It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
a right granted by the second amendment of the constitution, what wikipedia calls the "supreme laws" of the united states.
obama is a bum.
Our Global Neighborhood
Report of the Commission on Global Governance
(ISBN 0-19-827998-1; Published by Oxford University Press, 1995)
...Next to life, liberty is what people value most,". the report says. It also says: ."The impulse to possess turf is a powerful one for all species; yet it is one that people must overcome.". It also says: ."global rules of custom constrain the freedom of sovereign states,". and ."sensitivity over the relationship between international responsibility and national sovereignty [is a] considerable obstacle to the leadership at the international level,". and ."Although states are sovereign, they are not free individually to do whatever they want.". Maurice Strong, a member of the Commission, and a likely candidate for the position of Secretary General, said in an essay entitled Stockholm to Rio: A Journey Down a Generation: ."It is simply not feasible for sovereignty to be exercised unilaterally by individual nation-states, however powerful. It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the imperatives of global environmental cooperation.".
...Global governance will "Embody this ethic in the evolving system of international norms, adapting, where necessary, existing norms of sovereignty and self-determination to changing realities." The effectiveness of this global ethic "will depend upon the ability of people and governments to transcend narrow self-interests and agree that the interests of humanity as a whole will be best served by acceptance of a set of common rights and responsibilities. Without the objectives and limits that a global ethic would provide, however, global civil society could become unfocused and even unruly. That could make effective global governance difficult."
Of What Use is Global Governance?
I define global governance as the system assisting human society to achieve common objectives in a sustainable (i.e., fair and just) manner. Growing interdependence means that our laws, standards, and values, as well as the other social mechanisms that shape human behaviour, need to be analyzed, discussed, understood, and articulated in the most coherent way possible. This, in my opinion, is the condition for truly sustainable development in economic, social, and environmental terms.....
...the European Union, the very incarnation of an international organization of integration in which Member States have agreed to relinquish sovereignty in order to strengthen the coherence and effectiveness of their actions....
Our challenge today is to establish a system of global governance that provides a better balance between leadership, effectiveness, and legitimacy on the one hand, and coherence on the other, ...
If there is one place on earth where new forms of global governance have been tested since the Second World War, it is in Europe. European integration is the most ambitious supranational governance experience ever undertaken. It is the story of interdependence desired, defined, and organized by the Member States. In no respect is the work complete—...
The essence of the E.U. is already at the heart of this first initiative: the creation of an area of joint sovereignty, a space in which members agree to manage their relationship without the constant need for international treaties. What characterizes the paradigm of European governance is, thus, the combination of three elements: political will, a defined goal, and an institutional structure. The method of governance employed is certainly a major technological leap from Westphalian principles.
One innovation is the primacy of E.U. law over national law; another is the existence of a commission with a monopoly on legislative initiative; a third is the creation of a court whose decisions are binding on national courts;a fourth is the creation of a bicameral parliamentary system with, on one side, the Council that represents member states, and on the other, the European Parliament that represents the citizens. These are major institutional innovations, of course...
The economic crisis we are experiencing has accelerated the transformation of global governance toward a new architecture....
Global Governance 2025 | Atlantic Council
This report analyzes the gap between current international governance institutions, organizations and norms and the demands for global governance likely to be posed by long-term strategic challenges over the next 15 years. The report is the product of research and analysis by the NIC and EUISS following a series of international dialogues co-organized by the Atlantic Council, TPN, and other partner organizations in Beijing, Tokyo, Dubai, New Delhi, Pretoria, Sao Paulo & Brasilia, Moscow, and Paris. The executive summary is below.
Global governance—the collective management of common problems at the international level—is at a critical juncture. Although global governance institutions have racked up many successes since their development after the Second World War, the growing number of issues on the international agenda, and their complexity, is outpacing the ability of international organizations and national governments to cope.
With the emergence of rapid globalization, the risks to the international system have grown to the extent that formerly localized threats are no longer locally containable but are now potentially dangerous to global security and stability....
