I’m scared to death of people, who might
tell me I’m not allowed to defend myself,
because I am allowed to defend myself.
Anybody who wants to disarm me can drop dead.
Anybody who would take away our
individual rights and liberties…
They’re the enemy. They need to be killed.
ICE-T • TED NUGENT • ALEX JONES • BEN SHAPIRO • JESSE VENTURA
You can’t ban the iron rods. The guns, the iron rods, didn’t do it. The tyrants did it. Hitler took the guns. Stalin took the guns. Mao took the guns. Fidel Castro took the guns. Hugo Chavez took the guns, and I’m here to tell you… 1776 will commence again if you try to take our firearms. We will not relinquish them. The establishment understands. No matter how much propaganda, the Republic will rise again, when you attempt to take our guns. – Alex Jones
On March 21, 2013, Senator James M. Inhofe (R-OK) introduced Senate budget Amendments 139 and 360 to protect the 2nd Amendment rights of the residents of Oklahoma; one amendment of which would directly aid efforts to prevent ratification of the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). Inhofe spoke on the Senate floor the following day, Friday, March 22nd. Moments later, 53 senators voted in support of his amendments (46 voted against) and, for the time being, prevented the United States from signing its support for the Treaty, pursuant to Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution.
Nine weeks later, President Obama defied the Senate and authorized Secretary John Kerry to affirm U.S. support for the Treaty anyway, and on September 25, 2013, during the “High Level Event” held at U.N. headquarters in New York, Kerry affixed his signature without any constitutional authority whatsoever to do so.
“He does not what he says.”
Seated at his desk in the Oval Office on New Year’s Eve 2011, President Obama officially turned legacy into tragedy when he affixed his signature to his Statement on Signing the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 [Section 1022]. Though circumstantially similar to the U.S. Patriot Act, which President Bush signed into law a decade earlier (it denies American citizens one of their Constitutional rights; this one, to due process – Writ of Habeas Corpus), it stands alone as a document of disgraceful, presidential prevarication. Accordingly deceptive was the Signing Statement accompanying Kerry’s signature, which U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Thomas Countryman read to the U.N. assembly on the same day.
Kerry is no fool, and he’s certainly not illiterate. He has read the Constitution and knows what every American citizen expects. With a paper trail beyond his reach and nowhere to hide, he chose the path which lay before all members of Obama’s Cabinet.
But let’s also be clear about what this Treaty is not: this Treaty will not diminish anyone’s freedom. In fact, the Treaty recognizes the freedom of both individuals and states to obtain, possess, and use arms for legitimate purposes. We would never support any Treaty that is inconsistent with the rights of American citizens guaranteed under our Constitution.
All international treaties preempt our Constitution, both federally and at the state level, which is to say that U. S. sovereignty is surrendered and subject to international rule, especially when it departs from the protections of our governing documents. The fact that our Constitution permits such a “takeover” negates the provision in the Treaty intended to recognize the sovereignty of independent nations. (In other words, Article VI is the very reason why the United States should not enter into such an international treaty agreement. At the very least, there will no longer be any Constitutional guarantees in the Second Amendment, as it will effectively exist only when not in contradiction to the ATT.)
Contrary to the belief that the Constitution stands to preserve the Second Amendment just as it stands in self-preservation (totius corporis), Article VI of the Constitution allows for the authorization of any provisions in any treaty legally signed by the U.S. with a foreign entity to preempt any contradictions or conflicting provisions in the constitutions of the United States, collectively and individually.
The Obama Administration has abused the power of the Executive Branch to preempt that of the Legislative Branch and the highest authority in the land by “Executive fiat.” He’s threatened to do it again injudiciously. Authorizing the signing of the Arms Trade Treaty commitment document is affirmation that Obama has no intention of respecting American convention. “By signing the Arms Trade Treaty, a State signals its intention to become a party to it in the future. Once it has signed the Treaty, a State must not take any action that would undermine its object and purpose (See Article 18, Vienna Treaty on the Law of Treaties, 1969).” There is no doubt the President will authorize Kerry to ratify the Treaty on behalf of the U.S., and it will likely occur very soon – sometime before the end of session of the U. N. General Assembly in September. (Don’t allow yourself to be distracted by whatever else this administration conjures up. Keep your eyes on the ball.)
The Treaty entered into force on Christmas Eve 2014. Since then, American citizens have been only a few small, logistical steps away from turning over their arms and with no way out. (The United States already has agreed to begin implementing Articles 6 and 7.)
