to escape across the Grosser Garten by low-flying planes and that many bodies riddled by bullets were found later in this park” (Der Tod von Dresden, Axel Rodenberger, 25 February 1951). In Dresden, “even the huddled remnants of a children’s’ choir were machine-gunned in a street bordering a park” (David Irving, The Destruction of Dresden). “I think we shall live to rue the day we did this, and that it [the bombing of Dresden] will stand for all time as a blot on our escutcheon” (Richard Stokes, M.P.).
‘… the long suppressed story of the worst massacre in the history of the world. The devastation of Dresden in February, 1945, was one of those crimes against humanity whose authors would have been arraigned at Nuremberg if that court had not been perverted. Rt. Hon. Richard. H.S. Crossman, MP, Labour Government Minister.
Hamburg, 1946
Firestorm of Hamburg
‘Its horror is revealed in the howling and raging of the firestorms, the hellish noise of exploding bombs and the death cries of martyred human beings as well as the big silence after the raids. Speech is impotent to portray the measure of the horror, which shook the people for ten days and nights and the traces of which were written indelibly on the face of the city and its inhabitants. No flight of imagination will ever succeed in measuring and describing the gruesome scenes of horror in the many buried air shelters. Posterity can only bow its head in honour of the fate of these innocents, sacrificed by the murderous lust of a sadistic enemy.’ The Police President of Hamburg.
‘Three-hundred times as many people died in Hamburg during the ten-day blitz as died in Coventry during the entire course of the war… Not even Hiroshima and Nagasaki, suffering the smashing blows of nuclear explosions, could match the utter hell of Hamburg.’ Martin Caidin, The Night Hamburg Died, Ballantyne Books, NY, 1960.
Hamburg, 1946
The children
‘Of the children these dreadful nights, what can be said? Their fright became horror and then panic when their tiny minds became capable of grasping the fact that their parents could no longer help them in their distress. They lost their reason and an overwhelming terror took over. Their world had become the shrieking centre of an erupting volcano from which there could be no physical escape. Nothing that hell offered could be feared more. ‘By the hand of man they became creatures, human in form but not in mind. Strangled noises hissed from them as they staggered pitifully through the streets in which tar and asphalt ran as streams. Some of these tiny creatures ran several hundred feet. Others managed only twenty, maybe ten feet. Their shoes caught fire and then their feet. The lower parts of their legs became flickering sticks of flame. Here were Joans of Arcs… thousands of them. All who had perished unjustly on the fires of the Middle Ages were as nothing when compared with what was happening that night. ‘The sounds of many were unintelligible and undoubtedly many more called for their parents from whom they were parted by death or by accident. They grasped their tortured limbs, their tiny burning legs until they were no longer able to stand or run. And then they would crash to the ground where they would writhe in the bubbling tar until death released them from their physical misery.’ Martin Caidin.
Hamburg, 1946
Phosphorous, used contrary to international law
‘Men, women and children too, ran hysterically, falling and stumbling, getting up, tripping and falling again, rolling over and over. Most of them managed to regain their feet and made it to the water. But many of them never made it and were left behind, their feet drumming in blinding pain on the overheated pavements amidst the rubble, until there came one last convulsing shudder from the smoking “thing” on the ground, and then no further movement.’ Martin Caidin, The Night Hamburg Died.
‘Phosphorous burns were not infrequent.’ U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey.
‘Phosphorous was used “because of its demonstrated ability to depress the morale of the Germans.”‘ Official British source.
‘Even the senseless and highly culture-destroying terror acts, against for example, Lubeck and Dresden, carried out by the Allied pilots, should have been investigated and brought before a proper court of justice.’ Major General H. Bratt, Royal Swedish Army.*
‘A nation which spreads over another a sheet of inevitably deadly gases or eradicates entire cities from the earth by the explosion of atomic bombs, does not have the right to judge anyone for war crimes; it has already committed the greatest atrocity equal to no other atrocity; it has killed ­ amidst unspeakable torments  hundreds of thousands of innocent people.’ Hon. Lydio Machado Bandeira de Mello, Professor of Criminal Law; author of more than 40 works on law/philosophy.*
‘As for crimes against humanity, those governments which ordered the destruction of German cities, thereby destroying irreplaceable cultural values and making burning torches out of women and children, should also have stood before the bar of justice.’ Hon. Jaan Lattik. Estonian statesman, diplomat and historian.*

Hamburg, 1946
From Michael Walsh, Witness to History, Historical Review Press 1996. Edited, with additions marked * by the National Journal. Photographs from Victor Gollancz, In Darkest Germany, Victor Gollancz Ltd, London 1947.

