|
| Lockdown w Anglii |
|
Była kochanka Borisa Johnsona ujawnia - z kim Premier GB konsultował wprowadzenie stanu wyjątkowego pod pretekstem fikcyjnej pandemii
|
|
| Śledztwo w sprawie zbrodni wojennych w Strefie Gazy |
|
| To "pierwsze w historii ludobójstwo transmitowane na żywo... Jeśli ludzie są nieświadomi, to są świadomie nieświadomi" |
|
| Wszystko pod kontrolą |
|
Od zawsze służby specjalne kontrolowały rzekome niezaplanowane spotkania oficjeli z obywatelami.
Przykład podstawionego Putina - jako przypadkowego przechodnia.
|
|
| Szczepionkowy stan wojenny w Nowym Jorku |
|
| Nowy Jork inicjuje wprowadzenie medycznego stanu wojennego z użyciem oddziałów wojska, aby przejąć szpitale, z których niezaszczepieni pracownicy służby zdrowia są masowo zwalniani |
|
| W pierwszej kolejności powinno zostać ustalone, kto za to odpowie? |
|
| Niektórzy mówią, że jest to wirus, który ma zlikwidować Christmas w Wielkiej Brytanii oraz w całej Europie – unieruchomić kraj w momencie, kiedy chrześcijanie obchodzą jedno z dwóch najważniejszych świąt w ciągu roku |
|
| Hashtag COVID1984 |
|
Szczególnie polecamy:
"Tłum uzbrojonych w miecze Sikhów atakuje policję w Nanded po tym, jak rząd zakazał publicznych procesji w związku z p(L)andemią. Tak się walczy o swoje prawa! "
|
|
| Meredith Miller - Trauma w relacjach ludzi z rządem. Psychologiczne aspekty operacji „Covid-19” |
|
Jak robi się z ludzi idiotów czy zmanipulowane marionetki i jak ludzie robią to sobie sami !
|
|
| To tylko... / It's just... |
|
| Jak Nas wganiają w kajdany |
|
| Drugi List otwarty prof. Ryszarda Rutkowskiego |
|
| Panie Ministrze, Szanowni Państwo to prawda "że Internet przyjmuje wszystko", ale na szczęście pozwala też przełamywać rządową cenzurę i autocenzurę polskich naukowców i lekarzy, którzy swoim milczeniem autoryzowali i dalej autoryzują wielokrotnie bezzasadne działania rządu (np. w sprawie przymusowego noszenia maseczek). Dzisiaj bowiem w Holandii, Czechach, Szwecji, na Białorusi miliony ludzi chodzą bez maseczek na twarzy, nie chorują i nie umierają. W Polsce zaś, wbrew opiniom naukowców z Australii, czy USA miliony rodaków, w tym młodzież licealna, studenci i schorowani seniorzy muszą narażać swoje zdrowie nosząc "cudowne" bawełniane maseczki i/lub przyłbice |
|
| Naczelna Izba lekarska współpracuje z duchami zmarłych lekarzy |
|
| Bezczelność kowidowców przekroczyła wszelkie granice. Powołują się na autorytet zmarłych lekarzy, by ścigać uczciwych lekarzy. |
|
| Zakrzyczana prawda |
|
Mamy 2010 rok a zbrodniarze którzy doprowadzili do wielu wojen i kryzysu światowego w w dalszym ciągu - z tupetem - niczym Josef Goebbels kłamią w oczy w kwestii sytuacji gospodarczej świata i Stanów Zjednoczonych
|
|
| Cała prawda o World Trade Center |
|
| Filmik dokumentalny przedstawiający wydarzenia z 11 września 2001 roku. |
|
| Tego preparatu nie można nazywać szczepionką. Nazywam to konstruktem mRNA, rekombinowanym RNA, preparatem, który jest dziełem inżynierii genetycznej. |
|
| Prof. zw. dr hab. Roman Zieliński “O szczepionce genetycznej Pfizera i testach PCR” |
|
| Kryptoreklama-czy prawdziwe lekarstwo na cukrzycę? |
|
| "W naszym kraju nie skupiamy się na leczeniu diabetyków, ale na zarabianiu pieniędzy przez duże koncerny farmaceutyczne." |
|
| Ponad 5 lat po kowidzie wojna wobec uczciwych lekarzy trwa dalej |
|
| Zbrodniarze kowidowi niszczą lekarzy |
|
| Veto dla Funduszu Zadłużenia! |
|
| Konferencja Konfederacji:Veto dla Funduszu Zadłużenia! Apel do prezydenta Dudy - 7 maja 2021 r. |
|
| Szczepienia pełne kłamstw |
|
To szczepionki, a nie wirusy, powodują choroby.
