Thursday, April 16, 2015

Paving the Way For the U.N. Small Arms Treaty……….David Risselada

un-small-arms-treaty-draft picture
In October of 2013, American patriots let out a sigh of relief as the United States Senate authored a letter stating that the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty would be dead on arrival. While many people believe that the U.N. treaty would have little effect on law abiding American gun owners, the truth is the exact opposite. Language in the treaty gives the U.N. explicit authority in determining who is, or who isn’t, considered an “authorized recipient” of firearms.  The treasonous treaty also gives the U.N. the authority to disarm “hostile” populations in time of conflict. I have written many articles describing my belief that the Obama Administration is using the issue of race to push the country into a period of severe civil unrest; thus justifying the implementation of the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty. Looking at the current state of the nation it is difficult to come to any other conclusion. Over the past several months we have seen the Department of Justice intentionally create an atmosphere of hostility towards the police. I argued in my article “Using the Hegelian dialectic to Push For a National Police Force,” that this was being done to disarm the police in accordance with public law 87-297, The Arms Control And Disarmament act. While this law focused on disarming the military and then the public, I believe the same strategy is being implemented with the current “anti police” attitude.
In 2013 gun owners believed we were safe because there were enough senators on both sides of the political spectrum vowing to vote against the U.N. gun grabbing scheme. After all, according to the constitution there is a two thirds majority vote required to ratify any treaty. Unfortunately, this has all changed as we witnessed the Republican controlled senate surrender its power to Obama, again.  Instead of standing on principle and representing their constituents over the Iran nuclear deal, the traitorous Republicans caved to Obama and essentially re-wrote the treaty provisions found in the constitution. Under this deal the Senate would be required to over ride the president’s veto power with 67 votes as opposed to having the power to vote up or down on a treaty with the two thirds rule. This puts all of the power into the hands of the president as there are surely enough liberal Democrats that would prevent the 67 vote over ride.
Many people may be wondering what this has to do with the small arms treaty; they are after all two separate issues. This may be true; however, there is an element of conditioning taking place here. Over the past several years we have watched the U.S. Senate change its own rules in order to achieve their objectives. We have watched as the hard left has waged a relentless humiliation campaign aimed at Republicans that oppose their agenda. This tactic has wielded enormous success as we have watched the Republicans capitulate on nearly every agenda item of the Democrats.
Un treaty&guns
It’s almost as if the Republicans are working in coordination with the Democrats to bring about the destruction of the United States. Many people are convinced that we are living under the iron fisted rule of a one party system, and that what we witness day in and day out is nothing more than “political theatre” designed to keep us either distracted, or diametrically opposed to one another.  Take Ted Cruz for example. This week he made waves among the conservative base as he stood in defense of the second amendment and its intended purpose to protect us from government tyranny. It was a great speech that left many hoping he can become the Republican nominee. Doesn’t anyone else wonder why he gave this speech the same week the senate surrendered their treaty powers to the president? Think about it a moment. Ted Cruz’s speech kept many people distracted from what was going on behind the scenes, and in the event he is unable to protect your gun rights he will simply blame everything on the other Republicans who didn’t stand on principle. While this may make some people angry, it certainly isn’t outside the realm of possibility, it’s how the game is played.  Republicans and Democrats act like they hate each other for the camera, and then have a beer after work.
As far as the Arms Trade Treaty is concerned; I’m afraid that this Iran deal may have set a new precedent on how treaties are handled. The truth is that this deal isn’t even an actual treaty. This makes it even more frightening because you would think the Republicans would have been able to prevent its implementation because the President has no constitutional authority to make deals of this kind. Instead, what they have done is surrender their actual treaty power to work a deal that wasn’t a treaty in the first place, but should have been.  Now there is nothing stopping Obama from demanding these same rules apply to any other treaty that comes up. Do you honestly think they will muster enough courage to stand just because it’s the second amendment? The red line was crossed long ago.

No comments:

Post a Comment