"Offences Against the Law of Nations"

Post Reply
User avatar
bob
Posts: 27254
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

"Offences Against the Law of Nations"

#1

Post by bob » Thu Aug 25, 2011 1:55 pm

U.S. Const., [/break1]uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/a1_8_10.html]art. 1, sec. 8, cl. 10:


To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of NationsBlackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, [/break1]law.yale.edu/18th_century/blackstone_bk4ch5.asp]book 4, ch. 5:


Of Offences Against the Law of NationsDiscuss.
Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Welsh Dragon
Posts: 2811
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 3:29 pm

"Offences Against the Law of Nations"

#2

Post by Welsh Dragon » Thu Aug 25, 2011 2:01 pm

Do we have to?

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 22429
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

"Offences Against the Law of Nations"

#3

Post by RTH10260 » Thu Aug 25, 2011 2:15 pm

U.S. Const., [/break1]uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/a1_8_10.html]art. 1, sec. 8, cl. 10:


To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of NationsBlackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, [/break1]law.yale.edu/18th_century/blackstone_bk4ch5.asp]book 4, ch. 5:


Of Offences Against the Law of NationsDiscuss.Seems only a problem within the title.





Towards the end of the Blackstone reference this can be found:


III. LASTLY, the crime of piracy, or robbery and depredation upon the high feas, is an offence againft the univerfal law of fociety ; a pirate being, according to fir Edward Coke k, boftis humani generis. As therefore he has renounced all the benefits of fociety and government, and has reduced himfelf afrefh to the favage ftate of nature, by declaring war againft all mankind, all mankind muft declare war againft him : fo that every community hath a right, by the rule of felf-defence, to inflict that punifhment upon him, which every individual would in a ftate of nature have been otherwife entitled to do, any invafion of his perfon or perfonal property.





BY the antient common law, piracy, if committed by a fubject, was held to be a fpecies of treafon, being contrary to his natural allegiance ; and by an alien to be felony only : but now, fince tha ftatute of treafons, 25 Edw. III. c.2. it is held to be only felony in a fubject l. Formerly it was only cognizable by the admiralty courts, which proceed by the rule of the civil law m. But, it being inconfiftent with the liberties of the nation, that any man's life fhould be taken away, unlefs by the judgment of his peers, or the common law of the land, the ftatute 28 Hen.VIII. c.15. eftablifhed a new jurifdiction for this purpofe ; which proceeds according to the courfe of the common law, and of which we fhall fay more hereafter.





{FS}


l See the occafion of making this ftature ; Vol.I. pag.255.


k 3Inft.113. 1 Ibid.


m 1 Hawk. P.C.98.


{FE}


THE


.P 72.


PUBLIC WRONGS.


BOOK IV.


CH. 5.





THE offence of piracy, by common law, confifts in committing thofe act of robbery and depredation upon the high feas, which, if committed upon land, would have amounted to felony there n. as, by ftatute 11&12 W.III.c.7. if any natural born fubjeft commits any act of hoftility upon the high feas, againft others of his majefty's fubjefts, under colour of a commiffion from any foreign power ; this, though it would only be an act of war in an alien, fhall be conftrued piracy in a fubject. And farther, any commander, or other feafaring perfon, betraying his truft, and running away with any fhip, boat, ordnance, ammunition, or goods ; or yielding them up voluntarily to a pirate ; or confpiring to do thefe acts ; or any perfon confing the commander of a veffel, to hinder him from fighting in defence his fhip, or to caufe a revolt on board ; fhall, for each of thefe offences, be adjudged a pirate, felon, and robber, and fhall fuffer death, whether he be principal or acceffory. By the ftatute 8 Geo. I. c.24. the trading with known pirates, or furnifhing them with ftores or ammunition, or fitting out any veffel for that purpofe, or in any wife confulting, combining, confederating, or correfponding with them ; or the forcibly boarding any merchant veffel, though without feifing or carrying her off, and deftroying or throwing any of the goods overboard ; fhall be keemed piracy : and all acceffories to piracy, are declared to be principal pirates, and felons without benefit of clergy. By the fame ftyatutes alfo, (to encourage the defence of merchant veffels againft pirates) the commanders or feamen qounded, and the widows of fuch feamen as are flain, in any piratical engagement, fhall be entitled to a bounty, to be divided among them, not exceeding one fiftieth part of the value of the cargo on board : and fuch wounded feamen fhall entitled to the penfion of Greenwich hofpital ; which no other feamen are, except only fuch as have ferved in a fhip of war. And if the commander fhall behave cowardly, by not defending the fhip,Rather anoying transcription of the Blackstone. They really could have transcribed the flowing glyph 'f' to a proper 's' for this publication.

