Showing posts with label Treaty. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Treaty. Show all posts

Friday, March 14, 2014

NEW UN Gun Control Treaty R11110000

At The Daily News Source, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us (See this article to learn more about Privacy Policies.). This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by The Daily News Source and how it is used.


Log Files


Like many other Web sites, The Daily News Source makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol (IP) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider (ISP), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user"s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.


Cookies and Web Beacons


The Daily News Source does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.


DoubleClick DART Cookie


  • Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on The Daily News Source.

  • Google"s use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to The Daily News Source and other sites on the Internet.

  • Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html.

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on The Daily News Source send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.


The Daily News Source has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.


You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. The Daily News Source"s privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.


If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browser"s respective websites.



NEW UN Gun Control Treaty R11110000

Thursday, October 3, 2013

The Constitution vs the UN Arms Treaty


The Constitution vs the UN Arms TreatyTenth Amendment Center – by Lesley Swann


Last week, Secretary of State John Kerry signed a UN arms treaty that opponents say will implement a broad firearms registration scheme and eventually lead to global bureaucrats imposing gun control on the American people in spite of the Second Amendment. Despite the Obama administration’s support for the treaty, it remains to be seen whether the Senate will ratify it.


The Obama administration and other supporters of the arms treaty will likely claim that the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution places treaties above the Constitution and other U.S. laws as the supreme law of the land. Under this interpretation, they believe they can get around the Second Amendment protections on the right to keep and bear arms.  


What did the founders say?


The founders very clearly stated the conditions under which the U.S. Constitution could be amended, or changed in Article V. It is quite illogical to conclude that they would write such a brilliant document only to create a giant backdoor for foreign governments to come in and destroy the liberty they worked so hard to achieve. In fact, the founders themselves said otherwise.


“The only constitutional exception to the power of making treaties is that it shall not change the Constitution…” – Alexander Hamilton


“I do not conceive that power is given to the President or the Senate to dismember the empire, or alienate any great, essential right. I do not think the whole legislative authority to have this power.” – James Madison


“I say the same as to the opinion of those who consider the grant of treaty-making power to be boundless. If it is, then we have no Constitution.” – Thomas Jefferson



Considering three of the most prominent founding fathers explicitly said that the Constitution does not permit the dismantling of itself via treaty, there must be some other meaning to the Supremacy Clause. By properly reading the clause it becomes clear that not only did the founders not leave a backdoor, they actually expressly forbade this type of maneuver in Article VI.


The answer to the riddle that confuses many people isn’t to be found in an indecipherable tome on constitutional law, but instead in simple English grammar and a little attention to detail.


This or The?


Throughout the text of the Constitution, whenever the document refers to itself the verbiage “this Constitution” is used. The only exception to this rule is the President’s Oath of Office, where the phrase “the Constitution of the United States” is used. In every other place where you find the word Constitution written in the Constitution itself, it is preceded by the word “this” making it unmistakeably clear that the Constitution is referring to itself. In the President’s Oath of Office the phrase “Constitution of the United States” makes it perfectly clear that the phrase is referring to this Constitution as well.


Yet here in the Supremacy Clause – used to justify treaty supremacy by some – the phrase “this Constitution” is not used in the final phrase. So, why is the word “this” not used here?


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 Founders were very clear and precise with their use of language in the Constitution, so why do we have “the Constitution” in this case (“any Thing in THE Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding”), and “this Constitution” in all other cases where the word is written? The simple answer is that in this case, they were not referring to the United States Constitution at all.


The Humble Prepositional Phrase


The humble preposition is the key to solving the intent of the Founders in this statement. A prepositional phrase – such as of, to, or in – is a word that can modify and indicate relationships. Prepositional phrases can also modify more than one object. In this case, the prepositional phrase “of any State” refers to both the words“Constitution” and “Laws” that precede the phrase.


