Behind the Headlines
Two-Cents Worth
Video of the Week
News Blurbs

Short Takes

Plain Talk

The Ryter Report


Bible Questions

Internet Articles (2017)
Internet Articles (2016)
Internet Articles (2015)
Internet Articles (2014)
Internet Articles (2013)
Internet Articles (2012)

Internet Articles (2011)
Internet Articles (2010)
Internet Articles (2009)
Internet Articles (2008)
Internet Articles (2007)
Internet Articles (2006)
Internet Articles (2005)
Internet Articles (2004)

Internet Articles (2003)
Internet Articles (2002)
Internet Articles (2001)

From The Mailbag

Order Books





Openings at $75K to $500K+

Pinnaclemicro 3 Million Computer Products

Startlogic Windows Hosting

Adobe  Design Premium¨ CS5

Get Your FREE Coffeemaker Today!

Corel Store


Nullifying the 2nd Amendment by the Supreme Court without the necessity of three-fourths of the 50 States repealing it. A citizen's "primer" on how treaties become binding on a nation.
On June 5, 2016 an email was making the rounds concerning the rejection of UN Resolution 2117, which included a global ban and seizure by force of small arms which private citizens use for hunting for sport and food, and to protect their families from home invasions by criminals—both foreign and domestic. The email "hoorayed" the fact that the US Senate rejected UN Resolution 2117 by a vote of 53-46

On Oct. 28, 2009, the UN General Assembly voted 153 to 1 to move ahead with plans to put into place a formal Global Gun Ban Treaty and have it ready for a preliminary vote by the nations of the world in 2012. While the 2012 debate was theoretically centered on outlawing the illicit trade of illegal small arms everyone involved in the debate clearly understands the real purpose of the debate was to backdoor a complete and absolute ban on the private ownership of small arms by all private citizens everywhere in the world—including the United States. (Of course, UN Resolution 2117, which would become the UN Small Arms Treaty that excluded every Muslim majority nation on Earth since all national and international laws apply only to those who obey their nation's laws and ordinances. Which means the only people disarmed under gun control laws are those who obey the laws and have the most to lose by surrendering their lawfully purchased firearms.)

Had it been ratified by the US Senate on March 23, 2013, UN Resolution 2117 would have nullified the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution without repealing it by an affirmative vote of 3/4ths of the States concurring, simply by using the Supreme Court to rule that, based on the treaty between the United States, Canada and Mexico enacted by Congress in 1918, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act which was paid for by environmentalists in order to protect game birds whose "natural home" was either Canada or Mexico (based on where they "wintered"), from being shot by hunters in the United States. The US Supreme Court ruled that international treaties superceded the Constitution of the United States. The US Supreme Court was wrong because nothing nullifies any provision of the United States Constitution except a constitutional resolution approved by 3/4ths of the States.

On March 23, 2013 The Hill reported that the Democrat-controlled US Senate rejected the UN Small Arms Treaty by a vote of 53 to 46 (with 67 votes needed to ratify the small arms treaty). Why is a three-year old Senate vote important today? Because the very life of the United States of America hung in the balance with that vote—and it still does today.

Have you forgotten Fast & Furious yet? If you have, shame on you. What happened from October, 2009 to the shooting death of US Border Patrol agent Brian Terry on Dec. 15, 2010 by a Mexican "rip crew" (Mexican illegals operating along the border within the United States), ripping off both drug runners and human traffickers with weapons that the FBI and the ATF knowing allowed people who failed instant background checks to purchase from legal gun dealers. Those gun dealers thought they were helping the US government crack down on gun runners, cartel drug dealers and human traffickers when in fact, what the US government was doing was setting up legal gun dealers they could arrest and convict for selling guns to people who could not legally buy weapons of any type.

The "frame" was instigated by social progressives within the highest positions in this government, bought and paid for with bribes from the world's wealthy elite who have been attempting to create a world government—controlled solely by them—since 1918. To accomplish their objective, they first need to universally disarm those who would otherwise resist. A population which lacks the ability to defend itself is easily succumbed.

