Posted on 07/18/2011 5:44:01 AM PDT by Kaslin
Last week I went to New York to attend a meeting that should concern every gun owner and freedom-loving American in this great nation.
NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre and I attended a committee meeting at United Nations headquarters to send a simple, unequivocal message to the international bureaucrats who want to eliminate your right to keep and bear arms: An international Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) that in any way, shape or form affects the constitutional rights of American gun owners is completely unacceptable.
NRA will make no compromise on this critical issue.
In 2009, at the behest of the Obama administration, the United States joined 152 other countries in endorsing a U.N. Arms Trade Treaty Resolution. The Resolution establishes an international conference to be held next year, at which leaders from various countries around the world – many of which have deplorable human rights records – will draw up an international treaty designed to severely restrict or even outright ban your right to sell, purchase, carry or own a firearm.
NRA has been warning American gun owners about this ticking time bomb for 15 years. NRA-ILA was the first group to be officially recognized by the U.N. as a “non-governmental organization” representing gun owners, and we’ve attended dozens of meetings around the world to protect the freedoms of American gun owners, hunters and shooters.
President Obama, Hillary Clinton and the U.N. claim that the only purpose of the ATT is to fight terrorism and international crime syndicates. Americans should not be fooled.
NRA has monitored and studied all of the various ATT proposals to date. There can be no question that what is taking shape at the U.N. is an all-out attack on the constitutional freedom of American gun owners. While a treaty can’t override the Second Amendment, it can become the law of the land, either directly – equal to any law passed by Congress – or through implementing legislation.
That’s why we must take notice when international anti-gun activists demand ATT provisions that would force America to license firearm owners; severely restrict all firearm purchases; destroy certain firearms deemed “unauthorized”; ban commonly owned semi-automatic rifles; or join an international gun registry.
Astute readers know that U.S. participation in any U.N. treaty (the ATT included) requires ratification by a two-thirds majority of the U.S. Senate. Gun owners and liberty-minded Americans should note, however, that Hillary Clinton’s State Department has not been shy about its determination to push for Senate ratification of this gun ban treaty.
In a 2010 speech to the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Clinton’s Under Secretary for Arms Control told the audience: “We will work between now and the U.N. Conference in 2012 to negotiate a legally binding Arms Trade Treaty, and we’ll need your help in achieving it. We have made that a fundamental policy commitment.” (Emphasis is mine.)
So you can bet that if President Obama wins a second term he’ll move full speed ahead for Senate ratification and implementation of the ATT’s mandates. Popular or not, it won’t matter, because he won’t need to appeal to voters for re-election.
Even if a treaty isn’t ratified, it never dies – and can still affect your rights. The U.S. Senate could take a signed treaty off the shelf and try to ratify it 10, 20 or 50 years from now – as we know from experience. Just two years ago, we had to fight off a push to bring up a 1997 Organization of American States gun control treaty in the Senate. And even though the U.S. has never ratified that OAS treaty, the Clinton administration still used it as an excuse to restrict exports of gun parts and accessories to Canada of all places.
Obama and Clinton have spent their entire careers demonizing American gun owners and doing everything in their power to make firearms ownership more expensive, more difficult, and in many cases, illegal. Now they want to unleash the U.N. gun-ban axis on our right to keep and bear arms.
It’s time for all Americans to sound the alarm on this treacherous assault on U.S. sovereignty.
the only purpose of the ATT is to fight terrorismI'm really starting to hate the so-called War on Terror.
you can bet that if President Obama wins a second term he’ll move full speed ahead for Senate ratification and implementation of the ATT’s mandatesWarning to all the purists here in FR: I'm going to be posting this quote, and a link to this thread, periodically between now and Nov, 2012.
Do you think if we were fighting Hitler and Tojo that the liberals would not rephrase this as "the only purpose of the ATT is to fight fascism?"
It does not make the war on terror wrong. It just shows that liberals, who refuse to fight the war on terror, are willing to use it in order to disarm the last nation on Earth where firearm rights are mostly intact.
US out of the UN, UN off US soil.....
I no longer believe these people are purists.
They are either as naive as the Jewish people who support Palestinian terrorists or they are simply evil infiltrators who should be banned from FR.
