will see if i can find the US UN peacekeeping act here is the 1994 agreement www.fas.org... here is more on the PDD25 www.globalsecurity.org... and here is the 2 Senators that stood against HC on the UN Small arms treaty www.thenewamerican.com...
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) In October 2009, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton announced the United States support and participation in negotiating the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty, to be finalized in 2012, signaling a shift in United States policy.
(2) An Arms Trade Treaty that regulates the domestic manufacture, possession, or purchase of civilian firearms and ammunition would infringe on the rights of United States citizens protected under the second amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
It is the sense of Congress that the sovereignty of the United States and the constitutionally protected freedoms of American gun owners must be upheld and not be undermined by the Arms Trade Treaty.
You are right about this. But Obama should not be doing this "symbolic" signing in the first place. Pure brazenness... By pretending to go through the motions he will be tricking the American public and the world, into thinking it is a done deal.
Despite Obama’s pending signature, don’t panic just yet. The treaty must also be ratified by the Senate, which is unlikely to happen in the immediate future.
Originally posted by tothetenthpower
It doesn't matter.
The UN has no jurisdiction in America.
So it's a moot point. Obama can sign all the things he wants.
it is all part of Agenda 21 missoulian.com... from the link
New UN Ambassador Supports Giving Up Sovereignty To The United Nations!
On August 1st, Samantha Powers was confirmed by the US Senate to be the next US Ambassador to the United Nations. However, not everyone is thrilled about that, namely Senator Ted Cruz. Powers has advocated to giving up some sovereignty to the UN, claiming it will help keep us secure.
This is bull# and Sen. Cruz knows because he has spent much of his life fighting against abusive treaties and proposals out of the UN while he was Solicitor General of Texas. US sovereignty is essential to keeping America safe. Bravo Sen. Cruz!
WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) released the following statement regarding today’s vote to confirm Samantha Power to be Ambassador to the United Nations:
Today I voted to oppose the nomination of Samantha Power to be Ambassador to the United Nations. My opposition to her nomination comes down to one word: sovereignty.
I have seen firsthand how treaties and conventions negotiated at the United Nations and elsewhere can have unintended consequences for the United States when I represented Texas before the US Supreme Court in successfully arguing that no President has the authority to force a state to comply with an order from the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
Samantha Power’s positions on the United Nations suggest she agrees with President Obama in giving the United Nations authority over fundamental rights, such as our right to bear arms, and in allowing US taxpayer dollars to be used at the UN to undermine our ally, Israel.
In 2003, she wrote that “giving up a pinch of sovereignty” to organizations such as the UN is good for the United States and our security.
There is no higher national security principle than defending American sovereignty, especially at the United Nations, where it has been demonstrated time and time again that when it comes to authority over the United States, when you give the UN a pinch, they will take a mile.
- See more at: americanmilitarynews.com...
Still think that the US is free Nation ?? think again
Agenda 21 is a United Nations charter adopted by 178 nations in 1992. President George H.W. Bush was our signatory. The workhorse for Agenda 21 is the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives.
Missoula Mayor John Engen is a member and was praised by President Obama's administration for Missoula's ICLEI's initiatives. The Advocates for Our Republic oppose Agenda 21 because it will destroy our private enterprise economic system and replace it with a public/private partnership, which disregards our God-given and granted rights of private property. ICLEI will destroy our economy.
Agenda 21 runs counter to the U.S. Constitution which protects the middle class. Maurice Strong, Secretary General, UN, Conference on Environment and Development,1992, said the following: "current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class - involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work air conditioning and suburban housing are not sustainable."
Engen has been praised by Agenda 21 leadership, CEOs of non-governmental organizations, CEOs of nonprofits, and ICLEI for the following:
1. The discouragement of businesses with inhibiting rules and costs and the hate crimes ordinance that condemns business owners without equal standing in civil court. The "victim" only has to believe that he or she hasn't been hired or hasn't received a promotion because the boss was intolerant of his or her sexual orientation.
2. Strong opposition to the megaloads in 2011, which cost Montanans' jobs and hurt businesses along the way, such as restaurants, etc. The ability to bargain for lower fuel prices to benefit businesses and individuals was lost, also.
3. The threat to timber harvest was ignored by Missoula city and county. Pressure could have been brought against the unjust legal standing caused by the Endangered Species Act, which cost hundreds of good paying harvest jobs, as well as the ripple effect jobs.
4. The mayor, city council, and county are ignoring the threat to the private property rights of ranchers, farmer and developers of natural resources now. The Bureau of Land Management's recent Resource Management Plan could return to wilderness their land, as well as private land to provide protection for the sage grouse's habitat.
5. When the state legislature opposed Obamacare, the mayor and other leaders requested and received Obamacare money for two clinics in Missoula, which duplicated existing facilities.