NTS Notes:  We were all taught in school that Nazi Germany instigated the civilian bombings during World War II, but it seems that history is not as it seems.    Thousands of innocent people were murdered during the mass bombings such as at Dresden, and Hamburg.   Only now can the truth of these massacres be brought to light for proper investigation, and the truth!

New technology closer to harnessing mind power

NeuroSky CEO Stanley Yang demonstrates Mattel's Mind Flex... Lea Suzuki / The Chronicle

NeuroSky CEO Stanley Yang demonstrates Mattel’s Mind Flex game, which uses the company’s brain-control technology.

Photo: Lea Suzuki / The Chronicle

New technology closer to harnessing mind power

Ryan Kim, Chronicle Staff Writer

“May the Force be with you,” the popular refrain from the Star Wars movies, has beckoned many a sci-fi fan with its promise of mind-control powers.

But a real-world counterpart of the mystical Force has been a tantalizing concept floating outside the grasp of regular people.

That is, until now.

Brain-control interface technology is in the midst of a big coming-out party this year as it reaches the mass market for the first time in the form of a handful of games and toys.

The Force – or at least, the ability to trigger physical actions with your mind – can now be had for a couple hundred bucks.

San Jose’s NeuroSky is leading the charge with a half-dozen products, while rival Emotiv of San Francisco plans to start selling a mind-control headset in time for the holidays.

The basic technology, which has been around for decades, involves reading a wide spectrum of brain waves and isolating patterns to understand moods and psychological states.

From there, applications can be written to help understand the brain-wave profile and turn certain mental functions like heightened attention or meditation into catalysts for real-world actions.

Brain-control interface has far-reaching applications beyond entertainment, potentially transforming the way we train our attention-deprived minds to how we communicate with machines and broadcast our feelings to other people.

It also could be used to assist people with disabilities or test the efficacy of medical treatment and monitor patients.

“This is the first time the technology is really venturing out of the medical lab into the real world,” said NeuroSky CEO Stanley Yang. “This is the first time people can have brain-control interface technology as a consumer product.”

NeuroSky’s technology is working its way into gizmos like the Mindflex from Mattel, a toy due out Oct. 1 that allows you to lift a ball and send it through an obstacle course using your mind. The appropriately named Force Trainer from Uncle Milton challenges users to lift a ball using a fan activated by their thoughts.

Video game publisher First Hill Media is set to release the first of a series of online PC titles based on the Hero 108 cartoon series, which will incorporate NeuroSky’s MindSet headset.

Emotiv has plans for similar games and applications that will utilize its more complex Epoc headset, which can detect up to 30 emotions and expressions. Emotiv co-founder and president Tan Le said the company has signed up 10,000 preorders of its headset, an indication, she said, of the pent-up interest in mind-control products.

“I think people are ready for this,” Le said. “We’re not under any illusion that we’ll hit mass market immediately with this but we certainly believe this revolution will happen.”

Bulky headsets

In the past, researchers were able to get at the brain wave data only through complicated and bulky headsets with dozens of sensors that required gels to facilitate contact. Research rarely left the lab.

Companies like NeuroSky and Emotiv have been able to simplify the headset into a familiar form while whittling down the price. NeuroSky’s MindSet sells for $199 while Emotiv’s Epoc headset will sell for $299.

When combined with an open software development kit, the technology has the potential to spread quickly among outside developers who can build a new class of accessible brain-control apps.

Yang said the kit for MindSet has been downloaded more than 500 times since it became available in July, while Emotiv boasts 10,000 developers in its community.

Both companies plan to open application stores where developers can sell their mind programs, just as they do in the iPhone App Store.

“That’s the exciting part. NeuroSky has this great technology and they’ve said to the world, ‘Here it is. What can you do with it?’ ” said neuro-psychologist Joseph Graffi, CEO of NeuroCog Solutions, an Australian company building a MindSet program that helps people concentrate.

