Posted on 05/14/2005 5:57:08 AM PDT by nextthunder
U.S. JUDGE SETS PRECEDENT FOR UNITED NATIONS SOVEREIGNTY OVER AMERICA
MNA—A U.S. District Court judge ruled in favor of the United Nations over the U.S. Congress this week, setting precedent that, at least in federal courts, the U.N. is sovereign.
At issue are documents and audiotapes submitted under Congressional subpoena by former U.N. Oil for Food investigator Robert Parton. The information reportedly demonstrates proof positive that U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan’s stories are conflicting regarding the world’s largest bribery scandal.
U.S. District Judge Ricardo Urbina in Washington issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) after the United Nations filed a petition to block the Parton congressional supeonas. The ten-day TRO gives both sides, according to the judge, some time to resolve the matter. The ex-FBI agent quit the U.N.-appointed Independent Inquiry Committee in April, reportedly because he believed it ignored evidence critical of U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan.
The U.N. said that Parton, a former FBI agent, signed a letter of agreement with the Independent Investigative Committee on July 6 to become a "senior investigative counsel" and he began work on Aug. 9. On Aug. 18, Parton signed an agreement with the United Nations that included a clause prohibiting him from communicating with the media or with any government about material that the committee had not made public.
But Parton kept records to protect himself because the investigation’s report, in Parton’s estimate, was short of the truth. Parton told Fox News, “"Although I sought to avoid any public discussion of these issues, I had repeatedly voiced my concerns internally to the IIC and wanted to retain a record of my efforts so that, if it ever became necessary, I could establish that I was not associated with the path the IIC committee chose to take and I could be in a position to defend myself against risks that I knew existed as a result of the IIC committee's actions."
The court order comes in the wake of so-called Independent Investigator Paul Volcker’s (who was appointed by and is compensated by the U.N.) demands for Congress to return the Parton records and to not subpoena any more information or testimony. Volcker said the integrity of the probe into the $64 billion Oil-for-Food program was at stake and lives may be in jeopardy if details of the investigation are leaked.
Volcker’s unverified statement that lives may be at stake, if anything, has double meaning. American lives already have been lost. The U.S. military was committed to a war in Iraq based on false information. Sources often point to the weapons of mass destruction that were never found, although satellite pictures show Russian truck convoys hauling off tons of items across the Syrian border hours before the American attack in March 2003. Given the revelation that the U.N. Security Council was deeply involved with Saddam Hussein, and subsequent exposure that Russia in particular was doing under the table business with Hussein, the U.S. Congress has every Constitutional right to investigate the Oil for Food program.
The U.S. State Department supports the Congressional inquiry, but is deferring to the court on this latest judicial development. Acting Spokesman Tom Casey said State supports the Volcker work, “but we also believe it's important for the U.S. Congress to be able to have a look at this issue and make sure that it is comfortable with the facts and that it understands what happened…There is some ongoing litigation involved in that and I think I'll just leave it to the courts then to deal with it at this point, rather than trying to describe it for you further.”
Bottom line: Court authority seems to be trumping both the Executive Branch and Congressional authority in the Constitutional balance between the three branches of government. Article III of the Constitution gives the power to Congress over the courts. Question is: will the Congress of the United States allow the federal court system to hand U.S. sovereignty over to the United Nations. In this particular instance, it appears the precedent has been set. Taking this concept a few steps further, the United Nations seems positioned well to stand between the U.S. and its foreign policy objectives, including but not limited to, its longstanding relationship with Israel and the balance of power in the Middle East.
And the UN is nothing but a tool on the end of the globalist puppet masters' string.
And they are nothing but a powerful tool on the end of satan's string.
All well predicted more than 2,000 years ago.
What a drama we have a ring side seat to. Now, I pray for an early exit from the ring! I don't care to watch much from this side of eternity. Thanks anyway. LOL.
The first time I read your comment I thought you were expressing a wish to see him get caned.
I very strongly agree.
Whistleblowers should be made our Rock/Hollyweed stars.
They are the only ones who truly earn star status.
I hope the whistle blower who seems bright enough--has copied 5-7 copies of key documents and secreted them amongst as many close friends.
Gonna get ugly . . . uglier.
Works for me.
Though his bosses deserve it far more.
If it doesn't, it should, more so, when one considers the "source" of said contractual obligation.
We are (at least not yet--but probably won't be too long now, thanks to Justices Kennedy and O'Connor) NOT subject to ANY force of law from the U.N. and this judge (as are most activist jurist) is out to lunch.
Can anyone really appreciate the precedent this is setting.
Old Sadam must be kicking himself silly for not having thought of simply finding some wacko judge (and believe me, he could have) to "enjoin" (and gotten a TRO--Temporary Restraining Order) the US from pulling the plug on him?
"Beam me up, Scottie."
So how is the judge going to excecute his judgement?
Just say no should be the Congressional policy.
A lazy assed overpaid and unwilling to give up a day on the golf course or other leisure activity, to stay on the job in pursuit of truth and justice and to earn their pay , arguing the law and constitutionality of a case- found it far more simple and less time consuming to just treat past decisions on similar cases, regardless of the un-constitutionality, assinity or screwed up and scewered reason for the decision and personal bias of the judge, as the law of the land.
Precedents represent an attitude among the judiciary that amounts to: "Fu*k the written law, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights it rode in on!
Fu*k the law of the land, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, is the litmus test a Judge must pass to be confirmed by democrat Senators such as Hairy Arse Reed, Chris Dodd,Kennedy, Robert Byrd, that idiot from the postage stamp size state Deleware, etc., and RINOs like Snow, McCaine, etc.
Just say no should be the Congressional policy."
EXACTLY. Like the way you think.
What can he do if they refuse? Hold the Congress in contempt? Yeah, Right!
Would like to see him order the Marshal's to go fetch some Senators? LOL
You know, that is what p*ssed me off the most about the Terri case.
Had the LEA (Pinellas Park PD & County Mounties) told Judge Greer to shove it (as legally, he did/does NOT have any authority over them and this was unique as far as I know) then there may have been a different outcome.
"Seems to be" is the operative phrase. Court authority only trumps Congressional authority if weak-kneed Congressional leaders allow it. I do not believe that Henry Hyde is weak-kneed. I suspect that Hyde has been copying and distributing Parton's papers all week. At least I certainly hope he has. I mean, duh.... why wouldn't he? Hyde is NOT a spineless milquetoast - - I just know it.
Plus, Hyde surely knows better than to return the papers to Volcker. The only reason Volcker wants them back is so that he knows what Hyde has. Volcker needs to know this so he knows how to lie.
Please reference your quote and your point about it.
I'd rather shun evil and be on God's side and experience His rewards and protection even if He allowed martyrdom
than go with satan and share his 'rewards.'
To post #43. Whistleblowers wanting to do the right thing.
Judges don't determine the soverignty of this nation. Men with guns do that.
The UN only uses their guns against unarmed women and children for sexual adventures.
Our people and I would hope our generals, would never stand for such a thing as UN control.
I hope so anyway.
not good..
~sovereignty ping~
Not good.
U.S. JUDGE PRESIDENT SETS PRECEDENT FOR UNITED NATIONS MEXICAN SOVEREIGNTY OVER AMERICA
Read that and weep.
could you make that a lil bit bigger?
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.