This is NOT a Government Website.
Avoid Hustlers, Theives, and Con-Artist Attorney's. Visit: USCourtJudges.com Right Now!                             
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=+jeffrey+l+phillips+pacific+law+center+state+bar+california+&btnG=Search

Web
Images Video News Maps Gmail more ? Blog Search Blogger Books Calendar Documents Finance Groups Labs Orkut Patents Photos Products Reader Scholar
  Advanced Search
  Preferences
 Web  Results 1 - 10 of about 640,000 for jeffrey l phillips pacific law center state bar california . (0.06 seconds) 
Tip: Save time by hitting the return key instead of clicking on "search"

Jeffrey L. Phillips - a La Jolla, California (CA) Lawyer

Jeffrey L. Phillips. Firm:, Pacific Law Center ... State Bar of California Member. Past Employment Positions:. Pacific Law Center. Birth Information: ...
pview.findlaw.com/view/1722400_2?noconfirm=0 - 25k - Cached - Similar pages









http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=+jeffrey+l+phillips+california+bar+attorney&btnG=Search

Web Images Video News Maps Gmail more ? Blog Search Blogger Books Calendar Documents Finance Groups Labs Orkut Patents Photos Products Reader Scholar
  Advanced Search
  Preferences
 Web  Results 1 - 10 of about 1,260,000 for jeffrey l phillips california bar attorney. (0.16 seconds) 
Tip: Save time by hitting the return key instead of clicking on "search"

Jeffrey L. Phillips - a La Jolla, California (CA) Lawyer

Jeffrey L. Phillips. Firm:, Pacific Law Center. Address:, 4225 Executive Square Suite 1550 La Jolla, CA 92037 Map & Directions. Phone:, (877) 749-0000 ...
pview.findlaw.com/view/1722400_2?noconfirm=0 - 25k - Cached - Similar pages

Jeffrey L. Phillips - a Phoenix, Arizona (AZ) Lawyer

Jeffrey L. Phillips. Firm:, Phillips & Associates ... State Bar of California Member. Past Employment Positions:. Pacific Law Center. Birth Information: ...
Map of 3030 N 3rd St, Phoenix, AZ 85012
pview.findlaw.com/cmd/profileview?wld_id=1722400_1&channel=&print=1 - 18k - Cached - Similar pages
[ More results from pview.findlaw.com ]




http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Schill%2C+John+A.+California+attorney&btnG=Search

Web
Images Video News Maps Gmail more ? Blog Search Blogger Books Calendar Documents Finance Groups Labs Orkut Patents Photos Products Reader Scholar
  Advanced Search
  Preferences
 Web  Results 1 - 10 of about 15,100 for Schill, John A. California attorney. (0.14 seconds) 
Tip: Save time by hitting the return key instead of clicking on "search"

Pacific Law Center - a La Jolla, California (CA) Bankruptcy Law ...

La Jolla, CA 92037 Map & Directions. Phone:, (877) 749-0000. Fax:. E-mail:, Contact Us ... Samaniego, Celine I., Attorney · Schill, John A., Attorney ...
pview.findlaw.com/cmd/profileview?wld_id=3547590_1&channel=&print=1 - 18k - Cached - Similar pages








http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Schill%2C+John+A.+pacific+law+center

Web Images Video News Maps Gmail more ? Blog Search Blogger Books Calendar Documents Finance Groups Labs Orkut Patents Photos Products Reader Scholar
  Advanced Search
  Preferences
 Web  Results 1 - 10 of about 22,300 for Schill, John A. pacific law center. (0.08 seconds) 

Pacific Law Center - a La Jolla, California (CA) Bankruptcy Law ...

