Criminal Proceedings

Blue Wolf II

Blue Wolf II

A Wolf Most Blue
-
-
TNP Nation
Blue_Wolf_II
Ok, I proposed this before a really long time ago but I am going to do it again. The reason? Well, to protect my own ass for starters. Once upon a time this law was used as justification to keep raiders out of The North Pacific's government. It was over-ruled by Polts when he became PM because it was decided that as long as a raider maintained duality he/she would not be in violation of the law.

Its Polts, however, who just pointed out that if FL is convicted of his charges then duality is out the door and I, as a raider, am unprotected. Other raiders will also be screwed to hell and denied admittance to our government. Some here might think that's a good thing, I do not. It's not a good thing to proclaim democracy and then deny a certain group. So, without further ado, here it is.


Current Laws:
Section 5. Grounds for Civil, Criminal or Impeachment Proceedings.

The following acts shall constitute grounds for civil, criminal or impeachment proceedings:
A - Failure of a Nation to observe and abide by the Constitution of The North Pacific and The North Pacific Legal Code.
B - Failure of a Nation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any other nation or region in a manner inconsistent with the Constitution of The North Pacific and the North Pacific Legal Code.
C - Failure of a Nation to refrain from giving assistance to any nation or region against which The North Pacific is taking defensive or enforcement action. Exceptions is given to those Nations acting with official authorization of the North Pacific Army or the North Pacific Intelligence Agency, and is subject to the consent of the Cabinet officer having appropriate jurisdiction.
D - Failure of a Nation to Observe Its Oath of Office or its Oath as a Regional Assembly Member.
Click to expand...

Proposed Changes:
Section 5. Grounds for Civil, Criminal or Impeachment Proceedings.

The following acts shall constitute grounds for civil, criminal or impeachment proceedings:
A - Failure of a Nation to observe and abide by the Constitution of The North Pacific and The North Pacific Legal Code.
B - Failure of a Nation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any other nation or region in a manner inconsistent with the Constitution of The North Pacific and the North Pacific Legal Code.
C - Failure of a Nation to refrain from giving assistance to any nation or region against which The North Pacific is taking defensive or enforcement action after such action has begun. Exception is given to those Nations acting with official authorization of the North Pacific Army or the North Pacific Intelligence Agency, and is subject to the consent of the Cabinet officer having appropriate jurisdiction.
D - Failure of a Nation to Observe Its Oath of Office or its Oath as a Regional Assembly Member.
E- No member nation shall be entitled to make threats or actions against the territorial integrity or political independence of any other region in the name of The North Pacific Government. Exceptions shall be given to Nations acting with official authorization of the North Pacific Army or the North Pacific Intelligence Agency, and is subject to the consent of the Cabinet minister having appropriate jurisdiction.
Click to expand...

Ok, rip it apart...

Edit: Bad grammar in the revision fixed.
 
Do you think it's right for the region to pass a law to protect ONE member of it's society no matter how beloved or hated?

At the end of the day, nevermind the specifics, but which should win out the security of the region or the security of one individual nation?

Do you think how we treat individual nations is reflective to our region as a whole?

Do you think it's possible that certain individuals can use duality to harm the North Pacific and if so, how do we do stop this, if at all?
 
Do you think it's right for the region to pass a law to protect ONE member of it's society no matter how beloved or hated?
Click to expand...

Ya. Why? Because people raid, current I am the only one but one day TNP will get another raider who wants to be in the RA, and then what?

At the end of the day, nevermind the specifics, but which should win out the security of the region or the security of one individual nation?
Click to expand...

The security of the region is not being compromised at all. This is a petty clause which is aimed to regulated TNP members' actions outside of TNP.

Do you think how we treat individual nations is reflective to our region as a whole?
Click to expand...

I can't speak for this "we".

Do you think it's possible that certain individuals can use duality to harm the North Pacific and if so, how do we do stop this, if at all?
Click to expand...

Yes, but this does not address duality within TNP, only outside of it. How do we stop it? Simple way, get rid of it. Complex way, I don't know, it took me forever to write this law never mind one on something so boring as duality and defining it and such.
 
Blue Wolf II:
Do you think it's possible that certain individuals can use duality to harm the North Pacific and if so, how do we do stop this, if at all?
Click to expand...

