Category Archives: Justice

The Vatican, Illegality and when the Holy Can’t See

In the public interest. What the holy can’t see won’t hurt them hmmmm. Corruption is revealing unethical and criminal behaviour in an institution that preaches moral virtues and humility. This is the lesson for the Catholic church (and others). The trust of the people is what has been betrayed overtime. One can’t just confess sins it is to face what actions have done to innocent people. So a person would have to go to those personally he or she affected. This is how the crime is seen and felt. Forgiveness is then the next step of one’s greed, lust, indifference. The corruption of character.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-vaticans-dirty-money-problem

The Vatican’s Dirty Money Problem

 
FISHY

A mysterious firing and a new report on the Vatican’s creative bookkeeping begs the question: Why does no one ever get in trouble for laundering money at the Holy See?

Photo Illustration by Elizabeth Brockway/The Daily Beast

 

ROME—In 2015, the Council of Europe’s financial-evaluation arm Moneyval laid down the law for the Vatican Bank, telling the rather unholy financiers who had been accused of abetting money laundering for years that it isn’t enough to just smoke out suspicious account holders and freeze assets. Instead they said the Vatican Bank, formally known as the Institute for Religious Works, or IOR, needed to start actually prosecuting criminal cases.

Two years later, thousands of accounts have been closed or frozen, but Moneyval still isn’t happy. According to its 209-page December 2017 progress report, the Vatican gets good marks for not funding terrorism and for flagging potential illegal behavior. But the holy bank fails once again to actually hold anyone accountable for what are clearly crimes such as “fraud, including serious tax evasion, misappropriation and corruption,” according to the report.

More curious still, a week before the highly anticipated report was released, the IOR Deputy Director Giulio Mattietti was fired with no advance warning and escorted from his office out of fear he might remove files from his desk.

Mattietti was hired in 2007 by Paolo Cipriani, the former head of the bank who resigned under pressure a few months after Pope Francis was elected in 2013, after a Vatican accountant nicknamed “Monsignor 500” for his penchant for 500-euro notes, was arrested for trying to smuggle $26 million to Switzerland. Mattietti’s removal followed the sacking of a lower-level IOR employee days earlier. The Vatican gives no official reason for either of the firings beyond “reforms,” but a source close to the bank says the bank employees who were let go may have been whistleblowers who were alerting officials outside the bank about continuing impropriety.

In fact, despite apparently precise record keeping on the part of IOR, Moneyval evaluators still found 69 actions involving 38 customers that were not in accordance with money laundering and fraud standards set forth by the Council of Europe. None of those suspect cases were prosecuted to the fullest extent under the law, and instead Moneyval investigators point to vague records that imply that the cases were closed.

“Eight money-laundering investigations have been closed formally without any charges, while six additional investigations have been concluded without an indictment for any offense and their formal closure has been requested,” the report states.

And that is a problem.

The report specifically points to the recent Vatican tribunal case in which the chairman of the Vatican’s children’s hospital was accused of serious financial crimes using around a half million euros in funds meant for sick children to renovate a penthouse apartment for the former Vatican secretary of state, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone. The cardinal was never under investigation, but the hospital’s former president and treasurer were tried in a Vatican court for using funds they funneled through the Vatican Bank.

Moneyval is calling foul on the judicial outcome. The chairman was given a suspended sentence and the treasurer was acquitted even though the money clearly was misappropriated. “An immediate custodial sentence was not imposed on the former chairman of the  foundation. He received a one-year suspended prison sentence and was placed on probation for five years,” the report notes, adding the fact that there was “no application for restitution or compensation to the foundation.” That means the half-million that was criminally mishandled will never go to the sick children for whom it originally was intended.

In this case, Moneyval evaluators have advised the Vatican’s “promoter of justice,” or chief prosecutor, to “impose a fine, as foreseen by the law, in addition to the custodial sentence” essentially demanding that the chairman spend his year in prison.