Pacific Law Center. Address:, 4225 Executive Square Suite 1550 La Jolla, CA 92037 Map & Directions ... Schill, John A., Attorney · Schreiber, Jeffrey D. ...
pview.findlaw.com/cmd/profileview?wld_id=3547590_1&channel=&print=1 - 18k - Cached - Similar pages

John A. Schill - a La Jolla, California (CA) Accident Injury Lawyer

John A. Schill. Firm:, Pacific Law Center. Address:, 4225 Executive Square Suite 1550 La Jolla, CA 92037 Map & Directions. Phone:, (877) 749-0000 ...
pview.findlaw.com/view/2834483_2 - 19k - Cached - Similar pages






http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Wagner%2C+Barry+S.+pacific+law+center&btnG=Search

Web Images Video News Maps Gmail more ? Blog Search Blogger Books Calendar Documents Finance Groups Labs Orkut Patents Photos Products Reader Scholar
  Advanced Search
  Preferences
 Web  Results 1 - 10 of about 424,000 for Wagner, Barry S. pacific law center. (0.11 seconds) 
Tip: Save time by hitting the return key instead of clicking on "search"

Pacific Law Center - a La Jolla, California (CA) Bankruptcy Law ...

Pacific Law Center. Address:, 4225 Executive Square Suite 1550 La Jolla, CA 92037 ... Slattery, Thomas, Supervising Attorney · Wagner, Barry S. ...
pview.findlaw.com/cmd/profileview?wld_id=3547590_1&channel=&print=1 - 18k - Cached - Similar pages

Barry S. Wagner - a La Jolla, California (CA) Lawyer

Barry S. Wagner. Firm:, Pacific Law Center. Address:, 4225 Executive Square Suite 1550 La Jolla, CA 92037 Map & Directions. Phone:, (877) 749-0000 ...
pview.findlaw.com/view/3549451_2?noconfirm=0 - 22k - Cached - Similar pages










http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=pacific+law+center+findlaw&btnG=Search

Web Images Video News Maps Gmail more ? Blog Search Blogger Books Calendar Documents Finance Groups Labs Orkut Patents Photos Products Reader Scholar
  Advanced Search
  Preferences
 Web  Results 1 - 10 of about 521,000 for pacific law center findlaw. (0.11 seconds) 
Tip: Save time by hitting the return key instead of clicking on "search"

Pacific Law Center - a La Jolla, California (CA) Bankruptcy Law Firm

Pacific Law Center. Address:, 4225 Executive Square Suite 1550 La Jolla, CA 92037 Map & Directions. Phone:, (877) 749-0000 ...
pview.findlaw.com/view/3547590_1 - 26k - Cached - Similar pages

Pacific Law Center - a La Jolla, California (CA) Bankruptcy Law ...

http://lawyers.findlaw.com ... Pacific Law Center. Address:, 4225 Executive Square Suite 1550 ... Products Liability Law Toxic Torts Traffic Violations ...
pview.findlaw.com/cmd/profileview?wld_id=3547590_1&channel=&print=1 - 18k - Cached - Similar pages


TEHRAN, IRAN: Oct. 6 2006 -- Which country is in breach of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty? I posed that question to an American friend I met over lunch during a recent trip to Florida, and while his response that it was Iran was not a shocker, he was quite confused and surprised to learn otherwise. And there lies the problem with the so-called “civilized Western society” where misinformation and disinformation are systematically and intentionally implanted in the consciousness of the unsuspecting public by the so-called mainstream media.

If you don’t believe this, then just pick any story on any given day about Iran’s nuclear activity and somewhere in the narrative you will undoubtedly come across this or very similar statement:

“Iran refuses to suspend its uranium enrichment activity, which can produce among other things, the material for atomic bombs. Tehran insists that its nuclear program is for generating electricity but the West believes Iran wants to make nuclear weapons.”

The above assertion is then dutifully repeated by almost every media outlet -- newspapers, radio, and TV stations -- on a daily basis in order to create a negative image of Iran.

Before determining whether Iran is in violation of the NPT, we must first review a little history.

On the morning of August 6, 1945, the United States dropped the first nuclear weapon, code named "Little Boy", on the city of Hiroshima, followed three days later by the detonation of a second nuclear bomb, "Fat Man", on Nagasaki, Japan, incinerating 214,000 people.

