Thread: UN Treaty and Fast & Furious —Tools of Gun Control

UN Treaty and Fast & Furious —Tools of Gun Control

The history of the UN-ATT is intertwined with Fast & Furious and other false flags

David Knight
Infowars.com
September 25, 2013

It was just a few days ago that Henry Porter of the London Observer said:

This has reached the point where it has ceased to be a domestic issue. The world cannot stand idly by.

The UN has been working for a long time on tactics to disarm and control Americans. The purpose of the UN Arms Trade Treaty (UN-ATT) is to regulate the transfer of guns. That obviously requires that all guns be registered and tracked by governments — which is really about registering and tracking gun owners.

To get the ATT ratified, a watered down version is offered as a Trojan Horse with just a passing reference to “small arms”. Once it’s ratified, it can easily be changed and expanded with only 75% of UN countries voting for changes. That won’t be difficult considering it passed nearly unanimously, with only 3 countries (Iran, Syria and North Korea) voting against.

FALSE FLAGS & PUBLIC OPINION

The history of the UN-ATT is intertwined with false flags. Fast & Furious was supposed to lay the groundwork to scare the public about arms crossing the border. Even the NY Times pointed out that the purpose of our government shipping guns to Mexico in the “Gunwalker” programs was to scare the public about arms moving across borders and get the public to cry out for protection. And the UN-ATT was the legislation they had already prepared to offer as a solution.

The UN-ATT was originally scheduled for a vote last July. But Fast & Furious had been exposed and was in full blown controversy because the GOP wanted to use it for political gain — not because they wanted to end the BATF abuses or send anyone to jail for criminal behavior. The “Gunwalker” programs had been run under Bush prior to Obama.

Exactly one week before the UN was to vote on the UN-ATT, the Aurora, CO shooting was staged to try to energize gun control, take away attention from Fast & Furious and get American public opinion to support UN-ATT passage.



The history of the UN-ATT is intertwined with false flags.

I was at the UN that week covering it for a pro-Second Amendment organization. There were a couple of groups demonstrating for passage and the corporate media was in full court press calling for gun control. But the Feds didn’t get the traction from Aurora that they needed thanks to the authentic media. So they decided to wait until after the US election and even made public statements to that effect. If Obama lost, it would be done after election but before the new President took office.

Within hours of Obama winning re-election and the Senate Democrats increasing in numbers, they announced that they wouldn’t do it in the lame duck session after all but in the spring. The Sandy Hook shooting took place Dec 15 and for 3 months Sandy Hook and gun control were the corporate media’s theme. Then the UN passed the Arms Trade Treaty on April 2.

THE RATIFICATION PROCESS

Kerry signed the UN-ATT today. Senators have warned that the treaty has to be ratified by the Senate (probably because Obama has a history of violating the Constitution and ignoring requirements for Congressional authorization).

Constitutionally, it doesn’t matter that the Secretary of State signed the treaty. President Clinton’s Secretary of State, Madeline Albright, signed another terrible UN treaty — the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, attacking the family — back in 1995. It never got any farther.

If Obama signs the treaty it still has to be ratified by the Senate. But it’s important to note that the Constitution doesn’t require 2/3 of the Senate to approve — only 2/3 of those PRESENT have to sign it. Will Harry Reid schedule a vote during a recess to get it ratified?

TREATIES DON’T CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION

Treaties don’t amend the Constitution but neither does regulatory law. However, the Feds act as if both do. Once the government passes a “law” or “regulation”, they enforce it. Citizens can fight them in court, but even when governments lose, it’s not uncommon for them to ignore the court decision. Washington, DC ignores the fact that the Supreme Court struck down their gun laws 5 years ago in DC v Heller. And court decisions striking down laws against photographing cops are being ignored across the country.

INFRINGING RIGHTS

Former General McChrystal, has publicly supported banning military weapons from being possessed by the people

That’s what our soldiers ought to carry. I personally don’t think there’s any need for that kind of weaponry on the streets

and at the same time has called for re-instating the draft. Admiral Mike Mullen, the ex-chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said

he feared US civilians “do not know us” while the military had become increasingly “insular.”

McChrystal went on to say something very telling:

“Serious action is necessary. Sometimes we talk about very limited actions on the edges and I just don’t think that’s enough.”

“Very limited action around the edges” is exactly what “infringement” is. But not content with infringement, McChrystal is calling for more “serious action” implying, he’s ready to move on to confiscation. Clearly McChrystal & Mullen have no respect for the constitutional prohibition of a standing army and reject the constitutional prescription of a citizen militia like Switzerland.

The Founders used the term “shall not be infringed” in the Second Amendment because they knew that arms could never be confiscated from the people unless it was a gradual infringement, gradual and “limited actions on the edges” as McChrystal puts it.

One might ask why they used the term “shall not infringe” rather than “Congress shall pass no law” as in the First Amendment. If we look at Article 1, Sec 8, we see that Congress had already given authorization to pass laws that affected the militia. Congress was to organize, arm and call forth the people as a militia, i.e. support and aid the militia.

There is a clear distinction in the Constitution between a standing army (which was not to be funded for more than 3 years) and the militia. The militia, not the army, was tasked with “suppressing insurrections and repelling invasions” according to Article 1, Sec 8, Clause 15. The next clause, Article 1, Sec 8, Clause 16, gave Congress authority to organize, arm and train the militia and to appoint officers. That was what the term “well regulated” referred to in the Second Amendment — not the infringement of rights by bureaucratic “regulations”.

The Congress was tasked with arming the militia, not disarming it incrementally. The public’s understanding of militias and the army has been turned upside down by the schools and the corporate media. To correct it, we need to understand that a standing army and a national bank were correctly understood by the Founders to be the greatest threats to our liberties. The Constitution calls for a citizen militia, not a standing professional army, to defend the country.

This article was posted: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 at 3:49 pm

Tags: constitution, government corruption, gun rights


http://www.infowars.com/un-and-false...f-gun-control/

Senator Warns Obama Not to Implement UN Arms Treaty

Kerry to sign controversial treaty today

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
September 25, 2013

U.S. Senator Bob Corker, R-Tenn., ranking member of the Foreign Relations Committee, has warned President Obama not to implement the controversial UN Arms Treaty, which John Kerry is likely to sign today, without congressional authorization.

Image: The Knotted Gun.

The treaty – which critics have warned could lead to draconian gun control measures in the United States – is based around preventing illicit global weapons transfers to terrorists and other rogue agents, but its language could easily be interpreted to infringe on Second Amendment rights domestically.

Despite warnings from lawmakers that the agreement will be not ratified by the Senate, Secretary of State John Kerry is set to sign the UN treaty today, prompting Senator Corker to warn President Obama that any attempt to implement the measures without congressional consent “would be fundamentally inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution, law, and practice.”

“Because of the concerns discussed above, as well as the fundamental issues the ATT raises with respect to the individual rights protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, as the Ranking Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, it is my view that you may not take any executive action to implement this treaty, provisionally or otherwise, unless and until: (1) the United States Senate has provided its constitutionally required advice and consent to its ratification; and (2) the Congress has passed any and all required legislation to bring this treaty into effect under United States domestic law,” writes Corker.

Despite 130 members of Congress writing a letter to Obama and Kerry back in May demanding they refuse to sign the treaty, Kerry is set to do so anyway, proving in the eyes of Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla. that, “The administration is wasting precious time trying to sign away our laws to the global community and unelected U.N. bureaucrats.”

Earlier this year, the Senate already passed an amendment by 53-46 to “to uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty,” a vote that has been ignored by the White House.

Analysts who have studied the treaty warn that it effectively replaces constitutional rights, including the Second Amendment, with the UN Charter, supplanting God with global government as the source of all liberties.

