Unlawful War Crimes Planning
This is a checklist for prosecutors and investigators. This checklist outlines the steps used to allegedly unlawfully support war crimes in Eastern Europe and the detention centers.
This information focuses on the entities which allegedly supported the illegal war crimes. This checklist is not intended to be complete, but outline a range of areas investigators should consider during discovery. When reviewing this information, consider as an analogy the plans the Germans used during WWII to implement illegal activity.
Note The checklists below are not intended to state affirmatilvely that Abraxas has or has not done anything. Rather, the checklists are intended to act as a guide to consider whether any given entity has or has not engaged in the alleged illgeal misconduct. We make no claim that anything below is factual, true, or has occurred. These matters remain for the war crimes prosecutors to review and the court to adjudicate.
Other Links Related To Alleged Abraxas War Crimes
Ref Questions for Abraxas in re alleged war crimes.
Ref War Crimes Plan allegedly supported by Abraxas.
Ref Alleged Abraxas pipline to support war crimes.
Ref Alleged bribes by Republicans to silence Abraxas employees about war crimes.
There would have been a staff study plan to implement the illegal activity. The legal memoranda would have been cited as authority to implement the illegal plan.
The planning is not a simple matter of calling for a plan and writing it. Systems engineers would have to review the proposed plan ensure that funding and ground-air transport could be scheduled to support the activity, and the planned activity was fully supported.
Early Coordination, Revisions
One key date to consider was when Addington and others openly discussed the possibility to disclosure, when to disclose the information, and the meeting minute notes documenting the decision not to disclose the illegal activity or make needed changes to comply with Geneva.
There are several provable decisions within the illegal war crimes planning
(1) Plan development
(2) Illegal activity
(3) Knowledge the activity was illegal
(4) Failing to do what should have done
(5) Failure to prevent or stop illegal activity
(6) Course of conduct which abused, trust, power, access, and authority.
Information flowed from illegally captured sources, to Eastern Europe; then was subsequently used to target other American citizens in violation of FISA.
The issue will be to determine the technical means to transfer the data without detection; alternatives used when primary communication systems were believed to have been compromised; personnel placement; knowledge of outside efforts to monitor.
___ How was the illegally gathered information transferred through Verizon, AT&T, NAR&S STA, to the CIA detention centers;
___ How was the information gathered using methods with violated Geneva transferred through the communication system to support illegal monitoring, subsequent targeting, and illegal kidnapping of Americans.
___ How did the information from abuse get transferred to the telecoms and analysts and agents within JTTF and DHS to target other individuals within the United States
___ When was it known FISA court had been illegally bypassed
___ What were the range of communications occurring related to war crimes planning and personnel placement to support the war crimes plan
___ How did information flow between the CIA, outside entities, and firms which provided support to the CIA in eastern Europe
___ When did the agents know or should they have known the abuse, detentions, and other support activity in eastern Europe was related to illegal activity
___ Despite no changes, what were the obligations of the personnel to remove themselves
___ How was progress and concerns related to the effectiveness of the rendition, abuse, and illegal war crimes provided back to the National Security Council, White House, CIA, and senior leadership within DoD, DoJ, DHS, and JTTF
___ How were concerns related to the legality of the activity resolved; how did these resolutions stand up to legal scrutiny by inside and outside entities; when did DoD, CIA, and DoJ personnel first inquire about private insurance to protect them for possible war crimes related litigation
Abraxas Pipeline Creation
There are two phases to developing the pipeline. First is the over Abraxas employee placement; second are the subsequent Abraxas-connected entities which support CIA personnel movement.
___ Develop Abraxas pipeline concept
___ Receive CIA Directorate of Support approval to implement concept
___ Receive legal opinion that overseas operations are illegal
___ Ignore subsequent Supreme Court decisions in Hamdan, Rasul, Hamdii, and Padilla that Geneva applies, and prisoners may challenge their detentions
___ Ensure CIA agents are not told directly about the Abraxas pipeline
___ Conduct first wave of Abraxas-personnel placement: CEOs, technical writers, human resources, shipping, storage
___ Receive from CIA directorate of support CIA personnel case files, missions, and develop cover stories which are unrelated to the known CIA missions which violate the laws of war, Geneva, and human rights. If asked, feign ignorance, “I had no idea.” Use a crying towel, look sincere. Try harder. Hope they don’t use a polygraph.
