Posted on 06/19/2006 1:33:26 PM PDT by yoe
You're assuming, of course, that these people even have a conscience.
Good luck. From what I hear, 7.62x39 is getting hard to find. Even ammoman.com is pretty much tapped out.
Agreed but lets take it where the Constitution intended. If a government (in this case the UN) tries to deny us a RIGHT which we not only have but reinforced by the 2nd amendment the founding fathers gave us the mechanism to stop them. Will we? Not only is the UN not a representative for the US Citizens but they are attempting to tamper with our highest laws limiting the power of government.
If we lose this battle, the Declaration Of Independence, Bill of Rights and the remaining amendments are completely useless and meaningless. We will have lost our only protection to guarantee all other rights.
Paris would be fine.
Why?
Any part of it. That's the problem!
You are the one who hasn't been listening.
The only good the UN is for is to steal monies from people of 3rd world countries, and to rape and beat the less fortunate...they are useless for anything else....
They will never and I mean NEVER take my guns away from me.
Iraq and Venezuela from what I've heard. That and people stockpiling. Most of the stuff produced come from Russia or otehr Eastern bloc Nations. Domestic stuff is considered more "accurate", by comparisson, but is almsot half again as expensive.
The UN has been trying, EVERY YEAR for DECADES, to take our guns. This is nothing new. As long as we REMAIN VIGILANT, we will continue to prevail...it's "for the children": OURS. And our grandkids, and THEIR grandkids, etc, etc. This was part of Kerry's AND McStain's presidential platforms and thank God they lost, because THEY support the UN position.
Note to self: BLOAT
Oh c'mon, you're not being fair. They raped the whole free world with the blood for oil vouchers scam, and they have a booming industry in child and adult sex slaves going. Give credit where credit is due. Though to be BALANCED, they've sortof slowed way down in the booming sex slave market lately, probably in order to engineer another blood for oil vouchers scam in Iran without anyone noticing, as well as because the administration has spent the past three years smacking them down on it.
My tagline for at LEAST two years was "UN Resolutions=Very Scratchy, Very EXPENSIVE Toilet paper". Perhaps I should have gone back to it for this thread.
"Better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it"... ;-)
This is one of the many useless UN groups that does nothing useful and is instead being misused to attack people's freedoms around the world to give more power to governments.
However, it's really nothing more than an expensive political forum for useless UN diplomats now that it appears to have lost it's entertainment value without Bolton.
Even if this conference produced some form of treaty, it's not binding on us unless the President signs it and the Senate votes to affirm it. Even then it would not override our Constitution. Only a Constitutional Amendment overrides the Constitution, though the Supreme Court seems to forget that from time to time.
The SAF's rhetoric is a bit much, but their message that we must be ever vigilant to protect our rights is not. This UN Conference isn't a significant threat in itself. The real threat is within our country, and the fact that this group at the UN has been allowed to play their little games at our expense for so long does demonstrate that the threat is real.
It's long past time to force the UN to drastically reform itself or be disbanded. One of the first steps toward that goal is likely going to have to be cutting off most of their money and getting rid of most of the UN staff. The UN can provide a useful forum for discussing issues. However, that only requires a relatively small staff of note takers, a maintenance staff for necessary facilities, and a small accounting staff to handle the funds needed to keep that staff going.
The expenses of ambassadors and representatives should be paid by the countries they represent not some UN slush fund.
Some specific programs that get approved may need a larger staff. Such staff members should be approved as part of the program and their roles should end with that program. They should not be permanent UN employees, and the programs must have a fixed end date and any extensions must be explicitly authorized by the member countries.
We need to make it so that corrupt "diplomats" aren't simply using the UN as a source of personal wealth. We need to force the member countries to pay the expenses for their own representatives so they quit wasting other people's money.
Gut the bureaucracy, and while the UN may not suddenly become useful, it's scope becomes much more manageable, and it becomes far, far less wasteful.
However, there is no hope that the UN will do this to themselves. It must be forced upon them by exposing just how wasteful and useless they really are and holding the worst offenders criminally responsible for their actions.
Bush doesn't have the will to do it.
I think Bolton may have the will, but not the backing.
The liberals in our own government and the powerful people who support them will fight this because the corrupt bureaucracy at the UN serves them much better than a lean and limited UN does.
Simply cutting off the UN is probably not the best solution. However, we have to be willing to take that step if the UN doesn't change, or we will never be able to force the UN to change, and the UN must change.
Anyone that doesn't put a few firearms in a safe and unregistered place is making a big mistake.
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.