ZAPRASZA.net POLSKA ZAPRASZA KRAKÓW ZAPRASZA TV ZAPRASZA ART ZAPRASZA
Dodaj artykuł  

KIM JESTEŚMY ARTYKUŁY COVID-19 CIEKAWE LINKI 2002-2009 NASZ PATRONAT DZIŚ W KRAKOWIE DZIŚ W POLSCE

Ciekawe strony

Zdarzenia niepożądane związane ze szczepionką przeciw Covid 
Przykłady uszkodzeń organizmu po szczepieniach na Covid-19.
Stan na październik 2021.
 
Aresztować Netanjahu 
Protest w Warszawie po decyzji Rządu. 
Ceremonia otwarcia tunelu drogowego św. Gotarda 
Zapowiedź tego - co mamy dzisiaj 
Opresja szczepień - nieznany zapis wideo - prof. Stansiław Wiąckowski 
W wrześniu 2016 roku ekipa NTV odwiedziła w Kielcach wybitnego człowieka. Profesor Stanisław Wiąckowski to odważny naukowiec, autor kilkuset publikacji na temat ochrony środowiska i zdrowia. 
Bezczelność syjonistycznych "nadludzi" 
Już nie kryją się ze swoją pogardą do reszty świata.

 
Dyrektorzy Moderny i AstraZeneca obwiniają Rządy za niebezpieczne szczepionki 
Chciałbym poznać datę, jeśli to możliwe, kiedy rozszyfrowaliście całą sekwencję DNA tego wirusa, czy też opieraliście się wyłącznie na sekwencji dostarczonej przez rząd chiński?
Czy podczas prób na ludziach umierali u was ludzie, a jeśli tak, to na jaką chorobę umierali? 
Demonstracja w Pradze przeciwko terrorowi kowidowemu 
Prowokacja policyjna w celu wywołania ataku na pokojową demonstrację przeciwko maskom w Pradze 18.10.2020.
Na wzór komunistów pisowskie media demonstrantów tych nazywają "chuliganami".  
Tego nie pokażą w żadnym medium głównego ścieku 
Śmiertelny atak! Iran wystrzeliwuje przerażające rakiety - Israel Emergency
 
Lockdown w Anglii 
Była kochanka Borisa Johnsona ujawnia - z kim Premier GB konsultował wprowadzenie stanu wyjątkowego pod pretekstem fikcyjnej pandemii
 

 
Po wykrwawieniu starego Hegemona, Syjon sprzymierzył się z Chinami 
 
Szczepionka do zabijania Ludzi 
Eksplozja nowotworów, zawałów i chorób po zastrzykach na Covid.
W dn. 8 lutego 2023 r. Dr David Martin gościł w programie 'Stew Peters Show' aby omówić niezaprzeczalny związek tzw. "szczepionek" na Covid z obserwowaną na całym świecie eksplozją nowotworów, zawałów serca i wielu innych chorób.…
 
Dr Mike Yeadon rozmawia z dr Reinerem Fuellmichem o kłamstwach dotyczących COVID  
„Nie bój się wirusa. To nie jest tak niebezpieczne, jak ci wmówiono.

„Bójcie się swoich Rządów - lub organów, które panują ponad tymi Rządami”. 
Debata ws. pandemii COVID-19! 
Sytuacja w Polsce i na świecie! Klimczewski, Socha, Giorganni!  
Iran mówi „nie” zakończeniu blokady Cieśniny Ormuz po przyznaniu się Trumpa | Janta Ka Reporter 
 
WHO: Poprzez zdrowie publiczne do globalnej dyktatury 
Traktat WHO oraz poprawki do Międzynarodowych Przepisów Zdrowotnych to bezpośredni atak globalistów na demokratyczne, suwerenne narody świata (chociaż już wiemy, że tak naprawdę ani one „demokratyczne”, ani „suwerenne”) w celu ustanowienia sanitarnej dyktatury WHO pod pretekstem walki z niekończącymi się pandemiami (a według nowej, zmienionej niedawno przez WHO definicji „pandemii”, pandemią może być dosłownie wszystko - może być „pandemia otyłości”, „pandemia depresji”, „pandemia kataru”, "pandemia alergii", itd.) 
Awantura w Sejmie o maseczki! 
Terror covidowy przeniósł się na teren Sejmu. Przeciwko temu protestuje Grzegorz Braun.  
Bankructwo Ukrainy 
 
