UN Declares Arms Trade Treaty to Go Into Effect Dec. 24

Author Topic: UN Declares Arms Trade Treaty to Go Into Effect Dec. 24  (Read 45009 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline foxmulder241

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 55
UN Declares Arms Trade Treaty to Go Into Effect Dec. 24
« on: December 23, 2009, 07:10:58 PM »
Is this real or is just someone trying to get money out of people?

Hillary Clinton commits to UN Small Arms Treaty

http://email.wnd.com/hostedemail/email.htm?h=f094803bf3ed19b58b34e7faaeed0dab&CID=5499964060&ch=2C5DD19CF710E139D771B92136838F1A

Dear fellow patriot,

With willing one-world accomplices in Washington, D.C., gun-grabbers around the globe believe they have it made.

In fact, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton just announced the Obama Administration would be working hand in glove with the UN to pass a new "Small Arms Treaty."

Disguised as legislation to help in the fight against "terrorism," "insurgency" and "international crime syndicates," the UN Small Arms Treaty is nothing more than a massive, GLOBAL gun control scheme.

Ultimately, the UN's Small Arms Treaty is designed to register, ban and CONFISCATE firearms owned by private citizens like YOU.

That's why it's vital you sign special petition I've made up for your signature that DEMANDS your U.S. Senators vote AGAINST ratification of the UN's "Small Arms Treaty!"

So far, the gun-grabbers have successfully kept the exact wording of their new scheme under wraps.

But looking at previous versions of the UN "Small Arms Treaty," you and I can get a good idea of what's likely in the works.

If passed by the UN and ratified by the U.S. Senate, the UN "Small Arms Treaty" would almost certainly FORCE national governments to:

      *** Enact tougher licensing requirements, making law-abiding citizens cut through even more bureaucratic red tape just to own a firearm legally;

      *** CONFISCATE and DESTROY ALL "unauthorized" civilian firearms (all firearms owned by the government are excluded, of course);

      *** BAN the trade, sale and private ownership of ALL semi-automatic weapons;

      *** Create an INTERNATIONAL gun registry, setting the stage for full-scale gun CONFISCATION.

So please click here to sign the petition to your U.S. Senators before it's too late!

You see, this is NOT a fight we can afford to lose.

Ever since it's founding almost 65 years ago, the United Nations has been hell-bent on bringing the United States to its knees.

To the petty dictators and one-worlders who control the UN, the U.S. isn't a "shining city on a hill" -- it's an affront to their grand totalitarian designs for the globe.

These anti-gun globalists know that so long as Americans remain free to make our own decisions without being bossed around by big government bureaucrats, they'll NEVER be able to seize the worldwide oppressive power they crave.

And the UN's apologists also know the most effective way to finally strip you and me of ALL our freedoms would be to DESTROY our gun rights.

That's why it's vital you act TODAY!

The truth is, there's no time to waste.

You and I have to be prepared for this fight to move FAST.

The fact is, the last thing the gun-grabbers in the U.N. and in Washington, D.C. want is for you and me to have time to react and mobilize gun owners to defeat this radical legislation.

They've made that mistake before, and we've made them pay, defeating EVERY attempt to ram the "Treaty on Small Arms" into law since the mid-1990s.

But this time, time won't be on our side.

In fact, we're likely to only have a few days or weeks to defeat the treaty.

Worse, there's no longer any pro-gun Republican Senate to kill ratification of the treaty.

There's no longer any Republican in the White House who has stated opposition to the treaty.

And you and I know good and well how Germany, Great Britain, France, Communist China or the rest of the anti-gun members of the United Nations are going to vote.

So our ONE AND ONLY CHANCE of stopping the UN's "Small Arms Treaty" is during the ratification process in the U.S. Senate.

As you know, it takes 67 Senate votes to ratify a treaty.

With 40 Republicans, that should be easy, right?

Unfortunately, that couldn't be further from the truth.

First, you know just as well as I do that not all the remaining Republicans in the Senate are "pro-gun" in any sense of the term.

Second, even with the partisan rancor in Washington, D.C., many GOP Senators get "queasy" about killing treaties for fear of "embarrassing" the President -- especially with "international prestige" at stake.

They look at ratifying treaties much like approving Presidents' Supreme Court nominees.

And remember, there were NINE Republicans who voted to confirm anti-gun Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

A dozen more GOP Senators only voted against Sotomayor after receiving massive grassroots pressure from the folks back home.

So if we're going to defeat the UN's "Small Arms Treaty" we have to turn the heat up on the U.S. Senate now before it's too late!

That's exactly where this petition come in.

So won't you click here to sign IMMEDIATELY?

And also, if you can, I hope you'll agree to make a generous contribution of $200, $150, $100 or even just $35.

With your generous contribution, I'll immediately begin contacting Second Amendment supporters through mail, phones and e-mail to turn up the heat on targeted U.S. Senators.

Tops on the list are the "usual suspects" like Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, Lindsay Graham and the rest of the weak-kneed Republicans in the Senate whose votes we can never count on.

I also want to begin contacting gun owners in states represented by key Democrats -- like Senators John Tester and Max Baucus of Montana, Senators Mark Warner and Jim Webb of Virginia, Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana.

And finally, I've designed a "special" hard-hitting program especially for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to let Nevada gun owners know exactly what he and his anti-gun pals have planned for you and me.

Facing a tough reelection in 2010, Senator Reid knows he's already skating on thin ice with Nevada voters.

So you and I could end up putting the final nail in his political coffin -- if I can pull out all the stops.

Direct mail.  Phones.  E-mail.  Blogs.  Billboards.  Guest editorials.  Press conferences.  Hard-hitting newspaper, radio and TV ads.  The whole nine yards.

Of course, if I can raise enough resources, my goal is to expand this full program to ALL our target states.

But that's not going to be cheap, and we may not have much time.

In fact, if we're going to defeat the UN's so-called "Small Arms Treaty," we have to start NOW!

So please click here to sign the petition to your U.S. Senators.

And if you possibly can, please agree to make a contribution of $200, $150, $100, or even just $35.

Every petition and every dollar count in this fight.

So please sign the petition and include your most generous contribution of $200, $150, $100 or $35 TODAY.

In Liberty,

Dudley Brown
Executive Director
National Association for Gun Rights

P.S.  The Obama Administration just announced they would be working hand in glove with the UN to pass a new GLOBAL, "Small Arms Treaty."

That's why its vital you and I fight back IMMEDIATELY.

Please click here to sign the special petition I've made up for your signature that DEMANDS your U.S. Senators vote AGAINST ratification of the UN's "Small Arms Treaty."

And if you can, please make a generous contribution of $250, $150, $100 or $35 right away!

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,223
Re: Small Arms Treaty
« Reply #1 on: December 23, 2009, 09:43:48 PM »

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton addresses Moscow University (AP Photo/ Mikhail Metzel)

http://www.examiner.com/x-2698-Charlotte-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m10d16-Obama-and-Clinton-cede-to-UN-small-arms-treaty

Obama and Clinton cede to UN small arms treaty
October 16, 2009

As noted in “British gun control: Coming soon to a country near you? ” seven countries, led by the United Kingdom, are attempting to revive U.N. efforts to restrict imports and exports of small arms. On Wednesday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced the United States would reverse Bush administration opposition to international small arms control, potentially paving the way for the British-led effort, which calls for a vote by the U.N. General Assembly by year’s end.

The U.S. would support the “Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty” as long as it was conducted under rules of “consensus decision-making,” interpreted by some to require unanimous consent, Clinton said. Non-governmental organizations such as Amnesty International and Oxfam, which support international restrictions, objected to requirements for a consensus.

The Heritage Foundation, calling demands for consensus “irrelevant” and “dangerous,” expressed opposition to the conference. The NRA has long opposed treaty efforts on grounds they would be used to abridge American’s right to keep and bear arms guaranteed by the Second Amendment

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE59E0Q920091015
U.S. reverses stance on treaty to regulate arms trade - Oct 14, 2009

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States reversed policy on Wednesday and said it would back launching talks on a treaty to regulate arms sales as long as the talks operated by consensus, a stance critics said gave every nation a veto
The decision, announced in a statement released by the U.S. State Department, overturns the position of former President George W. Bush's administration, which had opposed such a treaty on the grounds that national controls were better.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the United States would support the talks as long as the negotiating forum, the so-called Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty, "operates under the rules of consensus decision-making."

