PDA

View Full Version : Who knew - UN Arms Trade Treaty began today



General of Darkness
2nd July 2012, 07:00 PM
Damn, things are ramping up.

Gun Control: Second Amendment Under Fire at UN Conference



http://media.townhall.com/res/th/20120619b/images/genericAvatar.gif (http://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis)
Leah Barkoukis (http://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/)
Blogger, Townhall.com


Jul 02, 2012 03:57 PM EST





One of the most important periods for the Second Amendment in recent history is upon us, as the opening meeting of the UN Arms Trade Treaty conference began this morning in New York. During the 26-day conference, world leaders are convening to finalize the terms of the ATT, which seeks to regulate the international arms trade and seriously threatens Second Amendment freedoms.

In a press kit that was released in June, the UN was obviously cognizant of the backlash surrounding Second Amendment rights, going so far as to include a "Myths & Facts" section, which states:


http://i847.photobucket.com/albums/ab40/katiepavlich/ScreenShot2012-07-02at15838PM.png (http://s847.photobucket.com/albums/ab40/katiepavlich/?action=view&current=ScreenShot2012-07-02at15838PM.png)

Also included in the press kit (http://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2012/07/02/gun_control_second_amendment_under_fire_at_un_conf erence#http://www.un.org/disarmament/ATT/), however, was a report by the UN Coordinating Action on Small Arms titled, "The Impact of Poorly Regulated Arms Transfers on the Work of the UN," which blatantly contradicts the above "Fact." I posted on this earlier (http://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2012/07/02/gun_control_second_amendment_under_fire_at_un_conf erence#http://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2012/06/22/un_arms_trade_treaty_eyes_legally_owned_weapons), but the report states that legally owned weapons should be regulated (along with everything from small arms and light weapons to helicopters, aircraft, tanks and heavy artillery) because of the "problem of diversion" or, transfer of weapons to the illicit market.

Who do we have to thank for dragging the U.S. into negotiations on this preposterous Treaty? Of course, the Obama administration, whose utter disdain for the Second Amendment seems truly unparalleled. The administration voted to support the talks in 2009, reversing George W. Bush's staunch opposition to the treaty back when the U.S. actually took state sovereignty seriously.

Via Bloomberg (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=abkyS4.975YM):
"The Bush administration was the only nation to oppose the 2006 resolution to create an international treaty on the sale of small arms and light weapons, and subsequent measures to continue the talks. The U.S. expressed concern about potential loopholes in a treaty and said national controls would be more effective."

Nearly a year ago, U.S. Senators wrote (http://moran.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?a=Files.Serve&File_id=c19ac87a-01b3-42cc-8ef0-f42fbb39387f) to President Obama and Sec. Clinton highlighting their concerns with the Treaty. Among their reasons was the fact that the UN maintains the position that "no treaty controlling the transfer of arms internationally can be effective without controls on transfers inside member states." Additionally, the Senators disapprove of the terms of negotiation:
"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."


But perhaps most egregious is the insistence that the U.S. become subjected to the very same standards as the dictatorial regimes (majority of UN member states) who are either perpetrating widespread human rights abuses or harboring non-state terrorist and criminal actors that are doing so.
Although the Senators that signed this letter vowed to oppose the ratification of an ATT that in any way infringes on Second Amendment freedoms, others in Congress are cause for concern.

