Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 10/6/2005 5:23:24 PM EDT
EU backs need for treaty on global arms sales
03 Oct 2005 15:23:06 GMT

Reuters

LUXEMBOURG, Oct 3 (Reuters) - European Union foreign ministers on Monday
backed the idea of creating an international treaty controlling the sale
of small arms and called on the United Nations to take the lead.
At a meeting in Luxembourg, foreign ministers "acknowledged the growing
support, in all parts of the world, for an international treaty to
establish common standards for the global trade in conventional arms," a
statement said.
They agreed that the United Nations was the only forum capable of
overseeing this, the statement added.
The EU move drew praise from aid agency Oxfam which, with Amnesty
International, has campaigned for a treaty setting global controls on
small and light arms.
Oxfam says one million people have been killed by small arms since the
U.N. last met on the issue in 2001.
"Dozens of countries from around the world have already backed the
treaty. Attention now turns to the U.N. arms conference next year and
ensuring that the treaty tops the agenda," it said.
The United Nations is due to meet on June 26 next year to discuss small
arms
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:24:17 PM EDT
good for those pussies.
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:24:40 PM EDT
I'd be thrilled to gun down a UN soldier in the United States.
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:25:44 PM EDT

My guess is that this is mostly to prevent the trafficking of arms to African countries like that Sudan and Congo - but I really don't know anything about this.

So tag.

Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:25:54 PM EDT
Cowards always want to drag others down to their level of helplessness.
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:26:34 PM EDT

Originally Posted By joker581:
I'd be thrilled to gun down a UN soldier in the United States.



Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:29:24 PM EDT
Let em control other countries......

Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:29:30 PM EDT
That's a laugh.

So, when is the invasion planned? Uh, I mean, when are the stupids coming?
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:29:33 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CRC:
EU backs need for treaty on global arms sales
03 Oct 2005 15:23:06 GMT

Reuters

LUXEMBOURG, Oct 3 (Reuters) - European Union foreign ministers on Monday
backed the idea of creating an international treaty controlling the sale
of small arms and called on the United Nations to take the lead.
At a meeting in Luxembourg, foreign ministers "acknowledged the growing
support, in all parts of the world, for an international treaty to
establish common standards for the global trade in conventional arms," a
statement said.
They agreed that the United Nations was the only forum capable of
overseeing this, the statement added.
The EU move drew praise from aid agency Oxfam which, with Amnesty
International, has campaigned for a treaty setting global controls on
small and light arms.
Oxfam says one million people have been killed by small arms since the
U.N. last met on the issue in 2001.
"Dozens of countries from around the world have already backed the
treaty. Attention now turns to the U.N. arms conference next year and
ensuring that the treaty tops the agenda," it said.
The United Nations is due to meet on June 26 next year to discuss small
arms



All UN members, "MOVE AWAY FROM THE CRACK PIPE !
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:29:42 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:
My guess is that this is mostly to prevent the trafficking of arms to African countries like that Sudan and Congo - but I really don't know anything about this.

So tag.




No, this is a scheme baked up by the VPC, George Soros, and the Brady bunch, to limit and halt the sale of guns AND AMMO between Countries. It is intended to supercede Countries own laws. This is one reason I have been stocking up on ammo, if even a fraction of countries sign up, you can kiss a lot of surplus mil ammo goodbye forever.
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:32:55 PM EDT
Cool
Does this mean we get our small arms/pistols back?

Taffy
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:33:13 PM EDT
First small arms........then the Internet.............
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:34:45 PM EDT
The EU can go fuck themselves and take the UN with them.
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:35:16 PM EDT
Oooh maybe they'll sue us in the international court if we don't sign on the dotted line!
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:35:28 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/6/2005 5:35:51 PM EDT by DK-Prof]

Originally Posted By fxntime:

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:
My guess is that this is mostly to prevent the trafficking of arms to African countries like that Sudan and Congo - but I really don't know anything about this.

So tag.




No, this is a scheme baked up by the VPC, George Soros, and the Brady bunch, to limit and halt the sale of guns AND AMMO between Countries. It is intended to supercede Countries own laws. This is one reason I have been stocking up on ammo, if even a fraction of countries sign up, you can kiss a lot of surplus mil ammo goodbye forever.



The UN has zero authority to supercede soverign nations' laws. Simply won't happen.


