First SOPA and PIPA, Now ACTA
Now that SOPA and PIPA have been shelved, a lot of worried folks have breathed a (premature) sigh of relief. But while all the attention was focused on domestic laws like SOPA and PIPA, nobody was watching what the administration was doing via treaty law.
Treaty law is just as binding as any domestically enacted legislation, with one major exception. Domestic legislation must pass Constitutional muster, since domestic law is subordinate to the Constitution. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land.
Although the Constitution and Supreme Court precedent consistently hold that treaty law is also subordinate to the Constitution in theory, in practice, treaty law is treated as if it were above the Constitution.
The Constitution, Article VI, Clause 2 states:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, 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.
The bone of contention is the phrase; "and all treaties made" which suggests that the Constitution and treaties are at least co-equal in authority, if one doesn’t look any closer, which is how the globalists get away with making that argument.
Under the Constitution, the President can only make treaties with the consent of two-thirds of the Senate present. That is different than two thirds of the Senate. That allows Senators to skip the vote so as not to be held accountable for taking a stand.
Or to schedule the vote during a time when most of the Senate is not in Washington, the way the Federal Reserve was passed, two days before Christmas in 1913 when most of the Senate was away from Washington.
(Or, like Obama, they could simply vote "present" as necessary).
If a treaty is so approved, then it actually does supersede the Constitution in practice, if not necessarily in theory.
Noted Patrick Henry during the Virginian Ratifying Convention:
"The Senate, by making treaties, may destroy your liberty and laws for want of responsibility. Two thirds of those that shall happen to be present, can, with the President, make treaties that shall be the supreme law of the land; they may make the most ruinous treaties; and yet there is no punishment for them.."
This enables activists to take the government to court to have national laws quashed on the grounds they violate existing treaty commitments. The judicial system can order the government to take steps to meet treaty commitments, even when said commitments violate US Constitutional provisions.
It takes two-thirds of the Senate, two thirds of the House, and two thirds of the States in a referendum to amend the Constitution. But treaty law can effectively accomplish the same thing with only two-thirds of those senators present in agreement.
It isn’t legal, but in recent years, and under this administration in particular, the primary meaning of "illegal" has come to mean "a sick bird."
In the last days of the 106th Congress (2000), the U.S. Senate ratified a package of 34 treaties almost without notice. They were ratified as a package. There was no debate. There was no recorded vote.
Under Obama, the Senate isn’t even necessary.
In October 2007, the United States, the European Community, Switzerland, and Japan simultaneously (and quietly) announced that they would negotiate a new intellectual property enforcement treaty.
The treaty, titled the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) sounds like it was designed to curtail counterfeiting of physical goods like medicines, currency, DVDs, or designer jeans.
President Obama quietly signed the ACTA treaty in September, 2011 as "an executive agreement" — without even presenting it for Senate ratification. Obama promised to bypass the Congress "in order to get things done" and ACTA is one of those things he decided needed doing.
So what is ACTA and why should we care? First, what it is:
"The agreement aims to establish an international legal framework for targeting counterfeit goods, generic medicines and copyright infringement on the Internet, and would create a new governing body outside existing forums, such as the World Trade Organization, the World Intellectual Property Organization, or the United Nations."
Did you see it? At the end of the first sentence . . . "and copyright infringement." That is the same provision that axed SOPA and PIPA since it would give the government the authority to shut down ANY website deemed to be infringing on someone’s copy rights.
That sounds ok, until one realizes what it means. We’re back to the place where you could upload a video of yourself singing a karaoke version of a copyrighted song and be in violation. It authorizes any member government to shut down any site on the grounds of copyright infringement.
ACTA is self regulatory and can be amended as needed without any public or judicial review:
"Articles 5 and 6 of the treaty provide creation of an "ACTA committee" which may make subsequent amendments to the agreement, subject to the approval of the parties. Public review or judicial review will not be needed to create amendments. Industry representatives may have consultatory input to amendments."
It would create a new governing body outside of existing organizations. One that gets to make up its own rules. It is outside the public and judicial process, and not accountable to a nation or an international body.
