It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Has this country been dissolved?

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 06:22 PM
link   
I submit to you these two pieces of information:

From our treaty with the united Nations:

The President is authorized to negotiate a special agreement or agreements with the Security Council which shall be subject to the approval of the Congress by appropriate Act or joint resolution, providing for the numbers and types of armed forces, their degree of readiness and general location, and the nature of facilities and assistance, including rights of passage, to be made available to the Security Council on its call for the purpose of maintaining international peace and security in accordance with article 43 of said Charter. The President shall not be deemed to require the authorization of the Congress to make available to the Security Council on its call in order to take action under article 42 of said Charter and pursuant to such special agreement or agreements the armed forces, facilities, or assistance provided for therein: Provided, That, except as authorized in section 287d–1 of this title, nothing herein contained shall be construed as an authorization to the President by the Congress to make available to the Security Council for such purpose armed forces, facilities, or assistance in addition to the forces, facilities, and assistance provided for in such special agreement or agreements.


This says in effect, that the POTUS needs no approval by congress to perform an act of war.
And now, Obama's own words, from his campaign:



Obama: ‘President Does Not Have Power Under Constitution to Unilaterally Authorize a Military Attack’ Monday, March 21, 2011 By Fred Lucas Barack Obama, presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama (D.-Ill.), campaigning for president on Sept. 21, 2008, in Charlotte, NC.. (AP photo/Chuck Burton) (CNSNews.com) - As a presidential candidate, Sen. Barack Obama (D.-Ill.) emphatically stated that the Constitution does not give the president the authority to unilaterally authorize a military attack unless it is needed to stop an actual or imminent attack on the United States. Obama made the assertion in a Dec. 20, 2007 interview with the Boston Globe when reporter Charlie Savage asked him under what circumstances the president would have the constitutional authority to bomb Iran without first seeking authorization from Congress. “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,” Obama responded. “As Commander-in-Chief, the President does have a duty to protect and defend the United States,” Obama continued. “In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent. History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the Legislative branch.” Obama did not seek congressional authorization before joining allies, including Great Britain and France, in taking military action against the regime of Libyan dictator Col. Moammar Gadhafi in order to establish a no-fly zone over that country. The action was approved by the United Nations Security Council but not by the U.S. Congress. In a followup question in its December 2007 interview, the Boston Globe asked Obama if the Constitution gave the president the power to disregard a congressional statute putting some type of limit on the way troops could be deployed. Here, too, Obama deferred to the constitutional authority of Congress. “No, the President does not have that power,” Obama told the paper. “To date, several Congresses have imposed limitations on the number of US troops deployed in a given situation. As President, I will not assert a constitutional authority to deploy troops in a manner contrary to an express limit imposed by Congress and adopted into law.”


It would seem, at least on the surface that the POTUS no longer answers to the US Congress, but instead, to the United nations. No the congress has not been disbanded or anything like that, nor will it be. In fact it will probably be preserved for "domestic" issues that are of no interest to the UN. However, for the BIG issues, it seems that the UN is now calling the shots. If I have misinterpreted something here, please point it out. If I have not misinterpreted, perhaps somebody will explain to me how this happened. We do not appear to be a sovereign country anymore. What's more...it doesn't seem as if anyone cares.

How have we come to a point where we are nothing more than the military arm of the UN security Council? We appear to be Americans in name only. Again, if I didn't read this right, somebody might enlighten me, but from where I stand, this country has been dissolved and nobody bothered to tell us.




posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 06:28 PM
link   
Sounds like you read it perfectly to me...Good Post !!



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by woghd
It would seem, at least on the surface that the POTUS no longer answers to the US Congress, but instead, to the United nations. No the congress has not been disbanded or anything like that, nor will it be. In fact it will probably be preserved for "domestic" issues that are of no interest to the UN. However, for the BIG issues, it seems that the UN is now calling the shots. If I have misinterpreted something here, please point it out.
OK, let’s see: The United States was the principal actor in creating the United Nations. It drafted much of the United Nations Charter. The Senate ratified the Charter in 1945, from its own free will. It enacted, as well, the provision that authorizes the President to use the armed forces pursuant to Article 42 military action, such as the one on-going in Libya. The United States, like Germany, could have decided not to participate in hostilities.

How is the UN “calling the shots”?

But please answer by sticking to the legal and constitutional context, seeing as it’s the one you used to present your argument, and not to appeals to the secret NWO conspiracies.


edit on 21-3-2011 by aptness because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 06:45 PM
link   
It doesn’t matter the president already has direct control of 20,000 regular army, trained for domestic deployment and non-lethal “crowd control”. In Jan, 2008 the ability of the president to overrule state governors and deploy the National Guard was repealed: en.wikipedia.org...

“# The John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007 Pub.L. 109-364

Federal law was changed in section 1076 so that the Governor of a state is no longer the sole commander in chief of their state's National Guard during emergencies within the state. The President of the United States will now be able to take total control of a state's National Guard units without the governor's consent.[14] In a letter to Congress all 50 governors opposed the increase in power of the president over the National Guard.[15]

# The National Defense Authorization Act 2008 Pub.L. 110-181

Repeals provisions in section 1076 in Pub.L. 109-364 but still enables the President to call up the National Guard of the United States for active federal military service during Congressionally sanctioned national emergency or war. Places the National Guard Bureau directly under the Department of Defense as a joint activity. Promoted the Chief of the National Guard Bureau from a three-star to a four-star general.”

Then on Oct 1 2008, a 20,000 man force was deployed specifically for domestic action. If the president cant have control over the National Guard, then he will just have his own personal army: www.armytimes.com...

In a totally unrelated coincidence the bank bailouts occurred Oct 3, 2008. en.wikipedia.org...
Just remember though, it’s all about terrorism.

The problem here is that this force is directly within the existing military chain of command and the president is commander and chief. It doesn’t require an act of congress to deploy. In fact it apparently doesn’t even require correct authorization, having deployed in Samson Alabama in 2009 without governor or presidential authorization. en.wikipedia.org...

“On March 10, 2009, active duty Army military police troops from Fort Rucker were deployed to Samson, Alabama in response to a murder spree. Samson officials confirmed that the soldiers assisted in traffic control and securing the crime scene. The governor of Alabama did not request military assistance nor did President Obama authorize their deployment. Subsequent investigation found that the Posse Comitatus Act was violated and several military members received "administrative actions.”

So I believe the answer to your question is yes it has. When and how they will let the rest of us know, is all dependant upon who we invade next and when will they tank the US dollar.



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 06:46 PM
link   
The USA only exists as a corporation owned by the foreign interests. You can start here: members.iimetro.com.au...

Since it is a corporation, they do not have to follow the constitution. Also, Washington D.C., along with London City and the Vatican City, are the only three sovereign city-states on the planet, as represented by the stars on the flag of Washington D.C.:



Crazy, how we thought we knew how things work around here but actually do not.



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 06:51 PM
link   
Sometimes, preemptive actions are better than delayed actions. But regardless, one may see, at first glance, what you are depicting as something rather unusual. So much for the Article 1 section 8 mantra.



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by alyoshablue
 


We can see this reflected in the threatened actions of Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder when he sites the law that he has the right to dissolve city governments and turn towns over to private control.



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 07:33 PM
link   
so the u.n. charter supercedes the u.s. constitution. bombing an independent nation is a declaration of war.

it has been that way since the beginning of warfare.

therefore he is in violation of the u.s. constitution.

but i'm sure there is some legal clauses in the charter that any resolution and actions voted by the u.n. involving the us have the pre-approved consent of congress.

that's why vetos are so important to the u.s. , if they didn't have that power, the world could decide, lets liberate the palestinians by force from an oppressive military regime, like they are doing now for the libyans, and the united states are legally bound to contribute if they chose to.



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 08:00 PM
link   
I don't know if I can describe how I am feeling right now. I see no way to delude myself into thinking that we are a sovereign nation anymore. The president simply sprung this on everyone, and went to the UN for permission to do this, never speaking to the people or to congress. What bothers me more is that apparently we haven't been sovereign for quite some time. This is simply the first time a POTUS has actually blatantly done it. (Or the first time that the UN felt safe and secure enough to try it)

It doesn't matter. Our President is working through the UN and not Congress...and that means we aren't a country anymore.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 02:02 AM
link   
The nation is not dissovled and is undilssolvable as this charter mearly is a global chequelist for nessecitating the need for military intervention be brought forth before the world's stage so that the rest of the world cannot just go to war with another without provocation as nowadays everyone is so intertwined economically the slightest shift in any direction could radically alter the direction of the overall global economy.

