• If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • Work with all your cloud files (Drive, Dropbox, and Slack and Gmail attachments) and documents (Google Docs, Sheets, and Notion) in one place. Try Dokkio (from the makers of PBworks) for free. Now available on the web, Mac, Windows, and as a Chrome extension!


Our Basic Statement: Discussion

Page history last edited by Andrew Lohmann 12 years ago

The Basic Statement for NetLap 

A few people have talked about this and the wording at present is:

NetLap seeks to increase knowledge of the domestic and international laws of Armed Conflict and Human Rights among citizens, Parliamentarians, and decision makers; and to explore, develop and improve productive communication between them.

We need to get this right, so do come back with your ideas for refining it. a



Alternative - please amend or delete as you wish. It takes on all coments I think but it may be unknecessarily broad.

NetLAP aims to strengthen international laws of Armed Conflict and Human Rights and thereby improve the respect for, and public perception of those laws in a more humanitarian way.


NetLAP therefore seeks to identify and disperse knowledge of laws of Armed Conflict and Human Rights, And where those laws are not being applied or where they could be strengthed provide support and information for citizens, Parliamentarians, and decision makers to use to acheive NetLap's aims.

Comments (5)

Andrew Lohmann said

at 11:11 am on Oct 15, 2009

This statement puts all concisely, but dryly.

George Farebrother said

at 10:23 pm on Oct 15, 2009

Andrew - would you want to have a go at re-wording it more catchilly?

George Farebrother said

at 10:30 pm on Oct 15, 2009

Jim McCluskey has suggeste making the following addition to the Basic Statement: ... "and to elucidate the degree to which these laws are being or are not being observed."

George Farebrother said

at 8:22 pm on Oct 19, 2009

Here's a comment from Martha Jean Baker

I also wonder if instead of war of armed conflict we talk about humanitarian law and its relationship to human rights law – there are parallels and differences that need to be understood. Humanitarian law is generally thought to be another term for law of armed conflict – the Geneva conventions and such

Andrew Lohmann said

at 4:39 pm on Nov 14, 2009

I thought further after looking at Jim McCluskeys' wish to identify where law is not being observed. There is an overiding natural law of might is right, although I am inserting a note of sinism; the point is as with everything you can only push authority a limited amount. They can never make there possition untenable; military persumably could never become pacifists and stay in bussiness. A politician at the present time could not easily be pacifist though in the 1920's Keir Hard's for the independant Labout Party had a pacifism in his manifesto. The point is that the statement should, I think push as far as is obtainable without becoming too marginalised.

I suspect that the Native Americans (Red Indians) still have tittle, by peace treaties signed by them, to the whole north american continent. US governement democratic system is in anycase based on the Native system of corcuses and primaries. I can't imagin that anyone would get anywhere trying to enforce any of that though. Actually I don't know what the treaties say but an awful lot of British and French soliders were killed by a compartively tiny number of native warriors until they signed the treaties and stopped fighting.

You don't have permission to comment on this page.