The Plain English site
Thursday September 9th 2010
Fight World Hunger

Abbas and Gaza

The Palestinian leader, President Mahmoud Abbas has called for an international investigation headed by the United Nations Security Council into the recent Israeli attack on the six ship flotilla carrying aid to the blockaded Gaza Strip.

He said that there should be a united Arab stand to end the siege of Gaza.? He also called for international protection of the Palestinian people wondering how long the Israeli occupation would continue.

"We are waiting for world justice," he said. "We waited for a long time but we will not despair."

Today, Mr. Abbas will meet special US envoy George Mitchell, who is heading a ranking US delegation to the investment conference.

Mr. Abbas said he would also travel to Washington on June 9 for a meeting with US President Barack Obama.

Noriega jailed

Former Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega, fresh out of a Miami prison where he spent two decades, was sent back behind bars in France on Tuesday to await a new legal battle -- this time on charges he laundered cocaine profits by buying luxury apartments in Paris.

Hours after Noriega arrived in Paris following his extradition from the United States, a judge deemed him a flight risk and dispatched him to La Sante, a grim brick prison in southern Paris. Famous past La Sante inmates include convicted terrorist Carlos the Jackal and Nazi collaborator Maurice Papon.

Noriega lost his first battle on French territory -- he unsuccessfully pressed a judge to send him home to Panama. If convicted in France, he could face another 10 years in prison, a daunting prospect for the 72-year-old. Noriega's French lawyers said they will appeal the decision putting him behind bars and say his detention and transfer are unlawful.

If Noriega had been released in France, even to house arrest, it would have been a victory after a generation in prison. It could also have been an awkward situation for France, where a string of former dictators from Haiti to Africa have settled or bought second homes in the past.

Officials are to set a trial date on May 12 for Noriega, who was deposed after a 1989 U.S. invasion and imprisoned in Florida for drug trafficking. After finishing his U.S. sentence, he was extradited from Miami and sent on a direct flight to Paris, where he was immediately served with an arrest warrant Tuesday.

France already has convicted Noriega and his wife in absentia of laundering some $7 million in cocaine profits through three major French banks and using drug cash to invest in three posh Paris apartments. But France agreed to give him a new trial if he was extradited. Noriega's wife, Felicidad Sieiro de Noriega, is living in Panama and faces no charges there.

In a hearing before Paris judge Jean-Michel Maton, Noriega pleaded to be sent home to Panama, citing his prisoner of war status. "I don't agree with the action against me," he said through a translator.

Noriega spoke little during the hearing and appeared tired. Wearing a white button-up shirt and black jacket, his black hair thinning, he periodically rested his head in one hand during the proceedings.

After the judge denied Noriega's request, he was escorted out a side door of the court by armed guards. Limping, he used a cane.

Yves Leberquier, a lawyer for Noriega, said the former dictator has been partially paralyzed since suffering a mild stroke four years ago.

Another of Noriega's lawyers said his client had seemed resigned to returning behind bars.

"Having been extradited from the U.S., he was not really expecting to be released tonight, even if he hoped for it," Olivier Metzner said.

Noriega's legal team argued that it was illegal to try a former head of state who should have immunity from prosecution.

Other legal objections are that Noriega is considered a prisoner of war, a status Leberquier said French jails aren't ready to accommodate, and that the charges against him are no longer valid because the acts he is accused of happened too long ago, the lawyer said.

Noriega was declared a POW after his 1992 drug conviction by a Miami federal judge. In Miami, Noriega had separate quarters in prison, the right to wear his military uniform and insignia, access to a television and monitoring by international rights groups.

Panama also has an outstanding request for the former dictator's extradition. He was convicted in Panama in absentia and sentenced to 60 years in prison on charges of embezzlement, corruption and murdering opponents.

Panama's foreign minister, Juan Carlos Varela, said Panama respects the U.S. decision to extradite Noriega to France but will still try to get him back to Panama "to serve the sentences handed down by Panamanian courts."

Noriega was Panama's longtime intelligence chief before he took power in 1982. He had been considered a valued CIA asset for years, but as a ruler he joined forces with drug traffickers and was implicated in the death of a political opponent.

Noriega was ousted as Panama's leader and put on trial following a 1989 U.S. military invasion ordered by President George H.W. Bush. Noriega was brought to Miami and was convicted of drug racketeering and related charges in 1992.

He finished serving his term in federal prison outside Miami in 2007, but stayed in prison while France sought his extradition.