This is the accepted avenue in being able to prove either negligance, flagarant misuse/abuse of power, murder of innocent civilians can all be investigated, brought forth, sanctions levied, invasion plans drafted and adopted.

The UN's purpose in matters of conflict is to serve a mediator whose purpose is to bring forth a ideally peaceful conclusion to any situation before Mankind as a whole. Thier intent is to prevent war at all costs but if no other option exists and war is the only answer this body is charged with setting up and enforcing paramiters to make sure a certain and respectful code of conduct when conducting threatre is maintained.

Make zero mistake and have no lillusion that The United States Of America's Soveriegnty and Soveriegn Authourity is still fully and completely intact.We will NEVER DIE! We remain as 307,000,000 strong and show no signs of slowing down ever! This is our nation, "Of The People, By The People, For The People" forever shines as our motto.

USA, USA, USA, USA, USA, USA, USA NOW, ALWAYS AND FOREVER!

Remember people, when you abandon your nation the terrorists win!!!


NOVUS ORDO HUMANAE LIBERTAS - NEW ORDER OF HUMAN LIBERTY!
edit on 22-3-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
Make zero mistake and have no lillusion that The United States Of America's Soveriegnty and Soveriegn Authourity is still fully and completely intact.We will NEVER DIE! We remain as 307,000,000 strong and show no signs of slowing down ever! This is our nation, "Of The People, By The People, For The People" forever shines as our motto.

USA, USA, USA, USA, USA, USA, USA NOW, ALWAYS AND FOREVER!

Remember people, when you abandon your nation the terrorists win!!!


Sorry, but all that Rah-Rah-Rah just doesn't cut it. The president is working with the UN instead of Congress.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by woghd

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
Make zero mistake and have no lillusion that The United States Of America's Soveriegnty and Soveriegn Authourity is still fully and completely intact.We will NEVER DIE! We remain as 307,000,000 strong and show no signs of slowing down ever! This is our nation, "Of The People, By The People, For The People" forever shines as our motto.

USA, USA, USA, USA, USA, USA, USA NOW, ALWAYS AND FOREVER!

Remember people, when you abandon your nation the terrorists win!!!


Sorry, but all that Rah-Rah-Rah just doesn't cut it. The president is working with the UN instead of Congress.


Yes it does as in most cases the UN takes orders from the US and not the other way around. Why else do you think their HQ sits in NYC for? This is proof we own them. Remember when the UN rejected our proposal to invade Iraq but we went anyhow without one sanction, action being levied against us? This is the proof.

The UN Charter does not supercede the US Constitution as if any conflictions on domestic matters the Constitution is law but on International matters The Charter is law. That is how both works. The way the one poster is saying is how the EU works and not The USA as too much of the UN's architecture and infastructure globally is based and hq'd out of the USA. So who is who's puppet?

This is why the EU can't get their things together because they are trying to install a Supranational Constitution that supercedes and dissovles every National Constitution that is currently in play.

Every member nation of The UN still owns, controls it's own independant Soveriegnty and retains it's Soveriegn Rights.
edit on 22-3-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 12:56 AM
link   
Sorry, but that argument simply isn't compelling. Our constitution is supposed to tell us jow to handle international affairs, not some "international law" The fact that anyone even thinks this is ok or acceptable is a testament to how far gone things have become. No "international law" should override the constitution in ANY event. Ever.

The constitution says that ALL acts of war must be approved by congress. Bombing another country is certainly recognized internationally as an act of war.

We've been P0wned by the NWO.



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by woghd
Sorry, but that argument simply isn't compelling. Our constitution is supposed to tell us jow to handle international affairs, not some "international law" The fact that anyone even thinks this is ok or acceptable is a testament to how far gone things have become. No "international law" should override the constitution in ANY event. Ever.

The constitution says that ALL acts of war must be approved by congress. Bombing another country is certainly recognized internationally as an act of war.

We've been P0wned by the NWO.


What I say on matters like this is law and the law is the law and the law in this case is the only thing that matters.

The Constitution cannot and does not include provisions that foreign Governments must recognize. The UN handles human rights issues and as The US along with Russia and China is the accepted broadsword of The UN and if a hungry masses is calling for us to engage an oppressor then The Constitution allows for it as any action to further the cause of freedom, democracy and liberty anywhere in the world is protected and allowable under The Constitution.

The doc itself allows for the use of military action as well to advance the concept of freedom, democracy and liberty to another anywhere in the world not directly requiring the direct consent of The Congress.

Put Biden in charge of this campaign and guess what Biden is currently as well?

Biden currently does have the authourity known as President Of The United States Senate and is incredibly well versed and is highly respected by the international community as Foreign Policy is actually something he is good at.

Using a certain loophole allows Obama can launch against someone but all he's gotta do is kick it back to Biden and guess what? US Senate approval guaranteed right there.

Have Biden clear Obama to launch before hand and by default that is Senate approval.
edit on 24-3-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1 The UN handles human rights issues and as The US along with Russia and China is the accepted broadsword of The UN and if a hungry masses is calling for us to engage an oppressor then The Constitution allows for it as any action to further the cause of freedom, democracy and liberty anywhere in the world is protected and allowable under The Constitution.


1. The UN should not be handling *any* of America's issues.
2. That Constitution demands congressional approval to make war. It didn't happen.

Again, we've been P0wned by the NWO.



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by woghd

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1 The UN handles human rights issues and as The US along with Russia and China is the accepted broadsword of The UN and if a hungry masses is calling for us to engage an oppressor then The Constitution allows for it as any action to further the cause of freedom, democracy and liberty anywhere in the world is protected and allowable under The Constitution.


1. The UN should not be handling *any* of America's issues.
2. That Constitution demands congressional approval to make war. It didn't happen.

Again, we've been P0wned by the NWO.


Congressional approval is required to make war yes but THE UNITED STATES HAS NOT DECLARED WAR ON LIBYA. THAT IS THAT.

THIS IS EUROPA'S SHOW AND NOT OURS. THAT MEANS THE WORLD RIGHT THERE.

THIS IS NOT A DOMESTIC MATTER WHICH MEANS UNEQUIVOCALLY THAT THE CONSTITUTION HAS NO BEARING HERE.

Quit trying to use this to spew the GOP Mantra as the right has been itching for war for a minute so get real.

Just because it is Libya and not Iran or Palestine is the entire reason why the entire right;s knickers are in a tizzy. If this was Iran the entire right would not dare complain.

Hypocrisy of the highest order from the right, Iraq was sold to us on lies and yet the right was all for that but the second an actual dictator is being challenged the ultra right all of a sudden have a complaint? I can now say that the right hates it when you go after actual dictators but it's completely ok to invade a nation upon lies.

Oh, how could I forget, Libya has no wmd's could that be why they are hesitant? Libya is an African and Arab Muslim nation, the two groups the entire racist GOP cannot stand. We are not fighting another conflict on behalf of Israel.

$14 Trillion got added on the card over lies and you said nothing then, continue to remain quiet now.

USING ANY EXCUSE TO TRASH THIS NATION!

You refused to call out 43 when he went to war with Iraq and have firmly lost the right to complain now.

Biden currently does have the authourity known as President Of The United States Senate and is incredibly well versed and is highly respected by the international community as Foreign Policy is actually something he is good at.

Allow him to handle and oversee this with our allies and we should not expect to see this happen same way Iraq and Afghanistan did. Cheney and Rice were horrible when it came to matters like this.

edit on 24-3-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1

Originally posted by woghd

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1 The UN handles human rights issues and as The US along with Russia and China is the accepted broadsword of The UN and if a hungry masses is calling for us to engage an oppressor then The Constitution allows for it as any action to further the cause of freedom, democracy and liberty anywhere in the world is protected and allowable under The Constitution.


1. The UN should not be handling *any* of America's issues.
2. That Constitution demands congressional approval to make war. It didn't happen.

Again, we've been P0wned by the NWO.


Congressional approval is required to make war yes but THE UNITED STATES HAS NOT DECLARED WAR ON LIBYA. THAT IS THAT.

Quit trying to use this to spew the GOP Mantra as the right has been itching for war for a minute so get real.




I'm not a Republican. nor am I a member of "the right". And an attack on Foreign soil is a declaration of war by anyone's standards, but most importantly by the standards of the Constitution. Shall I quote it?



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by woghd

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1

Originally posted by woghd

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1 The UN handles human rights issues and as The US along with Russia and China is the accepted broadsword of The UN and if a hungry masses is calling for us to engage an oppressor then The Constitution allows for it as any action to further the cause of freedom, democracy and liberty anywhere in the world is protected and allowable under The Constitution.


1. The UN should not be handling *any* of America's issues.
2. That Constitution demands congressional approval to make war. It didn't happen.

Again, we've been P0wned by the NWO.


Congressional approval is required to make war yes but THE UNITED STATES HAS NOT DECLARED WAR ON LIBYA. THAT IS THAT.

Quit trying to use this to spew the GOP Mantra as the right has been itching for war for a minute so get real.



Bagger, right, how could I not see that!


I'm not a Republican. nor am I a member of "the right". And an attack on Foreign soil is a declaration of war by anyone's standards, but most importantly by the standards of the Constitution. Shall I quote it?



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 06:20 PM
link   
You should quote it. It's fun and it's free.



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 07:38 PM
link   
Conservative Nazi's do not know about comprise

The entire GOP plan in a nutshell :

1. Continue and guarantee that the top 10% of earners don't have to contribute a thing to the economy.
2. Continually allow the banks to do whatever the flip they want and to blindly give them another multi trillion dollar bailout package whenever they get a bug up their tail.
3. Continually send our jobs oversees which will double and triple the unemployment rates.
4. Engage us in an armed conflict with Iran and North Korea while keeping the Wars Over Energy going.
5. Deny people the basic right to essential services like Medicaid, Social Security and cancel all social programs effectively leaving those like me who are unable to hold down a 40 hour 5 day a week job to fend for ourselves!
6. Allow time and time again the poisoning of our food and water supply while protecting the companies that are harming us.
7. Kill off the electric and non petrolchemical powered transportation.
8. Allow for more foriegn influence into our process domestically (law passages, elections)
9. Kill off any non white people!
10. Kill our chance to compete on the world's stage while cutting public school education while leaving the private schools alone.
11. Turn this "War On Terrorism" into a "Holy War" between Islam-Muslim and Christian-Hebrew!
12. Allow time and time again your health insurance company the control to deny you and your family any treatment they want. < These are the real "Death Panels" a bunch of insurance company employees sitting around dictating who gets what coverage.
13. Do nothing about this immigrant issue so the multi trillion dollar lobbyists firms can contunally exploit them for cheap and dirt cheap labour all the while not demanding that any of it remains stateside all while evading the Federal Income Tax laws,
14. Allow you to lose your job and home for whatever reason your employer and lender dictates and not have the populous the right to challenge any claim.
15. Return to an era whereas an African American was legally declared 2/3 of a person and Women weren't allowed out of the kitchen, forget about having the right to own property, hold down a job, have a say in matters pertaining to thier own bodies, have the right to vote, be forced to endure consistant beatings and belittements if they didn't have dinner done in time, being subjected to forced spousal rape. Do y'all really want to subject your daughters, mothers, sisters, aunts to this? African Americans would be forced back into the cotton fields stripped of all rights, properties, jobs, and all money earned. McCain admitted this while on The View in Ear 08!

This is when "The Party of HELL NO!" dictates policy all the while protecting their wealthy donors. This has everything to do with the entire GOP, cutting social programs and eliminating them has been on the dockett since the 1970's so don't tell me this has nothing to do with the GOP.

The CONSERVATIVE DICTAITORSHIP IS THE PROBLEM AND REFUSE TO COMPRIMISE ON A THING. It's either "Their will or the highway".

The entire GOP's mantra is to make Obama a "1 Term President" and will destroy anything in this nation to achieve that goal even go as far as putting 150 Million out of work and forcing anyone who is not a rich, white, Neo Con to get cut all while striping the people and the nation of it's rights and freedoms.

The GOP will protect with life and limb the following industries :
Energy, Big Pharm, Banks, Anyone with an account worth more then $10 Million.

For y'all that want smaller Govt do not dare complain when that new tool you got to fix your house burns your skin right off because the safety regulations were abolished and do not dare complain when that new skin cream makes your skin so raw it causes an infection that costs you your limb.

Say goodbye to ABS, airbags, seatbelts, aircon, brake override systems in cars if they get their way.

Say goodbye to every single safety protection that exists if you want smaller Govt as Big Govt keeps these firms up at night living in fear.

Look at 43 and how he acted too like Hitler and let us not also forget that his granddaddy Prescott was helping fund and finance the entire Nazi movement under the guise of Thyssien, Corp during WWII so to make the Nazi GOP connection more then fits.

The GOP wants to eliminate the 14th Amendment.

Thank the Conservative dictaitorship for that for completely dismantiling every single protection out there that worked beautifully for nearly 50 yrs. It only became a problem when the individual worker had more power then the corporate bigwigs and they couldn't stand



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join