IRC-Galleria

The Fourth U.S. "Supreme International Crime" in 7 Years Is already Underway
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=HER20060521&articleId=2492

Suosittelen lukemaan, ei edes ole pitkä teksti verrattaen sisältöön. Kaikkiin väittämiin löytyy viitteet. Artikkelissa käydään läpi jenkkilän rikokset, asenteet YK:ta ja muuta maailmaa kohtaan ja puhetta siitä mistä muutenkin puhutaan, ydinaseet, kellä saisi olla, kellä ei saisi olla ja kuka niitä edelleen kehittelee NPT:stä huolimatta.

"in sustaining these frames it is necessary to suppress major facts, such as: (1) that there is no proof that Iran plans to go beyond the civilian uses of nuclear materials to which it is entitled under the NPT and the IAEA has never claimed that it has evidence of such weapons efforts or plans; (2) that both the United States and Israel possess large and usable nuclear arsenals,18 and both have attacked other countries in violation of the UN Charter, which Iran has not yet done; (3) that Iran is far less dangerous than Israel and the United States because it is very much weaker than the two that threaten it, and could only use nuclear weapons in self-defense—offensive use would be suicidal, which is not the case should the United States and Israel attack Iran"

"the United States has been a chronic violator of the NPTÂ’s Article VI requirement that all parties "pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control." In the context of the U.S.-driven accusations about IranÂ’s violations of the NPT, it is worth emphasizing that in a 1996 decision by the International Court of Justice, the fourteen judges on the Court ruled unanimously that "There exists an obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control."20 The United States has brazenly ignored this ruling, refusing to countenance any form of disarmament or international control over its sovereign rights on questions of war and peace, openly working on improving its nuclear weapons,21 and even threatening to use them against Iran.22"

"It is clear that when it comes to actions that the superpower (or its leading client states) chooses to take, international law is completely inoperative, and that this has become institutionalized and accepted by the "international community" (which doesnÂ’t include the global underlying population)"

- Piski