Alexander's Column

Guns, and Other WMD

Obama and Kerry at the UN

By Mark Alexander · Sep. 26, 2013
“The experience of treaties being broken with impunity provide an afflicting lesson to mankind how little dependence is to be placed on treaties which have no other sanction than the obligations of good faith; and which oppose general considerations of peace and justice to the impulse of any immediate interest and passion.” –Federalist No. 15 (1787)

While most of America was focused on the ongoing ObamaCare and DemoDebt Debate, there was no shortage of mischief, malfeasance and mendacity at the United Nations confab this week, with Barack Hussein Obama and his left-hand man, John Kerry, leading the cast.

First up, Kerry made our nation a signatory to the United Nations' Arms Trade Treaty, ostensibly regulating small arms trade between nations.

At the signing ceremony, Kerry claimed, “Make no mistake, we would never think about supporting a treaty that is inconsistent with the rights of Americans, the rights of American citizens to be able to exercise their guaranteed rights under our Constitution. This is about keeping Americans safe and keeping America strong. This treaty will not diminish anyone’s freedom.”

Make no mistake, the ATT is a Trojan Horse.

Obama and Kerry assure us that the treaty exempts any regulation of domestic gun sales and ownership in the U.S., but with the stroke of a pen, it could implement severe gun restrictions and even confiscations – an end run around the Second Amendment that would provide political cover for gun control Leftists in the Senate and House.

Comment | Share

Indeed, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) warned that if this treaty were ratified, “Make no mistake, they will ultimately register, ban and CONFISCATE firearms owned by private citizens. Not long ago, Obama told Sarah Brady from the anti-gun Brady Campaign, ‘I just want you to know that we are working on [gun control]. We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.’”

Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) rightly put Kerry on written notice, informing him that the ATT is “dead in the water,” concluding, “The administration is wasting precious time trying to sign away our laws to the global community and unelected UN bureaucrats.”

But, in what could be an end run around our Constitution, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), fully aware that he can’t possibly win the necessary two-thirds majority of votes in the Senate for ratification, may not allow any vote at all. Thus, Obama could sign the treaty and ignore the constitutional mandate, as he habitually does when Rule of Law interferes with his political agenda.

Then what?

In a letter chastising Obama, Tennessee Sen. Bob Corker, ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, demanded he not take any further action on the ATT without the consent of the Senate. Corker sternly notes, “Any act to implement this treaty, provisionally or otherwise, before the Congress provides its advice and consent would be inconsistent with the United States Constitution, law, and practice. … The Executive Branch is not authorized to take any steps to implement the treaty,” because the treaty raises “fundamental issues” concerning “individual rights protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.”

To be clear, the Constitution specifies in Article II, Section 2: “[The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur…”

As John Jay elucidated this specification in Federalist No. 64: “The convention have done well, therefore, in so disposing of the power of making treaties, that although the President must, in forming them, act by the advice and consent of the Senate…”

Article VI specifies: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

In other words, the Constitution specifies that duly ratified treaties are “the supreme Law of the Land,” with the exception that such treaty may not violate provisions of the Constitution.

Let’s see who abides by their Oath to Support and Defend our Constitution regarding this treaty…

Comment | Share

Second up, the funniest line delivered at the UN this week, or the biggest lie (take your pick), was the following assertion by Obama: “The world is more stable than it was five years ago,” since his first election. Well, except for the meltdown in the Middle East and Central and North Africa. Oh, and except for the fact that al-Qa'ida and other jihadi groups are thriving.

He’ll be here all week, folks. Try the pork.

Obama’s shameful pandering to Iran, insisting, “the diplomatic path must be tested,” set a new benchmark low for his foreign policy ineptitude. (This is quite an achievement, given that he turned his red line on Syrian WMD over to the Russians three weeks ago.

Obama was lectured by Iran’s new president, Hassan Rouhani, who was previously Iran’s nuclear negotiation chief in charge of covering up his country’s nuclear weapons program – a program he claimed Iran does not have. As you may recall, back in 2006 Rouhani was caught on tape, bragging about how he had duped the West by insisting that Iran had no nuke program, which bought his nation enough time to complete the installation of equipment for the enrichment of uranium yellowcake at its Isfahan plant.

Rouhani completed his schooling of Obama with a snub for the entire world to see – a refusal to meet the U.S. president for a photo-op handshake. However, Kerry is meeting with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad-Javad Zarif to discuss Iran’s nuclear program, perhaps to see if he can also outsource our Iranian policy to Russia.

Obama’s taking Rouhani’s bait, but Republicans on the Intelligence and Foreign Relations committees are not. They warned Obama about “Iran’s track record of obfuscation and delay.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is not playing along either: “[Rouhani’s] speech gave no practical plan to stop the Iranian military nuclear program and there was no commitment in it to follow UN Security Council resolutions. This is exactly the Iranian plan – to talk and stall so they can advance Iranian capability to get [a] nuclear weapon.”

No doubt Obama will allow Rouhani to continue the charade and take no action because, as he told the UN, “The United States has a hard-earned humility when it comes to our ability to determine events inside other countries,” a dig at his predecessor, George W. Bush, regarding the WMD that was not found in Iraq – even though it was.

Comment | Share

For the record, not only was there plenty of evidence of Iraq’s WMD programs, but more than 550 metric tons of uranium yellowcake ore was airlifted out of Iraq in 2008 and taken to Canada where it was processed for the production of energy, instead of nukes. The cleanup of radioactive waste around Saddam’s nuclear weapons enrichment site at Tuwaitha and an adjacent research facility is ongoing.

The reason no “stockpiles” were found in Iraq was because the UN delay provided plenty of time for Saddam to move his WMD. As I wrote back in 2003, “There is a substantial body of intelligence supporting our position that Saddam shipped Iraq’s chemical, biological and nuclear WMD stores and components to Syria and into Lebanon’s heavily fortified Bekaa Valley, for points beyond.”

Wait, Saddam’s WMD went to Syria?

In 2002, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon asserted that Israeli intelligence confirmed “chemical and biological weapons which Saddam is endeavoring to conceal have been moved from Iraq to Syria.”

Lt. Gen. James Clapper, former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, and current Director of National Intelligence, confirmed the export in 2003, noting, “By the time that we got to a lot of these facilities … there wasn’t that much there to look at. There was clearly an effort to disperse, bury and conceal certain equipment prior to inspections.” Clapper added that there was ample evidence in satellite imagery of convoys of trucks moving Saddam’s WMD out of the country.

This was reconfirmed by Saddam’s own air force general, Georges Sada in 2006. Sada, second in command of Saddam’s defeated air force, confirmed that additional WMD were put on 56 civilian aircraft, which had had all the seats removed, and taken into Syria: “Saddam realized, this time, the Americans are coming. They handed over the weapons of mass destruction to the Syrians. … There are weapons of mass destruction gone out from Iraq to Syria, and they must be found and returned to safe hands. I am confident they were taken over.” (Sada is a Christian who was not a member of Saddam’s Baath Party and now manages Iraqi operations for a Christian humanitarian organization, World Compassion.)

Yes, Syria has WMDs that were produced in Iraq, including thousands of tons of chemical toxins.

But Obama perpetuates the “hard-earned humility” myth about “our ability to determine events inside other countries,” and that GWB lied about Iraq’s WMD.

The price of hiring a Leftist “community organizer” to serve as spokesperson for the Free World is going to prove catastrophically high one day when Islamist terrorist succeed in detonating a nuclear weapon in one or more U.S. urban centers.

Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Fortis Vigilate Paratus et Fidelis