According to John Lott, author of More Guns, Less Crime, “The Arms Trade Treaty will regulate individual gun ownership all across the world. Each country will be obligated to “maintain a national control list that shall include [rifles and handguns]” and “to regulate brokering taking place under its jurisdiction for conventional arms.”

The treaty also bars “unauthorized” individuals from trading weapons, a vague term that could be applied to just about anyone.

Read Senator Corker’s full letter to Obama below.

Dear President Obama,

It is my understanding that Secretary of State John Kerry will sign the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) on behalf of the United States. The ATT raises significant legislative and constitutional questions. Any act to implement this treaty, provisionally or otherwise, before the Congress provides its advice and consent would be inconsistent with the United States Constitution, law, and practice.

As you know, Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution requires the United States Senate to provide its advice and consent before a treaty becomes binding under United States law. The Senate has not yet provided its advice and consent, and may not provide such consent. As a result, the Executive Branch is not authorized to take any steps to implement the treaty.

Moreover, even after the Senate provides its advice and consent, certain treaties require changes to United States law in the form of legislation passed by both the House and Senate. The ATT is such a treaty. Various provisions of the ATT, including but not limited to those related to the regulation of imports and trade in conventional arms, require such implementing legislation and relate to matters exclusively reserved to Congress under our Constitution.

Because of the concerns discussed above, as well as the fundamental issues the ATT raises with respect to the individual rights protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, as the Ranking Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, it is my view that you may not take any executive action to implement this treaty, provisionally or otherwise, unless and until: (1) the United States Senate has provided its constitutionally required advice and consent to its ratification; and (2) the Congress has passed any and all required legislation to bring this treaty into effect under United States domestic law.

Sincerely,

Senator Bob Corker
Ranking Member

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.

This article was posted: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 at 8:41 am

Tags: constitution, gun rights


http://www.infowars.com/senator-warn...n-arms-treaty/

Record Gun Sales in Maryland as Tyrannical Law Looms

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
September 25, 2013

State police in Maryland report a record number of firearms applications ahead of the implementation of a draconian anti-Second Amendment bill on October 1.



Constitutional lawyer argues against Maryland’s controversial anti-Second Amendment law.

“It’s nothing like we’ve ever seen before in the history of the Maryland State Police,” Maryland State Police spokesman Greg Shipley told CBC News in Washington, D.C.

As of Friday, the police have received over 100,000 applications. The cops say they will not enforce the new requirements on applicants submitting prior to law going into effect next month.

The law signed by Maryland’s Democrat governor and former Baltimore mayor, Martin O’Malley, bans a large number of firearms the government has classified as “assault weapons,” imposes a ten round restriction on magazines, and forces handgun buyers to hand over their fingerprints to the state.

For some Democrats, however, the law is not restrictive enough. Jordan Cooper, a Democrat Delegate candidate from Bethesda, has called for gun confiscation in addition to biennial (every 24 months) renewal of gun licenses. Cooper exploited the Navy Yard shooting in nearby Washington when he proposed his legislation on September 18.

Cooper’s proposed bill calls for firearms “lacking registration with the state or having expired registrations be surrendered to the State and that the State proactively seek to retrieve and confiscate all firearms with expired registrations exceeding six months.”

In other words, under Cooper’s proposed legislation, the Maryland State Police would be required to “proactively” confiscate firearms from residents who do not obey state law.

Earlier this year, as the government prepared its legislation, the firearm manufacturer Beretta USA threatened to abandon the state. On September 18, Texas Governor Rick Perry toured the Beretta facility in Accokeek, Maryland, just over the Potomac River from Washington, D.C., as part of an effort to lure business to Texas.



This article was posted: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 at 11:00 am

Tags: constitution, domestic news, gun rights

Related Articles

• Beretta Tells Maryland It Will Move Operation If Gun Law is Enacted
• Beretta Exec Likens Gun Ban to Book Ban
• Maryland Senate Passes Governor O’Malley’s Gun Control Bill
• Smith & Wesson Hits Record Sales
• ‘Toaster Pastry Gun Freedom Act’ proposed in Maryland

http://www.infowars.com/record-gun-s...cal-law-looms/

Wednesday, 25 September 2013 17:00

Kerry Signs UN Arms Trade Treaty — Civilian Disarmament Advancing

Written by Joe Wolverton, II, J.D.



Secretary of State John Kerry signed the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty Wednesday. Upon adding his signature, Kerry addressed the world body:
On behalf of President Obama and the United States of America, I am very pleased to have signed this treaty here today. I signed it because President Obama knows that from decades of efforts that at any time that we work with — cooperatively to address the illicit trade in conventional weapons, we make the world a safer place. And this treaty is a significant step in that effort.
Promptly, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon thanked Kerry and Obama for their complicity in consolidating UN control over weapons and ammunition:
Today, a number of countries signed the Arms Trade Treaty, pushing the total number of signatures to more than half of all Member States.
The Secretary-General, as the depository of the Treaty, welcomes every signature to this important treaty. At the same time, it is of particular significance that the largest arms exporting country in the world, the United States, is now also among those countries who have committed themselves to a global regulation of the arms trade. He believes this will contribute to efforts to reduce insecurity and suffering for people on all continents. He calls upon other countries to follow suit.
On Monday, a source inside the State Department alerted The New American that Secretary Kerry would commit this act of treason. What’s more, we were told that key members of the Senate were informed Tuesday that Kerry intended to sign the treaty and that the reaction from senators was one of disinterest.
In fairness, a few senators have spoken out today (Wednesday), warning President Obama not to try to bypass the Senate in his fervor to enforce the terms of this globalist gun grab.
Senator Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, sent the president a letterreminding him that:
As you know, Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution requires the United States Senate to provide its advice and consent before a treaty becomes binding under United States law. The Senate has not yet provided its advice and consent, and may not provide such consent. As a result, the Executive Branch is not authorized to take any steps to implement the treaty.
President Obama knows this and he also knows that in March, 53 senators voted “to uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.”
Americans know something, too. They know that this administration has never failed to use every murderous act of armed violence as a pretext for tyranny. From Newtown to the Navy Yard, President Obama has issued scores of executive orders directly violating the Constitution’s explicit prohibition on the infringement of the right to keep and bear arms.
John Kerry’s signing of the Arms Trade Treaty demonstrates that he and his boss will continue along this treasonous trajectory until control of all weapons and ammunition is consolidated into the UN and its client governments.
There is so much wrong and so much unconstitutional about the Arms Trade Treaty that it is difficult to describe it all. The following summary of the agreement should be sufficient, however, to call to action all constitutionalists, gun owners, and lovers of liberty. Senators, President Obama, and Secretary of State John Kerry must know that we will not sit idly by while they surrender our sovereignty and plot to confiscate our weapons.
First, the Arms Trade Treaty grants a monopoly over all weaponry in the hands of the very entity (approved regimes) responsible for over 300 million murders in the 20th century.
Furthermore, the treaty leaves private citizens powerless to oppose future slaughters.
An irrefutable fact of armed violence unaddressed by the UN in its gun grab is that all the murders committed by all the serial killers in history don't amount to a fraction of the brutal killings committed by "authorized state parties" using the very weapons over which they will exercise absolute control under the terms of the Arms Trade Treaty.
Article 2 of the treaty defines the scope of the treaty’s prohibitions. The right to own, buy, sell, trade, or transfer all means of armed resistance, including handguns, is denied to civilians by this section of the Arms Trade Treaty.
Article 3 places the “ammunition/munitions fired, launched or delivered by the conventional arms covered under Article 2” within the scope of the treaty’s prohibitions, as well.
Article 4 rounds out the regulations, also placing all “parts and components” of weapons within the scheme.
Perhaps the most immediate threat to the rights of gun owners in the Arms Trade Treaty is found in Article 5. Under the title of “General Implementation,” Article 5 mandates that all countries participating in the treaty “shall establish and maintain a national control system, including a national control list.”
