57 Senators Sign Letter Telling To Protect Second Amendment Rights From United Nations

Video:  57 Senators Sign Letter Telling To Protect Second Amendment Rights From United Nations

THUMBS UP TO THE 57 SENATORS!!!

Aug 01 2011

Hatch, Senators raise concerns over UN Treaty impact on second amendment

WASHINGTON  – U.S. Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) joined his colleague Senator Jerry Moran (R-KS) and 44 other Senators in expressing grave concern about the dangers posed to Second Amendment rights by the United Nations’ Arms Trade Treaty. In a letter to President Obama and Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, the 45 senators (now up to 57 signers… do not have full list of names yet)  said they would oppose ratification of an Arms Trade Treaty that in any way restricts the rights of law-abiding American gun owners. This is enough to block the treaty from Senate passage, as treaties submitted to the U.S. Senate require approval of two-thirds of Senators present to be ratified.

“Our Second Amendment is non-negotiable,” said Hatch.  “We don’t need a bunch of bureaucrats at the United Nations dictating our liberties and freedoms.  This Treaty should not be ratified and I will fight it tooth and nail.”

In the letter, the senators wrote: “As the treaty process continues, we strongly encourage your Administration to uphold our country’s constitutional protections of civilian firearms ownership.  These freedoms are not negotiable, and we will oppose ratification of an Arms Trade Treaty presented to the Senate that in any way restricts the rights of law-abiding U.S. citizens to manufacture, assemble, possess, transfer or purchase firearms, ammunition and related items.”

“As we have for the past 15 years, the NRA will fight to stop a United Nations Arms Trade Treaty that infringes on the Constitutional rights of American gun owners,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director, NRA Institute for Legislative Action. “This letter sends a clear message to the international bureaucrats who want to eliminate our fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms. Clearly, a U.N. Arms Trade Treaty that includes civilian arms within its scope is not supported by the American people or their elected U.S. Senators. Sen. Moran is a true champion of our freedom. We are grateful for his leadership and his tenacious efforts on this issue, as well as the 44 other senators who agree with the NRA’s refusal to compromise on our constitutional freedoms.”

In October of 2009 at the U.N. General Assembly, the Obama Administration reversed the previous Administration’s position and voted for the U.S. to participate in negotiating the Arms Trade Treaty, purportedly to establish “common international standards for the import, export, and transfer of conventional arms.” Preparatory committee meetings are now underway in anticipation of a conference in 2012 to finalize the treaty. A treaty draft has not yet been produced.

The letter was signed by U.S. Senators Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), John Barrasso (R-WY), Roy Blunt (R-MO), John Boozman (R-AR), Scott Brown (R-MA), Richard Burr (R-NC), Dan Coats (R-IN), Tom Coburn (R-OK), Thad Cochran (R-MS), Susan Collins (R-ME), Bob Corker (R-TN), John Cornyn (R-TX), Saxby Chambliss (R-GA), Mike Crapo (R-ID), Jim DeMint (R-SC), Mike Enzi (R-WY), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Dean Heller (R-NV), John Hoeven (R-ND), Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), James Inhofe (R-OK), Johnny Isakson (R-GA), Mike Johanns (R-NE), Ron Johnson (R-WI), Jon Kyl (R-AZ), Mike Lee (R-UT), Joe Manchin (D-WV), John McCain (R-AZ), Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Jerry Moran (R-KS), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Rand Paul (R-KY), Rob Portman (R-OH), Jim Risch (R-ID), Pat Roberts (R-KS), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Jeff Sessions (R-AL), Richard Shelby (R-AL), Olympia Snowe (R-ME), John Thune (R-SD), Pat Toomey (R-PA), David Vitter (R-LA), and Roger Wicker (R-MS).

The full text of the signed letter is below :

July 22, 2011

President Barack Obama 
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 
Washington, D.C. 20500

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton 
2201 C St., NW 
Washington, D.C. 20520

Dear President Obama and Secretary Clinton:

            As defenders of the right of Americans to keep and bear arms, we write to express our grave concern about the dangers posed by the United Nations’ Arms Trade Treaty.  Our country’s sovereignty and the constitutional protection of these individual freedoms must not be infringed.

