Another step toward world government (United Nations New World Order)

Conservatives, alarmed over the erosion of American sovereignty, suffered another setback this week.

The New York Times describes the defeat: "The United States bowed Wednesday to broad opposition on the Security Council and announced it was dropping its effort to gain immunity for its troops from prosecution by the International Criminal Court."

It is a victory for the New World Order, and internationalists see it as such. Both the Financial Times ("U.S. Retreats on Bid for War Crimes Immunity") and The New York Times ("U.S. Drops Plan to Exempt G.I.s from U.N. Court") elevated it to the front-page lead story on June 24.

Several factors brought about the U.S. defeat. NATO allies Spain, Germany and France abandoned us. U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan called for an end to immunity for U.S. troops. And the Abu Ghraib prison scandal undermined the case for any exemptions from war crimes trials for America soldiers.

The prospect of U.S. soldiers being led in handcuffs before the ICC to be prosecuted for war crimes, while Washington impotently wails, is, of course, remote. But Americans had better wake up and smell the coffee. A global bureaucracy is steadily tying this nation down with tiny strands, just as Gulliver was tied down by the little men on that beach in Lilliput.

Globalists are elated and cocky over our defeat. Reports the FT: "International human-rights groups welcomed the Security Council's refusal to extend the immunity resolution.

'''The rule of law has been reinforced: that international law applies equally to all countries,' said William Pace, head of the Coalition for an International Criminal Court."

What is wrong with Pace's contention? Just this. The United States opposed creation of the ICC. And the president and Congress have rejected its claims to jurisdiction over U.S. armed forces. By what right, then, does the ICC claim such jurisdiction?

Can a tribunal be set up and assert a right to prosecute U.S. citizens and soldiers without our permission? In the World Government rising, apparently our consent is not required for us to be subject to a criminal tribunal whose sovereignty supercedes our own. Americans had best discover what these internationalists are up to, or our grandchildren may one day wake up and find out Granddad was napping while they lost forever what their ancestors had won for them on the battlefields of Saratoga and Yorktown.

Consider the claims being made and accepted by nations, by international organizations and by civil servants no one ever elected.

The U.N., a U.S. creation, is now claiming the right to determine when, where and whether the United States may go to war. Secretary General Kofi Annan, a U.N. bureaucrat from a failed state, Ghana, is telling us that U.S. soldiers must be subject to prosecution by a U.N. war-crimes tribunal with jurisdiction we have never accepted.

The World Trade organization, established in 1994 when Bob Dole and Newt Gingrich signed onto Bill Clinton's GATT treaty, ordered President Bush to lift U.S. steel tariffs or face fines, and President Bush meekly complied. Now, the WTO has ordered Congress to end tax breaks for major U.S. exporters and authorized the EU to impose tariffs on U.S. goods – which the EU has done. Now, Congress is rushing to comply.

Has no one considered imposing reciprocal tariffs on the EU and telling it the ball is in its court? Europe, after all, runs a huge trade surplus with us. They are the ones who should fear a trade war.

The question here is not only what is decided, but who decides. Why should laws enacted by Congress and signed by the president be subject to any review, other than by our own Supreme Court?

This year, another U.N. power grab, over the world's oceans and their resources, almost succeeded, until conservatives like Phyllis Schlafly and Frank Gaffney raised the roof. U.S. accession to the U.N. Law of the Sea Treaty was then interred in Senate committee. The Law of the Sea Treaty was a resurrected version of the one Ronald Reagan had torpedoed in 1983. They keep coming back.

Americans seem unaware that all these institutions with the high-sounding names – the United Nations, World Trade Organization, the Kyoto Protocols, the International Criminal Court, the Law of the Sea Treaty, the North American Free Trade Agreement, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank – have one grand strategic purpose:

To assert the superior sovereignty of international organizations over the government of the United States, to restrict and conscript our power for their purposes and to transfer the wealth of the American nation and people to international civil servants – for their consumption and redistribution.

In the name of humanity, these glorified thieves would rob us of our heritage. We are fools if we let it happen.

The fact that the waiver was not extended means that the United States cannot no longer participate in any peacekeeping missions unless it is an absolute matter of national security.

But the fact that the waiver was not extended means very little in terms of how we recognize the court's jurisdiction. We do not recognize the court, and we are barred from cooperating with it in any way by federal law. The President is also authorized to use "all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any American national.

These are selected passages of the American Servicemembers' Protection Act of 2002, which was signed into law by President Bush:

No United States Court, and no agency or entity of any State or local government, including any court, may cooperate with the International Criminal Court in response to a request for cooperation submitted by the International Criminal Court pursuant to the Rome Statute.

(a) Policy.--Effective beginning on the date on which the Rome Statute enters into force pursuant to Article 126 of the Rome Statute, the President should use the voice and vote of the United States in the United Nations Security Council to ensure that each resolution of the Security Council authorizing any peacekeeping operation under chapter VI of the charter of the United Nations or peace enforcement operation under chapter VII of the charter of the United Nations permanently exempts, at a minimum, members of the Armed Forces of the United States participating in such operation from criminal prosecution or other assertion of jurisdiction by the International Criminal Court for actions undertaken by such personnel in connection with the operation.

(b) Restriction.--Members of the Armed Forces of the United States may not participate in any peacekeeping operation under chapter VI of the charter of the United Nations or peace enforcement operation under chapter VII of the charter of the United Nations, the creation of which is authorized by the United Nations Security Council on or after the date that the Rome Statute enters into effect pursuant to Article 126 of the Rome Statute, unless the President has submitted to the appropriate congressional committees a certification described in subsection

(1) members of the Armed Forces of the United States are able to participate in the peacekeeping or peace enforcement operation without risk of criminal prosecution or other assertion of jurisdiction by the International Criminal Court because, in authorizing the operation, the United Nations Security Council permanently exempted, at a minimum, members of the Armed Forces of the United States participating in the operation from criminal prosecution or other assertion of jurisdiction by the International Criminal Court for actions undertaken by them in connection with the operation;

(2) members of the Armed Forces of the United States are able to participate in the peacekeeping or peace enforcement operation without risk of criminal prosecution or other assertion of jurisdiction by the International Criminal Court because each country in which members of the Armed Forces of the United States participating in the operation will be present either is not a party to the International Criminal Court and has not invoked the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court pursuant to Article 12 of the Rome Statute, or has entered into an agreement in accordance with Article 98 of the Rome Statute preventing the International Criminal Court from proceeding against members of the Armed Forces of the United States present in that country; or (

3) the national interests of the United States justify participation by members of the Armed Forces of the United States in the peacekeeping or peace enforcement operation.....

(a) Prohibition of Military Assistance.--Subject to subsections (b) and (c), and effective 1 year after the date on which the Rome Statute enters into force pursuant to Article 126 of the Rome Statute, no United States military assistance may be provided to the government of a country that is a party to the International Criminal Court.

(b) National Interest Waiver.--The President may, without prior notice to Congress, waive the prohibition of subsection (a) with respect to a particular country if he determines and reports to the appropriate congressional committees that it is important to the national interest of the United States to waive such prohibition.....

SEC. 2008. <<NOTE: 22 USC 7427.>> AUTHORITY TO FREE MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES AND CERTAIN OTHER PERSONS DETAINED OR IMPRISONED BY OR ON BEHALF OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT.

(a) Authority.--The President is authorized to use all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any person described in subsection (b) who is being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court.

(b) Persons Authorized To Be Freed.--The authority of subsection (a) shall extend to the following persons:

(1) Covered United States persons.

(2) Covered allied persons.

(3) Individuals detained or imprisoned for official actions taken while the individual was a covered United States person....

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.