This two-hour special reveals the complicated history, extreme politic, and rigid societal standards that have created a legacy of internal oppression and external aggression. As the North Korean people suffered famine, labor camp and public executions, the Kim regime spent three generations relentlessly pursuing nuclear ambitions. They operate as a criminal syndicate, using counterfeit money, drugs and cyber espionage to fund their war machine.
Now, with weapons rivaling the world’s superpowers, their aggressive rhetoric has pushed the world to a crisis point.
Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) received 63 casualties in a hospital it supports in Hajjah, following a series of night-time airstrikes by the Saudi and Emirati-led coalition on a wedding party that took place in a remote, impoverished village in Bani Qays district in Yemen, on Sunday 22 April.
The bombing was one of at least four deadly airstrikes reported in Yemen since the weekend.
On Saturday 21 April, at least 30 civilians were killed when coalition fighter jets bombed a bus carrying commuters in western Yemen, near the city of Taiz. An additional attack on Sunday night hit a house elsewhere in Hajja, killing an entire family of five, according to al-Nadhri.
On Thursday 25 April, a Saudi-led coalition airstrike killed the top civilian leader in the Houthi movement. Saleh Al-Sammad, president of the Supreme Political Council that runs Yemen’s capital of Sana’a, is also the second in command of the Houthi army. Al-Sammad is reported as the most senior official to be killed by the Western-backed alliance in the three-year-old war.
“Attacks on civilians are a serious violation of international humanitarian law. What happened in Bani Qays is appalling; among the 63 wounded our teams have treated, 13 are children.
These people arrived at the hospital in garlands traditionally worn to celebrate marriage. None were armed or arrived in military uniform,” said João Martins, MSF head of mission in Yemen.
The wounded were initially carried away from the scene by donkeys, as the only two cars in the village were damaged in the strikes. The first responders and two ambulances from the MSF-supported hospital eventually arrived in the village, but were severely delayed because the aircrafts circling overhead raised the spectre of more strikes.
“I was inside the tent when I heard the airstrikes. After that I fell down and lost consciousness. When I woke up, I saw people running away from the tent. I had been inside with my brother and the groom is my friend. One of my cousins died in this attack,” said 12-year-old Kamal.
Darees, who had also attended the wedding, left 20 minutes before the attack. When he returned he was confronted with a chaotic scene and dismembered bodies on the ground, covered in blood.
Children, he said, were frantically searching for their parents.
Warning: This video shows a young boy clinging to the body of his dead father following the wedding bombing.
“Some of the dead bodies were children. Children were playing outside while their parents attended the wedding inside the tent. That’s when the attack happened,” he said.
The injured had mainly lost limbs and suffered shrapnel wounds. At least three patients required amputation, including two brothers, who each lost a foot. By early morning, many residents of Hajjah had come to the hospital to donate blood. In two hours, 150 bags were collected to treat the wounded.
“One woman arrived at the hospital in panic, searching for her son. He was attending the wedding and she doesn’t know what happened to him. Many other women and children in the village are traumatised and don’t know what happened to their loved ones,” said Sally Thomas, MSF project coordinator in Hajjah.
“Warring parties to the conflict must respect the principles of distinction, proportionality and precaution: it is prohibited to launch such attacks which may be expected to harm civilians. The rules of war have constantly been violated in Yemen. All warring parties must commit to protecting civilians, and all parties fueling the conflict by selling arms should uphold their responsibility to ensure that international laws established to protect civilians are respected,” Martins added. 
To date, the Saudi-led coalition has declined to comment on the strikes.
The footage of civilian casualties emerges following the United Nations plea to end the fighting, and the U.S. Senate grilling officials over lack of U.S. accountability for arming and refueling Saudi Coalition war planes, while the Saudis continue to blatantly disregard the rules of war, of human decency and human rights; including the Yemenis right to life, and self-governance as a sovereign nation.
The following video is first in a playlist of the most recent United Nations and U.S. Senate hearings regarding policy and humanitarian aid in the Republic of Yemen.
Apparently “The House Of Saud” prefers to act like violent and ignorant wild dogs with one primal instinct – to kill the weak and dominate the pack.
In a joint meeting of the North Atlantic Council and the Military Committee, Ms. Angelina Jolie, UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) Special Envoy, and co-Founder of the Preventing Sexual Violence Initiative met with several Allied representatives to focus on NATO’s efforts to prevent sexual and gender-based violence, and discussed what more the Alliance will do.
Following the meeting, Secretary General Stoltenberg announced that “Special Envoy Jolie and I have decided to work together, focusing on three points: training, monitoring and reporting, and awareness.”
The following article is written by Jens Stoltenberg, NATO Secretary General, and Angelina Jolie, co-founder of the Preventing Sexual Violence in Conflict Initiative.
All violence against women betrays the fundamental promise in the UN Charter of equal rights and dignity for women. It is one of the prime reasons why women remain in a subordinate position in relation to men in most parts of the world.
When this violence is committed as an act of war it tears apart families, creates mass displacement, and makes peace and reconciliation far harder to achieve. In fact, it is often designed expressly to achieve those goals as part of a military strategy.
Despite being prohibited by international law, sexual violence continues to be employed as a tactic of war in numerous conflicts from Myanmar to Ukraine and Syria to Somalia. It includes mass rape, gang rape, sexual slavery, and rape as a form of torture, ethnic cleansing and terrorism. It accounts in large part for why it is often more dangerous to be a woman in a warzone today than it is to be a soldier.
In our different roles we have seen how conflicts in which women’s bodies and rights are systematically abused last longer, cause deeper wounds and are much harder to resolve and overcome. Ending gender-based violence is therefore a vital issue of peace and security as well as of social justice.
The Nato Alliance was founded to safeguard not just the security but also the freedom of its peoples: in the words of President Harry Truman, as “a shield against aggression and the fear of aggression”.