"Consensus is needed to ensure the widest possible support for the Treaty and to avoid loopholes in the Treaty that can be exploited by those wishing to export arms irresponsibly," Clinton said in a written statement.

While praising the Obama administration's decision to overturn the Bush-era policy and to proceed with negotiations to regulate conventional arms sales, some groups criticized the U.S. insistence that decisions on the treaty be unanimous.

"The shift in position by the world's biggest arms exporter is a major breakthrough in launching formal negotiations at the United Nations in order to prevent irresponsible arms transfers," Amnesty International and Oxfam International said in a joint statement.

However, they said insisting that decisions on the treaty be made by consensus "could fatally weaken a final deal."

"Governments must resist US demands to give any single state the power to veto the treaty as this could hold the process hostage during the course of negotiations. We call on all governments to reject such a veto clause," said Oxfam International's policy adviser Debbie Hillier.

The proposed legally binding treaty would tighten regulation of, and set international standards for, the import, export and transfer of conventional weapons.

Supporters say it would give worldwide coverage to close gaps in existing regional and national arms export control systems that allow weapons to pass onto the illicit market.

Nations would remain in charge of their arms export control arrangements but would be legally obliged to assess each export against criteria agreed under the treaty. Governments would have to authorize transfers in writing and in advance.

The main opponent of the treaty in the past was the U.S. Bush administration, which said national controls were better. Last year, the United States accounted for more than two-thirds of some $55.2 billion in global arms transfer deals.

Arms exporters China, Russia and Israel abstained last year in a U.N. vote on the issue.

The proposed treaty is opposed by conservative U.S. think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, which said last month that it would not restrict the access of "dictators and terrorists" to arms but would be used to reduce the ability of democracies such as Israel to defend their people.

The U.S. lobbying group the National Rifle Association has also opposed the treaty.

A resolution before the U.N. General Assembly is sponsored by seven nations including major arms exporter Britain. It calls for preparatory meetings in 2010 and 2011 for a conference to negotiate a treaty in 2012.






http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=35262
POLITICS: U.N. Passes Arms Trade Treaty Over U.S. Opposition
By Haider Rizvi

UNITED NATIONS, Oct 26 2006 (IPS) - United Nations member states voted Thursday to create an international treaty to curb the illicit trade in guns and other light weapons, despite strong opposition from the United States and other big powers.

On Thursday, a vast majority of delegates to the U.N. General Assembly's first committee endorsed the resolution calling for the establishment of a treaty to stop weapons transfers that fuel conflict, poverty and serious human rights violations.

As many as 139 countries voted in favour of the resolution while 24 abstained. The United States, one of the world's leading suppliers of small arms, was the only country that opposed the resolution.

Other major arms-manufacturing nations that oppose the treaty but did not participate in the voting include Russia, China, India and Pakistan.

The vote came after three years of complex diplomatic negotiations and a worldwide campaign by civil society groups that involved more than one million people in 170 countries.

Civil society groups said they were extremely happy with the outcome of the vote.

"It's a great victory," Helen Hughes of the London-based Amnesty International told IPS. "We had governments in that room who finally listened to human rights campaigners."

Jeremy Hobbs, director of Oxfam International, described the treaty as an international commitment to "end the scandal of the unregulated arms trade".

Both Amnesty International and Oxfam had been at the forefront of lobbying efforts in support of the treaty. This week they were joined by 15 Nobel Peace Prize-winners in urging nations to vote for the resolution.

"No weapons should ever be transferred if they will be used for serious violations of human rights," they said in a letter to the delegates who are currently attending the General Assembly session.

Supporters of the resolution said they hoped that it would help close loopholes in laws that allow the flow of small arms to conflict zones across the world, and thus give rise to violations of human rights and undermine development.

In their letter, the Nobel Peace laureates said all international weapons transfers should be authorised by a recognised state and carried out in accordance with international law.

"No state should authorise international arms transfers that violate the specific obligations under international law," the letter said. It further recommended that governments submit national reports on arms transfers to an international registry.

The current volume of the global arms trade is estimated to be around 1.1 trillion dollars, an amount that is likely to increase further by the end of this year, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.

Independent experts who have worked closely with the United Nations on the issue of small arms proliferation estimate that in the past three years more than one million people have been killed as a result of the unchecked flow of guns and other small weapons.

"A thousand people die every day and many more harmed as a result of the proliferation and misuse of small arms," said Rebecca Peters, the director of the International Action Network on Small Arms.

"The world can no longer leave civilians to the mercy of gunrunners and arms brokers who are profiting every year," she added in a statement calling for a worldwide ban on the use and supply of illicit weapons.

Several emerging arms exporters, such as Brazil, Bulgaria and Ukraine, as well as many countries that have been devastated by armed violence, including Colombia, East Timor, Haiti, Liberia and Rwanda, voted in favour of the resolution.

Expressing her support for the resolution, Amnesty International's secretary-general Irene Khan described the vote as "an historic step to stop irresponsible and immoral arms transfers".

"It will prevent the death, rape and displacement of thousands of people," she said in a statement.

The Nobel laureates signing the letter included South Africa's Archbishop Desmond Titu, the Dalai Lama of Tibet, Costa Rican president Oscar Arias, Iranian lawyer Shirin Ebadi, top U.N. nuclear watchdog Mohamed El Baradei, and former Polish president and anti-communist labour leader Lech Walesa.

Activists said they were disappointed with the U.S. role in the negotiations and its eventual decision to reject the resolution.

"This is not a good foreign policy," said Amnesty International's Hughes, who acknowledged that the U.S. laws on weapons manufacturing and supply were "relatively stronger".

"Their 'no' vote shows that they are opposed to the need for effective international controls," Hughes said.

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, the United States accounted for 48 percent of total military spending worldwide in 2005.

The resolution, which was sponsored by Argentina, Australia, Costa Rica, Finland, Japan, Kenya and Britain, calls for the establishment of a group of experts to look at the feasibility, scope and parametres of the treaty, which must report back to the first committee by the fall of 2008. (END/2006)
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline Freeagain

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 29
Re: Small Arms Treaty
« Reply #2 on: December 23, 2009, 10:11:05 PM »
 They may ban all of them..... but remember they still have to take them... and this is unconstitutional. >:(

luckee1

  • Guest
Re: Small Arms Treaty
« Reply #3 on: December 24, 2009, 12:36:57 AM »
They may ban all of them..... but remember they still have to take them... and this is unconstitutional. >:(

+1

foxmulder241, welcome to the prison!  I love your handle!   :D :D


JConner

  • Guest
UN Declares Arms Trade Treaty to Go Into Effect Dec. 24
« Reply #4 on: July 20, 2012, 12:32:52 PM »
http://askmarion.wordpress.com/2012/07/17/misleading-gun-owners-on-the-arms-trade-treaty/

Quote
The majority of both sides appears to emphasize or alternatively, find comfort in the fact that the treaty needs Senate ratification to be fully implemented, while completely dismissing the threat that merely signing the treaty poses.

It is critical to understand that by merely signing the treaty, as the U.S. is expected to do under by order of Barack Hussein Obama, the Vienna convention on treaties would disallow the United States from any act that would “defeat the object and purpose [of the Arms Trade Treaty].”  This must be fully understood by every American concerned about gun ownership rights.

The Senate is irrelevant to the Treaty. Under our obligations via the Vienna Convention on Treaties, if Hillary signs the treaty, and if POTUS does NOT 'repudiate' it, and if it never comes up for a vote in the Senate, then it STANDS AS LAW.

Treaty signed and enforced WITHOUT A SENATE VOTE.

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,223
Re: UN Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #5 on: July 20, 2012, 12:48:38 PM »
http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/ArmsTradeTreaty/
Arms Trade Treaty

The global trade in conventional weapons – from warships and battle tanks to fighter jets and machine guns – remains poorly regulated. No set of internationally agreed standards exist to ensure that arms are only transferred for appropriate use.

Many governments have voiced concern about the absence of globally agreed rules for all Countries to guide their decisions on arms transfers. That is why they have started negotiating an Arms Trade Treaty. Preparations to address this issue have been underway since 2006 and will culminate in the Conference on an Arms Trade Treaty in July 2012.