Yes, but this does not address duality within TNP, only outside of it. How do we stop it? Simple way, get rid of it. Complex way, I don't know, it took me forever to write this law never mind one on something so boring as duality and defining it and such.

At the end of the day, nevermind the specifics, but which should win out the security of the region or the security of one individual nation?
Click to expand...

The security of the region is not being compromised at all. This is a petty clause which is aimed to regulated TNP members' actions outside of TNP.
Click to expand...
How do you reconcile these two statements?

Also, let's say that Limitless Events had decided to claim innocence by saying that the part of him that was working for the Lexicon was another nation. Do you agree that a part of him, no matter the number of nations could be using the duality issue as an excuse or that it was all an unconcious effort to be evil in the NP and good in the Lexicon?
 
That wouldn't have worked as he violated a number of laws by posting that TNP IP list. As it is he couldn't use the above revisions to justify his actions. The only thing that really changes is that now if the NPA comes to bust a raid or liberate in which a raider who happens to be an RA is in that said raider will not go to trial because he wasn't on for up-date and thus didn't see that, oops, he just violated the law by not leaving ASAP.

Also, my revision gave the North Pacific Intelligence Agency official permission to act outside the law, thus fixing their possible legal issues.
 
What you are looking for is the right to act directly against the policy of this Region, while being in this Region. By law, the NPA is in fact a defender organization. By law, the Security Council has the authority to authorize deployments, even outside of treaties and agreements, upon the request for assistance from other Regions.

My other problem with this proposal is that you want carte blanche to serve your own interests at the expense of the rest of The North Pacific. This is one of those things where to build a community, one has to decide what importance they place to being a part of this Region, over other Regions, and whether they are willing to give up anything for the greater benefit of this Region as a community over their own personal, selfish interests.

Edited only because of too many typos, had to fix them.
 
Grosse, you keep saying that TNP will suffer under this law and yet you provide no examples, no scenarios, and nothing to back up your claim. You're simply throwing out actuations without any basis at all.

This proposal is not based on selfish interest; it is there to avoid further legal conflict regarding both defenders and invaders. Yes, I am included in one of these groups but at the same time I am not the only invader in all of NationStates and not the only one to grace The North with their existence. I do suspect that if this law was proposed, however, by a different member, perhaps they would not be getting the same amount of flak that I am currently getting from the Prime Minister and newly appointed Director of the North Pacific Intelligence Agency.

This law will help to more clearly define what is and is not acceptable for our members; I really do not see why some people are running for arms over it.
 
He said it here when he was ranting about how wrong I was. Now I am trying to decide who to believe, the current Director of the NPIA or the former Director of the NPIA.

Regardless, I am not going to drop this because of only two members I would like the input of others first.
 
Blue Wolf, what I am pointing to this the philosophy that has underscored this community and Region.

Raiding is philosophically inconsistent with a democracy. Imposing rule through invaiders on the "natives" of a region is inherently not democratic.

Having invaiders base themselves in a self-ruling democratic region, and a feeder region at that, is inconsistent with the view that the rule of law plays in a democratic society.

I guess you forger the negative reaction John Ashcroft Land got in the November elections (before I even declared my candidacy) when he proposed that TNP have a policy of invaiding other regions.

I can remember someone proposing that TNP amend the laws on political relationships to allow TNP to become an empire. That didn't go down well with people here either.

I could go on and on with examples of proposals that would point away from this regions democratic, pro-defender philosophy. The primary diference with TNP is that we're not fond of multi-regional defender organizations that impose their will on us. We might choose to join in defensive action, but we don't like being forced to. That is why unless there is an approved diplomatic agreement, or specific approval of some sort that provides authority, such as the Security Council, our law does not permit the NPA to engage in deployments outside the region.

In order to advance this region we need to maintain the continuity of our beliefs and philosophy as a region, and the community that created it. Protecting raiders is not consistent with that. You want examples, well, there aren't any when TNP has never been an invaider region. But even a little common sense makes it easy to understand that part.

What you propose, to give invaiders sanction in a democratic, defender-oriented feeder, is simply not the way to maintain this community or the continuity of its weltangschnaung (world view).. It would turn us into something we are not for the sole benefit of a minority whose philosophy comes down to being anti-democratic and against defending others who share democratic values.