This means that the final phrase of this clause could rightly be read to mean “any Thing in the Constitution of any State or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” The Founders weren’t saying that treaties were to be supreme over the U.S. Constitution, but that they could and would take precedence over the state constitutions and laws.


“In Pursuance Of…”


It is clear with a little analysis of the details of the language and grammar used to construct this clause that our Founders were placing treaty law in its rightful place – beneath the supreme law of the land in the form of our U.S. Constitution, but above the laws and constitutions of the states. There is no loophole that can allow international interests to trump the U.S. Constitution, but the treaty must be made in pursuance of our Constitution, just as all laws that Congress makes must be in pursuance of the Constitution.


While Barack Obama and John Kerry may claim that they can legislate via treaty, this clearly was not the intent of our Founders. Will this knowledge stop them from attempting to shred the Constitution and the Second Amendment by signing on to gun control treaties? Probably not. But we can rest firm in the knowledge that our Founders did not give the Federal government the power to usurp the Constitution by treaty, and that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, not treaty law.


http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2013/10/03/constitution-vs-un-arms-treaty/#.Uk18lYbbOSp






The Constitution vs the UN Arms Treaty

Thursday, September 26, 2013

Kerry Signs UN Arms Trade Treaty — Civilian Disarmament Advancing


Kerry Signs UN Arms Trade Treaty — Civilian Disarmament AdvancingThe New American – by Joe Wolverton, II, J.D.


Secretary of State John Kerry signed the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty Wednesday. Upon adding his signature, Kerry addressed the world body:


On behalf of President Obama and the United States of America, I am very pleased to have signed this treaty here today. I signed it because President Obama knows that from decades of efforts that at any time that we work with — cooperatively to address the illicit trade in conventional weapons, we make the world a safer place. And this treaty is a significant step in that effort.  


Promptly, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon thanked Kerry and Obama for their complicity in consolidating UN control over weapons and ammunition:


Today, a number of countries signed the Arms Trade Treaty, pushing the total number of signatures to more than half of all Member States.


The Secretary-General, as the depository of the Treaty, welcomes every signature to this important treaty.  At the same time, it is of particular significance that the largest arms exporting country in the world, the United States, is now also among those countries who have committed themselves to a global regulation of the arms trade.  He believes this will contribute to efforts to reduce insecurity and suffering for people on all continents. He calls upon other countries to follow suit.


On Monday, a source inside the State Department alerted The New American that Secretary Kerry would commit this act of treason. What’s more, we were told that key members of the Senate were informed Tuesday that Kerry intended to sign the treaty and that the reaction from senators was one of disinterest.


In fairness, a few senators have spoken out today (Wednesday), warning President Obama not to try to bypass the Senate in his fervor to enforce the terms of this globalist gun grab.


Senator Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, sent the president a letterreminding him that:


As you know, Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution requires the United States Senate to provide its advice and consent before a treaty becomes binding under United States law.  The Senate has not yet provided its advice and consent, and may not provide such consent.  As a result, the Executive Branch is not authorized to take any steps to implement the treaty.


President Obama knows this and he also knows that in March, 53 senators voted “to uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.”


Americans know something, too. They know that this administration has never failed to use every murderous act of armed violence as a pretext for tyranny. From Newtown to the Navy Yard, President Obama has issued scores of executive orders directly violating the Constitution’s explicit prohibition on the infringement of the right to keep and bear arms.


John Kerry’s signing of the Arms Trade Treaty demonstrates that he and his boss will continue along this treasonous trajectory until control of all weapons and ammunition is consolidated into the UN and its client governments.


There is so much wrong and so much unconstitutional about the Arms Trade Treaty that it is difficult to describe it all. The following summary of the agreement should be sufficient, however, to call to action all constitutionalists, gun owners, and lovers of liberty. Senators, President Obama, and Secretary of State John Kerry must know that we will not sit idly by while they surrender our sovereignty and plot to confiscate our weapons.


