ping
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.
I should have added that Morris said that it would be in force until the Senate votes it up or down. Reid just wouldn’t bring it up hence de facto agreement until such time...
B/S!
The UN can pass or ratify anything it wants.....all they have to do is enforce it....
They going to send in 100,000 blue helmets to cover our streets?
They can consider us bound in one hand and go chit in the other and see which opne fills up.
Send in the Blue Berets and prepare to bury a bunch of them.
I agree but it seems that we are living in a post constitutional federation these days.
A treaty cannot bind you to future, unwritten treaties.
“”So what if I ended with a preposition””
I quit worrying about that years ago when Bill Buckley said it was OK. If it was good enough for him, it’s good enough for us!
ping
Clinton signed on to the Koyoto treaty but the Senate never ratified and nobody, not even the UN, ever considered us bound by it.
To be quite honest the constitutionality of the UN treaty
and the attempt by the UN to tax America is irrelevant.
It would only be relevant if congress and the rest of the
parasites in Mordor on the Potomac cared about what the constitution said, required or prohibited....THEY DON’T.
Thus if the traitors in DC decide to allow the UN to tax us
then that is what will happen. If the traitors in DC decide
to misconscrew (sic) the UN small arms treaty to allow for the prohibition of guns in America then that is what will happen. Our only options in reality will be to either bend
over and grab our ankles or to take up arms and send as many of them to hell as we can.
Exactly.
UN can consider we are bound by any treaty all they want, regardless of who signs it.
It is not and will not be recognized by us.
Completely untrue. Article II states that president needs 2/3 of the senate to ratify a treaty. It doesn’t matter if the UN recognizes a treaty if the U.S. government does not.
Let the blue helmets try to enforce their crap on U.S. citizens.
I can envision “tarring and feathering” making a comeback in the future .... a very apt way of dealing with traitors, scoundrels, and corrupt politicians.
Oh for pete’s sake, of course it’s not true.
If it were, don’t you think some commie democrat prez would’ve just signed a treaty saying “No More U.S. Constitution Forever” by now???
Since the United States does not agree, then any signature would be invalid. The only way the US could agree would be for the Senate to ratify any given treaty.
IOW, a signature by Obama without the agreement of the US Senate would mean that "the state" had not agreed with the signature and the treaty would then not be binding.
There are a number of places in Article 12 in which the "state agree" language is used.
They will try lots of sneaky tricks. Gun turn-ins followed by rewards for neighbor turning in neighbor. I predict this push to communism will end the opposite from past movements. There won’t be an additional 150 million farmers, busisness people and freedom lovers killed by evil tyrants. There will be a backlash on the communist supporters from those who know history and won’t go peacefully to their deaths.
Gotta wonder when this article was written. Since ratification of the 17th Amendment, which enabled POPULAR election of US senators, senators are no longer "selected" by their respective state delegations/governments and consequently are no longer directly beholden to the state. Their constituents are in fact the people back home. It's likely that ratification of the 17th was not a stellar moment for the sovereign states and it seems that history bears that out.
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.