Plus, it certainly would not be an international law to HALT the trade of guns between countries, because plenty of EU countries buy weapons (including small arms) from the U.S. and Canada.



As with so many things the U.N. does, I imagine this is the same kind of paranoid about pointless UN bullshit that will never have real relevance.
Like people imagining "UN soldiers" on U.S. soil give me a break
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:36:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Chokey:
The EU can go fuck themselves and take the UN with them.



+1
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:36:42 PM EDT
Small arms means ANY firearms, grenades, ect.

That includes Granpappy's muzzleloader.

Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:40:27 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/6/2005 5:43:55 PM EDT by sWs2]
Sigh... bad attempt at humor...
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:42:35 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/6/2005 5:47:12 PM EDT by DK-Prof]

Originally Posted By sWs2:




Never mind me - I'm just being pissy tonight
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:44:17 PM EDT
The UN invading the US is fantasy.

What countries would sign up?

Heck the UN is based in the US.

Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:45:10 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CRC:
The UN invading the US is fantasy.

What countries would sign up?

Heck the UN is based in the US.





Exactly - I don't really comprehend where people get that delusional fantasy from.
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:46:20 PM EDT
"Don't fire 'til you see the blue of their helmets!"
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:46:44 PM EDT
DK-PROF,

Canada has taken part in every UN mission since the Korean War.

We get invaded from the North?
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:48:23 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CRC:
DK-PROF,

Canada has taken part in every UN mission since the Korean War.

We get invaded from the North?




And they'll bring that damn bacon with them!!


Do you suppose that's why they've stolen adopted the M16 themselves (the Diemaco C7/C8) - it's all part of their master plan to use U.S. spare parts and ammo when they invade!!

Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:55:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By CRC:
DK-PROF,

Canada has taken part in every UN mission since the Korean War.

We get invaded from the North?




And they'll bring that damn bacon with them!!


Do you suppose that's why they've stolen adopted the M16 themselves (the Diemaco C7/C8) - it's all part of their master plan to use U.S. spare parts and ammo when they invade!!




Diemaco parts far exceed the quality that of Colt's. I suppose now, that is meaningless since Colt owns Diemaco, rather than just a licensee.
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:57:11 PM EDT

Originally Posted By joker581:
I'd be thrilled to gun down a UN soldier in the United States.




Not too far fetched to say you (us?) may indeed get your chance to do just that.
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 5:57:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AILapua:

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By CRC:
DK-PROF,

Canada has taken part in every UN mission since the Korean War.

We get invaded from the North?




And they'll bring that damn bacon with them!!


Do you suppose that's why they've stolen adopted the M16 themselves (the Diemaco C7/C8) - it's all part of their master plan to use U.S. spare parts and ammo when they invade!!




Diemaco parts far exceed the quality that of Colt's. I suppose now, that is meaningless since Colt owns Diemaco, rather than just a licensee.



I have to admit, I even like the ELCAN better than the ACOG
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 6:00:36 PM EDT
Ban Machete's. How many millions have to die.
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 6:05:11 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By AILapua:

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By CRC:
DK-PROF,

Canada has taken part in every UN mission since the Korean War.

We get invaded from the North?




And they'll bring that damn bacon with them!!


Do you suppose that's why they've stolen adopted the M16 themselves (the Diemaco C7/C8) - it's all part of their master plan to use U.S. spare parts and ammo when they invade!!




Diemaco parts far exceed the quality that of Colt's. I suppose now, that is meaningless since Colt owns Diemaco, rather than just a licensee.



I have to admit, I even like the ELCAN better than the ACOG



That must be a Dutch thing! Friggin Elcrap! The glass is fine but, the eye relief blows! Even with the last (fifth?) generation, the elevation is still a dawg and prone to failure.

Then again, I am old and I use to enjoy the TA11 (DoD) on a 5.56.
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 6:15:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By fxntime:

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:
My guess is that this is mostly to prevent the trafficking of arms to African countries like that Sudan and Congo - but I really don't know anything about this.

So tag.




No, this is a scheme baked up by the VPC, George Soros, and the Brady bunch, to limit and halt the sale of guns AND AMMO between Countries. It is intended to supercede Countries own laws. This is one reason I have been stocking up on ammo, if even a fraction of countries sign up, you can kiss a lot of surplus mil ammo goodbye forever.



