Yes, let's ignore the relevant text of the treaty itself (that I quoted for you), and trump up the comments made by a partisan hack. Good work. Why bother with reality when you have your biases, I suppose.
I see that you're an equal opportunity conspiracy theorist. Does your post have ANY tie-in to your OP????
I wasn't theorizing that Obama may want an internal army, I quoted his words, hense, no conspiracy theory! If it's his intention to create this internal army to control us, ( it certainly won't be to control our borders now will it ), and also disarm this country, then yes I believe that ties in quite nicely. I guess quoting your own link somehow upset you, perhaps you should choose them in a more careful manner next time. Question; If I call Obama, Reid, Biden and Polosi partisan hacks, does that dismiss everything they say, I'm trying to learn the left's tactics!
It's simply another false myth created by those with no interest in truth. Do you not check your stories for veracity? I have no problem with you quoting from my sources, in fact I welcome it. It shows me that you have taken the time to expand your horizons. Your reference to the quote by Bolton does concern me however in that you might not have read the source any further than this particular political reference by a well known partisan. I quoted for you the relevant text of the treaty which you ignored and you also ignored the entire gist of the evaluation by FactCheck. I would not characterize this as "upset[ting]", but it would be fair to say it IS disappointing. Does this help you?
Americans have been killed by some of those guns, too. It's interesting. Obama says he knew nothing about it. So much for "The buck stops here". If he DID know, that's a crime and he should be charged, impeached and sent to jail. If he DIDN'T know, that means there is a rogue element in the U.S. govt. or ATF doing this and THEY should be charged, tried and sent to jail. I'd wager NOTHING happens to anyone and it's swept under the rug.
I believe your main misconception is your naive belief this administration will follow normal channels to achieve national passage of the U.N. Treaty. If you'll recall when confronted with their Cap & Trade bill failure in Congress, they simply bypassed them and summoned the E.P.A to begin the implementation of their new energy taxes through the Clean Air Act! You seem to underestimate your Presidents ability to achieve his goals. I don't believe the new push this administration has been pursuing in regard to this treaty is just an attempt in futility on their part as they seem to have a backdoor plan on everything and little regard to the rule of law. I would imagine this should dispel your myth theory! As far as the treaty itself, factcheck would be useless as the language has not been finished nor will it be until 2012. As we all know ( I hope ),the devil is in the details as we've learned from Obama-care - we have to pass it to find out whats in it! I hope this has helped YOU and expanded your horizons, if not unfortunately, I really can't go in circles with you while you push some anti-gun agenda wasting my time. I will allow you to get in the last post as some people feel the need for such things to feel good about themselves! Happy posting...
Well, you can't have it BOTH ways, friend. You can't make gloomy conspiracies based on the supposed text of a UN treaty, and then turn around and dismiss the actual text of the treaty because it might change. It's not consistent,....or perhaps you don't care.
Article 2, Section 2: He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments. Article 6: 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. --- By the above, the President cannot enter into a treaty without Senatorial consent and that treaty will go hand in hand with the Constitution, not allowed to usurp it. The UN cannot usurp the 2nd Amendment.
This President has a team of people working diligently on extending the power of the executive branch and bypassing that of congress through other agencies ( Example; EPA ) and other assorted Czars. Give him one more term and and I believe you'll see legal wrangling and manipulation that has never been attempted before. There, consistency!
Not a "consistency" to be proud of however. Your argument is only "consistent" in that it is consistently cynical and filled with suppositions and conspiracies.
The EPA and local DEC trying to impose Cap and Tax After being shot down by congress fits the template of this administration, hardly conspiracy and easily adapted to other Obama agendas! Enjoy your input, but you should learn from actions already taken as to future " CHANGE ", that's already being written...God help the constitution if he gets another Supreme court Justice on board!!!
From previous posts, I'd expect more from you! Life isn't black and white! Guns aren't bad, some people are, unfortunately a lot of them have made their way to positions of power and want to change your way of life! Put a little thought into it, but this can't be proven one way or the other till 2012 when enacted....FLY.
Irrelevant. I hadn't made any allusions to any absolutes, friend. If you recall, I was commenting on your hysterical fears of tyranny, that had no real basis in fact. Rather your position was based solely on perceptions and suppositions. Hence, my allusions to 'Chicken Little". Remember? More hysterical fear-mongering, I'm afraid. Chicken Little would have been proud.
http://blogs.forbes.com/larrybell/2011/06/07/u-n-agreement-should-have-all-gun-owners-up-in-arms/ I suspect such a scheme would result in folk being hurt.
Seems the hysterical fear-mongering conspiracy is growing all the way to the current events section, give a look!
U.S. Senate Stands with NRA in Strongly Opposing U.N Gun Control Efforts No way anti-gun pact will pass the upper house this session: For nearly 20 years, the NRA has worked tirelessly to oppose any United Nations effort to undermine the constitutional rights of law-abiding American gun owners. The latest attempt by the U.N. and global gun banners to eliminate our Second Amendment freedoms is to include civilian arms in the current Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), which will be finalized next year. In order for any treaty to take effect, however, it must be ratified by two-thirds of the U.S. Senate. To ensure that any ATT that includes civilian arms is dead on arrival in the Senate, the NRA has been working to get as many U.S. Senators as possible to publicly oppose any ATT that includes restrictions on civilian arms. As of this morning, 50 members of the U.S. Senate have signed letters to President Obama​ and Secretary of State Clinton saying they will oppose any ATT that includes civilian firearms ownership. These strongly worded letters caution the President and Secretary of State to uphold the Constitution of the United States. As Senator Jerry Moran's letter warns, (A)s the treaty process continues, we strongly encourage your administration to uphold our constitutional protections of civilian firearms ownership. These freedoms are non-negotiable, and we will oppose ratification of an Arms Trade Treaty presented to the Senate that in any way restricts the rights of law-abiding U.S. citizens to manufacture, assemble, possess, transfer or purchase firearms, ammunition and related items. Thanking the NRA for our long-standing work on this issue, Senator Moran remarked, "I appreciate the NRA's partnership on this important effort to defend the rights of American gun owners. I want to thank them for their active support in sending a strong message to the Obama Administration that our firearm freedoms are not negotiable." As we have for nearly two decades, the NRA will continue to fight against any U.N. treaty that undermines the constitutional rights of American gun owners. These letters send a clear message to the international bureaucrats who want to eliminate our fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms. Clearly, a U.N. ATT that includes civilian arms within its scope is not supported by the American people or their elected U.S. Senators. We are grateful to Senator Moran, Senator Jon Tester, and all members of the Senate who have chosen to stand on the side of America's 80 million gun owners in opposition to those who want to eliminate our freedoms. And thank you as well to those NRA members who contacted their Senators and encouraged them to support this critical effort. Source
That is what treaties become--law of the land. I'm not too concerned. I can't see a 2/3 majority of the Senate voting for this monstrosity.
What endrun? The Constitution clearly states that Treaties are law of the land. From Article VI (emphasis added): 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, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
ATF boss Eric Holder should be fired and sent to prison. Obama should be Impeached. Bottom Line.....The NRA will not give up on this matter. Justice will prevail.
