Dear Readers, One of the songs I cherish is Lou Reed’s ”Just a Perfect Day”Why…….Listen with me and just enjoy……..
Just a perfect day Drink Sangria in the park And then later When it gets dark, we go homeJust a perfect day Feed animals in the zoo Then later A movie, too, and then homeOh, it’s such a perfect day I’m glad I spent it with you Oh, such a perfect day You just keep me hanging on You just keep me hanging onJust a perfect day Problems all left alone Weekenders on our own It’s such funJust a perfect day You made me forget myself I thought I was Someone else, someone goodOh, it’s such a perfect day I’m glad I spent it with you Oh, such a perfect day You just keep me hanging on You just keep me hanging onYou’re going to reap just what you sow You’re going to reap just what you sow You’re going to reap just what you sow You’re going to reap just what you sow
At the request of someone I highly value for her excellent scientific historical work and who has become a valued and dear emailfriend [as I may say so], I sent her my Letter to the Editor.And although she can read Dutch well, I consider it as a special gesture to her, to translate my Letter in English too. And I wished to share it with you too.
Astrid Essed
HERE MY LETTER TO THE EDITOR TITLE [As I have emailed it to the papers] ”CORONAMEASURES OF THE DUTCH GOVERNMENT ARE STUPID, UNRESPONSIBLE AND DANGEROUS” Letter to the Editor The Roman philosopher and statesman Marcus Tullius Cicero warned the Senate [aristocratic precursor of the contemporary parliaments] in a number of speeches against a [finally prevented] coup d’etat of co senator Lucius Sergius Catilina.Without having the audacity to compare myself with Cicero, by means of this Letter to the Editor I want to warn against the dangerous Corona policy of this government, that is becoming worse and worse, despite the treath of a second Corona wave.The relaxation of the Corona measures, the socalled Corona trainbook [”Coronaspoorboekje], announced on 6th of may which implied except for the opening of schools and barbershops, the opening of almost the whole Dutch social live like the cafe’s, cinema’s, etc, has turned to be highly dangerous, because it led [especially in cafe’s] to more and more infections.And to make matters worse, lesser and lesser people followed the necessary coronarules, like social distancing and avoiding crowded places.And what is the policy of this government regarding those negative developments?Instead of tighten reins more [for example a lockdown of cafe’s and other outbreaks of contamination [like for example cafe’s or perhaps cinema’s], this government does nothing else to declare that discotheques and nightclubs remain closed [that had to be added!] and ”advising” people to follow the rules [that are violated increaslingly], giving ”advice” to go in quarantaine after visiting countries with ”code orange” [countries with great coronarisks] and an ”advice” to let yourself tested on corona.The political stupidity is, that an ”advice” need not to be followed, but a legal prohibition is binding.Why no mandatory testing at Schiphol Airport, when people return from risk countries and mandatory quarantaine [at Schiphol Airport] when tested positive on Covid 19?Why the GGD [Dutch Healthcare Centre] [1] has no centres where people are going in mandatory quarantaine when tested positive on Covid 19?Then there is a chance to avoid the second corona wave instead of stupid talk about ”own responsibility” and [a quote from prime minister Mark Rutte] ”I am no dictator”This isn’t a joke!It concerns maybe thousands of people, who can lose their life in the second corona wave, also predicted by some virologists.And what also helps is, that ministers [here mr Grapperhaus, minister of Justice and Security] follow the very rules they have set, in stead being a cry baby in parliament. [2]A minister of substance would have done the right thing, namely resign.No wonder people increasingly don’t follow the coronarules, when ministers, who are responsible for maintaining the rules, don’t care about those rules at all!When this government doesn’t want a pandemia like the Spanish Flu [1918-1919, 38 thousand dead in the Netherlands] it is high time to take strict measures.To save public health and to prevent worse.
“I also sent a letter around my department to the people, giving the same accountability as I did in parliament,” Grapperhaus said to newspaper AD. “I did not serve as an example and for that I am very sorry. That this should not have happened with me as Minister of Justice and Security either.”
During the parliamentary debate, which lasted hours on Wednesday night, parliament asked the Minister to ensure that not everyone who gets a fine for violating a coronavirus rule gets that mentioned on their criminal record. Grapperhaus said that he would start working on that. Though he added that people who deliberately and aggressively break the coronavirus rules, such as by spitting in someone’s face for example, should still get that on their criminal record.