That's why when the US Supreme Court ruled on US v Miller 307 US 174 in 1939, liberal Justice William O. Douglas opined on the record that "...based on the privileges standardized by the States in the 18th century..." (which was, and still is, the superior government of the United States) "...the general public—not the State-controlled militias—has to be as well-armed as its central government since the people, and the States, view the federal government as much, if not more, a threat to liberty than any foreign intruder on American soil."

Whenever governments fear its citizens, the first thing those in government do is disarm their citizenry in order to protect themselves from the people. Citizens armed with nothing more threatening than scythes, garden hoes, lawn rakes and pitchforks pose no threat to government, and thus, their voices are muted—as are our voices muted today by political correctness which makes pointing a finger at the evil within government a perverted form of racism. Why? Because if you can't describe the evil plotting against us, we can't stop it. Sadly, the free press, another inherent right protected by the Constitution to forewarn the People of the evils of a corrupt government, was usurped by the princes of industry and the barons of banking between 1906 and 1907. The US money cartel, controlled first by J.P. Morgan, purchased stock in the country's 179 largest newspapers newspapers, and by the process of elimination, whittled the list down to the 25 most influential, buying enough stock in each newspaper—including the Gray Lady—so they could control their editorial content—and, by doing so, the slant of the news the communists in America believed was "fit to print."

Those guilty of framing honest gun dealers who believed they were helping their government keep guns out of the hands of those who could not legally buy them in order to rob the People of an inherent right, are guilty of criminal conspiracy. Fast & Furious was a criminal conspiracy which implicated Barack Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton; Department of Homeland Security Director Janet Napolitano; Eric Holder, the Attorney General of the United States; Director of the DEA Michele Leonhart who resigned in 2010 after her own scandal (who was replaced by Charles Rosenberg, the FBI's chief-of-staff); FBI Director Robert Meuller; John Morton, head of the Dept. of Immigration Control and Enforcement [ICE]; and Acting ATF Director Kenneth Melson. (The ATF has not had a Senate confirmed Director since President George W. Bush was in office.) Every Obama pick for the job has been an anti-gun advocate. Not even the anti-gun Democrats who controlled the US Senate from 2007 to Jan., 2011 would confirm Obama's pick for that job, knowing that giving that job to an anti-gun socialist would cost them their jobs in 2012.

The Obama Administration's key need-to-know appointees all knew that the gun traffickers were buying weapons from closely-monitored, lawful US gun dealers under the direct supervision of the FBI and the ATF. However, unknown to the lawful gun retailers who believed the DEA, ICE and the ATF were following the guns the FBI authorized to be sold to the gun runners (which were then transported to the human traffickers or the drug cartels where, theoretically, the human traffickers or drug runners would be arrested). While the lawful gun dealers thought they were working for the good guys, Clinton, Obama and Holder were building a case to charge them—the legal US-based gun dealers—with selling what was now made to appear to be illegal weapons to those not lawfully eligible to buy them. So, instead of US law enforcement arresting the gun runners, human traffickers and drug runners (in a country where US law enforcement lacked the authority to arrest or seize illegal contraband), they arrested lawful gun dealers.

Obama and the Secretary of State—the fourth most important political figure in our country—committed high crimes and misdemeanors using smoke and mirrors to "prove" to Congress, the media and the American public, that most of the illegal guns on the streets in America's crime-ridden cities were actually coming from lawful gun dealers and not from back-trunk gun traffickers and smugglers whose weapons inventories were being smuggled into the United States from the former Soviet bloc nations, Israel and China—as suggested by gun rights groups and conservative politicians.

In 2009 the Democratically-controlled US Senate—under a decree issued by Barack Obama—decided to have a "re-do" on the Bush-43 GOP rejection of the UN Small Arms Treaty, Resolution 2117, and give the US Senate an official Global Gun Ban Treaty resolution to ratify by July 29, 2112. Keep in mind, the UN global gun ban treaty was Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's private property because she officially promoted it to the public and to the UN, and then ceremoniously signed it—something she could not constitutionally do. Because, although she is an appointee of the Chief Executive (who is also an agent of the States), the sole prerogative to make treaties falls neither on the president nor the Secretary of State, but on the States themselves.