This list should “apply the provisions of this Treaty to the broadest range of conventional arms.”
Mark it down: If the treaty is ratified by the United States or if its provisions are enforced by executive order, within months the federal government (likely under the management of the Department of Homeland Security) would begin compiling a list of who owns, buys, sells, trades, or transfers any firearm, as well as the ammunition, parts, and components of those weapons.
After creating this database, the federal government would be required under the provisions of Article 5(4) of the Arms Trade Treaty to “provide its national control list to the Secretariat, which shall make it available to other States Parties.”
That’s right. The UN treaty demands that the list of gun and ammunition owners not only be in the hands of our own government, but be sent to foreign regimes, as well. This provision would guarantee that should an American owner of a legally purchased firearm decide to emigrate, he will be on the radar of the ruling regime in his new home.
Americans are right to recognize this registry as the first step toward confiscation. Without such a registry, it would be impossible to monitor weapons transfers effectively because governments can’t track weapons exchanges and transfers unless they know who has them to begin with.
Article 12 adds to the record-keeping requirement, mandating that the list include “the quantity, value, model/type, authorized international transfers of conventional arms,” as well as the identity of the “end users” of these items.
In very clear terms, ratification of the Arms Trade Treaty by the United States would require that the U.S. government force gun owners to add their names to the national registry. Citizens would be required to report the amount and type of all firearms and ammunition they possess.
Section 4 of Article 12 of the treaty requires that the list be kept for at least 10 years.
Finally, the agreement demands that national governments take “appropriate measures” to enforce the terms of the treaty, including civilian disarmament. If these countries can’t get this done on their own, however, Article 16 provides for UN assistance, specifically including help with the enforcement of “stockpile management, disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programmes.”
In fact, a “voluntary trust fund” will be established to assist those countries that need help from UN peacekeepers or other regional forces to disarm their citizens.
Arguably, the Arms Trade Treaty would become the law of the United States if the Senate were to ratify the treaty.
While that is the process that the Constitution establishes for the implementation of treaties, fundamental principles of construction and constitutional law dictate that no treaty that violates the Constitution can become the supreme law of the land.
In the case of the UN’s Arms Trade Treaty, there is no doubt that regardless of presidential signatures or congressional consent, this treaty cannot pass constitutional muster and therefore will never be the valid law of the land.
Unless, of course, Americans once again acquiesce to President Obama’s assumption of illegal authority and relinquish their rights and weapons regardless of the reasons they should not do so.
Finally, citizens must understand a very important nuance of Secretary Kerry’s assurance in his speech that the Arms Trade Treaty isn’t about taking away freedom, “it is about keeping weapons out of the hands of terrorists and rogue actors.” Americans must remember that Kerry, Obama, and the UN consider gun owners to be “terrorists” and “rogue actors,” thus subject to seizure of their firearms in the name of “international peace and global security.”
For John Kerry and Barack Obama, the confiscation of weapons from civilians is an act of, as Kerry said Wednesday, “advancing important humanitarian goals.”
For Americans, however, it is a giant leap toward enslavement.

Americans would be wise at this critical time to remember the words of George Washington, who advised:
A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.

Joe A. Wolverton, II, J.D. is a correspondent for The New American and travels frequently nationwide speaking on topics of nullification, the NDAA, and the surveillance state. He is the host of The New American Review radio show that is simulcast on Youtube every Monday. He can be reached at jwolverton@thenewamerican.com

Photo of John Kerry signing Arms Trade Treaty as UN Under Secretary-General for Legal Affairs Miguel Serpa Soares looks on: AP Images

Related articles:
Final Version of Arms Trade Treaty Released; Disarmament of Civilians on Track
Global Gun Grab on Track Following UN Arms Trade Treaty Conference (Video)
Religious, Civil Rights Group Urge Obama to Sign Arms Trade Treaty



http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/con...ment-advancing

bttt