Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Senate DOES NOT need to ratify a UN treaty for us to be bound by it!!!
TeaParty.org ^ | 7/11/2012 | Bulldog

Posted on 07/16/2012 6:21:06 PM PDT by Eagles6

It has just been brought to my attention that because of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties which the US is apparently a signatory to, the UN will consider us bound to any treaty, including the ATT, that Obummer signs.  The Senate DOES NOT have to ratify it.  I couldn't believe it when I heard it so I researched it and found the treaty and sure enough that is exactly what it says.  Please read Article 12 of this treaty even if you don't read the rest of it.  Also watch the video from Dick Morris, he also talks about the UN trying to get the power to TAX US!!!  We are doomed if this happens.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Foreign Affairs; Government
KEYWORDS: salt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-99 next last
Heard Twinkletoes talking about this on Hannity today.

Is it true?

1 posted on 07/16/2012 6:21:09 PM PDT by Eagles6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All


Help End The Obama Era In 2012
Your Monthly and Quarterly Donations
Help Keep FR In the Battle!


Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!


2 posted on 07/16/2012 6:23:29 PM PDT by musicman (Until I see the REAL Long Form Vault BC, he's just "PRES__ENT" Obama = Without "ID")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eagles6

The UN can keep us “bound” all they want, but if our Gov’t (Hopefully, under a new administration soon) chooses NOT to participate, what can they do?


3 posted on 07/16/2012 6:24:28 PM PDT by Conservative Vermont Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eagles6

If any US official of any capacity says we’re bound by some UN treaty then they should be hung up by their thumbs.

BS, horse kaka, etc. We are NOT bound by any UN crap and we should ignore anything an unelected official (Clinton, and her master Obama) sign us up for...

So what if I ended with a preposition.


4 posted on 07/16/2012 6:26:04 PM PDT by CincyRichieRich (Keep your head up and keep moving forward!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CincyRichieRich

We’re bound by the IRS. That’s all Obama cares about.


5 posted on 07/16/2012 6:29:12 PM PDT by tsowellfan (http://www.cafenetamerica.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Eagles6
modernmilitiamovement.com

Because nothing says "Come and Take it" better than joing your local constitutional militia.

6 posted on 07/16/2012 6:29:40 PM PDT by Salvavida (The restoration of the U.S.A. starts with filling the pews at every Bible-believing church.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eagles6

Article 12
Consent to be bound by a treaty expressed by signature
1. The consent of a State to be bound by a treaty is expressed by the signature of its representative when:
(a) the treaty provides that signature shall have that effect;
(b) it is otherwise established that the negotiating States were agreed that signature should have that effect; or
(c) the intention of the State to give that effect to the signature appears from the full powers of its representative or was expressed during the negotiation.
2. For the purposes of paragraph 1:
(a) the initialling of a text constitutes a signature of the treaty when it is established that the negotiating States so agreed;
(b) the signature ad referendum of a treaty by a representative, if confirmed by his State, constitutes a full signature of the treaty.

I don’t read it that way at all, especially 2b. Thats why the Senate votes on these things.


7 posted on 07/16/2012 6:29:40 PM PDT by Adder (Da bro has GOT to go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CincyRichieRich
If any US official of any capacity says we’re bound by some UN treaty then they should be hung up by their thumbs.

I would recommend a much more painful part of their anatomy.

8 posted on 07/16/2012 6:30:28 PM PDT by SandRat (Duty - Honor - Country! What else needs said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Eagles6
You're claiming that the Vienna Convention actually ratified our Constitution?

I don't think so.

9 posted on 07/16/2012 6:30:49 PM PDT by ClearCase_guy (Roger Taney? Not a bad Chief Justice. John Roberts? A really awful Chief Justice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Conservative Vermont Vet

If Obama signs it, it should be a sign to the American people that he is not fit for office.


10 posted on 07/16/2012 6:31:30 PM PDT by RC2 (Buy American and support the Wounded Warrior Project whenever possible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
My "ratified" should be "amended".

Sorry.

11 posted on 07/16/2012 6:31:52 PM PDT by ClearCase_guy (Roger Taney? Not a bad Chief Justice. John Roberts? A really awful Chief Justice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Eagles6
Even if true, I am not bound by this treaty.

They can have my weapons when they pry them from my cold dead hands.
And I believe that there are multiple tens of millions of others in this country that feel the same way.