Sandra Noriega, one of his three daughters, called Noriega's extradition to France "a violation of his rights as a citizen, and a failing by the (Panamanian) government, which is supposed to protect its citizens."

The in-absentia French conviction, obtained by The Associated Press, says Noriega "knew that (the money) came directly or indirectly from drug trafficking." It said he helped Colombia's Medellin drug cartel by authorizing the transport of cocaine through Panama en route to the United States.

The French indictment says Noriega was born in 1938, although his French lawyers say he was born four years earlier. As a youth he claimed to be older so he could enter a military academy.

------
AP - 28 April 2010 01:03:48 By PIERRE-ANTOINE SOUCHARD
Associated Press writers Katie King and Alfred de Montesquiou in Paris and Juan Zamorano in Panama City contributed to this report.

OLDER ARTICLES

Brown Whitewash?

Chilcot Inquiry

During the latest Prime Minster’s Question Time, Angus Robertson of the SNP  asked Gordon Brown: “The Chilcot inquiry has heard that you were in the Iraq war inner circle and refused key payments for our troops on the front line. Will you confirm to the house that there is no impediment for you to seek a time to give evidence to the Chilcot inquiry before the general election?”

Gordon Brown replied: “This is, as I said, a matter for the Chilcot inquiry. I have written to Sir John Chilcot and I have said to him that I am happy to give evidence at any time. That is a matter for the committee to decide, but I will take whatever advice he gives me about when he wishes me to appear.”

Gordon Brown had already written to Sir John Chilcot and had said “I want to make it absolutely clear I am prepared to give evidence whenever you see fit.”

Chilcot fears that the Inquiry may become “politicised” as a result of the Prime Minister’s appearance – which will be within the next two months – and prior to the General Election.

The Chilcot Inquiry’s interrogation of Brown will probably be the equivalent of being flagellated by a warm marshmallow-on-a-rope.

Make no mistake, Brown would have preferred not to have been questioned at all -  but for pressure from the Opposition parties – notably Nick Clegg, leader of the Liberal Democrats.

The Iraq invasion was a transparently illegal act of war. A sovereign state was invaded and that is why many say that the Brits and Americans should now be asked to pay reparations to the Iraqi people.  In spite of the fact that there was more-or-less all-Party agreement and support for the invasion, it is the waythat that Parliamentary support was solicited and obtained that is in question. So, whether or not Chilcot agrees, this is a political matter.

It is probable that a Prime Minister lied to Parliament – possibly with the full knowledge of his co-conspirators – with Brown among them.

At the time, Brown was  Goering to Blair’s Fuhrer,  so in reality, they should both be standing shoulder-to-shoulder in the dock, next to that latter-day Joseph Goebbels – Alastair Campbell.

I make no apology for the Nazi parallels because it is becoming increasingly evident that the Cabinet was manipulated, as were Members of Parliament of all Parties. It seems that for a short time, democracy was a stranger to British politics.

Brown has to explain in detail,  his part in the decision to invade Iraq in 2003.

Jack Straw made it abundantly clear to the inquiry that he was anti the invasion and subsequent destruction of Iraq. At the time, it was the generally accepted feeling of both politicians and the secret services that any invasion of a Muslim state would result in increased terrorist activity targetted at the invading countries – and so it has come to pass.

Consequently, more and more of the United Kingdom’s and America’s resources are now focused on the “war on terrorism” which appears to consist of  no more than sending young soldiers to obscure places to be blown up and the UK  and USA “spook”  population running around in ever-decreasing circles in the sure knowledge that their political masters have ensured that they have a spooking  job for life.

The arithmetic is simple. Many more hundreds of thousands of people have been  bombed,  shot or blown up as a result of the West’s misguided attempts “prevent” terrorism, than have ever been killed by actual acts of terrorism.

Blair will be questioned next Friday – by then most of  the supporting acts will have done their “turn”. Let us hope that Brown’s interrogation takes place while feelings are still running high and that the Brown-hand-picked Chilcot committee temporarily puts all thoughts of future Peerages on the back burner and does its  job.

So far, their questioning technique is about as incisive as that of a old parish priest taking confession from a nun. Regrettably, there are no barristers present so we must not expect fireworks but it is hoped that Chilcot’s kindly old duffers pep up their somewhat moribund tennis-club-committee style of interrogation.

Originally, Conservative Leader David Cameron dismissed the Chilcot Inquiry as “an establishment stitch-up”. Let us hope that he was wrong. 

Leave a Reply