Again, here is a copy of the Law of War manual for reference. https://dod.defense.gov/Portals/1/Documents/law_war_manual15.pdf
To start you off, I posted this a few months ago and it explains how the Geneva Convention rules apply when there is a foreign occupation and how the United Nations could get involved if international rules were not followed. https://greatawakening.win/p/13zg9ZWTFC/hello-patriots-i-took-some-time-/
That post led to a conversation about the start date of the occupation. If we have to wait a year, when did it begin? Did it begin when he won the election, when the election was ratified or did it start on inauguration day? I think I found the answer.
If you look at 11.2.4 (page 749) in the Law of War Manual, it says "there is no specific legal requirement that the Occupying Power issue a proclamation of military occupation."
However, it also states "A proclamation may help fix the date of the beginning of the occupation. The proclamation may also advise inhabitants of occupied territory of the rules with which they must comply. In particular, the proclamation may be used to advise inhabitants of changes to law, including penal law."
There it is! "The proclamation may also advise inhabitants of occupied territory of the rules with which they must comply" What did Biden do on his first day in office (Jan 20th)? He signed 17 executive orders telling us the rules with which we must comply. When he signed the EO's, he changed the rules and that was his proclamation of occupation.
If we go to page 1073 section 18.9.3.1 we find " Grave Breaches of the 1949 Geneva Conventions"
Grave breaches of the GC are those involving any of the following acts, if committed against persons or property protected by the GC:
• willful killing;
• torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments;
• willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health;
• unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement of a protected person;
• compelling a protected person to serve in the forces of a hostile Power;
• willfully depriving a protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed in the GC;
• taking of hostages; and
• extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly.
I think it is safe to say that Biden has broken most, if not ALL, of the rules established by the GC. The grave breaches will be used to prosecute him and anyone who participated in this belligerent occupation.
If we go to page 1126, section 18.23.5 "Conspiracy"
The term conspiracy is defined as the combination of minds in an unlawful purpose.
Page 1127, section 18.23.5.1 " Conspiracy to Commit Genocide"
The Genocide Convention provides that conspiracy to commit genocide shall be punishable. Thus, mere agreement by perpetrators to commit genocide may be punishable even if no preparatory act has taken place.
Page 1119, 18.22.3 Official Position Does Not Relieve a Person of Responsibility.
The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible Government official does not relieve him or her of responsibility under international law.
Page 1120, 18.22.4 Acting Pursuant to Orders Does Not Relieve a Person of Responsibility.
The fact that a person acted pursuant to orders of his or her Government or of a superior does not relieve that person from responsibility under international law, provided it was possible in fact for that person to make a moral choice.
To summarize, just following orders will not be a defense, being a head of state will not be a defense and if you conspired with this plandemic, at any level, you will be held responsible and charged with conspiracy to commit genocide. I think Fauci will be the first arrest. "First arrest will verify action and confirm future direction." Q Imagine what will go through the minds of all these liberals when he gets charged with conspiracy to commit genocide. "What did he inject me with?"
How many world leaders will be arrested along with him. It is a conspiracy, "combination of minds in an unlawful purpose".
I think it will happen soon and the cabal knows its coming.
They tried to pass HR-1 in a gutted NASA bill yesterday, They are desperate, they are panicking. Enoy the show.
I have more, I will post it later.
Stay safe my frens!!
WWG1WGA!!!
Meh. You kinda assume too much, don't you? I've been going over this for days now, by which I mean, reading the LoW manual, analysing it, checking to see if there is any basis for the assertions.
I'd prefer to ask the question of the OP, to see if the OP can back up his/her post, instead of just saying "you're wrong".
Funny that you're accusing me of copy/pasta and not actually doing the work. I guess different people have different approaches to actually digging, posting, and discussing.
But I could have been more clear. The first quote in my comment above is from the OP's previous post where he lays the assertions on which this current post is based. (OP would have recognized it, but perhaps no one else, unless they're paying the same level of attention to this that I am).
The second quote in my comment above is from the actual LoW manual itself.
I'm attached to the 1 year issue because so many people appear to be accepting it as gospel when no one, as far as I can see, has provided any evidence in the LoW that this is relevant.
In the current post, I don't really have any disagreement with the OP's supposition re: proclamation, in and of itself, except that the flimsy and unsubstantiated nature of the assertions people are letting fly (i.e. using reason, instead of actual evidence in LoW) makes me doubt most of the whole premise.
For example, one dude mengderen is asserting that the belligerent occupier is Biden camp, another one is asserting, no, Trump is the occupying force.
LoW discusses obligations of the occupier to uphold GC, and does not refer at all to what a sovereign cannot do.
No one said putting the pieces together would be easy. Patel Patriot does a masterful and sterling job of laying out the Devolution theory, precisely because he ONLY focuses on facts and evidence that is there, and clearly distinguishes between interpretation, speculation and the actual evidence.
I'm yet to see any of that sort of diligence around the "mah one year" assertions or theory.
Researching with an agenda yields little and you are the poster child for fruitless endeavors...
OK, I'm going to take that as a constructive criticism.
Thanks for your sincere reply.