0 votes

Ron Paul - "out of the U.N. " H.R. 1146 - Support ASAP

On February 24, Rep. Ron Paul (R.-Texas) introduced H.R. 1146, the American Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2009 in the House and the legislation was referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. The bill was cosponsored by Rep. John J. Duncan, Jr. (R.-Tenn.) on March 19.

The stated objective of H.R. 1146 is to end membership of the United States in the United Nations. It would accomplish this end by initiating the following actions:

* Repeal the United Nations Participation Act of 1945;
* Require the president to terminate all participation by the United States in the United Nations, and any organ, specialized agency, commission, or other formally affiliated body of the United Nations;
* Close the United States Mission to United Nations;
* Terminate the appropriation of funds for assessed or voluntary contributions of the United States to the United Nations or any of its affiliated agencies;
* Prohibit funding of contributions to any United Nations military operation;
* Prohibit any member of the Armed Forces of the United States from serving under the command of the United Nations;
* Prohibit employees of the United Nations from using U.S. government property;
* Suspend diplomatic immunity for officers and employees of the United Nations;
* Repeal acts authorizing U.S. participation in UN agencies such as the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization; the United Nations Environment Program; and the World Health Organization; and would end all participation in any and all conventions and agreements with the United Nations.

WRITE, EMAIL, FAX your representatives! This is as big as End The Fed!


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

The report on Bilderberg

The report on Bilderberg just came out they are planning a world treasury being administered in some way by the U.n. (thats the usual nonsense or the united nuts). With public opinion towards the u.n. being at an all time low we need to push this hard. I know its hard to realize how big of an impact we are making (we gain new ground every week) so to put it in perspective ron paul said on the alex jones show IN 5 YEARS WE WILL BE THE REPUBLICAN PARTY! Ya gotta love him. hes so humble it makes it all the more amazing when he brags like that.http://www.dailypaul.com/node/92259

Every State for Sovereignty

and intra-state sovereignty must get behind this Act....

all Representatives and all the people - need to respond and show support

Just emailed

my Congress Critter.

Yes why not?

I think Ron Paul's H.R. 1146 should be supported. RP thinks it's worth it, His bill could provide a way, maybe the only way? and with enough "We The People" support anything is possable. I see too many obama bumper stickers but I also see alot of Get the US out of the UN stickers, so this tells me alot of average americans understand this concept and would rally behind it.

This Bill...

... just makes too much damn sense :-)

Won't pass

As good as this would be, realistically, the chance of it passing with the current Congress and administration is almost 0. I say keep the pressure on the audit the Fed movement.

new world order revocation act :)

he could have called it that, same chances of going through

bump for freedom*)

"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government -- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests."
-- Patrick Henry

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15


“A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement” - Thomas Jefferson

Official Daily Paul BTC address: 16oZXSGAcDrSbZeBnSu84w5UWwbLtZsBms
Rand Paul 2016

Maybe Dr. Paul should rather

introduce a bill that (severly) limits the way the Un can interfere in the US. Actually the UN charter respect the sovereignty of each country, thus the invasion of Iraq did not respect the sovereignty of iraq.

He has introduced 'out of the UN" type bills in the past and got little reaction:

This is foolishness

There is relevance for reevaluating some of our relationship with the UN, HOWEVER, this is not the time for that debate. The US, courtesy of a Republican administration, has hurt it's credibility for making unilateral decisions. The majority of the populace is not going to be swayed against the UN toward even more unaccoutable US governance. Let's keep to the HR 1207 effort, it is a measured reform in the midst of a financial crisis. Finally, libertarian philosophy has a chance to make an impact on our countries modern governance. Let us not be unfocused into unfruitful pursuits.

Furthermore while I can understand some of this bill's provisions, I don't see much good in our leaving the UN's community of nations altogether and attempting to evict diplomats. We ought to keep diplomatic channels open, otherwise war will be the only option. JBS might not mind that, but I do.

Ron Paul dropped the ball on this one.

I agree with you

Ron Paul has said out of the UN is more on the last on his list, though he has brought in such similar legislation every year. Last year got only 4 co-sponsors. It is NOT going to succeed. It is better to concentrate on bills with which he can get bipartisan support, like hemd.


I know what his motive is, e.g. that the UN cannot ask US troops to fight war, that especially the 2nd Amendment not be endangered, to end foreign aid and ensure the UN cannot impose abortion-legislation. He should however keep in mind that it was the US initiative that lead to the UN adoption of the Iraq Freedom Act and formed the basis for the inspections and that important countries like Germany and France voted AGAINST going to war with Iraq, so there was no universal obligation.
Just like audit the fed (before end the Fed), he should rather reformulate it was "reform the UN" to affirm the validity of the constitution, but an international body can also be of use for diplomatic discussions and co-operation on common issues. I am afraid if he is ONLY advocating for pulling out of this and that, then the label of "isolationism" is easier to be smeared.

Also, Dr. Paul has himself said perhaps 25% of Americans are in favor of going out of the UN, e.g. a minority. Once can threaten with this possibility should the UN's grip on the US become stronger, otherwise take the step by step mode. And also do not introduce too many changes at once.