The Moneyval report also outlines a case in which a Vatican Bank customer who was “a foreign citizen” and not a Vatican resident, withdrew more than $3 million from his private IOR account and deposited that money into three separate safety deposit boxes kept in the bank, which was a practice apparently used by Mother Teresa and others who had big sums of money but who lacked the paperwork to move it around legally.

The Moneyval report says that the cash was then subsequently “gradually withdrawn from the safety boxes and transferred to a third country without declarations.” In 2014, the Vatican Bank reported the case and suspended access to the safety boxes, the contents of which, by then, had been depleted. An unnamed foreign country then opened its own investigation into the deposit of the same sum ($3 million) that had apparently come from the Vatican Bank account.

The Vatican tribunal originally levied a sanction of more than $250,000 on the customer, but in a secret hearing in June of this year, the Vatican promoter of justice apparently reduced the fine by more than half. “The appeal against the administrative sanction was heard by the Vatican Tribunal in June 2017, when the fine, was reduced considerably,” according to the Moneyval report. Moneyval then leaned on the Vatican’s promoter of justice to reopen the case and consider reinstituting the original fine for apparent money laundering but found that “So far there has been no indictment in this case.”

The evaluators went further to suggest the promoter of justice is actually complicit in keeping cases out of its courts. “While this review cannot form a view on the quality of the evidence adduced in financial-crime cases that have so far come before the Tribunal, the success rate of the promoter before the tribunal so far is not encouraging,”  the evaluators state. “It is noted that persons have been discharged by the tribunal. That is the tribunal’s prerogative, having heard the evidence in the case. However, if the promoter is dissatisfied with evidential decisions of the tribunal or decisions of the tribunal to convict on lesser charges than those brought by his office, he is encouraged to be proactive in appealing those decisions in appropriate cases.”

The bank once had more than 30,000 account holders, including several religious entities and private citizens who maintained accounts worth millions at the hallowed institution, which is tucked safely within the sovereign state of  Vatican City. The bank has since closed several high-profile accounts, including many held by diplomatic missions and the consulates to Syria, Iran, and Iraq who moved millions of euros around through “vague cash transactions,” but it has never been able to shake its troubled past.

Last June the Vatican’s prefect of the Secretariat of the Economy, Cardinal George Pell was sent back to Australia to face child sex-abuse charges in early 2018, leaving a notable gap in the pope’s efforts to reform the church’s troubled finances, which had been a priority since his election in 2013.

The Vatican had little to say after the recent Moneyval report. “The Holy See is committed to taking the necessary actions in the relevant areas to further strengthen its efforts to combat and prevent financial crimes,” was the only official word from the Vatican press office. Just shortly after he was elected, Pope Francis threatened to close the bank for good after widespread allegations that it was involved in corrupt practices including money laundering. No doubt he has been second-guessing the decision to keep it open ever since.

Law, Donald Rumsfeld and Abu Ghraib

In the public interest.

https://supreme.findlaw.com/legal-commentary/rumsfeld-and-abu-ghraib.html

Rumsfeld and Abu Ghraib

By JOANNE MARINER

Monday, Apr. 25, 2005

A year ago, when the first photos appeared of U.S. soldiers beating and sexually humiliating detainees at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, President George W. Bush expressed horror and disgust. Recognizing the damage that the abuses had done to the image of the U.S. abroad, he promised, in an interview broadcast to the Arab world via the Pentagon-funded TV station Al-Hurra, that the crimes would not go unpunished.

In the coming months, he affirmed, “those mistakes will be investigated, and people will be brought to justice.”

And, indeed, investigations have been conducted, court martials have been held, and a few perpetrators have been convicted. One soldier, army reservist Charles Graner, Jr., was sentenced to a ten-year term of imprisonment, the heaviest penalty to date.

But these results represent partial justice, at best. Notably, with the exception of one major personally implicated in abuse, only low-ranking soldiers — privates and sergeants — have been held to account.

Thanks to the Abu Ghraib photos, Graner became the smiling face of American brutality. Yet there is no ignoring the fact that while he and other underlings have faced prosecution, those beyond the camera’s frame — those who made policies, gave orders, and condoned or ignored abuses — have not.

