Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: CalculatedRisk who wrote (5743)	3/9/2004 5:23:39 PM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

>>> I am a Republican. I wrote in John Kerry. And yet the state says 100% of Republicans voted for Bush. I do not believe this at all.<<< Why don't you contact the secretary of state's office and see if they can locate your vote. Better yet, have a local reporter do it!

To: CalculatedRisk who wrote (5743)	3/9/2004 5:36:05 PM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

World Court Rises; America Rejects It At any moment now—possibly by the time you read this—the International Criminal Court will come into existence. But Americans are defending their sovereignty. Exclusive to American Free Press By Fred Lingel With just four more nations needed to sign on to it, a treaty creating another global court, is expected to be come a reality at any moment. But U.S. officials, prompted by pressure from American citizens, have vowed to unconditionally reject it. The International Criminal Court (ICC) claims jurisdiction over the world, even countries like the United States that refuse to ratify. The global bureaucracy is claiming that America is also bound to the court because President Bill Clinton signed the document in his waning hours in the White House. Fifty-six countries have ratified the ICC. Under the Constitution, of course, it can only take effect when the Senate ratifies the treaty. Globalists, however, reject this argument because the Constitution is a target for destruction. America’s leaders and lawmakers have heard the outraged voices of patriots and are strongly rejecting ICC jurisdiction. The administration is speaking out against the ICC and the Senate rejected the treaty on a 99-0 test vote. “The U.S. is not and will not be part of the ICC,” said Pierre Prosper, the State Department’s ambassador-at-large for war crimes issues. He suggested the United States may “unsign” the treaty, as urged by Americans in mail and phone calls. Americans are also urging Congress to enact legislation to punish nations that arrest American soldiers for “war crimes” committed while performing on United Nations “peacekeeping” and “nation building” ventures. Sen. Jesse Helms (R-N.C.) introduced the American Servicemembers’ Protection Act (S. 857) and Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) introduced the same measure (H.R. 1794) in the House. Both bills have the same exact language, meaning that if passed by both chambers they would go straight to President Bush’s desk, without conference hassles. But the Helms bill has remained in the Foreign Relations Committee and DeLay’s bill is stuck in the Inter national Relations Committee. The legislation would cut off military aid to any country that ratifies the ICC and prohibit U.S. forces from participating in UN ventures unless expressly immunized from ICC jurisdiction by a UN Security Council resolution. Both bills also authorize the president to take any action “necessary and appropriate” to free American soldiers from ICC captivity. This includes going to war. Advocates of a world government make no secret of their goals. The world has now moved into “a system of international relations in which human rights . . . are much more important than sovereignty,” said UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan. Czech leader Vaclav Havel said the invasion of Yugoslavia was “an important precedent for the future” in which “state sovereignty must inevitably dissolve.” But don’t fear that Americans will be immediately grabbed by the ICC—a waiting game is being played, which was explained by a high State Department official who did not want his name used. The strategy is to let the court operate for a few years “without upsetting Americans” so “they will get used to the ICC.” They hope Bush will not “unsign” the treaty. They hope for a “more progressive” Senate and administration in future years that will quietly commit America to ICC jurisdiction. When it drops out of the headlines, they reason, it can pass like the “Genocide Convention” which lingered for more than a decade before being quietly ratified. americanfreepress.net