The committee won’t even be accountable to those countries governed by the agreement, including the U.S. government and the European Commission. The European Digital Rights Commission (*pdf) points out:
“ACTA provides an extremely low threshold for imposing criminal sanctions.” This means that should a person, a company, or even a government accidentally or unintentionally infringe copyright, this could be considered a criminal act. Further into this, what used to be a civil offence can now be deemed a criminal offense"
And, as we’ve already noted, Obama has already signed on the dotted line, subordinating America to its provisions.
If you didn’t like SOPA or PIPA, then you will really dislike ACTA. ACTA removes all the legal safeguards that protect ISPs from liability for the actions of their subscribers, meaning ISP’s either censor content on their servers or go out of business.
Who decides what is a copyright infringement? Pretty much anybody. If somebody complains to your ISP that a photo you posted on your blog of a cute puppy is copyrighted, the ISP will have no choice but to shut down your website first, and ask questions later.
It is worth mentioning (again and again) that ACTA was negotiated in secret until it was exposed by Wikileaks in 2008.
ACTA provides for "statutory damages." In the US, the basic level for damages ranges between $750 and $30,000 per work. So posting the cute puppy photograph can cost you your website plus a fine of $750.00.
Downloading a song falls into the upper ranges of damages. One college student, Joel Tennenbaum, was ordered to pay damages in the amount of $675,000.00 for illegally downloading 30 songs.
In addition to the statutory damages provisions, ACTA also calls for extensive seizure and forfeiture provisions covering everything from infringing goods to assets whose value equals assets derived from infringement.
What does that mean? It means that under ACTA, should the government so desire, you could download thirty songs and not just end up just with a judgment, but could end up losing everything you own.
ACTA demands that each signatory nation must include the option of imprisonment as well as monetary fines, and includes criminal provisions for "aiding and abetting" copyright infringement.
"Each Party’s enforcement procedures shall apply to infringement of copyright or related rights over digital networks, which may include the unlawful use of means of widespread distribution for infringing purposes. These procedures shall be implemented in a manner that avoids the creation of barriers to legitimate activity, including electronic commerce, and, consistent with that Party’s law, preserves fundamental principles such as freedom of expression, fair process, and privacy."
It is worth noting that anything on the internet automatically meets the threshold of "widespread distribution."
ACTA has been signed, but not ratified, and the battle over whether or not Obama’s signature will require Senate ratification is ongoing. But what I want to highlight in today’s brief is the way that the internet is becoming a vehicle for transforming the globalist agenda from theory into practice.
Look at the infrastructure that is under construction and where it could lead. Today, the effort is focused on restricting file sharing and copyright violations.
While one can easily avoid file-sharing, avoiding copyright restrictions is practically impossible. So every website is vulnerable, but only certain websites need fear the government. Avoid calling government attention to yourself and you’re relatively safe.
So Far Left websites and those of the Soros network have little to fear, while Christian websites and the politically incorrect could go dark and the individuals behind them could be financially ruined or imprisoned.
“Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.” (Revelation 13:18)
When the Scriptures say, "here is wisdom" it implies that there is something important being revealed, if only we had the wisdom to see it.
In this case, the clue is the number, 6-6-6. We aren’t told much else, other than it is the number of the beast, and the number of a man and that is related to the Mark of the Beast.
So somehow, and in some way, John is telling us that the antichrist’s government will in some way be linked to either three sixes or the number six hundred and sixty-six (666).
The Book of the Revelation was inked in Greek by the Apostle John, a Judean Jew who undoubtedly also spoke Hebrew. Much of the Book was written using symbols that were intended for Christians.
The early Church was primarily made up of converted Hebrew-speaking Jews who then spread the Gospel to the Gentile world.
If one wanted to impart spiritual wisdom from God to the Church without necessarily sharing it with the secular authorities, the best way to accomplish that would be to encode it within the sentence itself.
Hebrew, like Latin, is alpha-numeric — each alpha letter has a corresponding numeric value. In Hebrew, the alpha equivalent to "W" (as in "www") is the letter "vav."
The numeric value of vav is "six". Let’s look at Revelation 13:18 one more time, only this time, substituting the alpha equivalent first, and then translating to English.
"Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is www."
That leaves two possible conclusions. One might conclude that the antichrist’s economic and political empire is in some way related to his eventual control of the world wide web.
The only other conclusion is that it is an amazing coincidence.
