The World: The USA is an Outlaw Empire: My Comment on the Topic

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.

Karl Sanchez
Karlof1's Geopolitical Gymnasium

Resize text-+=

Today’s Moon of Alabama article is about the genuine nature of just passed UNSC Resolution 2728 on the Gaza Genocide and the fact that it’s binding, a fact the Outlaw US Empire is trying mightily to say it isn’t. Readers are invited to use the link to read the excellent article that cites many sources about the veracity of the UNSCR’s being binding—indeed, all of them, many of which have been ignored, like those related to the Minsk Two agreements. (You can also sample it in the editorial box below). In my comment that follows is a plea to all other writers to adopt my descriptor of the USA or devise something similar so the vital facts of what such a descriptor means can get circulated and hopefully acted upon.

Acco Hengst | Mar 28 2024 17:13 utc | 10--

Thanks very much for your reminder to the bar. For many years, I've openly said the USA immediately began violating the UN Charter as soon as it came into legal force in October 1945 and hasn't stopped since; and in the process, has also been violating its own Constitution since that time--the document POTUS swear to uphold and defend. Thus, the Outlaw US Empire was legally constituted via its illegal acts in October 1945--facts very few want to accept despite their veracity. And now--AGAIN--we have 100% proof that the Outlaw US Empire is indeed a Rogue, a Desperado, an International Crime Syndicate to the nth degree.

So, what does it really mean that the US Constitution's been a broken instrument since October 1945? How legitimate are all the laws passed since then? If every POTUS was guilty of constantly violating what it swore to uphold, what legitimacy does the US political system have? Each of the POTUS's deserved to be Impeached AND Convicted under the Law of the Land, including Biden and his main challenger Trump. And that brings into the legitimacy of the US Supreme Court whose justices were all nominated by POTUS's that were illegitimate? And what then of Congress who has refused to impeach and convict every POTUS since October 1945 for the basic crime of undermining the US Constitution and failing to carry out the duties of the Executive?

And what does this all say about the US public's level of basic Constitutional literacy as well as that of every person employed by government at any point within the Federalist System since October 1945? I've known about this since I took Civics in 1972 and studied the US Constitution and the UN Charter. Admittedly, I haven't stood on a street corner with a sign saying all of the above since then. But in the mid 1990s, I decided I needed to do something. My advocacy got me banned from commenting at Common Dreams.org and by Disqus. MoA is the one place I've been able to advocate my points and be accepted by its controller. I went to VK knowing I wouldn't be censored there and finally to substack where I've done the same and bult a small following of 1700+ people from all over the planet. It would be awesome if people with a much larger audience like Simplicius would adopt my description--the Outlaw US Empire--as he now has 30,000+ subscribers. And then there're those who won't allow my comments containing my descriptor to be posted, Larry Johnson being one, despite my spelling out the why that's empirically correct.

I'll admit to being very pleased when the Outlaw US Empire is used by others; it means my efforts haven't been in vain. Somehow that needs to be pounded into the heads of 300+ million people within that Empire. And most of all into the heads of those who can actually do something about it--legislators, governors, and Congresscritters. I do believe they all make a similar vow to uphold the Constitution just as Naturalized Citizens and members of the Military must, so they must perform their duties.

So ended my MoA comment. The nature of our situation as citizens of an Outlaw Empire is detailed in many books that discuss the nature of the political system but never go to its cause or how it became that way. That whole story is what I’ve been attempting to compile in my work as a historian over the decades, and I probably finally have enough material to write a major essay on the topic, although new facts are always being uncovered that further prove some facet of the whole story. The problem is to know when to stop compiling facts and start writing. And then there’re contemporary events that I continue to cover that take me away from that project. Writing a long essay is sort of like building a house: you need to make a blueprint to know how to proceed.

At The UN It Is A Rogue U.S. Against The Rest Of The World

Ted Snider asks:

Is America a Rogue Superpower?

“Unipolar” used to mean that the United States was, at least in theory, alone in leading the world. Now “unipolar” means that the United States is alone and isolated in opposition to the world.

UN Security Council resolution 2728 which "demands" a ceasefire in Gaza and "demands" a release of hostages and "demands" the unhindered supply of food and other items to Gaza.

The U.S. has claimed, falsely, that the resolution is not binding.

As Snider writes:

On March 25, the U.S. went one step further and took a step toward becoming a rogue state who has supplanted international law with its rules-based order. International law is grounded in the charter system and the United Nations and is universally applicable. The rules-based order is composed of unwritten laws whose source, consent, and legitimacy are unknown. To the global majority, those unwritten laws have the appearance of being invoked when they benefit the U.S. and its partners and not being invoked when they don’t.

