Jew World Order

The report itself is an amazing document, not only because it is entirely contrived, but also because the “crimes” which the Commissioners allege take place in the DRPK are exactly the conditions that exist inside the United States itself. The hypocrisy is stunning but no one can be surprised when we learn in paragraph 31 of the report that the “public hearings” held by the Commission were conducted with the help of the governments of the United States, Britain, Japan and South Korea, all enemies of the DPRK, who arranged, according to the Commission itself, all the logistics, venues, interpreters, technology, security, press services and, importantly, the “witnesses.” Nor can we be surprised when we look at the three members of the Commission: the Australian, Michael Donald Kirby, the Serb, Sonja Biserko, and the Indonesian, Marzuki Darusman, each one of them linked to CIA front groups somewhere in their careers.

Darusman, who was the Special Rapporteur regarding the DPRK and whose initial report is the basis for the creation of the DPRK commission, is a well known friend of the US and opportunist who became a member of Suharto’s Golkar party in Indonesia which, with CIA help, murdered, 500,000 communists and people linked to left or labour groups in 1965.

In the eighties and nineties he turned on Suharto for the Americans and is now listed as an advisor to the United States Indonesia Society (USINDO), a US government front group whose president is David Merrill, who was a senior official with the United States Agency For International Development (USAID), a well-known front of the CIA, in various Asian and eastern European countries, during the eighties and nineties, and was an American ambassador to Bangladesh.

Darusman is also a member of the Global Leadership Foundation, whose patrons include such unsavoury characters as George W. Bush, Helmut Schmidt, and Lech Walesa. The Foundation is a syndicate of former western leaders that states it gives advice to world leaders on how to run their countries but does so secretly, outside democratic processes, and the knowledge of the people. Their slogan is “Helping Leaders Govern.” Of course the citizens of the countries concerned think that it is the job of the people through their representatives to help their leaders govern but apparently that’s not how it works. Chief Executive Officer, Sir Robert Fulton, a former general in the British Army, and, former Commandant of the British Royal Marines, heads the Foundation, which is incorporated in Switzerland but has its headquarters in London. Not surprisingly, its financing comes from companies such as Chevron, Barclays Bank, Goldman Sachs, Alcatel, BAE Systems, Exxon Mobile, The Ford Foundation, and many others of the same stripe.

The second member of the Commission is Sonja Biserko, a detested figure in Serbia where she is regarded as a Nato Quisling of the worst type. She openly conspired with the US and Nato against President Milosevic in the nineties, advocated the bombing of her own country by Nato in 1999 and called for the kidnapping of Milosevic to the Nato tribunal at The Hague. She is a founder and Director of the USAID funded Helsinki Human Rights Group linked to Human Rights Watch, another CIA front group. She is also a senior fellow at the United States Institute of Peace, an official agency of the American government the Board of which is appointed by the President of the United States with Congressional approval. Present members of the Board of Directors include Chuck Hagel and John Kerry.

Michael D. Kirby is an Australian judge who is a former president of the International Commission of Jurists, an organisation created in West Berlin to investigate alleged human rights abuses in the German Soviet Zone which was funded by the CIA through the American Fund For Free Jurists and the Ford Foundation and its founders included the head of the CIA, Allen Dulles. The ICJ was created in opposition to the International Association of Democratic Lawyers, the IADL, an organisation of leftist lawyers around the world of which the writer is a member. Kirby opposed the move to make Australia a republic in the nineties and was a founding member of Australians For A Constitutional Monarchy that advocated the retention of the British monarchy in Australia.

All three were appointed by Ban Ki Moon, who has caused dismay at the United Nations because of his obstruction of anticorruption policies and attacks on the independence of the Office of Internal Oversight, the UN watchdog bureau, and because of his biased call for action in the Security Council against the DPRK during the Cheonan crisis of May 2010.  The Secretary-General is supposed to represent the views of the Security Council, but Ban tends to ignore Russia and China in favor of obedience to the US, Britain, and France which should come as no surprise when his candidacy for Secretary-General was championed by President Bush after years of senior diplomatic service in the US puppet governments in South Korea.

The absurdity of the document produced by the Commission becomes plain in the opening paragraphs. Paragraph 2 states:

“Among the violations to be investigated were those pertaining to the right to food, those associated with prison camps, torture and inhuman treatment, arbitrary detention, discrimination, freedom of expression, the right to life, freedom of movement, and enforced disappearances, including in the form of abductions of nationals of other states.”