Merry Christmas, America!
Section VI of the Constitution does not specify who may sign on behalf of the United States, nor whether or not treaty negotiations with foreign entities must be voted on by Congress. (That authority is delegated to the Senate in Article II). But those who would even think about entering into any agreement with one or more foreign entities without tacit advice and consent of a 2/3 majority of the U. S. Senate in toto are defying, contemptuously, the highest authority in the United States, and with common sense as with common law, they are those who may not ever be expected, in either practice or principle, to respect the Constitution or any oath ever made thereto. (It is for this reason the first provision of Section 3 is reiterated in Article VI, and why Kerry has already committed the High Crime of Treason).
Section 3 requires Congress to be bound in its legislative authority to the Constitution. It appears to imply that Congressional authority is not required; only that all members of Congress must support and defend the instrument of their own authority. Failing in that regard would seem to imply an instantaneous indictment of any member who voted on any action in contradiction to it.
Article II, Section 2 states, “[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…”
Collectively, these two provisions comprise the protectorate of the Constitution in Article VI, Section 2, because it limits the Senate to a 2/3 affirmative vote only when provisions of proposed treaties do not contradict the intent of the Constitution. (Horrifically, there is the more likely option that the President will call a meeting of three senators in the oval office and hold a vote. Such a malevolent exercise would certainly satisfy the requirements.)
The physical distance separating the two interrelated provisions (Article II, Section 2 and Article VI, Section 3) presupposes and strives to prevent the misinterpretation resulting from two possible circumstances, either of which could be perceived to adversely transfer the assignment of the highest power authorized by Article VI, Section 2: (1) the law specifically governing treaties entered into with foreign entities by the United States is incomplete in any single Article, thereby distracting detractors, who may not otherwise perceive such a relationship; and (2) rulings based on the misinterpretation of only one part will not singularly reverse the intent of the two sections, collectively. (Of such import is the power they protect, that the two sections appear in two completely different Articles, each uniquely purposed.)
We don’t know for certain that the President is going to exercise “Executive Privilege” to move forward; however, we’d be pretty stupid not to expect it. He has been cited as saying he and his administration would work to further gun control, whether legislated or not, via “a few processes, but under the radar,” and that he authorized Secretary of State Kerry to sign the Arms Trade Treaty in contempt of the Senate. We know, also, that at the core of his NDAA 2012 signing statement lies a lie.
Were the United States to complete the final step of the U. N. process (ratification) by declaring its support for and participation in the Treaty, the action would, according to Senator Rand Paul, “ultimately and inevitably lead to the nullification of the Second Amendment.”
Former U.N. ambassador John Bolton has cautioned gun owners to take this initiative seriously, stating that the U.N. “is trying to act as though this is really just a treaty about international arms trade between nation states, but there is no doubt that the real agenda here is domestic firearms control.”
As if he had been listening in, Wayne LaPierre did just that. The N.R.A.’s Vice President traveled to New York in July 2011 to read his statement on behalf of the members of the National Rifle Association.
Americans must not become complacent or let down their guard. They should join in, spread the word and demand that, pursuant to Articles 24(2) and 25(2) of the Treaty, Congress must issue to the Depositary an immediate withdrawal of America’s reservation to participate.
Given that Article VI, Section 3 of the Constitution requires all legislators to support and defend the Constitution, it is a cause for grave concern that any United States Senator could knowingly vote in favor of any provision, which, at any time, exists in contradiction to the Constitution. It’s been done before, however; several times. It can be done again.
For now and from now on, Americans must not only remain vigilant and informed, requiring the same of their legislators, they should think seriously about beginning proceedings to impeach those legislators, which do not adhere (or have not adhered) to the third paragraph of Article VI. On March 21, 2013, 46 senators committed acts perceivable as treason by voting to allow what Obama refers to as “International Rule of Law” to trump that of the Constitution.
If our country is to remain fair and just, and if the people are to remain the Sovereign Rule, our Constitution needs to be protected as much as we, the people, need its protections, and those who vote for any motions which contradict the Constitution must be held accountable, at least until we fail, and the Constitution ceases to exist as the highest authority in the land. Write and demand that your legislators vote to withdraw commitment of the United States to the U. N. Arms Trade Treaty, and do it now. [Click here to locate and contact your legislators.]
In the meantime, because it is time, Americans should consider handcuffs for those 46 Senators (all Democrats), whose votes were to support international legislation which is, by any interpretation, unconstitutional and, by all accounts, treason: