News:

Welcome to the Astral Pulse 2.0!

If you're looking for your Journal, I've created a central sub forum for them here: https://www.astralpulse.com/forums/dream-and-projection-journals/



International Crime Court

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

jilola

Not intending to hurt anybody's feelings...  but I think the reason for the USs reluctance to accept the court's jurispudence(sp?) is that the US would then risk having its foreign actions being called for investigation and possible prosecution. At least this is what I've gathered from what's been in the media in Europe.
The court would be severely limited in power if there were significant countries that are not supporting the court.


My 2cents

Jouni

Tisha

This whole International Court fiasco makes me feel embarrassed to be a U.S. citizen.  Who do we think we are, anyway?  

The U.S. power structure apparently thinks it can do whatever it pleases (like drop ordinance on weddings in Afghanistan, as the USAF did yesterday), prop up evil dictators, assassinate who they please . . . often without U.S. citizens even knowing it.  As long as we can have our burgers and fries and our malls and our cheap gas, we don't seem to care.  

The media even lies to us . . . yesterday the CNN website stated "A bomb went astray while the USAF was under fire but we don't know where it landed."  BULLSH** ----- CBS already had photos posted online of a child who'd been taken out by the USAF bombs.

God only knows whatever other evil the U.S. may be up to.  THAT's WHY the U.S. will not support the international Court.  It knows it is guilty.  Once the world starts airing its grievances against us in an official capacity, the media will be all over it, and we will look up from our burgers-and-fries, aghast at what dirty deeds fund our cushy lifestyle.

I hope the International Court presses on, without the U.S.  if necessary.  

tisha

Tisha

jilola

I thought about the mess the world is in these days a while back and came to the conclusion that while individual people are i general fairly intelligent Nations are the blundering idiots. A group behaves distinctily differently form any of its individual members, well usually anyway.

A guess a bit of the attitude the US as a nation has comes from the isolation of it being a continent.
2cents again http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/images/icon_Smile.gif" border=0>

Jouni

Cylentpanthur

Here's the kitty cat on her soap box again. The US has several good reasons for not joining the international court. One of which being that it's not constitutional. The Constitution states that the highest court in the land is the Supreme Court and no other. Joining the IC puts it higher than our own. The reason the US has pulled out of Bosnia is not in retaliation of anything. The US asked for immunity from the IC so that it could continue it's peacekeeping efforts without having to fear procecution at every call of "human rights violation." Because anytime it's called, founded or unfounded, our people would have to stand trial from a power we don't recognize. Because we were not granted that immunity, the US has pulled out to protect it's own people. And it's not all of the UN nations. There are several who have not ratified the court, and several who have, are not a member of the UN. Before you form an opinion, read all sides of the story, and remember that everyone writing those stories has their own bias. Don't believe everything you read.

MEOW http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/images/icon_Smile_sleepy.gif" border=0>

jilola

Yep. I can understand that point of view. Although the statement in the Const. about judicial power of the Supreme Court isn't exclusive.
Personally I don't see how the International court is ever going to be effecting.

Jouni

WalkerInTheWoods

I do not see how it can be effective either if every nation does not agree to it.

I do not know all the facts, that is why I posted on here. I have not been able to find much on this so I hoped some on here could give more facts, especially those in other nations.

I do not think this would violate the Constitution and the Supreme Court being the highest Court of the land. This International Court is that international, while the Supreme Court is domestic, so would still be the highest Court over the US. But it is not very effective when dealing with international issues, which this new court would be able to deal with. So the Supreme  Court would be the highest court of the land (land being the US, unless the entire world belongs to the US), and the IC would be over international issues and not domestic.

Of coarse I can see good and bad things about this court. I do not know all the facts so I cannot commit to a firm stance one way or another. But it still seems like the US is behaving badly. It is the image that is given off from the actions taken.

Alice had got so much into the way of expecting nothing but out-of-the-way things to happen, that it seemed quite dull and stupid for life to go on in the common way.

koshka

Hi --

I'm reading PRACTICAL PSYCHIC SELF-DEFENSE.  Robert is great about staying on topic ala Occam's Razor.  He acknowledges the vast areas of inquiry that would be tempting to follow down the rabbit hole, yet he sticks to the concrete actualities of "Neg" attacks as he has direct experience.  My own question is: are we not subject to Neg attacks in our governments and institutions?  Yes, this IS a rabbit hole in that I am not personally a major organ in the body politic -- or is such an attitude an example of Neg influence on my public consciousness?

"Dubya" Bush, a globalist through and through, is totally on board with an International Criminal Court actually.  This debate, so-called, is a crafted melodrama.  A few cycles of phoney compromises and Bush will endorse a version of the ICC which will stipulate that the supreme global "governance" authority, the UN of course, can never be subordinate to such a court, nor any of it's combatant agents, such as the US, carrying out tasks for the UN.
PRIVATE CITIZENS ANYWHERE, however, will be constantly subject to the tribunal dictates of the ICC -- with none of the bothersome safeguards which are recognized in such instruments as the US Constitution.  You can be charged, tried, and sentenced without ever knowing it, then abducted for punishment, never being permitted to face accusers or have a jury present.
OR, you can just be abducted and held (and perhaps tortured) indefinitely; or just killed in the meantime by thugs carrying ICC stamped papers -- or not even carrying papers (do you QUESTION the Centurion's authority!?).  US Supreme Court " justices" have already promised to subordinate themselves to rulings of the ICC, betraying their oath to protect the rights of sovereign citizens of the United States.  It's not a matter of America (or Switzerland, Cambodia, United Kingdom, etc.) being ABOVE others by being SOVEREIGN, it's a matter of these nations betraying their citizens, abandoning them to fall BENEATH  these distant governance tribunes who will brook no silly individual rights chirping.

College-processed young people assume that THEY will be the enlightened, elite, professional class who will be among these new princes of this glorious New World Order.  A Platonic World Republic for the philosopher kings from Winnemucca Community College dictating to the the lumpkin masses!  Only there's already a self-appointed elite class on this planet -- has been for a long time, and they ain't taking any new applications -- except for toadies and useful idiots.  The unwieldy numbers of the lumpkin livestock must be thinned, culled and confined in access sties for the pleasures of the Masters who can at last ride about the whole world without intolerable limits.

The Masters will be appointing these NGOs and panels "managing" the whole Earth.  It is their divine/diabolical destiny.  Below them no one will be "above" in any way that matters one whit.



Ashfo

quote:
Originally posted by Cylentpanthur:
Here's the kitty cat on her soap box again. The US has several good reasons for not joining the international court. One of which being that it's not constitutional.



Just quickly.... Are you telling me the USA PATRIOT act is constitutional?


- Ashfo


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
"You are First Cause. You are a portion of the great energy. And you, yourselves are thought manifestations of what you think you are."
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

cainam_nazier

Fallenangel77-

"I do not see how it can be effective either if every nation does not agree to it."


I don't agree with most of what the US does but they seem to get along just fine with out my opinion.

In other words, you don't need permission to be a dictator.  Or in this group a body of dictators.

"Why should I trade one tyrant three thousand miles away for three thousand tyrants one mile away?"  -The Patriot.


David Rogalski
cainam_nazier@hotmail.com
I am he who walks in the light but is masked by the shadows.

koshka

The ICC considers their rulings binding on ALL nations if a MAJORITY of UN member nations agree.  Is the concept "color of law" understood?  It's like a guy putting on a horsehair wig and calling himself a magistrate on no more substance than the wig alone.  The Emperor has NO clothes -- oh, maybe just a wig.

Our "leaders" are all traitors; our "nations" are all but franchises.


WalkerInTheWoods

I do not know a lot about this, they seem to not be covering this much in the US but I caught a little on the radio yesterday. They are apparently creating an International Crimes Court to prosecute people who commit international crimes. I do not know who all the nations are that are in this, I assume it is all of the UN nations. But the US refuses to sign this. Now I do not know all the laws for this but the impression  I get is that the US holds everyone to a certain standard, trying to influence them into a certain mold. But the US is apparently above everyone else. By not trying to work something out and go with this it seems that the US is saying that it is too good to be judged by other nations.

In some kind of retaliation for going ahead with this the US is not going to continue with the Bosnia Peace Mission. This seems very selfish, abanding something that seems to be very helpful to people just because the other nations are trying to do something without the US. Is it just me or does this seem very childish? Like the child that has all the toys and when something does not go his way he gets all his toys and goes home.

Alice had got so much into the way of expecting nothing but out-of-the-way things to happen, that it seemed quite dull and stupid for life to go on in the common way.