Treaties are an important source of international law. Article VI Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution provides "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land..." Our treaties, which form part of international law, are recognized as federal law. Do you really deny that the U.S. lacks the power to make binding treaties?
You have time to waste on unlearned people like me??? Do a youtube search on "The Creature from Jekyll Island" and learn what those college classes left out. Because I'm done with you. Your trolling this Channel and I believe its Border line harassment. You are an Internationalist of the Rockefeller sort and I think you need to recognize that before ridiculing others who care about freedom.
@NO2NAFTA "The Creature from Jekyll Island" is about the Federal Reserve. That was created by a law made by the U.S. Congress, not by international law. The Constitution clearly states that all treaties the U.S. signs are the law of the land.
From Article VI: "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land
Can you read the English language? The Constitution specifically recognizes the Law of Nations. Maybe it should not have, but it did. Your problems with NAFTA or any other contemporary issue do not change the original intent of the Founding Fathers. Woodrow Wilson did not draft the Constitution. Your arguments are irrelevant to the central question you pose. Perhaps if you think logically you may at some point in your life understand why the unquestioned legal consensus disagrees with you.
Can you just ignore me and pay your International taxes with pleasure. Remember that the "World Council" is trying still to set us up with a global carbon tax to fund your beloved world government.
Furthermore, even if you were correct that international law has no (inherent) supremacy over U.S. law it is clear that that the Constitution does, and the Constitution has specifically recognized the Law of Nations. Frankly, small states like international law, and when we first began the U.S. was a small state that saught refuge in international norms, involving disputes with more powerful countries like France. The fact that we are now powerful doesn't change the meaning of the Constitution.
Your college professor and you have nothing better to do then troll my youtube page trying to prove something other than what I have already proven logically. WE HAVE BEEN SOLD OUT and YOU NEED TO DEAL WITH THAT TRUTH FIRST BEFORE YOU MOCK CONCERNED CITIZENS.
Perhaps you should read the Constitution again, specifically Article I Section 8, which lists under the powers of Congress "To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations." The Law of Nations is international law, explicitly recognized by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution. Moreover, early Supreme Court cases were far more accepting of international law than the current court, undercutting your "originalist" argument.
This response is in seven parts, please read in full. Thanks.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. (sound familiar)
In other words, No International body of law has any delegation supremacy over the U.S.
I can accept the fact that our courts and representatives have been operating outside its constitutional jurisdictions as if the supreme court of the world is of man and not of our CREATOR (which many do not accept and therefore makes our declaration of Independence, bill of right nor the constitution of no major relevance to them.)
Just because the tax free rockefeller foundation financed the "united nations" from its inception and the tax free carnegie foundation financed the "world court" in the hague from its inception does not mean the unwitting tax payers of america wanted "world governance" with unelected "officials" and their attached edicts.
I'm also not in the business of debating geneva laws which no one follows anyways. I am however in the business of showing that we are being swallowed up with lies that nationalism is a decease and the only" way to "peace" and "safety" is to relinquish our fought for sovereignty.
So the U.S. Courts ultimately disagree with their own Constitution which they have hypocritically sworn to up hold and protect. regardless if our universities and colleges continually teach other wise.
This comment section is not open to a debate where we already know our law makers have become a law unto themselves by passing said laws to protect themselves and for their own ungodly gain. Not all of them and not in every law they create, but sometime soon the citizens will need to vote them out because by said laws they have gone astray.
So its not me they disagree with, its themselves because they refuse to obey their own oaths. And if they did not realize their operations outside said jurisdictions then they need to be reeducated with the constitution. And reading the Declaration of Independence would not be a bad idea to get reacquainted with our history of outside forces and edicts.
U.S. courts disagree with you. "Upon ratification of the Constitution, the thirteen former colonies were fused into a single nation, one which, in its relations with foreign states, is bound to both observe and construe the accepted norms of international law, formerly known as the law of nations." Filartiga v. Pena-Irala, 630 F.2d 876 (2d Cir. 1980).
To rebut the GYPSIESEEKER response and to defend the Constitution, I want to say just two more things about the individual in question "Charles Evens Hughes" who was appointed by President Harding to be the Secretary of State and that previous to that he was the attorney for Standard Oil Co. So when we discuss Supreme Court Justice Hughes it is wise to point out that he defended "Monopoly" trust(s)
So enjoy your "Wilsonian New World Order" and the International taxes we pay without representation. For you to support unelected "Officials" and taint the Constitution by saying it upholds such tyranny is a farce and nothing could be further from the truth.
In other words you need to review why I stated "International Law Is Not Our Law"
I also stated that just because they gave an "Oath" to uphold the Constitution does not mean they always do. And that is what I am saying in the video.
These men are made to lie when it suits them, Kind of like "OPERATION GUNRUNNER" AKA: Fast and Furious. Or WMD's or "NAFTA is a good deal" or "Read my lips no new taxes" or "I didn't know about the Iran Contra / drugs for hostages operation"
the list of lies are of course innumerable and perhaps thats why citizens have become use to the idea that they Individually can not do anything to correct it therefore , "Lets Roll"
Treaties are an important source of international law. Article VI Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution provides "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land..." Our treaties, which form part of international law, are recognized as federal law. Do you really deny that the U.S. lacks the power to make binding treaties?
GypsieSeeker 3 months ago
You have time to waste on unlearned people like me??? Do a youtube search on "The Creature from Jekyll Island" and learn what those college classes left out. Because I'm done with you. Your trolling this Channel and I believe its Border line harassment. You are an Internationalist of the Rockefeller sort and I think you need to recognize that before ridiculing others who care about freedom.