If this is justice, in President Bush’s view of things, it comes awfully close to scapegoating. For the evidence shows that the abuses at Abu Ghraib were not isolated and aberrant acts and that, in fact, the worst perpetrators may not have been those whose faces were captured on camera.

As Human Rights Watch described yesterday, in an important new report, the abuses at Abu Ghraib are part of a broader picture. They fit a pattern of brutality and mistreatment, evident at Guantanamo, in Afghanistan, and in dozens of U.S. detention facilities worldwide, that “did not result from the acts of individual soldiers who broke the rules. It resulted from decisions made by the Bush administration to bend, ignore, or cast rules aside.”

Rumsfeld’s Possible Legal Responsibility

Human Rights Watch’s exhaustively-documented report names the top officials, both civilian and military, that it believes should be investigated for crimes against detainees. Its list starts with Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and goes on to include George Tenet, the former CIA director; Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, U.S. military commander in Iraq from June 2003 to July 2004; and Gen. Geoffrey Miller, the U.S. military commander at Guantanamo.

While the report does not reach any conclusions as to the ultimate guilt or innocence of these officials, it argues that abundant evidence exists to justify their investigation. Under both U.S. and international law, it explains, civilian officials and military commanders may be held criminally liable if they order, induce, instigate, aid, or abet in the commission of a crime. In addition, under the doctrine of “command responsibility,” individuals who are in positions of civilian or military authority may be criminally liable for the crimes of those under their command.

Secretary Rumsfeld, the report asserts, may well be liable under both of these theories. He may have directly instigated abuses when, on December 2, 2002, he approved a list of inhumane interrogation techniques for use at Guantanamo.

These techniques — which include the use of hoods, stress positions, isolation, stripping, deprivation of light, removal of religious items, forced grooming, and dogs — violate not only the Geneva Conventions but also legal prohibitions on torture and other ill-treatment. The techniques later “migrated” to Iraq and Afghanistan, where they figured prominently in abuses against detainees there. In Iraq, moreover, Rumsfeld approved the hiding of detainees from the International Committee of the Red Cross, a practice likely to facilitate abuse.

Journalist Seymour Hersh has alleged, in addition, that Secretary Rumsfeld approved a secret program that encouraged the physical coercion and sexual humiliation of Iraqi prisoners.

Rumsfeld may also bear command responsibility for abuses against detainees. To be liable under the doctrine of command responsibility, a superior must have known, or have had reason to know, that a subordinate was committing a crime, and the superior must have failed to take reasonable steps to prevent the crime or to punish the perpetrator.

Rumsfeld clearly had the necessary knowledge. In Afghanistan, Iraq, and Guantanamo, Secretary Rumsfeld had access to military briefings, ICRC reports, human rights reports, and press accounts that would have put him on notice that U.S. troops were committing war crimes, including torture. Yet, despite receiving abundant warning of abuses, there is no evidence that Rumsfeld ever exerted his authority to protect prisoners from mistreatment.

The Need for an Independent Counsel

Yet while soldiers like Charles Graner, Jr. and Lynndie England are put on trial, Rumsfeld is not. Indeed, if there were any doubts as whether legal liability for Abu Ghraib abuses might eventually be traced up the chain of command, a high-level Army investigation whose findings were announced last Friday probably put them to rest.

Conducted by the Army Inspector General, a subordinate to Secretary Rumsfeld, the new investigation exonerated four of the five top Army officers in charge of detention policies and operations in Iraq. To Human Rights Watch, the American Civil Liberties Union, and other groups that have documented military abuses, it provided further proof of the need for an independent counsel to look into allegations of abuse.

For when President Bush told the world that the perpetrators of crimes at Abu Ghraib would be brought to justice, he didn’t not qualify his claim. He didn’t say that a handful of low-level perpetrators would be brought to justice.

And we shouldn’t, in retrospect, have to say it for him.