The UN has zero authority to supercede soverign nations' laws. Simply won't happen.


Plus, it certainly would not be an international law to HALT the trade of guns between countries, because plenty of EU countries buy weapons (including small arms) from the U.S. and Canada.



As with so many things the U.N. does, I imagine this is the same kind of paranoid about pointless UN bullshit that will never have real relevance.
Like people imagining "UN soldiers" on U.S. soil give me a break



If a Country sign's on to it, the UN "law" will supercede the signing Countrys own. Kyoto treaty anyone? It is being aggressivly pushed by Soros lapdog ex secretary. Her name eludes me at the moment.
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 6:16:20 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Triumph955i:
good for those pussies.



That was fucking funny! Fuck the UN.
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 6:20:19 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/6/2005 6:22:49 PM EDT by Hank_Rearden1]
Last time they tried this... Embassador Bolton (then Undersectretary, I believe) told them to shove it up their ass.

Here is what he said:
=====================

Text: Bolton's Remarks to UN Session on Small Arms and Light Weapons

Following is the text of Bolton's remarks:

Statement by John R. Bolton
United States Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs

UN Conference on Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All its Aspects

Plenary, July 9, 2001

Excellencies and distinguished colleagues, it is my honor and privilege to present United States views at this United Nations Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All its Aspects.

The abstract goals and objectives of this Conference are laudable. Attacking the global illicit trade in small arms and light weapons (SA/LW) is an important initiative which the international community should, indeed must, address because of its wide ranging effects. The illicit trade in SA/LW can be used to exacerbate conflict, threaten civilian populations in regions of conflict, endanger the work of peacekeeping forces and humanitarian aid workers, and greatly complicate the hard work of economically and politically rebuilding war-torn societies. Alleviating these problems is in all of our interest.

Small arms and light weapons, in our understanding, are the strictly military arms -- automatic rifles, machine guns, shoulder-fired missile and rocket systems, light mortars -- that are contributing to continued violence and suffering in regions of conflict around the world. We separate these military arms from firearms such as hunting rifles and pistols, which are commonly owned and used by citizens in many countries. As U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft has said, "just as the First and Fourth Amendments secure individual rights of speech and security respectively, the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms." We, therefore, do not begin with the presumption that all small arms and light weapons are the same or that they are all problematic. It is the illicit trade in military small arms and light weapons that we are gathered here to address and that should properly concern us.

The United States goes to great lengths to ensure that small arms and light weapons transferred under our jurisdiction are done so with the utmost responsibility. The transfer of all military articles of U.S. origin are subject to extremely rigorous procedures under the U.S. Arms Export Control Act and International Traffic in Arms Regulations. All U.S. exports of defense articles and services, including small arms and light weapons, must be approved by the Department of State. Assurances must be given by the importing country that arms will be used in a manner consistent with our criteria for arms exports: they must not contribute to regional instability, arms races, terrorism, proliferation, or violations of human rights. Arms of U.S. origin cannot be retransferred without approval by the United States. To ensure that arms are delivered to legitimate end-users, our government rigorously monitors arms transfers, investigating suspicious activity and acting quickly to curtail exports to those recipients who do not meet our strict criteria for responsible use. In the past five years, the United States has conducted thousands of end-use checks, interdicted thousands of illicit arms shipments at U.S. ports of exit, and cut-off exports entirely to five countries due to their failure to properly manage U.S. origin defense articles.

All commercial exporters of arms in the United States must be registered as brokers and submit each transaction for government licensing approval. Our brokering law is comprehensive, extending over citizens and foreign nationals in the United States, and also U.S. citizens operating abroad.

Believing that it is in our interest to stem the illicit trade in military arms, the United States has avidly promoted and supported such international activities as the Wassenaar Arrangement and the UN Register of Conventional Arms. Bilaterally, we offer our financial and technical assistance all over the world to mitigate the illicit trade in SA/LW. We have worked with countries to develop national legislation to regulate exports and imports of arms, and to better enforce their laws. We have provided training, technical assistance, and funds to improve border security and curb arms smuggling in many areas of the world where this problem is rampant. And in the past year, we have instituted a program to assist countries in conflict-prone regions to secure or destroy excess and illicit stocks of small arms and light weapons.