Campaigners for the Control Arms Coalition at the UN Arms Trade Treaty Conference, July 2012

Campaigners from the Control Arms Coalition in front of the UN building for the opening of the diplomatic conference on the future Arms Trade Treaty. They are calling on the over 190 countries present to agree a strong global agreement that will bring the arms trade under con
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline Optimus

  • Globalist Destroyer
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,802
    • GlobalGulag.com
Re: UN Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #6 on: July 20, 2012, 01:48:46 PM »
http://askmarion.wordpress.com/2012/07/17/misleading-gun-owners-on-the-arms-trade-treaty/

Quote
The majority of both sides appears to emphasize or alternatively, find comfort in the fact that the treaty needs Senate ratification to be fully implemented, while completely dismissing the threat that merely signing the treaty poses.

It is critical to understand that by merely signing the treaty, as the U.S. is expected to do under by order of Barack Hussein Obama, the Vienna convention on treaties would disallow the United States from any act that would “defeat the object and purpose [of the Arms Trade Treaty].”  This must be fully understood by every American concerned about gun ownership rights.


The Senate is irrelevant to the Treaty. Under our obligations via the Vienna Convention on Treaties, if Hillary signs the treaty, and if POTUS does NOT 'repudiate' it, and if it never comes up for a vote in the Senate, then it STANDS AS LAW.

Treaty signed and enforced WITHOUT A SENATE VOTE.

That is complete nonsense. First of all, the notion that the Vienna Convention on Treaties and any treaties can supercede the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is a myth and relies solely on people being ignorant about the supremacy clause in the Constitution and that treaties MUST be ratified through the senate. The clause does not state that treaties are supreme, but reinforces that the Constitution IS.


http://www.libertygunrights.com/2TreatySet10Pgs.pdf
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people,
it's an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” – Patrick Henry

>>> Global Gulag Media & Forum <<<

JConner

  • Guest
Re: UN Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #7 on: July 20, 2012, 02:29:51 PM »


That is complete nonsense. First of all, the notion that the Vienna Convention on Treaties and any treaties can supercede the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is a myth and relies solely on people being ignorant about the supremacy clause in the Constitution and that treaties MUST be ratified through the senate. The clause does not state that treaties are supreme, but reinforces that the Constitution IS.


http://www.libertygunrights.com/2TreatySet10Pgs.pdf

You know what? You're absolutely right! That's why all that talk about 'indefinite detention' bills are complete nonsense as well, cause that would be unCONsteetootional, too!

Glad I can go back to sleep!

Offline larsonstdoc

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28,341
Re: UN Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #8 on: July 20, 2012, 04:49:23 PM »
http://global.christianpost.com/news/christian-leaders-urge-control-over-arms-and-ammunitions-in-un-treaty-78625/

  The World Council of Churches is the "SPLC of Christianity".  There isn't an ounce of good in that organization.


Christian Leaders Urge Control Over Arms and Ammunitions in UN Treaty

Raymond C. Offenheiser (left), Suzanne Nossel (center) and Bishop Elias Taban discuss the new Arms Trade Treaty at a press briefing at the United Nations on July 3, 2012.

A number of Christian organizations have come out with a joint statement addressing the current United Nations Arms Trade Treaty negotiations taking place, warning that time is running out and that strict new measures need to be imposed to combat the global problem.

"With thousands of people around the world killed or injured in armed violence each day, the governments' work will be judged by how many lives the treaty helps save," began the joint statement signed by members of the World Evangelical Alliance, World Council of Churches, Pax Christi International and Caritas.

More than 2,000 representatives from member states around the world are currently debating the issue and trying to come to an agreement, which is set to put a ban on, or greatly restrict arms sales in cases of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, terrorist acts and grave human rights violations.
I'M A DEPLORABLE KNUCKLEHEAD THAT SUPPORTS PRESIDENT TRUMP.  MAY GOD BLESS HIM AND KEEP HIM SAFE.

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,223
Re: UN Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #9 on: July 21, 2012, 06:04:56 PM »
http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/SALW/


...
Small arms and the UN

Governments have a responsibility to ensure public safety and they have an interest in providing human security and development to their citizens. So they should ensure that small arms from Government stocks or from private ownership are not misused and do not enter illicit circuits, where their use may contribute to instability and to exacerbating poverty.
 
To attain those goals, within the UN, countries have agreed on several commitments on small arms control: the Firearms Protocol, the Programme of Action on small arms - including an Instrument on marking and tracing - and the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials.
 
The topic of small arms comes up in other discussions as well. Countries are giving separate attention to closely related issues, such as armed violence, child soldiers, the protection of civilians in armed conflict, ammunition, the arms trade treaty and the UN register of conventional arms.

Production

The small arms industry appears to be fragmenting, bringing manufacturers closer to potential markets. More than 1,000 companies in about 100 countries are involved in some aspect of small arms production, with significant producers in around 30 countries. Conservative estimates mention 7.5 to 8 million small arms being produced per year.

Licensed production is now a common feature worldwide, sometimes leaving questions as to where responsibility lies with regard to the export of production techniques. Craft production, carried out in private workshops, is practiced in some regions and remains largely outside of control systems.
 
Marking and tracing

If national law enforcement officials were able to trace small arms back to their last legitimate owner, who might then be held accountable, this would form an effective measure against illicit trade and diversion. For that purpose, it is essential that the weapon be marked upon production and import, and that appropriate records be kept. Existing stocks should also be marked. Although many weapons are marked upon production and import, international cooperation in marking and tracing of small arms is in its infancy.
 
Traders and brokers

The vast majority of small arms are sold and transferred legally, but global patterns of supply of small arms and light weapons have changed profoundly over the past few decades. This has complicated controls. In the past, arms markets were relatively easy to survey, with far fewer supply outlets and less intermediate activity. Typically, closing a deal and delivering the goods were done by State authorities or Government agents. The use of private intermediaries has become common practice. These actors now routinely arrange transactions for defence industries, armed forces, law enforcement agencies and suppliers to Government as well as private entities, operating in a particularly globalized environment and often from multiple locations.

Contemporary traders, agents, brokers, shippers and financiers may well combine activities, making it difficult at times to distinguish small arms trade from brokering. Governments must assure that the shipments handled through these often complex networks are regulated according to the rule of law.

Investigations of arms embargo violations by the monitoring groups of the Security Council have exposed some international networks involved in the illicit trade and brokering of small arms. These brokers and dealers exploit legal loopholes, evade customs and airport controls and falsify documents such as passports, end-user certificates, cargo papers and flight schedules. Illicit activities by certain brokers and traders - and by the Government officials they collude with - have violated every UN arms embargo, with small arms and ammunition as the main items transferred.

A recurring problem concerning the proliferation of small arms, in particular in zones of crisis and conflict, is the absence of a normative framework for all States to guide decisions regarding arms transfers.
 
Ammunition

Information on global ammunition flows is difficult to obtain. More than 80 per cent of ammunition trade seems to remain outside of reliable export data. However, ammunition forms a key component of tackling the small arms topic in all its aspects. In contexts of sustained use, ammunition stockpiles are rapidly depleted. Preventing their resupply in unlawful situations should be a matter of prime concern. Furthermore, these stockpiles present a two-fold problem of security and safety - research shows that much of the non-State actors' ammunition are illicitly diverted from State security forces, and ammunition warehouses located in densely populated areas have exploded in a number of countries, causing thousands of casualties. Therefore, security as well as safety measures with regard to ammunition stockpiles need to be urgently addressed.
 
Stockpile management

Stockpile management and control is one of the most acute small arms problems. "Leaking" Government stockpiles are prominent sources of illegal small arms in circulation. Generally, surplus and obsolete weapons are better destroyed than stored. In post conflict settings, the immediate destruction of surplus weapons and ammunition removes possible fuel for new instability.

The results of collection and destruction programmes are mixed. Often, projects have had only marginal impact on security, presumably because it is typically the obsolete weapons that are destroyed, and because affected communities do not always participate in the design and implementation of collection programmes. Also, disarmament programmes tend to focus on weapons rather than ammunition. Most importantly, for weapons collection programmes to have a lasting effect, they must be embedded in robust efforts linked to violence reduction, reconciliation, security sector reform and peacebuilding.
...
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline chris jones

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21,621
Re: UN Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #10 on: July 21, 2012, 06:56:19 PM »
 This one baffles me, does anyone truly believe that we or any other entity can control the NSA,DOD,CIA,NATO, HIRED MERCS, super powers. etc.
  That any laws apply to the big dogs, that the constitution is the law of the land applies for these untouchables?
   The laws apply to the little people,            us.
   No rant.
 