Sexual violence continues to be employed as a tactic of war. For nearly 70 years NATO has stood for collective defence against military threats. But also for the defence of democracy, individual liberty, the rule of law and the UN Charter.
We believe that Nato has the responsibility and opportunity to be a leading protector of women’s rights.
In particular, we believe Nato can become the global military leader in how to prevent and respond to sexual violence in conflict, drawing on the strengths and capabilities of its member states and working with its many partner countries.
Over the coming months we will be working together and with others to identify ways in which Nato can strengthen its contribution to women’s protection and participation in all aspects of conflict-prevention and resolution.
First, by building on Nato’s commitment to integrate gender issues into its strategic thinking as part of its values and reinforcing a culture of the integration of women throughout the organization including in leadership positions.
Nato’s senior military leaders, have a vital role to play in being positive role models, and promoting the role of women in the military.
Second, by helping to raise the standards of other militaries. Nato and Allied countries are involved every day in training partner militaries around the world. We want to explore ways in which existing training on the protection of human rights and civilians, including against sexual violence, can be strengthened.
Third, Nato has developed standard operating practices for soldiers in the field, learned through mandatory pre-deployment training. Standards and training are not the only answer, but they ensure that personnel recognize the different ways in which women and girls are affected by conflict and are trained to prevent, recognize and respond to sexual and gender-based violence.
This is a vital part of helping to create lasting cultural changes, including debunking the myths that fuel sexual violence and deepening understanding of the centrality of protection and rights for women in the creation of lasting peace and security.
Fourth, Nato already deploys gender advisers to local communities in Kosovo and Afghanistan, while Nato’s female soldiers are able to reach and engage with local communities. Stronger awareness of the role that gender plays in conflict improves military operational effectiveness and leads to improved security. Strengthening this culture can only benefit Nato’s contribution to peace and security over the long term.
Fifth, Reporting on conflict-related sexual violence is now one of the tasks of Nato commanders. Nato is also creating a reporting system to record instances of gender-based violence compatible with UN Monitoring Analysis and Reporting Arrangements.
With this data, which will be shared with the UN, Nato soldiers will be able to discern patterns and trends so that they will be able to respond more quickly to prevent potential violence. By reporting crimes and supporting work to bring perpetrators to justice, Nato can challenge the culture of impunity, including for senior leaders and those most responsible.
Nato Allies have strongly committed to put these issues front and center every day, in how they train soldiers, in how they operate in the field, and in how they interact with civilians who find themselves in combat zones.
We will also be urging more concerted action in the wider world. By working together with business, civil society, governments and political leadership writ large, international organizations such as Nato can help lead the way toward ending impunity for sexual violence in conflict.
It is humanity’s shame that violence against women, whether in peaceful societies or during times of war, has been universally regarded as a lesser crime. There is finally hope that we can change this. We owe it to ourselves – men and women alike – and to future generations.
The crisis in Yemen continues to worsen as the Saudi-led coalition forces and Houthi rebels blatantly disregard the damage being inflicted on innocent Yemeni civilians. Famine and disease have spread through the country unchecked, due in large part to a Saudi-imposed blockade on air and sea ports that has resulted in a desperate shortage of food, humanitarian aid, and medical supplies.
The United Nations has renewed demands for combatants to allow unconditional humanitarian access to all parts of the country.
Saudi-led coalition allies repeatedly have hindered the movement of aid and commercial goods to the population. Huthi/Saleh (forces in Taiz)… routinely interfere with the work of humanitarians, at times demanding the diversion of aid to themselves or denying aid workers access to populations in need. 
The human cost of the two-year-old conflict is horrific. At least8,000 civilian deaths and 45,000 injuries were reported by the middle of 2017, though it is suspected that the real figures are much higher. A recent draft UN report alleges that the Saudi coalition was responsible for more than 680 child casualties in 2016.
A devastating cholera outbreak, the most recent consequence of the fighting, has thus far afflicted over 500,000 people and resulted in almost 2,000 deaths. This outbreak is being exacerbated, and potentially even strategically exploited, by the coalition forces. Meanwhile, 17 million people are experiencing food insecurity and nearly 15 million lack access to basic healthcare services.
The innocent people of Yemen are trapped within a complex network of different national, regional and international competing vested interests, resulting in violent and deadly outcomes for which they alone suffer. Only bold leadership from the players in this conflict, both home and abroad, can (end the total ambivalence to human tragedy) – indeed it is their moral, and legal, responsibility to do so. 
As the situation deteriorates, an effective international response is desperately needed.
To date, there has been a widespread failure on the part of the international community to substantively address the crisis, which is unfolding in plain view and in which combatants are demonstrably violating the rules of international law. Indiscriminate air strikes, imprecise weapons used in residential areas, and the use of cluster munitions are but a few of the atrocities being perpetrated on both sides of the conflict. Significant pressure needs to be put on Saudi Arabia to de-escalate the situation and bring an end to civilian suffering.
The UN Security Council should take prompt action to rejuvenate the political track by passing a long-overdue new resolution under its mandatory Chapter VII authority demanding an immediate ceasefire, unfettered humanitarian access and a return to talks based on the existing UN road map, which requires compromises from both sides.
In such a context of lawlessness and abuse, there is an urgent need for truth, accountability and justice for victims of the conflict.
Given the apparent inadequacies of Saudi Arabia and Yemen-led investigations to date, Amnesty International believes the only way to achieve this is through the establishment of a UN-led independent international investigation to look into alleged violations by all parties. 
It is in this context that we must once again highlight the unconscionable decision by the Canadian government to continue moving forward with the $15 billion Saudi arms deal.
Simply put, Canada cannot export weapons to Saudi Arabia without being complicit in the gross violations of human rights being perpetrated by Saudi forces. In addition to Canada taking a more active diplomatic role in resolving the Yemen conflict, it is absolutely critical that this arms deal is cancelled and that Bill-C47 ensures an acceptably high standard for Canadian arms exports moving forward. 
This report takes a look at how 20 months of the Saudi-led airstrikes, relentlessly bombing Yemen, has reduced a country to rubble, and forever destroyed the lives of the people who survive these deadly airstrikes on civilians.
The attacking Saudi-coalition has been fighting to restore Saudi-backed President Mansour Hadi to power since March of last year, after the Houthi gained control of their county’s capital Sana’a, and Hadi fled to Saudi Arabia, where he remains in exile.
And now – a country with more than 10,000 people killed in the ensuing violence, over 10,000 more died of starvation under the blockade of humanitarian aid and supplies – the Middle East’s poorest nation, Yemen is reduced to the brink of famine.
Over 7.4 million children are suffering the brunt of the conflict in myriad ways; including chronic diseases. malnutrition, loss of home and parents, loss of education; then there is resulting infliction’s of trauma caused by the violence thrust upon them at such a young age; and tens of thousands more maimed and disabled for life – in a country with no means to care for them. Adding to their hardship are the groups recruiting children to fight as soldiers.
Human rights groups have accused the Saudi-led coalition of indiscriminately bombing civilians and systematically committing human rights violations, which Riyadh has denied. To no avail, activists and lawmakers have urged the United States and other Western countries to stop supplying fighter jets, bombs and other weaponry to Saudi Arabia.
Last month the world temporarily expressed outrage at the Saudi’s when over one hundred and forty (140) men, women and children were killed, and at least525 others injured, some critically, and according to several reports, the death toll has risen, after their air force targeted a funeral hall in Sana’a. Watch our report.
ITV News was at the scene and shown remnants of a bomb, which a Yemeni military official has claimed was from a US-made Mark 82.
Senior News Editor Paul Tyson, who is also in Sana’a, said a morgue attendant told him they have “no room for bodies“, and that he saw body parts being removed from the ruins of the funeral hall.
The Yemen government claimed the Saudi-led coalition had dropped rockets on mourners who had gathered to honour the father of the government’s interior minister, who died on Friday – but the coalition air command initially denied any involvement. In his report, Paul Tyson said “important tribal leaders” were reportedly among the dead and injured.
Since then the Saudis have released a statement claiming it was the actions of one person – who will “fall on his sword“.
Human rights groups have requested an independent investigation be carried out, but the Saudi Royals have refused.
The U.S. said it will review its support for the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen, said a U.S. National Security Council spokesperson.
“US security cooperation with Saudi Arabia is not a blank check,” said NSC spokesman Ned Price in a statement. “In light of this and other recent incidents, we have initiated an immediate review of our already significantly reduced support to the Saudi-led Coalition.”
About sixty-percent(60%) of the children killed in Yemen since March 15, 2015, were the victims of airstrikes. So I ask again, how many more dead children will it take to put the Saudi Royals back on the United Nations’ Blacklist for killing children?
Back in June of this year – the same day UN Nations informed the Saudi’s they had been placed on a blacklist for maiming and killing children in Yemen – ten children were killed, and 28 more children were injured in a Saudi-coalition airstrike that targeted a school.
The children were taking exams inside their classrooms in Haydan, an enclave of the city of Saada. Gruesome images of their burnt and dismembered bodies immediately emerged on social-media sites. 
It is yet to be seen if the U.S. will proceed with its sale of $1.5 billion more in weapons and military advisory support to Saudi Arabia.
Yet, even in light of such an unthinkable act of violence toward children, when the Saudi Royals threw a temper tantrum and threatened to withdraw critical funding from UN programs – the UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-Moon released a statement saying he had remove them from the blacklist after “undue pressure.”
The conflict began early last year, when President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi resigned and fled to the southern city of Aden after Houthi consolidated their hold on Sana’a. So the Saudis and their allies decided to attack Yemen and restore their choice for Yemen’s president – Hadi to power.
The Houthis are currently fighting for the return of their former president, Ali Abdullah Saleh.
The Saudi invasion of Yemen – under the pretense of restoring their government, and fighting terrorists – it is a despicable hoax, and in my opinion, the Saudi “Royals” are reprehensible beasts who have no place in decent society.
According to The Telegraph, “Army units still loyal to Mr Saleh have backed the Houthi offensive after Mr Saleh switched sides and turned on the internationally recognised Saudi-backed government that replaced him three years ago.” 
However, former president Saleh remains a powerful presence in his country, and maintains military and political muscle.
As for the Saudis, they have revealed their deep disregard for international law and human life, and their disrespect towards the United Nations, and like wolves in sheep’s clothing, they are devouring anyone in their path to satisfy their instinct to dominate.
Even on the rugged, back roads of Canada – THAT is NOT a JEEP! Back in 2014, the Harper government shook hands on a $15-billion deal to sell, what Trudeau later referred to as “lightly armed jeeps,” to Saudi Arabia. However, Ken Epps of Project Ploughshares, an anti-war group that tracks arms sales, said the LAV weaponry shows how lethal this Canadian deal really is.
Videos, dated from 2012 and 2015, show Saudi authorities using LAVs (not Canadian-made) against Shia citizensin the “Wahhabi-State of Arabia“.
“Such vehicles, far from simple troop carriers, are capable of major destruction, and given the ongoing deplorable human rights situation in Saudi Arabia, there is great risk that they will be used against civilians opposed to the Saudi government. This is why the new Canadian government should be reconsidering the Saudi contract,” Mr. Epps said.
During the 2015 election campaign, Mr. Trudeau played down the strategic nature of the sale, saying General Dynamics was merely exporting jeeps. Mr. Trudeau went on to characterize the sale as a private contract involving a manufacturing company – omitting Ottawa’s crucial role.
The gun subcontract is at the heart of growing controversy in Belgium, where critics are questioning the wisdom of selling weapons to Saudi Arabia – and citing the CMI-General Dynamics deal.