Joanne Mariner is an attorney with Human Rights Watch in New York. Her piece is based on a just-released Human Rights Watch report, “Getting Away with Torture? Command Responsibility for the U.S. Abuse of Detainees,” written by Human Rights Watch special counsel Reed Brody.

Hillsong Church, Boys Town and the Conspiracy of Silence

This blog covers issues about pedophilia in respect of Hillsong Church, Boys Town and the Conspiracy of Silence due to those in power being part of pedophile rings  It is absolutely unacceptable for child abuse to be covered up and ignored.  Imagine if you were that child.  To force sex on an innocent child reveals this emotional disconnect from the suffering of the ‘other’ and drives to the heart of how and why abuse happens.  It is a sickness not an ‘orientation’ as has been stated, thus objectifies the suffering of children and projects fantasy’s onto them. These children may become so traumatised that the mind disassociates from the experience which is why later in life they get flash backs.  The mind does this as a survival mechanism as the trauma was too great.

I will look into some of the links that indicate that there are some commentators attempting to normalise pedophilia.  This is very concerning. Yet it is what those who abuse do as they are in denial of the gravity of the crime. Some call it ‘boy love’, it is the extreme opposite of love.

What prompted me to produce this blog was a news feed from the ABC entitled ‘Scott Morrison dismisses report he wanted Hillsong pastor Brian Houston to attend events during US state visit’.   I suddenly had inspiration to look at Hillsong and pedophilia. 

This is the ABC article refer
https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/scott-morrison-dismisses-report-he-wanted-hillsong-pastor-brian-houston-to-attend-events-during-us-state-visit/ar-AAHEhoN?ocid=spartandhp

I recall Fiona Barnett, a child ritual abuse victim from Victoria, Australia bravely making public a VIP pedophile ring.  She remembered those involved in ritual child abuse as she was flown around the world as a child given to men to abuse. I am extremely concerned about this issue.  If it is true then there must be an investigation into high level pedophilia. This is a serious crime and no-one is above the law.
Fiona’s website is:  https://pedophilesdownunder.com/

I have found another story on the Exclusive Brethren, Pedophilia and links to conservative politics.  I note that John Howard has links to them given they approached him to give donations.

For some reason my blog page is not allowing me to post the link, I’ve just gone to an another private browser that blocks data gathering and I’ve been able to paste a link.  Take note of that if you have difficulties when blogging.

This is the article.  Brethren bid to cover up sexual assaults on girls
Refer https://www.theage.com.au/national/brethren-bid-to-cover-up-sex-assaults-on-girls-20061230-ge3w60.html

The public demand to know if there are pedophiles in high profile positions still at large. These matters must be investigated in the public interest.

The first video is from 60 Minutes Australia exposing Frank Houston the founder of the Hillsong Church.   The second video is explosive called ‘Conspiracy of Silence’. It exposes pedophilia in Boys Town and speaks about pedophilia at the highest levels. I will feature the article in the next blog.

60 minutes YouTube video highlights pedophilia in the church.

Whistle-Blower McBride States Government Acting as a Totalitarian

In the public interest, courtesy of the Guardian.

I don’t think the government is acting. The suppression of the truth is perverting the course of justice, in my view.

A notable extract from below:

Boyle, the ATO whistleblower, similarly made an internal disclosure under the Public Interest Disclosure (PID) Act to the ATO. His complaint was investigated and dismissed, according to the ABC and the Nine Entertainment newspapers. Boyle then went public.

There are attempts to have people complain internally to ensure no public scrutiny, but if they are not able to act neutrally or seek to protect themselves then inevitably if the problem is not resolved, it escalates.  The lack of values is a core issue.  It is all very well to have mission statements and assert publicly the organisation has values but not act on it due to interference or fear. 

