Showing posts with label United Nations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label United Nations. Show all posts

Monday, April 1, 2013

Senators Who Voted To Give Your Second Amendment Rights To The UN


Wizbang -- Would you like to meet the Democrats that voted to destroy your Second Amendment rights? Would you like to meet those traitorous Senators that voted to give the power over your rights to the United Nations?

Fortunately, the odious, anti-American treaty was again voted down by the full Senate, but 46 Senators voted in favor of handing over our Constitutional rights to the UN.

Senator Jim Inhofe (R-OK) offered Amendment 139 that was passed with a 53 to 46 vote. His Amendment contained language to affirm that foreign treaties would not trump the U.S. Constitution.

“Mr. President,” Inhofe said on the floor of the Senate, “I want to make sure that everyone understands what the United Nations trade treaty is. The trade treaty is a treaty that cedes our authority to have trade agreements with our allies in terms of trading arms.”

He went on to say, “I want to very briefly read this so nobody over there or over here misunderstands what this amendment does. This is right out of the amendment. Uphold the Second Amendment rights, that is one thing. And secondly, prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations arms trade treaties.”

But many Democrats simply didn’t agree with Inhofe’s insistence that the U.S. Constitution trump the UN.

Below is the list of Democrats that voted against the amendment and in favor of the UN being given the power to overturn the U.S. Constitution.


Blog author's comments - These 46 Democrat Senators voted to give our Second Amendment rights to the UN. Thankfully the 'treaty' was voted down by the full Senate. What bothers me is why would any sane American want to allow the UN to have any power at all over us?

Tuesday, June 7, 2011

The UN And The Liberals Want Your Guns


U.N. Agreement Should Have All Gun Owners Up In Arms

Forbes.com - It may not come as surprising news to many of you that the United Nations doesn’t approve of our Second Amendment. Not one bit. And they very much hope to do something about it with help from some powerful American friends.

Under the guise of a proposed global “Small Arms Treaty” premised to fight "terrorism", “insurgency” and “international crime syndicates” you can be quite certain that an even more insidious threat is being targeted – our Constitutional right for law-abiding citizens to own and bear arms.

What, exactly, does the intended agreement entail? While the terms have yet to be made public, if passed by the U.N. and ratified by our Senate, it will almost certainly force the U.S. to:

1. Enact tougher licensing requirements, creating additional bureaucratic red tape for legal firearms ownership.

2. Confiscate and destroy all “unauthorized” civilian firearms (exempting those owned by our government of course).

3. Ban the trade, sale and private ownership of all semi-automatic weapons (any that have magazines even though they still operate in the same one trigger pull – one single “bang” manner as revolvers, a simple fact the ant-gun media never seem to grasp).

4. Create an international gun registry, clearly setting the stage for full-scale gun confiscation.

5. In short, overriding our national sovereignty, and in the process, providing license for the federal government to assert preemptive powers over state regulatory powers guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment in addition to our Second Amendment rights.

Have no doubt that this plan is very real, with strong Obama administration support. In January 2010 the U.S. joined 152 other countries in endorsing a U.N. Arms Treaty Resolution that will establish a 2012 conference to draft a blueprint for enactment. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has pledged to push for Senate ratification.

Just how effectively have gun bans worked to make citizens safer in other countries? Take the number of home break-ins while residents are present as an indication. In Canada and Britain, both with tough gun-control laws, nearly half of all burglaries occur when residents are present. But in the U.S. where many households are armed, only about 13% happen when someone is home.

Recognizing clear statistical benefit evidence, 41 states now allow competent, law-abiding adults to carry permitted or permit-exempt concealed handguns. As a result, crime rates in those states have typically fallen at least 10% in the year following enactment.

So the majority in our Senate is smart enough to realize that the U.N.’s gun-grab agenda is unconstitutional, politically suicidal for those who support it, and down-right idiotic—right? Let’s hope so, but not entirely count on it. - Keep reading...

Blog author's comments - This is shear lunacy. The UN is a worthless organization that has no business in the affairs of the United States. I honestly don't see this happening, but I also would not have predicted what Obama has done during such a short amount of time in office.

Of course Obama could try to push this through during a second term as President. If he receives a second term there will be no recovery from the damage he will do.

If he wins a second term he will probably have the opportunity to appoint two more Supreme Court Justices. If that happens and the SCOTUS hears this case the Second Amendment could be rewritten in favor of the UN and the liberal/anti-gun crowd.

The primary duty of the President of the United States is to protect the freedom of Americans, not to conspire with foreign interests to take our freedom and rights away from us.


Thursday, September 23, 2010

10 Things Obama Should Do at the UN

Ten Things Obama Should Do at the United Nations This Week
By: Richard Grenell
When Barack Obama was campaigning to be president of the United States in 2008, he frequently promised Americans that he would lead the world. In fact, he and his team relentlessly pounded President George W. Bush for “going it alone” and alienating our friends and allies around the globe.

