Well I see your point on that but you understand that under the
Articles Of Confederation there was not any federal court for either
the states or
individuals.
I don't have so much a problem with an individual bringing
a case against his state in a federal court or against his nation or
federal government in a multi national court but I am very concern
on how the decesion is enforced if the decesion goes against the
government in the higher court. I don't think it wise to send in
troops against a federated member government or treaty member
government, it would be better for the federation or treaty
organzation to kick the member government out of the membership if
it does not follow the courts decesion. It would not declare war( but
it could if the blackballed government attacked) on the government
but it would amend its constitution or treaty to kick out the
government and no longer reconize it as a government. The federation
or treaty organaztion still would not send in troops to help liberate
people but private groups could, also county and local government in
the federation nearest the blackballed state orother government could
exercise their police powers to assist those that wanted assisstance
in that area.--- In [email protected], "Jeffrey Smith"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In [email protected], "terry12622000"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I like the idea of a basic world bill of rights but
> who
> > would enforce them should be of great concern.Personally I think
> > federal courts should be for state government against state
> government,
> > state versus federal government.The federal government should not
> be
> > the state and thus should have no relations with individuals as
> far as
> > government goes. Multi nation courts should be nation against
> nation.
> > One or more states could bring charges before that a state is
> violating
> > a person or persons rights and put forth a constitutional
> amendment to
> > kick that state out of the union for violating rights, the
> defendent
> > state could demand the violations be proved in federal court, if
> the
> > case is taken all the way to the Supreme Court and the defendent
> state
> > loses the amendment vote can procede through both parts of
> Congress and
> > through the necessary numbers of state legisltor. if the
amendment
> > passes then the state government will be kicked out of the union.
> The
> > federal government would not have to reconize the state
government
> as a
> > soveriegn government thus it would not offer protection against
> private
> > groups that would try to help liberate the people of that state,
> > neither would the federal or state governments have to hear
> charges
> > brought by the state government in question against private
groups
> in
> > question that may be based in the US
>
> The problem with that sort of setup is that it depends on other
> governments to defend individual rights--whether it be national,
> state, or federal. That's like expecting one group of mobsters to
> protect you against another group. They will, but only so long as
> they don't get their cut of the swag, and/or you don't fork over
> protection money.
>
> A government has a disincentive to protest or prosecute the
> violations of rights by another government: because it may want to
> commit a similar violation in the future against its own citizens.
>
> Notice our own government protests "human rights" violations only
> for propaganda purposes. When it has the opportunity to
effectively
> intervene, it normally does not, or only does so under concerted
> public pressure from non governmental groups and concerned
> individuals. Iraq is a good example: Saddam's record as a
dictator
> was used as the excuse for overthrowing him only after WMD and
> supporting terror shriveled in the light of daylight. And when a
> constitution was produced under our supervision, the result was
rife
> with socialism and light on indefeasable individual rights.
>
> Jeffrey Smith
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Fair play? Video games influencing politics. Click and talk back!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/VpgUKB/pzNLAA/cUmLAA/KlSolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
