Bill Defunds United Nations If Arms Trade Treaty Is Adopted

Washington, DC --(Ammoland.com)- Congressman Joe Walsh (R-IL-8) on Dec. 7 introduced the Second Amendment Protection Act (HR-3594) with 20 co-sponsors, a measure that would cut off all funding to the United Nations if the United States agrees to any treaty that infringes on the constitutional rights of American citizens.

In a letter to his colleagues seeking additional co-sponsors in the House, Walsh noted that “The United Nations has been trying for almost a decade now to move forward with the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). This treaty poses a very real threat to the sovereignty of the United States and to our right to keep and bear arms—and this treaty is now moving forward with the support of the current administration.”

In late 2009, the US State Department reversed prior policy and announced that the US would back launching talks on the ATT. That version of the ATT is now expected to be finalized in 2012.

“The United States should never agree to a treaty that infringes on our constitutional rights, especially one that could implement sweeping gun control measures,” Walsh’s letter notes. “This treaty poses many dangers and could put serious pressure on the US to compromise on personal gun ownership rights. In a 2008 resolution on the treaty–adopted almost unanimously with only the US and Zimbabwe in opposition–the ‘highest possible standards’ of control were called for. “It is time for Congress to act to help ensure this treaty never sees the light of day. While the Senate is tasked with ratifying treaties, we (the House) must send a signal that this treaty is bad for America and bad for US gun rights.”

Almost 40 senators previously had written to the President and Secretary of State to express their opposition to the ATT. However, Walsh’s bill is the first in Congress to put financial brakes on any such treaty.

Bill Defunds United Nations If Arms Trade Treaty Is Adopted

Obama 'star' of Palestinian ad - Mackenzie Weinger - POLITICO.com

Unlikely....he has a higher Q rating and voter approval rating in the Gaza Strip then he has here in the United States. Backup plan if he loses the election is to run for President of the World where he wins by a landslide thanks to ballot stuffing at the point of an AK.

President Barack Obama is the unlikely star of a new Palestinian media campaign.

Part of a speech Obama gave in 2010 to the United Nations General Assembly is featured in an ad aimed to rally support for the Palestinians upcoming bid for statehood at the United Nations on Sept. 20, Reuters reported on Wednesday.

“When we come back here next year, we can have an agreement that can lead to a new member of the United Nations, an independent, sovereign state of Palestine living in peace with Israel,” Obama said in the 2010 speech in the clip that is played in the radio ad.

The Palestinians use of the remarks is at odds with the Obama administration’s current all-out push to stop the Palestinians from pursuing their statehood bid. U.S. Special Envoy to the Middle East David Hale is set to hold talks Wednesday with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to urge him to reconsider the statehood effort and instead return to direct negotiations with Israel.

Obama 'star' of Palestinian ad - Mackenzie Weinger - POLITICO.com

U.N. Agreement Should Have All Gun Owners Up In Arms - Larry Bell - The Bell Tells for You - Forbes

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.

 Read more: U.N. Agreement Should Have All Gun Owners Up In Arms - Larry Bell - The Bell Tells for You - Forbes

Douglas J. Feith: Obama Embraces 'Transnational' Law - WSJ.com

By DOUGLAS J. FEITH

This month, President Barack Obama declared he has a "legal obligation" to treat wartime detainees according to provisions of a treaty that the United States has never ratified. The maneuver raises a basic question: Who makes law for Americans? 

The standard answer, drawing on the Constitution, is Congress. One of American democracy's quaint conceits, after all, is that laws should be made by the people American voters have elected. 

But that old-school answer doesn't satisfy those in the progressive "transnational legal norms" movement. Frustrated that elected officials often refuse to enact the measures they favor, these reformers aim to persuade judges that progressive ideas on war crimes, arms control, the death penalty and other matters should be accepted as rights. They encourage judges to ground these rights not in local statutes produced by legislators, but in treaties, laws and court decisions of other countries, in academic writing, and in customary international law. 

This legal movement, potent in Europe, has had less success in this country, where citizens fervently safeguard democratic accountability and national sovereignty. But Mr. Obama has brought some eminent transnational law supporters into his administration, including the chief lawyer at the State Department, Harold Koh. And the president's announcement about the proper way to treat wartime detainees is a precedent-setting endorsement of transnational legal theory. 

The move hasn't gone unnoticed. Sen. Jon Kyl (R., Ariz.) has already criticized the announcement, and more opposition can be expected from senators protective of their advice-and-consent authority on treaties. 

The treaty Mr. Obama cited is Protocol 1 to the Geneva Conventions on the laws of war. Drafted in the mid-1970s, the Carter administration signed Protocol 1, but President Ronald Reagan, after years of interagency review, concluded that it is "fundamentally and irreconcilably flawed," because it contains provisions that would "undermine humanitarian law and endanger civilians in war."

Read more here: Douglas J. Feith: Obama Embraces 'Transnational' Law - WSJ.com