NL TIMES
EMOTIONAL JUSTIC MIN AGAIN APOLOGIZING FOR SOCIAL DISTANCE BLUNDER; SURVIVES DEBATE
A visibly emotional Minister Ferdinand Grapperhaus of Justice and Security again apologized for not adhering to coronavirus rules at his wedding during a parliamentary debate on the matter on Wednesday. Despite the criticism against him, he finds he has enough credibility to enforce the coronavirus policy. He did say that he would look into whether coronavirus fines could be kept off of people’s criminal records in some cases.
Photos from the Grapperhaus’ wedding show him not only standing too close to his guests, but also shaking hands and hugging people. “During my wedding, compliance with the coronavirus measures went wrong. I have expressed my regret about this and I am doing that again today to the parliamentarians,” Grapperhaus said. “I didn’t do it right myself. I got caught up in the events of that day.” The Minister was visibly overcome with emotions and had to pause. “We talked about it at home. We said to each other: if only we had done it just the two of us together.”
Parliamentarians from the entire political spectrum raised doubts about whether Grapperhaus could still credibly enforce the coronavirus policy. He believes that he can. “Let one thing be clear: I fully support the corona policy that we have agreed on and implemented with the cabinet and I will continue to propagate that in the future.”
MPs also asked him how citizens should accept fines that go onto their criminal records for breaking the same rules he did. Grapperhaus said that he would look into whether these fines can be kept off of people’s criminal records in some cases. But he wants to keep that note on the criminal record for people who spit in the face of others, are aggressive, and deliberately flout the corona rules, he said.
When asked about waiving the fines, Grapperhaus said that was absolutely impossible. The decision of whether a fine was justified or not lies with the Public Prosecution Service and the courts, and the Minister has no businesses interfering with that, he said.
As Minister of Justice and Security, Grapperhaus was responsible for enforcing the coronavirus rules. Opposition parties called it scandalous that he then broke the two most basic rules in place to curb the spread of this virus – staying 1.5 meters apart, and not shaking hands. “Making a mistake and standing too close to someone else can happen to us all,” GroenLinks leader Jesse Klaver said before the debate started. “But shaking hands, you just don’t do it, especially as Minister of Justice. It was the first agreement we made in March.”
The union for enforcement officers NBB, whose job it is to fine citizens for breaking the same rules Grapperhaus did, raised this same issue. “The understanding for the corona fine is getting smaller. And the enforcer is noticing this. It is complicated to explain why people can get a corona fine if the responsible Minister himself does not comply with the rules,” NBB chairman Richard Gerrits said to NOS earlier this week.
Grapperhaus eventually apologized, saying that he feels especially bad given he has to set an example as a Minister. He paid 780 euros – twice the amount of the fine for not adhering to the coronavirus rules – to the Red Cross, but was not officially fined. Then on Tuesday, more photos surfaced, showing Grapperhaus shaking hands with people and embracing his mother-in-law.
Prime Minister Mark Rutte expressed support for Grapperhaus on Friday, saying that him violating the coronavirus rules at his wedding does not affect his credibility as far as the Prime Minister is concerned. “Credibility is related to facing up when something is not going well. He is doing that,” the Prime Minister said.
During a press conference on Tuesday, Rutte did not specifically mention Grapperhaus, but he did talk about social distancing and fines for not adhering to the rules. “The 1.5 meters is always necessary everywhere,” Rutte said about social distancing. “Sometimes difficult to maintain. Sometimes you’ll bump into someone on the street. I really get it. And again, we’re not all perfect. And it is not the case that the police immediately impose fines, it does not work that way. Relatively few fines are imposed.”
Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Coronameasures and the Grapperhaus Case/Coromameasures of the Dutch government are stupid, unresponsible and dangerous
ZIONIST LEADER AND LATER ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER DAVID BEN GURION, WHO ONESIDEDLY DECLARED IN MAY, 1948 THE STATE OF ISRAEL AND ONE OF THE ARCHITECTS OF THE ETHNIC CLEANSING OF PALESTINETHIS LETTER TO HIS SON ONLY SHOWS HIS PREPAREDNESS FOR ETHNIC CLEANSINGS, ALREADY IN 1937! https://la.indymedia.org/news/2008/05/217559.php
‘ We must expel Arabs and take their place. Up to now, all our aspirations have been based on an assumption – one that has been vindicated throughout our activities in the country – that there is enough room in the land for the Arabs and ourselves. But if we are compelled to use force – not in order to dispossess the Arabs of the Negev or Transjordan, but in order to guarantee our right to settle there – our force will enable us to do so. ” AN EXCERPT FROM THE UNDERLYING LETTER, REVEALING THE LONG MADE ZIONIST PLAN TO ETNICALLY CLEANSE THE ”ARABS” [PALESTINIANS]………
THE LETTER
PALESTINA KOMITEELETTER FROM DAVID BEN GURION TO HIS SON AMOS, WRITTEN 5 OCTOBER 1937 Obtained from the Ben-Gurion Archives in Hebrew, and translated into English by the Institute of Palestine Studies, Beirut
Letter from David Ben-Gurion to his son Amos, written 5 October 1937 Obtained from the Ben-Gurion Archives in Hebrew, and translated into English by the Institute of Palestine Studies, Beirut
5 October 1937 Dear Amos,
I was not angry at you, but I was very sorry indeed that there was no reply from you. I cannot accept the excuse that you have no time. I know you have a lot of work at school, in the field, and at home, and I am happy that you are so preoccupied with your studies. But it is always possible to find free time if necessary, not only on Sabbath days but even during weekdays. Your excuse that I keep moving from one country to another is not convincing. You can write to me in London. Here they [the Jewish Agency office] always know where I am, and they are efficient in forwarding my mail. As to the question of my membership in the executive committee [of the Jewish Agency], I shall explain to you in person if I meet you in Tel Aviv upon my return. Here what I want to talk about is the conflict you are experiencing between your reason and your emotions with regard to the question of the state. Political matters should not be a question of emotions. The only thing that should be taken into account is what we want and what is best for us, what will lead to the objective, and which are the policies that will make us succeed and which will make us fail.
It seems to me that I, too, have “emotions” [quotation marks in original.Hebrew: regesh]. Without these emotions I would not have been able to endure decades of our hard work. It definitely does not hurt my feelings [regesh] that a state is established, even if it is small.
Of course the partition of the country gives me no pleasure. But the country that they [the Royal (Peel) Commission] are partitioning is not in our actual possession; it is in the possession of the Arabs and the English. What is in our actual possession is a small portion, less than what they [the Peel Commission] are proposing for a Jewish state. If I were an Arab I would have been very indignant. But in this proposed partition we will get more than what we already have, though of course much less than we merit and desire. The question is: would we obtain more without partition? If things were to remain as they are [emphasis in original], would this satisfy our feelings? What we really want is not that the land remain whole and unified. What we want is that the whole and unified land be Jewish [emphasis original]. A unified Eretz Israeli would be no source of satisfaction for me–if it were Arab.
From our standpoint, the status quo is deadly poison. We want to change the status quo [emphasis original]. But how can this change come about? How can this land become ours? The decisive question is: Does the establishment of a Jewish state [in only part of Palestine] advance or retard the conversion of this country into a Jewish country?
My assumption (which is why I am a fervent proponent of a state, even though it is now linked to partition) is that a Jewish state on only part of the land is not the end but the beginning.
When we acquire one thousand or 10,000 dunams, we feel elated. It does not hurt our feelings that by this acquisition we are not in possession of the whole land. This is because this increase in possession is of consequence not only in itself, but because through it we increase our strength, and every increase in strength helps in the possession of the land as a whole. The establishment of a state, even if only on a portion of the land, is the maximal reinforcement of our strength at the present time and a powerful boost to our historical endeavors to liberate the entire country.
We shall admit into the state all the Jews we can. We firmly believe that we can admit more than two million Jews. We shall build a multi-faceted Jewish economy– agricultural, industrial, and maritime. We shall organize an advanced defense force—a superior army which I have no doubt will be one of the best armies in the world. At that point I am confident that we would not fail in settling in the remaining parts of the country, through agreement and understanding with our Arab neighbors, or through some other means.
We must always keep in mind the fundamental truths that make our settlement of this land imperative and possible. They are two or three: it is not the British Mandate nor the Balfour Declaration. These are consequences, not causes. They are the products of coincidence: contingent, ephemeral, and they will come to an end. They were not inevitable. They could not have occurred but for the World War, or rather, they would not have occurred if the war had not ended the way it did.
But on the other hand there are fundamental [emphasis original] historical truths, unalterable as long as Zionism is not fully realized. These are:
1) The pressure of the Exile, which continues to push the Jews with propulsive force towards the country 2) Palestine is grossly under populated. It contains vast colonization potential which the Arabs neither need nor are qualified (because of their lack of need) to exploit. There is no Arab immigration problem. There is no Arab exile. Arabs are not persecuted. They have a homeland, and it is vast. 3) The innovative talents of the Jews (a consequence of point 1 above), their ability to make the desert bloom, to create industry, to build an economy, to develop culture, to conquer the sea and space with the help of science and pioneering endeavor.