NO2NAFTA 3 months ago
@NO2NAFTA "The Creature from Jekyll Island" is about the Federal Reserve. That was created by a law made by the U.S. Congress, not by international law. The Constitution clearly states that all treaties the U.S. signs are the law of the land.
From Article VI: "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land
DJWEBSTAR914 2 months ago
Can you read the English language? The Constitution specifically recognizes the Law of Nations. Maybe it should not have, but it did. Your problems with NAFTA or any other contemporary issue do not change the original intent of the Founding Fathers. Woodrow Wilson did not draft the Constitution. Your arguments are irrelevant to the central question you pose. Perhaps if you think logically you may at some point in your life understand why the unquestioned legal consensus disagrees with you.
GypsieSeeker 3 months ago
@GypsieSeeker
Can you just ignore me and pay your International taxes with pleasure. Remember that the "World Council" is trying still to set us up with a global carbon tax to fund your beloved world government.
NO2NAFTA 3 months ago
Enjoy your new world tax system buckeroo.
NO2NAFTA 3 months ago
Furthermore, even if you were correct that international law has no (inherent) supremacy over U.S. law it is clear that that the Constitution does, and the Constitution has specifically recognized the Law of Nations. Frankly, small states like international law, and when we first began the U.S. was a small state that saught refuge in international norms, involving disputes with more powerful countries like France. The fact that we are now powerful doesn't change the meaning of the Constitution.
GypsieSeeker 4 months ago
@GypsieSeeker
Your college professor and you have nothing better to do then troll my youtube page trying to prove something other than what I have already proven logically. WE HAVE BEEN SOLD OUT and YOU NEED TO DEAL WITH THAT TRUTH FIRST BEFORE YOU MOCK CONCERNED CITIZENS.
NO2NAFTA 3 months ago
Perhaps you should read the Constitution again, specifically Article I Section 8, which lists under the powers of Congress "To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations." The Law of Nations is international law, explicitly recognized by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution. Moreover, early Supreme Court cases were far more accepting of international law than the current court, undercutting your "originalist" argument.
GypsieSeeker 4 months ago
This response is in seven parts, please read in full. Thanks.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. (sound familiar)
In other words, No International body of law has any delegation supremacy over the U.S.
NO2NAFTA 4 months ago
I can accept the fact that our courts and representatives have been operating outside its constitutional jurisdictions as if the supreme court of the world is of man and not of our CREATOR (which many do not accept and therefore makes our declaration of Independence, bill of right nor the constitution of no major relevance to them.)
NO2NAFTA 4 months ago
Just because the tax free rockefeller foundation financed the "united nations" from its inception and the tax free carnegie foundation financed the "world court" in the hague from its inception does not mean the unwitting tax payers of america wanted "world governance" with unelected "officials" and their attached edicts.
NO2NAFTA 4 months ago
I'm also not in the business of debating geneva laws which no one follows anyways. I am however in the business of showing that we are being swallowed up with lies that nationalism is a decease and the only" way to "peace" and "safety" is to relinquish our fought for sovereignty.
NO2NAFTA 4 months ago
So the U.S. Courts ultimately disagree with their own Constitution which they have hypocritically sworn to up hold and protect. regardless if our universities and colleges continually teach other wise.
NO2NAFTA 4 months ago
This comment section is not open to a debate where we already know our law makers have become a law unto themselves by passing said laws to protect themselves and for their own ungodly gain. Not all of them and not in every law they create, but sometime soon the citizens will need to vote them out because by said laws they have gone astray.
NO2NAFTA 4 months ago
So its not me they disagree with, its themselves because they refuse to obey their own oaths. And if they did not realize their operations outside said jurisdictions then they need to be reeducated with the constitution. And reading the Declaration of Independence would not be a bad idea to get reacquainted with our history of outside forces and edicts.
NO2NAFTA 4 months ago
U.S. courts disagree with you. "Upon ratification of the Constitution, the thirteen former colonies were fused into a single nation, one which, in its relations with foreign states, is bound to both observe and construe the accepted norms of international law, formerly known as the law of nations." Filartiga v. Pena-Irala, 630 F.2d 876 (2d Cir. 1980).
GypsieSeeker 4 months ago
To rebut the GYPSIESEEKER response and to defend the Constitution, I want to say just two more things about the individual in question "Charles Evens Hughes" who was appointed by President Harding to be the Secretary of State and that previous to that he was the attorney for Standard Oil Co. So when we discuss Supreme Court Justice Hughes it is wise to point out that he defended "Monopoly" trust(s)
NO2NAFTA 4 months ago
So enjoy your "Wilsonian New World Order" and the International taxes we pay without representation. For you to support unelected "Officials" and taint the Constitution by saying it upholds such tyranny is a farce and nothing could be further from the truth.
NO2NAFTA 4 months ago
In other words you need to review why I stated "International Law Is Not Our Law"
I also stated that just because they gave an "Oath" to uphold the Constitution does not mean they always do. And that is what I am saying in the video.
NO2NAFTA 4 months ago
These men are made to lie when it suits them, Kind of like "OPERATION GUNRUNNER" AKA: Fast and Furious. Or WMD's or "NAFTA is a good deal" or "Read my lips no new taxes" or "I didn't know about the Iran Contra / drugs for hostages operation"
NO2NAFTA 4 months ago
the list of lies are of course innumerable and perhaps thats why citizens have become use to the idea that they Individually can not do anything to correct it therefore , "Lets Roll"
NO2NAFTA 4 months ago