| |
  
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||
The Daily Paul is a community website with no official affiliation with Ron Paul or his Presidential Committee. The content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original poster, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise representative of the opinions of the Daily Paul, its owner, site moderators or Ron Paul. This site may contain adult language and adult concepts. If you are offended by such content, or feel you may be offended by such content, point your browser to a different site IMMEDIATELY. For more, read the Full Disclaimer
© 2007 - 2011 by The Daily Paul. Not paid for by, nor officially affiliated in any way with Ron Paul. | General Site Disclaimer | DMCA Disclaimer | Advertise here
Because they have submitted
Because they have submitted to the governance of the UN..Why do you suppose your former leaders are all suck ups to & for the UN ? They are the UN representatives..Dual rolls. Where is the alliegence ?
I will not state what I wanted to the timing is off...
naughty, naught
I have read this & at first
I have read this & at first glance there seems to be a legal debocle.. As the US is a "federation of States" any international treaty has precidence over States rights reserved to themselves . In effect the Fed gov't is agent for states & can willfully arbitrate away your States rights.. So ,claiming sovernty will not work..You would need to secede, out of the union, to retain or reserve your States rights..check me out I don't know the details .This is as I understand things. This is why the UN can dictate to the US & the State gov't..Your leaders have essentialy arbitrated away your right to treaty law..Check me out ???? I could be wrong.
naughty, naught
Debacle
There is no conflict as you suggest. The federal government has not the power to legislate away state powers. Thus, a federally ratified treaty with a foreign power is only binding if it serves to protect states rights. The whole purpose of the federal government is to protect the states and the people, not to usurp their powers. So, just as Congress regularly legislates on things that have no Constitutional basis, treaties can also be signed unconstitutionally. And, without an uprising from the states and the people, they will continue to get away with it. (In other words, people will actually act in accordance to the legislation or treaty.) This is why it is encouraging to have states reaffirming their 10th Amendment protected rights: It shows that people and their states are finally getting sick of the usurpations.
A good example is the 18th Amendment, a clearly unconsitutional amendment. Though it was ratified as an actual amendment to the Constitution - and thus seemingly became a part of the Constitution - it had to eventually be repealed because it is in clear opposition to the right of the people to drink and possess alcohol if they like. The fact that it became part of the Supreme Law of the Land does not make it right. It's the job of the people to set things straight. If they don't, who will?
KenM
I would further reply, but
I would further reply, but the timing is off.
naughty, naught
So how does that work? If
So how does that work? If it's already part of the Constitution, why does it even need to be ratified? Does ratifying the 10th amendment tell the Feds to "FO" and leave us alone?
I thought the states already have their souverneighty and could tell Uncle Sam to "FO" anytime they wanted. Sorry, I am still an aging Newbie.
"The price of Freedom is Eternal Vigilance"- Thomas Jefferson
There is no Left or Right -- there is only freedom or tyranny. Everything else is an illusion, an obfuscation to keep you confused and silent as the world burns around you." - Philip Brennan
"Invest only in things that you can stand in front of and pr
I only can tell how" I "
I only can tell how" I " think it works, from my research. .The Constitution only addresses the limits placed on the Central gov't..Therefore as an agent representing the States, the FED gov't is free to administer treatys ,etc amoung international entities ..These entities because they are international are deemed to take precidence over any other governing bodies ,which includes the States within the Union of States..The States apparently have given permission to the Fed gov't to do the international arbitating via the President ..So we the people are held hostage by any treaty or outside entity or what ever the President arbitrares away..This is the reason international law has come to your back door, fields ,water ,food etc..These items have been treaty'd away by your trusted leaders who only have your best interests at heart..Right.
.And you wonder why the birther thing is important .
.Allegience means EVERYTHING to the defence of Constitution...All your past leaders have been selling America out by treaty..This is my view only do not take it as fact ..Research.
naughty, naughty