First, the Arms Trade Treaty grants a monopoly over all weaponry in the hands of the very entity (approved regimes) responsible for over 300 million murders in the 20th century.


Furthermore, the treaty leaves private citizens powerless to oppose future slaughters.


An irrefutable fact of armed violence unaddressed by the UN in its gun grab is that all the murders committed by all the serial killers in history don’t amount to a fraction of the brutal killings committed by “authorized state parties” using the very weapons over which they will exercise absolute control under the terms of the Arms Trade Treaty.


Article 2 of the treaty defines the scope of the treaty’s prohibitions. The right to own, buy, sell, trade, or transfer all means of armed resistance, including handguns, is denied to civilians by this section of the Arms Trade Treaty.


Article 3 places the “ammunition/munitions fired, launched or delivered by the conventional arms covered under Article 2” within the scope of the treaty’s prohibitions, as well.


Article 4 rounds out the regulations, also placing all “parts and components” of weapons within the scheme.


Perhaps the most immediate threat to the rights of gun owners in the Arms Trade Treaty is found in Article 5. Under the title of “General Implementation,” Article 5 mandates that all countries participating in the treaty “shall establish and maintain a national control system, including a national control list.”


This list should “apply the provisions of this Treaty to the broadest range of conventional arms.”


Mark it down: If the treaty is ratified by the United States or if its provisions are enforced by executive order, within months the federal government (likely under the management of the Department of Homeland Security) would begin compiling a list of who owns, buys, sells, trades, or transfers any firearm, as well as the ammunition, parts, and components of those weapons.


After creating this database, the federal government would be required under the provisions of Article 5(4) of the Arms Trade Treaty to “provide its national control list to the Secretariat, which shall make it available to other States Parties.”


That’s right. The UN treaty demands that the list of gun and ammunition owners not only be in the hands of our own government, but be sent to foreign regimes, as well. This provision would guarantee that should an American owner of a legally purchased firearm decide to emigrate, he will be on the radar of the ruling regime in his new home.


Americans are right to recognize this registry as the first step toward confiscation. Without such a registry, it would be impossible to monitor weapons transfers effectively because governments can’t track weapons exchanges and transfers unless they know who has them to begin with.


Article 12 adds to the record-keeping requirement, mandating that the list include “the quantity, value, model/type, authorized international transfers of conventional arms,” as well as the identity of the “end users” of these items.


In very clear terms, ratification of the Arms Trade Treaty by the United States would require that the U.S. government force gun owners to add their names to the national registry. Citizens would be required to report the amount and type of all firearms and ammunition they possess.


Section 4 of Article 12 of the treaty requires that the list be kept for at least 10 years.


Finally, the agreement demands that national governments take “appropriate measures” to enforce the terms of the treaty, including civilian disarmament. If these countries can’t get this done on their own, however, Article 16 provides for UN assistance, specifically including help with the enforcement of “stockpile management, disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programmes.”


In fact, a “voluntary trust fund” will be established to assist those countries that need help from UN peacekeepers or other regional forces to disarm their citizens.


Arguably, the Arms Trade Treaty would become the law of the United States if the Senate were to ratify the treaty.


While that is the process that the Constitution establishes for the implementation of treaties, fundamental principles of construction and constitutional law dictate that no treaty that violates the Constitution can become the supreme law of the land.


In the case of the UN’s Arms Trade Treaty, there is no doubt that regardless of presidential signatures or congressional consent, this treaty cannot pass constitutional muster and therefore will never be the valid law of the land.


Unless, of course, Americans once again acquiesce to President Obama’s assumption of illegal authority and relinquish their rights and weapons regardless of the reasons they should not do so.


Finally, citizens must understand a very important nuance of Secretary Kerry’s assurance in his speech that the Arms Trade Treaty isn’t about taking away freedom, “it is about keeping weapons out of the hands of terrorists and rogue actors.” Americans must remember that Kerry, Obama, and the UN consider gun owners to be “terrorists” and “rogue actors,” thus subject to seizure of their firearms in the name of “international peace and global security.”


