Globalist overthrew Dutch Constitution in 2002
July 19, 2013 in Europe
The Netherlands (my country) is a country under a Constitution, a country under law *) Our Constitution is now subverted on several points. One attack is that a newly made article 90 and subsequent articles elevate a treaty above our constitution (!). Part of this attack is that a treaty can be accepted by a 2/3rd majority of the representative houses when it is in violation of the Constitution (!). Another part of this attack is that a treaty and even decisions of bodies of international law of various peoples (meaning not just Dutch people but for example the EU or UN) have direct validity within the Dutch nation (!). In the meantime there are still the previous more proper laws in our Constitution on how to change the constitution (!).
All of this may be hard to belief, and therefore I will quote our Constitution and show what the problems are. This coup has been committed in march of 2002 ***) (at least that is the date that this attack carries in one website that records apparently the history of these laws, which go back to 21th march 2002, which is when now banker crony Wim Kok headed the Government.) It makes obviously no sense that a treaty goes above a Constitution. It would mean that a Government could set the Constitution for our nation in an agreement with a foreign people, and the people do not even have the chance to ratify or reject it (!). This absurd behavior of the Dutch ruling cliques becomes more understandible when one realizes that their pet corruption project the EU and Euro only exist as treaties; but they so desperately want their EU and UN Empires to have force of law and subvert our nation. Therefore they have resorted to this absurd hack and slash job of our Constitution.
In our Constitution are laws how this Constitution may be altered. This is mostly regulated in article …
1.De law states that a change in the Constitution, such as those proposed will be considered.
2.De Lower House may or may not split a proposal for such a law made for that purpose by or on behalf of the King***) proposal.
3.After the publication of the law referred to in the first paragraph, the parliament dissolved.
4.When the new parliament has come together, both chambers conduct a second reading of the proposed change referred to in the first paragraph. This can be passed only if at least two thirds of the votes cast.
5.De House may, whether or not an application for that purpose by or on behalf of the King’s proposal, at least two thirds of the votes cast, a proposal to change split
A key part of this is member 4, it says that a change in the Constitution has to be passed by two concequtive elected parliaments. This article 137 is in a chapter predictably perhaps named “changing the Constitution.” The idea is that the people in general can now influence the decision – that is ratify or reject the proposed change to the Constitution **). Here is now the new article that apparently first appeared 21th march 2002:
1.The Kingdom is not bound to treaties and these can not be denounced without the prior approval of the States General [the two houses, parliament and senate]. The law determines the cases in which no approval is required.
2.De law determines the manner in which the approval and can provide tacit approval.
3.If a treaty contains provisions which deviate from the Constitution or necessitate a change in the Constitution, the two chambers can only approve with at least two thirds of the votes cast.
This article is in chapter “Law making and Governance.” You can see that when a treaty deviates from the Constitution (meaning it is unconstitutional, it is illegal, it is in effect criminal) … it can still be approved ! Not only can it be approved, there is only needed a two third majority to do so ! Where if one wants to change the Constitution, one needs two times a two third majority of two concequtive parliaments and senates ! It is easier to accept a treaty that breaks the Constitution, then it is to change the Constitution ! Perhaps you are not convinced that they have put a treaty above the Constitution, then read these articles which they put below article 90:
Provisions of treaties and of resolutions by international institutions that can be binding on everyone, have binding force upon publication.
Legal regulations in force within the Kingdom shall not be applicable if such application is not compatible with any binding provisions of treaties and decisions of international organizations.
This means that the treaties are supreme over the Dutch law. Since this is put in the Dutch Constitution and treaties that break the Constitution can explicitly be approved, it seems obvious that the intention of these articles is that the treaties are enforced even when they break our Constitution. This is absurd. It is noteworthy that these articles 90 to lower have been added in a suplementary section. The whole Constitution is overthrown essentially, in a suplementary section (section 2 in chapter 5).
That is however not the entirety of the attack. They have also put in the provision that vague international bodies of international law can have law making power, and even governmental power:
Taking into account, where appropriate, the provisions of Article 91, third member, by treaty or out of the force of a treaty international peoples justice bodies can be assigned legislative, administrative and judicial powers.
There they have just given our Justice system, our executive system and our law making system away to vague “international peoples justice bodies” (‘volkenrechtelijke organisaties’ literally). The term international justice bodies is not even described ! It isn’t even made clear who that is ! This is is our Constitution now, after the coup d’etat of 2002 ! Who did this: all of the main political parties, CDA, VVD, PvdA, D66, Christenunie, LPF where the ones in power doing this; but they are all doing it together. *****) .
