Trade Regulations

Question by Joe_Pardy: Has President Bush’s use of force, fueled a nuclear arms race, as Russian President Putin claims ?
“…the United States, has overstepped its national borders in every way…”

“This is very dangerous. Nobody feels secure anymore because nobody can hide behind international law.

“This is nourishing an arms race with the desire of countries to get nuclear weapons.”

– Vladimir Putin, Russian President

Putin attacks ‘very dangerous’ US

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6349287.stm

Best answer:

Answer by Answerman
Just because he is Russian don’t make him wrong. With Bush threatening Iran, he is becoming the most dangerous man in the world and he needs to be impeached and then tried for his war crimes in Iraq, maybe Iraq hung the wrong person.

Add your own answer in the comments!

Question by Mizz G: what are the laws in indonesia concerning international schools?
There’s this law “UU No 23/2003″ on the national education system, and what I understand from reading it is that a national curriculum for primary and secondary schooling is to be designed by the government. However, I don’t think I saw a clause in there ruling whether national Indonesian children must be educated according to national curriculum as long as they live in the country, or whether expat children living in Indonesia are exempted from national Indonesian curriculum.

Doesn’t this technically mean that international schools in Indonesia are illegal? I’d like to think not, because there are a lot of great international schools in Jakarta, and I don’t hear a lot of them getting in trouble with the government, if at all. But then, there must be some written laws out there concerning the existence of English or other language speaking schools in Indonesia which employ foreign curricula, and regulations on who are eligible to skip the Indonesian national curriculum by going to those special schools. Does anybody have any information on such laws?

Best answer:

Answer by KGP
Your questions are techinical best to contact some of the schools for the answers :

http://www.jisedu.org/site/main.php?sWidth=1093&sHeight=614

and

http://www.bis.or.id/

Give your answer to this question below!

Question by Biomimetik: Is This The Beginning Of The End For The Barbaric Zionist Enclave?
THE RACIST ZIONISTS were yesterday condemned for systematically and deliberately targeting civilians in Lebanon, acts which the respected New York organisation Human Rights Watch described as HATE CRIMES and “serious violations of international law”

“In HUNDREDS of attacks, the barbaric racist zionists struck an area with no military target,” the report states.

VIEW FULL (HRW) REPORT HERE:

http://hrw.org/reports/2006/lebanon0806/

US taxpayer paid for ISRAEL atrocities — WHO ARE THE REAL TERRORISTS?:

http://www.thewe.cc/contents/more/archive/atrocities.htm

http://fromisraeltolebanon.info/

http://www.jewwatch.com/

Uncensored News Reports (video) From Across The Middle East

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14374.htm

Click here for dial up video:

http://ia310342.eu.archive.org/1/items/Mosaic20060803/Mosaic20060803_64kb.mov

Best answer:

Answer by lucky_j_2003
spin spin spin you are wrong

Add your own answer in the comments!

Question by joewas: Isreali settlements illegal or legal ?
has the UN or the british news agencies for that matter provided a full explaination as to why they think settlements are illegal ? a definition ? i would love to find out about it. does anyone know of a press release or a longer statement than “settlements have been deemed illegal under international law”
im talking about a detailed explaination, if you have one involving the balfor declaration the geneva convention and any other bits of information you have thanks x

Best answer:

Answer by Liberals make me laugh
land is yours for only as long as you can hold it….

Give your answer to this question below!

Question by Ursus Particularies: What did President Putin mean?
When he said nations of the world “cannot hide behind International Law.”???

Who is hiding behind International Law?

Isn’t it better to honor it?

Best answer:

Answer by oneundergod
international law is a beast that says if you can enforce obeyance to any law it is lawfull ,
ie might is right if you can cower others into acceptance ,hence dictators that violate laws yet dont obey human decencies are still accorded by international law a defacto legitimicy ,because it is proven to be enforcable ,by sociaty accepting it

Give your answer to this question below!

Question by Longhaired Freaky Person: Do you agree with what Vladamir Putin said about the United States today?
Mr Putin told senior security officials from around the world that nations were “witnessing an almost uncontained hyper use of force in international relations”.

“One state, the United States, has overstepped its national borders in every way,” he said, speaking through a translator.

“This is very dangerous. Nobody feels secure anymore because nobody can hide behind international law.

“This is nourishing an arms race with the desire of countries to get nuclear weapons.”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6349287.stm

Best answer:

Answer by sydb1967
yes, it’s true. those who dont think it is are blind.

What do you think? Answer below!

Question by Sweet Lou Singer: What can states do to expand criminal defendants’ rights if the US Supreme Court will not protect such rights?
As since 1803 in Marbury vs. Madison, the Supreme Court was deemed the country’s constitutional referee, so I’m prone to go with the answer “states cannot do anything”.

Other choices are “Governors can veto US Supreme Court decisions”
(but I’ve seen a bill that was deemed unconstitional that wanted just that)

“states can appeal to the International Court of Law”
(International court? Wouldn’t they not have jurisdiction?)

“State courts can use their state constitutions to protect defendants’ rights”
(this seems like a very likely alternative to “they can do nothing”)

“States can impeach the justices of the US Supreme Court”
(they can’t, can they?)

Or, the original answer I thought was the most plausible, “states can not do anything”.
(Given that story over president Obama scolding the justices of the Supreme Court for their recent decision.)

What choice do you think is correct?
I think that I would have to change my answer to the one about state constitutions too, simply because it makes more sense.

I will choose best answer when I figure out what’s the acceptable answer myself.

It’s on the quiz tommorrow, Feb 4th 2010.

Best answer:

Answer by billy h
I would use your Original answer. I would say “although there appear to be ways for the states to expand criminals rights such as (then list all the ideas you showed above), the states really have no checking power over the Judaical branch, supreme court. For the most part, what the supreme court decides goes. There are indirect ways to check the supreme court, but no direct ones. For example the president approves the Justices, and the Legislative (congress) branch can handcuff some of the presidents votes… but realistically states have now power if the Supreme court chooses to intervene.

hahah sorry for the long rant, hope it helps.

Add your own answer in the comments!

Question by tom.t: Why doesnt anybody take the UN seriously and just pursue their own agenda?
Countries like Sudan, Israel and America do whatever they feel like and say “screw human rights, screw international law”.
them as well JP
Bobo if its a 3rd world mouthpiece the 3rd world should be given veto power. No its in the hands of America who has used it more times than any other nation in defense of illegal wars of aggression.
Michon youre wrong, I’m not American or liberal, for the umpteenth time, if calling random people American liberals is your only retort on important issues I feel sorry for you and the hole you crawled out of.

Best answer:

Answer by J P
As opposed to those stalwart defenders of human rights such as Cuba, North Korea and Venezuela?

Give your answer to this question below!

Question by J D: What do you think about this Obama quote?
in a press conference yesterday he said, in regards to iran, “…security is achieved through the adherence to international law.”

Best answer:

Answer by Yahole
The U.S. should start adhering to international law.

Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!

Question by enslavementality: Do you think biblical “laws” are similar to U.S. federal laws?
In that, they don’t really apply if you’re out over international waters?

Best answer:

Answer by Daniel B
yes 100%.

What do you think? Answer below!