Remote monitors

Graffi said the technology can help people focus and potentially ward off the early effects of Alzheimer’s disease, or help curb the effects of addictions like smoking. It can also be used by doctors to remotely monitor the efficacy of drug doses or track the progress of a patient’s treatment.

Adriano Parrotta, founder of First Hill Media, said the challenge is to get people to buy the headset and to create more uses for it. Though his Hero 108 games don’t require the headset for play, First Hill is pushing the MindSet as a unique way to experience the games.

For example, in one of the games in development, Parrotta is looking at allowing players to detonate a bomb just by concentrating on the weapon.

“No one believes it when we tell them, but once they see it, the response is overwhelming,” Parrotta said. “The technology sells itself.”

Yang said the potential for the technology is vast. He said Toshiba is working on a visualizer that helps record the user’s state of mind. It might help athletes find the elusive “zone,” which forms at the intersection of concentration and meditation.

Or the brain-control interface can work to augment communication, allowing your online chat partner to see if their joke made you smile or got you seething.

Devices for drivers

Auto companies have come to NeuroSky to see if the technology could be used to rouse drowsy drivers or perhaps be implemented for some hands-free controls. Imagine turning up the stereo volume or turning down the air conditioning just by thinking about it.

Japanese telecommunications giant NTT Docomo has also looked at ways of disabling a cell phone when a sensor recognizes that its user is driving without a hands-free device.

It’s all possible, said Yang. It just requires fine-tuning the software and enabling further applications of the technology.

He said the brain could serve as a substitute input mechanism in place of the hand and fingers. For quadriplegic patients and people with cerebral palsy, a bio-sensor like MindSet could open up a new realm of possibilities.

“Up to now, machines only understood mechanical interfaces, but humans are physical and mental,” he said. “I firmly believe that a bio-sensor that interfaces with everything we do today will be the future.”

E-mail Ryan Kim at

US-German rift emerges over Afghan deaths case

[In the many videos that have been released from the bombing runs, it is obvious when there are crowds of people, as opposed to small groups of fighters.  The Pakistani news reports that these people were lined-up to receive the fuel that was being drained from the broken-down tanker truck.  The pilot knew what would happen to those 90 Afghans when he detonated 5-10 thousand gallons of gasoline in their midst.  He should be charged with mass murder.  Perhaps this will move Germany to pull its support for the butchery of the American program.]

German colonel Georg Klein is pictured at the German base in ...

German colonel Georg Klein is pictured at the German base in Kunduz, Afghanistan, Sunday, Sept. 6, 2009. An airstrike ordered by a German commander Klein and carried out by U.S. fighter jets that appears to have killed Afghan civilians could turn into a major dispute between the two NATO allies, as tensions began rising Sunday over Germany’s role in the attack. Afghan officials say up to 70 people were killed in the early morning airstrike Friday in the northern province of Kunduz after Taliban militants stole two tanker trucks of fuel and villagers gathered to siphon off gas. Afghan and NATO investigations are just beginning, but officials already appeared to be trying to deflect blame.

(AP Photo / Anja Niedringhaus)

US-German rift emerges over Afghan deaths case

By JASON STRAZIUSO and FRANK JORDANS, Associated Press Writers Jason Straziuso And Frank Jordans, Associated Press Writers 17 mins ago

KABUL – An airstrike by U.S. fighter jets that appears to have killed Afghan civilians could turn into a major dispute for NATO allies Germany and the United States, as tensions began rising between them Sunday over Germany’s role in ordering the attack.

Afghan officials say up to 70 people were killed in the early morning airstrike Friday in the northern province of Kunduz after Taliban militants stole two tanker trucks of fuel and villagers gathered to siphon off gas.

Afghan and NATO investigations are just beginning, but both German and U.S. officials already appeared to be trying to deflect blame.

German Defense Minister Franz Josef Jung said the Taliban‘s possession of the two tankers “posed an acute threat to our soldiers.” German officials have said the tankers might have been used as suicide bombs.

“If there were civilian causalities or injuries, of course we deeply regret that. At the same time, it was clear that our soldiers were in danger,” Jung said in comments to German broadcasters. “Consequently, I

stand clearly behind our commander’s decision” to order the air strike.

Meanwhile, Rear Adm. Gregory J. Smith, the top U.S. and NATO spokesman in the country, said German troops let too many hours pass before visiting the site of the bombing Friday.

He explained that it’s important to hold the ground after a strike and determine what happened before the enemy comes out with its own version of events.

The top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, U.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, visited the site Saturday where two charred trucks and yellow gas cans sat on a riverbed. He asked a top commander in Regional Command North about the response time.

“Why didn’t RC-North come here quicker?” McChrystal asked Col. Georg Klein, the commander of the German base in Kunduz.

“I can honestly say it was a mistake,” Klein answered, in a discussion witnessed by an Associated Press reporter.

On Sunday, Smith said that in McChrystal’s judgment the response time “was probably longer than it should have been.”

German troops in Afghanistan have long been criticized for avoiding combat operations, even as militants have increasingly infiltrated northern Afghanistan the last year, destabilizing the once-peaceful region.

Taliban militants stole two fuel tankers late Friday that became stuck on a riverbed outside Kunduz. Villagers — either forced by the militants or enticed by offers of free fuel — gathered near the trucks, even as U.S. jets patrolled overhead.

German commanders watching images from the U.S. aircraft could see about 120 people, McChrystal said Saturday. The commanders decided that the people were militants and ordered the airstrikes, Smith said, even though images provided by the U.S. aircraft would have been grainy and difficult to see.

Whether the German commanders or the U.S. pilot are at fault for any civilian casualties may turn into an inner-NATO tussle.

Smith said the ground force commander “is the decision maker for close air support. That’s doctrine.” But he also conceded that a pilot can refuse an order to drop a bomb.

Klein, in an interview with The Associated Press on Sunday, declined to say whether images provided by the U.S. jets had been clear enough for weapons to be seen among Afghans on the ground, citing the ongoing investigation.

A German Joint Terminal Air Controller, or JTAC, who spoke on condition that his name not be used because he wasn’t authorized to speak publicly, said the rules for ordering an attack clearly state that the ultimate decision rests with the ground commander.

But rules also require that both the pilot and the JTAC get a good positive identification of the target before the commander can order a weapon deployed, the JTAC said.

“Only when both are sure that what we see is a target, only then will the pilot drop the bomb,” the JTAC said.

The German Defense Ministry, meanwhile, pushed back against a story published in the Washington Post that German officials said painted their commander in a poor light and played up the U.S. version of events. The ministry said the article “will definitely influence at least the preliminary investigation by the various bodies.”

“The Defense Ministry is very surprised about the unusual procedure of using a journalist as a source to reveal initial investigation results,” the ministry said.

Kris Coratti, director of communications for the Washington Post, said in an e-mail: “The story speaks for itself.”

Smith said a trip to Kunduz by military officials from Kabul was not an official investigation but a fact-finding trip.

“And I think it’s much, much better for people to understand the facts,” he said of the decision to allow a journalist to witness the discussion among military officials.

No NATO officials will yet say how many civilians they think may have died. Smith on Saturday said the preliminary overall death toll was believed to be 56. Afghan officials say it’s in the low 70s.

Smith said he hopes a U.S.-German rift does not develop over the strike. “I hope everyone allows the investigation to proceed and we’ll determine what we know more precisely and move on from there,” Smith said.

The director of an Afghan human rights group criticized NATO’s International Security Assistance Force for the deaths. “It was carelessness in terms of ISAF using force without doing enough to investigate whether this is a civilian location,” Ajmal Samadi of Afghan Rights Monitor said.

German troops have long been criticized for restrictions that limit the battle their troops see. A U.S. based military analyst, Anthony Cordesman, said German troops don’t have “the situational and combat experience” to confront Taliban on the ground.

“They’re as oriented toward staying in their armored vehicles as any group I’ve met,” Cordesman said. “They’re not active enough to present much of a threat to the Taliban most of the time.”

Klein rejected the claim that his troops lacked combat experience.

“Since I arrived here we have unfortunately seen many combat situations and my soldiers performed very well,” he said.

“But the thing that’s always given us a very good reputation in the civilian society here is that we tried as best as possible to exclude any civilian casualties, and I’ve got very good feedback on that from the Afghan people,” he said.


Associated Press reporters Douglas Birch and Kay Johnson in Kabul and Melissa Eddy in Berlin contributed to this report. Frank Jordans reported from Kunduz.