CAFTA, THE EU & COMMUNITARIAN LAW

CAFTA, THE EU & COMMUNITARIAN LAW
PART 1 of 2

By Niki Raapana

January 25, 2006

NewsWithViews.com

How both parties sold America down the river

After wading through all the publications and websites representing both support and opposition for the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA-approved by the U.S. Congress July 2005), it’s astonishing to realize how very few of them bother to explain the legal foundation for the agreement. CAFTA, like most international trade agreements, is based entirely in the supremacy of communitarian law.

This isn’t Bush and Clinton quietly slipping in communitarian programs like Local Agenda 21 that bury communitarian laws deep inside hefty grants and incentives. The U.S. Congress has officially denounced their own Constitution as Supreme Law. When the United States Congress approved CAFTA they endorsed a regional trade agreement that places U.S. Constitutional Law below Communitarian Law. While communitarian law is without a doubt the most important legal topic in the world, American experts on both “sides” of the free trade arguments completely ignore it. Consequently, it’s the rare American who has any concept of how prevalent or powerful this new system of justice is.

The European Court of Justice is occassionally referred to as the Communitarian Court of Justice. CAFTA officials openly discuss using the EU as their model for communitarian case law. Communitarian Regulations govern the archiving of EU legal documents. The term communitarian law is in hundreds of online law journals. It’s taught in several foreign law schools and there are degreed law professors of Communitarian Law. The Jean Monet program sponsors symposiums on it at U.S. universities. The D.C. Communitarian Network sends out a communitarian law newsletter. It’s a widely understood term in Europe, Central, and South America. Still, Communitarian Law is so unfamiliar to U.S. Americans (and their attorneys) that most have never once heard the terms used.

One reason for its obscurity comes from the fact that communitarian law is also called Community Law, community aquis, and aquis communitaire. But another reason for its obscurity is the simple fact that globalists don’t want our people to know anything about it. The European Constitution was defeated at the polls by the Dutch and the French voters because of its supremacy of communitarian law. The last thing the communitarian supra-nationalists want to happen is for all of America to learn the whole truth about communitarian “free trade.” Remember, universities in England, Spain, Portugal, and Romania offer coursework and masters programs in Communitarian Law. Only a few elite American universities offer courses in communitarian law, and barely a handful of American students have ever studied it.

The vice-president of the EU Constitutional Convention sums it up nicely:

“One must act ‘as if’ in Europe: as if one wanted only very few things, in order to obtain a great deal. As if nations were to remain sovereign, in order to convince them to surrender their sovereignty. The Commission in Brussels, for example, must act as if it were a technical organism, in order to operate like a government … and so on, camouflaging and toning down. The sovereignty lost at national level does not pass to any new subject. It is entrusted to a faceless entity: NATO, the UN and eventually the EU. The Union is the vanguard of this changing world: it indicates a future of Princes without sovereignty. The new entity is faceless and those who are in command can neither be pinned down nor elected … That is the way Europe was made too: by creating communitarian organisms without giving the organisms presided over by national governments the impression that they were being subjected to a higher power.

That is how the Court of Justice as a supra-national organ was born. It was a sort of unseen atom bomb, which Schuman and Monnet slipped into the negotiations on the Coal and Steel Community. That was what the ‘CSC’ itself was: a random mixture of national egotisms which became communitarian. I don’t think it is a good idea to replace this slow and effective method – which keeps national States free from anxiety while they are being stripped of power – with great institutional leaps – Therefore I prefer to go slowly, to crumble pieces of sovereignty up litle by little, avoiding brusque transitions from national to federal power. That is the way I think we will have to build Europe’s common policies…”

– Italian Prime Minister Giuliano Amato, later Vice-President of the EU Constitutional Convention, interview with Barbara Spinelli, La Stampa, 13 July 2000. Posted in a great list of quotes compiled by Free Europe Blog.
How is it possible that Americans, with their “free press” and literate population are completely unfamiliar with the term communitarian law? The problem appears to be a constitutional issue over the definition of treason. Communitarian law is designed to over-rule all national law, including the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. Why do so many Americans flat out refuse to consider the possibility that current events resulting in federal legislation and Executive Orders are related? Communitarian laws balance individual rights against “safety” (as do the Patriot Act and the Homeland Security Act). This shows a pattern of thought, doesn’t it? Part of the problem is the American people don’t believe there are any more Hitlers or Stalins.

They believe communism “died” in the eighties, and that former evil colonial rulers all magically, spiritually evolved into nice, kind “helpers.” This amazing under-education promotes such a naive approach to modern politics that admitting the unknown is almost impossible for them. Indeed, many prefer to “shoot the messenger” rather than admit they somehow missed the most important legal development of the 20th century. The fact is, communitarian law and philosophy are so well hidden from the American people that many have accused this author of making the terms up as a part of my own personal “conspiracy theory.”