Reading that one would think that the Commission was making inquiries into the conditions existing within the United States of America where a fifth of the population is reliant on food stamps to avoid starvation, where prisoners are used as forced labour for private businesses, where torture and inhumane treatment of common prisoners and prisoners of war is routine, where habeas corpus has been suspended and arbitrary detentions along with forced disappearances, through the euphemistically termed “rendition” programmes, of people all over the world is a routine practice, where freedom of expression for those disagreeing with US policies is severely limited, where the freedom of movement is restricted to countries approved by the government, where racial discrimination is rampant and where the right to life for many minority groups especially blacks, natives, Hispanics and the poor does not exist as police murders of members of those groups increase daily.

But of course the commissioners could not care less about human rights crimes against the people of the United States by the American regimes. Instead they succeed in showing themselves to be a politically motivated team of US agents who held show hearings and produced a politically driven report.

In paragraph 12 of the document they state that the DPRK has not provided any substantive input yet the DPRK issued a report of 167 pages on the human rights situation in the DPRK, on September 13, 2014, produced by the DPRK Association For Human Rights that refutes every one of the allegations made. Not surprisingly the DPRK slammed the UN report and stated that witness testimony was fabricated, a charge that should be seriously considered in light of the experience of this writer and other defence lawyers at the Nato-controlled Yugoslav and Rwanda tribunals where the fabrication of witness testimony by the US controlled prosecutors has been the preferred method of operation.

The report also states that “fear of reprisals…has limited the willingness of many … foreign visitors to the DPRK to share their knowledge and information with the Commission.” This is a surprising statement since this writer was a member of a team of lawyers who, on behalf of the National Lawyers Guild of the United States, an organisation affiliated with the IADL, made a visit to the DPRK in 2003. Our report on what we observed has been available on the NLG website.

And covers all aspects of Korean society. The allegations being made then by the west are the same as the allegations made now but the Commission never bothered to read that report nor did they try to contact us for our views. Nor have they spoken to the 5 American Army officers we met at our hotel in Pyongyang, the day we arrived, all members of a remains recovery team whose mission was to locate the bodies of American soldiers killed in the Korean war and who were able to freely move around the country.

Once we got over our surprise that the first people we met in our hotel in this supposedly “isolated” country were American Army officers, we asked them what they thought of the country and conditions, since we had just arrived and did not know what to expect. We were surprised to here an American Major say:

“Look, don’t quote me or use my name, but when we left Hawaii to come here we were told it was hell on earth, but we’ve been here for two years and nothing they told us was true. It’s nice here and they treat us well. Everything we had heard in the western media, everything our superiors told us was complete and total bullshit.”

This echoed a conversation we had with two Congolese diplomats who we met on the way out of the country. We asked them to compare their experiences and they stated they were shocked, that everything they had head about North Korea, all the negative propaganda, was false. They added that it would be a dream for most Africans to have the life that people in North Korea have.

The conclusion to all this is that the Commission of Inquiry Report is just another exercise in US propaganda. This conclusion is reinforced by the Commission’s call for the Security Council to refer the matter to the International Criminal Court when they know this cannot be done legally since a strict reading of the Statute of the ICC only permits the Security Council to refer matters concerning countries that are already parties to the Treaty of Rome and the DPRK is not a party to the Treaty. In the alternative they call for the creation of another one of the ad hoc tribunals whose role as propaganda tools for the US and its allies is now notorious. Since this can never happen as Russia and China will never allow it, the single purpose of the report is to prepare the people of the west for war against the people of the DPRK by portraying their government as criminals, the same propaganda strategy the US has used against Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, and now, as Obama tried to do at the G20 meeting in Australia, regarding the attack on flight MH17, Russia.

Bitter experience shows that once the criminal label is attached the dogs of war are soon unleashed, so it was a welcome sign that, despite a heavy disinformation campaign, 55 nations rejected the resolution against the DPRK, including Russia and China, while 12 other nations abstained. But, for all that, we must be alarmed and we must stay alert, because the principal propaganda target of this campaign is the domestic population of the Nato allies themselves so that they will support, or, at least, not resist, the next planned war.

Christopher Black is an international criminal lawyer based in Toronto, he is a member of the Law Society of Upper Canada and he is known for a number of high-profile cases involving human rights and war crimes, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.