Patriotyzm 
Piosenka Lecha Makowieckiego 
Przemoc seksualna wobec dzieci  
Organizacje pedofilskie na najwyższych szczeblach władzy 
Nastąpił globalny zamach stanu 
Oszustwo covid-19 zostało wymyślone w jakimś celu; była to część planu, który zaczął się na poważnie w latach 60., kiedy grupa ludzi spotkała się i zgodziła, że świat jest przeludniony. 
więcej ->

 
 

Ciekawostka - wojna z Irakiem była nielegalna

Surprise, surprise: War on Iraq was illegal

War on Iraq was illegal, say top lawyers

A panel of eminent experts will warn that UN authority has been 'seriously weakened' by conflict

By Severin Carrell and Robert Verkaik
25 May 2003

The war on Iraq will be condemned as illegal by a panel of eminent international lawyers at a conference being organised by the actor Corin Redgrave.

The symposium, to be held next Sunday at the Young Vic theatre in London, will also hear senior legal experts allege that the conflict has seriously weakened the authority of the United Nations and potentially threatened global security.

The panellists include Professor Philippe Sands QC, a member of Cherie Booth's Matrix chambers, Professor Christine Chinkin, professor of international law at the London School of Economics, and Jan Kavan, the president of the UN General Assembly and former Czech foreign minister.

Another prominent speaker, Professor Burns Weston, a human rights lawyer at the University of Iowa in the US, fears that other countries might use the American decision to wage war illegally to justify their own unlawful wars.
He is most concerned about India and Pakistan - two nuclear powers in dispute over Kashmir. "It is a very bad precedent for other countries that might seek, in their own lack of wisdom, to emulate the United States," he said.

The event, called "Liberation or War Crime" will be chaired by the former Radio 4 Today programme presenter Sue MacGregor and is expected to attract other prominent figures, including the playwright David Hare, the Booker
Prize-winning Indian writer Arundhati Roy and the former foreign secretary Robin Cook.
Prof Sands, one of 16 prominent international lawyers who earlier this year publicly warned Tony Blair that the war was illegal, said the conflict raised two major issues.

"First, did the Security Council authorise the use of force, and the answer to that is no. And [second] were we misled about the presence of weapons of mass destruction? Apparently, yes. These things are going to come back to haunt us," Prof Sands said.

Mr Redgrave, whose film roles include parts in Four Weddings and A Funeral, Enigma and In the Name of the Father, said one objective in staging and paying for the event was to investigate the damage caused by the war to international peace.

"Very early on, before the war began, it seemed that one of the main casualties of war was the whole fabric of international law and convention," he said. "It seemed to me there was a willingness, indeed a desire, on the part of America at least, to rend that fabric in a way that would almost make it irreparable."

The controversy over the legality of the war partly subsided on Thursday after the US supported an unexpectedly far-reaching resolution at the Security Council guaranteeing Iraq's independence and giving the UN a more powerful role in its reconstruction.

Although the resolution answered widespread concerns that the occupation of Iraq was also illegal - concerns shared by the Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith - British lawyers warned there were still serious worries over the legality of the coalition's conduct.

Peter Carter QC, chairman of the Bar Council's human rights committee, said coalition forces were in breach of UN Resolution 1325, which requires participants in a conflict to have particular regard to the rights of women.

Since the war, Mr Carter said, women feared more for their safety because of the frequent looting, chaos and unlawfulness. "Women must feel free to walk the streets and go about their business. It is true to say that Iraqi women during Saddam's rule experienced greater freedoms than in other Arab countries."

Prof Sands said the new UN resolution had, for the first time, cancelled all previous legal or contractual rights to Iraq's oil - giving the coalition freedom to sell the oil to whichever firm they wanted. This raised "far-reaching" questions about the rights of an occupier to control a country's natural resources.

'There was no threat. There was no resolution'

Professor Philippe Sands QC
Director of the Centre on International Courts and Tribunals, University
College London

The war was contrary to international law and it was contrary to international law whether or not they find weapons of mass destruction. The illegality was based on the absence of a Security Council resolution authorising the use of force. I think that is the view of almost every independent commentator.

The claim by the Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith - that the war was legal because Saddam Hussein had failed to comply with UN resolutions dating back to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait - has received almost no support outside the UK or the United States from independent academic commentators.

Professor Robert Black QC
Professor of Scots law, Edinburgh University, and architect of the Lockerbie trial in The Hague

It's simple and straightforward. There are only two legal justifications for attacking another country: self-defence, or if the Security Council authorises you to do so. It is perfectly plain that none of the Security Council resolutions relating to Iraq authorised armed intervention. It's possible to cobble together what looks like a legal argument, but the real test of any legal argument is whether a court would accept that argument. I challenged the Attorney General to say what he thought the odds were of the International Court of Justice in The Hague accepting his argument. In my view, the odds against were greater than 10 to 1.