Perhaps you can explain how raiding regions is consistent with democratic values and the doctrine of non-interference in others' affairs. because that is what this proposal amounts to. And I'm not willing to have this region give up either.
 
Blue Wolf II:
He said it here when he was ranting about how wrong I was. Now I am trying to decide who to believe, the current Director of the NPIA or the former Director of the NPIA.

Regardless, I am not going to drop this because of only two members I would like the input of others first.
Click to expand...
Current Director BW...current Director.
 
My, my, you people are touchy tonight.

I propose this document because The North is democratic, and as such is obliged to protect every group’s right to exist, even if said group is considered "anti-democratic". It is what sets democracies apart from tyrannies, Councils, and monarchies, everyone is equal.

When this law was first proposed on s2, by Hersfold, he believed in a persons right to do what he wished outside of The North’s halls. Yet you stand before me proclaiming freedom and such and yet would strip me of my very right to exist as a raider. Would you really turn me and my kind into martyrs? Don't we already have enough of those?

This proposal simply removes restrictions upon outside actions by a members non-TNP nation. You make it sound as if I was proposing that The North Pacific government officially go raider, or officially back raiders. I am not, and I will never propose such things to this government. I am merely giving our members more personal freedom so they can act without having to check the constitution every five minutes to make sure they have not broken a law.
 
I believe I was the first to suggest that you propose laws if u want too change how the Gov deals with raiders.

IMHO, I believe the duality that the constitution protects is and has been abused by those that wish to cause harm to the region and those who have their own selfish agenda. I believe this is evident in our courts inability to convict anyone. Because of this we have to let threats linger and depend on the SC and PM to act before something happens.

I was forced to not use the courts and use the PM powers...we had to let a threat linger until it became an eminent security threat. Hence the accusations that I trampled civil rights...yadda yadda yadda....I assure you...despite its faults...at the end of the day this government has the power to secure the region. Use the loop holes all u want...the more u point it out...the faster we close them.

Thanks for that BW. Please...by all means...continue...
 
When Hersfold originally proposed something similar at s2 he was trying to craft a compromise that he thought might be acceptable to disparagent points of view.

Since it wasn't adopted, clearly that was not the middle of road view on the issue that it would have had to have been in order to pass.

I would even suggest that you don't find Hersfold supporting the proposal now, so that would indicate a change on his part, or a realization that it wouldn't work.

The recent amendment to the Regional Assembly aoth, proposed by Flemingovia just before my election as Prime Minister is a pretty clear indication of what sort of conduct is viewed as not acceptable. The fact that you have already gone ahead and pursued a dangerous and risky course of conduct see here is an indication that the motives for this proposal is important and not as altrustic as you try to suggest.

This is an effort to devide the region, and not to weave it together for a strong future. This is not an effort on your part that reflects the TNP community or the continuity TNP values.

I would strongly urge you to reconsider your actions.
 
Tressy:
I was forced to not use the courts and use the PM powers...we had to let a threat linger until it became an eminent security threat. Hence the accusations that I trampled civil rights...yadda yadda yadda....I assure you...despite its faults...at the end of the day this government has the power to secure the region. Use the loop holes all u want...the more u point it out...the faster we close them.
Click to expand...

hmm...I have an oldie but a goody here somewhere to respond to that....AH! Here it is!

Enjoy.

raiderzillaqr2.jpg


Grosseschnauzer:
I would strongly urge you to reconsider your actions.
Click to expand...

What actions would this be my dear Schnauzer? I have simply summited a proposal which is being god smacked by the powers that be.
 
Blue Wolf II:
hmm...I have an oldie but a goody here somewhere to respond to that....AH! Here it is!

Enjoy.

raiderzillaqr2.jpg
Click to expand...
I object...Godzilla was a cold blooded lizard...I'm more like the in Love King Kong (ask THE LADIES...grrrrrr)!! :tb2: :tb1: But you won't see anyone chasing me onto a ledge or tower top! :rofl:
 
Blue Wolf II:
I announced it on this forum as well in the LWU consulate. It's no secret.
Click to expand...
Never said it was, just why station yourself here? You've always said that the LWU provides an alternative experience to the NP, and I've always liked that answer. So... why?
 