Offline Nailer

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,448
Re: UN Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #11 on: July 23, 2012, 06:08:49 PM »
research this I found on a militia site.





DICK ACT of 1902..Cannot Be Repealed..GUN CONTROL FORBIDDEN !



listed several sources and printed two articles in case the links “disappear”. Don’t know if this ads to our “ammo” or
 Not. Can’t hurt. Please file away and push out to your email lists! ~victoria
 http://patrioticandproud.biz/blog/2011/07/19/the-dick-act-of-1902/
 http://www.care2.com/news/member/101930885/527449
 http://www.scribd.com/doc/93223004/DICK-ACT-1902-PART-3-OF-3-HR-11655
 http://www.gunandgame.com/forums/powder-keg/82716-anyone-ever-heard...
 https://www.unitedstatesmilitia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=854
 DICK ACT of 1902... CAN'T BE REPEALED (GUN CONTROL FORBIDDEN) - Protection Against Tyrannical Government
 Submitted by Jonathan on Sun, 03/29/2009 - 2:04pm.
 
Description: second amendment2
 The Dick Act of 1902 also known as the Efficiency of Militia Bill H.R. 11654, of June 28, 1902 invalidates all so-called gun-control laws. It also divides the militia into three distinct and separate entities.
 
** SPREAD THIS TO EVERYONE **
 The three classes H.R. 11654 provides for are the organized militia, henceforth known as the National Guard of the State, Territory and District of Columbia, the unorganized militia and the regular army.
 The militia encompasses every able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45. All members of the unorganized militia have the absolute personal right and 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms of any type, and as many as they can afford to buy.
 The Dick Act of 1902 cannot be repealed; to do so would violate bills of attainder and ex post facto laws which would be yet another gross violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
 The President of the United States has zero authority without violating the Constitution to call the National Guard to serve outside of their State borders.
 The National Guard Militia can only be required by the National Government for limited purposes specified in the Constitution (to uphold the laws of the Union; to suppress insurrection and repel invasion).
 These are the only purposes for which the General Government can call upon the National Guard.
 Attorney General Wickersham advised President Taft, "the Organized Militia (the National Guard) can not be employed for offensive warfare outside the limits of the United States."
 The Honorable William Gordon, in a speech to the House on Thursday, October 4, 1917, proved that the action of President Wilson in ordering the Organized Militia (the National Guard) to fight a war in Europe was so blatantly unconstitutional that he felt Wilson ought to have been impeached.
 During the war with England an attempt was made by Congress to pass a bill authorizing the president to draft 100,000 men between the ages of 18 and 45 to invade enemy territory, Canada.
 The bill was defeated in the House by Daniel Webster on the precise point that Congress had no such power over the militia as to authorize it to empower the President to draft them into the regular army and send them out of the country.
 The fact is that the President has no constitutional right, under any circumstances, to draft men from the militia to fight outside the borders of the USA, and not even beyond the borders of their respective states.
 Today, we have a constitutional LAW which still stands in waiting for the legislators to obey the Constitution which they swore an oath to uphold.
 Charles Hughes of the American Bar Association (ABA) made a speech which is contained in the Appendix to Congressional Record, House, September 10, 1917, pages 6836-6840 which states:
 "The militia, within the meaning of these provisions of the Constitution is distinct from the Army of the United States." In these pages we also find a statement made by Daniel Webster, "that the great principle of the Constitution on that subject is that the militia is the militia of the States and of the General Government; and thus being the militia of the States, there is no part of the Constitution worded with greater care and with more scrupulous jealousy than that which grants and limits the power of Congress over it."
 "This limitation upon the power to raise and support armies clearly establishes the intent and purpose of the framers of the Constitution to limit the power to raise and maintain a standing army to voluntary enlistment, because if the unlimited power to draft and conscript was intended to be conferred, it would have been a useless and puerile thing to limit the use of money for that purpose.
 Conscripted armies can be paid, but they are not required to be, and if it had been intended to confer the extraordinary power to draft the bodies of citizens and send them out of the country in direct conflict with the limitation upon the use of the militia imposed by the same section and article, certainly some restriction or limitation would have been imposed to restrain the unlimited use of such power."
 The Honorable William Gordon
 Congressional Record, House, Page 640 – 1917
 Source: http://www.knowthelies.com/?q=node%2F3949
 Description: https://fbexternal-a.akamaihd.net/safe_image.php?d=AQDMOP2VhGC3e2Cy...
 DICK ACT of 1902... CAN'T BE REPEALED (GUN CONTROL FORBIDDEN) - Protection Against Tyrannical Govern
 http://www.knowthelies.com/?q=node%2F3949
 The Dick Act of 1902 also known as the Efficiency of Militia Bill H.R. 11654, of June 28, 1902 invalidates all so-called gun-control laws. It also divides the militia into three distinct and separate entities.
 
Efficiency of Militia Bill H.R. 11654, June 28, 1902. Congressional Record, House, pages 7706-7713 and 321-353, 7594-7595. Also known as the Dick Act of 1902, written by Representative Dick, passed by Congress on June 30, 1902.
 
The three classes H.R. 11654 provides for are the organized militia, henceforth known as the National Guard of the State, Territory and District of Columbia, the unorganized militia and the regular army. The militia encompasses every able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45. All members of the unorganized militia have the absolute personal right and 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms of any type, and as many as they can afford to buy.
 
The Dick Act of 1902 cannot be repealed; to do so would violate bills of attainder and ex post facto laws which would be yet another gross violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The President of the United States has zero authority without violating the Constitution to call the National Guard to serve outside of their State borders.
 
The National Guard Militia can only be required by the National Government for limited purposes specified in the Constitution (to uphold the laws of the Union; to suppress insurrection and repel invasion). These are the only purposes for which the General Government can call upon the National Guard.
 Attorney General Wickersham advised President Taft, "the Organized Militia (the National Guard) can not be employed for offensive warfare outside the limits of the United States."
 
The Honorable William Gordon, in a speech to the House on Thursday, October 4, 1917, proved that the action of President Wilson in ordering the Organized Militia (the National Guard) to fight a war in Europe was so blatantly unconstitutional that he felt Wilson ought to have been impeached.
 
During the war with England an attempt was made by Congress to pass a bill authorizing the president to draft 100,000 men between the ages of 18 and 45 to invade enemy territory, Canada. The bill was defeated in the House by Daniel Webster on the precise point that Congress had no such power over the militia as to authorize it to empower the President to draft them into the regular army and send them out of the country.
 
The fact is that the President has no constitutional right, under any circumstances, to draft men from the militia to fight outside the borders of the USA, and not even beyond the borders of their respective states. Today, we have a constitutional LAW which still stands in waiting for the legislators to obey the Constitution which they swore an oath to uphold.
 
Charles Hughes of the American Bar Association (ABA) made a speech which is contained in the Appendix to Congressional Record, House, September 10, 1917, pages 6836-6840 which states: "The militia, within the meaning of these provisions of the Constitution is distinct from the Army of the United States." In these pages we also find a statement made by Daniel Webster, "that the great principle of the Constitution on that subject is that the militia is the militia of the States and of the General Government; and thus being the militia of the States, there is no part of the Constitution worded with greater care and with more scrupulous jealousy than that which grants and limits the power of Congress over it."
 
"This limitation upon the power to raise and support armies clearly establishes the intent and purpose of the framers of the Constitution to limit the power to raise and maintain a standing army to voluntary enlistment, because if the unlimited power to draft and conscript was intended to be conferred, it would have been a useless and puerile thing to limit the use of money for that purpose. Conscripted armies can be paid, but they are not required to be, and if it had been intended to confer the extraordinary power to draft the bodies of citizens and send them out of the country in direct conflict with the limitation upon the use of the militia imposed by the same section and article, certainly some restriction or limitation would have been imposed to restrain the unlimited use of such power."
 
The Honorable William Gordon
 Congressional Record, House, Page 640 - 1917
 
"Be it enacted that the militia shall consist of every able-bodied male citizen, respective of States, Territories, and the District of Columbia and every able-bodied male of foreign birth who has declared his intention to become a citizen, who is more than 18 and less than 45 years of age, shall be divided into three classes; the organized militia, to be known as The National Guard of the State, Territory or District of Columbia, or by such other designations by the laws of the respective States or Territories, as may be given by the laws of the respective States or Territories, the national voluntary reserve as provided in this act, and the remainder to be known as the reserve militia."
 
