World Court Demands U.S. Halt Executions of Mexicans in Texas


New member
I would really like to tell the world court where they can go if you know what I mean.

Link Removed

There was a thread posted on this subject last month. Since the World Court has no enforcement mechanisms short of an invasion, we can feel free to ignore their demands. The U.S. is a sovereign and it alone has the authority to decide how best to deal with criminals on its own soil, whether other countries like it or not.
There was a thread posted on this subject last month. Since the World Court has no enforcement mechanisms short of an invasion, we can feel free to ignore their demands. The U.S. is a sovereign and it alone has the authority to decide how best to deal with criminals on its own soil, whether other countries like it or not.

I agree, but I do know that the buracrats in this country that want to move us into their One World Government, New World Order would like to move us in that direction. Who knows what they are cooking up for us behind the scenes
I still feel the same way I did the last time this came up. The US government needs to remind the UN and all of its corrupt divisions that the USA is a sovereign government and need not obey laws that conflict with the US Constitution and the body of law subject to it.
The problem is that we are a signatory to the Vienna Convention on which this ruling is based. Unfortunately our Founding Fathers saw fit to include the following in our Constitution:
Article VI
All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

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 or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.
So we are obligated to obey treaties the same as we are the Constitution itself.

The Bush administration tried to intervene the last time this came up a few years ago and essentially told Texas to start over by obeying the treaty.The Supreme's found that despite the fact that we were obligated under the treaty the Congress had never actually passed any enabling legislation to put it into effect; they tossed the administration's instructions to Texas and the state proceeded with their plans. As far as I know Congress has still never taken action on the matter so it appears Texas is free to proceed with the execution.

The ball is probably in Bush's court. My guess is that, given his concern for the delicate sensibilities of Mexico and disinterest in the views of his fellow citizens in matters Mexican, he will make a personal appeal to the Governor to stay the execution if not cancel it altogether. Watch this space, I believe August 5 is the date set for the serial rapist killer to meet his maker courtesy of the good citizens of Texas.

NB IANAL so ...

Now, my personal opinion is that we ought to tell the "World Court" to take a hike, and take the entire UN with them.
Last edited:
We should have thrown the UN out of this country a long time ago

Something certainly needs to be done. Those who make the case that we're better off having the UN on US soil where we have some ability to limit their insanity lost all credibility with me long ago.

Perhaps we should just quit giving them any money and veto everything...

If any of y'all have clever and creative way to deal with the UN, I'd like for you to share.
Something certainly needs to be done. Those who make the case that we're better off having the UN on US soil where we have some ability to limit their insanity lost all credibility with me long ago.

Perhaps we should just quit giving them any money and veto everything...

If any of y'all have clever and creative way to deal with the UN, I'd like for you to share.
To: Secretary General UN
From: United States of America
Subj: UN Departure

Dear Mr. Secretary,

Please be advised that we expect you and the entire nest of surrender monkeys and vipers to vacate the premises in 90 days. We plan to pave over the site and turn it into aparking lot. Please be sure to take all you personal belongings, you will not be coming back.

Signed: America

PS Pay your d*mn parking tickets before you go.
For those of you that may not know just how evil the U.N. is here is a little history on it.

What The UN Doesn't Want You To Know

Foreign Affairs Editorial Editorial Keywords: U.N., NWO
Source: The Oil Patch
Published: 05/05/01 Author: Irvin Baxter Jr.
Posted on 05/06/2001 08:48:07 PDT by Typhoon

What The UN Doesn't Want You To Know

The Father of the UN Was a Communist
by Irvin Baxter Jr.

A young American diplomat was the leading force in the designing of the United Nations. He was secretary of the Dumbarten Oaks Conversations from August to October of 1944 where most of the preliminary planning for the U.N. was done. He was Roosevelt's right-hand man in February of 1945 at Yalta where the postwar boundaries of Europe were drawn (Roosevelt was a dying man at the time. His death came only ten weeks later).

At Yalta it was agreed that the Soviet Union would have three votes (one each for Russia, Ukraine, and Byelorussia) in the U.N. General Assembly, even though the United States had only one.

At Yalta much of Europe was placed under the iron heel of communist rule.