Why couldn't Hillary Clinton "ceremoniously" sign UN Resolution 2117? Because Emer deVattel's Essay on the Foundation of Natural Law and on the First Principle of the Obligation Men Find Themselves Under, The Principle to Observe Laws [1747], deVattel was the foremost authority in the world on common law). Once any official of any Stare or principality—with or without the legislated authority to sign treaties—signs it, that official, petty or perfect, will have bound that nation to the aforesaid treaty until such time as that nation formally rejects it. (DeVattel was the youngest son of a Prussian noble, David deVattel who received his title and land grants from Fredrich Wilhelm I of Prussia.) In 1759, Emer deVattel completed what became The Law of Nations—the legal backbone of global common law. DeVattel was affirmed by Fredrich I of Prussia as the world's greatest authority on natural law. In fact, he was not only the foremost authority on natural law, he was acknowledged as the final authority on natural law by the Hapsburgs (the bloodline of all of the royals of Europe were sired by Hapsburg blood). What does that mean in plain language?

In plain language, it means that Hillary Clinton, like Al Gore before her (who signed the Kyota Protocol [the global warming treaty]) after 99 members of the US Senate told the Clinton Administration that the Kyota Protocol would not be ratified. President Bill Clinton never signed the Global Warming Treaty (forcing Congress to repudiate it) because the co-presidency of Bill and Hillary Clinton knew, if they did nothing, it would go into effect under the terms of the Law of Nations. So, they did nothing. And, since Republicans usually do nothing, the Clintons thought the Global Warming Treaty would become law with no one's smudgy fingerprints on it. In the end, Clinton's fingerprints, as well as Al Gore's, were all over it.

The UN Global Warming Treaty was implemented by the Clinton Administration through Executive Orders. On January 20, 2001 newly-inaugurated President George W. Bush froze 175 Clinton environmental Executive Orders. Environmentalists sued him over one that would weaken the Clean Air Act, claiming he had launched an unprecedented assault on another President's use of Executive Orders. The federal court the environmentalists filed their lawsuit in ruled that, in this one instance, Bush could not repeal Clinton's Executive Order because it was an unprecedented assault on Clinton's environmental policies.

That was then, this is now. Once again, a Clinton (or Clinton accomplice is trying to greatly shrink the perimeters of liberty in America to serve her own purpose. Today, it's gun rights, with the intent by Hillary Clinton (for her own purposes) to erase the 2nd Amendment through a federal court decision, skipping the need to craft a resolution to repeal it. GlobalGunBan-VideoUnder Section 11 of UN Resolution 2117, law enforcement can use local, State, federal or even international police to use whatever force is needed to initiate a fascist-style gun seizure in America, using the same type of SWAT team mentality that Obama used in 2012 to collect long delinquent student loans. Click on this sentence to see what happened when the Obama Administration used a SWAT team to collect on defaulted student loans.

Many Americans wondered, on July 10, 2012 when Barack Obama and then UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon spoke before the UN on the subject of gun control, if both the Secretary General and Obama were in accord, and perhaps in cahoots, on global disarmament. In his address to the General Assembly that day, Ban said: "Our goal is clear: a robust and legally-binding Arms Trade Treaty that will have a real impact on the lives of those millions of people suffering from consequences of armed conflict, repression and armed violence...It's ambitious, but it's achievable."

Had the US Senate ratified the Small Arms Treaty before the November, 2012 election, Obama could not have stolen enough votes to remain in power. Nor would any US Senator—Republican or Democrat—who voted to ratify a gun ban treaty get reelected because the inherent rights enjoyed by the American people exist only because those rights are reinforced by the Second Amendment and backed-up with 270 million weapons legally in the hands of American citizens.

The Bush-43 Administration and the Republican-controlled Senate rejected the Small Arms Treaty in 2006 because they knew that Section 11 of United Nations Resolution 2117 was a killer clause.