These three fundamental truths will be reinforced by the existence of a Jewish state in a part of the country, just as Zionism will be reinforced by every conquest, large or small, every school, every factory, every Jewish ship, etc.
Our ability to penetrate the country will increase if we have a state. Our strength vis-à-vis the Arabs will likewise increase. The possibilities for construction and multiplication will speedily expand. The greater the Jewish strength in the country, the more the Arabs will realize that it is neither beneficial nor possible for them to withstand us. On the contrary, it will be possible for the Arabs to benefit enormously from the Jews, not only materially but politically as well.
I do not dream of war nor do I like it. But I still believe, more than I did before the emergence of the possibility of a Jewish state, that once we are numerous and powerful in the country the Arabs will realize that it is better for them to become our allies.
They will derive benefits from our assistance if they, of their own free will, give us the opportunity to settle in all parts of the country. The Arabs have many countries that are under-populated, underdeveloped, and vulnerable, incapable with their own strength to stand up to their external enemies. Without France, Syria could not last for one day against an onslaught from Turkey. The same applies to Iraq and to the new [Palestinian] state [under the Peel plan]. All of these stand in need of the protection of France or Britain. This need for protection means subjugation and dependence on the other. But the Jews could be equal allies, real friends, not occupiers or tyrants over them.
Let us assume that the Negev will not be allotted to the Jewish state. In such event, the Negev will remain barren because the Arabs have neither the competence nor the need to develop it or make it prosper. They already have an abundance of deserts but not of manpower, financial resources, or creative initiative. It is very probable that they will agree that we undertake the development of the Negev and make it prosper in return for our financial, military, organizational, and scientific assistance. It is also possible that they will not agree. People don’t always behave according to logic, common sense, or their own practical advantage. Just as you yourself are sometimes split conflicted between your mind and your emotions, it is possible that the Arabs will follow the dictates of sterile nationalist emotions and tell us: “We want neither your honey nor your sting. We’d rather that the Negev remain barren than that Jews should inhabit it.” If this occurs, we will have to talk to them in a different language—and we will have a different language—but such a language will not be ours without a state. This is so because we can no longer tolerate that vast territories capable of absorbing tens of thousands of Jews should remain vacant, and that Jews cannot return to their homeland because the Arabs prefer that the place [the Negev] remains neither ours nor theirs. We must expel Arabs and take their place. Up to now, all our aspirations have been based on an assumption – one that has been vindicated throughout our activities in the country – that there is enough room in the land for the Arabs and ourselves. But if we are compelled to use force – not in order to dispossess the Arabs of the Negev or Transjordan, but in order to guarantee our right to settle there – our force will enable us to do so.
Clearly in such event we will have to deal not only with the Arabs living in Eretz Israel, since it is very probable that Arabs from the neighboring countries will come to their aid. But our power will be greater, not only because we will be better organized and equipped, but also because behind us stands a force still greater in quantity and quality. This is the reservoir of the millions in the Diaspora. Our entire younger generation of Poland, Romania, America, and other countries will rush to our aid at the outbreak of such a conflict. I pray to God that this does not happen at all. Nevertheless the Jewish state will not rely only on the Jews living in it, but on the Jewish people living in every corner of the world: the many millions who are eager and obliged [emphasis original] to settle in Palestine. There are not millions of Arabs who are compelled or willing to settle in Palestine. Of course it is likely that Arab adventurers and gangs will come from Syria or Iraq or other Arab countries, but these can be no match for the tens and hundreds of thousands of young Jews to whom Eretz Israel is not merely an emotional issue, but one that is in equal measure both personal and national.
For this reason I attach enormous importance to the conquest of the sea and the construction of a Jewish harbor and a Jewish fleet. The sea is the bridge between the Jews of this country and the Jewish Diaspora – the millions of Jews in different parts of the world. We must create the conditions that will enable us in times of necessity to bring into the country in our own ships manned by our own seamen, tens of thousands of young men. Meanwhile we must prepare these young men while they are still in the Diaspora for whatever task awaits them here.
I am confident that the establishment of a Jewish state, even if it is only in a part of the country, will enable us to carry out this task. Once a state is established, we shall have control over the Eretz Israeli sea. Our activities in the sea will then include astonishing achievements.
Because of all the above, I feel no conflict between my mind and emotions. Both declare to me: A Jewish state must be established immediately, even if it is only in part of the country. The rest will follow in the course of time. A Jewish state will come.
My warm greetings [Hebrew: Shalom Rav].
When do you return to Kadoorie [agricultural school]? Write to me. Show this letter to your mother and sisters.