Many NGO groups are concerned the Saudis will use them to not only crush “dissent” at home, but use them against civilians in Yemen. In which case – would put Canada in violation of its own arms-trading rules – and in light of recent events in Yemen, possibly international law governing export of weapons to countries committing war crimes.
Regardless of worldwide outrage of the reprehensible Saudi war crimes against women and children in Yemen, and innumerable human rights crimes against their own citizens – the Trudeau government has approved the export permits for the lethal vehicles anyway.
And from where I am sitting, it looks as though the Liberals had every intention of giving this Saudi weapons deal the government’s stamp of approval even before they won the election, evident by the vote MP Dion gave before he was given the job of actually signing the export papers – which he did – shortly after the Liberals moved into the Parliament building.
Although the number of vehicles included is blacked-out, according to The Globe and Mail a French municipal official has said the transaction CMI, a subcontractor, is involved with concerns about 700 vehicles.
What do the Saudis get from this deal?
Some information has leaked out in Belgium, where one broadcast journalist called CMI’s work for the Canadian maker of armoured vehicles the “contract of the century” for the firm, which is based in Seraing, Belgium. Local media say it would be worth €3.2-billion ($4.9-billion) and last more than 15 years.
In 2015,CMI announced it had bought a military base in northeastern France to be transformed into a campus to train the Saudis on the LAV weaponry.
The Globe and Mail report continued by saying: CMI, which manufactures turrets and cannons, announced in 2014 that it had signed a large contract with a “Canadian vehicle manufacturer” to supply two gun systems, including a medium-caliber weapon and the Cockerill CT-CV 105 HP, which it advertises as a “high-pressure gun with an advanced autoloader to deliver high lethality at very light weight,” one with the capacity to fire 105-mm shells and a heavy-armour-penetrating missile. CMI did not name the Canadian company.
In France, where CMI’s campus is located, a local municipal official said CMI is doing work for General Dynamics and its armoured vehicle contract with Saudi Arabia. In an interview, Jean-Philippe Vautrin, president of the Communauté de Communes du pays de Commercy, said CMI will start training the Saudis on the turrets and cannons in 2017, using simulators on the campus site but also a nearby artillery range.
He said the Saudis will learn how to operate the wheeled portion of the LAVs onCanadian soil. 
Do the Saudis have the vehicles yet?
General Dynamics is still gathering the materials needed to make the vehicles, but export permits were issued in April, 2016, for an unspecified number of them, according to a secret Global Affairs Canada memo released by the Justice Department.
What could the Saudis possibly need 700 armed tanks for?
Attacks on Saudi civilians – even reasonable doubt that the Saudis would use the LAVs for purposes not stated in their military statement, and if those other purposes include crimes against their own citizens – should have raised red flags under Canada’s weapons export rules – which forbid weapons shipments “unless it can be demonstrated there is no reasonable risk that the goods might be used against the civilian population” by the buyer.
And what about the attacks on Yemeni civilians andthe use of internationally banned cluster bombs?
Saudi war crimes – go far beyond casting a serious, reasonable doubt – when reliable reports give evidence of 10,000 Yemeni civilians killed in Saudi airstrikes in just over one year, and over half the dead were children; and another 10,000 children have suffered an excruciating death by starvation, due to the Saudi military-enforced block on food, medicine and humanitarian aid, and those numbers rise exponentially every day.
How many DEAD CHILDREN will it take to declare Saudi Royals’ egotistical and violent bombing of Yemeni civilians exactly what it is – a GENOCIDE.
American Weapon Sales.
The U.S. is responsible for nearly 33% of worldwide exports – by far the top arms exporter on the planet – but which countries does the U.S. sell the most weapons to?
Saudi Arabia was the top recipient of American-made arms from 2011-2015, followed closely by the United Arab Emirates, according to research compiled by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), which has been analyzing international arms transfers since 1968.
Experts believe the Middle East will remain a top destination for weapons for some time – it currently accounts for about 40% of U.S. arms exports. The American exports include everything from small arms to fighter jet aircraft and tanks, to Patriot Missile batteries.
While most of the top importers use their own money to buy arms from the U.S., the U.S. also provides some countries with grants and loans — separate from the arms sales — to buy defense equipment from American manufacturers, as part of a program called Foreign Military Financing.
The State Department’s 2017 budget request includes approximately $5.7billion for Foreign Military Financing. In the proposed budget, the top five recipients of American foreign military financing:
Israel: $3.1 billion
Egypt: $1.3 billion
Jordan: $350 million
Pakistan: $265 million
Iraq: $150 million
While Israel is supposed to spend this money on U.S. arms, some of that country’s most expensive purchases, like the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, have yet to be delivered and are therefore not reflected in SIPRI’s statistics.
While the Middle East tops the list, funding for African armies in 2017 will more than double from last year, likely a consequence of increased terrorist activity in places like Mali, Somalia, and Nigeria.
If the federal Liberals are loathe to cancel Canada’s controversial arms deal with Saudi Arabia, it may have something do with a trend published by Jane’s Defence Weekly.
According to the magazine, Canada has become the world’s second-largest exporter of arms to the Middle East, behind the United States.
The last time Jane’s surveyed arms exports, Canada was in sixth place on Middle East exports, but the country leapfrogged Britain, France, Germany and Russia into second place, with US $2.7 billion in sales in 2015, Jane’s reports.
That comes amid a growing frenzy of military spending by Middle Eastern countries that has made the region the top arms importer and Saudi Arabia the world’s single largest buyer of foreign weapons.
“The combined value of Saudi Arabia and the [United Arab Emirates’] defence imports is more than all of Western Europe’s defence imports combined.
“The U.S., Canada, France and the U.K. are the main exporters of defence equipment to the Middle East and beneficiaries of this spending boom.
“The global defence trade market has never seen an increase as large as the one we saw between 2014 and 2015.”
said Jane’s senior analyst, Ben Moores.