His then-campaign foreign policy advisor and current U.S. Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice even joked about how, if elected, they would repair the damage and lead the UN in a way that the Bush team couldn't.

But after almost 2 years on the job, Rice and Obama haven’t been able to garner support from the UN to implement U.S. foreign policy priorities as they said they would.

As President Obama goes back to the UN this week, there are 10 things he should do to more forcefully push for progress on U.S. priorities and more aggressively defend the U.S.:

1. Make clear that the Arizona law the UN attacked was written to stop illegal immigration, not prohibit legal immigration.

2. Call out the Human Rights Council for yet another disastrous year of Israel bashing and overlooking rights violators.

3. Nominate a U.S. Ambassador level person to tackle UN reform and UN budget waste, fraud, abuse and duplicity.

4. Ask Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to investigate the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to ascertain how erroneous scientific claims were added to official UN reports.

5. Make clear that the United States will not unilaterally disarm its nuclear weapons and will not support restrictions on private firearm ownership.- All 10 points & Entire column

Blog author's comments - Good points, but how many of them will Obama address?

Most of us know, there will be no peace in the Mideast until Israel along with help, finally removes a few of it's many enemies. Their enemies won't worry about that while Obama is the President. Israel will have to go it alone.

Also - make it clear that the U.S. will not unilaterally disarm its nuclear weapons and will not support restrictions on private firearm ownership. Excellent point from the above column.

Twenty months into the tenure of Obama's presidency, what has he accomplished with regard to the UN? Not much. He has talked to some countries, offering apologies from the United States and again blaming George W. Bush for many of the worlds problems.

Other than the 'Apology Tour' he has had minimal involvement in foreign policy. Of course he was forced into some action with regard to Iraq and Afghanistan.

I believe he is somewhat surprised, because he no doubt thought that a speech and hand shake and let's not forget an occasional bow, would change the minds of many UN members. I believe what they do see is a weaker U.S. President.

The UN meetings are worthless.

Thursday, September 9, 2010

Clinton: UN - Important Global Institution

Hillary Clinton: United Nations is "Single Most Important Global Institution"



CNS News
In a speech before the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) on Wednesday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton praised the work of the United Nations and said it is “the single most important global institution.”

At the CFR in Washington, D.C., Clinton said, “Now the U.N. remains the single most important global institution. We are constantly reminded of its value: The Security Council enacting sanctions against Iran and North Korea. Peacekeepers patrolling the streets of Monrovia and Port-au-Prince. Aid workers assisting flood victims in Pakistan and displaced people in Darfur.”

“The United States believes that the Council must be able to react to and reflect today’s world,” Clinton said. “We favor Security Council reform that enhances the U.N.'s overall performance, effectiveness and efficiency to meet the challenges of the new century.” - Entire column

Blog author's comments - Only a leftist liberal like Hillary Clinton, would utter this. As I have said before, I believe the United Nations to be a worthless organization.

Most of the members are anti-United States and Israel. I do wish they would move the U.N. headquarters out of the United States and let the other countries pay the bill for these people. Mrs. Clinton, the U.N. in my opinion has very little credibility.

Tuesday, September 7, 2010

Obama Goes To U.N. - Over "Unionization Rights"

Obama reports America to the UN claiming that difficulty in forming a union in this country is a human rights abuse.



Obama does not like America, at least not the way it was before he took office. To Obama, anything less than radical socialism is human rights abuse and he will try and go to the United Nations to force change. Recently Obama complained to the Human Rights Council about racism in America.

This latest whine to the U.N. is outrageous. The U.N. does not control this country, at least the last time I checked. The U.N. does not have a say concerning domestic matters within our borders or our laws. The U.N. is a worthless organization.

The Obama administration has declared unionization a human right and indirectly equated it to freedom of speech, freedom of religion and other normal human rights. Unions were gradually becoming a thing of the past until Obama occupied the White House. In Obama’s warped mind, he gets to trash America at the U.N. while also pleasing his biggest backers, the unions.

Blog author's comments - Barack Hussein Obama has ceased to surprise me with his radical goals and actions. His latest attempt to unionize many businesses will not create more jobs. It will have just the opposite affect.

Obama wants more control and he wants to see people who could not otherwise land a job for a decent salary, end up in a unionized job. Once there - it is almost impossible to get rid of a worthless employee.

Making it very easy for unions to organize workers is now a stated U.S human rights goal. The primary bill among the 'several bills' the Obama administration is referring to is the ironically named Employee Free Choice Act which is commonly called 'Card Check'.

This bill does away with secret ballot elections for unionization. When a union gets over 50% cards signed, they have won. There is no election.

Supporters of the bill claim it still allows an election to be called when 30% have signed cards (same as current law), but only the union doing the organizing can petition for an election.

Anti-union workers and businesses don't have that right... stripping workers of their right to a secret ballot vote is now a stated U.S. human rights goal.


Via: canadafreepress