___ Transfer through Abraxas-related entitles the CIA personnel; use multiple corporations which may or may not be related to DoD
___ Rely on illegal assurances from DoD, DoJ, and CIA that all communications are protected; ignore legal memoranda and case precedents that evidence related to fraud cannot be protected
___ Rely on illegal assurances from DoD, DoJ, and CIA that contracts are protected, or that the business operations are not covered by Geneva; ignore subsequent Supreme Court findings that prisoners of war have rights
___ Rely on illegal assurances from DoD, DoJ, and CIA that legal memoranda and other Abraxas-related documents are protected; ignore legal precedents stating only the Executive is entitled to claim executive privilege; ignore legal precedents which strip claim of secrecy against entities, documents, and evidence related to fraud and illegal activities
___ Facilitate insurance purchases for concerned Abraxas-related personnel
___ Rely on illegal assurances that Abraxas-related contractors and subsidiary contracts cannot be revealed or discussed; continue with operations despite open discussion of war crimes charges against Abraxas personnel;
___ Rely on illegal assurances that Abraxas-related pipelines will protect travel, conferences, and other trip memoranda; ignore precedents where these travel documents were subpoenaed, and personnel were lawfully executed for interfering with a war crimes investigation.
___ Maintain a small number of personnel in McLean; assign Abraxas personnel overseas;
___ Change names of overseas entities; encourage Abraxas-placed employees to work with DoD-related entities which are ongoing, and have no obvious association with DoD or the Untied States
___ Support Abraxas-personnel flows through the Abraxas-pipeline
___ Demonstrate to CIA Management that the Abraxas-pipeline cannot be penetrated; and that this is a secure means to flow CIA personnel through the pipeline to their final destination
___ Establish worldwide outposts to support broader Abraxas-penetration, permitting Abraxas-related personnel to work without detection in other firms, and still provide access to personnel records, contracts, shipping data, technical information, and other key documents and positions to support Abraxas-pipeline
___ Ignore the public discussion on war crimes, or the risk that the Military Commissions Bill language will not be enforced; pretend that the Congressional bill cannot be struck down; ignore ex post facto claims; ignore claims that the Military Commissions Bill is an illegal, unenforceable bill of attainder; pretend that the Congressional language guaranteeing financial payments for US personnel will be honored; refuse to discuss possibility that a war crimes prosecutor may use this agreement as evidence of subsequent war crimes; ignore possibility that the war crimes tribunal may find this Congressional Bill illegal and refuse to enforce the provisions which would otherwise ensure Abraxas-personnel are defended by DoJ Staff.
___ Support targeting of DOJ OPR staff to shut down investigation of possible Abraxas-related support for war crimes
___ Refuse to discuss with Abraxas-related entities the Oregon litigation which has exposed the ongoing attorney-client monitoring program; do not discuss the Hezbollah ability to penetrate Israeli SIGINT; provide meaningless assurances that Abraxas-related communications to the overseas pipeline has or has not been penetrated, or that evidence has or has not been provided to the war crimes prosecutors.
___ Change the subject from Geneva violations to the need to change FISA, even though FISA and Geneva was the law of the land 2001-2006, but the Abraxas senior management allegedly has no legal foundation to justify anyone in Abraxas or the Abraxas-pipeline to have confidence their activity will or will not be detected, and be the subject of war crimes prosecutions
___ Refuse to discuss possibility that US Members of Congress and/or the media have been bribed, offered something of value to not discuss (a) the alleged Abraxas war crimes involvement; (b) the means by which the Abraxas-pipeline has allegedly been used to thwart the Geneva Conventions and EU rules; or (c) the means by which the States Attorney General have been illegally threatened with prosecution to dissuade them from seeing the link between the alleged Verizon-FISA violations and the subsequent illegal use Abraxas-placed personnel engaged when they used that illegally acquired information to allegedly engage in abuse, kidnapping, and other war crimes.