Worldwide, the defense trade reached a record high of US $65 billion in 2015, Jane’s reports. Canada remained the sixth-largest arms exporter, the same rank as in 2015 and up from 10th place in 2013 and 2014.
“The global defence trade market has never seen an increase as large as the one we saw between 2014 and 2015,” Moores said.
The Jane’s report comes amid ongoing controversy about the federal Liberal government’s decision to proceed with a $15-billion defense contract with Saudi Arabia signed by the previous Conservative government in February 2014.
The $15-billion contract for a fleet of armoured vehicles is expected to create 3,000 jobs at General Dynamics Land Systems in southern Ontario. The deal will add at least $1 billion to Canada’s arms exports numbers over the next decade. 
Though polls show that only one-fifth of Canadians back the arms deal — and roughly half oppose it — Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said in April that honouring the Saudi arms deal is a matter of principle.
“The principle at play here is that Canada’s word needs to mean something in the international community,” Trudeau said at the time.
I bet you are as disheartened as I am to learn that Canada has become the second largest supplier of military goods to the Middle East – mostly from the sordid $15 billion deal to supply Saudi Arabia with light armoured combat vehicles (or LAVs).
In fact, researchers at IHS Jane’s Defence told The Globe and Mail that “Canada has never ranked so highly among all arms-exporting countries.”
How did this happen?
How did Canada get mixed up in the dark underbelly of the global arms industry, sending billions of dollars’ worth of light armoured vehicles to the despots in Saudi Arabia?
Armoured vehicles, made right here in Canada and shipped under an earlier contract, were used to suppress peaceful pro-democracy protesters in neighbouring Bahrain, and now are taking part in bloody attacks in Yemen, where the Saudi-led coalition had been blacklisted by the UN for the unconscionable number of children killed by its airstrikes.
This new arms deal, to sell even more LAVs to Saudi Arabia over the next decade, contradicts everything we stand for. Our middle-power nation is known around the world for inventing peacekeeping, for banning landmines, for rejecting George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq and his Star Wars missile defence system.
These are values that you and I share, and together, we have steadfastly upheld and promoted them. That’s why I am counting on your support, once again. Like you, I am not prepared to let the arms dealers win.
It was almost a year ago that millions of Canadians voted for historic change – finally ridding Canada of Stephen Harper’s Conservative government.
The Defence Lobby – that powerful network of corporations (mostly U.S.-headquartered), politicians, academics and media pundits – all fueled by billions of dollars in military spending – has been working overtime to push the Trudeau government to make more dubious arms deals, and even to abandon their promise to kill the Harper plan to buy the obscenely overpriced and under-performing F-35 stealth fighter.
Under new transparency rules, the Liberal government released the 2014 and 2015 Reports on Canada’s Military Exports and, unbelievably, they reveal that Middle Eastern tyrants like Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates are not the only questionable recipients of Canadian-made weapons. In fact, Algeria, Thailand (after the military coup), Peru and Colombia are also recipients, despite their dreadful human rights records.
Canadian companies have also been accused of UN sanctions-busting, through banned weapons sales to Libya and South Sudan.
What is happening to the Canada I grew up in?
We have just come through a veritable “decade of darkness” characterized by reckless military spending, disastrous foreign wars, and Cold War sabre-rattling.
We can clearly see the terrible results. The Defence Lobby, and the arch Conservative think tanks they fund, have become so deeply entrenched in the Canadian body politic and they have such a stranglehold on government that the Liberals seem powerless (or unwilling) to escape their clutches.
The ball is in your court Prime Minister Trudeau. Are you going to turn a blind eye to Saudi’s inhumane treatment and killing of women and children, while dragging Canada into their disregard for the right to life in Yemen – a grievous crime surmounting to genocide? If Canada proceeds to arm their invasion of Yemen with sniper guns and lethal tanks, your term as Prime Minister will leave permanent blood stains on our country’s reputation as peacekeepers and defenders of mankind’s humanity.
Regimes like Saudi Arabia and Israelhave swept justice under the carpet, setting a standard of “new rules” of war, and what constitutes a human rights violation, or warrants U.N. sanctions – all played out for the world to watch by way of social media and television. Perhaps that is the most disturbing injustice – every nation is watching – yet, no one is willing to take a stand, and stop the killing, and put out an international arrest warrant for the Saudi royals, and certain Israeli rulers, for their violent war crimes against children, and unimaginable cruelty against innocent civilians of all ages.
Meanwhile… Saudi royals continue to throw money, or threaten to stop throwing money at the United Nations. And Israel, well the Jews survived Nazi Germany genocide, so that immediately grants them impunity – consequently Madam Justice has been bought, blackmailed, and bullied.
Please send all inquiries or request to publish this article to Alistair.Reign@Gmail.com, thank you.
We welcome your feedback and conversation, use the comment box below. Your identity will not be shown.
“When he crossed the Olympics marathon finish line, Feyisa Lilesa put his hands above his head in an “X.” Most of those who watched Lilesa’s spectacular silver medal performance didn’t know what that meant — or just how dangerous a protest they were watching,” reported Kevin Sieff, Africa Bureau Chief for the Washington Post.
Lilesa was protesting the Ethiopian government’s killing of hundreds of the country’s Oromo people, the country’s largest ethnic group, which has long complained about being marginalized by the country’s government. The group has held protests this year over plans to reallocate Oromo land.
This playlist exposes the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Royals for a staggering number of Crimes against Humanity on their Citizens and Immigrant Workers. Includes coverage of their War Crimes committed in Yemen and other foreign countries. Includes coverage of the International Crimes of counties selling weapons to the Saudis.
This is a continuous news feed that is updated regularly. The window will open to the latest video, and play through to the last. You can always fast forward and rewind. Each video varies in length from 2:00 min up to 1:30 hours.
Alistair Reign News Military Channel: Saudi’s Crimes Against Humanity.
Alistair Reign Playlists bring you the news from the source. Watch, listen, learn and stay informed.