Executive Director of the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action, Chris Cox wrote (http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/02/congressmen-urge-the-un-to-trample-the-us-constitution/) on Monday:
“In fact, a group of anti-gun members of the U.S. House of Representatives, led by U.S. Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), went so far as to circulate a letter last week to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, in which they “strongly urge the United States to take a leadership role in pushing for a strong, verifiable Arms Trade Treaty.”
These House members insist that the treaty include “controls on a comprehensive list of weaponry, including small arms and light weapons,” as well as controls on ammunition. For good measure, they wrap their unconstitutional demands in the mantle of advancing “human rights” and preventing international violence.
Since when did it become fashionable for sitting members of Congress to lobby international thugs, tyrants and dictators against our own U.S. Constitution?
Rep. Grijalva should consider the plight of good people in countries like the Sudan, where it’s virtually impossible for an average citizen to legally own a firearm for self-defense.
He, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton should open their eyes to the unspeakable human rights atrocities that exist in their gun-ban utopia. They ought to see how far their gun-confiscation agenda resonates with hundreds of thousands of defenseless Sudanese men, women and children who live in constant fear of being beaten, raped, sold into slavery or murdered.
It’s easy for Congressmen Raul Grijalva, James McGovern, Bobby Rush, Dennis Kucinich and every other signer of this woefully ignorant letter to sit on high — surrounded by the secure walls of freedom built by our strong Second Amendment rights — and dictate to oppressed citizens in other parts of the world that their lives would be better if they only had less freedom than we do in the United States.
Thankfully, these clueless representatives don’t speak for the majority of us.”


No, they certainly don’t - but the administration’s position towards this treaty is one Americans need to pay close attention to. More to come as the conference unfolds.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2012/07/02/gun_control_second_amendment_under_fire_at_un_conf erence

Twisted Titan
2nd July 2012, 08:23 PM
I would love to get their commentary on Fast and Furious

Blink
2nd July 2012, 08:44 PM
I would love to get their commentary on Fast and Furious

Ain't never gonna happen..........

collector
2nd July 2012, 09:23 PM
Are Attorney Generals specifically mentioned in the treaty?
We need tee shirts made - Our Attorney General has killed more people than my entire gun collection ever has !!

Xizang
2nd July 2012, 11:18 PM
Word has it that Hillary Clinton's killed a few herself.

I'm sure Obama's having a clause inserted to protect Eric Holder. It's going to be called the Executive Privilege exemption.

Awoke
3rd July 2012, 04:18 AM
The OP article ramps up to make a quote, and there is no quote there. I checked the OP original link, and it is missing from that as well.



In a press kit that was released in June, the UN was obviously cognizant of the backlash surrounding Second Amendment rights, going so far as to include a "Myths & Facts" section, which states:


http://i847.photobucket.com/albums/ab40/katiepavlich/ScreenShot2012-07-02at15838PM.png (http://s847.photobucket.com/albums/ab40/katiepavlich/?action=view&current=ScreenShot2012-07-02at15838PM.png)

Also included in the press kit (http://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2012/07/02/gun_control_second_amendment_under_fire_at_un_conf erence#http://www.un.org/disarmament/ATT/), however, was a report by...


I wonder what the press kit stated?

The press kit hot link just links you back to the OP, not to the actual press kit.

chad
3rd July 2012, 05:43 AM
utah announced they are starting a ban on recreational shooting yesterday "because of wildfires."

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865558410/Gov-Herbert-says-he-may-have-ability-to-ban-fireworks-target-shooting-but-wants-lawmakers-on.html

iOWNme
3rd July 2012, 06:02 AM
Meanwhile the real UN Arms Control Treaty has been sitting quietly on the US Code since 1961.



Disarmament FACTS. (http://www.seewithyourmind.org/index.php/political/27-disarmament-facts)

http://www.seewithyourmind.org/images/M_images/undisarm.jpg
(Once again, you have been conned America, and it is your own self apathy that is to blame.)

The United Nations Treaty of 1945 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Charter) has many Disarmament policies for all nations who participate.