Sincerely, Your father
END OF THE LETTER
SEE ALSO JEWISH VOICE FOR PEACEBEN GURION: LETTER TO HIS SON, OCTOBER 5, 1937
Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Letter from David Ben Gurion to his son Amos, written 5 october 1937/About the ethnic cleansing of the ”Arabs” [Palestinians]
Dear Readers, Despite of the heathwave it is important to mention the wrongs in history!I already did it in Dutch [article and Letter to the Editor], but now I wrote this Letter to the Editor about the allied bombings of German cities during WO II,Especially because it strikes me, that even after 75 years liberation of the nazi terror, there are still people, and many of them, who deny the fact that those allied bombings on cities, civilian goals, were forbidden, even in those times! [1]This Letter to the Editor I’ve sent to a number of British, American and German newspapers.Of course I have no idea, whether they publish it or not, so I want to share my Letter with you.See the Letter to the Editor under note 1 Hoping you all stay healthy in those dangerous Corona days. Astrid Essed
[1] The attack or bombardment, by whatever means, of towns, villages, dwellings, or buildings which are undefended is prohibited.
ALLIED BOMBINGS OF GERMAN CITIES DURING WORLD WAR II ARE WARCRIMES
Letter to the Editor Dear Editor,
Again and again it strikes me, that even after 75 year liberation of the Nazi terror, many people still deny the fact, that the British-American bombings of German cities were warcrimes.Of course there is a story behind this:After the killing of 40 000 British civilians by German bombings during the Blitz [warcrimes of course, but nobody denies that], it was payback time, not only out of revenge, but also to destroy the German economy and war industry.Another motive for lage scale bombing was to break the morale of the German people and the hope they would rise up against the nazi regime.Rather ridiculous, since the deadly air attacks were caused by the Allied forces and the caused destruction was ther sole responsibility.Therefore it was no surprise, that the German people became more and more hostile to the Allied forces, being the killers of the people they loved.Not only bombings on civilians and civilian goals are morally wrong, even in that time they were forbidden according article 25 of the Hague Convention [1907]Attacks on military goals of course were permitted.Yet bombings on civilian goals took place, as well by the Allied as the Central Powers.Firestorms on German cities and villages, since firebombs were used, with as a consequence, that people burned alive.In 1942, the German city Cologne was attacked with 1000 firebombs and at an attack on the German city Pforzheim in february 1945, 30 percent of the population had been killed.Was the Nazi top hunted and killed?Not at all, ordinary people.Dozens of cities were attacked, Cologne,Hamburg,,Berlin,Dusseldorf,Osnabruck,Kalsruhe,Dessau,,Potsdam and on and on.Deeply morally inferior was the fact, that even in may 1945, when Germany was about to surrender,bombing took place.Not only the bombing of Dresden [february 1945] was a warcrime, all those other bombings, too.More than half million German civilians were killed by those merciless carpet bombings and miliions of people were left homeless.High time to acknowledge that ”the good side of history” committed warcrimes too and not only Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Astrid Essed
‘Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Allied bombings of German cities during World War II are warcrimes/Letter to the Editor
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCJSNMqub8g Today, the 6th of may, is the first Birthday of Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, son of Prince Harry and his wife Meghan Markle, Duke and Duchess of Sussex.It is my great pleasure , from my website, to congratulate Lord Archie and wish him and his parents a Happy Birthday!As also his grandparents.And especially too his greatgrandparents Queen Elisabeth and her husband, Prince Philip [Duke of Edinburgh]
INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURTTO SECRETARIAT OF THE ASSEMBLY OF STATE PARTIESTO THE BUREAU MEMBERS Mr O-Gon Kwon, PresidentMr Jens-Otto Horslund and Mr Mr. Michal Mlynár
Subject:Request for an investigation after possible Dutch warcrimes in Iraq and the possibility of the prosecution of members of the Dutch government, if warcrimes have been confirmed. Dear Sirs
Although Covid 19 rages around the world like a roaring lion, it is of the utmost importance to remain focussed on the wrongs in the world, as you’ll know better than me.Today I take the liberty to ask your attention for the following, namely:something of the utmost importance, namelyReal or alleged Dutch warcrimes in Iraq, committed in june 2015 In my view, you should investigate A Whether we can speak of warcrimes according to the Rome Statute [1] on which your authority is based B It is possible for you to prosecute the Dutch government [government Rutte II][2] or members of that government?