Professor Sean Murphy
Associate professor of law at George Washington University, Washington DC

I think there's a real question to be raised about whether the US, UK and Australian coalition properly intervened in Iraq without Security Council authorisation, and I think there are very sound reasons for saying that the intervention was not permitted. The US-UK legal justification, which is based on Security Council resolutions dating back to 1990-91, isn't credible. When you look closely at the resolutions and the practice of the Security Council, it's clear that the majority of members of the Security Council believed that further authorisation was needed in March 2003 than, in fact, existed.

Professor Vaughan
Lowe Chichele Professor of Public International Law, All Souls College, Oxford

The new resolution provides a firm legal basis for the coalition occupation of Iraq.
It gives the UN a role that is prominent on paper but which, in fact, is not at all powerful on the ground. The coalition practically has a free hand in 'promoting' reform and the formation of an interim administration ... The key question is how far the coalition may proceed with economic and political restructuring in Iraq before the election of a government by the Iraqi people. The resolution does not spell that out; nor does it fix any timetable for the return of power to the Iraqi people. Nor does it stipulate how the massive reconstruction costs of the programme - and the benefits, in terms of commercial contracts - will be distributed.

Professor James Crawford
Whewell Professor of International Law, Jesus College, Cambridge

On the information available, none of the exceptions that permit the use of force applied. There was no UN Security Council authorisation, and no
imminent humanitarian catastrophe, and no imminent threat of the use of force by Iraq. I think it was unlawful in the beginning, and they haven't found anything since to make one change one's mind.
The earlier Security Council resolutions were related to the occupation of Kuwait, and that situation has completely changed. It's very contrived to treat Resolution 1441 as if it authorises the use of force.

Professor Mary Kaldor
Professor of global governance, London School of Economics

Going back to the 1991 UN resolutions is the real weakness of their
argument. It is an awfully long time ago, and it's as though this isn't a new war - as if it is the same war we fought in 1991. I think that it is an incredibly weak legal case. I don't think there's any way we can argue that the Iraq intervention was legitimate, and it's illegitimate for two reasons.
There was no real case that the inspectors weren't dealing with the weapons of mass destruction. And, we're now seeing what a lot of people warned we would see: that this will be bad for [curbing] terrorism rather than good.
26 May 2003 11:27
3 czerwiec 2003

przesłała Elżbieta 

  

Archiwum

Kołodko zostaje
Miller też

grudzień 19, 2002
Adam Zieliński
Pipsztyk
wrzesień 15, 2002
korekta (ku pamięci)
Zniewolenie ekonomią
lipiec 28, 2003
Prof. Anna Ra?ny
Czym kończy się powrót do polityki?
grudzień 31, 2007
Gregory Akko
2009.02.15. Serwis wiadomosci ze świata bez cenzury
luty 15, 2009
tłumacz
Makler okradł bank na 5 mld euro
styczeń 24, 2008
PAP
Oszustwa GUS w polskich Rocznikach Statystycznych. Ukrywanie eksterminacji i grabieży narodu
wrzesień 15, 2007
tłumacz
Belka zadowolony z obniżki stóp
czerwiec 27, 2002
PAP
Co robić? (II)
marzec 31, 2003
Andrzej Kumor
Przeminął czas
styczeń 12, 2004
przesłała Elżbieta
Passentowa choroba
wrzesień 29, 2003
Andrzej Kumor
Is Poland America's donkey or could it become NATO's horse?
maj 12, 2003
przesłała Elżbieta
Hubalczycy
maj 7, 2005
przesłała Elzbieta
Katastrofa w Kaliforni
styczeń 30, 2005
Mirosław Naleziński
Dokąd zmierzasz Polsko
sierpień 17, 2003
przesłała Elżbieta
Sojusz Talmudu z Radykalnymi Protestantami
marzec 9, 2008
Iwo Cyprian Pogonowski
Kraków żegna Papieża Jana Pawła II
kwiecień 7, 2005
Emeryci i renciści mają być wreszcie bardziej ludzko traktowani.
listopad 18, 2006
Zdzisław Raczkowski
Puk, puk nowe idzie...
grudzień 10, 2005
Marek Olżyński
Ex-Mossad Chief Calls For World War After London Attack
lipiec 9, 2005
przysłał Krzysztof Cieplisz
więcej ->
 
   


Kontakt

Fundacja Promocji Kultury
Copyright © 2002 - 2026 Polskie Niezależne Media