Home > Uncategorized > Like Mischevious Gremlins Alan Gottlieband and Wife Juilianne H. Versnel-Gottlieb as Wannabe Internationalists are at it Again!

Like Mischevious Gremlins Alan Gottlieband and Wife Juilianne H. Versnel-Gottlieb as Wannabe Internationalists are at it Again!

Wednesday, March 17, 2010 Leave a comment Go to comments

  

  
  
March 16, 2010  (The Merchant of Fear) Alan Gottlieb  of the Second Amendment Foundation issued a press release titled, “SAF Helps Spearhead New Int’l Group To Protect Civilian Arms Rights.” Is this a another fame and glory, get rich quick scheme at the expense of the American People?


Hmmm. Let me think about this…

FROM SAF PRESS RELEASE:  

“BELLEVUE, Wash., March 16 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The Second Amendment Foundation is delighted to be part of a new and growing international organization whose goal is the protection of firearms rights for private citizens.  

The  (IAPCAR) met last week in Nuremberg, Germany. Gun rights organizations and activists from several countries, including Sweden, Norway, Germany, the United Kingdom, Canada, Italy and the United States attended. The group’s official slogan is “Liberty and Security.” “  

————————————
ADVERTISING THE AMERICAN COMMON DEFENCE REVIEW MAGAZINE’S SEAL OF APPROVAL:

I am seeking start-up and venture capital for my magazine, American Common Defence Review to defend the Constitution of the United States through the freedom of the press.
————————————

For good reason I always view new developments in anything with skepticism and suspicion until proven true. And Alan Gottlieb’s involvement with IAPCAR is no exception. He draws my suspicion. Alan Gottlieb’s failure with the Hodgkin’s case, and the federal judge slamming Alan Gottlieb’s lack of preparedness with the Hodgkin’s case give me legitimate concerns about his competitency and the competitency of his attorneys in Second Amendment litigation in the federal ccourts. Is he becoming a bungling threat to our Second Amendment rights? 

The March 7, 2010 edition of The New York Times has a Bull’s Eye news report on the growing grassroots movement for National Open Carry overtaking the NRA’s sacred cow for National Reciprocity for Concealed Carry in popularity. The report is amazingly well balanced. I anticipated in my blog posting in September 2009,  “Applying Social Norms Theory and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties to National Open Carry,” that the Open Carry Movement would gain popularity. And so it has today.   

From the NYT Report: “Newer, more driven by grass-roots and the Internet than the N.R.A., open-carry groups are also less centralized, less predictable and often more confrontational in their push for gun rights.”  

That’s exactly what it is going to take to win back “National Open Carry” as it once was lawfully exercised in the 1800s. The NRA is the bully against Open Carry. We don’t need the NRA standing in our way to actual freedom (see. Abraham Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation and the Dred Scott case on the right of citizens “to carry arms wherever they went.”  

Stuffed shirt Alan Gottlieb of the Second Amendment Foundation reportedly said “I’m all for open-carry laws but I don’t think flaunting it is very productive for our cause. It just scares people.”  

Why, In God’s Name, would Alan Gottlieb speak so denigratingly and nihilistically against the National Open Carry Movement, which I consider as part of the full scope of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms that the U.S. Supreme Court and the lower federal courts, have up until now, an aversion to address? I suspect that, like Wayne LaPierre of the NRA, Alan Gottlieb of the Second Amendment Foundation is a Second Amendment advocate soley for the fame and glory and the money it brings in. What else can be the applicable suspicion when they take half- or quarter-measures to protect the Second Amendment against a tsunami flood of gun control laws?  

If exercising your Second Amendment right to openly keep and bear arms in a lawful manner scares the timid folks in society, as Alan Gottlieb claims, then so be it. Let the timid folks find their own courage and bravado by acclimating them to the resurrected social norm of open carry.  

Again, from NYT: “While the N.R.A. is almost always going to support the increased deregulation of guns, Professor Weisberg said, the organization keeps its distance from open-carry advocacy because it does not want to distract attention from its higher priority of promoting the right to carry concealed weapons.”  

The NRA has their head up their ass and their priorities all upside down! If I am not mistaken the American history of wearing sidearms carried with it the custom of open carry as the social norm and the customary view that concealed carry was a criminal act of deception with intent to commit a crime of armed robbery. How did we get to a State of the Union where the positions of open carry and concealed carry are reversed? How did we let the psychology of baseless fear influence the Second Amendment standing in society?  

I have proof positive that the NRA does NOT support Open Carry! because they refused to help me with my Second Amendment case for open carry in interstate travel from a U.S. merchant seaman’s point of view in 2002.  