Wirusy pobudzają proces zdrowienia. Nie są naszymi wrogami, stoją po naszej stronie.
Wybuch epidemii świńskiej grypy z 2009 roku ma swoje korzenie w inżynierii genetycznej i jest wynikiem działania człowieka. |
|
| Uzasadnienie haniebnego wyroku Izby Lekarskiej przeciwko dr Zbigniewowi Martyce |
|
| Przestępcy z Izby Lekarskiej pozostawili dowody na przyszły proces przeciwko nim |
|
| Kanciarze z Wall Street |
|
| Film przedstawia kulisy Wall street . Metody działania , które doprowadziły w ciągu kilku ostatnich lat do wywołania kryzysu finansowego. |
|
| Astrid Stuckelberger, sygnalistka WHO - wywiad 'Planet Lockdown' |
|
| |
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
|
|
|
|
Jubilatka a imaż przyjaznej firmy
listopad 14, 2004
Mirosław Naleziński
|
Jak oszukać PKB?
czerwiec 17, 2006
Mirosław Naleziński, Gdynia
|
Program podróży Jana Pawła II do Polski
sierpień 5, 2002
PAP
|
Czekiści w natarciu
lipiec 14, 2006
Stanisław Michalkiewicz
|
Zagadka dla "gieniuszy yntelektu"
maj 14, 2007
¬ródło informacji: INTERIA.PL/PAP
|
Życie w Gazie, czyli do Żydzi robią w Palestynie - wideo
listopad 25, 2007
przysłała Dorota
|
Sowińska chce zabronić seksu 17-latkom
marzec 25, 2008
Artur Łoboda
|
Wiek katastrofalnego kapitalizmu
październik 23, 2007
Naomi Klein
|
Janukowycz wrócił do władzy
sierpień 10, 2006
Marek A. Koprowski
|
Kto jest odpowiadzialny za klęskę w Iraku?
listopad 10, 2006
Iwo Cyprian Pogonowski
|
Israel Über Alles
listopad 14, 2007
przysłał ICP
|
Jak funkcjonują największe gangi (1)
Dla kogo pracuje Marek Belka?
luty 25, 2005
nz
|
„Faszyści” i obłąkańcy
grudzień 11, 2006
Stanisław MICHALKIEWICZ
|
"Kryminalizacja Polityki Zagranicznej USA"
luty 28, 2007
Iwo Cyprian Pogonowski
|
Armia oprawców
luty 14, 2008
marduk
|
NEXUS - Bronie do zdalnej manipulacji mozgu
czerwiec 20, 2008
Goska
|
Przeczytaj pomysl i pozwol podobnie uczynic innym.
styczeń 31, 2003
Elzbieta
|
al-Kubaysi: Proces polityczny korzystny dla Al-Kaidy
sierpień 10, 2007
przysłał marduk
|
Pominięte oskarżenie w sprawie Saddama Husseina
listopad 4, 2005
Iwo Cyprian Pogonowski
|
Nierządy rządu, czyli poszeptywania szatana
lipiec 3, 2007
Marek Olżyński
|
więcej -> |
|