The Militia Act and the revised Militia Act (the Dick Act), make it quite clear that all men between the ages of 18 and 45 are the (unorganized) militia with an absolute right to keep and bear Arms under the Article II of the Bill of Rights, of whatever type; automatic or semi-automatic, regardless of size, magazine capacity, barrel length or caliber/gauge in any quantity they may deem necessary along with any amount of ammunition they may determine from time to time.
 
"The Right to Keep and Bear Arms Report", of the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the United States Senate Judiciary Committee; Ninety-seventh Congress, second session, February 1982. Orrin Hatch, Chairman.
 "That the National Guard is not the "Militia" referred to in the Second Amendment is even clearer today. Congress has organized the National Guard under its power to "raise and support armies", and not its power to "Provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia." This Congress chose to do so in the interest of organizing reserve military units which were not limited in deployment by the strictures of our power over Constitutional militia, which can be called forth only "to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrection, and repel invasions." The modern National Guard was specifically intended to avoid status as the Constitutional militia, a distinction recognized by Title 10 United States Code 311 (a)."
 
"The conclusion is thus inescapable that the history, concept, and wording of the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, as well as its interpretation by every major commenter and court in the first half-century after its ratification, indicates that what is protected is an individual right of a private citizen to own and carry firearms in a peaceful manner."
 
The Second Amendment right to keep and bear Arms, therefore, is a right of the individual citizen to privately possess and carry in a peaceful manner firearms and similar arms. Such an individual rights interpretation is in full accord with the history of the right to keep and bear arms previously discussed...It accurately reflects the majority of proposals that lead up to the Bill of Rights itself.
 
NOW, THEREFORE, all existing or future so-called "gun and/or ammunition laws", of whatever name or form under "color of law", whether Federal, Federal Agency, Pseudo Federal Agency, State, County or Municipal that infringes, abridges or restricts in any manner, the God given, unalienable, indefeasible, Constitutional right of Citizens to keep and bear Arms peaceably, openly or concealed, for their defense of life, liberty, and property are prima facie violations of Article 1, Sec. 9, Part 3; Article 6, Part 2; and Amendments I, II, IV, IX, and X of the Constitution for the United States of America; Article 2; Sec. 1, Sec. 2, Sec. 4, Sec. 5, Sec. 27, and Sec. 29 of the Constitution for the State of Arkansas; and the Dick Act of 1902, and are NO LAW, ab initio, ultra vires, of no force and effect, incumbent upon no one to obey or any court to enforce.
 __________________
 https://www.unitedstatesmilitia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=854 SOURCE
 
Victoria Baer
 Description: Description: LogoBAEREDGE
 4320 Deerwood Lake Pkwy #101-222
 Jacksonville, FL 32216
 904.982.1734 PH
 904.996.1510 FAX
 Victoria@baeredge.net
 www.BaerEdge.net
I am a realist that is slightly conservative yet I have some republican demeanor that can turn democrat when I feel the urge to flip independant.
 
The truth shall set you free, if not a 45ACP round will do the trick.. HEHE

JConner

  • Guest
Re: UN Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #12 on: July 26, 2012, 03:33:02 PM »
And how's that 'dick act' workin out for ya?

THEY don't give a rat's ass about 'lawful' or 'constitutional'.

NO PIECE OF PAPER is going to save us.


Offline Nailer

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,448
Re: UN Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #13 on: July 27, 2012, 06:48:46 AM »
And how's that 'dick act' workin out for ya?

THEY don't give a rat's ass about 'lawful' or 'constitutional'.

NO PIECE OF PAPER is going to save us.



we can only save ourselves by disobeying any and all unconstitutional laws and treaties signed.

We the people are now responsible for defending and upholding the Constitution as our Government and foreign entities ( UN ) are out to destroy it.
Lock N Load gun owners and prepare for War is the current language on the web.

I am a realist that is slightly conservative yet I have some republican demeanor that can turn democrat when I feel the urge to flip independant.
 
The truth shall set you free, if not a 45ACP round will do the trick.. HEHE

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,223
Re: UN Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #14 on: July 27, 2012, 10:38:45 AM »
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/2012-07-27/revised-draft-raises-hopes-for-arms-trade-treaty
Revised draft raises hopes for arms trade treaty
By Edith M. Lederer on July 27, 2012

UNITED NATIONS (AP) — A revised draft of a new U.N. treaty to regulate the multibillion dollar global arms trade raised hopes from supporters and the British government, which has been the leading proponent, that an historic agreement could be reached by Friday's deadline for action.

The draft circulated late Thursday closed several loopholes in the original text, though the Washington-based Arms Control Association said further improvements are still needed to strengthen measures against illicit arms transfers.
...
Opponents in the U.S., especially the powerful National Rifle Association, have portrayed the treaty as a surrender of gun ownership rights enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. The issue of gun control, always politically explosive one for American politicians, has re-emerged since last week's shooting at a Colorado cinema killed 12 people

In Washington, a bipartisan group of 51 senators on Thursday threatened to oppose the treaty if it falls short in protecting Americans' constitutional right to bear arms. In a letter to President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, the senators expressed serious concerns with the draft treaty that has circulated at the United Nations, saying that it signals an expansion of gun control that would be unacceptable.

Supporters  [and  Lying bastards] of the treaty say it will not affect law-abiding individual gun owners  , but would close loopholes that allow arms dealers to evade the strict laws that already exist in countries and transfer guns through weaker states.
...

The new draft makes clear that doesn't pertain only to arms exports but to all types of arms transfers, closing a loophole raised by campaigners.

The United States objected to any requirement to report on exports of ammunition and that remains out of the latest draft.
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,223
Re: UN Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #15 on: July 27, 2012, 10:46:12 AM »
51 lying bastards say they will oppose the NWO treaty that they support... Understand the Senate is Demo controlled, gee, does the Potus have any blackmail going on these guys? No that would be wrong  Does this "joker" want to be re-selected? Maybe not

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/us-senators-threaten-to-block-un-weapons-treaty-over-right-to-bear-arms/article4443407/
U.S. senators threaten to block UN weapons treaty over right to bear arms
Jul. 26 2012, 7:09 PM

A bipartisan group of 51 senators on Thursday threatened to oppose a global treaty regulating international weapons trade if it falls short in protecting Americans’ constitutional right to bear arms.
...
The senators said as the negotiations continue, “we strongly encourage your administration not only to uphold our country’s constitutional protections of civilian firearms ownership, but to ensure – if necessary, by breaking consensus at the July conference – that the treaty will explicitly recognize the legitimacy of lawful activities associated with firearms, including but not limited to the right of self-defence.
“As members of the United States Senate, we will oppose the ratification of any Arms Trade Treaty that falls short of this standard,” they wrote.

The lawmakers insisted that the treaty should explicitly recognize the legitimacy of hunting, sport shooting and other lawful activities.

They also raised concerns that the draft defines international arms transfers as including transport across national territory while requiring the monitor and control of arms in transit.

The National Rifle Association, the powerful U.S. gun lobby, opposes the treaty, saying its members will never surrender the right to bear arms to the United Nations.
...
A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly, told The Associated Press earlier this week that the United States wants export controls to prevent illicit transfers of arms and has been making clear its “red lines, including that we will not accept any treaty that infringes on Americans’ Second Amendment rights.” The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to bear arms.
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline MonkeyPuppet

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,976
  • aut libertas aut mors
Re: UN Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #16 on: July 27, 2012, 11:00:36 AM »

The National Rifle Association, the powerful U.S. gun lobby, opposes the treaty, saying its members will never surrender the right to bear arms to the United Nations.


While I oppose the treaty outright due to the fact that the U.S. should NEVER agree with an international committee on anything that would restrict it's ability to trade, the NRA is not against this because they give a shit about the individual unalienable right to keep and bear arms.

The NRA, as a political lobby, is protecting its constituents... that would be gun manufacturers who make shitloads of money selling arms internationally without much scrutiny.

Read the actual treaty itself.  There is nothing that dictates State Parties are to disarm their citizens.  It is about a international trade.