We assess that the multiple and diverse governance frameworks, however flexible, probably are not going to be sufficient to keep pace with the looming number of transnational and global challenges absent extensive institutional reforms and innovations. The capacities of the current institutional patchwork will be stretched by the type of problems facing the global order over the next few decades....
The URAA puts U.S. sovereignty and U.S. law under perfect protection. According to the Act, if there is a conflict between U.S. and any of the Uruguay Round agreements, U.S. law will take precedence regardless when U.S. law is enacted. § 3512 (a) states: "No provision of any of the Uruguay Round Agreements, nor the application of any such provision to any person or circumstance, that is inconsistent with any law of the United States shall have effect." Specifically, implementing the WTO agreements shall not be construed to "amend or modify any law of the United States, including any law relating to (i) the protection of human, animal, or plant life or health, (ii) the protection of the environment, or (iii) worker safety", or to "limit any authority conferred under any law of the United States, including section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974." www.eastlaw.net...
....the USDA decided to move to the HACCP system of inspection. Based on the idea that the plant operator knows the plant better than the USDA, the responsibility for designing an inspection system was turned over to each individual plant.
.... USDA “officials initially described HACCP to the industry in the mid-90’s, the agency made the following enticing promises:
* “Under HACCP, the agency will implement a ‘Hands Off’ role in meat inspection.
* “Under HACCP, the agency will no longer police the industry, but the industry will police itself.
* “Under HACCP, the agency will disband its previous command and control authority.
* “Under HACCP, each plant will write its own HACCP Plan, and the agency cannot tell plants what must be in their HACCP Plans.”
As a result, the plant operator was required to identify potential hazards and the critical points in the process where those hazards could come into play. The plant would then identify procedures that would be used to minimize the hazard risk at those control points. The plant would be responsible for the implementation of the plan.
As a result, the inspector was no longer responsible for what was happening on the plant floor: that was left to company personnel. The new role of the inspector was to make sure that plant personnel were carrying out their duties in a manner consistent with the HACCP plan. In many cases this amounted to making sure that all of the paper work was in the proper order....”www.agpolicy.org...
Summary of Tuberculosis Surveillance in California Cattle
Number of Cattle Tested........1995.....1996.....1997.......1998.......1999......2000.....2001
By Animal Health Officials...10,576...5,100 ....2,861 .....3,530.....1,425 ....1,967.....2,500
By Private Veterinarians ...15,921...17,100...19,930...18,189...22,863...19,930...19,587
Submissions at Slaughter..........39..........58 .........64...........39...........58..........64.........385
“The harmonization of laws, regulations and standards between and among trading partners requires intense, complex, time-consuming negotiations by CFSAN officials. Harmonization must simultaneously facilitate international trade and promote mutual understanding, while protecting national interests and establish a basis to resolve food issues on sound scientific evidence in an objective atmosphere. Failure to reach a consistent, harmonized set of laws, regulations and standards within the free trade agreements and the World Trade Organization Agreements can result in considerable economic repercussions...”
The "Food Safety Modernization Act" just being passed in December 2010 g0es in effect 2012.
The new law includes the following section:
SEC. 404. COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS.
Nothing in this Act (or an amendment made by this Act) shall be construed in a manner inconsistent with the agreement establishing the World Trade Organization or any other treaty or international agreement to which the United States is a party.
“What are Good Agricultural Practices?
...A multiplicity of Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) codes, standards and regulations have been developed in recent years by the food industry and producers organizations but also governments and NGOs, aiming to codify agricultural practices at farm level for a range of commodities....”
www.fao.org... [has links]
...the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) submitted its response to a lawsuit filed earlier this year by the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund (FTCLDF)....
Here are some of FDA's views expressed in its response on 'freedom of food choice' in general and on the right to obtain and consume raw milk in particular...