The essence of what happened here seems to be: our Constitution has been effectively in secret been subverted with a laughable slew of shameful articles that should even make a college freshmen in law either scream in anger or laugh in disgust at the nonsense of it all. They have committed this treason to our Constitution so that their dangerous EU treaties would gain force of law in our country. Does anyone care though, in the Netherlands ? I am still looking for them, so far not much luck.
These Dutch events could be relevant for the Americans, as the destruction of the American Republic is also somewhat relevant to us in the Netherlands. It shows a pattern, and reactionary cliques might help each other destroy resistance of the people in their respective realms – for example with weapons or mercenaries. In this case we both go under the same internationalist clique; we have one enemy it seems. All have some interest in the other countries to be nations under law and justice, like the reactionaries have an interest from the other end: that all nations are hell holes of tyranny, with them on top, so that nobody dare think otherwise may be possible. Where the American Constitution is under assault – some say disregarded and shredded as the murder of Michael Hastings and the officially accepted cover story lies prove – so is the Dutch Constitution being overthrown at the same time. Fortunately here this is only procedurally to put the EU in power. The political murdering will presumably come later, perhaps after several decades of entrenchment of the eurofile cliques (as these things tend to go). All these cliques seem to work together. Both these dangerous Empires (USA and EU) seem to be similar, and combine in their NATO and UN attempts at world domination. Their flag: an old symbol of Rome, the Empire of Rome. As the Republic of Rome fell into the tyranny under the Emperor of Rome, this is perhaps what the reactionaries are after. Even if they need first a period of ostensible Republic, they presumably must realize that this Republic will fall and give way to a one man tyranny once enough war and over taxation has been levied. This may be the plan down range for the entire west; a plan that must be stopped.
The people here have not ratified the EU. On the contrary when they proposed a Constitution (that had dangerous provisions, such as an ever expanding army law) it was rejected (sadly with not a large margin). Chances seem fairly good that these traitors to our Constitution will one day succeed in a Referendum. Every day that these ills are not rectified is another day of entrenchment for these dangerous cliques. What State under the American FedGov ever became free again, I know of not one; all are still lost under Federal Empire – and they even think it’s the right way but it’s not. It is too big, democracy on that scale looses its meaning, the people loose touch with the Government and vice versa.
*) We call this ‘Recht Staat’ which literally translates as ‘Straight State,’ a State of straightness where straightness is another word for Justice in our language, ‘Recht,’ and a Judge is literally called a ‘Straightener’ one could say a ‘Rechter’ literally. Recently an admitted American in Dutch Usenet was trolling for the EU/UN and suggested the Netherlands is not a nation under law (!). Hence I am making it clear that it is, or at least it used to be and should be (what it is now under the internationalist cliques remains to be seen; it looks worrying at best; technically the parliament has placed itself above the Constitution which they can now change by themselves through a treaty; thus they have become lawless. I am wondering if this American infiltrator may be linked to the USA Pentagon or other such political infiltration operations (nl.politiek); and how widely such infiltrator activities are occuring.
**) I think this is too weak a provision, but at least there is an attempt at public ratification. Notice how the parliament is supposed to dissolve itself when reaching the point of voting the change in once. This is something they have never done (to my knowledge) and which is potentially a breach of the Constitution already. If they had dissolved themselves about the issue of a Constitutional change, the Constitutional change proposed would receive attention. This seems to be the spirit of the Constitution – which they have violated for decades or more. Perhaps now we end up paying the cost for this breaching with the politicians putting in offensive changes to the Constitution with nobody paying attention. They use the regular election cycle, which is about a thousand and one other things, while they sneakily keep quiet about what they are doing to our Constitution. In any case, most people are not going to care about these changes which are esoteric to them. When talking to the People one has to be clear and honest and say “these changes to the Constitution mean foreign peoples are going to write the law in our nation, do you want that ?”
***) I don’t know why the King is named here. Keep in mind that our King does nothing and follows orders of our ministers, he/she is even disallowed to have an opinion – no freedom of speech for our head of state; when our head of state/King/Queen says something or reads something, it is written by ministers and not by them; this is our system and we don’t expect anyone else to understand; I personally considder an elected President with allmighty power it seems more dangerous then our powerless head of state and parliamentary controlled prime-minister.)
****) Only going superficially by the dates listed on this source on these laws (I’m not a research journalist and don’t want to be and can’t be one; proposing revolutionary changes on law4.org should be dangerous enough): http://www.st-ab.nl/wetgrondwet.htm
*****) The Dutch ruling class main parties are VVD, CDA and PvdA; the rest is either miniscule or will be probably be shortlived. These parties where involved in this coup d’etat; also Wim Kok (now a banker crony, probably always was already), and Balkenende.