At Yalta, Churchill, Roosevelt, and Stalin appointed this young diplomatic shining star to be the first Secretary-general of the U.N. for the founding conference held in San Francisco,April/June of 1945.

All of this seemed well and good until three years later.

Alger Hiss was exposed as a communist spy and sent to prison. Only then did people understand why the emblem of the United Nations looked so much like the emblem of the Soviet Union. It now made sense that the Soviet Union, at Yalta, was given control over all of Eastern Europe. Then everyone understood how the Soviet Union managed to capture three votes in the U.N. General Assembly compared to one for the United States. Then it became clear why a secret deal had been struck stating that a communist would always hold the office of of head of the U.N. military.

The U.N. charter was authored by a communist, the first U.N. Secretary-general was a communist, and the U.N., from the beginning, was designed to be a Union of World Socialist Republics.

On a recent tour of the U.N., not one mention was made of any of this by our guide. Hiss' name was not mentioned one time. When pictures of the founding conference contained his picture, our U.N. guide avoided telling us who it was.

I'm sure everyone was taught about the United Nations and its importance in school, but I'm also sure that the above information was conveniently omitted from your textbooks!

Secret agreement:
U.N. military to always be commanded by a communist
One of the most important positions within the entire United Nations - if not the most important - is that of Undersecretary-General for Political and Security Council Affairs. Most Americans have never even heard of this position, much less anything about the man who holds the job. The undersecretary-general for political and security council affairs has three main areas of responsibility.

They are:

Control of all military and police functions of the United Nations peacekeeping forces.
Supervision of all disarmament moves on the part of member nations
Control of all atomic energy ultimately entrusted to the United nations for peaceful and "other purposes".

In view of the fact that these three functions may soon constitute the ultimate power of life and death over every human being on the face of the earth (once national disarmament is achieved and all military is under the control of the U.N.), there would appear to be some minor justification for us to be more than passingly curious over who wields this power. Since the United Nations was created in 1945 there have been fifteen men appointed to the position of undersecretary-general of political and security council affairs. Astonishingly, every single one of them has been a communist!

Communists appointed to the position of undersecretary-general

Arkady Sobolev -- USSR (1946-1949)
Konstantin Zinchenko -- USSR (1949-53)
Ilya Tehernychev -- Ygoslavia (1954-1957)
Anatoly F. Dobrynin -- USSR (1958-1960)
Georgi Ptrovich Arkadev -- USSR (1960-1962)
Eugeny Dmiterievich Kiselev -- USSR (1962-1963)
Vladimir Pavolovich Suslov -- USSR (1963-1963)
Alexie E. Nesterenko -- USSR (1965-1968)
Leonid N. Kutakov -- USSR (1968-1973)
Arkady N. Shevchenko -- USSR (1973-1978)
Mikhail D. Sytenko -- USSR (1978-1981)
Viacheslav A. Ustinov -- USSR (1981-1986)
Uasiliy S. Safronchuk -- USSR (1987-1992)
Vladimir Petrovsky -- Russia -- former USSR (1992- )
James O. C. Jonah -- Sierra Leone (Co-chairman)

Some observers feel that fifteen Communists out of fifteen appointees constitutes a trend of sorts. But whatever we call it, Trygve Lie, the first secretary-general of the United Nations, revealed that this pattern was no mere coincidence. In his book "In The Cause Of Peace" Lie wrote: "Mr. Vyshinsky (of the USSR) did not delay his approach. He was the first to inform me of an understanding which the Big Five had reached in London on the appointment of a Soviet national as assistant secretary-general for political and security council affairs...

"Mr. Stettinius (U.S Secretary of State) confirmed to me that he had agreed with the Soviet delegation in the matter...

"The preservation of international peace and security was the organization's highest responsibility, and it was to entrusting the direction of the Secretariat department most concerned with this to a Soviet national that the Americans had agreed." (From The Fearful Master by Edward Griffin)

Every U.N. Secretary-General has been a socialist

Trygve Lie from Norway was the first elected head of the U.N. He was chosen by the fifteen-member U.N. Security Council and ratified by the U.N. General Assembly on February 1, 1946. Lie, at the age of twenty-three, was appointed secretary in charge of administration of the Norwegian Labor Party. The socialist lawyer served as Minister of Justice until June 1939, when a Cabinet reorganization made him Minister of Commerce. In April 1945, Lie was chosen to head the Norwegian delegation to the United Nations Founding Conference at San Francisco. At the conference itself he was chosen chairman of Commission III which was charged with drafting the charter of the Security Council of the United Nations, "the organ...which would have the power to act against aggressors."

