Wrong answer brother.  We didn't agree to be bound by it, and congress made
sure of it.  


Not to mention anything Mr.. Hiss was responsible for should be overturned
as he was convicted of being a communist spy.


The debate about even taking part in the U.N. back then was such that the
U.S. allowed in no actual regulatory control over us.  It is their to
facilitate communication, and when necessary to form alliances to bring
pariah nations back into the fold through force.


We are NOT members of a one world government.

--
Timothy Heald
Web Portfolio Manager
Overseas Security Advisory Council
U.S. Department of State
571.345.2319

The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S.
Department of State or any affiliated organization(s).  Nor have these
opinions been approved or sanctioned by these organizations. This e-mail is
unclassified based on the definitions in E.O. 12958.

-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Graeme [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 11:44 AM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Bush gives the finger to the world again

Semantics. International law vs. domestic law. Illegal in one, possibly not
in the other. We are signatories on the United Nations Charter which is a
constitution of international law. It is a treaty to which all signatories
are legally bound.

I know we like to say that the U.N. has no control over the U.S., but when
the US signed that treaty we agreed to be held to that body's laws.

-Kevin

----- Original Message -----
From: "Heald, Tim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 10:16 AM
Subject: RE: Bush gives the finger to the world again

> The U.N. has no regulatory control over the United States.
>
> We are a sovereign nation.
>
> Hence not illegal.
>
> --
> Timothy Heald
> Web Portfolio Manager
> Overseas Security Advisory Council
> U.S. Department of State
> 571.345.2319
>
> The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S.
> Department of State or any affiliated organization(s).  Nor have these
> opinions been approved or sanctioned by these organizations. This e-mail
is
> unclassified based on the definitions in E.O. 12958.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kevin Graeme [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 10:56 AM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Bush gives the finger to the world again
>
>
> The UN resolution basically said that if Iraq didn't cooperate with
> dismantelling their WMD that we could attack. However, Iraq couldn't
> dismantel what they didn't have. So we trumped up evidence to show that
they
> did. Hence the illegal.
>
> -Kevin
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Heald, Tim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 9:42 AM
> Subject: RE: Bush gives the finger to the world again
>
> > Tell me again how the war was illegal?
> >
> > The United Nations holds no mandate over our actions.  We are still a
> > sovereign nation capable of acting unilaterally.
> >
> > You might not have thought it was a good idea, but that doesn't make it
> > illegal.  Now I would be forced to agree that it was unconstitutional
> (read
> > illegal) as war was never formally declared, but for some reason we no
> > longer feel bound by the constitution in this country.  As most
mainstream
> > people, both left and right, believe that the constitution is a living,
> > interpreted document, you shouldn't complain about that too loudly.  If
we
> > want to strictly follow one section of the constitution, than all need
be
> > applied equally (Firearms laws, private property, gov't only getting
> > involved in those things that are specifically mentioned in the
> > constitution).
> >
> > Additionally why should we support the economies of nations that in
effect
> > cost lives of American soldiers?  These supposed allies (whose defense
we
> > have bled for time and again) refused to take part in the fighting, and
> have
> > continued to take part in the reconstruction unless we met their
demands.
> > They don't deserve our money, and make no mistake, this is our money.
> >
> > I can't agree Kevin.  We are doing nothing wrong here.  We may have
erred
> in
> > invading.  I am sure we have made many mistakes during the occupation.
> Yet
> > we're still trying to do the right thing there, and the people that
> wouldn't
> > stand with us during the tough part shouldn't profit now that there is
> money
> > to be made.
> >
> > --
> > Timothy Heald
> > Web Portfolio Manager
> > Overseas Security Advisory Council
> > U.S. Department of State
> > 571.345.2319
> >
> > The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S.
> > Department of State or any affiliated organization(s).  Nor have these
> > opinions been approved or sanctioned by these organizations. This e-mail
> is
> > unclassified based on the definitions in E.O. 12958.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Kevin Graeme [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 10:29 AM
> > To: CF-Community
> > Subject: Bush gives the finger to the world again
> >
> >
> > Former top U.S. officials are blasting the Bush administration for
> reopening
> > a rift with Europe by excluding critics of the war from prime contracts
> for
> > Iraq's reconstruction.
> >
> > http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105433,00.html
<http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105433,00.html>
> <http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105433,00.html>
> > <http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105433,00.html>
> >
> > "I thought we were in the process of acquiring support rather than
> > alienating it," former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright (search)
> said.
> >
> > So let me get this straight.
> >
> > 1. Economy is bad.
> > 2. Find a patsy country and accuse them of something unfounded.
> > 3. Get called on it by other countries.
> > 4. Attack anyway
> > 5. Deny reconstruction contracts to countries that wouldn't help in an
> > illegal war.
> >
> > And people are complaining? I don't get it. It looks like a perfect plan
> to
> > boost the economy by giving local companies big contracts.
> >
> > -Kevin
> >   _____
> >
> >
> >
>   _____
>
>
>
  _____
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]

Reply via email to