For John Kerry and Barack Obama, the confiscation of weapons from civilians is an act of, as Kerry said Wednesday, “advancing important humanitarian goals.”


For Americans, however, it is a giant leap toward enslavement.


Americans would be wise at this critical time to remember the words of George Washington, who advised:


A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.


 


Joe A. Wolverton, II, J.D. is a correspondent for The New American and travels frequently nationwide speaking on topics of nullification, the NDAA, and the surveillance state.  He is the host of The New American Review radio show that is simulcast on Youtube every Monday. He can be reached at [email protected]


http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/16618-kerry-signs-un-arms-trade-treaty-civilian-disarmament-advancing






Kerry Signs UN Arms Trade Treaty — Civilian Disarmament Advancing

Iran chides Israel for not signing nuclear treaty





Iranian President Hassan Rouhani addresses a high-level meeting on Nuclear Disarmament during the 68th United Nations General Assembly on Thursday Sept. 26, 2013 at U.N. headquarters. (AP Photo/Mike Segar,Pool)





Iranian President Hassan Rouhani addresses a high-level meeting on Nuclear Disarmament during the 68th United Nations General Assembly on Thursday Sept. 26, 2013 at U.N. headquarters. (AP Photo/Mike Segar,Pool)





United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, left, president of the 68th Session of the United Nations General Assembly John Ashe, left, are seated behind listening as Iranian President Hassan Rouhani addresses a high-level meeting on Nuclear Disarmament during the 68th United Nations General Assembly on Thursday Sept. 26, 2013 at U.N. headquarters. (AP Photo/Mike Segar,Pool)





United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, left, president of the 68th Session of the United Nations General Assembly John Ashe, center, and Under Secretary-General Tegegnework Gettu, right, are seated above as Iranian President Hassan Rouhani addresses a high-level meeting on Nuclear Disarmament during the 68th United Nations General Assembly on Thursday Sept. 26, 2013 at U.N. headquarters. (AP Photo/Mike Segar,Pool)





Iranian President Hassan Rouhani speaks at a meeting on nuclear disarmament during the 68th session of the General Assembly at United Nations headquarters, Thursday, Sept. 26, 2013. (AP Photo/Seth Wenig)





Iranian President Hassan Rouhani speaks at a meeting on nuclear disarmament during the 68th session of the General Assembly at United Nations headquarters, Thursday, Sept. 26, 2013. (AP Photo/Seth Wenig)





Top Headlines



Iran chides Israel for not signing nuclear treaty

Wednesday, September 25, 2013

Senator Warns Obama Not to Implement UN Arms Treaty


Kerry to sign controversial treaty today


Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
September 25, 2013


U.S. Senator Bob Corker, R-Tenn., ranking member of the Foreign Relations Committee, has warned President Obama not to implement the controversial UN Arms Treaty, which John Kerry is likely to sign today, without congressional authorization.


Senator Warns Obama Not to Implement UN Arms Treaty 250913un

Image: The Knotted Gun.



The treaty – which critics have warned could lead to draconian gun control measures in the United States – is based around preventing illicit global weapons transfers to terrorists and other rogue agents, but its language could easily be interpreted to infringe on Second Amendment rights domestically.


Despite warnings from lawmakers that the agreement will be not ratified by the Senate, Secretary of State John Kerry is set to sign the UN treaty today, prompting Senator Corker to warn President Obama that any attempt to implement the measures without congressional consent “would be fundamentally inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution, law, and practice.”


“Because of the concerns discussed above, as well as the fundamental issues the ATT raises with respect to the individual rights protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, as the Ranking Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, it is my view that you may not take any executive action to implement this treaty, provisionally or otherwise, unless and until: (1) the United States Senate has provided its constitutionally required advice and consent to its ratification; and (2) the Congress has passed any and all required legislation to bring this treaty into effect under United States domestic law,” writes Corker.