European voters, on the other hand, are much more familiar with the terms of the new agreements. Dutch and French voters rejected the European Constitution because of its basis in the supremacy of communitarian law. With a rare openness regarding the controversy, James Kanter reported in the International Herald Tribune on Sunday, January 1, 2006 that, “There are some tendencies within the European Union that can be seen with critical eyes,” he said, notably “an extension of communitarian law by the European court.” ( From Austria, ‘new thoughts’ for EU)

Besides CAFTA, many other “soft” communitarian legal agreements have been made between U.S. officials with international and supranational organizations. The U.S. has been governed by communitarian laws for decades. Communitarian legislation is before every legislative body in the country. Readers who’ve been studying the meaning of Sustainable Development will immediately recognise the true meaning of communitarian law. Communitarianism puts the rights of the community “at large” over the rights of the individuals living in the community. This is the entire foundation for anything communitarian. Global communitarians came to the U.S. to “shore up the moral, social and political environment.” They came to “balance” American’s selfish individualism (and outdated and dangerous nationalism) against their definition of the collective good.

Each member state choosing to join the supra-national organization must modify their national constitutions to accommodate communitarian principles. Communitarian Law balances the rights of individuals and nations against the rights of the “community.” It requires nations to make political and legal internal reforms. Communitarian law integrates nations into the global communitarian justice system. The term “community,” when used by global communitarians, can define everything from smallest rural area to the entire region, as in the “European Community.” Today the EU Communitarian Court is used as the model for all regional trade agreements in the works.

The United Nations is also based entirely in the supremacy of communitarian law. Communitarian law supports the mandates for sustainable and smart growth principles established in UN Local Agenda 21. Besides the communitarian supremacy of CAFTA and in other proposals for a North American Free Trade Agreement, there are also plans to create a communitarian code of justice for the Middle East.

Communitarian Community based Development is the structure for implementing the new system of law. Bush called it Re-Building Community when he explained the new War on Terror in February 2002, and he wasn’t kidding. The idea for re-building every community in the world under the control of a powerful community government is well underway in every nation. It’s being violently exported to Afghanistan, Palestine, Iraq and discussions have begun to export the law into the entire Middle East. It’s being quietly adopted by local stakeholder councils across the U.S. Everywhere, from Mexico to Peru, Serbia to Malaysia, the Philippines to Russia, China to the UK, the EU to Central America, all are in the process of subordinating national law under regional communitarian authority. No place in the entire world has been left behind.

The original American system, now much denigrated and ridiculed, was based entirely in the idea of protecting local markets from imperialist monopolies. When we “threw out the British,” we threw out their banker’s control over our trade, production and land. The U.S. federal government was later designed to protect our national borders from continual imperialist invasions. It was authorized to regulate trade and commerce between the free and independent states and to establish a national bank to coin American money. The bank had private investors but it was regulated by officials in the U.S. Government, who were responsible to the states. The first bank funded state banks who provided loans to build a transportation infrastructure, and it made small loans to small businessmen and cottage industries along the routes.

The plan was to make the U.S. entirely self-sustaining both economically and politically. We were working toward a balance between agriculture and industry, whereas after achieving it we would slowly begin to engage in foreign trade with equals. During those years, before taxes, the U.S. built up a huge surplus in the U.S. Treasury. The American national system worked so well here it was copied by almost every imperial colony during the first half of the 19th century. (The early 1800s could be described as the “Declaration of Independence” Days.) But that didn’t last long before the international bankers were back in control of everybody’s land.

YOU THOUGHT IT WAS POLITICIANS?

Now we have the private corporations called the World Bank and the Federal Reserve. We have a progressive tax and an unfathomable national debt. Today the “idea” of a national system or a national bank is ridiculed as a capitalist, elitist idea. Protected trade and tariffs are regarded as selfish, anti-human sentiments. Individual rights are really just a barrier to peace and social justice. Private land is ecologically unsustainable. The communitarian banker’s plan is more “fair,” or you’re an uneducated buffoon.

PART TWO

Here’s how communitarian rulings create a new quality of life:

“Adams offered an illuminating example of the questions arising from the interaction between European institutions on the one hand and society at large on the other. Only keen observers of communitarian matters are aware that the European Court of Justice has been an active policy maker, in a role similar to that played by the U.S. Supreme Court after World War II. By enforcing on individual countries, sectors and firms the laws approved at the level of the European Community (now Union), the Court has profoundly affected long-standing national practices.