Basis principals of Francoism. It's a lot easier to bring the organization to the people than the people to the organization.

TAO wanted me to try it out in TWP but, frankly, they scare me.
 
Hey, this is not a bad thing here, you should feel honored that you have a region that's so great and free that even raiders feel secure in The North.
 
Blue Wolf II:
Basis principals of Francoism. It's a lot easier to bring the organization to the people than the people to the organization.
Click to expand...
Mind telling me how you've reconciled raiding with the principles of Proper Francoist Thought? EDIT: Seems to me like another example of a Userite exploiting another feeder to grow his own personal ambitions. Which, as I'm sure you know, is decidedly NOT Francoist.

For my money, The North Pacific should not be home to a group of raiders. This is not because I dislike them, but because The North Pacific Army has such a long and proud defender tradition. The moment this group raids in the name of the North Pacific is the moment that this Security Councillor votes to authorize the ejection and banning of said group from this region.

Raiding does not promote regional peace, stability or strength, and as such, it has no place in the North Pacific. Raiders are more than welcome in this region, but once again, the moment they use the name of the North in their raiding, they should be expelled.

IMHFO.
 
The announcement was posted here. It's ok you missed it, no one really seems to read the consulates anyways...

Seems to me like another example of a Userite exploiting another feeder to grow his own personal ambitions. Which, as I'm sure you know, is decidedly NOT Francoist.
Click to expand...

Well, if what you mean by "my own personal ambitions" you mean "anything but the ambitions of the Pacifica and the NPO" yes, you are correct, in that way it is not Proper Francoist Thought. Thankfully, I was ignoring that part of the theory when I made that statement.

The moment this group raids in the name of the North Pacific is the moment that this Security Councillor votes to authorize the ejection and banning of said group from this region.
Click to expand...

Which is why the group is not called "The North Pacific - A raider group" but "Wolves of the North". It's quite clear simply by the name there is little association between the Wolves and the government other than the region that they share.
 
Well, if what you mean by "my own personal ambitions" you mean "anything but the ambitions of the Pacifica and the NPO" yes, you are correct, in that way it is not Proper Francoist Thought. Thankfully, I was ignoring that part of the theory when I made that statement.
Click to expand...

Number A, Francoism does not serve the ambitions of Pacifica or the New Pacific Order alone. It serves the best interest of all feeders and the citizens of those feeders. This is why Francoist sympathies and uprisings are inevitable in the culture of feeder regions. If you divorce that theory from the tenets of Francoism, you do not have Francoism. Not in any way. You still have failed to present how this group is in the best interests of the region, just as you have failed to accurately tie in its existance with the tenets of Proper Francoist Thought. Don't get me wrong, I don't claim to be Comrade Unlimited, but still... If you're going to try and appeal to those who wish for peace, stability and strength through the path of Francoism, you must also try to realize that we are more learned than your post implies. Please try to reconcile the institution of a branch of a user-created organization in a feeder to the principles of Francoism. Otherwise, don't include the philosophy in your argument. This would be equivilent to the ADN establishing a branch or an outpost of their army here, just on the opposite side.

Now to make this more relevant to our region in particular...

Which is why the group is not called "The North Pacific - A raider group" but "Wolves of the North". It's quite clear simply by the name there is little association between the Wolves and the government other than the region that they share.
Click to expand...

Mmm... Are you a chef? This red herring you're serving is delicious.

If there is no desire to be associated with our government, why even let this group exist? There is no concievable reason why you would compromise your duality, let alone even being remotely near anything that could be construed as an act of hostility towards this region and this region's government. You seem to be convinced that there are raiders living in the North Pacific and they really want to raid. If they want to raid that badly, let them leave this region and join yours or any other invader region. There is no need to bring your ambitions here to our shores. If you really wish to further your group's reach, send more recruitment TG's. Make raiding more fun. Get a cool-looking new forum. Just don't sit there and try to convince us that establishing a raider army in the North Pacific isn't establishing a raider army that will raid in the name of TNP.

EDIT: I also realized that you did not rebut this statement, my most relevant.

Raiding does not promote regional peace, stability or strength, and as such, it has no place in the North Pacific.
Click to expand...
 
