The Violet Flame as an Healer: Activist Post

Showing posts with label Activist Post. Show all posts

Monday, 9 January 2017

CHARGES WILL NOT BE BROUGHT AGAINST UN PEACEKEEPERS IN AFRICA ACCUSED OF CHILD ABUSE ~ Jesse Tremblay

CHARGES WILL NOT BE BROUGHT AGAINST UN PEACEKEEPERS IN AFRICA ACCUSED OF CHILD ABUSE

By Jesse Tremblay, Activist Post

JANUARY 9, 2017

The New York Times has reported that “a panel of French judges has decided not to bring charges against soldiers accused of having sexually abused children while on a peacekeeping mission in the Central African Republic.”

The accusations have a troubling backstory that is detailed in a December 2015 independent report on the situation. The 170-page report heavily scrutinized not only the possible role of UN peacekeepers in child abuse cases in the ailing African nation but also the failure of UN officials to react in a proper manner. Among those accused of failing in their role in this situation were the head of the UN mission in CAR, UNICEF and the UN Human Rights staff in CAR – page 2.

There were inadequate measures taken to protect the children before the event and an absolute failure to consider their health after the event. Allegedly, no one within the organization wanted to take responsibility for the issue, and as such, it infringed on the victims’ human rights. The report impugned the bureaucratic nature of the United Nations.

Failures at all levels have led to citizens in CAR to protest the presence of the UN in their country, which led to 4 deaths and 14 injured.

Even more troubling is the fact that the Central African Republic has one of the lowest ratings on the UN’s human development index.

These children were the most helpless kind of victims, and it could be a sign that the UN was hoping to ride this situation out with the hope that no one would pick up the story. In fact, the report notes that the head of the HRJS “encouraged the SRSG [Senegalese Army General] of MINUSCA to keep the Allegations quiet” due to the political sensitivity of the allegations –page 7.

The report demands that the UN adhere to a zero tolerance policy in regards to actions like this and made 12 recommendations (see below) to prevent future debacles like this in the future. While there have been firings involved in this case, including the SRSG, the nature of today’s ruling makes us question how serious the UN is about following these recommendations.

Recommendation #1: Acknowledge that sexual exploitation and abuse by peacekeepers, whether or not the alleged perpetrator is under UN command, is a form of conflict related sexual violence to be addressed under the UN’s human rights policies.

Recommendation #2: Create a Coordination Unit in OHCHR reporting directly to the High Commissioner for Human Rights to oversee and coordinate responses to conflict related sexual violence, including: (monitoring, reporting and follow up on allegations of sexual abuse; (analyzing data with a view to tracking trends and practices for the purpose of improving prevention and accountability; and (following up on the implementation of the Panel’s recommendations.)

Recommendation #3: Create a working group to support the Coordination Unit made up of experts (including specialists skilled in addressing sexual violence by international forces), and representatives of TCCs. The working group should: (develop a single policy harmonizing the SEA and human rights policies and (develop processes promoting criminal accountability for sexual violence.)

Recommendation #4: Require mandatory and immediate reporting of all allegations of sexual violence to: (the head of the human rights component in the field or mission, or the reporting officer; and (in the case of sexual violence against children, the child protection officer, as well as UNICEF and the SRSG CAAC; and in the case of sexual violence against adults, the SRSG on Sexual Violence in Conflict; and (the Coordination Unit. xvi)

Recommendation #5: Establish, under the authority of the Coordination Unit, a professional investigative team available for immediate deployment when conflict related sexual violence by peacekeepers is reported.

Recommendation #6: Task the working group with reviewing UN policies dealing with confidentiality in order to establish a proper balance between informed consent, protection, and accountability.

Recommendation #7: Establish a Trust Fund to provide specialized services to victims of conflict related sexual violence.

Recommendation #8: Negotiate with TCCs provisions ensuring prosecution, including by granting host countries subsidiary jurisdiction to prosecute crimes of sexual violence by peacekeepers.

Recommendation #9: Negotiate the inclusion in agreements with TCCs of provisions ensuring transparency and cooperation in accountability processes.

Recommendation #10: Adopt an approach to immunity that presumes cooperation and active participation of UN staff in accountability processes.

Recommendation #11: Negotiate with all TCCs provisions for screening troops that are minimally equivalent to the standards described in the HRDDP.

Recommendation #12: Maintain a comprehensive and up-to-date human rights database hosted by OHCHR

Jesse Tremblay is a contributor for Planet Free Will.com, where this article first appeared.

Tanks to URL: http://wp.me/p1Fiwj-hTo

Please respect all credits.

This author archives:

Discernment is recommended.

All articles are of the respective authors and/or publishers responsibility.

No religious or political belief is defended here.

Sunday, 1 January 2017

ADAM KOKESH DESCRIBES HIS AYAHUASCA EXPERIENCE

By Adam Kokesh, Activist Post

JANUARY 1, 2017

This video is the best introduction to ayahuasca I could offer after my own incredible experience. Ayahuasca is an Amazonian plant mixture that is capable of inducing altered states of consciousness, usually lasting between 4 to 8 hours after ingestion. It is commonly said to purge trauma which in turn treats many mental conditions.

o book a trip with Barry Cooper’s Trip to Wellness, click here and tell him Adam sent you for 10% off.

Visit TheFreedomLine.com

Tanks to URL: http://wp.me/p1Fiwj-hMA

Please respect all credits.

This author archives:

Discernment is recommended.

All articles are of the respective authors and/or publishers responsibility.

No religious or political belief is defended here.

Individually you can be helped to find your Truth that is different of everyone.