In 2009 Obama reversed the standing Bush-43 policy and, with his inner circle: Hillary Clinton, Holder, Melson, Meuller, Morton, Napolitano, Leonhart, and, the late-comer, Rosenberg framed the American people to make "gun rights" the criminal in order to justify a global gun ban. The question, of course, is why? Because the overlords of global wealth, based on the aforementioned logic expounded by US Supreme Court Associate Justice Douglas in 1939 due to the egregious conduct of government—the People, sometime in the future—would find it necessary to overthrow a tyrant government in order to restore liberty.

The attempt to outlaw the private ownership of guns began with the Clintons in 1993 with the enactment of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act. From 1981 to 1993 during the Reagan and Bush-41 Administrations, the only gun measure acted upon by the White House happened in 1986 with the Firearm Protection Act of 1986 revising the Gun Control Act of 1968, which was signed into law by Lyndon Johnson to regulate the gun industry and every lawful gun owner in America (but not those who owned illegal arms). By Feb., 1982 the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee reported that the NRA and scores of FFL (federal firearms license holders) licensees complained that the ATF had grossly exceeded its authority under the law, and that at least 75% of the ATF prosecutions were aimed at private citizens and not the gun dealers the ATF was created to regulate. The ATF under Jimmy Carter misled gun dealers into make technical violations of the law.

Congress not only addressed those grievances in 1986, it also enacted the firearms regulation reforms demanded by Reagan. Benevolence to gun owners ended with the Clintons. The leftwing-controlled Congress legislated the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993. The Brady Act required background checks of gun buyers in order to prevent sales to people prohibited under the 1968 legislation. The Clintons began tweaking gun control by creating the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) which was maintained by the FBI rather than the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. That's where, and when, the tweaking of US law—in a search for a chink in the armor of liberty—began in earnest. And the socialist wielding the hammer and chisel behind the throne of power was none other than the First Lady, Hillary Rodham Clinton. Much more than her husband, Hillary Clinton feared the American people.

Based on the the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 the federal government cannot preserve gun records because federal law prohibited the creation of a national registry of gun ownership or the sale or transfer of guns by unlicensed private sellers who were not engaged in gun dealing as a business.

Nevertheless, in October, 1993, Congressman Neal Smith [D-IO] reportedly sent a newsletter to his anti-gun constituents in which he reported that the Clinton Administration was investing some $400 million to construct a national information center some four hours from the nation's capital in West Virginia. The new computer system would amass a database on every citizen in the country. Smith further noted that the need for better gun control in the United States was the reason for the NIC, adding that "...the solution [to the problem is to have] a national center computerized so that local law enforcement offices can instantly access information...and we hope to have it completed and equipped in about two years..."

Neal Smith's NIC, officially named the National Crime Information Center [NCIC] became operational in Clarksburg, WV on July 11, 1999 under the authority of the newly created FBI Criminal Justice Information Services. The NCIC database contains all federal, state, local and foreign criminal justice agencies records—criminal and non-criminal in nature, with the non-criminal data authorized for inclusion by federal, state, county and municipal judges. Among that data is the same national gun ownership registry which was banned by the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986. Smith, who relied heavily on his participation in "birthing" this federal agency to keep his seat in Congress lost it to a political neophyte, Dr. Greg Ganske [R-IO] in 1994 as the Republicans swept both houses of Congress. Sadly, federal judges feel they have the license to legislate from the bench by ignoring, waiving or simply erasing, federal law whenever those laws stand in the way of the socialist or Islamofascist agenda of the left.

The Clintons, like Barack Obama, spent two administrations each trying to outlaw the private ownership of guns not only in the United States but around the world. In 2012 Larry Bell, a Forbes columnist wondered why, if Barack Obama was a constitutional lawyer, that he didn't realize that the UN's "gun grab" violated America's sovereign, and inherent, right to own firearms? In 2013 he asked, "...was the 2nd Amendment rights of the American people part of the deal all along?" Of course it was.

