THE SUPREME FRAUD OF THE LAND
A PRODUCT OF TREASON
By Robert Pletka
August 2, 2002
“…Decency, security, and liberty alike demand that government officials shall be subjected to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen. In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law breaker, it breeds contempt for laws; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy…”
Mr. Justice Brandies, U.S. Supreme Court – dissent passage
Olmstead V. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928)
The Constitution of the United States of America, Article VI, par. 2, stipulates that the supreme Law of the Land consists of three elements: (1) This Constitution, and (2) the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof (the Constitution), and (3) all Treaties made (past tense), and which shall be (future tense), under the Authority of the United States (government), shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
Note the above underlined qualifying phrase (“under the authority of the United States”)! The authority of the United States (government) is intentionally limited. It possesses no inherent or written authority to change the fundamental character and/or structure of itself. Changes must be lawfully made through the article 5 amendment process to wit:
U.S. SUPREME COURT DECISIONS:
..a treaty may not enlarge or amend the Constitution of the United States. In the case of New Orleans v. U.S. (10 Pet. 662, 1836), the Court said that Congress cannot by legislation enlarge the Federal jurisdiction nor can it be enlarged under the treaty-making power.
Again in Doe v. Braden (16 How. 635, 1853), the Court indicated it thought that the Constitution was superior to a treaty when it stated: The treaty is therefore a law made by the proper authority, and the courts of justice have no right to annul or disregard any of its provisions, unless they violate the Constitution of the United States. ***
Later, in The Cherokee Tobacco Case (11 Wall.616, 620-621, 1870), the Supreme Court stated: It need hardly be said that a treaty cannot change the Constitution or be held valid if it be in violation of that instrument. This results from the nature and fundamental principles of our Government.
The Court, in the case of Geoffroy v. Riggs (133 U.S. 258, 1890) that: It would not be contended that it (the treaty power) extends so far as to authorize what the Constitution forbids, or a change in the character of the Government or in that of one of the States, or a cession of any portion of the territory of the latter, without its consent.
U.S. Supreme Court, Reid v. Covert. 354 U.S. 1, 1957:
[No] agreement with a foreign nation can confer power on the Congress, or on any other branch of Government, which is free from the restraints of the Constitution.
[There] is nothing in [the supremacy clause] which intimates that treaties and laws enacted pursuant to them do not have to comply with the provisions of the Constitution. Nor is there anything in the debates which accompanied the drafting and ratification of the Constitution which even suggests such a result.
It would be manifestly contrary to the objectives of those who created the Constitution, as well as those who were responsible for the Bill of Rights – let alone alien to our entire constitutional history and tradition – to construe Article VI as permitting the United States to exercise power under an international agreement without observing constitutional prohibitions. In effect, such construction would permit amendment of that document in a manner not sanctioned by Article V. The prohibitions of the Constitution were designed to apply to all branches of the National Government and they cannot be nullified by the Executive or by the Executive and the Senate combined….” Constitutional Law, Stone, Seidman, Sunstein Tushnet – p. 216.
Did the senate and president change the fundamental character and/or structure of government via the U.N. charter treaty? Answer: yes! Check out the following changes:
1. The senate and president obligated the United States, as a member of The United Nations, “To accept and carry out the decisions of the (U.N.) Security Council in accordance with the present charter.” (U.N. Charter, Article 25) (And 89 out of 91 Senators voted for it!)
2. Congress no longer declares war. Who does! Answer: Nobody. The U.N. peacefully ended all wars in 1945! The last and only reference to war appears in the first paragraph of the U.N. charter’s preamble.
3. What, then, does congress do? It only appropriates the money because "the (U.N.) security council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with articles 41 and 42 to maintain or restore international peace and security." (See U.N. Charter, Article39) (Examples: Korea, Katanga, Rhodesia, Iraq, Bosnia, Kosovo, etc.)
4. The (U.N.) Korean and Vietnamese “Peace Operations” were both fought according to peaceful U.N. rules of engagement – don’t shoot – let the enemy shoot first. Both wars were no-win wars based on defensive “containment” and attrition because offensive actions violate U.N. charter principles of “pacific settlement” and of “human rights.” American troops are still stationed there and all over the world while illegal aliens including terrorist enemies of America are invading us. The war goes on while Americans are being conditioned to accept perpetual U.N. wars for perpetual U.N. “peace.”
5. Congress no longer regulates commerce with foreign nations. Congress conveniently “fast tracked” that power and constitutionally delegated responsibility over to a 'faceless' international bureaucracy that now regulates U.S. commerce instead.
6. Congress annually plunders billions from U.S. taxpayers to “pay our fair share” as a member in “good standing" and to: “promote higher standards of living, full employment, and conditions of economic and social progress and development” - world-wide! (Article 55)
7. Congress un-constitutionally passed the U.S. Participation Act in 1945 by transferring powers to the president; powers greatly exceeding those granted him by the Constitution.
U.S. Participation Act, “Sec. 5. (a) Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law whenever the United States is called upon by the Security Council to apply measures which said Council has decided, pursuant to article 41 of said Charter, are to be employed to give effect to its decisions under said Charter, the President may, to the extent necessary to apply such measures, through any agency which he may designate, and under such orders, rules, and regulations as may be prescribed by him, investigate, regulate, or prohibit, in whole or in part, economic relations on rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication between any foreign country or any national thereof or any person therein and the United States or any person subject to the jurisdiction thereof, or involving any property subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.” (Page 086 Senate Document #87, 1954, “Review of the United Nations Charter.”)
The above random examples illustrate major constitutionally unauthorized changes in the fundamental character and structure of the U.S. government. The Constitution was never lawfully amended to permit the president and congress to expand their own powers through laws or treaties such as the United Nations charter and other fraudulent U.N. related treaties and “covenants”.
Therefore: The U.N. charter “treaty” was not ratified (made) under the authority of the United States (government) because such authority did not and still does not constitutionally exist. The U.N. charter was the intended gateway to one-world government and destruction of the magnificent American constitutional system by cleverly twisting the limited treaty-making power of the president, the U.S. Senate and the limited legislative powers of congress. It was designed by Soviet agents including Alger Hiss and fully supported by the Communist Party U.S.A. (Political Affairs, April 1945)
The U.N. is an international Marxist war-machine sold as the “world’s last and only hope for peace” to war-weary Americans in 1945. Immediately thereafter, and now, U.N. “peace” continues all over the world at the high cost of multi-trillions of dollars. Since 1945, more than 100,000 American sons, brothers, sisters and fathers have been “peacefully” slaughtered, several hundred thousand more maimed for life and unknown numbers abandoned as POW’s and MIA’s. Grieving families are told to be proud that their loved ones “died in the service of the United Nations.” Question: Who benefits?
Americans must demand that congress returns to its constitutionally limited role and operates within the law that each member has sworn to protect and defend.
The U.N. charter treaty was fraudulently imposed upon this nation for ulterior reasons. The honorable Ron Paul’s American Sovereignty Restoration Act (HR-1146) will sever all connections with the United Nations – including its presence on American soil! The duty of congress and the president is defending the United States, its Constitution, its citizens and their lives, liberty and property – not bankrupting the nation by policing and supporting the entire globe!
DEMAND ENACTMENT OF HR-1146!
To sever all U.S. connections to the United Nations
© 2002 Robert Pletka - All Rights Reserved
Robert Pletka founded the National United Nations Research Association in 1970 to expose the fraudulently ratified U.N. Charter, its associated treaties, and their use to subversively expand the Constitutionally limited powers of government. He enlisted and served in the U.S. Army Air Corps (1942-1946). Still taking his oath seriously, he teaches classes and writes on the genius of the Founders’ original intent and works.