showing its teeth, the UN makes it illegal for terrorists to use nuclear weapons

[robrr2000]

Yahoo.com (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050413/ap_on_re_us/un_nuclear_terrorism)

UNITED NATIONS - The U.N. General Assembly approved a global treaty Wednesday aimed at preventing nuclear terrorism by making it a crime for would-be terrorists to possess or threaten to use nuclear weapons or radioactive material.

The treaty makes it a crime for any person to possess radioactive material or a radioactive device with the intent to cause death or injury, or damage property or the environment. It would also be a crime to damage a nuclear facility.

Boy, watch out evil doers.... the U.N. is on the case.
Next up making it sort of not ok to blow up school busses, and an agreement to use firm language against all that commit genocide.

[Ninjaman09]

:rofl

Oh man, that's funny. Way to go, U.N.! That'll stop the terrorists!

btw I think you meant, "teeth".

[robrr2000]

haha ya I did.. thats what I get for posting this damn early.

edit: fixed.

[SLippe]

They're about a day late and a dollar short...or more.

[Sazar]

Countries that are parties to the treaty would be required to make these acts criminal offenses under their national laws, "punishable by appropriate penalties which take into account the grave nature of these offenses."



Some nations punish terrorists by putting them to death for their offences.

Reading through the details though, not sure how i feel about Russia of all nations sponsoring this.

[Ninjaman09]

Pardon me for asking, but were there no laws in place ALREADY to make it illegal for nuclear devices to be detonated by terrorists?

[DaveW]

Well some people are hazy on what defines a "terrorist". This is probably a cunning step towards declaring the US use of nuclear weapons during WWII to be illegal.

[Ninjaman09]

Hmm, good point. Can the U.N. create ex post facto laws? *puts on tin foil hat*

[oldsk00l]

Well some people are hazy on what defines a "terrorist". This is probably a cunning step towards declaring the US use of nuclear weapons during WWII to be illegal.

Yes, since the UN is hell bent on screwing the USA in the ass, this is true.

"We hereby announce that the United States is a terrorist nation for the use of nuclear weapons on Japan"

[UDawg]

Some nations punish terrorists by putting them to death for their offences.

Reading through the details though, not sure how i feel about Russia of all nations sponsoring this.


...

[intercede007]

Holy *****!!! Talk about a truisum....this wasn't illegal already!!?!?!?!?!

Congratulations UNGA..you've just made the entire literate world that much dumber.

Hmm, good point. Can the U.N. create ex post facto laws? *puts on tin foil hat*

Even if they could punish people retroactive to the date of signing, the United States Constitution would protect it's citizens from facing any sort of punishment. Ex Post Facto laws are specifically cited in the Constitution as against the civil rights of it's people.

It would also be a crime to damage a nuclear facility.

Aimed at preventing Israel from attempting a strike on Iran ala Iraq circa 1981?

[Ninjaman09]

Even if they could punish people retroactive to the date of signing, the United States Constitution would protect it's citizens from facing any sort of punishment. Ex Post Facto laws are specifically cited in the Constitution as against the civil rights of it's people.
Would the U.S. Constitution apply if tried in an international court? Or would the case go to a specific country? Sorry if this is a dumb question, I've never bothered learning about this.

[intercede007]

Would the U.S. Constitution apply if tried in an international court? Or would the case go to a specific country? Sorry if this is a dumb question, I've never bothered learning about this.

Depends really, and there is no precident for it as of yet so it's all conjecture on my part.

But it's part of the reason the United States has been so against an international criminal court because in theory,"laws" like this could usurp an American citizens civil rights.

I think, and this is just my opinion, that the United States Constitution should be aplied to all laws, both national and international, that may be used against citizens of this country, and those laws that are deemed unconstitutional by our Supreme Court should be flatly ignored.

I guess this little rant I went on is a little off topic...there isn't anything in the law that I've read that would make it an issue, but as a seperate discussion I suppose it's relavant (new thread time! :D)

[oldsk00l]

Depends really, and there is no precident for it as of yet so it's all conjecture on my part.

But it's part of the reason the United States has been so against an international criminal court because in theory,"laws" like this could usurp an American citizens civil rights.

I think, and this is just my opinion, that the United States Constitution should be aplied to all laws, both national and international, that may be used against citizens of this country, and those laws that are deemed unconstitutional by our Supreme Court should be flatly ignored.

I guess this little rant I went on is a little off topic...there isn't anything in the law that I've read that would make it an issue, but as a seperate discussion I suppose it's relavant (new thread time! :D)

I see pretty eye to eye with you on this though. It's perfectly reasonable, and yeah, US rights would be usurped by an foreign interest if we allowed this.

[oldsk00l]

Some nations punish terrorists by putting them to death for their offences.

Reading through the details though, not sure how i feel about Russia of all nations sponsoring this.

http://www.envision7.com/~rich/pics/master_of_the_obvious.jpg

[CybrSage]

Would the U.S. Constitution apply if tried in an international court? Or would the case go to a specific country? Sorry if this is a dumb question, I've never bothered learning about this.


This is why we did not agree to the International Court. If an International Court tries to try a US Citizen, and the US Government does not agree to let it happen, **** will fly...(ie, they will put YOU on the case, since you are the expert poo flinger).

[Rakeesh]

So what happens when terrorists do get nuclear weapons? The UN sends a public letter to the terrorists telling them how angry the UN are at them?

[CybrSage]

So what happens when terrorists do get nuclear weapons? The UN sends a public letter to the terrorists telling them how angry the UN are at them?


Well, eventually. They will have to debate the usage first for a few months.

[bigC]

Yahoo.com (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050413/ap_on_re_us/un_nuclear_terrorism)



Boy, watch out evil doers.... the U.N. is on the case.
Next up making it sort of not ok to blow up school busses, and an agreement to use firm language against all that commit genocide.:lol: when i heard that this morning on the radio, i had to chuckle. what will the UN do next: ban poverty and hunger? solve the environmental problems by legislating it away?

[UDawg]

I heard that the UN is going to ban all bad intentions and frowning faces.

[Vagrant Zero]

I heard that the UN is going to ban all bad intentions and frowning faces.

:firedevil

:(

In before the ban.