did obama just sign away our sovereignty?

[marcirvine]

Another executive order attempts to align US laws and regulations with international regulations, bypassing Congress and our own lawmaking process.

http://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/obama-signs-executive-order-declaring-international-law-for-the-united-states/14439

Any other interpretations? The wording of this order is pretty confusing...

[Philosophy_of_Politics]

Another executive order attempts to align US laws and regulations with international regulations, bypassing Congress and our own lawmaking process.

http://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/obama-signs-executive-order-declaring-international-law-for-the-united-states/14439

Any other interpretations? The wording of this order is pretty confusing...

Mainly, it permits UN law inside the US. From my understand, this makes UN law triumphant over the Constitution. It's a loophole to serve the will of the UN.

[Simple]

Impeachable? Treason?

[marcirvine]

Mainly, it permits UN law inside the US. From my understand, this makes UN law triumphant over the Constitution. It's a loophole to serve the will of the UN.

that is what I got from it also. Definitly treason, but will anyone do anything about it?

[Philosophy_of_Politics]

that is what I got from it also. Definitly treason, but will anyone do anything about it?

Sh*t in one hand, wish in the other. :P

[kcchiefs6465]

did obama just sign away our sovereignty?
Just? He has been pissing on the Constitution for years now. Listen to Leon Panetta or anyone of the WH legal team. They have no respect for the sovereignty of our nation. They have stated publicly that U.N. resolutions trump U.S. law. He signs "executive decisions" (treaties) without the approval of Congress. He went into Libya with an U.N. resolution. Even George Bush and Bill Clinton etc. had some class about them when blatantly ignoring the Constitution i.e. secrecy. Obama flaunts it. He literally doesn't seem to G.A.F. His executive orders are treasonous. Every last one (thousand) of them.

[Publicani]

Can you show me where does it says that in case of difference, international law trumps the Constitution? All I see is "examine," "coordinate," develop..."

[Philosophy_of_Politics]

Can you show me where does it says that in case of difference, international law trumps the Constitution? All I see is "examine," "coordinate," develop..."

It's a legislative loophole to allow "International Law" into the US. Thus, the constitution will be further irrelevant.

[Publicani]

It's a legislative loophole to allow "International Law" into the US. Thus, the constitution will be further irrelevant.
Where does it say that? What specific language in the executive order you have the biggest problem with? Give me the quote.

[marcirvine]

Can you show me where does it says that in case of difference, international law trumps the Constitution? All I see is "examine," "coordinate," develop..."

The wording of the first portion of section 2 says it all, even though it is put within the flowery terminology of 'coordination and develop.'

Sec. 2. Coordination of International Regulatory Cooperation. (a) The Regulatory Working Group (Working Group) established by Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993 (Regulatory Planning and Review), which was reaffirmed by Executive Order 13563, shall, as appropriate:
(i) serve as a forum to discuss, coordinate, and develop a common understanding among agencies of U.S. Government positions and priorities

We have to take the term 'executive order' literally, as when a military sergeant 'orders' a private to do something. This executive order 'orders' the regulatory working group to coordinate and develop a working understanding between the US and any international bodies and laws which 'differ' from American policies. As such, the president (dictator) is 'ordering' that group to find ways to bring the US in compliance with the respective international bodies and laws, thereby bypassing the Congress and American laws that exist.
You have to learn to read between the lines on this flowery Orwellian 'doublespeak.'

[Publicani]

You have to learn to read between the lines on this flowery Orwellian 'doublespeak.'

Obama has done enough openly including killing an American citizen without a trial. Do we improve our case by "reading between the lines?"

[CaptainAmerica]

Impeachable? Treason?

definitely...if our U.S. Congress was willing to actually follow the law and impeach him.

[marcirvine]

Obama has done enough openly including killing an American citizen without a trial. Do we improve our case by "reading between the lines?"
Much of what governments do is laced with flowery language when it is in fact evil. Try reading the constitution for the Soviet Union. So, yes, if you want to know what the government is really up to, you have to 'read between the lines.' We do not do so to make our case; we do so to know what the govt. is really up to.

[John F Kennedy III]

Arrest Barry Soetero!

[mczerone]

Funny. My sovereignty was taken away 192 years before I was born.

Obama just leased partial ownership of his slaves to some other slavemasters.

[marcirvine]

Funny. My sovereignty was taken away 192 years before I was born.

Obama just leased partial ownership of his slaves to some other slavemasters.

What happened 192 years before you were born?

[azxd]

definitely...if our U.S. Congress was willing to actually follow the law and impeach him.I think they should roll tanks onto the Whitehouse lawn, and give a damn order to the troops :rolleyes:

[Xhin]

Edit: wrong thread

[Thaddeus Kosciuszko]

Article 6, Clause 2 - 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; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution [of any state] or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

I know that the SC has often traversed the boundaries of Reason; however, I do not believe that Clause 2 lends itself elastic interpretations.

Executive Orders carry the weight of law—Clause 2 is clear—laws made in pursuance of this Constitution are laws which are made within the strict and limited confines of the Constitution itself. No federal, state, or international law, rule or bureaucratic regulation and no state constitution can supersede this Constitution.

Fed obtains its power solely from the Constitution. It is not logical to think that fed has the power to circumvent that which grants its power.

T Kosciuszko

Mr. Jefferson's brilliance was epitome of liberal philosophy
Revolutionary is the romantic ideal: Ennobling Humanity.

King George and the Torries were conservatives.

[Intoxiklown]

I don't think Congress wants to see this go away, since they believe they have a "shoo in" party President this election cycle.

[Philosophy_of_Politics]

I know that the SC has often traversed the boundaries of Reason; however, I do not believe that Clause 2 lends itself elastic interpretations.

Executive Orders carry the weight of law—Clause 2 is clear—laws made in pursuance of this Constitution are laws which are made within the strict and limited confines of the Constitution itself. No federal, state, or international law, rule or bureaucratic regulation and no state constitution can supersede this Constitution.

Fed obtains its power solely from the Constitution. It is not logical to think that fed has the power to circumvent that which grants its power.

T Kosciuszko

Mr. Jefferson's brilliance was epitome of liberal philosophy
Revolutionary is the romantic ideal: Ennobling Humanity.

King George and the Torries were conservatives.

Precisely. There's a reason why the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. All branches/departments/roles of government are required per the constitution, to obey that document. The Supreme Court is no exception.

It works like this:

Constitution > Government < Individual/We The People

It was designed to be above government, in order to protect the smallest minority on earth.

[Publicani]

Much of what governments do is laced with flowery language when it is in fact evil. Try reading the constitution for the Soviet Union. So, yes, if you want to know what the government is really up to, you have to 'read between the lines.' We do not do so to make our case; we do so to know what the govt. is really up to.
But we shouldn't exaggerate. Maybe Obama intends to end the Constitution and maybe not. This regulation has no fire and no smoke. This is not the end of Constitution contrary to many in this thread who suggest that.

I am pissed because I initially believed the claim and wanted to send this to everybody on my list. But I couldn't find anything outrageous in the regulation. So I asked you to show me where it is and now you are telling me to read between the lines? I feel manipulated. With claims like these this site can lose any credibility.

We have plenty of real problems to worry about something implied between the lines. And you, the moderators! It's enough to barely mention some evidence about the Birth Certificate or 9/11 for you to jump in and move the thread to the hot topics. But unsubstantiated crap like this can go on and on.

[Philosophy_of_Politics]

But we shouldn't exaggerate. Maybe Obama intends to end the Constitution and maybe not. This regulation has no fire and no smoke. This is not the end of Constitution contrary to many in this thread who suggest that.

I am pissed because I initially believed the claim and wanted to send this to everybody on my list. But I couldn't find anything outrageous in the regulation. So I asked you to show me where it is and now you are telling me to read between the lines? I feel manipulated. With claims like these this site can lose any credibility.

We have plenty of real problems to worry about something implied between the lines. And you, the moderators! It's enough to barely mention some evidence about the Birth Certificate or 9/11 for you to jump in and move the thread to the hot topics. But unsubstantiated crap like this can go on and on.

The problem is that it's a loophole. Not that it blatantly disregards the constitution.

[marcirvine]

But we shouldn't exaggerate. Maybe Obama intends to end the Constitution and maybe not. This regulation has no fire and no smoke. This is not the end of Constitution contrary to many in this thread who suggest that.

I am pissed because I initially believed the claim and wanted to send this to everybody on my list. But I couldn't find anything outrageous in the regulation. So I asked you to show me where it is and now you are telling me to read between the lines? I feel manipulated. With claims like these this site can lose any credibility.

We have plenty of real problems to worry about something implied between the lines. And you, the moderators! It's enough to barely mention some evidence about the Birth Certificate or 9/11 for you to jump in and move the thread to the hot topics. But unsubstantiated crap like this can go on and on.