The British government has quietly issued reams of corrections to previous ministerial statements in which they claimed that Saudi Arabia is not targeting civilians or committing war crimes. The autocratic petro-state is currently engaged in a bombing campaign in Yemen where it has blown up hospitals, schools, and weddings as part of its intervention against Houthi rebels.
Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, the UN’s high commissioner for human rights, has said that “carnage” caused by certain Saudi coalition airstrikes against civilian targets appear to be war crimes.
Britain has been a staunch defender of the dictatorship’s assault, with UK arms companies supplying billions in weapons and ministers staking their reputation on the conduct of the Saudi Arabian armed forces.
However as MPs went back to their constituencies for recess on Thursday the Foreign Office admitted six ministerial statements from the past year “did not fully reflect” the real situation.
In many cases ministers had denied war crimes were being committed – statements the FCO now believes went too far. Instead, ministers were meant to only say that they had not actively confirmed that war crimes were being committed.
In February, then Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond, said:
“we have assessed that there has not been a breach of international humanitarian law by the coalition”, the Foreign Office noted.
It added: “However, these should have stated … ‘we have not assessed that there has been a breach of IHL by the coalition’.”
On another occasion, the FCO noted, Mr Hammond, who is now the Chancellor, had said:
“‘The MOD assessment is that the Saudi-led coalition is not targeting civilians; that Saudi processes and procedures have been put in place to ensure respect for the principles of international humanitarian law; and that the Saudis both have been and continue to be genuinely committed to compliance with international humanitarian law.’
The correction continued:
“This should have said, ‘…The MOD has not assessed that the Saudi-led coalition is targeting civilians. We have assessed that Saudi processes and procedures have been put in place to ensure respect for the principles of international humanitarian law; and that the Saudis both have been and continue to be genuinely committed to compliance with international humanitarian law.”
The UK has repeatedly refused calls from the European Parliament and House of Commons international development committee to stop selling weapons to the autocratic monarchy.
Oliver Sprague, Amnesty UK’s Arms Programme Director, said:
“This is jaw-dropping stuff. The government has admitted grossly misleading parliament no fewer than six times on issues as serious as the deaths of civilians in Yemen.
“The government has spent most of this year telling us that assessments had been conducted and it was confident that no breach of international law had occurred – when it’s now apparent no specific assessment of Saudi operations had been done whatsoever.
“It appears that what the UK government is admitting is to only having reviewed general Saudi procedures rather than investigating the many actual reports of unlawful attacks.
“It’s staggering that such a shameful admission is made at the eleventh hour on the last day of parliament. It’s not even doublespeak, it’s just plain wrong.”
A spokesperson for Campaign Against Arms Trade, which has led calls for a boycott, said:
“This is a stunning piece of back-peddling, and the timing feels very cynical.
“The corrections reveal that Philip Hammond’s original statements were either totally wrong or outright distortions.
“UK arms have been central to the devastation inflicted on Yemen and it’s time for the government to come clean about its role.”
Official figures reported by The Independent in January this year show sales of British bombs and missiles to the country increased 100 times in the three-month period since the start of the attacks on Yemen.
The sales jumped from £9m ($14,650,822.07 USD) in the previous three months to £1bn (1,567,451,085.57 USD).
Mr Cameron, who stepped down as PM this week following the election of Theresa May to leader of the Conservative party, said in January that Britain’s relationship with Saudi Arabia is “important for our own security”.
Last week The Independent reported that the UK government had refused to rule out re-electing Saudi Arabia to a key UN human rights council.
Saudi Arabia Human Right’s Violation article’s in Belfast Telegraph:
Tuesday, while the eyes of this nation were focused on the Republican convention, U.S. airstrikes in the northern Syrian ISIL-controlled city of Manbij killed at least 56 civilians, injuring dozens more. The Syrian Observatory said 11 children were among those killed.
This airstrike is one of numerous U.S. strikes that have taken the lives of countless Syrian civilians.
As bombings by the U.S. coalition, the Assad government and Russia continue to devastate the already war-torn country, innocent Syrians suffer severely from a lack of clean water, electricity, medical care, and food. In Manbij, 70,000 people are trapped between warring parties,with no access to food or supplies.
To help this besieged population, the United States should drop food, not bombs.
The U.S. military has said that they are being “extraordinarily careful to make sure” that airstrikes selectively hit militant fighters, but we know that that innocent civilians are often the victims.
We continue to mourn the victims of the strikes in Manjib this week. We ask you join us in ensuring that senseless killings like these do not take the lives of more Syrian civilians.
In their internal review published on June 21, 2016, MSF (Doctors without Borders) looked into the February 2016 attack on the Malakal Protection of Civilians Site (PoC) in South Sudan, including a review of the post-event situation:
Violence erupted between internally displaced persons (IDPs) of different ethnic groups in a protection of civilians (PoC) site in Malakal, South Sudan, on February 17, 2016, and continued until the next afternoon. 
There are strong indications that external military forces were also involved in the fighting.
The violence and ensuing fire caused the destruction of large swathes of the camp (35 percent of shelters were destroyed) and left between 25 and 65 people dead (including two MSF staff), 108 injured and over29,000 IDPs displaced once again.
This report constitutes the findings of an internal review conducted by Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) into those events.
The review aimed to provide lessons learned from MSF’s medical emergency response, as well as to help better understand the circumstances around the events and the role of the different actors.
The findings exposed a glaring failure on behalf of the UN Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) to protect the civilians residing in the PoC site. By not ensuring that adequate preventive measures were taken, failing to act to stop the violence in a timely manner, and actively blocking the IDPs from reaching safety during a large part of the emergency, UNMISS effectively failed to protect the civilians it is mandated by the UN Security Council to protect.
The rigid structure of the UN integrated mission within the PoC site prevented an efficient emergency response, as the strong reliance that humanitarian organizations had on the UN security apparatus and its recommendations for security meant that they could not be mobilized and thus assist in the humanitarian and medical emergency response.
