Kindgo
Advanced Member
Member # 2
|
posted
American 'Outlaws'
Constitution Vs. The World Court
It is the U.N.'s court for resolving disputes between nations. It has no power to enforce its decisions, and the United States has disregarded them in the past.
This is the third case filed by the World Court in five years against the United States on the issue of the death penalty. Sandra Babcock, a lawyer for Mexico, said she expects America to comply.
She warned, “These types of orders are binding on the United States. By ignoring the decision, the United States would send the impression that it ‘didn't care about the rule of law.’”
Then came the inevitable threat, “Americans traveling abroad are more vulnerable than ever at this point in time, and if the United States disregards the order of the world’s highest court on an issue that directly affects Americans abroad (consular assistance), I think that sets a very dangerous precedent.”
There is a growing perception that the United States is becoming something of an international outlaw. At best, we are getting a reputation for being an international scofflaw.
America is preparing to invade Iraq, in spite of the fact that various and sundry international lawyers say that would be a violation of international law. The World Court says America cannot carry out the legally imposed sentences for those convicted and condemned under American law.
If we did, says the World Court, we would be in violation of ‘international law’. Once, when asked what he thought of Western civilization, Mahatma Gandhi said, “I think it would be a very good idea.” The same argument could be made for ‘international law’.
The globalists argue that international law is all that stands between us and the Saddams, the Stalins and the Hitlers. But what is law? Oxford Dictionary defines it as the “body of rules ... which a particular State or community recognizes as governing the actions of its subjects or members and which it may enforce by imposing penalties.”
Note three things. Laws are passed by a particular sate or community. They are binding on the subjects of that state. And to be laws, there must be penalties. Blackstone's Law Dictionary defines law as “That which must be obeyed by citizens subject to sanctions or legal consequences. Law is a solemn expression of the will of the supreme power of the State.”
So, who is the State that is behind the World Court? Who are the subjects of that State? And what supreme power does the World Court express by its rulings? In point of fact, there is no functioning, legal world government.
Therefore, there is no “state” or “community” which is the sovereign upon whose will the so-called “law” emanating from the United Nations is predicated. This is no minor technicality. As U.S. citizens, each of us is entitled to have our governmental decision-making based upon the structure described in the Constitution.
Nowhere does the Constitution envision the surrender of authority to foreign governments for matters such as war making, movement of armed forces, conduct of diplomacy or setting foreign policy.
There is no true political process within the United Nations. We, as U.S. citizens, have no vote in the General Assembly or the Security Council.
Listen to how the UN defines international law. “The customary law, which determines the rights and regulates the intercourse of independent nations in peace and war.”
Would that be like the international law that Saddam Hussein is subject to? The UN further defines it as “A body of rules established by custom or treaty and agreed as binding in the relations between one nation and another.” But the concept of international law collapses under the weight of that definition as well.
If international law evolved out of ‘custom’ like the Magna Carta, the UN has only been around 50 years. When the UN was born in 1945, it had 51 members. With Switzerland’s membership in 2002, there are now 191.
Where did the extra 140 countries come from? They are the breakaway parts of the original fifty. So from what common custom does International Law spring? The whole process is a myth.
But it is a myth primarily perpetuated by undemocratic states that do not obey laws – states that in fact would like to do America harm.
This actually threatens America as much as any real terrorist does.
Author: Hal Lindsey
--------------------
God bless,
Kindgo
Inside the will of God there is no failure. Outside the will of God there is no success.
Posts: 4320 | From: Sunny Florida | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged | 
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