Why? Because, during the Great Gun Debate on July 9, 2012 between Rebecca Peters, Chief Executive of IANSA and Wayne LaPierre, Executive Vice President of The National Rifle Association, at King's College in London, Peters argued that it wasn't right that only one country in the world should have the legal right to own firearms, and the rest of the world could not. Her logic? Ban guns in the one country with the inherent right to own firearms. (Swiss law requires its citizens to be armed.) Switzerland, among the smallest nations on Earth, has the third largest percentage of population, 45.7%, that owns weapons. But, because Switzerland's 3,400,000 firearms, unlike the US's 270 million citizen-owned guns (excluding US military-owned weapons), pose no major threat to the socialists, the gun control focus is not on them, nor on the Muslim world whose radical extremists have—and don't mind using to slaughter those who oppose their theology and refuse to convert to their brand of Islam, 168,515,000 guns.

When LaPierre began his address in the library at King's College in London, his first comment which brought raised eyebrows from Peters, who moments before had said that "...some of America's freedoms cause some of the world's problems." was "...you heard Miss Peters call me to take responsibility for some of the world's ancient and most complex challenges. Central to her mission is a new and gartganuan global bureaucracy endowed with sweeping control, which Miss Peters and the United Nations seeks to impose on the world—on every one, on every gun, without exception."

Which is why, you will recall, when Ban Ki-Moon and Barack Obama spoke about gun control in July, 2012, in unison, they said: "Our goal is clear: a robust and legally-binding Arms Trade Treaty that will have a real impact on the lives of those millions of people suffering from consequences of armed conflict, repression and armed violence...It's ambitious, but it's achievable." Because when the dictators and presidents-for-life have all the guns, anything is achievable.

In point of fact, the core objective of the United Nations and the money mafia which controls it, Barack Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton and the Islamofacist and socialist far left in this country is not to save lives—it's to control lives. A population which is not armed lacks the ability to resist tyranny.

Today, Obama and Clinton are pumping the tragedy at the Pulse nightclub Islamic-terrorist attack in Orlando, Florida for all its worth, demanding legislation to ban all semi-automatic rifles under the guise that what they are seeking to ban, the civilian AR-15 rifle, is an automatic military weapon when it is not. An automatic rifle fires bursts as long as the shooter presses the trigger. A military shooter can empty his or her magazine by simply depressing the trigger and holding it. Someone shooting a semi-automatic AR-15 [civilian version] can fire one round only by depressing the trigger—even if he or she holds the trigger down. The socialist left (Clinton) and the Islamofascist left (Obama) need to disarm America before the American people remove, try and imprison them. Remember the astute words of US Supreme Court Associate Justice William O. Douglas opined on the record in US v Miller 307 US 174 in 1939, that "...based on the privileges standardized by the States in the 18th century the general public—not the State-controlled militias—has to be as well-armed as its central government since the people, and the States, view the federal government as much, if not more, a threat to liberty than any foreign intruder on American soil."

On June 19, US Attorney General Loretta Lynch appears on several news talk shows and said that the Justice Department had redacted the transcripts of the conversations between Omar Mateen, the Orlando shooter and authorities. Lynch said the transcripts, to be released the following day, would not include Mateen's oath of loyalty to ISIS or any other religious justification for the attack. "What we’re not going to do is further proclaim this man’s pledges of allegiance to terrorist groups, and further his propaganda," Lynch told NBC. "We are not," Lynch added, "going to hear him make his assertions of allegiance to ISIS." Of course not. "We" (the Justice Dept. and the White House) are going to blame lawful firearms for the carnage in the Pulse nightclub rather than the terrorist who killed 49 and wounded 53—particularly since Obama has been smuggling thousands of Muslim extremists, who hate America, into the United States. Mateen is a frightening reminder to Americans that the bloody violence caused by Muslim extremists in Europe has now befallen the United States.

The most important national election in the history of the United States is about to take place in this country on Nov. 8, 2016. Not just the presidential race when the second non-eligible, non-Article II, contestant will vie for the office of President of the United States, but the election of the legislative branch—particularly one third of the US Senate where treaties, which affect the inherent rights of the American people—are ratified or rejected.

It is the responsibility of the States to make sure that the only treaties ratified by the Senate are those which benefit the People and the States, not the barons of banking, the princes of industry or the Islamofascist and socialist politicians who use the laws of this nation to financially benefit themselves—political outlaws who fear that when the People wake up, they will use their inherent rights to use force to take back their nation, and jail the money barons and their hirelings on Capitol Hill.