___ Do not discuss possibility that Abraxas-placed personnel are incompetent, and have allegedly illegally provided meaningless assurances of defense, immunity, or protection for war crimes;
___ Spout non-sense to continue believing in a government that otherwise engages in war crimes, fails to ensure justice is done, and commits grave braches of Geneva;
___ Create non-sense excuse to continue supporting the Abraxas-Pipeline despite mounting evidence that personnel have already worked with the US Attorney to share contracts, evidence, and other war crimes related information
___ Feign sympathy despite no real concern wither Abraxas-related pipeline entities are or are not discovered and implicated for war crimes involvement
___ Spout non-sense reasons, point to the possibility of an IPO, or other financial benefit as an excuse to take no action and remain loyal to the Abraxas-pipeline, not the US Constitution, rule of law, or Geneva;
___ Pretend there is a higher loyalty than the law, and claim one has a higher duty to protect secrets, not protect the Construction; ignore the possibility that Abraxas-pipeline personnel have already worked with US Attorney and are putting their oath of office before their meaningless promise to stay silent about alleged war crimes;
___ Feign shock and outrage when the US entities, forces, and other interests are attacked by combat forces that see the American justice system has been ignored, and that the Abraxas-pipeline has been instrumental in undermining the rule of law and respect for the Judicial branch
___ Point to a convenient slogan and say "our duty is to the Homeland, not the Constitution" when Abraxas-personnel wonder if they could be indicted for war crimes;
___ Continue targeting those who show signs of reporting their evidence to the war crimes prosecutors; make allegations against anyone; ignore claims that Abraxas-entities are run like Animal Farms
___ Make up more reasons to provide false information
___ Start rumors to silence those who might be a potential threat to the Abraxas-Pipeline
___ Do not discuss the Abraxas shuttles to McLean and the dirty seats -- must not mention the broken radios. "All is well! The Abraxas-shit doesn't stink!"
___ Say nothing about the strange disappearances. "They have been compromised," not rendered. "We would never silence anyone working for Abraxas."
___ Issue meaningless statements from DoJ Staff on the evidence of review. "hay, the morons in DoJ said so, it must be true." Ignore Hamdan and the Constitution.
___ Make no comment about the strange transfer of personnel from US districts to the VA District Court. Do not consider the potential liability Abraxas-personnel could have when their domestic involvement and placement as Non-official cover status is revealed, and they are shown to have actively supported illegal shipment of American citizens, in violation of the 6th Amendment. "Nobody will ever find out about the data exchanges to the DHS, or what we do when driving our vans."
___ Change the Burden of proof from the government to the defendant. Yell at them louder. Treat the non-Abraxas entities as if they were morons. Yell more!
___ Encourage the "more loyal ones" of Abraxas to fabricate information, engage in retribution, and stifle the Abraxas-related entities in the pipeline from discussing their evidence with the war crimes prosecutor.
___ Do not respond to outbursts such as, "Oh, yeah, what are you going to do -- wage illegal war and commit war crimes? You're already doing that. And even stupid bloggers can see through this."
___ Change the subject from war crimes and no statute of limitations to a condescending tone, "I understand that you're not happy and upset."
___ Do not discuss the imminent war crimes prosecutor arrival. "It's only a rumor. Nobody will find us in the Netherlands."
___ Refuse to comment when the Abraxas-related entities ask, "Hay, you made up stories about who you were detaining in Pakistan. What's going on with the similar frivolous claims about American citizens who are talking about the Abraxas-pipeline?"
___ Ignore concerns that foreign combat forces and paramilitary units will use the US Vote on the Military Commissions bill to lawfully target and strike at suspected Abraxas-related entities. "Hay, when you're dealing with alleged assholes like Abraxas, you can't be too sure. Bombs away!" [Ignore this, it is meaningless.]
___ Do not comment when asked, "if we don't allow the court to review these matters, then aren't we sending a signal that the only forum to resolve disputes is the battlefield?" Just create another Abraxas-entity, then let the other side (the evil ones) know their location, and compromise your employees. Scream loudly, "They knew the risks." Pound table to add emphasis to illegally intimidate the meek Abraxas employees into submission.
___ Create excuses introducing ambiguity.
___ Ignore Abraxas-pipeline concerns that the US is acting like the Roman Empire. Illegally communicate a threat, "Hay, we put Jesus on the cross, do you want to be next?"
___ Illegally broadly apply unlawful Geneva violations.
___ Communicate to superiors blind obedience to orders to illegally abuse power, and pretend the laws of war and US Constitution do not apply.