Income Tax: Shattering The Myths
w w w . original intent . o r g

The 1911 in .45 ACP... don't leave home without it!  Safety first!!

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,223
Re: UN Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #17 on: July 27, 2012, 11:14:11 AM »
...
Read the actual treaty itself.  There is nothing that dictates State Parties are to disarm their citizens.  It is about a international trade.

The problem is any gun sale domestically is a potential international transfer and sale. They want to track all domestic gun and ammunition production and sales.
One objective is to shut down all independant gunsmiths and dealers. No private sales. Once the regulate they can set fee's and penaties so high as to
shut out all but the largest out of the business.
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline MonkeyPuppet

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,976
  • aut libertas aut mors
Re: UN Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #18 on: July 27, 2012, 11:21:48 AM »

The problem is any gun sale domestically is a potential international transfer and sale. They want to track all domestic gun and ammunition production and sales.
One objective is to shut down all independant gunsmiths and dealers. No private sales. Once the regulate they can set fee's and penaties so high as to
shut out all but the largest out of the business.


While I'm sure some smarmy douches will attempt to interpret it this way, I'm just not seeing it in the wording itself.  I guess it comes down to what is considered diligent and responsible with regard to domestic controls regarding the monitoring of arms for international trade purposes.

Article 12 Part A
Each State Party shall adopt national legislation or other appropriate national measures regulations and policies as may be necessary to implement the obligations of this Treaty.

For context, we turn back to the Preamble...

Reaffirming the sovereign right and responsibility of any State to regulate and control transfers of conventional arms that take place exclusively within its territory pursuant to its own legal or constitutional systems

Income Tax: Shattering The Myths
w w w . original intent . o r g

The 1911 in .45 ACP... don't leave home without it!  Safety first!!

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,223
Re: UN Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #19 on: July 27, 2012, 11:32:33 AM »
While I'm sure some smarmy douches will attempt to interpret it this way, I'm just not seeing it in the wording itself.  I guess it comes down to what is considered diligent and responsible with regard to domestic controls regarding the monitoring of arms for international trade purposes.

I think this article pretty much sums it up (which actually goes with the thread title):

http://www.ijreview.com/2012/07/10064-un-small-arms-treaty-barack-obamas-backdoor-gun-control-may-pass/
UN Small Arms Treaty: Barack Obama’s Backdoor Gun Control May Pass
 Kevin Danielsen July 10, 2012


...
While it is difficult to sift through the various UN treaties, the ‘small arms treaty’ is a part of a much larger initiative to curtail individual gun rights.  In essence, the ‘small arms treaty’, the ‘Law of the Sea’ treaty, and the ‘Arms Trade Treaty’ can be bundled into one giant effort to remove US sovereignty, giving the UN control over the liberties of US citizens, nullifying protections Americans have enjoyed since the birth of the US.

Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have already vowed to sign such a treaty.  In fact, both have largely been working behind closed doors, as they know full-well that Americans would surely show staunch resistance if their agenda committed to ‘open war’.

Douglas J. Hagmann of the HomelandSecurityUS.com reports:

Regardless of how unlikely it would appear that the U.S. Senate would ratify the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty, the antagonism to the right to bear arms in the U.S. by Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and our elected officials cannot be disputed. While seeming to loathe the Second Amendment, the majority of their efforts to enforce gun control appear to be “under the radar” to avoid raising the ire of the advocates of the right to bear arms.”

What does this mean for Americans?  All of these ‘treaties’ have a common thread, which boil down to 4 directives.  Katie Pavlich, the Editor of TownHall.com, reports:


-Enact tougher licensing requirements, creating additional bureaucratic red tape for legal firearms ownership.

-Confiscate and destroy all “unauthorized” civilian firearms (exempting those owned by our government of course).

-Ban the trade, sale and private ownership of all semi-automatic weapons (any that have magazines even though they still operate in the same one trigger pull – one single “bang” manner as revolvers, a simple fact the anti-gun media never seem to grasp).

-Create an international gun registry, clearly setting the stage for full-scale gun confiscation.

In short, overriding our national sovereignty, and in the process, providing license for the federal government to assert preemptive powers over state regulatory powers guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment in addition to our Second Amendment rights.”

According to various White House insiders, Barack Hussein Obama has not been idle, saying, “I just want you to know that we are working on it,” he continues …“We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.”  Perhaps, this is why the President has been curiously silent on the subject, as he does not want to attract attention to what he is truly doing through the various UN treaties.

Either way, this spells bad news for American gun rights.  Anthony Martin of the Examiner.com stated:


As the United Nations prepares its final push to ratify a controversial gun treaty, the U.S. Senate is set to approve the measure which critics say will not only give away U.S. sovereignty but directly attack the individual gun rights of American citizens, according to a report published Thursday at Stand Up America.

Democrats still hold the majority in the Senate.”
...
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

JConner

  • Guest
Re: UN Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #20 on: July 27, 2012, 11:40:32 AM »
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=234520.0

The Text of the treaty includes the following language:

"Recognizing the legitimate international trade and lawful private ownership and use of conventional arms exclusively for, inter alia, recreational, cultural, historical and sporting activities for States where such ownership and use are permitted or protected by law;"

This means the UN Treaty does NOT recognize the Second Amendment, and ONLY ("exclusively") for 'sporting, recreational, cultural, historical' purposes. A nation that signs on to the Treaty is thus BOUND BY TREATY TO ADHERE TO THAT, ie, recognizing private ownership of arms EXCLUSIVELY for 'sporting, recreational, cultural, historical' purposes.

"Each State Party shall establish and maintain a national control system to regulate the export of parts and components to the extent necessary to ensure that national controls on the export of the conventional arms covered by Paragraph A1 are not circumvented by the export of parts and components of those items."

This will effectively eliminate the importation into the US of gun parts kits, foreign replacement parts, etc. If you do not understand the logistical implications of this, then you do not understand either the global arms business AT ALL or you do not understand the 'end game' of this treaty, which is to slowly suffocate and dry up any private ownership of MILITARY-TYPE WEAPONRY.

"Each State Party shall establish or update, as appropriate, and maintain a national control list that shall include the items that fall within Paragraph 1 above, as defined on a national basis, based on relevant UN instruments at a minimum. Each State Party shall publish its control list to the extent permitted by national law."

Here's the Big One - this demands the US establish a NATIONAL REGISTRY of 'small arms' - which will include AT LEAST all semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, and possibly could be taken to mean ANY rifle, ANY handgun, ANY shotgun. In other words, converting ALL semi-auto's to NFA regulated weapons. Which by the way has been mentioned before by some pro-disarmament politicians and organisations.

Then there's this:

"At any time after the Treaty’s entry into force, a State Party may propose an amendment to this Treaty. ... A proposed amendment adopted in accordance with Paragraph 3 of this Article shall enter into force for all States Parties to the Treaty that have accepted it, upon deposit with the Depositary. Thereafter, it shall enter into force for any remaining State Party on the date of deposit of its instrument of accession."

So there's the back-door for 'future amendments' which could include ANYTHING. THAT is where the REAL danger lies (that and the 'national control list' described above). A future Amendment prohibiting private ownership of magazines having a capacity of more than 10 rounds, for example, could be passed WITHOUT ANY FANFARE, NO SENATE HEARINGS, NO SENATE VOTE, etc. Also, here's how the Amendments would be adopted: "Any amendment to this Treaty shall be adopted by consensus, or if consensus is not achieved, by two-thirds of the States Parties present and voting at the Conference of States Parties."

Amendments can and probably would be forced upon the US by a 2/3rds vote. Think 2/3rds of the UN Membership list is pro-Second Amendment? Hardly.

This Treaty includes CLEAR VIOLATIONS of the Second Amendment, and subverts the Constitutional authority of Congress as well by taking LEGISLATIVE POWERS AWAY from congress and placing them in the hands of a foreign power governing by 'consensus OR 2/3rds vote', which votes are cast entirely by UNELECTED people (unelected by American citizens). Not to mention the budgetary issues, which essentially reduce down to taxation without representation.

The main threats, then, are a disruption of parts and rifle imports to the US, disruption of foreign ammunition (which is just about the only affordable ammunition available in quantity to Americans), establishing a national registry of arms, and the open ended 'future amendments' possibilities.

To suggest this Treaty has no impact on American civilians is naive and ill-informed AT BEST.

Oh, and screw the NRA, they are America's oldest gun control organisation in existence.