            In October of 2009 at the U.N. General Assembly, your administration voted for the U.S. to participate in negotiating this treaty.  Preparatory committee meetings are now underway in anticipation of a conference in 2012 to finalize the treaty.  Based on the process to date, we are concerned that the Arms Trade Treaty poses dangers to rights protected under the Second Amendment for the following reasons.

            First, while the 2009 resolution on the treaty acknowledged the existence of “national constitutional protections on private ownership,” it placed the existence of these protections in the context of “the right of States to regulate internal transfers of arms and national ownership,” implying that constitutional protections must be interpreted in the context of the broader power of the state to regulate.  We are concerned both by the implications of the 2009 resolution and by the hostility to private firearms ownership manifested by similar resolutions in previous years—such as the 2008 resolution, which called for the “highest possible standards” of control.

            Second, your Administration agreed to participate in the negotiation only if it “operates under the rule of consensus decision-making.”  Given that the 2008 resolution on the treaty was adopted almost unanimously—with only the U.S. and Zimbabwe in opposition—it seems clear that there is a near-consensus on the requirement for the “highest possible standards,” which will inevitably put severe pressure on the United States to compromise on important issues.

            Third, U.N. member states regularly argue that no treaty controlling the transfer of arms internationally can be effective without controls on transfers inside member states.  Any treaty resulting from the Arms Trade Treaty process that seeks in any way to regulate the domestic manufacture, assembly, possession, transfer, or purchase of firearms, ammunition, and related items would be completely unacceptable to us.

            Fourth, reports from the 2010 Preparatory Meeting make it clear that many U.N. member states aim to craft an extremely broad treaty.  A declaration by Mexico and other Central and South American countries, for example, called for the treaty to cover “All types of conventional weapons (regardless of their purpose), including small arms and light weapons, ammunition, components, parts, technology and related materials.”  Such a broad treaty would be completely unenforceable, and would pose dangers to all U.S. businesses and individuals involved in any aspect of the firearms industry.  At the 2010 Meeting, the U.S. representative twice expressed frustration with the wide-ranging and unrealistic scope of the projected treaty.  We are concerned that these cautions will not be heeded, and that the Senate will eventually be called upon to consider a treaty that is so broad it cannot effectively be subject to our advice and consent.

            Fifth, and finally, the underlying philosophy of the Arms Trade Treaty is that transfers to and from governments are presumptively legal, while transfers to non-state actors (such as terrorists and criminals) are, at best, problematic.  We agree that sales and transfers to criminals and terrorists are unacceptable, but we will oppose any treaty that places the burden of controlling crime and terrorism on law-abiding Americans, instead of where it belongs: on the culpable member states of the United Nations who have failed to take the necessary steps to block trafficking that is already illegal under existing laws and agreements.

            As the treaty process continues, we strongly encourage your Administration to uphold our country’s constitutional protections of civilian firearms ownership.  These freedoms are not negotiable, and we will oppose ratification of an Arms Trade Treaty presented to the Senate that in any way restricts the rights of law-abiding U.S. citizens to manufacture, assemble, possess, transfer or purchase firearms, ammunition, and related items.

###

Permalink: http://hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/8/hatch-senators-raise-concerns-over-un-treaty-impact-on-second-amendment

The question must be which 43 Senators did not sign this letter and support the United Nations’ Arms Trade Treaty?  They, Obama, Hillary and anyone in the House who does not support of Constitution, Bill of Rights and especially the Second Amendment must be go!!

And remember the words of Thomas Jefferson "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." See Video of Suzanna Gratia-Hupp’s Congressional Testimony: What the Second Amendment is REALLY For, (u-tube HERE).

And remember: there is no first amendment, without a second amendment!!  Ask anyone who lived through Nazi Germany!

CNN – Complete Sellout For Obama?!?

'Factor' Exclusive: Dobbs Says CNN Aims to Please Obama

Lou says network didn't want to offend president

Lou Dobbs said yesterday CNN was eager to show him the door because its top execs didn't want to offend President Obama.

Dobbs made the claim last night on Fox News Channel's "The O'Reilly Factor," saying he took on President George W. Bush's immigration policy with equal force but didn't draw any CNN flak then.

"I discern more of a difference between then, which was under the Bush administration when I was criticizing, and now, when it is the Obama administration -- and an entirely different tone was taken," said Dobbs.

He claims both Bush and Obama are soft on illegal immigration.

CNN bosses told Dobbs -- a strong opponent of illegal immigration -- that the network wants to aggressively market itself as the neutral alternative to left-leaning MSNBC and conservative Fox, he said.

The Post reported that CNN paid Dobbs an $8 million severance to leave 1½ years before his contract expires.

Dobbs said he found CNN's drive to the middle oddly timed to the beginning of Obama's term.

"I don't know whether that was the distinction that triggered any sort of response or a difference in perspective on the part of CNN's management, but it is the only difference between the way I was conducting myself under this administration and the previous administration," said Dobbs, who did his last show for CNN on Wednesday.

Host Bill O'Reilly bluntly asked Dobbs if he'd consider a run for a New Jersey US Senate seat, and the former CNN anchor didn't dismiss it.

"A lot of things are on my mind, I'm not going to be coy about that," Dobbs said.

"My wife and I are thinking about a lot of opportunities. I'm very blessed that I have a lot of opportunities. I guarantee you 100 percent I'm going to remain in the public arena."

And Dobbs showed some political moxie when O'Reilly fired an odd query at him: "Final question, Barack Obama, is he the devil?"

Dobbs didn't take the bait, but offered a well-measured answer to satisfy O'Reilly's decidedly conservative viewers.

"He's not the devil, but he is certainly a man who is right now not making it easy to understand why he's making the public-policy choices that he is," Dobbs said.

david.li@nypost.com

CNN Hosts Palin Forum with No Palin Supporters

Posted by: Greg Hengler at 4:42 PM

I guess you could call CNN's idea of "fair and balanced." Sanchez appears to be using a Luntz-style forum to test the Palin-approval waters.

I put this up there with CNN's fact-checking the Obama SNL skit.

Reminder: This is an Obama-approved "news" network. Big H/T to Lee Habeeb for spotting this.

It appears that CNN has sold out to be part of the lame stream media, joining NBC, CBS and ABC… leaving us one US network FOX, and Obama is obsessed with controlling them.

Fox, Beck, Limbaugh, Palin, Hannity, Bachmann, Buchanan… If you stand up against them or just report or tell the truth you are on the enemies list and on their radar to be Quaylenized… (George H.W. Bush’s V.P.), now Palinized.

CNN Bans Talk Radio Hosts… As Guests

Does anybody want to say? Fairness Doctrine Step-1? Transparency Anyone? Freedom of Speech? Variety of Opinion?

Or is it just part of being in the bag?

Jonathan Klein

No More Talk Radio Hosts on CNN?

Exclusive: TVNewser has learned, and a CNN spokesperson confirms, that in his morning editorial meeting yesterday, CNN/U.S. president Jon Klein asked his show producers to avoid booking talk radio hosts. "Complex issues require world class reporting," Klein is quoted as saying, adding that talk radio hosts too often add to the noise, and that what they say is "all too predictable."

One of CNN's longtime show hosts, Lou Dobbs, hosts a daily radio show. A few political contributors also host radio shows including Bill Bennett and Roland Martin. They are presumably not affected by this, at least for now… Although, the next thing will probably be the firing of Lou Dobbs because he offers a different opinion or spin on a network that pretty much marches in lock step in the same direction.

But this means other talk radio hosts who appear regularly on CNN, probably won't in the near future including names like Stephanie Miller, Michael Medved, and Ben Ferguson.

> Update: Roland Martin stopped hosting his show on WVON last October when he became senior analyst for the "Tom Joyner Morning Show.

Posted: Daily Thought Pad

Whooh... Garofalo and Olbermann Indulge In Name Calling

Quote - It's your Friday night recappers open thread! And to make the concept of Keith "Man on Fan" Olbermann a bit more tolerable, we have a delightful clip of Lou Dobbs as an appetizer. Listen as he goes after Krazy Keith, Goofy Garofalo, and that cesspool known as A-Mess-NBC. Then do your recapping of tonight's Hour of Spin. 

Lou Dobbs Rips Keith Olbermann, Garofalo, and MSNBC!

Red Eye Reams Olbermann, Garafalo for Racist Comments!

It is Garofalo who has no idea what she is talking about or American history and rights!! I guess name calling is okay if you are on the left...