___ Pretend you didn't read it on the internet.
___ Ignore Nuremburg precedent that civilian contractors were lawfully prosecuted then executed for engaging in war crimes. Illegally state, "They'll never find out about the Abraxas-pipeline."
Prior to placement of support contractors and CIA personnel within Eastern Europe, there were readiness reviews. These were not necessarily major reviews, but included check sheets, confirming memoranda, and other data and messages sent through the Intel Link system.
Intel link and the classified support it provides to the unlawful rendition program and abuse is no longer lawfully classified, and has been disclosed to third parities. The DoJ Staff counsel and incorrectly asserted that the documents are protected. All personnel who have accessed the Intel Link system, reviewed these documents, and have failed to distance themselves from the illegal activity may be lawfully prosecuted for war crimes.
___ Which personnel inside the CIA support division and outside contractors reviewed the post-2001 decision to support decision
___ Once they were aware of the abuse, how did the resolve their concern with their continued involvement in the illegal activity
___ To what extent were they able to review or not review the range of evidence, communications, orders, and other messages related to the war crimes in Eastern Europe.
Personnel when assigned to Eastern Europe detention were the object of CIA management review, and verification they were ready to perform their assigned tasks.
___ Identify whether primary communication, placement had been compromised
___ Security notification based on unusual questions or possible disclosure of related or support activities
___ Conduct other reviews of disclosure and consulting
___ Complete checklist: Final message of arrival sent
___ Information related to upcoming events, reviews
___ Confirmation the agent, contractor had been successfully placed, and feedback on issues for resolution and follow-up
___ Legal review: Completed, satisfied with conclusions, despite the illegality of the effort
___ White House and DoJ memoranda reviewed, compared with agency legal opinion, decision to continue involvement
___ Other regional activities identified, income and oversight left to other individuals outside McLean in other entities and regions
___ Support activity completed
___ Personnel placed, checklist complete
___ Decision to violate regional reporting requirements, inadequate notification to civilian leadership
___ Inappropriate segregation of illegal activity and espionage efforts from the Geneva violations and war crimes
___ Intermediate, regional support if trouble or contacted
___ Decision: Person, place, situation, event
___ Job hiring
___ No notice arrivals
___ Trip Coordinator
___ Food delivery
___ Technology support
___ False communication related to non-entities
___ Distraction from real objective
___ Individual identified
___ Target location determined
___ Intermediary entities notified
___ Information shared without coordination
___ Valid reason for departure, arrival, operation
___ Planning conditions established
___ Expertise, training, and placement consistent
___ Unique match on timing
___ Reluctant arrival
___ Training completed on expertise
___ Placement criteria satisfied
___ Method to communicate on adjustments to placement, training
___ Training, preparation properly aligned with assignment
___ Funds for regional development, contracts secured
___ Traveler explanation
___ Legal obligation approved, funds expenditure limits reviewed
___ Personnel training, preparation consistent with plan
___ New project construction
___ Regional observer
___ Coordination with legal, DoJ, DoD
___ Background review satisfactory
___ Contract requirements identified
___ Non-disclosure agreements signed, retained
___ Electronic mailbox, indirect access to Intel Link
___ Case studies: Anticipated questions, issues, and suggested resolutions
___ Cash, letter generations, local currency support
___ Case studies: Legal review, issues, questions
___ Data: Background, specialty, no conflicts
___ Read files
___ Travel documentation records
___ Coordinating letters, historical files, reference
___ Verification of reports, data prior to release
___ Location of journal articles, publication background
___ Placement within universities, communications, media
___ Domestic NOCs
___ Communication: Public v. Private information
Indirect Method of Placement
___ Political, scientific, academic, economic connections
___ Confirming information
___ Travel, shipping documents through intermediaries
___ New position within a disaster, scandal
___ Re-entry from retirement, specialty, transition effort
___ Holiday traveler
___ Public affairs, media
___ Motion picture
___ Travel, tour, trip planning
___ Legitimate reason
___ Variety, non-patterned
___ Cultural awareness
___ Feedback on success
___ Adjustments, changes
___ Similar movements
___ SIGINT feedback on detection
___ Analysis of results, tests on false efforts