If there is no desire to be associated with our government, why even let this group exist?
Click to expand...

Your right! If this group associates with the government at all we must ban it! And if it does not associate with the government at all we must ban it! Oh how blind I have been! Clearly your logic is superiors to all!

Here's your fish :fish:

You seem to be convinced that there are raiders living in the North Pacific and they really want to raid.
Click to expand...

Well, that would be why I set up the group, yup you’re headed in the right direction there.

If they want to raid that badly, let them leave this region and join yours or any other invader region.
Click to expand...

Your right, and if those defenders what to defend and spy so badly let them leave this region! Be gone fowl scourge who dare threaten our neutrality!

Unfortunately the NPA and NPIA don't seem to want to leave...I guess that means TNP doesn't want to be neutral and therefore it's perfectly alright to set up whatever group one pleases in whatever region. Oh crap! It's like people have the freedom to choose! Remarkable! Outstanding! I must publish an article in the journal so all may know its divine light!

Just don't sit there and try to convince us that establishing a raider army in the North Pacific isn't establishing a raider army that will raid in the name of TNP.
Click to expand...

Once again sir, you are confused. OPA, do you know where you are? What date it is? What your name is? SIR! CAN YOU HEAR ME?! BLINK IF YOU CAN! Ok, I was just establishing that you’re alert and orientated so you can understand this completely.

The group is called Wolves of the North and it will raid in the name of the Wolves of the North NOT in the name of The North Pacific. Can you see the difference in the two names? Blink twice if you can...
 
Blue Wolf II:
Your right! If this group associates with the government at all we must ban it! And if it does not associate with the government at all we must ban it! Oh how blind I have been! Clearly your logic is superiors to all!

Here's your fish :fish:
Click to expand...
Irrelevant. The only pertinent thing you've said in this paragraph is that the group must be banned.

Well, that would be why I set up the group, yup you’re headed in the right direction there.
Click to expand...

So how deep undercover are these invaders? PROTIP: The burden of proof is on you.

Your right, and if those defenders what to defend and spy so badly let them leave this region! Be gone fowl scourge who dare threaten our neutrality!

Unfortunately the NPA and NPIA don't seem to want to leave...I guess that means TNP doesn't want to be neutral and therefore it's perfectly alright to set up whatever group one pleases in whatever region. Oh crap! It's like people have the freedom to choose! Remarkable! Outstanding! I must publish an article in the journal so all may know its divine light!
Click to expand...

Sarcasm and a missing contraction notwithstanding...

:lol:

It's quite amusing that you really have no concept of this region's history. The North Pacific is a defender region. The North Pacific has always been a defender region. All your rhetoric amounts to nothing. Nothing at all.


Once again sir, you are confused. OPA, do you know where you are? What date it is? What your name is? SIR! CAN YOU HEAR ME?! BLINK IF YOU CAN! Ok, I was just establishing that you’re alert and orientated so you can understand this completely.

The group is called Wolves of the North and it will raid in the name of the Wolves of the North NOT in the name of The North Pacific. Can you see the difference in the two names? Blink twice if you can...
Click to expand...

:blink: :blink:

I understand you perfectly. It's just that... It's shit. It really is. This argument is nothing. Yes, the names are different. No, this doesn't change the fact that WotN will be construed as a raiding group from The North Pacific. This is unacceptable. You can claim all you want that you do not represent TNP and if this is the case, then why even bother being housed here? You have not offered one legitimate reason for this group's formation.

And we still let this one go:
Me!:
Raiding does not promote regional peace, stability or strength, and as such, it has no place in the North Pacific.
Click to expand...

Let's claim TNP neutrality. The North Pacific has no defender sympathies. No NPA. In this hypothetical world, this statement still stands true. I am so against this piece of legislation because it will protect a group of people whose activities do not belong in this region for historical and current reasons.

BTW, thanks for abandoning the "Francoist" thing. Ignorance of the theory was really getting on my nerves.
 
Save if for someone who cares!

Fact is the one thing WotN has done thus far is (OMG! OMG! OMG! OMG!) announce it's existence...which is suuuuuuch a threat to regional security at this point.

Save it for when we actually start raiding.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top