On March 25, the Security Council passed a resolution demanding “an immediate ceasefire for the month of Ramadan respected by all parties leading to a lasting sustainable ceasefire.” The resolution was able to pass because the U.S. stood aside and let the other fourteen Security Council members pass it by abstaining instead of vetoing.

But in her explanation of the American abstention after the resolution passed, U.S. Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield “surprisingly” said that “we fully support some of the critical objectives in this nonbinding resolution.”

Her claim that the Security Council resolution was nonbinding was not an off script, impromptu comment. It is the strategy of a country that enforces, not international law, but the U.S. led rules-based order.

Arnaud Bertrand has added a similar thought:

Since the beginning, it's been obvious that Gaza was in many ways a fight between International Law and the US's "rules-based order".

This whole episode around the UN resolution is a perfect illustration of this. There is no debate amongst international law scholars that resolutions by the UN Security Council that "demand" certain actions are binding (good explanation by a legal scholar here). In fact resolutions by the council ARE international law, article 25 of the UN Charter clearly states: "The Members of the United Nations agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council in accordance with the present Charter."

Yet the US now argues that the "rule" is in fact different: "It's a non-binding resolution, so there's no impact at all on Israel".

Where is this rule written, that somehow when the UNSC "demands an immediate ceasefire for the month of Ramadan respected by all parties leading to a lasting sustainable ceasefire", it's non-binding and "there's no impact at all" on the warring party?

Nowhere, that's the beauty of the rules-based order: the rules are made-up in the moment to fit the interests of the U.S. and its henchmen, depending on the circumstances.

The big issue here is that the whole world, literally, disagrees with the U.S. claims.

Snider again:

All UN Security Council resolutions are legally binding and have the status of international law. That is why UN Secretary General António Guterres said, “This resolution must be implemented. Failure would be unforgivable.” UN deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq explained that, “All the resolutions of the Security Council are international law. They are as binding as international laws.”

Others responded the same way to the U.S. claim. On behalf of the ten elected members of the Security Council who drafted the resolution, Pedro Comissario, Mozambique’s envoy to the United Nations, said, “All United Nations Security Council resolutions are binding and mandatory.” He then added, “It is the hope of the 10 that the resolution adopted today will be implemented in good faith by all parties.”

The United Kingdom also did “not share” the U.S. claim, prompting their envoy to the UN to say, “we expect all Council resolutions to be implemented. This one is not any different. The demands in the resolution are absolutely clear.” China, too, did not share the U.S. evaluation. “China’s U.N. Ambassador Zhang Jun said Security Council resolutions are binding.”

France too rejects the U.S. claim and insists that UNSC Res 2728 is absolutely binding and especially binding for Israel:

"A United Nation Security Council resolution is binding under international law. All concerned parties MUST implement it, especially Israel, to whom it is incumbent to apply this resolution."

Russia has said similar:

Russia's Foreign Ministry said Tuesday that UN Security Council Resolution 2728 on Gaza, which calls for an immediate cease-fire and access for humanitarian aid, is binding for all sides, including Israel.
...
"The Russian side expects that the binding UN Security Council Resolution 2728 will contribute to de-escalating violence in Gaza, including preventing the Israeli operation in Rafah, freeing hostages, (and) increasing humanitarian assistance to civilians in the sector," it said.

Four of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council - including two major U.S. allies -, all of its non-permanent members and the UN Secretary General have explicitly said that UNSC Res 2728 is binding.

The U.S. (plus maybe a few of its minor proxies) is the only state which publicly disputes that.

Bertrand points out that this will have huge consequences:

There's no overstating how consequential this is for the integrity of international relations. By doing so, the US effectively destroys the world order it largely created after WW2 because it effectively tells everyone that the set of institutions, rules and norms that underpin it are meaningless. We're effectively now in a world system where everyone realizes the police, the government, the basic set of beliefs, have become completely corrupted. This changes everything.

What comes next? I think there's no coming back for the U.S. And I think they know this, maybe unconsciously, otherwise they would at least pretend to act for the better good of all. The fact they don't shows they've effectively abdicated ambitions to restore their hegemony: they're now nakedly in it to milk the system for themselves, universal pretentions have gone.

This UN Security Council is not the only institution which the U.S. tries to destroy after having largely created it.

Read the rest here.

Original post by b on March 28, 2024 at 16:43 UTC | Permalink

VITAL

If you approve of this article, please share it with your friends and kin.
Help us grow our reach. Lies cost countless lives. And freedom.
We must act together to smash the VILE Western disinformation machine.

Neo-Nazi ideology has become one of the main protagonists of political and social life in Ukraine since the 2014 coup d'état. And that's a fact.

window.addEventListener("sfsi_functions_loaded", function() { if (typeof sfsi_widget_set == "function") { sfsi_widget_set(); } });

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.

Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.

Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted.
DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP…
PLEASE send what you can today!
JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License