Posted on 07/30/2003 3:51:18 AM PDT by kattracks
LIST
1) Washington D.C.
** pretty much everthing else will taken care of after fixing the U.S. Federal Government
ref.material:--> read "TREASON".. Ann Coulter..
ICJ and ICC are as similar as Mc Donalds' Big Mac
and Mc Donnel's DC-10
they have nothing in common except similarly sounding name and location. ICC is leftist scam for world domination and US should work with other countries to abolish it.
I also believe that American support to the ICTY is un-American because ICTY rules are against American laws and U.S. Constitution.
Well, not exactly - they can subpoena and prosecute to their little heats' content. It just doesn't mean anything.
Frankly, I don't see even a Democrat signing this up given its track record - Democrat or Republican, he'd know perfectly well who would be first in the docket.
The UN is coming into the same problem the ICC has had from the very start - it has been subverted by a group of activists who are saying, in effect, "you must submit yourself to an organization that we have every intention of using against you. And you have to do it because we say so." Anyone stupid enough to agree to these terms deserves what he gets. Sorry, Tony.
Have you read the case descriptions of the ICJ? I'm guessing you have, and because you're purposely downplaying the existing ICJ against the smokescreen of the ICC, then I ascertain that you have an agenda.
Allright, there's an American Judge on the ICJ, great!....BUT THERE ARE ALSO FOREIGN JUDGES JUDGING FOR YOU, AN AMERICAN. AND THEY'RE NOT FROM "FREE" COUNTRIES LIKE THE US. This IS the UN. How can you trust people from other countries to judge what we do or what any other SOVEREIGN nation does?
So you want to trust...:
CHINA?! For crying out loud, the President is from CHINA!
France - You want to trust France?????
Sierra Leone
Russian Federation
United Kingdom
Venezuela
Netherlands
Brazil
Jordan
Egypt
Japan
Germany - ya, GREAT friends of ours!
Slovakia
Belgium
When you have other countries judging side by side equally w/the US, then where does sovereignty come into play? Or if there's a conflict between Mexico and the US (as there is in one case), then why bring FRANCE into it!!??
Can someone else help bring home this reality, please?
You said: "How can you trust people from other countries to judge what we do or what any other SOVEREIGN nation does?"
ICC judges INDIVIDUALS by using arbitrary ad hoc approach and 'humanitarian' rubber criteria that may apply in one case and be neglected in another one. ICC provides no protection of the basic rights guaranteed by US Constitution. This is the reason to abolish and dismantle ICC.
What to do with ICJ is altoghether another issue. ICJ judges in disputes between SOVEREIGN STATES.
If we do not accept the concept of disputes between sovereign states being settled in court, then we have to rescind signature from all international treaties and do not expect that other countries will abide by them either. This will bring us back to pre-westphalian way of solving disputes. Let might make right and let the winner take it all.
I have no problem with that either. Get US from UN, Get UN out of USA, get US out of all international treaties. Let America judge for Americans. But give the same right to Sovereign citizens of Sovereign nations elsewhere.
What you want for yourself, give it to others as well.
Having an attitude that "enemies of America" will judge American citizens and American policy and for that reason rejecting ICJ and ICC while forcing other free nations to accept their enemies jugding their citizens and their policy in ICJ and ICC is against the principles America was build upon.
It is one way or another. Only liberals can have it both ways to suit their needs.
Now my state rep, my state senator, my U.S. rep and both my U.S. senators are Marxist extremists.
Could you tell me: who do I vote for?
Somehow countries have to come together to resolve their disputes. I don't want foreign judges deciding on my country. Why get a referree? If two countries have a dispute, they should through their own existing treaties, diplomats, and their own laws and ethics, come together and resolve it.
In today's world the referree's are FAR from impartial....like I said, do you want CHINA as president of the judging? They've openly called us "enemy #1" (and quoting). How about France?
Are we talking about the lesser of two evils: ICJ, ICC? How about NO evils.
My revulsion for the UN agenda grows daily. That we have Americans and ex-presidents who support the UN over the sovereignity of the US is more than I can grasp.
"Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct; and can it be, that good policy does not equally enjoin it? It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and at no distant period, a great nation, to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a people always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence.
Who can doubt that, in the course of time and things, the fruits of such a plan would richly repay any temporary advantages which might be lost by a steady adherence to it? Can it be that Providence has not connected the permanent felicity of a nation with its virtue ? The experiment, at least, is recommended by every sentiment which ennobles human nature. Alas! is it rendered impossible by its vices?
In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards another a habitual hatred or a habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence, frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the government, contrary to the best calculations of policy. The government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of nations, has been the victim.
So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.
As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils? Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.
Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy to be useful must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.
The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop. Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none; or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves by artificial ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.
Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to pursue a different course. If we remain one people under an efficient government, the period is not far off when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any time resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel.
Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice?
It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs, that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat it, therefore, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But, in my opinion, it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them.
Taking care always to keep ourselves by suitable establishments on a respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies.
Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations, are recommended by policy, humanity, and interest. But even our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand; neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing (with powers so disposed, in order to give trade a stable course, to define the rights of our merchants, and to enable the government to support them) conventional rules of intercourse, the best that present circumstances and mutual opinion will permit, but temporary, and liable to be from time to time abandoned or varied, as experience and circumstances shall dictate; constantly keeping in view that it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its independence for whatever it may accept under that character; that, by such acceptance, it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal favors, and yet of being reproached with ingratitude for not giving more. There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion, which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.
`Beats me, Bob. Maybe Tercel, or Tundra, or some other made-up name ala jackson-Lee(no relation!)
The globalists (read:communists) will eventually kill our civilization, but I hope there's a big-bloody-battle for control of the USA first.
The elites revel in the numbers of easily-manipulated, ignorant and stupid people that they can create and control, forgetting that it's the smart and educated people that make the world run.
These so-called 'international-courts' are pure bullsh!t, and some democRAT someday will try to forfeit our National sovereinty. That's when the 100 million guns we own will come into play.
.
Howdy bets! Long time no see. Smootches, sweetie...........FRegards
If you get a chance, peruse through some of the links in my posts above. These web sites don't hide anything (or not much) - they just flat out claim arrogant powers like:
"ICC speaks for world business whenever governments make decisions that crucially affect corporate strategies and the bottom line."
The ICC, the International Chamber of Commerce arrogantly states this. Many of these organizations feel they're some sort of godsend or all-powerful benevolant force that will "help" you run your city, your business, or your country! The US caves and participates, motivated by money to be made by having a hand in and foreknowledge of controlling what happens.
Sheila Jackson-Lee, (D) Houston, TX... you remember her: she asked NASA [in her district] if they could send the Mars Rover over to the sight where the astronauts landed so we could all see the flag...
I'm becoming one of those easily-manipulated, ignorant and stupid people you spoke so eloquently about. :-/
Had she become a prostitute to finance her seeking of another globe, that would have made her a 'Harlot-Globesoughter'.
I hope that clears this up..........FRegards
Time to change your meds... ;-D
If you get a chance to peruse this web site, let me know what you think: International Court of Justice
http://www.icj-cij.org/
and then I just found this related site:
International Commission of Jurists
http://www.icj.org/recherche.php3?lang=en&country=113&topic=§ion=&keywords=Ethnic+Intimidation&go=Search
Out of 60 Commissioners, 2 are from the US.
From their "About Us" page:
The International Commission of Jurists is dedicated to the primacy, coherence and implementation of international law and principles that advance human rights.
What distinguishes the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) is its impartial, objective and authoritative legal approach to the protection and promotion of human rights through the rule of law.
The ICJ provides legal expertise at both the international and national levels to ensure that developments in international law adhere to human rights principles and that international standards are implemented at the national level.
The Commission was founded in Berlin in 1952 and its membership is composed of sixty eminent jurists who are representatives of the different legal systems of the world. Based in Geneva, the International Secretariat is responsible for the realisation of the aims and objectives of the Commission. In carrying out its work, the International Secretariat benefits from a network of autonomous national sections and affiliated organisations located in all continents.
National Implementation
The most pressing concern in the legal fight for the promotion and protection of human rights is the inadequate incorporation of international human rights standards into national legislation and case-law. In response, the ICJ's National Implementation Programme aims to assist in the national implementation of international human rights standards both through direct monitoring and the provision of expert technical assistance.
In addition, the ICJ's National Implementation Programme also encompasses the activities of the ICJ's Center for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers (CIJL). The CIJL was established in 1978 to safeguard the independence of judges and lawyers and protect them from attacks and harrassment. The core work of the CIJL is to promote international standards relating to the need for an independent and impartial tribunal and to ensure that Governments implement these standards in their legislation and practice.
Evolving Law
However, national implementation is inevitably subject to social, political and technological realities and the interdisciplinary challenges presented by other branches of international law. In response, the ICJ's Evolving Law Programme aims to add precision to exisiting human rights standards, to clarify the interaction between human rights standards and other branches of international law, and to propose new international standards where required.
.
bets, I'm not big on anything that purports to be 'International', but I'll read 'em. I'm just hoping the UN building falls down before some American politico agrees to fund the rebuild with OUR tax dollars instead of having a National Referendum on it..........FRegards
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.