CASE
Within the context of the Dutch participation in the military intervention against ISIL [called IS or ISIS in the Netherlands] [3], Dutch F’16s launched an airstrikein june 2015, targetting a factory in which ISIS was reportedly manufactering improvised explosive devices. [4]The factory was located in the Iraqi town Hawija.Horrible result:70 civilians were killed. [5] Not only the Dutch government was silent to the parliament about this deadly airstrike untill two newspapers revealed it , which led to the admittance by the government: [6], the Dutch ”justification” of what went wrong, I found very weird:Defence minister [not the minister, who was responsible for the attack, but her successor] Ank Bijleveld said the intelligence before the strike had indicated that “there were no civilians in the immediate vicinity of the target” [7] The most strangest thing, because the factory was located in a town with about 100 000 inhabitants, Hawija. [8] Besides, according to the NOS article [do you read Dutch?] ”In Hawija is niemand de Nederlandse bomaanval vergeten” [9] [Translated in English: In Hawija no one has forgotten the Dutch bombattack], where Dutch journalists interview people from Hawija, Hawija inhabitants confirmed, that the real/alleged IS factory was located in the middle of a neighbourhood.I quote [In Dutch]:”Midden in de wijk stond ooit een grote opslagloods van de gemeente. Die was het doelwit van de coalitie. De loods was door terreurgroep IS in gebruik genomen om munitie in op te slaan” [10]Translated in English:”In the middle of the neighbourhood once was a great storage shed of the municipality. That was the target of the coalition. The storage shed was used by ISIL to store munitions” If that is true, then Dutch intelligence whether must have known this [IS target located in a neighbourhood] and yet have taken the risk, or investigated the location superficially, not fully regarding the safety of civilians. And according to International Humanitarian Law, the protection of civilians times of war is essential, as you know better than me. [11] But there is more: I am not a military expert, but when an attack is launched on a target, which is reportedly manufacting explosive devices and one knows that the target is located in or nearby a city, one can estimate that when the explosives are hit, they are scattered widely into the environment! With all risks for civilians, unless they are exploded in the desert. And the Dutch military knew that the factory was located in the Hawija town! Again, they took a great risk with human lives and that is, in my view, unacceptable! WARCRIMES ACCORDING TO THE ROME STATUTE YOUR MISSION I know it is your mission to investigate, if military actions can be defined as warcrimes according to the Rome Statute and other human rights treaties.Reading the conditions under which you operate I’ve learned, that you may exercise jurisdiction under a situation where genocide, crimes against humanity or warcrimes are committed on or after 1 july 2002 [12], which, concerning the alleged Dutch committed warcrimes, is the case here [june 2015]Further, the crimes must be committed by a State national, or in the territory of a State Party or in a State that has accepted the jurisdiction of the Court. [13]As you know, the Netherlands has signed and accepted the Rome Statute [14] and so acknowledged the jurisdiction of the Court. An other conditon for your jurisdiction is the complementarityI read on your website:”The ICC is intended to complement, not to replace, national criminal systems; it prosecutes cases only when States do not are unwilling or unable to do so genuinely.” [15] And, dear Sirs, that’s exactly the case in the Netherlands concerning the Dutch F’16 airstrike on the IS facory in Hawija, since the Dutch Public Prosecution Service. although it investigated the bomb attack on Hawija, saw no reason for a follow-up investigation. [16]
EPILOGUE Dear Sirs, I have submitted the case of the Dutch F 16 bomb attack on the IS factory in Hawija, in which 70 civilians lost their lives and I am of the opinion, that you should investigate whether warcrimes have been committed according to the definition in the Rome Statute and whether you are willing to prosecute either members of the cabinet Rutte II [under which the bomb attack took place], or the pilot involved, or perhaps both or other parties. Civilians are so vulnerable in a war and should be protected, as International Humanitarian Law says. [17]I think that in this case, where the attack was executed on a factory in a crowded neigbourhood, there is reason for your Court to prosecute those who are responsible. The dead will not come back, but Justice will be done.That’s my opinion and I sincerely hope that you have a case here. Thank you for reading this letter and much success with your work Stay healthy, in those terrifying days of Corona.
Kind greetings Astrid EssedAmsterdam The Netherlands
NOTES
[1] UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTAHUMAN RIGHTS LIBRARYROME STATUTE OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT
The airstrike triggered multiple secondary explosions in the factory, devastating the surrounding area and killing dozens.’ HUMAN RIGHTS WATCHNEW REVELATIONS ON DUTCH ROLE ON DEADLY IRAQ ATTACKNetherlands Remained Silent Over Role in 2015 Airstrike For Four Years 13 NOVEMBER 2019
”A Dutch F-16 jet serving with the US-led coalition in Iraq killed about 70 people – Islamic State (IS) militants and civilians – in an air strike in 2015, the Dutch defence ministry says.”