Before I digress any futher let’s get back to this IAPCAR situation. Who started this group? How credible is this group and their web site? Nowhere does Alan Gotlieb provide contact information or explain in his press release as to exactly how IAPCAR originated. Who’s idea was it? Did the idea to create IAPCAR spring up in Communist China? In the midst of war ravage Mexico in opposition to the drug cartels? Did a survivor of the Darfur genocide come up with IAPCAR?  

Let’s establish some facts. Julianne H. Versnel is Alan Gottlieb’s wife. J. H. Versnel is the registrant owner of www.MyDotCalm.com marketing a Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) program called the “.Calm  for the iPhone and iPod. The .Calm is designed to be used with or without a pscyhological therapist as a psychotherapeutic technique to control and manage anxiety attacks by using thoughts to control emotions. FINALLY! There’s a psychotherapeutic devise to answer the frantic anti-gun nuts need raised by Dr. Sarah Thompson, Raging Against Self Defense: A Psychiatrist Examines The Anti-Gun Mentality (2000). Now ain’t that a funny bit of comparative news analysis? Where’s Julianne’s Nobel Peace Prize for achieving world peace with her self-treating Cognitive Behavioral Therapy device? We won’t need our Second Amendment right to armed self-defense because no one will ever again get aggressive enough to kill, mame, or even lay a hand on another! ROFLMAO on that one! Gee whiz! Ain’t I one with a quick wit! Imagine that! Julianne H. Versnel-Gottlieb helping to reduce the cost of health care with a do-it-yourself psychotherapy device placating both sides of the Second Amendment debate. “I don’t care who ya are, that’s funny right there!” Graciously borrowing from Daniel Whitney (Larry, the Cable Guy, “Gitter Done!” fame).  

Oops! I’m digressing again.  

SHOCKING NEWS? 

The address for the Second Amendment Foundation is 12500 NE Tenth Place, Bellevue, Washington 98005. Julianne Versnel Gottlieb is the author of Shooting Sports Survey: Conservation and Sport (Paperback – 2008). Julianne Versnel-Gottlieb, through the Second Amendment Foundation, is the publisher of Women and Guns magazine based in Buffalo, NY. It appears from my research that Juliane H Versnel maintains her maiden name in her own business ventures while using the Second Amendment Foundation’s address such as www.MyDotCalm.com.  

The domain name registrant for www.iapcar.org is none other than “J. H. Versnel.” Alan Gottlieb’s wife, Julianne H. Versnel-Gottlieb! The address for IAPCAR is the same address as for the Second Amendment Foundation. 

Note the deception at www.iapcar.org with no contact page. No mailing address. No email addresses for more information. The same missing features as with Julianne H. Versnel’s www.MyDotCalm.com advertising for the psychotherapy device .Calm. What are we to make of the Bonnie and Clyde team of Second Amendment advocacy short-sheeting not only the American People but the People of every nation on Earth parading around advocating by implication for the full scope of Second Amendment rights for U.S. citizens and the human right of armed self-defense (implying the right to open carry) but for concealed carry? Why can’t or why won’t the people at the Second Amendment Foundation or the NRA support National Open Carry? Or Global Open Carry since Global Individual Right to Armed Self-Defense is the new goal for the Second Amendment Foundation? 

THE BIGGEST QUESTION OF ALL? 

Why won’t the Second Amendment Foundation or the NRA support and back a Second Amendment lawsuit for National Open Carry from a merchant seaman’s point of view that impacts not only local, state, and federal laws but also international maritime treaties such as my 2006 international human rights complaint, Hamrick v. United States, that is still pending at the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Petition No. 1142-06 (2006)? As an individual U.S. merchant seaman, I am challenging the: 

♦ United Nations Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects 9-20 July 2001 (UN Document A/Conf.192/15). 

 Inter-American Convention Against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related Materials of 1997. 

 Piracy And Armed Robbery Against Ships: Recommendations to Governments for Preventing and Suppressing Piracy and Armed Robbery Against Ships,  MSC.1/Circ.1333, 26 June 2009 and the the “no firearms” provision seamen of all nations,   ¶¶ 59–61; 

♦ Piracy And Armed Robbery Against Ships: Guidance to Shipowners and Ship Operators, Shipmasters and Crews on Preventing and Suppressing Acts of Piracy and Armed Robbery Against Ships, MSC.1/Circ.1334, 23 June 2009 

All of the above international documents, under the authority of the United Nations, violate the Article 2, Clause 7 of the U.N. Charter which states: 

Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter VII ACTION WITH RESPECT TO THREATS TO THE PEACE, BREACHES OF THE PEACE, AND ACTS OF AGGRESSION 

I guess the Second Amendment is a threat to the peace, breaches of the peace, and acts of aggression in the view of the United Nations. How do we stop the U.N. attack on our Second Amendment? Since, Alan Gottlieb or Wayne LaPierre won’t tell you, I will! 