The issue in my own experience is reporting suspected corruption to regulators to be told the complaint is dismissed or not even investigated when evidence is available.  I perceive this practice is widespread and deeply problematic. There are other questions around underfunding regulators so that complaints are delayed.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/jun/06/whistleblower-protections-a-sham-says-lawyer-whose-leaks-led-to-abc-raids

Whistleblower protections ‘a sham’, says lawyer whose leaks led to ABC raids

 This article is more than 3 months old

David McBride, who leaked information on special forces, says government is acting like a ‘totalitarian regime’

Leaks from whistleblower David McBride prompted this week’s raids on the ABC
 Leaks from whistleblower David McBride prompted this week’s raids on the ABC Photograph: Alexandra Back/Fairfax Media

The military lawyer whose leaks prompted this week’s police raids on the ABC has criticised Australia’s whistleblower protections as a “sham”, saying the government is acting like a “totalitarian regime” to shield itself from criticism.

David McBride is facing lengthy jail time for providing documents to the public broadcaster on the conduct of special forces in Afghanistan, which prompted the Wednesday raids.

McBride is far from alone in his plight. Witness K and Bernard Collaery, who revealed Australia’s unlawful 2004 spy operation against Timor-Leste, are facing two years behind bars for their actions, and the Australian Taxation Office whistleblower, Richard Boyle, is facing a lengthy jail sentence for exposing aggressive debt collection tactics that were destroying the lives of vulnerable taxpayers.

In all three cases, the whistleblowers went through the appropriate steps to raise their concerns internally within government, before frustration at inaction led them into going public. They believed doing so would help afford them protections under Australia’s whistleblower regime.

“I made an internal complaint, I even went to the police first, I invoked whistleblower protections,” McBride told Guardian Australia.

“It’s all a sham.”

McBride said the inaction on his complaints led him to the ABC.

The lawyer says he was simply acting on his duty to report illegal conduct, and only wanted to protect Australia’s interest.

“I think it says everything about the problem today that if you describe my situation without saying my nationality, you would think we were talking about China or Russia,” McBride said.

“The idea that someone who basically suggested something was going wrong from within an organisation … is put in jail forever as a spy, that’s what totalitarian regimes do.

“There’s no suggestion that I’m actually damaging national security. I think the government is damaging national security, and yet they’re treating me as if I’m a terrorist.”

McBride’s comments again raise concerns about the ability of whistleblower protections to help those wanting to expose government wrongdoing.

In the case of Witness K and Collaery, the pair aired their concerns internally as required.

Witness K sought and obtained permission to talk to his lawyer, Collaery, about an illegal spy operation bugging Timor-Leste’s government during sensitive oil negotiations, raising his concerns through the inspector-general of intelligence and security.

Frustrated by the inaction, they contacted a series of journalists. Both are now facing two years behind bars for doing so.

Boyle, the ATO whistleblower, similarly made an internal disclosure under the Public Interest Disclosure (PID) Act to the ATO. His complaint was investigated and dismissed, according to the ABC and the Nine Entertainment newspapers. Boyle then went public.

“It says the government of Australia actually only cares about the government of Australia, and doesn’t actually care about Australia anymore,” McBride said.

“So if you speak out against the government, you’re a really bad person, even if you’re sticking up for the nation.”

“They’ve forgotten that they’re actually meant to work for the people of Australia.”

CIA Accused of Heroin Trade and Lockerbie Bombing

This appears to be testimony.

Question: If the Libyans were not responsible for Lockerbie do you have any idea who was?

Responder: Susan Lindauer  (summarised)

Susan Lindauer a former CIA asset indicates that the person who bombed Pan Am 103 lived in Virginia.  She states 6 miles from her house.  She said he is protected by the FBI and CIA and on a client basis paid a stipend.  It is to protect the CIA of its exposure of the heroin trafficking ring which continued through the 1990s.  She states Richard Fuse (1994) told her about it.  She thought the heroin trafficking stopped after Lockerbie she was told THEY are still profiting from this.