BBC
IS CONFLICT: DUTCH AIRSTRIKE KILLED ABOUT 70 PEOPLE IN IRAQ IN 2015
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50286829
[6]
”Recent news reports have exposed Dutch involvement in an airstrike in Iraq in June 2015 that killed at least 70 civilians, with the Minister of Defense finally admitting on November 5, 2019 that the ministry had known about the deaths after years of denial.
Two Dutch news outlets, NRC and NOS, reported on October 18 that a Dutch F-16 pilot staged the attack on the town of Hawija, 20 kilometers southeast of Mosul, which ISIS had captured in June 2014. At the time, the Netherlands were part of a coalition conducting operations against the Islamic State (ISIS) in Iraq and Syria.”
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCHNEW REVELATIONS ON DUTCH ROLE ON DEADLY IRAQ ATTACK
Netherlands Remained Silent Over Role in 2015 Airstrike For Four Years
””Midden in de wijk stond ooit een grote opslagloods van de gemeente. Die was het doelwit van de coalitie. De loods was door terreurgroep IS in gebruik genomen om munitie in op te slaan’
NOS
IN HAWIJA IS NIEMAND DE NEDERLANDSE BOMAANVAL VERGETEN
The Court may exercise jurisdiction in a situation where genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes were committed on or after 1 July 2002 and:
the crimes were committed by a State Party national, or in the territory of a State Party, or in a State that has accepted the jurisdiction of the Court
The ICC is intended to complement, not to replace, national criminal systems; it prosecutes cases only when States do not are unwilling or unable to do so genuinely.
”Het OM heeft eigenstandig besloten feitenonderzoeken in te stellen naar vier gevallen, inclusief de drie door Defensie onderzochte gevallen. Hierover is uw Kamer openbaar en vertrouwelijk geïnformeerd. Zoals met uw Kamer gedeeld, hecht het kabinet aan open en transparante communicatie over inzet, ook wanneer dit slecht nieuws is. Dat geldt bij uitstek ook voor de uitzonderlijke gevallen waar mogelijk sprake is van burgerslachtoffers door Nederlandse wapeninzet. Daarom hecht het kabinet er aan uw Kamer over deze specifieke gevallen te informeren. In algemene zin blijft de afweging tussen transparantie en nationale en operationele veiligheid leidend. Het OM onderzocht de volgende vier gevallen, waarbij zoals gezegd in geen geval aanleiding was voor een vervolgonderzoek”
MEDEDELING AAN DE TWEEDE KAMER OVER DE BOMAANVAL OP HAWIJA EN DE ONTWIKKELINGEN ROND DE ANTI ISIS COALITIE
The public prosecution service has independently decided to investigate four cases,included three cases that were investigated by the ministry of Defence over which your Parliament has been informed confidently and publicly.As has been shared with your Parliament, the cabinet finds it very important to share open and transparent communication, even when the news is bad.This is also explicitly the case, in the exceptional cases when there are possible civilian victims due to Dutch military operations.That’s why the cabinet finds it very important to inform your Parliament about those specific cases.In general, the consideration between transparency and national security is leading.The public prosecution service has investigated the following four cases and saw no reason for a follow-up investigation” STATEMENT TO THE PARLIAMENT ABOUT THE BOMB ATTACK ON HAWIJA AND THE DEVELOPMENTS CONCERNING THE ANTI ISIS COALITION http://content1b.omroep.nl/urishieldv2/l27m677e797b0a39d024005e63ac48000000.df389e427806cc57454a8a856b1f7358/nos/docs/181019_kamerbrief.pdf
[17]
The seven fundamental rules which are the basis of the Geneva Conventions and the Additional Protocols.
1 – Persons hors de combat and those who do not take a direct part in hostilities are entitled to respect for their
lives and their moral and physical integrity. They shall in all circumstances be protected and treated humanely
without any adverse distinction.
2 – It is forbidden to kill or injure an enemy who surrenders or who is hors de combat .
3 – The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for by the party to the conflict which has them in its power.
Protection also covers medical personnel, establishments, transports and equipment. The emblem of the red
cross or the red crescent is the sign of such protection and must be respected.
4 – Captured combatants and civilians under the authority of an adverse party are entitled to respect for their lives,dignity, personal rights and convictions. They shall be protected against all acts of violence and reprisals. They shall have the right to correspond with their families and to receive relief.
5 – Everyone shall be entitled to benefit from fundamental judicial guarantees. No one shall be held responsible for an act he has not committed. No one shall be subjected to physical or mental torture, corporal punishment or cruel or degrading treatment.