Despite 130 members of Congress writing a letter to Obama and Kerry back in May demanding they refuse to sign the treaty, Kerry is set to do so anyway, proving in the eyes of Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla. that, “The administration is wasting precious time trying to sign away our laws to the global community and unelected U.N. bureaucrats.”


Earlier this year, the Senate already passed an amendment by 53-46 to “to uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty,” a vote that has been ignored by the White House.


Analysts who have studied the treaty warn that it effectively replaces constitutional rights, including the Second Amendment, with the UN Charter, supplanting God with global government as the source of all liberties.


According to John Lott, author of More Guns, Less Crime, “The Arms Trade Treaty will regulate individual gun ownership all across the world. Each country will be obligated to “maintain a national control list that shall include [rifles and handguns]” and “to regulate brokering taking place under its jurisdiction for conventional arms.”


The treaty also bars “unauthorized” individuals from trading weapons, a vague term that could be applied to just about anyone.


Read Senator Corker’s full letter to Obama below.


Dear President Obama,


It is my understanding that Secretary of State John Kerry will sign the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) on behalf of the United States. The ATT raises significant legislative and constitutional questions. Any act to implement this treaty, provisionally or otherwise, before the Congress provides its advice and consent would be inconsistent with the United States Constitution, law, and practice.


As you know, Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution requires the United States Senate to provide its advice and consent before a treaty becomes binding under United States law. The Senate has not yet provided its advice and consent, and may not provide such consent. As a result, the Executive Branch is not authorized to take any steps to implement the treaty.


Moreover, even after the Senate provides its advice and consent, certain treaties require changes to United States law in the form of legislation passed by both the House and Senate. The ATT is such a treaty. Various provisions of the ATT, including but not limited to those related to the regulation of imports and trade in conventional arms, require such implementing legislation and relate to matters exclusively reserved to Congress under our Constitution.


Because of the concerns discussed above, as well as the fundamental issues the ATT raises with respect to the individual rights protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, as the Ranking Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, it is my view that you may not take any executive action to implement this treaty, provisionally or otherwise, unless and until: (1) the United States Senate has provided its constitutionally required advice and consent to its ratification; and (2) the Congress has passed any and all required legislation to bring this treaty into effect under United States domestic law.


Sincerely,


Senator Bob Corker
Ranking Member


*********************


Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.


This article was posted: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 at 8:54 am









Prison Planet.com



Senator Warns Obama Not to Implement UN Arms Treaty

Kerry to sign UN arms treaty


September 25, 2013 9:30AM ET



Accord aims to stop the spread of guns to human-rights violators, but critics say it violates Americans’ rights


Topics:

Gun Laws

United Nations

John Kerry







Delegates to the United Nations General Assembly April 2, 2013 applaud the passage of the first-ever U.N. treaty regulating the international arms trade. Timothy A. Clary//AFP/Getty Images




Secretary of State John Kerry will sign the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty Wednesday, joining 89 other countries in support of an international solution to the proliferation of guns and other deadly weapons, but flying in the face of many U.S. senators and pro-gun groups such as the National Rifle Association.


The treaty would create a framework for regulating the $ 70-billion-a-year conventional arms business. It would require nations to ensure tanks, warships, small arms (pistols and rifles, for example) and other weapons would not be sold to parties that were intent on committing genocide, terrorism or otherwise infringing on human rights.


The leaked information, first reported by Reuters, immediately won praise from the treaty’s advocates, who say it’s a major step in ensuring guns and other arms don’t fall into the hands of terrorists and dictators intent on carrying out crimes against humanity. But the move was harshly criticized by leaders of the pro-gun lobby in the U.S. who say the treaty is a way for lawmakers to circumvent the Second Amendment.