* "There is no absolute right to consume or feed children any particular food." [p. 25]
* "There is no 'deeply rooted' historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds." [p. 26]
* "Plaintiffs' assertion of a 'fundamental right to their own bodily and physical health, which includes what foods they do and do not choose to consume for themselves and their families' is similarly unavailing because plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to obtain any food they wish." [p. 26]
"There is no fundamental right to freedom of contract." [p. 27]
PS They can Have my guns when they pry them from my cold dead hands!!!
Originally posted by TreadUpon
Don't forget Fast and Furious. A blatant attempt to give the UN what they needed to push it.
And for the record, Chuck Noris wears TreadUpon pajamas...
CRS Report for Congress
The United Nations and “Gun Control”
...On July 28, 1998, the U.N. Economic and Social Council adopted a resolution recommending that nation states work towards “elaboration of an international instrument to combat the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, their parts and components and ammunition” within the context of a United Nations convention against transnational organized crime. This resolution had been recommended to the Council by the April 1998 meeting of the U.N. Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice. On December 9, 1998, the U.N. General Assembly, without a vote, adopted Resolution 53/111...
The United States signed this Convention on November 11, 1997; it was transmitted to the Senate on June 9, 1998 (105th Congress, 2nd Session. Senate Treaty Document 105-49). Hearings have not been held. According to the State Department, the Preamble to this treaty
makes clear that the Convention is intended to address the problem of transnational trafficking in firearms, and is not meant to regulate the internal firearms trade of the States Parties. The Preamble expressly recognizes, for example, that the Convention “does not commit States Parties to enact legislation or regulations pertaining to firearms ownership, possession or trade of a wholly domestic character....” 6
Under way in early 2005 are negotiations by an Open-Ended Working Group on Tracing Illicit Small Arms and Light Weapons aimed at a draft international instrument (treaty) for the “timely and reliable identification” and tracing of illicit small arms and light weapons. The second meeting was held January 24 to February 4, 2005, with a third substantive session scheduled for June 6 to 17, 2005....
The Council encouraged “international and regional cooperation in identifying the origin and transfer of small arms and light weapons in order to prevent their diversion, in particular, to Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups.” It welcomed the “ongoing efforts by [the] open- ended working group...to negotiate an international instrument to enable States to identify and trace, in a timely and reliable manner, illicit small arms and light weapons...”
U.S. representatives have focused on the need to combat organized crime and to reduce out-of-control violence and conflict by limiting the availability of firearms, light weapons, and small arms that contribute to and aggravate these situations. They have made it clear that the reduction of crime and conflict is a primary goal of the United States....any international treaties in this area would not bind the United States unless these documents were acted on favorably by the U.S. Senate, if the President decided to transmit the treaty to the Senate for its consideration.
SOURCE: Congressional Research Service ̃ The Library of Congress
Washington Times May 27, 2010
This week, the Obama administration announced its support for the United Nations Small Arms Treaty. This international agreement poses real risks for freedom both in the United States and around the world by making it more difficult - if not outright illegal - for law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.
The U.N. claims that guns used in armed conflicts cause 300,000 deaths worldwide every year, an inordinate number of which are the result of internal civil strife within individual nations. The solution proposed by transnationalists to keep rebels from getting guns is to make the global pool of weapons smaller through government action. According to recent deliberations regarding the treaty, signatory countries would be required to “prevent, combat and eradicate” various classes of guns to undermine “the illicit trade in small arms.” Such a plan would necessarily lead to confiscation of personal firearms.....
...former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John R. Bolton warns.
“After the treaty is approved and it comes into force, you will find out that it has this implication or that implication and it requires the Congress to adopt some measure that restricts ownership of firearms..The [Obama] administration knows it cannot obtain this kind of legislation purely in a domestic context. … They will use an international agreement as an excuse to get domestically what they couldn’t otherwise.”
Originally posted by JibbyJedi
reply to post by kro32
Are you just the counter argument in every thread lately? No matter what the topic is.... even Chuck Norris.... you will debunk it?
Chuck Norris - un-debunkable
Chuck Norris = automatic star & flag