6 – Parties to a conflict and members of their armed forces do not have an unlimited choice of methods and means of warfare. It is prohibited to employ weapons or methods of warfare of a nature to cause unnecessary losses or excessive suffering.
7 – Parties to a conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants in order to
spare civilian population and property. Neither the civilian population as such nor civilian persons shall be the
object of attack. Attacks shall be directed solely against military objectives.
BASIC RULES OF INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW IN ARMED CONFLICTS
F-16 mission in Iraq For the first time, an investigation by NRC and Dutch public broadcaster NOS has shown the serious consequences of bombing by Dutch F-16s in Iraq. In Hawija, 70 people were killed.
In 2015, a bomb dropped by a Dutch F-16 in Iraq killed seventy civilians and injured around a hundred others. During the night of 2 to 3 June, the Dutch fighter plane carried out an air strike on a munitions plant belonging to the Islamic State (IS) in the city of Hawija in the north of Iraq. One reason the blast and the series of following explosions caused so many deaths and injuries was the fact that many refugees were living in houses and other buildings around the arms depot. Outdated intelligence concerning the number of people living in the vicinity and the presence of explosives might have been a factor.
The Netherlands’ role in the bombing emerges from a joint investigation by NRC and NOS in Iraq and the Netherlands. Various sources have confirmed that it was a Dutch bomb, something the Ministry of Defence has never disclosed. As far as is known, the air strike was one of the deadliest carried out by the international coalition in the early years of the war against IS.
Minister of Defence Ank Bijleveld (CDA) told NRC and NOS on Friday morning that she could not comment on the Netherlands’ involvement in the attack on Hawija “at this time”. She said she hoped to be able to make a statement “in the not too distant future” and promised greater transparency about the consequences of Dutch air strikes. “In that context, everyone’s security, particularly that of the pilots, will be our main priority,” said Bijleveld.
Six F-16s
The Netherlands has been a member of the international US-led coalition trying to drive IS out of Syria and Iraq since 2014. The Netherlands initially deployed six F-16s, and later four. The Dutch planes carried out a total of 2,100 bombing missions.
Avoiding civilian casualties was always a major priority for the Netherlands in carrying out air strikes. Although the Netherlands operated as part of a coalition, each of the participating countries made its own decision on whether or not to carry out an attack. The Netherlands had officers stationed at the headquarters of the air operations in Doha, Qatar for that purpose. As ‘red card holders’, they could call off an air strike by Dutch F-16s if the risk of civilian casualties was too great. They relied heavily on intelligence from the US and Iraq for those decisions.
In the interests of national security and the safety of the pilots, the international coalition agreed that no information would be provided about a country’s involvement in air strikes. There were fears of retaliatory attacks, particularly at the height of the war with IS, from 2014 until 2017.
At the time, it was already known that many civilians had been killed in the bombing of Hawija in 2015. However, no further information was provided about the circumstances. An investigation by the US central command of the air campaign remained secret. However, at the end of last year the Pentagon did confirm to NRC and NOS that 70 civilians had been killed in the bombing.
The explosions on 3 June 2015 not only destroyed the industrial estate where the munitions depot was located, but also many houses in a wide radius around it. According to residents, the devastating force of the blast was due in part to the presence of stocks of highly explosive TNT, which IS planned to use to carry out attacks.
Refugees
Nearby residents included many refugees from other regions. They believed they had found refuge in abandoned houses and buildings in the vicinity of the munitions depot. Aid workers in Hawija estimate that the actual death toll was far higher than 70, because the identity of many refugees was not known.
As far as is known, parliament has never been informed of the seriousness of the incident. Requests for information from NRC and NOS on the basis of the Government Information (Public Access) Act (WOB) have been denied. An investigation by the public prosecution service into four anonymised incidents involving possible civilian victims, which was published in April 2018, found that no rules of international humanitarian law had been violated. One of the cases closely resembles the attack on Hawija. In that case, the public prosecution service found that “there were far more explosives in the bomb factory than was known in advance or could have been anticipated”. A civilian in Hawija spoken to by NOS disputes that. He said he was an informant who had warned the coalition in advance.
The investigation by NRC and NOS further shows that the compensation schemes for victims of air strikes in Iraq are not working. Residents have to pay a lot in bribes and often receive nothing. On Friday, Bijleveld promised to discuss this issue in the international coalition.
Reacties uitgeschakeld voor [Article Dutch newspaper NRC]/”Dutch bomb killed seventy in Iraq”/Warcrimes, to my opinion
.jpg)