In the exemplary case chosen by Adams, the German beer market, regulated since the Middle Ages by strict purity laws, was suddenly thrown open to producers following looser practices. As typical of judicial decisions, the Court was not concerned with the question of what rules ensured the production of the best beer (provided no harm to consumers would ensue, of course); it merely weighed different legal principles against one another. The Court thus decided that the principle of free movement of goods and services in Europe trumped local German norms, because these de facto created a protected market for German producers.” The Euro: A New Currency for a New Millennium By Daniela Gobetti.

None of this is new. The European Commission tells us their Communitarian Court of Justice has established communitarian environmental case law precedent since 1957. Legal permission from the locally elected officials for enforcing new laws in rebuilt sustainable communities is almost always granted. It’s the rare Smart Growth Plan in the United States that wasn’t unanimously passed by states, counties and municipalities. Communitarian environmental law was the first major breakthrough back in the 1970s. By the 1990s every state in the U.S. had jumped on the bandwagon.

Communitarian environmental laws are supreme to any national law or individual right that conflicts with the collective rights of the member states included in supranational organizations. Regional justice centers have replaced City Halls and County Courts. Administrative Hearing and Review Boards replaced constitutional courts altogether. (Try to use the Bill of Rights to get your driver’s license back from the DMV.) Revised zoning violations and public nuisance abatements are used by government and NGO partners to assume control over private land. Eminent domain has been expanded to include “best use” policies. All American cities, towns, and rural areas have the exact same new Community Development agencies; they enforce all the exact same new communitarian laws.

United Nations Local Agenda 21 was adopted just before Clinton took office. The U.N. sponsored Bruntland Commission defined the new way to explain the principles of a communitarian system; communitarian law came to be defined as “sustainable development.” It mimicked Marxism’s motto of “each according to their need, each according to their ability.” UN Sustainable Development means to protect all resources for future generations and make everyone in the present quit making anything useful or productive that comes out of the earth. The whole theory is based on the idea that humans kill the planet by using its resources. [Must see video: Liberty or Sustainable Development]

Communitarians promote a thing called human rights, a theory of justice which is totally the opposite of individual rights. Individual rights are what the U.S. Bill of Rights was established to protect. Human Rights covers every aspect of human suffering and death. Unlike clear laws that protect individual liberty, Human Rights can only be enforced by a supreme global communitarian legal system. What Americans really don’t understand is that ultimately, Human Rights includes the Marxist mandates for confiscation and “equal” distribution of private property and goods. In the logic of the globalists, individual rights to protect yourself, your property, and the freedom to choose ones’ own life path, are ancient, outdated barriers to global peace and justice. Does it matter to Americans (or Iraqis) if individual rights are being criminalized under communitarian laws?

Community Development agencies partnered with Community Policing in almost every American community. Many towns have a whole lot more COPS on the beat now. The new cops prevent crime before it happens and their new job includes helping rebuild livable communities. This is why new COPS walk right in people’s private homes all the time without knocking or wasting time getting a legal search warrant. Modern cops are part of action teams who write innovative communitarian laws. Modern COPS can require our citizens show ID (Hiibel v. State of Nevada). Communitarian COPS visit nosey neighbors and gather “anecdotal information” that may indicate who’s a “problem.”

In the communitarianized U.S., former KGB spies and Mossad assassins train cops to use high-powered technology. Some COPS are military snipers. Cops wear bullet proof vests all the time now. New COPS have fifty nifty new gadgets hanging all over their uniforms (while our troops in Iraq send home for 12 gauge shotguns). And, in a major shift in American public policy regulations, communitarian COPS sit on “citizen” committees. New cops help rewrite local zoning regulations to incorporate communitarian laws. Actually, the COPS help suggest the problems. Then they suggest new ways to get around the individual rights of the problem people, rights which are too strongly guaranteed by a binding legal contract called the U.S. Constitution. They write the exact same laws in every community in America to address the exact same locally identified, citizen suggested problems. They call it holistic, local, grass roots, “participatory democracy” in action.

COPS are trained to stalk and patrol targeted neighborhoods. More and more neighborhoods in the U.S. are ghost towns at night. It’s creepy to drive through neighborhoods where the only cars are cops who play cat and mouse games. COPS keep computer logs of patrons at local watering hubs, and the statistics on Americans who’ve been arrested by them for DUIs is astounding. Our President has openly admitted to have ordered illegal surveillance on private citizens. This is communitarian “law” in action. Communitarian data-gathering requirements are now part of every state driver’s licensing agency. Our private information is being cross-referenced with data gathered from our family members, work associates, and our friendly, patriotic neighbors. Our private communications, via phone and our personal and work computers, on and off the internet, are all being monitored in the name of community security. Does it matter that the justification for this is communitarianism?