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,223
Re: UN Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #21 on: August 03, 2012, 12:41:34 PM »

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/27/un-fails-to-reach-deal-on-global-arms-trade-treaty-as-us-asks-for-more-time/
UN fails to reach deal on global arms trade treaty, as US asks for more time
Published July 27, 2012


UNITED NATIONS –  U.N. member states have failed to reach agreement on a new treaty to regulate the multibillion-dollar global arms trade.
 
Some diplomats and treaty supporters blamed the United States for triggering the unraveling of the month-long negotiating conference.
 
Hopes had been raised that agreement could be reached on a revised treaty text that closed some key loopholes by Friday's deadline for action.

But the United States announced Friday morning that it needed more time to consider the proposed treaty -- and Russia and China then also asked for more time.

A bipartisan group of 51 U.S. senators on Thursday had threatened to oppose the global treaty regulating international weapons trade if it falls short in protecting the constitutional right to bear arms

...

 Despite the failure to reach agreement, Moritan predicted that "we certainly are going to have a treaty in 2012."
 
  He said there are several options for moving forward in the General Assembly which will be considered over the summer, before the world body's new session begins in September.
 
  Britain has taken the lead in pushing for a treaty to reduce the impact of the illicit arms trade.
 
  Ahead of Friday's meeting, Britain's Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg discussed treaty prospects with U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in London and told reporters and both urged the treaty's adoption.
 
  "Global rules govern the sale of everything from bananas to endangered species to weapons of mass destruction, but not guns or grenades," Clegg said. "This anomaly causes untold suffering in conflicts around the world. 1,000 people are killed daily by small arms wielded by terrorists, insurgents and criminal gangs."
 
  The secretary-general said he was disappointed at the failure to agree on a treaty, calling it "a setback." But he said he was encouraged that states have agreed to continue pursuing a treaty and pledged his "robust" support.
 
  At the end of the negotiating session, Mexico read a joint statement from more than 90 countries saying they "are determined to secure an Arms Trade Treaty as soon as possible."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/27/un-fails-to-reach-deal-on-global-arms-trade-treaty-as-us-asks-for-more-time/#ixzz22VBoWCLp
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline a ReVoLuTIONarY ideA

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 280
Re: UN Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #22 on: August 04, 2012, 11:06:51 PM »
Meanwhile in Washington...

U.S. homeland-security and law-enforcement agencies have objected to Obama administration proposals to relax export restrictions on high-powered firearms, threatening a centerpiece of the president’s trade…agenda.
 
The agencies, in internal memos viewed by The Wall Street Journal, warn the changes could help arm drug cartels and terrorists and make it harder for the U.S. to crack down on gun-trafficking.
...
Under the proposed rules, close-assault weapons, sniper rifles, combat shotguns and ammunition would be moved from the “strict controls” of the Munitions List to a “lesser controlled” Commerce list, according to a Homeland Security memo.
...
Homeland Security warned in its memo that many eligible countries in Europe have “considerable government corruption, significant underground economies and no border controls for exports allowing these countries to serve as transshipment points for diversion of small arms and light weapons.” No [specific] country was named


Full Article: http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/daily-news-article/white-house-efforts-to-relax-gun-exports-face-resistance/

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,223
Re: UN Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #23 on: September 24, 2012, 02:06:19 PM »
UN Small Arms Treaty Passes

Remember the days when know-it-alls would tell you...  "The UN doesn't have ANY authority to do anything."  Oh, really?

UN Small Arms Treaty Passes While Media (does it's job to...) Sleep

The United Nations Small Arms Treaty passed in its second session. The Media was silent over its passage.

According to the UN’s press release,

Concluding its two-week session today, the second United Nations conference to review the 2001 Programme of Action on trafficking in small arms and light weapons adopted a consensus outcome document that highlighted the international community’s renewed commitment to preventing, combating and eradicating the illicit trade.

The document’s adoption represented a major achievement for delegations, who had failed to agree on a final outcome at the first review conference, held in 2006. “We accomplished something great today,” said U. Joy Ogwu ( Nigeria), President of the Conference, formally known as the United Nations Conference to Review Progress Made in the Implementation of the Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects.

According to the text, Member States renewed their pledge to rid the world of the scourge brought upon it by the illicit manufacture, transfer and circulation of small arms and light weapons, and their excessive accumulation and uncontrolled spread in many parts of the world. They also committed to mobilizing the necessary political will and resources to implement the Programme of Action and the International Tracing Instrument, with the aim of achieving clear and tangible results over the next six years, through 2018.

Further by the text, States emphasized that the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons continued to sustain conflicts, exacerbate armed violence, undermine respect for international humanitarian law and international human rights law, aid terrorism and illegal armed groups, and facilitate increasing levels of transnational organized crime, as well as trafficking in humans, drugs and certain natural resources.



Read more...
http://www.thedailysheeple.com/un-small-arms-treaty-passes-while-media-sleeps_092012

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,223
Re: UN Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #24 on: September 24, 2012, 02:11:38 PM »

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2012/dc3389.doc.htm

7 September 2012
...
Representatives of Israel and the United States said they wished to disassociate themselves from preambular paragraph 11 of the Programme of Action, relating to the right to self-determination of people under foreign occupation.

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline Effie Trinket

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,293
Obama is wasting no time to destroy America-new U.N. arms treaty talks
« Reply #25 on: November 07, 2012, 07:32:20 PM »
Replete with psyops pretending that it won't violate the Constitution:

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-win-u-backs-u-n-arms-treaty-193445288.html

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Hours after U.S. President Barack Obama was re-elected, the United States backed a U.N. committee's call on Wednesday to renew debate over a draft international treaty to regulate the $70 billion global conventional arms trade.

U.N. delegates and gun control activists have complained that talks collapsed in July largely because Obama feared attacks from Republican rival Mitt Romney if his administration was seen as supporting the pact, a charge Washington denies.

The month-long talks at U.N. headquarters broke off after the United States - along with Russia and other major arms producers - said it had problems with the draft treaty and asked for more time.

But the U.N. General Assembly's disarmament committee moved quickly after Obama's win to approve a resolution calling for a new round of talks March 18-28. It passed with 157 votes in favor, none against and 18 abstentions.

U.N. diplomats said the vote had been expected before Tuesday's U.S. presidential election but was delayed due to Superstorm Sandy, which caused a three-day closure of the United Nations last week.

An official at the U.S. mission said Washington's objectives have not changed.

"We seek a treaty that contributes to international security by fighting illicit arms trafficking and proliferation, protects the sovereign right of states to conduct legitimate arms trade, and meets the concerns that we have been articulating throughout," the official said.

"We will not accept any treaty that infringes on the constitutional rights of our citizens to bear arms," he said.

U.S. officials have acknowledged privately that the treaty under discussion would have no effect on domestic gun sales and ownership because it would apply only to exports.

The main reason the arms trade talks are taking place at all is that the United States - the world's biggest arms trader accounting for more than 40 percent of global conventional arms transfers - reversed U.S. policy on the issue after Obama was first elected and decided in 2009 to support a treaty.

'MONTHS AWAY' FROM DEAL?

Countries that abstained included Russia, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Sudan, Belarus, Cuba and Iran. China, a major arms producer that has traditionally abstained, voted in favor.

Among the top six arms-exporting nations, Russia cast the only abstention. Britain, France and Germany joined China and the United States in support of the resolution.

The measure now goes to the 193-nation General Assembly for a formal vote. It is expected to pass.

The resolution said countries are "determined to build on the progress made to date towards the adoption of a strong, balanced and effective Arms Trade Treaty."

Jeff Abramson, director of Control Arms, a coalition of advocacy groups, urged states to agree on stringent provisions.

"In Syria, we have seen the death toll rise well over 30,000, with weapons and ammunition pouring in the country for months now," he said. "We need a treaty that will set tough rules to control the arms trade, that will save lives and truly make the world a better place."

Brian Wood of Amnesty International said: "After today's resounding vote, if the larger arms trading countries show real political will in the negotiations, we're only months away from securing a new global deal that has the potential to stop weapons reaching those who seriously abuse human rights."

The treaty would require states to make respecting human rights a criterion for allowing arms exports.

Britain's U.N. mission said on its Twitter feed it hoped that the March negotiations would yield the final text of a treaty. Such a pact would then need to be ratified by the individual signatories before it could enter into force.

