The US government, via Merrick Garland, is claiming Civil Forfeiture Laws and International Sanction Laws to legally justify sending “Alleged” Iranian ammo and weapons confiscated in January 2023 to the victim – Ukraine. Except Ukraine isn’t a victim of Iran terrorism and the weapons were in transport “supposedly” to Yemen. They were on a unidentified wooden ship in the Gulf of Oman. The US Navy boarded the unmarked vessel crewed by Yemeni sailors. The sailors were NOT identified as Houthi.
A United Nations arms embargo has prohibited weapons transfers to the Houthi rebels in Yemen since 2015.
The Navy CENTCOM statement declares the weapons were seized in The Gulf of Oman – which is considered territorial water – not International Waters.
Yemen is a member of the UN. While the US was a supporter of the Civil War on behalf of the government, Biden declared the US would no longer be involved as of 2021. The confiscation took place in January 2023 in territorial waters and the weapons were determined to have been made in China and Russia according to CENTCOM.
REALITY: an unidentified boat in territorial waters within the Gulf of Oman crewed by Yemeni’s was illegally boarded by US Navy operating in said waters and cargo was seized and confiscated by the US Military. That seized cargo is now being transferred to Ukraine, which is not a party to Yemen or Iran.
“The U.S. Attorney’s Office has again taken action to prevent Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps from spreading violence and bloodshed across the world and threatening the security of our nation and allies,” said U.S. Attorney Matthew M. Graves for the District of Columbia. “As proven before, where we have jurisdiction, this office will use all the tools available in our power to prevent criminals and terrorists from threatening global stability.”
There is absolutely no evidence the weapons came from Iran – there is only speculation. Therefore, the terrorist clause would not exist. In addition, International laws used to govern international waters are based on the country where the ship is registered and the flag it is flying. Territorial waters are governed by the border countries.
In determining what defines terrorism and terrorist activity, the US adopted:
Section 212(a)(3)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). Wherein, “terrorist activity” means: any activity which is unlawful under the laws of the place where it is committed – in this case, The Gulf of Oman.
Terrorism is defined as:
- to commit or to incite to commit, under circumstances indicating an intention to cause death or serious bodily injury, a terrorist activity;
- to prepare or plan a terrorist activity;
Terrorism means may involve the use of:
(b) explosive, firearm, or other weapon or dangerous device (other than for mere personal monetary gain), with intent to endanger, directly or indirectly, the safety of one or more individuals or to cause substantial damage to property.
** Section 140(d)(2) of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1988 and 1989 defines “terrorism” as: “premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents.”
Yemen: Firearm ownership is a right. It is allowed without any license or permit and carry is unrestricted.
US Civil Forfeiture Law requires that the international individual, entity or organization be planning or perpetrating an act of international terrorism. Once the property is seized it is held by the Department of Treasury until such time as an arrest warrant has been issued pursuant to Maritime Claims via The Attorney General, Garland. The rules for disbursement of any property confiscated state that reimbursement is to ‘those who are claimants or creditors of the property’ – ‘victims’.
Ukraine was/is not a victim of Yemen or Iran. And the entire parade of sending these assets to Ukraine is illegal and a violation of US and International Law. No procedure or arrest warrant was every conducted.
It is also of interest as to why the Attorney General, Merrick Garland, who is tasked with preserving the assets did not file a criminal forfeiture claim if in fact terrorism was involved in International Waters… ANSWER: Because Criminal Forfeiture would require an actual conviction of the person(s) charged. Which was not performed. And because under UN law, such seizures must be destroyed or stored. They may NOT be transferred to anyone.
Manipulating the Laws, altering the official account of the entire confiscation, making the unfounded claim that the weapons came from the IRGC – a terrorist organization as listed by the US, create greater and greater caverns for the Military, State Department, and Attorney General who are purposefully overriding US and International Law to suit an agenda – Ukraine.
It also puts US military positions across the globe in perilous insecurity given the law is distorted and devolves us further into global chaos. IF International Law is abridged by the US – the law is no longer enforceable against anyone – it has been breeched. In that vein, the US Military will be viewed as Pirates on the Sea.