UN Making its Move...
UN Making its Move...
By Jack Kinsella
Right now, as we speak, the United Nations is hosting top officials from "all the countries of the world" in New York City for the UN Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty, or ATT. This is another one of those ideas that sounds like a good thing, as long as you don't look at it too closely.
It is hard to argue with the UN's stated reasoning for coming up with some kind of global regulatory system to prevent the proliferation of weaponry, particularly small weaponry, such as pistols, rifles, shotguns, etc.
"The United Nations, in its work to assist people all over the world, is confronted with many of the negative impacts of lax controls on the arms trade. Think of peacekeeping, delivering food aid, improving public health, building safer cities, protecting refugees, eradicating poverty or fighting crime and terrorism. In all those activities we witness the consequences of armed violence and conflict, and that often lead to violations of international law, abuses of the rights of children, civilian casualties, humanitarian crises and missed social and economic opportunities necessary for development – often fueled by irresponsible arms deals."
Who could possibly be in favor of "irresponsible arms deals"? I mean, really. What kind of person would object to restricting al-Qaeda's ability to buy guns? Or Hamas? Or Somali pirates?
And look at the activities the UN fears will be threatened by armed bad guys. Teachers, firefighters, policemen . . . no, wait, that's not UN propaganda. . . sigh . . . it's hard to tell when the lies sound so similar.
It's when Obama is trying to justify something outrageously dangerous to individual liberties that he trots out the embattled police, firefighters and teachers, which are evidently the only occupations in America that we think we can afford to do without.
When was the last time anybody from Team Obama worried aloud about the threat to janitors, auto supply clerks and 7-Eleven cashiers? Doesn't anybody care about them? Or are those occupations immune from layoffs? But I digress....
When the UN wants to baffle with umm, you know, rather than dazzle with brilliance, they agonize about the threat that guns pose to peacekeepers, humanitarian food aid, public health, refugee safety, and the abuse of children.
"Concerned by the misuse of weaponry around the world, civil society organizations have successfully mobilized governments and parliamentarians to call for the global regulation of the conventional arms trade. Countries have discussed the matter within the UN since 2006 and are set to negotiate an Arms Trade Treaty in July 2012."
The current draft of the ATT mandates that the governments of member states petition the United Nations for approval of any contract to sell weapons to any nation where there exists a “substantial risk of a serious violation” of human rights.
So, if the UN decided that the United States (I know! It's crazy, but stay with me for a second)...just suppose the UN decided that America is a state where there exists a "substantial risk of a serious violation of human rights"?
In such an unlikely event as that, well, the UN would be obligated, by treaty, to cut off America's access to the international arms trade. It might even find itself obligated to confiscate privately owned weapons to prevent further human rights violations.
Of course, the UN says it would NEVER take such an action against the United States. The UN says on its website in no uncertain terms, that the new Arms Trade Treaty will never, ever;
Interfere with the domestic arms trade and the way a country regulates civilian possession
Ban, or prohibit the export of, any type of weapons
Impair States' legitimate right to self-defense
Lower arms regulation standards in countries where these are already at a high level.
So, there you have it. The UN's "secret" agenda, spelled out in detail, right from their website. They are using that tried and true propaganda trick of telling a lie so outrageous that people will automatically assume it must be true because it sounds so crazy.
"We won't use this new authority against you guys! We're all on the same team. Right?"
Right....The UN is our friend...the UN is our friend...the UN is our friend...
So, once we emerge from the propaganda fog, this is what Forbes Magazine says we can look forward to.
While the terms have yet to be made public, if passed by the U.N. and ratified by our Senate, it will almost certainly force the U.S. to:
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.
The UN says it doesn't want to confiscate privately-owned weapons, it just wants everybody to register the guns that they have.
That way, if they ever need to disarm an unruly population in order to prevent resistance to UN efforts to impose peace or to rectify an unfair human rights situation, they will know where to find them.
But historically, every single nation that has imposed firearms registration regulation eventually took it to the next logical step.
In 1911 Turkey established gun control. Subsequently, from 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, deprived of the means to defend themselves, were rounded up and killed.
In 1929 the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, approximately 20 million dissidents were arrested and executed.
In 1938 Germany established gun control. From 1939 to 1945 over 13 million Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, mentally ill, union leaders, Catholics and others, unable to fire a shot in protest, were killed by the state. (The Nazi Weapons Law, which was supposed to curtail Communism, was the framework the US 1968 Gun Control Act was based.)
In 1935 China established gun control. Between 1948 and 1952, over 20 million dissidents were rounded up and murdered by the Communists.
In 1956 Cambodia enshrined gun control. In just two years (1975-1977) over one million "educated" people (about 1/3 of the entire population!) were executed by the Reds.
In 1964 Guatemala locked in gun control. From 1964 to 1981 over 100,000 Mayan Indians were rounded up and killed, unable to defend themselves.
In 1970 the Ugandan dictator Idi Amn Dada decreed gun control. During the next nine years over 300,000 Ugandan Christians were murdered.
The next logical step after registering guns is to use those registration lists. Historically, the first segment of any population to be disarmed is the segment most resistant to dictatorship. So...there are some 192 UN member countries.
Which of them, do you suppose, would be the most resistant to some unelected foreign power, especially the UN, imposing domestic rules that nullify that nation's Constitutional guarantees?
Because it makes sense to disarm THAT one first.
The Founding Fathers enacted the Second Amendment because free men with access to guns are citizens, whereas without them, they are subjects.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain their right to keep and bear arms is as a last resort to protect themselves against tyranny in government". - Thomas Jefferson
"Americans need never fear their government because of the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation". - James Madison
"The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun". -Patrick Henry
"The said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms". - Samuel Adams
"We can have reasonable, thoughtful gun control measure that I think respect the Second Amendment and people’s traditions". - Barack Hussein Obama
According to the Bible, the day is coming when the antichrist will assume control of a global government, centralized global economy and a global religious system.
Before a centralized global economy can come into full force, the existing system has to be eliminated and replaced. The US dollar is fast losing its status as the benchmark currency. That conditioning process is well underway.
In most parts of the world, the only thing more dangerous than being a Christian is being a Jew. However, any other religious system is carefully protected from human rights abuses by a watchful United Nations.
Step into the WayBack Machine with me for a moment and let's take a look at how that sounded, say, in 1948. The world had just emerged from a global war aimed at preventing Adolf Hitler from doing exactly that.
The effort left Europe in ashes. Recovery would take decades. The effort cost some fifty-eight million lives and the world came together via the United Nations under the mutual pledge of "Never Again!"
To all intents and purposes, the antichrist came and tried to fulfill his destiny but was defeated by the free world and ultimately shot himself in the head in a bunker in Berlin. The last thing anybody would have believed in 1948 was that it would happen again.
But sixty-four years later, despite the warnings of recent history, here we are, preparing the infrastructure for Satan's next big push. It isn't that the UN is the government of antichrist, or that this is the beginning of the Tribulation.
We won't be here for the actual kick-off, but it is fair to say that the pregame show has already started.
"And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." (Luke 21:28).