User avatar
kate520
Posts: 15700
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:02 pm
Location: Dark side of the Moon
Occupation: servant of cats, chicken wrangler
Contact:

"Offences Against the Law of Nations"

#4

Post by kate520 » Thu Aug 25, 2011 2:20 pm

Aarrgh, matey.Fince we know that Birthers have no common fenfe and lack reading comprehenfion fkills, it stands to reafon they would mifinterpret the meaning of the phrafe Law of Nations.Edited: stoopid terminal s.
DEFEND DEMOCRACY

User avatar
Whatever4
Posts: 12241
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 6:36 am
Location: Mainely in the plain
Occupation: Visiting doctors.

"Offences Against the Law of Nations"

#5

Post by Whatever4 » Thu Aug 25, 2011 2:56 pm

Aarrgh, matey.Fince we know that Birtherf have no common fenfe and lack reading comprehenfion fkills, it ftandf to reason they would mifinterpret the meaning of the phrafe Law of Nationf.I sea what you did there. =)) =)) =))
"[Moderate] doesn't mean you don't have views. It just means your views aren't predictable ideologically one way or the other, and you're trying to follow the facts where they lead and reach your own conclusions."
-- Sen. King (I-ME)

User avatar
DaveMuckey
Posts: 4110
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 3:17 pm

"Offences Against the Law of Nations"

#6

Post by DaveMuckey » Thu Aug 25, 2011 3:46 pm

Yvo're killing me, here.

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 45129
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

"Offences Against the Law of Nations"

#7

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Thu Aug 25, 2011 5:50 pm

fcrew it.

User avatar
AuBricker
Posts: 416
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 6:32 pm

"Offences Against the Law of Nations"

#8

Post by AuBricker » Thu Aug 25, 2011 6:03 pm

This entire debate serves only to illustrate that Birthers either can not or will not read. The following passage from Chapter XXI Catherine Drinker Bowen's classic Miracle at Philadelphia proves this point.





Gouverneur Morris wished to strike out, in Section 8 of Article I, the second use of the word punish: "To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas and punish offences against the law of nations." This would make offenses against the law of nations definable as well as punishable. James Wilson was against it. "To pretend to define the law of nations which depends on the authority of all the civilized nations of the world," he said, would have a look of arrogance and would make us look ridiculous."The Birthers pull the Framers from their graves and insert lies upon their lips.

A Legal Lohengrin
Posts: 10415
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:56 pm

"Offences Against the Law of Nations"

#9

Post by A Legal Lohengrin » Thu Aug 25, 2011 7:31 pm

This entire debate serves only to illustrate that Birthers either can not or will not read. The following passage from Chapter XXI Catherine Drinker Bowen's classic Miracle at Philadelphia proves this point.





Gouverneur Morris wished to strike out, in Section 8 of Article I, the second use of the word punish: "To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas and punish offences against the law of nations." This would make offenses against the law of nations definable as well as punishable. James Wilson was against it. "To pretend to define the law of nations which depends on the authority of all the civilized nations of the world," he said, would have a look of arrogance and would make us look ridiculous."The Birthers pull the Framers from their graves and insert lies upon their lips.This also points out something birthers don't understand. Vattel could not define the law of nations, either. All he did was describe it. Treatises like his were much like what we now call treatises. They can be cited to some degree, but if there's a case in your jurisdiction that disagrees with the treatise or adopts a minority view, they mean nothing. Sure, it's fun to cite Blackstone or the Federalist Papers, but except where an originalist interpretation is needed, not terribly useful, except perhaps for showing that some legal principle now in operation also has tradition behind it.





To the extent the Birfers want to use it, though, they ignore that the meaning they want, if ever they were right (there is a possibility of that), they certainly were not after the adoption of the Reconstruction Amendments (of course they play make-believe that those are not real amendments also).

User avatar
aarrgghh
Posts: 1747
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 4:05 pm
Contact:

"Offences Against the Law of Nations"

#10

Post by aarrgghh » Fri Aug 26, 2011 12:10 am

U.S. Const., [/break1]uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/a1_8_10.html]art. 1, sec. 8, cl. 10:


To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of NationsBlackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, [/break1]law.yale.edu/18th_century/blackstone_bk4ch5.asp]book 4, ch. 5:


Of Offences Against the Law of NationsDiscuss.the person you need to talk to is [/break1]google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=site]bushpilot1 ...

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 45129
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

"Offences Against the Law of Nations"

#11

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Fri Aug 26, 2011 12:19 am

Where is the observation by Emereich de Vattel in his Law of Nations that in England it's jus soli?