12 posted on 07/16/2012 6:33:48 PM PDT by Just another Joe (Warning: FReeping can be addictive and helpful to your mental health)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eagles6
Found this:

The Constitution, Plain and Simple

http://www.jpands.org/hacienda/article4.html

Article I, Section 10, paragraph 1 declares: "No State shall enter into any Treaty..."

All civil magistrates are bound by oath to abide by the U.S. Constitution, and nowhere in the U.S. Constitution is any authority given for these United States to be subject to and bound by any earthly piece of paper that abrogates or is alien to the Constitution of the United States. As a matter of fact, Article VI, paragraph 2, the latter half of which is quoted at the outset above, in its first half, says only three (3) pronouncements are "the supreme Law of the Land":

(1) "THIS [the U.S.] Constitution," (2) "the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof" (i.e., as permitted by, in conformity with, and to implement this Constitution), and (3) "all treaties made....under the Authority of the United States" ("under" designates that treaties are not over, not above, and not even equal to the authority of the United States granted to it by the States via the U.S. Constitution - but remain under, inferior to its jurisdiction).

A TREATY MAY NOT DO OR EXCEED WHAT THE CONGRESS IS CHARGED TO DO OR WHAT IT IS FORBIDDEN TO DO. CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY SUPERSEDES, OVERRULES, AND PRECLUDES ANY CONTRARY TREATY AUTHORITY.

Thus, if a proposed treaty would violate any provision of the Constitution, it may not even be seriously considered or debated, much less be ratified and implemented because the same restrictions that were placed by the Constitution on the U.S. Federal government are also imposed on any treaty provision.

TREATY EMBROILMENT IS SO DANGEROUS AND SO IMPORTANT, THAT TO FURTHER LIMIT AND RESTRICT THEIR MAKING, ARTICLE II, SECTION 2, PARAGRAPH 2 ORDERS THAT 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; [EMPHASIS ADDED.]"

This provision accomplishes two things: 1) it prohibits the President alone to commit the United States to an agreement with other nations (the Senate must advise, consent, concur, and ratify). And 2), why is the Senate singled out, and not the House of Representatives, or both Houses? Because the Senate is the branch of the Congress whose Senators' constituencies are not "my people back home," but "my State government back home."(1)

Treaties are potentially so threatening to the sovereignty of the individual States and the Union of These States that two thirds of the Senators are required to be convinced that the treaty under consideration does not contravene the U.S. Constitution and/or adversely impact on the retained functions and interests of the States before they consent/ratify.

13 posted on 07/16/2012 6:33:48 PM PDT by Conservative Vermont Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

Huh?


14 posted on 07/16/2012 6:35:33 PM PDT by Eagles6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Conservative Vermont Vet
A TREATY MAY NOT DO OR EXCEED WHAT THE CONGRESS IS CHARGED TO DO OR WHAT IT IS FORBIDDEN TO DO. CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY SUPERSEDES, OVERRULES, AND PRECLUDES ANY CONTRARY TREATY AUTHORITY.

Yes.

15 posted on 07/16/2012 6:36:43 PM PDT by Talisker (One who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Eagles6
The federal government cannot do by treaty what it does not have the power to do in it's own right.

No foreign government or entity can grant power to the US Government over the States or the People. Attempting to do so would be an act of war.

16 posted on 07/16/2012 6:36:48 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #17 Removed by Moderator

To: Eagles6

It’s the latest favorite fallacy of the bipartisan political regulator class. They can do anything they want to, and there’s nothing that we can do to stop them. So just give up.

Slow business down more noticeably. Starve the B for real. See how long she continues to huff and puff about how big and bad she is.


18 posted on 07/16/2012 6:38:31 PM PDT by familyop ("Wanna cigarette? You're never too young to start." --Deacon, "Waterworld")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eagles6
Huh?

I believe that the US Constitution states that the US Senate must ratify every treaty. The fact that we signed the Vienna Convention does not change the Constitution. We can say anything we like. We can sign anything we like. The fact is that the US Senate must ratify every treaty.

The only way to change that is the amend the US Constitution, and signing the Vienna Convention is not one of the ways to amend our Constitution.

19 posted on 07/16/2012 6:39:44 PM PDT by ClearCase_guy (Roger Taney? Not a bad Chief Justice. John Roberts? A really awful Chief Justice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe

I’ll have their weapons when I pry them from their cold dead hands.It works both ways.


20 posted on 07/16/2012 6:40:02 PM PDT by Farmer Dean (stop worrying about what they want to do to you,start thinking about what you want to do to them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-99 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson