Posted on 07/11/2013 7:10:09 AM PDT by NOBO2012
The number one goal of the United Nations is to become the political entity that rules all nations or in other words, the one world government. (SNIP)
One of the key pieces of international law that needs to be in place before the UN can take over the world is to control all weapons, including handguns, rifles, shotguns, semi-automatic and automatic weapons and ammunition. Over the past few years, the UN has been pushing one treaty that will help to accomplish that goal. It is the UN Arms Trade Treaty.
The UN Arms Trade Treaty is a treaty that would regulate the international sale and transfer of all conventional weapons throughout the world. Conventional weapons are sea and land mines, rockets, missiles, cluster munitions, non-nuclear bombs, shells, small arms and light weapons. By small arms, they mean handguns, rifles and shotguns of all kinds, regardless of their use or design. (SNIP)
White House Press Secretary Jay Carney has indicated that President Obama intends to sign the treaty by the end of August. (SNIP)
Notice that the time frame that Obama has given for his signature of the UN Arms Trade Treat just happens to coincide with Congress’s summer recess, which makes me wonder if he is going to try to pull something like a recess appointment to push it through without congressional approval. But legally, he can’t because in order for an international treaty of any kind to become binding to the United States, it must be passed by a two-thirds majority vote of the Senate. At this time, it does not appear that there is enough support in the Senate to muster up 67 out of 100 votes...
(Excerpt) Read more at politicaloutcast.com ...
-------------
"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of "liberalism" they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."
--Norman Thomas, longtime U.S. Socialist Presidential candidate
-------------
UNITED NATIONS' WORLD CONSTITUTION:
'...The age of nations must end....The governments of the nations have decided to order their separate sovereignities into one government to which they surrender their arms."
-------------
Can they get 2/3 of the senators to concur?
He can sign it all day...won’t matter until a Senate concurs.
He can use it to wipe his azz, for all the force it will have...like he does with the rest of the constitution.
*cough*cowardlytraitor*cough*
It doesn’t matter if the senate is in session or not.
Does not our Constitution require that the Senate approve a treaty before the President can sign it?
obozo ignores laws he doesn’t like and uses other laws as a control factor to get what he wants. When he signs a UN treaty without the support of congress and then starts enforcing it, who going to stop him. Congress certainly won’t nor will the courts. If you’re thinking that the congress will, just consider the fact that the criminal fraud obozo is still in the WH and the criminal Holder is still the AG and they control all enforcement agencies that will start confiscating Americans weapons. Citizen resistance could be the domino that starts the government round up of those they deem as a threat to their regime.
Actually I think it is more correct to say that the Obama’s have been wiping their Azzes on the American people for years. This is just another example.
Even if he could by some nefarious means get the necessary vote of the Senate to ratify, a Treaty CANNOT AMEND the Constitution. Period.
US out of the UN, UN off US soil, and Obama to St. Helena!
Constitution Article II, section 2: 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”
The U.S. Supreme Court has made it very clear that
1) Treaties do not override the U.S. Constitution.
2) Treaties cannot amend the Constitution. And last,
3) A treaty can be nullified by a statute passed by the U.S. Congress (or by a sovereign State or States if Congress refuses to do so), when the State deems a treaty the performance of a treaty is self-destructive. The law of self-preservation overrules the law of obligation in others. When you’ve read this thoroughly, hopefully, you will never again sit quietly by when someone — anyone — claims that treaties supercede the Constitution. Help to dispell this myth.
“This [Supreme] Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty.” - Reid v. Covert, October 1956, 354 U.S. 1, at pg 17.
Since when has Obama been concerned about what is “legal” or not?
It angers me that you are probably right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.