Having built and used the ultimate weapon, the U.S. adopted a failed policy of monopoly and exclusion by even refusing to cooperate with its closest wartime ally Britain, which independently along with France developed their own nuclear weapons. By 1964, there were five declared nuclear weapon states with the Soviet Union and China posing the first proliferation fear for the West. In 1965, the Geneva Disarmament Conference began considering a draft non-proliferation treaty which led to the introduction of the formal treaty which was then opened for signature on July 1, 1968 and entered into force on March 5, 1970. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was charged with the primary task of verifying that parties to the NPT are complying with its terms.

Article I of the NPT requires the nuclear weapon states undertake not to transfer to any recipient whatsoever nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices and not to assist, encourage or induce any non-nuclear-weapon state to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.

Under Article II, each non-nuclear-weapon state pledges not to receive, manufacture, or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, and not to seek or receive assistance in their manufacture.

Article III obliges each non-nuclear-weapon state to accept comprehensive international safeguards through agreements negotiated with the IAEA. The intent of these safeguards is to deter and detect the diversion of nuclear material for nuclear explosive purposes.

Under Article IV, parties may engage in peaceful nuclear programs in a manner consistent with Articles I and II and are expected to assist the nuclear programs of other parties. It emphasizes that nothing in the treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the parties to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with articles I and II of the treaty.

Article VI obligates the nuclear weapon states to pursue plans to reduce and liquidate their stockpiles and all parties to pursue good-faith negotiations on effective measures relating to ending the nuclear arms race at an early date, to nuclear disarmament, and to achieving a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.

Article VII recognizes the right of any group of states to conclude regional treaties ensuring the total absence of nuclear weapons in their respective territories.

So if you haven’t figured it out by now, uranium enrichment is a central tenet guaranteed by Article IV of the treaty as an "inalienable right" granted to all non-nuclear states. It is the process that produces the fuel to run a nuclear reactor in order to produce electricity which is conveniently dismissed as “among other things” in the news example cited above. It is also the carrot without which there is no incentive for countries to join the NPT, as they would then be accepting an apartheid system that rewards nuclear states without any practical benefits for the non-nuclear members. The right to utilize nuclear technology without developing nuclear weapons is vital for the treaty to remain credible and enforceable.

The United States, on the other hand, is in material breach of Article VI, which requires the nuclear weapon states to “pursue plans to reduce and liquidate their stockpiles of nuclear weapons”. To the contrary, the U.S. has secured funding and is actively pursuing development of a new generation of nuclear weapons and has never allowed inspection of its nuclear facilities by the IAEA.

Iran is only refusing the UN Security Council’s demand to give up its right under Article IV to enrich uranium, which it suspended voluntarily for a time as a "confidence building" measure. Having failed to win any meaningful economic or diplomatic incentives from the West for temporarily suspending something that is guaranteed to every other member state, it resumed that lawful activity earlier this year. In its August 22nd reply to the incentive package offered by the permanent members of the Security Council plus Germany, it called for negotiations to consider such action again, but not as a precondition but rather as part of a serious and respectful dialogue.

This was published in Tehran Times - October 2006

Secret memo shows Israel knew Six Day War was illegal

By Donald Macintyre
Published: 26 May 2007

A senior legal official who secretly warned the government of Israel after the Six Day War of 1967 that it would be illegal to build Jewish settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories has said, for the first time, that he still believes that he was right.

The declaration by Theodor Meron, the Israeli Foreign Ministry's legal adviser at the time and today one of the world's leading international jurists, is a serious blow to Israel's persistent argument that the settlements do not violate international law, particularly as Israel prepares to commemorate the 40th anniversary of the war in June 1967.

The legal opinion, a copy of which has been obtained by The Independent, was marked "Top Secret" and "Extremely Urgent" and reached the unequivocal conclusion, in the words of its author's summary, "that civilian settlement in the administered territories contravenes the explicit provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention."

Judge Meron, president of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia until 2005, said that, after 40 years of Jewish settlement growth in the West Bank - one of the main problems to be solved in any peace deal: " I believe that I would have given the same opinion today."

Judge Meron, a holocaust survivor, also sheds new light on the aftermath of the 1967 war by disclosing that the Foreign Minister, Abba Eban, was " sympathetic" to his view that civilian settlement would directly conflict with the Hague and Geneva conventions governing the conduct of occupying powers.