Now you must ask yourself. Can this possibly be true? This is a big revelation. It’s much too important to come from a nobody. Something so fantastic would never be left to the small-time, rank-and-file, American home based researcher. Grassroots is only a good word when it applies to community plans, not to opposition research. This should be a New York Times or a Washington Post story. Who the hell is the ACL? I wish I could list off all my degrees and Ph.ds, but the fact is we have no credentials, none, what-so-ever. We’re just two freedom loving American women who asked the wrong questions at the right time. You’ve gotta figure that if this article were factual and verifiable, obviously, somebody much more credible would have broke the story a long time ago. But they didn’t, did they? “CAFTA eliminates the U.S. Constitution!” was never headline news, was it? And now, maybe you’re just a little curious.

Once you verify our sources and confirm the existence of communitarian law, you’ve got to ask yourself the only thing that matters anymore. Why? Why didn’t your schools or your elected officials or your TV news stations or your newspapers publicly explain U.S. integration into a communitarian juridical system? The U.S. has been integrating communitarian legal principles for several decades, and what’s obvious to us is, the last thing the plotters want is for you to identify how they’re doing it.

What would happen if Americans began identifying communitarian laws and programs AS communitarian? What happens when our citizens question the authority of communitarian law in the United States? Would it make any difference if Americans were able to recognise and therefore legally disobey communitarian laws and programs? And, not that it will ever happen, but could it have any affect on the elections this November if U.S. voters were pre-informed of the proposed Andean Parliment? I can’t help but wonder about the depth and layers to this entire Hegelian ruse. Sponsored by Republicans who support “free trade,” CAFTA passed with just enough votes to get it through. Only a thorough understanding of the Hegelian dialectic explains why our most committed communitarian senators and representatives vote against it.

References:

1, http://www.fas.usda.gov/itp/CAFTA/cafta.html
2, Why We Oppose Cafta by the Oakland Institute.
3, The Creation of a Communitarian System of International Law cyber.law.harvard.edu.
4, pdf-Harmonization and harmonizing measures in criminal law, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences.
5, Court Buttresses Eminent Domain: Local Governments Cleared to Take Private Property if Projects Promise Growth
6, Integration to the EU and Economic Transformation: State and Its Role on the Example of the Export-Promoting Policy by Marek Csabay
7, Presentation by Dr Jan Mazak, President of the Slovak Constitutional Court 21.10.2004.
8, University of Oradea Faculty of Law and Jurisprudence
9, From Aquamont to Berlaymont: On the Integration-Friendly Features of the Slovak Constitution by RADOSLAV PROCHÁZKA
10, EDUCATION IN EUROPEAN LAW AT THE POLICE ACADEMY OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC
11, commlaw@hermes.gwu.edu
12, THE FUTURE OF CONSTITUTIONAL CONFLICT IN THE EUROPEAN UNION:CONSTITUTIONAL SUPREMACY AFTER THE CONSTITUTIONAL TREATY* by Mattias Kumm and Victor Ferreres Comella.
13, Historical Archives Service of the European Commission “ARCHISplus (French ARChives HIStoriques) is the Historical Archives of the European Commission’s database which contains references to files of European institutions from their beginnings to today. It is extracted from an internal database, Archis, and includes those references only which are helpful to access historical files open to the public according to communitarian regulations pertaining to their archives (30 years rule).”

© 2006 Niki Raapana- All Rights Reserved

Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts

E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale

——————————————————————————–

Niki Raapana was trained in government document research at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Raised by a career Army NCO, she traveled the U.S. most of her life. Her dad taught her it is every American’s job to defend the rights of people who are unable to defend themselves.

After her landlord complained that the city was out to steal his land, Niki agreed to study Seattle’s development plans for him in March 1999. In September 1999 she found out the city planned to do a lot more than steal Hugh’s land. She identified the Communitarian Network’s connection to the plans in March 2000.

Niki filed many public disclosure requests for Hugh Sisley and in the fall of 2001 the City of Seattle ceased actions against his properties based on Niki’s research. By 2002 she had provided 2500 documents for Dawson et. al. v. The City of Seattle et. al, a 4th Amendment lawsuit currently under consideration before the Ninth District Court of Appeals.

Niki co-founded the Anti-Communitarian League with her (then) teenage daughter Nordica, in April, 2001.

E-Mail: nikiraapana@gmail.com

http://www.newswithviews.com/Raapana/niki1.htm

One response to “CAFTA, THE EU & COMMUNITARIAN LAW

  1. http://www.newswithviews.com/Raapana/niki1.htm

    NIGEL FARAGE OF UKIP

    BOTH BNP GUYS KEEP STUM ABOUT IT…..PLACEMEN!

    When they have ammo they refuse to use- you should be asking- why not?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s