Kerry’s signature will likely be symbolic. U.S. laws on arms exports are more stringent than the treaty itself mandates, and the Senate has to pass a resolution supporting the treaty by a two-thirds majority in order for the U.S. to ratify it.


But its long odds haven’t stopped both sides from coming out with strong words.


Frank Januzzi, deputy executive director of Amnesty International USA, called the move “a very significant win for 20 years of human rights activism,” by his organization and other groups in favor of gun control.


On the other side, Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., promised the treaty would “collect dust” along with other U.N. treaties rejected by the Senate which, in Inhofe’s view, would “threaten our country’s sovereignty.”


The U.S. is the largest exporter of arms in the world. A U.S. signature on the treaty could help Western countries press to curtail Russian arms sales to Syria, where President Bashar al-Assad’s government has been accused of widespread abuses in more than two years of civil war.


The U.N General Assembly voted to adopt the treaty in April, with 154 voting in favor, including the United States. Three nations — North Korea, Iran and Syria — voted against the treaty. Twenty-three countries abstained.


While 90 nations have already signed the treaty, 50 would need to also ratify it for it to go into effect. So far only four have done so.


Even though the treaty explicitly states it could not be used to regulate arms sales within any nation, that hasn’t stopped gun-rights advocates from calling for its dismissal.


“The Arms Trade Treaty directly threatens the Second Amendment rights and privacy of American gun owners,” Chris W. Cox, director of the NRA’s legislative branch wrote in a statement. “Signing this treaty would be a clear indication that President Obama wants to resurrect his failed attempt to implement back door gun registration. It would also show his clear contempt for American supremacy and sovereignty.”


Gun-control advocates criticized the Obama Administration during U.N. negotiations on the treaty, saying the U.S. bent to pressure from the NRA and conservative lawmakers by pushing to water down the treaty’s scope, including blocking the inclusion of ammunition regulation.


Peter Moskowitz contributed to this report, with wire services




Al Jazeera America



Kerry to sign UN arms treaty

Senator Warns Obama Not to Implement UN Arms Treaty


Kerry to sign controversial treaty today


Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
September 25, 2013


U.S. Senator Bob Corker, R-Tenn., ranking member of the Foreign Relations Committee, has warned President Obama not to implement the controversial UN Arms Treaty, which John Kerry is likely to sign today, without congressional authorization.


Image: The Knotted Gun.



The treaty – which critics have warned could lead to draconian gun control measures in the United States – is based around preventing illicit global weapons transfers to terrorists and other rogue agents, but its language could easily be interpreted to infringe on Second Amendment rights domestically.


Despite warnings from lawmakers that the agreement will be not ratified by the Senate, Secretary of State John Kerry is set to sign the UN treaty today, prompting Senator Corker to warn President Obama that any attempt to implement the measures without congressional consent “would be fundamentally inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution, law, and practice.”


“Because of the concerns discussed above, as well as the fundamental issues the ATT raises with respect to the individual rights protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, as the Ranking Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, it is my view that you may not take any executive action to implement this treaty, provisionally or otherwise, unless and until: (1) the United States Senate has provided its constitutionally required advice and consent to its ratification; and (2) the Congress has passed any and all required legislation to bring this treaty into effect under United States domestic law,” writes Corker.


Despite 130 members of Congress writing a letter to Obama and Kerry back in May demanding they refuse to sign the treaty, Kerry is set to do so anyway, proving in the eyes of Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla. that, “The administration is wasting precious time trying to sign away our laws to the global community and unelected U.N. bureaucrats.”


Earlier this year, the Senate already passed an amendment by 53-46 to “to uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty,” a vote that has been ignored by the White House.


Analysts who have studied the treaty warn that it effectively replaces constitutional rights, including the Second Amendment, with the UN Charter, supplanting God with global government as the source of all liberties.