Which is why the co-presidency of Bill and Hillary Clinton backed the UN's Universal Declaration of Principles on Firearm Regulation. The document, known as Resolution 9, was the UN Global Gun Ban Treaty which was championed by the left as the only way to protect the American sheep—(a derogatory term for the passive behavior herd instinct of people easily controlled by the governing authority by disarming them and leaving them at the mercy of the political wolves).

On July 28, 1998 as the UN Global Gun Ban Treaty began making its way around the world, the UN Economic and Social Council adopted a resolution to from Russia, China, Israel, Indonesia and several third world rogue states. On Dec. 9, 1998 the UN General Assembly, without a vote, adopted Resolution 53/111, an instrument outlawing the illicit manufacturing and trafficking of firearms, their parts and the ammunition needed to make them lethal weapons.

That's why it shouldn't have surprised anyone when Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton quietly, and with any media fanfare, unobtrusively signed the UN Small Arms Treaty Resolution on May 19, 2010. According to US law, treaties must be ratified by the US Senate before they are signed by the President of the United States. The signature of the Secretary of States, while indicative of the intent of the nation to sign and ratify the document is preliminary, but not binding on the signatory nation until it is signed by the head of State. The US Senate ignored the Small Arms Treaty until March 23, 2013 because one-third of the Senate faced re-election in 2012, and no Democrat wanted to be among those who would lose their seat for voting to abrogate what they couldn't repeal—the Second Amendment. Not a single Republican senator voted to ratify Resolution 2117 on March 23, but all 46 Democrat and Independent senators voted to ratify it with a provision, Section 11, that called for all UN member states to support weapons collections and the universal disarmament of all UN nations.

Democratic US Senators who are up for reelection in 2016 are: Michael Bennett [D-CO], Richard Blumenthal [D-CT], Barbara Boxer [D-CA], Tim Kaine [D-VA], Patrick Leahy [D-VT], Barbara Mikulski [D-MD], Patty Murray [D-WA], Brian Schatz [HI], Chuck Schumer [NY] and Ron Wyden [D-OR]. The following Senators and members of the House joined Hillary Clinton this spring to wage war against the American people—DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz [D-FL] (who is being challenged in the Florida primary on Aug. 30 by law professor and political activist Tim Canova). Wasserman-Schultz changed the campaign rules, rigging them so that [a] no one could challenge Hillary Clinton and, just in case, [b] she created a super-abundance of super delegates to guarantee that only Hillary could win.

However, there is still a problem with Resolution 2117. On Sept. 24, 2013 John Kerry doubled-down and, like Hillary Clinton, signed (the recently defeated) Resolution 2117 as the current Secretary of State.

Since the US Senate defeated the measure, as far as they are concerned the treaty is null and void. But, under common law, based on Emil de Vattel's Law of Nations, Resolution 2117 needs to be rejected again because while the signature of a nation's foreign minister or secretary of state does not legally bind the nation to the contract, it does obligate that nation to act in accordance with the terms of the treaty until such time as that nation's Senate or Parliament accepts or rejects the treaty (even if they rejected it prior to the second signing ceremony). If the Senate fails to act on the re-signed treaty by either ratifying it or rejecting it again, technically, the signature of the second Secretary of State will perpetually bind that nation to the terms of the treaty. Once the right to own firearms is erased, all remaining rights are easily cut from the Constitution because a nation without guns cannot, for long, resist a tyrannical government.

Whether you are conservative or liberal, Republican or Democrat, once the robber barons steal your rights, they will no longer exist because you will no longer be free to enjoy them. If you think I'm wrong, ask anyone who escaped from the Soviet Union, communist Cuba or any other socialist or fascist dictatorship. More than any natural born US citizen, they know we may be only months away from losing our freedom forever. We, as a free People, must act now to stop criminal politcians and criminal politics...or America, as we know it, will die the death of apathy.


Just Say No
Copyright © 2009 Jon Christian Ryter.
All rights reserved