The National Rifle Association, the powerful U.S. interest group, strongly opposes the arms treaty and had endorsed Romney.

The United States has denied it sought to delay negotiations for political reasons, saying it had genuine problems with the draft as written.

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,223
Re: UN Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #26 on: November 07, 2012, 08:27:00 PM »
bump - back on the table with BO reselection
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

JConner

  • Guest
Re: Obama is wasting no time to destroy America-new U.N. arms treaty talks
« Reply #27 on: November 08, 2012, 09:57:18 AM »

U.S. officials have acknowledged privately that the treaty under discussion would have no effect on domestic gun sales and ownership because it would apply only to exports.


And that is the point. All that IMPORTED ammo... gone, because the nations EXPORTING that ammo to the US would no longer be allowed to. All those IMPORTED rifles, handguns, shotguns... GONE, for the same reasons.

So we'll be stuck with whatever we already have, and maybe AR15s. BUT, most AR manufacturers, and most ammo manufacturers, are now owned by the Eye of Soros, and methinks the Dark Lord will not long tolerate us peasants having access to firearms and ammunition...

Offline MonkeyPuppet

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,976
  • aut libertas aut mors
Re: Obama is wasting no time to destroy America-new U.N. arms treaty talks
« Reply #28 on: November 08, 2012, 10:26:21 AM »

And that is the point. All that IMPORTED ammo... gone, because the nations EXPORTING that ammo to the US would no longer be allowed to. All those IMPORTED rifles, handguns, shotguns... GONE, for the same reasons.

So we'll be stuck with whatever we already have, and maybe AR15s. BUT, most AR manufacturers, and most ammo manufacturers, are now owned by the Eye of Soros, and methinks the Dark Lord will not long tolerate us peasants having access to firearms and ammunition...


This is old "news", and apparently not true...

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/10/george-soros-gun-grab/

http://www.isra.org/alerts/freedom_group/

http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/articles/2012/7/rumor-control.aspx


Again, I'm not for the U.S. being party to any international treaty or body, but the prohibition on exports from parties to the treaty to the list of prohibited recipient nations would inherently exclude the U.S. ... most notably because the U.S. would not be on that list.  The treaty is not a ban on all exports of firearms and ammunition, but rather a ban on exports to those listed as prohibited.

I'm not defending the treaty.  I just think conjecture is not a solid foundation upon which to formulate an objective opposition.

Income Tax: Shattering The Myths
w w w . original intent . o r g

The 1911 in .45 ACP... don't leave home without it!  Safety first!!

Offline fred.greek

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
Re: UN Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #29 on: November 08, 2012, 07:41:41 PM »
Constitutional checks and balances only work if you have a government the respects such, or a population ready to oust the politicians who ignore it.  Re the power of treaties, the constitution says:

“… 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… “

It is easy to see that in the mind of some, a ratified treaty that, for an extreme example, said that the treaty controls in some aspect of US law or future treaties, then these individuals would see that further treaties that comply with the earlier one are “automatically” valid…  Absent a insisting population.
Retired but still working in the garden...

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,223
Re: UN Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #30 on: December 17, 2012, 01:39:00 PM »
bump fyi
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,223
Re: Small Arms Treaty
« Reply #31 on: December 17, 2012, 01:42:04 PM »
bump - way back machine....
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,223
Re: UN Small Arms Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #32 on: January 11, 2013, 12:37:36 PM »
bump for Obama Disarmament push to be in time for the next UN vote!
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

EvadingGrid

  • Guest
Re: UN Small Arms Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #33 on: January 11, 2013, 12:46:14 PM »
bump for Obama Disarmament push to be in time for the next UN vote!

yup it is important.

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,223
Re: UN Small Arms Disarmament Treaty back-door
« Reply #34 on: January 11, 2013, 12:58:58 PM »
yup it is important.


Next round:
http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/ArmsTradeTreaty/



March 18-28 2013 NEW YORK !!!

http://www.un.org/disarmament/ATT/

All Member States of the United Nations gathered in New York on 2-27 July 2012 for an historical initiative in the area of conventional arms: to negotiate an Arms Trade Treaty.

The Treaty would establish high common standards for international trade in conventional arms. Despite the efforts put forth by delegations during the intense four weeks of negotiations, the Conference could not reach agreement on a treaty text.

The General Assembly of the United Nations has decided to convene another conference in March 2013 to conclude the work begun in July 2012.
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

EvadingGrid

  • Guest
Re: UN Small Arms Disarmament Treaty back-door - March 18 2013 New York
« Reply #35 on: January 11, 2013, 01:17:53 PM »
I predict it is just a matter of time before they start saying we gotta criminalize guns because the UN says so...

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,223
Re: UN Small Arms Disarmament Treaty back-door - March 18 2013 New York
« Reply #36 on: January 11, 2013, 01:43:54 PM »
I predict it is just a matter of time before they start saying we gotta criminalize guns because the UN says so...

Piers morgans / Ted Turner's CNN - we are the target!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Turner

UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan (right) meeting with Ted Turner (centre), chairman of the board of the United Nations Foundation, and John D. Negroponte, representative of the United States to the United Nations, as Turner presents Negroponte with a contribution to U.S. assessments for the United Nations, New York City, September 2001. Credit: UN Foundation.


Robert Edward "Ted" Turner III (born November 19, 1938[2]) is an American media mogul. As a businessman, he is known as founder of the cable news network CNN, the first 24-hour cable news channel. In addition, he founded WTBS, which pioneered the superstation concept in cable television.

As a philanthropist, he is known for his $1 billion gift to support the United Nations, which created the United Nations Foundation, a public charity to broaden support for the UN. Turner serves as Chairman of the United Nations Foundation board of directors.[3]

http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2012/07/27/time-to-face-facts-on-gun-control/
Time to face facts on gun control - July 27th, 2012
By Fareed Zakaria


It has now been just over a week since a lone gunman opened fire on moviegoers in Aurora, Colorado. The airwaves have been dominated by soul searching. ...
i2.cdn.turner.com
We have 5 percent of the world's population and 50 percent of the guns.
 
But the sheer number of guns isn’t an isolated statistic. The data shows we compare badly on fatalities, too.  The U.S has three gun homicides per 100,000 people. That’s four times as many as Switzerland, ten times as many as India, 20 times as many as Australia and England.
 
Whatever you think of gun rights and gun control, the numbers don’t flatter America. ...
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,223
Re: UN Small Arms Disarmament Treaty back-door - March 18 2013 New York
« Reply #37 on: January 11, 2013, 02:10:31 PM »

http://politicalvelcraft.org/2013/01/10/breaking-democrats-passed-law-in-2010-which-prevents-gun-and-ammo-registry-obama-signed-into-law-on-march-21-2010-senate-amendment-3276-sec-2716-part-c/


On March 21, 2010 Barry Soetoro Signed Harry Reid’s Senate Amendment 3276, Sec. 2716, Part C, which prevents the government from collecting “any information relating to the lawful ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition.”
 
It was put into the bill by Senator Harry Reid — in order to keep the NRA out of the Obamacare fight. Well, thank you Harry Reid?
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,223
Re: UN Small Arms Disarmament Treaty back-door - March 18 2013 New York
« Reply #38 on: January 15, 2013, 12:40:52 PM »
http://www.un.org/disarmament/
DISARMAMENT - SELECTED EVENTS IN 2013

2013 session of Conference on Disarmament — The Geneva-based 65 member Conference on Disarmament (CD), established in 1979 as the sole multilateral disarmament negotiating forum,
will hold its first session of 2013 from 21 January to 29 March.
The second and third sessions will be held on 13 May to 28 June and 29 July to 13 September, respectively
...
DISARMAMENT - SELECTED EVENTS IN 2013
 
Final UN Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty — No set of internationally agreed standards exist to guide States in making arms transfer decisions. The UN General Assembly has decided to change this situation and will convene

the Final Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), from 18 to 28 March 2013 "to negotiate a legally binding instrument on the highest possible common international standards for the transfer of conventional arms".
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,223
Re: UN Small Arms Disarmament Treaty back-door - March 18 2013 New York
« Reply #39 on: January 16, 2013, 09:08:07 PM »
Notice they have decided on the schedule (which was delayed last year because they didn't have the votes - now they are redoubling the efforts.  In light of recent events I shudder to think what comes next. .
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5