According to John Lott, author of More Guns, Less Crime, “The Arms Trade Treaty will regulate individual gun ownership all across the world. Each country will be obligated to “maintain a national control list that shall include [rifles and handguns]” and “to regulate brokering taking place under its jurisdiction for conventional arms.”


The treaty also bars “unauthorized” individuals from trading weapons, a vague term that could be applied to just about anyone.


Read Senator Corker’s full letter to Obama below.


Dear President Obama,


It is my understanding that Secretary of State John Kerry will sign the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) on behalf of the United States. The ATT raises significant legislative and constitutional questions. Any act to implement this treaty, provisionally or otherwise, before the Congress provides its advice and consent would be inconsistent with the United States Constitution, law, and practice.


As you know, Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution requires the United States Senate to provide its advice and consent before a treaty becomes binding under United States law. The Senate has not yet provided its advice and consent, and may not provide such consent. As a result, the Executive Branch is not authorized to take any steps to implement the treaty.


Moreover, even after the Senate provides its advice and consent, certain treaties require changes to United States law in the form of legislation passed by both the House and Senate. The ATT is such a treaty. Various provisions of the ATT, including but not limited to those related to the regulation of imports and trade in conventional arms, require such implementing legislation and relate to matters exclusively reserved to Congress under our Constitution.


Because of the concerns discussed above, as well as the fundamental issues the ATT raises with respect to the individual rights protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, as the Ranking Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, it is my view that you may not take any executive action to implement this treaty, provisionally or otherwise, unless and until: (1) the United States Senate has provided its constitutionally required advice and consent to its ratification; and (2) the Congress has passed any and all required legislation to bring this treaty into effect under United States domestic law.


Sincerely,


Senator Bob Corker
Ranking Member


*********************


Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.


This article was posted: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 at 8:41 am


Tags: constitution, gun rights










Infowars



Senator Warns Obama Not to Implement UN Arms Treaty

Senator Warns Obama Not to Implement UN Arms Treaty


Kerry to sign controversial treaty today


Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
September 25, 2013


U.S. Senator Bob Corker, R-Tenn., ranking member of the Foreign Relations Committee, has warned President Obama not to implement the controversial UN Arms Treaty, which John Kerry is likely to sign today, without congressional authorization.


Image: The Knotted Gun.



The treaty – which critics have warned could lead to draconian gun control measures in the United States – is based around preventing illicit global weapons transfers to terrorists and other rogue agents, but its language could easily be interpreted to infringe on Second Amendment rights domestically.


Despite warnings from lawmakers that the agreement will be not ratified by the Senate, Secretary of State John Kerry is set to sign the UN treaty today, prompting Senator Corker to warn President Obama that any attempt to implement the measures without congressional consent “would be fundamentally inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution, law, and practice.”


“Because of the concerns discussed above, as well as the fundamental issues the ATT raises with respect to the individual rights protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, as the Ranking Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, it is my view that you may not take any executive action to implement this treaty, provisionally or otherwise, unless and until: (1) the United States Senate has provided its constitutionally required advice and consent to its ratification; and (2) the Congress has passed any and all required legislation to bring this treaty into effect under United States domestic law,” writes Corker.


Despite 130 members of Congress writing a letter to Obama and Kerry back in May demanding they refuse to sign the treaty, Kerry is set to do so anyway, proving in the eyes of Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla. that, “The administration is wasting precious time trying to sign away our laws to the global community and unelected U.N. bureaucrats.”


Earlier this year, the Senate already passed an amendment by 53-46 to “to uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty,” a vote that has been ignored by the White House.


Analysts who have studied the treaty warn that it effectively replaces constitutional rights, including the Second Amendment, with the UN Charter, supplanting God with global government as the source of all liberties.


According to John Lott, author of More Guns, Less Crime, “The Arms Trade Treaty will regulate individual gun ownership all across the world. Each country will be obligated to “maintain a national control list that shall include [rifles and handguns]” and “to regulate brokering taking place under its jurisdiction for conventional arms.”