Dag Hammarskjold of Sweden was elected Secretary-general of the United Nations on April 7, 1953. At the age of thirty, Hammarskjold became Undersecretary of the Swedish Ministry of Finance. At the Ministry he worked under the Fabian socialist economist Ernst Wigforss, whom he once said he considered his second father. Sweden has long been the leading socialist state of Western Europe, taxing its citizens at a 75% rate.

U Thant of Burma was elected Secretary-general of the U.N. on November 30, 1962. According to Current Biography 1962, U Thant considered himself a democratic socialist.

Kurt Waldheim of Austria took office as Secretary-general of the United Nations on January 1, 1972. Waldheim had been Austria's U.N. ambassador from 1964 to 1968. When the Austrian Socialist party won the March 1970 elections, Waldheim again became Austria's U.N. representative. After serving two terms as U.N. Secretary-general, Waldheim became the head of Austria. It was revealed that Waldheim had lied about his role while serving in the Nazi forces of Adolf Hitler. Facts that were made known resulted in Waldheim being banished from the United States, even though he was the head of Austria.

Javier Perez de Cuellar became U.N. Secretary-general on December 15, 1981. In his address to the General Assembly after being sworn in, Perez de Cuellar called the disparity in wealth between rich and poor nations a violation of "the most fundamental human rights." During his administration, some third-world spokesmen complained that Perez de Cuellar had not been sufficiently outspoken in promoting the massive transfer of resources from rich to poor nations on a global scale (Wealth redistribution has always been the central plank in the platform of international socialism).
"I am a third-world man," the Secretary-general replied. "But first of all I am a representative of 157 countries. I have to act in a way so that I am not only the representative of the third world."

Boutros Boutros-Ghali, the former foreign minister of Egypt, became the first African to head the U.N. on January 1, 1992. "If I was offered the job (of secretary-general) five years ago," Ghali said, "I would have turned it down. The U.N. then was a dead horse, but after the end of the Cold War, the U.N. has a special position." Politically, Boutros-Ghali was a member of the Arab Socialist Union.

Is it coincidence that one communist and six socialists have headed the United Nations since its birth in 1945? Does it seem strange at all that the driving message of the U.N., the message of wealth redistribution, is the central message of international communism? Do you find it amazing that the United States has allowed the Soviet Union to have three votes to our one in the United Nations since 1945? With the supposed dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1992, each of the fifteen member of the ex-Soviet Union now have a vote in the U.N. So now we are outvoted fifteen to one. Yet Russia retains the right to invade these states if they get out of line.

So what does all this mean? The plain truth is that the United Nations has been designed to be a communistic world government from its very beginning.

What will happen? The United Nations will obtain the world domination that it has been planning for since its beginning. Communism will achieve its dream of ruling the world, but only for a very short time.

We know this because the New World Order beast of Revelation 13 appears in another prophecy in Revelation 17.

In Revelation 17:3 the beast is red. Red is used by God in another prophecy on Communism (See chapter 3 of A Message for the President). And why not?! Red is the official color denoting Communism -- Red China, Red Russia, et al.

There are some dreadful times just ahead for this world. The consolation is that the deep darkness that lies just ahead will soon be replaced by the glorious dawning of the kingdom of our Lord and savior Jesus Christ. And He shall reign forever!!
Last edited:
Gov Perry of Texas

already made it quite clear that the world court has no jurisdiction over the state of texas and executions would continue. and that we fought a revolution here to through offthis type of nitwittery. and to kiss off. Good Going , Gov!!
A murderer is a murderer. It doesn't matter what citizenship you hold, if you come to the U.S. you should be held by our laws. The same goes for our visits to other countries, we are held by their laws. This is the same court that would demand welfare, medical care and education for illegal immigrants. Ignoring them is not enough, they need to understand that we are a free and autonomous nation.

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Latest member