I will fight during the primary to ensure we have a solid conservative candidate. If I lose, I will support a ham sandwich over Obama, even if his last name is Romney.
Get us the “H” out of the UN. Eliminate the UN. It's been a Communist base from day one.
Been to an airport lately?
The fact is, after 9/11 all we had to do was harden the cockpit doors and arm the pilots.
We did the former, I’m not sure of the status of the latter, but in the meantime we’ve empowered an army of jackbooted thugs to grope 80year olds and 8year olds in the name of “War on Terror”... and at the same time, there is ATT.
As for the war against Germany and Japan in the 40s, that was a clearly defined DELCARED war with clearly defined objectives, fighting against clearly defined enemies.
The “War on Terror” is kept purposely vague and has a single, solitary goal: the magnification of State Power.
Ping!
I agree with the sentiment you express in #7 but with an explicit qualification:
The nomination of Willard Romney by the Republican Party will mean the certain re-election of The Kenyan King.
I understand what you are saying in #7 and I am not disagreeing with the concept you express, but I insist that nominating Romney will be a disaster of epic proportions.
Who actually believes that terrorist groups, rogue nations, and drug cartels would ever be constrained by this treaty.
Whoever believes it, I would love to sell you a terrific investment in skittles production, where you will have unlimited skittles coming out of unicorn a$$es.
Mark
Yes, it would be.....but we can only blame ourselves for not taking control of the party.
You are right. We all have to do our part to make sure this doesn’t happen.
The UN Plan For Human Settlements
The UN Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat II) which met June 3-14 in Istanbul, painted an alarming picture of the 21st century community. The American ways-free speech, individualism, travel, and Christianity-are out. A new set of economic, environmental, and social guidelines are in. Citizenship, democracy, and education have been redefined. Handpicked civil leaders will implement UN “laws”, bypassing state and national representatives to work directly with the UN. And politically correct “tolerance”-meaning “the rejection of dogmatism and absolutism” as well as “appreciation” for the world’s religions and lifestyles-is “not only a moral duty, it is also a political and legal requirement.”1
Hard to believe? Not for veteran UN observers who faced boos and hisses for expressing concern in open UN assemblies. Nor for pro-family members of NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations) who faced exclusion from public dialogues for opposing feminist commander Bella Abzug and her radical agenda. And not for those who watched the ecstatic welcome given Fidel Castro and his anti-American diatribe.
Yet, our president and our non-elected American delegates, headed by U.S. Secretary Henry Cisneros, endorse this revolutionary plan, and our U.S. Department of Education is already establishing the framework for its local implementation.
http://www.crossroad.to/text/articles/hab2.html
60 votes in the Senate to end a fillibuster and ratify? I really doubt it. Especially after the 2012 elections, which right now forecasts the Repubs holding 57 seats.
The really hilarious thing about this sort of nonsense is that the US and other "good guys" will be the only ones constrained by these "treaties." Just like gun control laws, only the "law abiding" will follow the laws.
No sir, we will not be constrained. Anti-gun treaties that violate our rights will be ignored by a large number of patriots.
My neighbors and I know that local law enforcement (who are also members of our local Oath Keepers group) will not be the ones enforcing unconstitutional laws or confiscating firearms, so any liberty-raping fascist jackboots that show up in our neighborhood will be treated as domestic enemies and dispatched accordingly.
We will not go quietly into the night.
The UN doesn’t care what the NRA thinks.
I’m guessing the motion will coast through the UN and then go to the US Senate where it will coast through just as easily.
What’s the UN going to do if I treat one of its resolutions or treaties with intentional, deliberate, and willful contempt? Come to think of it, the Human Rights Council banned criticism of Islam. I will show my respect for this ban as follows. “Militant Islam is a phony religion for superstitious Stone Age savages, with nothing to offer its followers but filth, ignorance, poverty, violence, and squalor.”
A nithing is a subhuman monster and an enemy of civilization, like the rapist and murderer of a child or a terrorist. If you were a medieval Scandinavian and somebody called you a nithing, you had to fight a duel (holmgang) with him to avoid being outlawed, i.e. put outside the law's protection. The word strips its target of his very humanity and relegates him to the status of vermin, the Devil, or even worse. UN = United Nithings.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.