The treaty also bars “unauthorized” individuals from trading weapons, a vague term that could be applied to just about anyone.


Read Senator Corker’s full letter to Obama below.


Dear President Obama,


It is my understanding that Secretary of State John Kerry will sign the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) on behalf of the United States. The ATT raises significant legislative and constitutional questions. Any act to implement this treaty, provisionally or otherwise, before the Congress provides its advice and consent would be inconsistent with the United States Constitution, law, and practice.


As you know, Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution requires the United States Senate to provide its advice and consent before a treaty becomes binding under United States law. The Senate has not yet provided its advice and consent, and may not provide such consent. As a result, the Executive Branch is not authorized to take any steps to implement the treaty.


Moreover, even after the Senate provides its advice and consent, certain treaties require changes to United States law in the form of legislation passed by both the House and Senate. The ATT is such a treaty. Various provisions of the ATT, including but not limited to those related to the regulation of imports and trade in conventional arms, require such implementing legislation and relate to matters exclusively reserved to Congress under our Constitution.


Because of the concerns discussed above, as well as the fundamental issues the ATT raises with respect to the individual rights protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, as the Ranking Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, it is my view that you may not take any executive action to implement this treaty, provisionally or otherwise, unless and until: (1) the United States Senate has provided its constitutionally required advice and consent to its ratification; and (2) the Congress has passed any and all required legislation to bring this treaty into effect under United States domestic law.


Sincerely,


Senator Bob Corker
Ranking Member


*********************


Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.


This article was posted: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 at 8:41 am


Tags: ,










Infowars



Senator Warns Obama Not to Implement UN Arms Treaty

Friday, September 20, 2013

Arab states call on Israel to join global anti-nuclear weapons treaty


Reuters
September 20, 2013


Arab states will push ahead with a bid to single out Israel for criticism over its assumed atomic arsenal at this week’s UN nuclear agency meeting, despite Western pressure to refrain, a senior representative said on Friday.


Frustrated over the indefinite postponement last year of an international conference on banning atomic arms in the region, Arab states have proposed a non-binding resolution expressing concern about “Israeli nuclear capabilities”.


If adopted at the annual member state gathering of the UN International Atomic Energy Agency, it would call on Israel to join a global anti-nuclear weapons treaty and place its nuclear facilities under IAEA monitoring. Diplomats expect a close vote.


Full article here


This article was posted: Friday, September 20, 2013 at 4:17 pm


Tags: foreign affairs










Infowars



Arab states call on Israel to join global anti-nuclear weapons treaty

Friday, May 31, 2013

Obama to Sign U.N. Firearms Treaty Rejected by Senate


Kit Daniels
Infowars.com
May 31, 2013


Photo: ZeroOne



President Barack Obama will soon sign an international arms trade treaty previously rejected by the United States Senate.


The United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) establishes regulations for international arms sales. Categories of firearms listed in the treaty includes tanks, artillery, and small arms such as handguns. The U.N. General Assembly passed the treaty on April 2nd with a vote of 153-4, with the United States voting in favor. Obama intends to sign the treaty on June 3rd.


On March 23rd, Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.) introduced an amendment to prevent the U.S. from entering into the treaty. It passed by a vote of 53 to 46.


Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) introduced another amendment to ensure “that the United States will not negotiate or support treaties that violate Americans’ Second Amendment rights under the Constitution of the United States.” This amendment passed in the Senate by a voice vote.


Signatories of the treaty are encouraged to keep records on the recipients of imported arms and to introduce domestic legislation to support the treaty’s requirements, according to the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action.


Due to the Senate’s response to the treaty, Obama’s signature will be symbolic at best. According to Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution, the President “shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.”



This article was posted: Friday, May 31, 2013 at 1:31 pm


Tags: constitution, domestic news, foreign affairs, gun rights, legislation









Infowars



Obama to Sign U.N. Firearms Treaty Rejected by Senate