User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 16993
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

"Offences Against the Law of Nations"

#12

Post by Suranis » Fri Aug 26, 2011 4:15 am

Its 2 paragraphs down from the mistranslated paragraph birthers love[/break1]constitution.org/vattel/vattel_01.htm]http://www.constitution.org/vattel/vattel_01.htm§ 212. Citizens and natives.The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.§ 213. Inhabitants.The inhabitants, as distinguished from citizens, are foreigners, who are permitted to settle and stay in the country. Bound to the society by their residence, they are subject to the laws of the state while they reside in it; and they are obliged to defend it, because it grants them protection, though they do not participate in all the rights of citizens. They enjoy only the advantages which the law or custom gives them. The perpetual inhabitants are those who have received the right of perpetual residence. These are a kind of citizens of an inferior order, and are united to the society without participating in all its advantages. Their children follow the condition of their fathers; and, as the state has given to these the right of perpetual residence, their right passes to their posterity.§ 214. Naturalization.(58)A nation, or the sovereign who represents it, may grant to a foreigner the quality of citizen, by admitting him into the body of the political society. This is called naturalization. There are some states in which the sovereign cannot grant to a foreigner all the rights of citizens, — for example, that of holding public offices — and where, consequently, he has the power of granting only an imperfect naturalization. It is here a regulation of the fundamental law, which limits the power of the prince. In other states, as in England and Poland, the prince cannot naturalize a single person, without the concurrence of the nation, represented by its deputies. Finally, there are states, as, for instance, England, where the single circumstance of being born in the country naturalizes the children of a foreigner.
Learn to Swear in Latin. Profanity with class!
https://blogs.transparent.com/latin/lat ... -in-latin/

User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 16993
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

"Offences Against the Law of Nations"

#13

Post by Suranis » Fri Aug 26, 2011 4:29 am

By the way, thanks to Doc Conspiracy, we actually have an image of the first English Translation of Vattel from 1760http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/wp-contentsrc=" ... 1760.gifWe also have The first American Edition (1787) issued the year of the Constitutional Convention which also does not have “natural born citizen”.http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/wp-conte ... ion.gifFun, eh?
Learn to Swear in Latin. Profanity with class!
https://blogs.transparent.com/latin/lat ... -in-latin/

Bran Mak Morn
Posts: 491
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 5:34 am

"Offences Against the Law of Nations"

#14

Post by Bran Mak Morn » Fri Aug 26, 2011 4:53 am

What is funny is "native" is used, when the birthers tell us "native" and "natural born" are two different things. But what, to me, is even crazier -- birthers generally are big NWO conspiracy folks. The idea of some book is to be followed by all in international law would create the NWO they fear.

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 45129
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

"Offences Against the Law of Nations"

#15

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Fri Aug 26, 2011 10:06 am

Thanks, furanis. fInce George Wafhington had borrowed my copy of The Law of Nations and never returned it, I wafn't able to perufe it.

User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 16993
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

"Offences Against the Law of Nations"

#16

Post by Suranis » Fri Aug 26, 2011 10:14 am

Well, that'f my good deed for the day. Af a reward, I think I go fuck some orange juice.What?
Learn to Swear in Latin. Profanity with class!
https://blogs.transparent.com/latin/lat ... -in-latin/

ballantine
Posts: 416
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 5:21 pm

"Offences Against the Law of Nations"

#17

Post by ballantine » Fri Aug 26, 2011 11:25 am

What is funny is "native" is used, when the birthers tell us "native" and "natural born" are two different things. But what, to me, is even crazier -- birthers generally are big NWO conspiracy folks. The idea of some book is to be followed by all in international law would create the NWO they fear.Apuzzo's theory is that originally "native" meant the same thing as "natural born" as Vattel had the word "native" and then it somehow switched later on to have different meanings. Law is easy when you just make stuff up. Kind of like his big "C" and little "c" citizenship definitions.

Bran Mak Morn
Posts: 491
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 5:34 am

"Offences Against the Law of Nations"

#18

Post by Bran Mak Morn » Fri Aug 26, 2011 4:29 pm

You know, birthers never quote this:





All soldiers, natives or foreigners, are to take an oath to serve faithfully, and not desert the service. This is no more than what they are already obliged to, the former as subjects, the latter by their engagement; but their fidelity is of so great importance to the state, that too many precautions cannot be taken for rendering it secure. Deserters merit severe and exemplary punishment; and the sovereign may, if he thinks it necessary, annex the penalty of death to desertion. The emissaries who solicit them to desert are far more guilty than the recruiters mentioned in the preceding section.

[/break1]constitution.org/vattel/vattel_03.htm]http://www.constitution.org/vattel/vattel_03.htm


Sorry to tell you what Vattel thinks of you, Moran....

obsolete
Posts: 239
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 3:42 am

"Offences Against the Law of Nations"

#19

Post by obsolete » Sun Aug 28, 2011 5:42 am

So, Vattel is saying you need to have fathers (plural) to be natural born.


So every President is a Usurper.

Adrianinflorida
Posts: 3110
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2011 1:07 pm
Location: South Detroit

"Offences Against the Law of Nations"

#20

Post by Adrianinflorida » Sun Aug 28, 2011 6:25 am

Ugh! The Homosexual Agenda rears it's head! Two Fathers!?!?! Run Away!!! /wagglebee mode

Post Reply

Return to “Legal Claims by Birthers”