This order is much more important than you think. Ordering our federal agencies to find ways to align our policies with international policies regardless of what Congress says basically hands over our policy making to the UN and other international organizations. This is no less serious than when Leon Panetta said our military will take orders from the UN and NATO and may consult with Congress if it is felt necessary. With this order, it is not just our military which will be dictated by the UN and such, but all our policies can now be dictated by them. If you are familiar with UN Agenda 21, you will realize that this executive order forces our government agencies to get in line with this nasty agenda. With this order, Congress as well as all government agencies no longer plan American policies. Now they must simply learn how to work in conjunction with international policy makers. If you don't have a problem with that, then I guess we should all just bow down to the UN right now. But, personally, I don't like the idea of the UN being our new officialy policymaker. It just takes away our sovereignty.

[mczerone]

What happened 192 years before you were born?

A bunch of aristocrats formed a govt that eventually claimed complete ownership of each individual that happen to be born on the landmass between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, north of Mexico and south of Canada.

[nobody]

Sorry for any confusion on an Executive order. The Executive works for the Federal Government, therefore Executive orders are subject to the authorization by the States and ulimately farther down to WE the PEOPLE. The Federal Government still is subject to it's own limitations, as agreed upon by the Citizenry. A President is not authorised to do anything not agreed upon by dictates from the U.S.Constitution which permits the Federal government to do anything. The President is NOT commissioned directly by We the People, but is a branch of the Federal Government. Even the Supreme Court is limited by the Constitution because they are employed by the Charter given and established by the States and ultimately WE the PEOPLE. The SUPREME law of the land is in the hands of WE the PEOPLE. There is NO authority outside of WE the People. A contract is binding around the World. The U.S. Constitution is a Contract. Any subversion of the Contract is Internationaly illegal and punishable by same and at the same time punishable by WE the People. The U.S. Constitution establishes our Nation amoung the rest of the Nations. We have been doing business and diplomacy for an established number of years. There can be NO confusion on this matter; or WE the People of the USA can hold the World of Nations in contempt.

[Thaddeus Kosciuszko]

It was designed to be above government, in order to protect the smallest minority on earth.

Minority rights--was worth the fight; but the trend has been giving them up without a fight. And once more, Rs ignore, the only candidate trying to win the election, for a Reason other than simply winning the election.

T Kosciuszko

Lord Acton said it best..."If there is any presumption, it is the other way, against the holders of power, increasing as the power increases. Historic responsibility has to make up for the want of legal responsibility. All power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority."

[Eisenhower]

Is this another one of those executive orders that each president routinely signs, similar to the "martial law" E.O. we saw that Bush and I believe Clinton had signed?

[echebota]

The OP article describes a treaty that has been already signed. But apparently there are several others under negotiation between Obama administration (mainly Hilary) and international bodies.

Did anybody read This book???? Is it true what he is stating there?
http://www.dickmorris.com/get-dick-and-eileens-new-book-screwed/

I listened to an interview with Dick Morris, author of the book. He says he researched these treaties and his conclusions confirm the OP article about the signed treaty but also reveals great US sovereignty dangers from the treaties that are planned to be pushed through a Senate this summer. Most of them require Senate approval but not the House. And with the Senate as is they have a realistic chance of passing. In addition to the treaties he also covers some well known US foreign policies - some of his conclusions (see below) are BS, so I would not pay attention to this part.

This is a summary from his site:
____________________________

The end-of-his-term treaties Obama and Hillary are negotiating with the UN and the EU. They would:

o Enact comprehensive gun control,
o Ban space based missile interceptors (our best defense against Iran and North Korea),
o Require us to pay a UN body half of our royalties from off-shore drilling,
o Establish a legal right to US foreign aid,
o Ban use of our military without U.N. approval.
o Create a legal right to welfare
These measures are all proceeding in secret…until now! We advanced our publication date to be able to alert the public to these dangers!

• China’s currency manipulation which is soley responsible for its trade surplus with the US. China’s hacking of our technology, its policy of industrial espionage, and its demand that companies give it their technology as the price of access to the Chinese market. The book proposes immediate concrete steps to counter China’s practices.

• How Saudi Arabia uses our oil money to fund terrorism. 90 percent of Muslim fundamentalist funding comes from the monarchy we prop up with our military strength. Screwed lays out a comprehensive strategy for oil independence within three years!

• How Pakistan uses our military aid to kill our troops. Screwed proposes a bold new strategy of “triangulation” with India to check Pakistan.

• How our foreign aid goes to our worst enemies and does the poor nations that get it harm…and no god!

• How the United Nations is a screen for corruption and won’t move to stop it.

• How the Afghan regime of Karzai is totally corrupt, heavily involved in the drug trade, and not worth a single American life. Screwed suggests how to fight al Qaeda without having to prop up Karzai.

• And, most importantly, how our own former Congressional leaders are now working as lobbyists for our enemies to undermine our national security!

[echebota]

Bump