|
| davidicke.pl |
|
| Tym - którzy interesują się losami Świata nie ma potrzeby przedstawiać Davida Icke. Tym ktorzy do tej pory spali umysłowo ta strona może otworzyć oczy. |
|
| 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. |
|
| Tu jest Polska, a nie Polin! Protest pod Sejmem! |
|
Protest przeciwko świecy chanukowej pod Sejmem w Warszawie.
|
|
| Izraelscy żołnierze zamordowali 15 sanitariuszy i ratowników ze Strefy Gazy i zakopali w nieoznaczonym masowym grobie |
|
| |
|
| Odważni eksperci z USA, Rosji i Czech mówią prawdę o szczepieniach |
|
| |
|
| 5 przykładów izraelskich zbrodni wojennych w Strefie Gazy |
|
| |
|
| Uzasadnienie haniebnego wyroku Izby Lekarskiej przeciwko dr Zbigniewowi Martyce |
|
| Przestępcy z Izby Lekarskiej pozostawili dowody na przyszły proces przeciwko nim |
|
| Nazwisko Horban na mapie świata |
|
| |
|
| Papież błogosławi strażników de Rotschild |
|
| To nie jest pomysł Dana Browna na nową powieść, ale wydarzenie, które umknęło uwadze mediów w Polsce, a oznacza wsparcie Watykanu dla potężnych postaci świata finansów i przemysłu, deklarujących działania na rzecz przemiany systemu gospodarczego współczesnego świata. |
|
| AI to wyrok śmierci, który już jest wykonany |
|
| Pod koniec 2023 roku ukazała się książka Pana Profesora „informatyka w służbie ludobójstwa” w której opisuje całe swoje życie i to, jak największe korporacja świata budowały jego zdaniem swoje marki na ludobójstwie, w tym w trakcie II Wojny Światowej i obozach zagłady |
|
| Zielony ŁAD zniszczy UE, a wcześniej zniszczy prywatną własność |
|
| |
|
| Rosyjska ruletka, czyli epidemia testów |
|
| Jak jeden mąż przyjęto błędny model matematyczny i zamknięto w domach miliony ludzi wpędzając ich w dodatkowe problemy zdrowotne i finansowe. Zrujnowano gospodarki, zlikwidowano całe branże, przekreślono cały dorobek na temat zdrowego stylu życia. |
|
| Człowiek 2.0 |
|
| Nanoszczepienia i Transhumanizm, MODERNA w natarciu na mR |
|
| Dr Michael Yeadon: masowe morderstwa z paszportami szczepionek i szczepionkami uzupełniającymi |
|
| Ten system jest wprowadzany za pomocą kłamstw w jakimś celu, i myślę, że celem jest całkowita totalitarna kontrola. |
|
| Zabójcze leki - prof. Stanisław Wiąckowski - 15.03.2017 |
|
| Zapis wykładu prof. Stanisława Wiąckowskiego omawiającego m.in. leki i ich składniki, które wbrew powszechnym opiniom nie leczą, a wręcz przyczyniają się wzrostu zgonów. Wiedza ta jest ukrywana przez koncerny farmaceutyczne, a nazwy leków zmieniane i dalej są dopuszczanie i promowane w sprzedaży mimo wiedzy, iż ich działanie jest zabójcze. |
|
| Szczepionka na covid ma służyć genetycznej mutacji ludzkości |
|
Dr. Andrew Kaufman Responds To Reuters Fact Check on COVID-19 Vaccine Genetically Modifying Humans
In the first interview the two discussed the coronavirus, they covered testing and they covered the vaccine. The video was quickly approaching 100k views but YouTube removed the video after only a couple days. This video will likely be taken down as well, because it does not conform to the establishment's narrative.
Not only did YouTube remove the previous video, Reuters, which is a massive international news publication that news sites from all over the world obtain their talking points from, published a fact checking report attempting to debunk Dr. Kaufman's claims that the new COVID-19 DNA vaccine would genetically modify humans. In this must see report, Dr Kaufman responds to the Reuters ‘fact checking’ report.
|
|
| Ekspert od COVID-u, okazał się być awatarem stworzonym przez Chińczyków |
|
| |
|
| Peruwianski sad uznal B. Gatesa G. Sorosa i Rokefelerow odpowiedzialnych za tworzenie "pandemii" COVID 19 |
|
| |
|
| Próba upodmiotowienia obywateli za pośrednictwem internetu |
|
| Celem serwisu jest umożliwienie obywatelom wyrażenia swojej woli w najważniejszych dla nich sprawach. |
|
| Niemiecki agent na czele Instytutu Pileckiego |
|
| |
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
|
|
|
|
Jak to z Polanami bylo
maj 22, 2008
przeslala Elzbieta Gawlas
|
Uratowac Polski istnienie
lipiec 17, 2008
...
|
Masoni nie wybrali Belki
listopad 25, 2005
|
"Och, Zyta"
KLIKA - Kabaret Autorów Marek Sobczak & Antoni Szpak
wrzesień 12, 2002
SOBCZAK & SZPAK http://www.angora.pl
|
"Zachodnie wzorce"
listopad 19, 2002
Artur Łoboda
|
Odpowiednie potraktowanie "geniuszy biznesu"
lipiec 13, 2005
PAP
|
Kosowo
nowe "państewko"
luty 19, 2008
Jacek Bartyzel
|
Czy przeproszą
sierpień 19, 2003
Tłum. Alex L.
|
To nawet nie jest śmieszne...
maj 3, 2007
¬ródło informacji: RMF
|
Bóg się rodzi, moc truchleje
w Palestynie giną ludzie
grudzień 26, 2002
PAP
|
Reklamy leków - jak proszek do prania
październik 15, 2006
Adam Sandauer
|
"L" ("lewoskrętne") oraz "P" ("prawowite") odmiany chrześcijaństwa
wrzesień 21, 2006
dr Marek Głogoczowski
|
Zmieniać aby nie zmienić
kwiecień 18, 2005
Kazimierz Murasiewicz
|
Zła wola uwola
lipiec 18, 2006
Jeremi Jedlicz
|
Prezydent u amerykanskich Żydów
październik 1, 2007
przesłała Goska
|
Warszawa 13.05.2005
maj 17, 2005
Alina
|
Sejm zdrady
grudzień 20, 2007
...
|
Demokraci atakują Busha za interwencję w Iraku
PAP 02:00
listopad 15, 2005
PAP
|
Oblicze frustracji czyli -
"Konieczność pacyfikacji polskich służb specjalnych i prokuratury"
maj 12, 2005
konstytucjonalista
|
Komu nie wolno latać
maj 1, 2003
prof. Iwo Cyprian Pogonowski
|
więcej -> |
|
