|
| Rothschildów apetyt na Chiny |
|
| |
|
| Dr. Jeff Barke przerywa milczenie o COVID19 |
|
| |
|
| Chcą całkowitej eksterminacji wszystkich Palestyńczyków |
|
| Izrael i Hamas: czy ludzi ogarnęło zbiorowe szaleństwo? |
|
| Po tych szczepionkach 12-15 letnie dzieci umierają na krwotoki mózgu, zawały serca, niewydolność serca |
|
|
|
| Kolędowanie w Alternatywie dla Niemiec |
|
| |
|
| Deborah Tavares o broni elektromagnetycznej stosowanej wobec społeczeństw cz I, 13 marca 2021 |
|
| Deborah Tavares z portalu StopTheCrime.net i PrimaryWater.org ma liczne filmy na YouTube i niestrudzenie bada dokumenty wypuszczane przez amerykańską administrację. |
|
| Cicha Broń do Cichych Wojen |
|
| |
|
| Paszporty szczepionkowe to koń trojański (napisy PL) |
|
| |
|
| Czy zaszczepieni staną się własnością koncernów farmaceutycznych? |
|
| Czy szczepienia służą nowoczesnemu niewolnictwu? |
|
| Niemcy 1940 - Izrael 2009 - Szokujące zdjęcia |
|
| |
|
| Czy celem szczepień jest unicestwienie USA? |
|
“To, czego KPCh pragnie najbardziej, to aby amerykańscy żołnierze zostali zaszczepieni...
Po zaszczepieniu wojsk amerykańskich, mówię wam, szczepienie przeciwko wirusowi KPCh będzie w znacznym stopniu bliska końca”. |
|
| Dowody na zbrodnię ludobójstwa szczepionkowego są nawet w bazie VAERS |
|
To jest artykuł z maja 2013 roku!
i dotyczy wszystkich - wcześniejszych szczepień. |
|
| TAK SIĘ BAWIĄ UKRAIŃCY - KORUPCJA źródłem BOGACTWA? |
|
| Bardzo drogie auta, prywatne odrzutowce, jachty, helikoptery i nieruchomości w luksusowych europejskich destynacjach, przemyt w walizkach kilkunastu lub kilkudziesięciu milionów dolarów i ponad miliona euro tak bawią się ukraińskie elity. |
|
| 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 |
|
| Na straży wolności: Goldman Sachs |
|
| Gerald Celente i John Stossel rozmawiają z sędzią Napolitano o różnych, nie do końca jasnych powiązaniach, między amerykańskimi bankami i rządem USA. Największe podejrzenia budzi bank Goldman Sachs, który ma dziwną nadreprezentację we władzach rządowych. Dla przypomnienia, dodam, że pracownikiem tego banku jest były premier RP, Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz, a bank był zamieszany w spekulacje na złotówce. |
|
| Ludobójstwo covid |
|
| Wywiad z CLAIRE EDWARDS |
|
| AI nie będzie świadoma, twierdzi Roger Penrose (Nobel 2020) |
|
| Czy sztuczna inteligencja może być i czy kiedykolwiek będzie świadoma? |
|
| Peruwianski sad uznal B. Gatesa G. Sorosa i Rokefelerow odpowiedzialnych za tworzenie "pandemii" COVID 19 |
|
| |
|
| CZY ROZUMIESZ SKĄD ZAMIESZKI I PRÓBA WYWOŁANIA WOJNY DOMOWEJ W USA? |
|
| nie podejmuje żadnych interwencji w stosunku do osobników kierujących takimi organizacjami jak „Antifa” i Black Lives Matter – czyli George Sorosowi, Billowi Gates czy Amerykański wirusolog i członek powołanej przez administrację Donalda Trumpa grupy zadaniowej ds. epidemii COVID-19 Anthony Fauci – który jest siłą napędową dla Gatesa i Sorosa w sparawie Covid-19 i szczepionek. – to wszystko, zaprzecza opisom powyższego artykułu. Myślę że czas pokaże co dalej… |
|
| Konzentrationslager Fuehrer |
|
| Niemcy - obóz koncentracyjny dla niewierzących w wirusa |
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
|
|
|
|
Russia is Doomed
styczeń 17, 2005
Said Ibrahayev
|
Pakistan traktowany jak republika bananowa w celu pacyfikacji Afganistanu
wrzesień 15, 2007
Iwo Cyprian Pogonowski
|
Ludzie z wazeliny
październik 30, 2008
Marek Jastrząb
|
Praca - dobro luksusowe ?
czerwiec 26, 2003
Artur Kowalski
|
Śląscy "biznesmeni" ukradli 4 mln zł
lipiec 4, 2002
PAP
|
Rozprawa o Ruch przełożona z 25 czerwca na 22 pa?dziernika
czerwiec 24, 2004
|
Pewnego razu, Gomułka ...
luty 20, 2004
El
|
Powstanie wymusił „Monter”...
sierpień 15, 2008
www.myslpolska.pl
|
Komputerowe sprawdzanie wyników wyborów - tylko pilotażowo
sierpień 3, 2002
PAP
|
Jałowa machinacja
marzec 11, 2003
|
Oblicze bestii 666
marzec 2, 2009
tomeq
|
Uczciwość ludzka
marzec 26, 2006
Artur Łoboda
|
Bogata Rosja, biedni Rosjanie
grudzień 18, 2007
Iwo Cyprian Pogonowski
|
Możemy kupić 4 razy mniej paliwa...
listopad 3, 2005
INTERIA.PL
|
A może nie warto zaglądać na ten Portal?
marzec 1, 2007
Artur Łoboda
|
Pl.Jokes.Diamenty???Walenty???
luty 13, 2007
8IIIFAN
|
Umarł człowiek
Zbylut Grzywacz 1939-2004
lipiec 29, 2004
Artur Łoboda
|
"Przestańmy myśleć tylko o sobie"
grudzień 18, 2002
Tygodnik "Forum" / L'Express - 2002.11.7
|
Nowy VAT: 24 proc.?
luty 28, 2003
Krzysztof Tomaszewski http://www.gazetaprawna.pl/
|
Apel o tłumaczenia
styczeń 16, 2006
Jerzy Paruszewski
|
więcej -> |
|