More @ http://violetflame.biz.ly and https://rayviolet.blogspot.com/

Like this! please bookmark. It is updated daily

(email:nai@violetflame.biz.ly)

PT: a chama ~ Israel ou Cazária!? ~
ES: LLAMA VIOLETA
EN: VioletFlame ; CPLP ; Light a Candle for PEACE ; Alternative Media ; Creator's Map ; ESU IMMANUEL ; Exposing Media DesInformation ; Galactic Federation ;; Hopi Indians, Prophecies and UFOs ; Illuminati, The ; Infinite Being ; Israel (or Khazaria!?) ; Jews..., the Real! ; The Khazars, or converted (Ashkenazi) Jews are'nt real ; Meditation ; Media News ; NESARA (!) ; SCIENCE, SPIRIT, Free Energy!... ; UFO CONTACTS ; UFOs (MORE) ;; USA The 4th NAZI Reich!? ; Zionism Lies and The Illuminati ; The Red Pill ; The True Shadow
North Atlantic Islands

Friday, 30 December 2016

Fifth Anniversary Of NDAA “Indefinite Detention” ~ Harold Pease

Fifth Anniversary Of NDAA

“Indefinite Detention”

By Harold Pease,Activist Post

December 30, 2016

On December 31, 2011, New Year’s Eve, President Barack Obama signed into law the most constitutionally damaging law in American history, the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012.

This New Year’s Eve we note its 5th Anniversary. Previous annual appropriations bills funding national defense were mostly procedural but it was the addition of two sections, buried deep within the over 600-page document, that potentially gutted the Bill of Rights for American citizens thought by the President to be assisting the enemy, that so upset constitutionalists and libertarians.

Subsections 1021–1022 of Title X, Subtitle D, entitled “Counter-Terrorism,” authorized the president to apply the Authorization for Use of Military Force, the 2001 congressional document used to justify war on Iraq, now broadly to all thought to be terrorists—including Americans living in the states far from any battlefield. The military would be used to find, arrest and “detain covered persons…pending disposition under the law of war.”

Translated, this means military tribunals and prisons and no Bill of Rights. U.S. law; local law enforcement agents, juries, courts and judges would be excluded, all on the whim of but one man—the president. Moreover there exists no requirement to notify local authority when one is “kidnapped” (captured and detained), or transferred out of the country, as for example to Guantanamo Bay, or detained indefinitely. President Obama did promise that he would not use it against US citizens. This power will be transferred to Donald Trump January 20, 2017.

Constitutionalists and libertarians, notably Senator Rand Paul, have worked hard to at least modify these two sections. Newer versions do have Sections 1031-1033 that portend to affirm the rights of due process and habeas corpus but opponents of newer NDAA’s are certain that it is not enough to get back to pre-2011 constitutional protections. Senator Feinstein noted that her goal “was to ensure the military won’t be roaming our streets looking for suspected terrorists.”

The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, following the Civil War, forbade the U.S. military from performing law enforcement functions on American soil. The American Civil Liberties Union warned in 2011, “Since the bill puts military detention authority on steroids and makes it permanent, American citizens and others are at greater risk of being locked away by the military without charge or trial if this bill becomes law.”

When asked if it were possible for an American to be shipped to Guantanamo Bay, Senator John McCain said yes. Senator Lindsey Graham was more blunt. “When they say, ‘I want my lawyer,’ you tell them, ‘Shut up. You don’t get a lawyer.’”

With at least three generals in the Trump cabinet it is questionable whether they will advise Trump to return to the constitutional protections heretofore in place. But it will be a major test of his sincerity respecting separating himself from the establishment, both Republican and Democratic, who together, have imposed this upon all Americans. Cosponsors of the disturbing changes were Senators Carl Levin and John McCain, the latter Trump deeply offended in his presidential campaign. Neither is likely to abandon what they created without a serious fight.

Some things are very clear in the sections disputed. The terms “terrorists” and “affiliates” are not adequately defined, the President is given too much power, and they violate the U.S. Constitution, which everyone voting affirmatively swore to uphold.

How to Escape from Any Restraint (Ad)

It is hard to trust the government’s definition of terrorist when Vice President Joe Biden, once referred to Tea Partiers as terrorists and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, as mobsters (a term also implying a threat to society). What guarantee do we have that the “new” enemy does not simply rotate to anyone defined as “anti-government,” citizen or not?

Presidents have not proved particularly trustworthy in the past with respect to the Constitution and civil liberty. Franklin D. Roosevelt, with the stroke of a pen, detained over 110,000 Japanese Americans in “relocation camps” (Japanese-Americans called them concentration camps) in World War II on the basis of race and potential terrorism. Why should we have confidence in any president to not use this power as “seemeth” him good?

The Writ of Habeas Corpus found in Article I, Section 9 recognized that some day war might exist on our soil and that the accused had rights that might have to be momentarily delayed until recognized civilian authority could reasonably attend to them. It allowed this delay in only two circumstances “when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.”

Section 9 provides a list of powers specifically denied Congress; nor were they given to the President in Article II. This strongly suggests no federal role outside the two parameters, rebellion or invasion. The removal of any civilian role and the carting off of U.S. citizens to a foreign place without benefit of civilian judge or jury obliterates this right.

The threat of potential incarceration without recourse to a lawyer, judge and trial is very serious. The military performing police duties previously rendered by civil authorities is unconscionable in a free society. Ninety-three senators voted for this bill. Only seven understood the Constitution well enough to defend it and vote no. These were Democrats Tom Harkin, Jeff Merkley, Ron Wyden and Republicans Rand Paul, Thomas Coburn, Mike Lee.

Harold Pease writes for The Tenth Amendment Center, where this article first appeared.

Tanks to URL: http://wp.me/p1Fiwj-hL4

Please respect all credits.

This author archives:

Discernment is recommended.

All articles are of the respective authors and/or publishers responsibility.

No religious or political belief is defended here.