Despite the legal opinion, which was forwarded to Levi Eshkol, the Prime Minister, but not made public at the time, the Labour cabinet progressively sanctioned settlements. This paved the way to growth which has resulted in at least 240,000 Jewish settlers in the West Bank today.

Judge Meron, 76, is now an appeal judge at the Tribunal. Speaking about his 1967 opinion for the first time, he also tells tomorrow's Independent Magazine: "It's obvious to me that the fact that settlements were established and the pace of the establishment of the settlements made peacemaking much more difficult."

Blaming restrictions on Palestinian movement for the devasatation of the Palestinian economy, the World Bank earlier this month acknowledged Israeli security concerns but added that many of the restrictions were aimed at " enhancing the free movement of settlers and the physical and economic expansion of the settlements at the expense of the Palestinian population." The settlements and their "jurisdictions" effectively control about 40 per cent of the area of the West Bank.

The argument that the settlements are illegal, stated in successive UN resolutions, and by the International Court of Justice advisory opinion condemning the separation barrier in 2004, is reinforced by such an authoritative source. It strengthens the political case in any "final status" negotiations on borders with the Palestinians for genuinely equitable land swaps of Israeli territory to a future Palestinian state if Israel is to retain settlement blocks.

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon secured a promise in 2004 from President George Bush that large Israeli "population centres" in the West Bank could remain in Israel in any such negotiations. In a subsequent letter to the Palestinians, the President promised that final borders had to be subject to agreement by negotiation.

Judge Meron's memorandum was obtained from the Israel State Archives. His subsequent defence of it amounts to a direct challenge to Israel's continuing contention that the Geneva Convention's provisions on settling people in occupied territory did not apply to the West Bank because its annexation by Jordan between 1949 and 1967 had been unilateral.

The memorandum was written in September 1967 as the Eshkol government was already considering Jewish settlements in the West Bank and the Golan Heights, seized from Syria during the Six Day War. It says that the international community had already rejected the "argument that the West Bank is not 'normal occupied territory'."

It pointed out that the British ambassador to the United Nations, Lord Caradon, had already asserted that Israel's position was that of an occupier. It added that a decree from the army command saying that military courts would "fulfil Geneva provisions" indicated that Israel thought so too.

Judge Meron also says in his interview that such an argument would not in any case have applied to the Golan Heights which had been undisputed as sovereign Syrian territory prior to the Six Day War.

While the Olmert government has so far rejected calls for peace negotiations by Syria's President Bashir Assad, it has been weighing a welter of internal advice proposing that it explores talks seeking an end to Syrian support for Hizbollah and Hamas in return for restoring the Golan Heights to Syria.

The memorandum, details of which were published by the Israeli writer Gershom Gorenberg last year, also says settlements built on private land would explicitly contravene the 1907 Hague Convention.

The only implicit acknowledgement of the Meron memorandum - which Mr Gorenberg established also went to Moshe Dayan, the triumphant Defence Minister during the Six Day War - was that one of the first West Bank settlements, Kfar Etzion, was initially called a "military outpost" although it was already, in effect, a civilian settlement. The memorandum said there was no legal prohibition against military posts in occupied territory.

Ehud Olmert fought the Israeli election last year on a programme of unilateral withdrawal from parts of the West Bank - usually thought to mean dismantling settlements east of the separation barrier, which cuts deep into the West Bank in places. But this strategy was abandoned after the Lebanon war.

Mark Regev, the foreign ministry spokesman, said yesterday: "We do not accept that the West Bank is occupied in the classic sense." He added that it was not sovereign Jordanian territory before 1967 and it had not enjoyed legal status since the British mandate, which had the remit, underpinned by the League of Nations, of establishing a Jewish national home.

He added: "That said we accept the principle of two states living side by side and obviously in the creation of this state settlements will be coming down. I would point anyone who says that is impossible to what happened in Gaza less than two years ago."

Mr Regev also said that in some settlements - like Hebron where Jews left after a massacre by Arabs in 1929 - Jews had a long history of residence preceding the War of Independence in 1948.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2584164.ece