Infowars.com
March 23, 2011
No difference between Republicans and Democrats — both are addicted to war.
Check out the video on: http://www.infowars.com/ron-paul-and-the-judge-obamas-illegal-war/
Infowars.com
March 23, 2011
No difference between Republicans and Democrats — both are addicted to war.
Check out the video on: http://www.infowars.com/ron-paul-and-the-judge-obamas-illegal-war/
Yes, Bush and republicans like war for terrorist reason while Obama and democrates for humanitarian reasons. This is now a proved fact. Only the reason or pretext differ. They are all addicted to money and power they think will come out of it. They have just showed the ultimate face of both themselves and the greed of politicians before them. Looking so disgusting it wanna make me puke.
Article 51
of the Charter of the United Nations
“Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.
Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.”
Which countries making up the ‘US-led coalition’ which are attacking Libya, were themselves attacked by Libya?
Is this ‘US-led coalition’ ‘protecting civilians’ – or aiding armed combatants?
In order to seize control of Libya’s oil?
Under International Humanitarian Law – the Nuremberg Principles; the Geneva Convention(s), the UN Charter – how ON EARTH is this attack on Libya ‘lawful’?
Penny Bright (NZ)
http://waterpressure.wordpress.com
UNDER INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW – WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF ‘CIVILIAN’?
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977.
Part IV : Civilian population #Section I — General protection against effects of hostilities #Chapter II —
Civilians and civilian population
Article 50 — Definition of civilians and civilian population
1. A civilian is any person who does not belong to one of the categories of persons referred to in Article 4 A (1), (2), (3) and (6) of the Third Convention and in Article 43 of this Protocol.
In case of doubt whether a person is a civilian, that person shall be considered to be a civilian.
2. The civilian population comprises all persons who are civilians.
3. The presence within the civilian population of individuals who do not come within the definition of civilians does not deprive the population of its civilian character.
Art 43. Armed forces
1. The armed forces of a Party to a conflict consist of all organized armed forces, groups and units which are under a command responsible to that Party for the conduct of its subordinates, even if that Party is represented by a government or an authority not recognized by an adverse Party. Such armed forces shall be subject to an internal disciplinary system which, inter alia, shall enforce compliance with the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict.
2. Members of the armed forces of a Party to a conflict (other than medical personnel and chaplains covered by Article 33 of the Third Convention) are combatants, that is to say, they have the right to participate directly in hostilities.
3. Whenever a Party to a conflict incorporates a paramilitary or armed law enforcement agency into its armed forces it shall so notify the other Parties to the conflict.
_______________________________
Article 4 A (1), (2), (3) and (6) of the Third Convention
Art 4. A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:
(1) Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict, as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.
(2) Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:
(a) that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
(b) that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
(c) that of carrying arms openly;
(d) that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
(3) Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.
(6) Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.
__________________________________________________
Who is Gaddaffi allegedly killing?
‘Civilians’ or members of ‘organised armed forces’?
Who are the US-led Coalition protecting?
‘Civilians’ or members of ‘organised armed forces’?
IF YOU DON’T KNOW YOUR RIGHTS – YOU DON’T HAVE ANY!
(The same principle applies to rights under International Humanitarian Law.)
Penny Bright (NZ)
http://waterpressure.wordpress.com