6. Support of bicycle and bus transportation at the expense of car owners. Many potholes remain unrepaired.
7. Support for accessory apartments and subsidized apartments, which is described as "smart growth" by ICLEI.
We can do nothing about Agenda 21, but we can vote Engen out of office and mitigate or reverse the initiatives.
Jeanette Zentgraf of Lolo is co-chair of Advocates for Our Republic.
The Reid Court (U.S. Supreme Court) held in their Opinion that,
"... No agreement with a foreign nation can confer power on the Congress, or any other branch of government, which is free from the restraints of the Constitution. Article VI, the Supremacy clause of the Constitution declares, "This Constitution and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all the Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land...’
"There is nothing in this language which intimates that treaties and laws enacted pursuant to them do not have to comply with the provisions of the Constitution nor is there anything in the debates which accompanied the drafting and ratification which even suggest such a result...
"It would be manifestly contrary to the objectives of those who created the Constitution, as well as those who were responsible for the Bill of Rights – let alone alien to our entire constitutional history and tradition – to construe Article VI as permitting the United States to exercise power UNDER an international agreement, without observing constitutional prohibitions. (See: Elliot’s Debates 1836 ed. – pgs 500-519).
"In effect, such construction would permit amendment of that document in a manner not sanctioned by Article V. The prohibitions of the Constitution were designed to apply to all branches of the National Government and they cannot be nullified by the Executive or by the Executive and Senate combined."
At this point the Court paused to quote from another of their Opinions; Geofroy v. Riggs, 133 U.S. 258 at pg. 267 where the Court held at that time that,
"The treaty power as expressed in the Constitution, is in terms unlimited except by those restraints which are found in that instrument against the action of the government or of its departments and those arising from the nature of the government itself and of that of the States. It would not be contended that it extends so far as to authorize what the Constitution forbids, or a change in the character of the government, or a change in the character of the States, or a cession of any portion of the territory of the latter without its consent."
Assessing the GATT/WTO parasitic organism in light of this part of the Opinion, we see that it cannot attach itself to its host (our Republic or States) in the fashion the traitors in our government wish, without our acquiescing to it.
The Reid Court continues with its Opinion:
"This Court has also repeatedly taken the position that an Act of Congress, which MUST comply with the Constitution, is on full parity with a treaty, the statute to the extent of conflict, renders the treaty null. It would be completely anomalous to say that a treaty need not comply with the Constitution when such an agreement can be overridden by a statute that must conform to that instrument."
The U.S. Supreme court could not have made it more clear : TREATIES DO NOT OVERRIDE THE CONSTITUTION, AND CANNOT, IN ANY FASHION, AMEND IT !!! CASE CLOSED.
ok out dated to say the least here is the sell out of the US to the UN www.freedomadvocates.org... long read but well worth it, sadly is is one of them "can not copy links" Yes the US has been sold out to the UN and hes been for some time, early mid 90's if your wondering about the time line,
Reid v. Covert, October 1956, 354 U.S. 1, at pg 17.
I'm so proud of the senators willing to take a stand alongside Iran and North Korea in opposition to this treaty.
In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nauru, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan, Spain, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, United States, Uruguay, Zambia.
Against: Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Iran, Syria.
UN Peacekeepers began training the 4th week of July and will complete their nine week training by October 1st. They are learning English, as well as US weapon systems and Urban Warfare training.How many troops are training? 386,000 troops!
yea well it is just a matter of time before they come knocking on your front door. if you missed the big if here it is [still requires ratification by the U.S. Senate]will they stand up for you or will they roll over you?
Kerry signs U.N. Arms Trade Treaty, says won't harm U.S. rights
By Michelle Nichols
updated 9/25/2013 4:35:30 PM ET
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The United States signed a U.N. Arms Trade Treaty regulating the $70 billion global trade in conventional arms on Wednesday and the Obama administration sought to allay the fears of the powerful U.S. gun lobby which says the pact will violate the constitutional rights of Americans.
The treaty, which relates only to cross-border trade and aims to keep weapons out of the hands of human rights abusers and criminals, still requires ratification by the U.S. Senate and has been attacked by the influential gun rights group the National Rifle Association (NRA).
Among the NRA arguments against the treaty are that it undermines American sovereignty and that it disregards the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees citizens the right to bear arms.
The United States, the world's No. 1 arms exporter, became the 91st country to sign when U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry put pen to paper on the sidelines of the annual gathering of world leaders at the United Nations.
"It's significant that the United States, which amounts for about 80 percent of the world's export in arms, has signed," Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop told a news conference.
The practical implications for U.S. arms manufacturers are likely to be limited since, as Kerry noted, the United States already has in place the kind of strict export controls for weapons that are outlined in the treaty.
"We are talking about the kind of export controls that for decades have not diminished one iota our ability in the United States as Americans to exercise our rights under the constitution," he said.