Glad someone sees the point

I know we are a community of idealists, but pushing this point identifies us as very hard right, to the point where we are not part of the national debate. At that level, you just get mocked, you don't get offered much opportunity for counterpoint.

We ought to respect several things; A) the great majority of the American people don't want this, harassing representatives to support it weakens our credibility as a movement. If someone sincerely believes this is important, the first step is to educate your fellow man. B) To my reading this legislation is simple minded. It is backward in some harmful ways (leaving the UN altogether and evicting diplomats).

We will progress further as a liberty minded movement if we recognize certain laws and institutions, while they may have been implemented unconstitutionally, have nonetheless good purpose and should be mostly respected. Our primary goals ought to be (1) to overturn the laws and institutions that are HARMFUL and (2) to ensure respect of the Constitution in implementing FUTURE laws.

If we concern ourselves with ridding every unconstitutional adjustment to our way of life since George Washington, we would have a long way to go indeed. Example: Most people feel that the questionable constitutionality of Lincoln's methods aside, slavery is better off gone. When we talk about certain issues from the perspective of only one ideal (respect the Constitution), we are the losers. We need to consider the issue through an integration of the many high ideals and multiplicitious factors that are often at play in the complex situations of life.

Respectfully, I dissagree I'm sticking with Ron Paul

The USA did not go to war on Iraq. It went to the UN, where it obtained a coalation of the willing to break it's own MISSION STATEMENT, breach a republic based on false evidence, and since some of these countries practice torture, now the USA is being held responsible... but it is not the USA. It is the UN.The UN has been getting more and more control over we the people. The Swine Flu... who was in control of the USA? Obama? No. WHO. World health Organization.

We are headed for a global goernment and the WORLD does NOT want the corrupt UN. The UN served it's purpose, is a failed experiement, and needs to be re established, especially since the money is not here anymore. We'e broke and can not continue to pay off criminals so we can continue this notorious foreign policy. I'm with Ron Paul!!

Are you suggesting

that if we want to get rid of the UN that we might go so far as want slavery back. Brother!! I disagree with every little thing you said. The UN is NWO all the way and I never, ever wanted in the UN in the first place.


I am suggesting that arguments that Dr. Paul has brought up regarding some of the methods employed in emancipating slaves are detrimental to our cause, because people perceive it as either racially motivated or detached from reality. At times like those, it appears that he is more concerned with lesser details than more fundamental ideals.

Just my opinion.

Where do you get that?

We are in different universes. Dr. Paul's suggestion for getting rid of slavery was brilliant and done before, I believe.

The UN serves no constructive purpose.

The only thing the UN accomplishes is further extension of world tyranny.
Further loss of individual sovereignty. Taxes to be collected by international bodies. Control over what NEW nations may arise, and what they can do...and control over the seas. These latter two are very important issues, as the battle between the authoritarian establishment and libertarian decentralization extends into experimental nation building projects.

Getting out from under the shadow of the UN would be a great step forward for those who believe in individual liberty.

Support the Constitution of the United States

Support the Constitution of the United States


wrong, wrong.

au contraire, eagles...

It's all connected, and Dr. Paul is smart enough to continue rolling that ball, since it's just started.

Do you think he was born yesterday! Think about it some more. The UN is controlling us, the same as the central bank. It's ALL relevant and related!

It is a bureaucratic nightmare, a cesspool of waste, mismanagement and corruption. More importantly is the danger it poses to American sovereignty.

Check google

he has been introducing the "American Sovereignty Restoration Act" since at least 2001, about every year, also in 2007, perhaps not last year while he was busy running. Like eagles has said, this is not priority one. Maybe it would be more effective to take the incremental approach.


you - good article!

Go to jb's ACTION location

and send your rep's an email, to get us out of the U.N. It doesnt take but a second to do so.

My PA reps NEVER listen

I'm so jealous of those of you who have some influence with your reps. Sestak, Specter, and Casey NEVER, EVER do what I ask, no matter how many letters and petitions they get. So I feel like it's a waste of time.

Hammer it home

Just keep hammering.

I'm in PA

and that won't stop me - also "demand" - no longer ask or say please. I then write back (when they don't listen) and tell them I am giving my full time and attention and money to their opponent. And will do whatever it take to vote them out of office.

What success have you had?

Any? It's just frustrating for me to do things that I consider futile. Sestak, especially, is hopeless. When presented with a petition of 100 names requesting he sign HR1207, he said, "I don't like that bill." When I called his office about 1207, his secretary promised I'd get an email from him about it. No email.

You too can have the same influence by

starting to limit their terms and vote them. out every two years. Also, start educating those in your state as to why it's a good thing to have a constant turnover.

DC wouldn't have enough time to corrupt if they had to deal with a different rep and 1/3 of the sen. every two years.

In the case of Congress...turn over is...a good thing.

I don't believe elections are safe from fraud

but I agree that turnover is a good thing. Usually.