Then in 1961, JFK (yes) along with the 87th Congress, introduced and SIGNED Public Law 87-297 (http://www.libertygunrights.com/PublicLaw87-297.html) , Which gave the statutory authority to create the Arms Control & Disarmament Agency. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_Control_and_Disarmament_Agency)

This ACT was then CODIFIED into the United States Code, under Title 22, Chapter 35, Entitled 'Arms Control & Disarmament'. (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode22/usc_sup_01_22_10_35.html)

Inside it you will find this:

Title 22, Chapter 35, Subchapter 1, $2551 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode22/usc_sec_22_00002551----000-.html):
"An ultimate goal of the United States is a world which is free from the scourge of war and the dangers and burdens of armaments; in which the use of force has been subordinated to the rule of law; and in which international adjustments to a changing world are achieved peacefully. It is the purpose of this chapter to provide impetus toward this goal by addressing the problem of reduction and control of armaments looking toward ultimate world disarmament."

(Do you see how they actually create all the wars since the United Nations, but get the world to think if we all give away our guns, we will be safe, this is classic Hegelian Dialectic, and here. They will cause change, through manipulating the mass into making a decision. It doesnt even matter if it is a bad decision for the Elite, it is a push into a different direction. A game of chess, where we are always moving. Too bad most people cant see that the box we live in gets smaller, no matter what the discussion is about.)

Next look in the same subchapter, $2552 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode22/usc_sec_22_00002552----000-.html):
"The terms “arms control” and “disarmament” mean the identification, verification, inspection, limitation, control, reduction, or elimination, of armed forces and armaments of all kinds under international agreement including the necessary steps taken under such an agreement to establish an effective system of international control, or to create and strengthen international organizations for the maintenance of peace."

Its right there! In the US Code since 1961! And look! THEY ARE GETTING RID OF ALL THE MILITARY! Think im crazy? ALL NATIONS in the UN have been steadily working since its inception to disarm COMPLETELY. Believe me, not many other nations even have guns!

Now go to Subchapter 3, $2571 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode22/usc_sec_22_00002571----000-.html):
3(a): "Control, reduction and elimination of armed forces and armaments:
the detection, identification, inspection, monitoring, limitation, reduction, control, and elimination of armed forces and armaments, including thermonuclear, nuclear, missile, conventional, bacteriological, chemical, and radiological weapons: "

Now, this Public Law 87-297 was explained further in 2 different instances, a State Dept Document called "Publication 7277 (http://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/ERC/arms/freedom_war.html)", and "The Blue Print for the Peace Race (http://www.usccb.org/sdwp/globalpoverty/pdfs/2009-02-27-commonweal-article.pdf)." It is a 35-page booklet printed by the United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency as Publication No. 4 - General Series 3 - Released May of 1962. Publication No. 4 is the unabridged version of State Department Document 7277.

Both of these booklets explain how our military is to be reduced to 2.1 million men. China and the Soviets are to be reduced to that level also. At this point, we are at Stage I at which time we are to transfer (on a permanent basis) one-half of our armed forces to be merged with the Russian and Chinese armies. In Stage II, the remaining one-half of our armed forces is then turned over to this same Security Council of the United Nations. The person in charge of the merged armies must, by agreement, always be a Russian. The world's smaller nations turn 100% of their armies over to the same under-secretary of the Security, Council in Stage II. President George Bush and Admiral Wm. J. Crowe [have referred] to this process as being "in transition."(1993)

Every couple of years the House of Representatives votes to appropriate funds for this on-going program. Since P.L. 87-297 was first passed into law in 1961, there have been 18 updates to it. The Congress knows that the plan includes the policing of the United States by foreign troops. (The world army they are forming in Europe.) The Congress is allowing our military bases to be closed down, except for those that will be used by the world army. You will find that plan in Publication 7277 and in "The Blueprint for the Peace Race."

The Congress has praised these documents and is on record in Senate hearings. Ask your librarian for "Revision of the United Nations Charter - Hearings Before a Subcommittee (Foreign Relations) Feb. 2-20, 1950 U.S.Government Printing Office." The ultimate goal to be reached in Stage III of the disarmament process is to "proceed to a point where no state [nation] would have the military power to challenge the progressively strengthened U.N. Peace Force...."

So, dont let any politician fool you, or the Supreme Court. Treaties TRUMP the Constitution. PERIOD. It is just a matter of time.....