This resulted in a short yet acute emergency gap during the peak of the incident, where the emergency response capacity of those present in the PoC site could not be counted upon.
MSF’s medical response to the crisis was timely, relevant, and effective. MSF took the lead in the emergency response and was able to act when many others couldn’t. It treated many patients and provided refuge for the IDPs in its hospital. The team, and most notably the national staff, showed a dedicated commitment to the emergency response.
The need for better emergency preparedness and more efficient and dignified management of dead bodies are among the lessons learned by MSF from the incident. The circumstances surrounding the death of the two MSF staff need to be further investigated.
Worryingly, there are no signs, four months after the events, that the UN is taking steps to improve the situation in the PoCs or admit its mistakes in the February events.
The UN under-secretary for peacekeeping operations has recently announced that the findings of the two UN investigations conducted will shortly be made public, and we urge the UN to delay no longer.
This report is intended to open up a constructive debate within the international community to ensure that the failures of the February events are discussed and concrete measures put in place to improve the protection and living conditions for IDPs in Malakal and other PoC sites in South Sudan. 
To give credit where it is due, the United Nations started out with the best of intentions; with a mission set forth to prevent another holocaust and other crimes against humanity.
The time was the end of WWII, and the enormous task of convincing countries once at war to “Unite as One Nation” was accomplished by several leaders of humanity, and the UN Charter was born – a signed agreement of what constitutes humane treatment, equal rights, rules of war and international law.
However, times have changed and on the 10th of this month UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon’s statements to the Security Council committee have lost their original potency:
“Protecting civilians is an overarching responsibility involving all the critical functions of the United Nations: human rights, humanitarian, political and peacekeeping.“
Today the past accomplishments of the United Nations has lost their shine, as has the UN lost its effectiveness. In fact, the UN committees have proven powerless in matters of serious crimes against humanity openly committed worldwide.
United Nations is no longer a cure for a sick world. Evidence is in the inhumanity we see around us; committed by the very same seated members of the United Nations we count on to protect us.
The serious crimes committed by peacekeepers have gone unpunished.
The war crimes by Saudi Arabia and Israel are accepted with impunity.
The rise of Daesh, and the validation of their terrorist Islamic states.
The barbaric and public punishments inflicted on children and women.
In this chapter I will cover humanitarian crisis number one: Non-accountability of UN Peacekeeper crimes.
1.United Nations Peacekeepers
UN Peacekeepers are just as likely to inflict cruelty on the suppressed people they are charged with protecting, as the warring armies and extremists. Peacekeeping officers have been accused of engaging in serious criminal offenses such as sexual abuse, sex-trafficking, soliciting prostitutes, sexually abusing minors and forcing children into prostitution.
“In November (2015), United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon announced he intends to start naming and shaming countries whose troops and police serving in UN peacekeeping missions face credible accusations of sexual abuse and exploitation.
“This statement came a day after he took the unprecedented move of firing the head of the peacekeeping mission in the Central African Republic over the handling of dozens of misconduct allegations. The latest, brought on Tuesday by Amnesty International against the mission’s police officers, included the indiscriminate killing of a teen and his father, and rape of the daughter, a twelve-year-old (12) girl.
“”Considering the gaps in the system for reporting, investigating and prosecuting sexual abuse allegations,” (US Ambassador Samantha) Power said, the number of actual allegations against peacekeepers “could be far worse”.” 
There is a reason for this increasing phenomenon.
In fact, the magnitude of sexual violence and exploitation committed by peacekeeping forces on local populations, together with the U.N. response to them, has become central topics for discussion and analysis for many.
It was previous UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, in November 2004, first pledged to eliminate the scourge of sexual abuse from the United Nations peacekeepers.
The United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO) statistics from their 2005 report: from the one-hundred-fifty-five (152) peacekeeping personnel dismissed for misconduct, one-hundred-seventeen (117) were members of military contingents. Besides deciding on administrative penalties against the one-hundred-seventeen (117) military officers, the United Nations has no legal authority to bring up criminal charges or enforce prosecution.
All the United Nations can do is send the officer back to his troop-contributing country, “but it cannot ensure the prosecution of that person once they have returned home” (Murphy, 2006, p.532). Typically, the environment in which the U.N. personnel operate is one where there are weak and ineffective judicial and law enforcement structures, a collapsed economy and corrupt institutions.
All of these factors create chaos and disorder that consequently facilitate misconduct.
However, “while these conditions certainly foster situations in which sexual abuse occurs or in which the likelihood of sexual abuse may increase, a contributing factor is that peacekeepers commit these violations because they believe they can get away with it,” wrote Muna Ndulo in her 2009 paper, “UN Responses to Sexual Abuse and Exploitation of Women and Girls by Peacekeepers“page 144.
The criminal liability of peacekeeping personnel, therefore, lies at the very core of successfully addressing the problem.
[a]s such, it enjoys the status, privileges and immunities of the Organization provided for in Article 105 of the UN Charter, and the UN Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the UN of 13 February 1946. UN staff members are appointed by the Secretary-General and they have the status of officials under the Convention, section 18 of which provides that officials are immune in respect of acts committed by them in their official capacity (pdf page 533).
In a similar note, Deen-Racsmany contends that “the SOFA provision on the exclusive criminal jurisdiction of the sending state over military members of national contingents (MMsNCs) constitutes a major obstacle in the way of ensuring the accountability of this category of persons for crimes and serious misconduct committed in peacekeeping operations” (2011,page 350).
in addressing the sexual abuse problem is increased recognition of the importance of women’s role in peace processes, along with the importance of incorporating female perspectives in the general U.N. peace and security framework. An effort to do just that resulted in the 2000 U.N. Security Council Resolution 1325 on women, peace and security. (pdf Resolution 1325).
However, when it comes to practice, analysts are ambivalent as to how successfully the resolution has been translated into the implementation of U.N. peacekeeping mandates. The report on the ten-year impact study on the implementation of UNSC Resolution 1325 states that while there has been significant progress in supporting women’s participation in political processes, “conflict related sexual violence as a deliberate strategy in areas of conflict still occurs with impunity” says United Nations in their 2010 report (pdf page 10).
In his meeting with UN Security Council last November,S.G. Ban Ki-moon said: “The UN lacks the power for criminal investigation and prosecution, which lets member states take whatever punitive action they choose against the troops they contribute. “In the most frustrating cases,” nothing is done at all.
““A failure to pursue criminal accountability for sexual crimes is tantamount to impunity,” he said, saying countries must quickly investigate and hold its troops accountable.
“Ban also announced several UN measures now being implemented. They include strict timelines for completing investigations, setting up immediate response teams inside peacekeeping missions to handle allegations, and suspending payments to countries whose troops face credible allegations of misconduct.
“Since its creation in April 2014, the peacekeeping mission in Central African Republic says it has received fifty-seven (57) casesof misconduct, includingeleven (11) allegations of sexual exploitation and abuse.” 
Yet, United Nations peacekeepers in the Central African Republic raped or sexually exploited at least eight women and girls between October and December 2015. Among the survivors are two 14-year-old girls, an 18-year-old and a 29-year-old woman who said peacekeepers gang-raped them:
The 18-year-old woman said that when she visited the Republic of Congo troop base near the airport in late 2015 seeking food or money, armed peacekeepers forced her into the bush and gang-raped her. “I didn’t want to have sex with them, but when I went to visit their base they took me into the bush,” she said. “There were three of them on me. They were armed. They said if I resisted they would kill me. They took me one by one.”
A 14-year-old girl said that in November, two peacekeepers attacked her as she walked by the MINUSCA baseat the airport. “The men were dressed in their military uniforms and had their guns,” she said. “I walked by and suddenly one of them grabbed me by my arms and the other one ripped off my clothes. They pulled me into the tall grass and one held my arms while the other one pinned down my legs and raped me. The soldier holding my arms tried to hold my mouth, but I was still able to scream. Because of that they had to run away before the second soldier could rape me.”
Another 14-year-old girl said she was walking by the MINUSCA base at an old cotton factory in late December (2015) when a peacekeeper from the Democratic Republic of Congo attacked her. “I was on a path in the bush and had walked by the MINUSCA guards when a soldier jumped out at me. He was in a uniform like the other soldiers from the [Democratic Republic of the] Congo. He had his gun with him. He slapped me in the face and made me continue to walk on the path… We walked for a while, then he ripped off my clothes and used them to tie my hands behind my back. He threw me on the ground, placed his gun to the side and got on top of me to rape me. When he was done he just left. I had to put my clothes on and I went home.”
A 29-year-old woman said that a soldier from the Democratic Republic of Congo raped her inside her home in October 2015. “I heard a knock on the door and I said I was busy. But a man said, “No, open the door…. I have come to see you.” I ignored it and thought a few minutes later that he had left. But as I finished washing he just came in. It was a MINUSCA soldier in a blue hat. I said, “What are you doing here?” and I told him to leave. But he forced himself on me and as he was stronger I had no choice.“
UN Peacekeepers stationed in refugee camps are extorting sex from children and women in exchange for food or or money, as ongoing conflict has left the population desperate.
A 16-year-old girl said that a peacekeeper from the Republic of Congo who was based at the airport gave her food and money in exchange for sex from October to December (2015). She said that soldiers instigated sexual relationships with her when she and a friend went to the base to sell alcohol: “I met him when he was on guard duty at the airport. We had sex there. After that he would come to my hut.”
The girl said that when the conflict started in Bambari she had no choice but to move near the airport for her safety and that of a family member with a disability. Once there, she said she had no means to provide for herself and her relative and felt she had no option but to exchange sex for food and money.
An 18-year-old woman said that in November (2015) she exchanged sex for food and money with soldiers presumed to be from the Republic of Congo, who were based at the airport. Her friends, who were already trading sex for basic supplies, and a family member encouraged her to approach the contingent because her family had “problems of food and money.” She said that her friends told her, “Instead of staying in your situation you should go with the Congolese so they will give you money to feed your family.”
It has been over a decade since the UN Secretary General holding office had promised to bring the crimes of Peacekeepers to justice – and NOTHING has improved, on the contrary, along with the increase in armed conflict, comes with it an increase in Peacekeeper sexual crimes and abuse. The troop-contributing country of the accused is STILL solely responsible for carrying out judicial proceedings against soldiers who commit sexual exploitation and rape.
It is2016 and the United Nations is still powerless to enforce that justice is served.
“In a country where armed groups routinely prey on civilians, peacekeepers should be protectors, not predators,” said Hillary Margolis, women’s rights researcher at Human Rights Watch.
“Sending peacekeepers back home is not enough. The UN needs to insist that troops’ home countries bring rapist and other abusers to justice, and that survivors get the support they need.”
Human Rights Watch documented the eight (8) cases of sexual exploitation and abuse by UN peacekeepers, known as MINUSCA, during research in Bambari between January 16 and 30, 2016. 
In this chapter of my report I have focused on the region of Africa for purpose of examples of these crimes, however, almost every vulnerable nation is at risk from the abuses of UN Peacekeepers, so many in fact, it would require several chapters to cover the global epidemic of Peacekeeper’s abuse of their power and position over the people’s poverty, or vulnerability of living in refugee camps.
This type of abuse of a Peacekeeper’s position is especially heinous for this very fact – the people they abuse are already suffering terrible physical and mental health trauma before being attacked; and the insidious instigation of children reduced to prostitution to keep their families alive – these crimes against humanity should be treated with zero-tolerance.
I say – double shame on the United Nations’ Secretary General, and triple shame on its seated leaders of inhumanity.