What was the motivation and why Pan Am 103 chosen.  She states the Defence Intelligence Agency filed a complaint in Washington and a internal affairs team sent out from the CIA encompassing the FBI and DIA, and gone in to Lebanon gathering forensic evidence to prove the CIA’s role in heroin trafficking and they boarded Pan Am 103 that morning, they were flying back to Washington to deliver their report with heroin, finance, cash and banking records etc and were going to expose the whole lot and that is when the plane was bombed.

The State Department put out a travel advisory to the embassies telling them to get off that plane. That plane on that date was expected to be targetted in a terrorist attack.  Embassy staff in South Africa, President Botha got off the plane, other diplomats did and they freed up seats for young students flying from Syracuse University to board the plane, they were flying standby to go home for Christmas holidays, they all died in the attack.  It is ugly. The Government is protecting itself, allowing the terrorist attack to occur, in fact they facilitated it, they made sure Islamic Jihad knew which flight the investigative team were taking back and said hey why don’t you take care of this for us.

I am adding the comments below the video as I think they are noteworthy. The last comment is of particular interest, mental issues are often used in respect of whistleblowers.

I consider her a credible witness as her allegations are dangerous for her and her family.  Moreover, she is clearly coherent.  What is hard to understand is the departments of the US Government FBI, DIA gathering evidence against the CIA.  They are clearly disparate.

These types of high level allegations should be presented before an International Criminal Court (neutral) to resolve the truth of the allegations.  Often whistle-blowers end up using the media because they are stonewalled by the Government and regulators given alleged criminality or fear of disclosures.  When they are accusing those at the highest levels the key issue is where do they go to take the case further in order to allow evidence and justice to be the final arbiter.

It is often stated no-one is above the law, yet we find many are able to avoid confronting criminal allegations.  The Judiciary is above the law in that they are immune from prosecution as I was informed by the Australian Human Rights Commission.  I believe all must be accountable and the public have to be assured that a court is impartial and not interfered with for political or religious purposes.  Issues concerning the privatisation of courts under debt/equity financing arrangements (not government funding) mean that the public can’t be sure about neutrality. The infiltration of powerful interests, ideologies and corporate interests in politics coupled with powerful financiers, can confuse the public about what is true or what is spin.  Vested interests do not work in the public interest, this is a key problem. That is why it is very important that Government accountable and transparent and able to legitimately stand before the public as a neutral party representing their interests to ensure faith in legitimate laws and that Justice is actually done (not seen to be done).

This short video raises the frightening issue of the CIA involved with organising terrorism in the case of the Pan Am flight that was bombed over Lockerbie in Scotland. The bombing was blamed on two Libyan nationals in November 1991. A Libyan intelligence officer was jailed for life.  Wikipedia outlines the case.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_Am_Flight_103

Susan Lindauer indicates that in order to prevent truth of a FBI/DIA investigation which would expose the CIA’s involvement in the heroin trade.  This information raises awareness that terrorism is the creation of intelligence on the behest of Government.  This must be placed in the forum of the International Criminal Court but as a neutral forum.  It cannot be interfered with by other interests. 

 

Here are a few comments…

Susan Its Steve Australia… You could quite Imagine my need for a good alibi” … and you’d perfect” what feisty personality…
 
 
 
 
WHY is she GRINNING so smugly, at such a HUMAN DISASTER?!
 
 
 
 
Susan Lindauer: This wacko is living her own imagination and has no credibility. She was a journalist who subsequently worked as a congressional staffer for several representatives and senators.  She became friends with a senior congressional staffer (“Richard”) and fantasized that he was a CIA officer. Both were anti-war activists.  Of her own initiative she went to NYC contacting the Iraq delegation and represented herself as a government official. The Iraq delegation quickly realized she was unstable but had value as an informant.  She later traveled to Iraq, where she may have received $10k.  After returning to the US she was arrested as a unregistered agent of a foreign power (Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) is a United States law (22 U.S.C. § 611 et seq.) passed in 1938) which is not the Patriot Act.  During her time incarcerated she received a psychological evaluation and found unfit to stand trial.  Her charges were later dropped because she was unfit to stand trial and since she was not a danger to herself or others the federal government didn’t pursue the offense further.