The United Nations Wants to Take Your Gun!
Posted on 05/23/2002 9:44:23 AM PDT by Jack Black
Well those stubborn Easterners have gone and done it this time. They passed an anti-UN ordinance in Grant County Oregon. They also passed a measure giving the county to right to control local federal owned forests. Obviously these are probably symbolic victories, but personally I like the symbolism. Here is the official vote:
County ballot measures
Keep the United Nations out of Grant County
Passed 1,326-959
(58 percent)
Stewardship on federal lands
Passed 1,512-745
(67 percent)
Here are the two stories I put up earlier this week with information on these initatives.
Oregon County has anti-UN and anti-Fed ballot initatives
Where stubborn pride meets broken dreams. (more on anti-UN ititative)
The Sage Brush Rebellion is spreading! Sound the trumpets, gather your pitchforks!!
BTW: I loved your performance in High Fidelity Mr. Black.
I'd love to see this spread.
Hey, it's better than a Pyrrhic victory. ;^)
They'd certainly make frightening bayonets.
First, let's correct the spelling and grammar on your question. This is Free Republic, not a chat room for illiterates.
why Why did i I know u you would be the one to suck up to the un UN?
Second, I noticed that you didn't address the substance of my post--namely, that the anti-UN ordinance is grossly unconstitutional. I am not alone in saying this; the John Birch Society agrees with me. Defending the Constitution is NOT "sucking up to the UN," it's defending the Constitution.
AKA, Scablands.
"No officer or official of the United Nations shall be granted special status or afforded special privilige by any employee of the county"
"We hereby declare that all United Nations initiatives concerning, controlling, and aserting dominion over citizens, resources and property in Grant County have no force of law and shall be ignored by all county employees in the completion of their official duties.".
If you substitued "Catholic Church" for "United Nations" I would still agree with these statements, and I would feel they were extremely supportive of the first ammendment, not unconstitional in any way.
As opposed to those more left-leaning Oregonians on the Pacific coast, or western part of the state...
the infowarrior
There was a similar ordinance in Utah that additionally enjoined private citizens from displaying the UN emblem without a lot of official involvement (it would have created a city-managed "enemies list" of UN sympathizers). If that part was included, that's a problem.
Also, there is the small matter that the US has ratified the UN Treaty; certain UN personnel therefore have diplomatic immunity under the Vienna Convention, and said immunity is to be respected by all inferior jurisdictions, and that is pursuant to Article VI of the Constitution.
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.