Western Nations calls for International Law(& the rule of law) is code for “don’t buck up against white supremacy”

GREETINGS,

WE HAVE BEEN SAYING THESE THINGS LONG BEFORE THE ANGLO MEDIA UTTERED A WORD. WE HAVE EXPOSED WORLDWIDE ANGLO HYPOCRISY IN EVERY INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION . THERE IS NO DOUBT ABOUT IT.

  WE SHOWED YOU HOW EVEN THE UNITED NATIONS, AN AMERICAN CONCOCTION, WAS SET UP NOT ONLY BY THE ARROGANT WHITE POWERS, BUT ALSO TO FURTHER INGRAINE AND PROMOTE WHITE SUPREMACY AND DOMINANCE ACROSS THE GLOBE.

HERE(IN THE UN) YOU HAVE A NATIONAL ASSEMBLY( A MAKE UP OF ROUGHLY 190 TO 200 NATIONS), YET REGARDLESS TO WHAT THESE NATIONS RECOMMEND AND REGARDLESS TO THE POLICIES PUSHED BY THE BODY OF 99.99% OF THE ENTIRE GLOBE, 5 NATIONS(NONE OF THEM BLACK, BROWN, OR RED) CAN IGNORE OR OVER-RULE THEM.

THIS MEANS THAT 5 NATIONS, THE SOCALLED SECURITY COUNCIL , CAN IMPOSE THEIR WILL OVER THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE WORLD AND CLAIM IT TO BE THE WILL OF THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY.

LOOK AT THE REPRESENTATION…AMERICA…..BRITAIN, FRANCE, AND RUSSIA. FOR OF THE FIVE NATIONS ON THIS BODY ARE WHITE. THREE OF THESE FOUR ARE EUROPEAN. AND ONLY ONE NATION NONE WHITE, BUT NATURE IS CLOSE TO WHITE(CHINA).

THIS IS ABSOLUTELY CONTEMPT FOR THE ABORIGINAL PEOPLE WHO HAS NO PERMANENT REPRESENTATION IN A COUNCIL THAT IS SUPPOSEDLY MADE TO REFLECT THE REALITY OF THE WORLD. WHEN AMERICA AND EUROPE COMPRISE LESS THAN 18% OF THE TOTAL POPULATION, YET HAS FOUR…COUNT THEM FOUR PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE NATIONS .

IS THAT NOT BUILD UPON RACISM? IS IT NOT A POWER PLAY MOVE FOR WHITE SUPREMACY? THIS MEANS THAT THESE NATIONS IN THE SO-CALLED SECURITY COUNCIL CAN WAGE WARS, KILL THOUSANDS, BOMB NATIONS, STEAL RESOURCES, OCCUPY SOVEREIGN NATIONS, AND DISREGARD LAWS AT WILL AND ONLY APPLY THESE LAWS TO THE SMALLER OR WEAKER NATIONS TO PROMOTE AND PRESERVE WHITE SUPREMACY.

HAS BUSH AND BLAIR GONE BEFORE THE HAGUE? HAS THE LEADERS OF ENGLAND, US, FRANCE, GERMANY, BELGIUM, AND OTHER WHITE NATIONS BEEN BROUGHT UP ON CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY AND WAR CRIMES CHARGES FOR WARRING IN AFRICA AND DESTROYING NATIONS WHILE STEALING MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF WEALTH AND RESOURCES?

JUST AS MUHAMMAD TOLD US….” With the end of the rule of the white race over the Black people of earth in sight — face to face — we have to deal with each other according to the actual facts which exist between the two nations (Black and white).

 With the nature and desire of the white race to continue their rule and subjection of the darker people even though the white man recognizes these facts, he will continue to try holding onto his rule; his subjection; his thinking of what he has acquired under such rule — that which is his and he cannot give up the prey — his concession — the merchandise which he has exploited out from under the noses and eyes of the real owners (Black man).

 He is willing to shed the blood of his own people and that of others to hold onto that which he calls his legal possessions …”–pg.184(TFOA)

The conviction  of Charles Taylor, the former president of Liberia, is said to have sent an  unequivocal message to current leaders: that great office confers no immunity.  In fact it sent two messages: if you run a small, weak nation, you may be  subject to the full force of international law; if you run a powerful nation,  you have nothing to fear.(Illustration by Daniel Pudles)

 

While anyone  with an interest in human rights should welcome the verdict, it reminds us that  no one has faced legal consequences for launching the illegal war against Iraq.  This fits the Nuremberg tribunal’s definition of a “crime of aggression”, which  it called “the supreme international crime”. The charges on which, in an  impartial system, George Bush, Tony Blair and their associates should have been  investigated are far graver than those for which Taylor was found  guilty.

 

The foreign  secretary, William Hague, claims that Taylor’s conviction “demonstrates that  those who have committed the most serious of crimes can and will be held to  account for their actions”. But the international criminal court, though it was  established 10 years ago, and though the crime of aggression has been recognised  in international law since 1945, still has no jurisdiction over “the most  serious of crimes”. This is because the powerful nations, for obvious reasons,  are procrastinating. Nor have the United Kingdom, the United States and other  western nations incorporated the crime of aggression into their own legislation.  International law remains an imperial project, in which only the crimes  committed by vassal states are punished.

 

In this respect  it corresponds to other global powers. Despite its trumpeted reforms, the  International Monetary Fund remains under the control of the United States and  the former colonial powers. All constitutional matters still require an 85%  share of the vote. By an inexplicable oversight, the United States retains  16.7%, ensuring that it possesses a veto over subsequent reforms. Belgium still  has eight times the votes of Bangladesh, Italy a bigger share than India, and  the United Kingdom and France between them more voting power than the 49 African  members. The managing director remains, as imperial tradition insists, a  European, her deputy an American.

 

The IMF, as a  result, is still the means by which western financial markets project their  power into the rest of the world. At the end of last year, for example, it  published a paper pressing emerging economies to increase their “financial  depth”, which it defines as “the total financial claims and counterclaims of an  economy”. This, it claimed, would insulate them from crisis. As the Bretton  Woods Project points out, emerging nations with large real economies and small  financial sectors were the countries which best weathered the economic crisis,  which was caused by advanced economies with large financial sectors. Like the  modern opium wars it waged in the 1980s and 1990s – when it forced Asian  countries to liberalise their currencies, permitting western financial  speculators to attack them – the IMF’s prescriptions are incomprehensible until  they are understood as instruments of financial power.

 

Decolonisation  did not take place until the former colonial powers and the empires of capital  on whose behalf they operated had established other means of retaining control.  Some, like the IMF and World Bank, have remained almost unchanged. Others, like  the programme of extraordinary rendition, evolved in response to new challenges  to global hegemony.

 

As the  kidnapping of Abdul Hakim Belhaj and his wife suggests, the UK’s foreign and  intelligence services see themselves as a global police force, minding the  affairs of other nations. In 2004, after Tony Blair, with one eye on possible  contracts for British oil companies, decided that Gaddafi was a useful asset,  the alliance was sealed with the capture, packaging and delivery of the regime’s  dissenters.

 

Like the  colonial crimes the British government committed in Kenya and elsewhere, whose  concealment was sustained by the Foreign Office until its secret archives were  revealed last month, the rendition programme was hidden from public view. Just  as the colonial secretary, Alan Lennox-Boyd, repeatedly lied to parliament about  the detention and torture of Kikuyu people, in 2005 Jack Straw, then foreign  secretary, told parliament that “there simply is no truth in the claims that the  United Kingdom has been involved in rendition”.…MORE HERE

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2012 Hiram's 1555 Blog