 The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties [of 1969] [(VCOTLOT)] is the authoritative instrument on the international law of treaties.  Most of its provisions are thought to reflect customary international law, so they are considered binding even on nation-states (such as the United States) that are not formally parties to the Vienna Convention.  It defines a reservation to a treaty as “a unilateral statement, however phrased or named, made by a State, when signing, ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to a treaty, whereby it purports to exclude or to modify the legal effect of certain provisions of the treaty in their application to that State.” (SOURCE: Frederic L. Kirgis, Reservations to Treaties and United States Practice, The American Society of International Law, (May 2003)). 

See also the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations or between International Organizations of 1986 (VCOLTBSIOBIO)

You can strongly petition up to nearly but not to actually harass in a criminal manner the U.S. Senate to ratify the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969 and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations or between International Organizations 1986, to stop the unlimited use of Reservations, Understandings, and Declarations (RUDs) on human rights treaties so that the American people can hold the United States to certain human rights, such as the human right of armed self-defense against our own government with the right to National Open Carry. 

 This is the argument I would use:

For the remedy to stop the United States from nullifying the effectiveness of citizen-enforcement of human rights treaties in the federal courts through the use of RUDs look to VCOTLOT Article 18 Obligation Not to Defeat the Object and Purpose of a Treaty Prior to its Entry into Force.

For the remedy of securing the Second Amendment right to openly keep and bear arms as a human right look to the combination of several articles of VCOTLOT and VCOLTBSIOBIO used separately or together:

Article 48 Error

Article 49 Fraud (as with U.N. Charter, Article 2, Clause 7)

EXTREMELY IMPORTANT: Article 53 Treaties Conflicting with a Peremptory Norm of General International Law (“jus cogens”)

DISBANDING THE U.N.? TRY ARTICLE 49 FOR GLOBAL WARMING AND GLOBAL GUN CONTROL AND DISARMAMENT OF INDIVIDUAL CITIZENS: Article 54 Termination of or Withdrawal From a Treaty Under its Provisions or by Consent of the Parties

NO WAY OUT OF THE U.N.? TRY THIS ONE: Article 56 Denunciation of or Withdrawal from a Treaty Containing no Provision Regarding Termination, Denunciation or Withdrawal 

NO WAY OUT OF THE U.N.? TRY THIS ONE: Article 60 Termination or Suspension of the Operation of a Treaty as a Consequence of its Breach 

U.N. TREATIES OR MARITIME CONVENTIONS REPUGNANT TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION? TRY THIS ONE: Article 61 Supervening Impossibility of Performance 

“1.A party may invoke the impossibility of performing a treaty as a ground for terminating or withdrawing from it if the impossibility results from the permanent disappearance or destruction of an object indispensable for the execution of the treaty.” 

GROWING GRASSROOTS MOVEMENT FOR OPEN CARRY IN OPPOSITION TO GROWING TYRANNY OF NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL GUN CONTROL: Article 62 Fundamental Change of Circumstances 

OPEN CARRY AS THE NEW NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL NORM: Article 64 Emergence of a new peremptory norm of general international law (“jus cogens”)   

Why haven’t Alan Gottlieb of the Second Amendment Foundation or Wayne LaPierre chasing after Rebecca Petters of IANSA taken the VCOTLOT or VCOLTBSIOBIO approach? Because the leadership at the Second Amendment Foundation and the NRA, like the power-crazed politicians in government, want to dictate what they want the social norms of open society to develop into instead of letting the People Themselves dictate what they want their social norms to develop into. We don’t need the Second Amendment Foundation or the NRA stopping us from exercising the full scope of our Second Amendment rights! 

Off the top of my head, and if I had the money and power, I would create an International Individual Common Defense Organization (IICDFO) to combat the globalization of tyranny through gun control. 

Alan Gottlieb and Julianne Versnel-Gottlieb new pet project for IAPCAR is nothing more that another one of their publicity stunts to raise more money and make them more rich in money and fame. If they were not flim-flamming in the name of Second Amendment freedom they would do what I did! Write up their own human rights complaint against the United States are directly assist a citizen of a country in this Western Hemisphere and file that human rights complaint with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR). That would be more effective and more expediate than the path they have chose with IAPCAR. The end result with IAPCAR may be the same as the IACHR but IAPCAR will be 10 to 20 years slower than IACHR. And I believe Alan and Julianne are perfectly aware of that fact. Hence the fraud and deception for more money. Wouldn’t this be approaching racketeering under the RICO Act? Now that’s something to think about when they say they don’t support open carry! 

But for the moment I stand content to criticize the NRA and the Second Amendment Foundation for their dual-purposed activities. (First Amendment right to express my opinions editorially). 

Signed: Don Hamrick 

 

Advertisements
Categories: Uncategorized
  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: