The left “exercising its right to free speech.”
The right “hides behind the first amendment.”
This is hte official language used in the media. So Holocaust deniers who do their denying on the internet are, according to official media language, “Hiding behind the first amendment in the United States.”
In plain English, that means that they avoiding the years in prison that they deserve.
But the first amendment isnot a very safe hiding place.
Many years ago the Supreme Court decided that treaties are not subject to constitutional guarantees. The treaty that established the United Nations is exempt from the Constitution.
In case you think this is a detail of history, Senator Bricker of Ohio fought for years for his constitutional amendment which would overrule the Supreme Court and make treaties subject to the United States Constitution.
They are NOT.
So the first amendment does NOT protect you from extradition to Europe for internet Holocaust denial. The UNited Nations, which is exempt from the first amendment, has demanded it.
Under present so-called constitutional law, which means whatever the Supreme Court feels like, the United States is obligated to extradict any person to France if he violates French Holocaust Denial law.
Or Israeli Holocaust denial law.
If that were NOT the case, the Bricker Amendment would have passed. Bricker fought for it a LONG time. It’s the real thing.
It happens to be true that if the United Nations declared worldwide gun control, the United States is obligated to obey.
It happens to be the case that if the United Nations says that Americans accused of war crimes by Sweden must be extradicted, what we call constitutional law requires us to do it.
And when the UN gets wround to THAT, the conservatives will start screaming, just as they did with Roe versus Wade, “How could THIS have happened?”
These things ALWAYS start with “a blow against racism” like the 1968 Supreme Court decision voiding all state antimiscegenation laws. The conservatives ALWAYS fail to notice it.
Then it ALWAYS comes home to roost.
#1 by joe rorke on 11/20/2005 - 7:02 pm
It was a good many years ago that I began to see that people who called themselves “conservatives” for the most part had no guts. Not all of them. Most of them. And most is enough. Marxists had a lot more guts than “conservatives” from my observation. I lost my respect for “conservatives” in general. It’s no wonder the law has been perverted as it has over the years. The law you describe in this piece is my idea of gangsterism. Even in my short lifetime in our country (which is the equivalent to your lifetime at least) I have seen law change to the serious detriment of the American people. “Conservatives” told me what they were going to do to stem the tide. They lied. On a daily basis. With no conscience to go along with it. They are a shameful lot. In my opinion. I would not want one of them to enter my home. They had no guts. They bowed prostrate before their masters. They were shameless. They were dishonourable. That which they swore to do they did not do. And now our children and grandchildren and greatgrandchildren will pay for their contemptible behaviour. All because they had no guts. Not brains. Guts.
#2 by Mark on 11/20/2005 - 10:47 pm
Bob, considering that Europe is bloated on Muslims who hate the Jewish puppeteers, and considering how in America we are doing our best to pack in as many non-whites into this nation as we can, which is leading us into a crime-ridden, 3rd. world existance, I shudder at the thought of what the world faces once the other shoe officially drops and the PC religion is set upon. Today’s South Africa sounds bad but I can’t imagaine the entire globe undergoing such turmoil as will most likely happen if all indications are correct. We are all in for some interesting times.