We are proud of our record, and would hope that the Program of Action would encourage all nations to adopt similar practices. Our practical experience with these problems reflects our view of how best to prevent the illicit trade in SA/LW. Our focus is on addressing the problem where it is most acute and the risks are highest: regions of conflict and instability. We strongly support measures in the draft Program of Action calling for effective export and import controls, restraint in trade to regions of conflict, observance and enforcement of UNSC embargoes, strict regulation of arms brokers, transparency in exports, and improving security of arms stockpiles and destruction of excess. These measures, taken together, form the core of a regime that, if accepted by all countries, would greatly mitigate the problems we all have gathered here to address.

There are, however, several aspects of the draft Program of Action that we cannot and will not support. Some activities inscribed in the Program are beyond the scope of what is appropriate for international action and should remain issues for national lawmakers in member states. Other proposals divert our attention from practical, effective measures to attack the problem of the illicit trade in SA/LW where it is most needed. This diffusion of focus is, indeed, the Program's chief defect, mixing together as it does legitimate areas for international cooperation and action and areas that are properly left to decisions made through the exercise of popular sovereignty by participating governments:

-- We do not support measures that would constrain legal trade and legal manufacturing of small arms and light weapons. The vast majority of arms transfers in the world are routine and not problematic. Each member state of the United Nations has the right to manufacture and export arms for purposes of national defense. Diversions of the legal arms trade that become "illicit" are best dealt with through effective export controls. To label all manufacturing and trade as "part of the problem" is inaccurate and counterproductive. Accordingly, we would ask that language in Section II, paragraph 4 be changed to establish the principle of legitimacy of the legal trade, manufacturing and possession of small arms and light weapons, and acknowledge countries that already have in place adequate laws, regulations and procedures over the manufacture, stockpiling, transfer and possession of small arms and light weapons.

-- We do not support the promotion of international advocacy activity by international or non-governmental organizations, particularly when those political or policy views advocated are not consistent with the views of all member states. What individual governments do in this regard is for them to decide, but we do not regard the international organizational support of particular political viewpoints to be consistent with democratic principles. Accordingly, the provisions of the draft Program that contemplate such activity should be modified or eliminated.

-- We do not support measures that prohibit civilian possession of small arms. This is outside the mandate for this Conference set forth in UNGA (UN General Assembly) Resolution 54/54V. We agree with the recommendation of the 1999 UN Panel of Governmental Experts that laws and procedures governing the possession of small arms by civilians are properly left to individual member states. The United States will not join consensus on a final document that contains measures contrary to our Constitutional right to bear arms. We request that Section II, para (paragraph) 20, which refers to restrictions on the civilian possession of arms, be eliminated from the Program of Action, and that other provisions which purport to require national regulation of the lawful possession of firearms such as Section II, paras 7 and 10, be modified to confine their reach to illicit international activities.

-- We do not support measures limiting trade in SA/LW solely to governments. This proposal, we believe, is both conceptually and practically flawed. It is so broad that in the absence of a clear definition of small arms and light weapons, it could be construed as outlawing legitimate international trade in all firearms. Violent non-state groups at whom this proposal is presumably aimed are unlikely to obtain arms through authorized channels. Many of them continue to receive arms despite being subject to legally-binding UNSC (UN Security Council) embargoes. Perhaps most important, this proposal would preclude assistance to an oppressed non-state group defending itself from a genocidal government. Distinctions between governments and non-governments are irrelevant in determining responsible and irresponsible end-users of arms.

-- The United States also will not support a mandatory Review Conference, as outlined in Section IV, which serves only to institutionalize and bureaucratize this process. We would prefer that meetings to review progress on the implementation of the Program of Action be decided by member states as needed, responding not to an arbitrary timetable, but specific problems faced in addressing the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons. Neither will we commit to begin negotiations and reach agreement on any legally binding instruments, the feasibility and necessity of which may be in question and in need of review over time.

Through its national practices, laws, and assistance programs, through its diplomatic engagement in all regions of the world, the United States has demonstrated its commitment to countering the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons. During the next two weeks, we will work cooperatively with all member states to develop a final document which is legitimate, practical, effective, and which can be accepted by all nations. As we work toward this goal over the next two weeks, we must keep in mind those suffering in the regions of the world where help is most desperately needed and for whom the success of this Conference is most crucial.
==================

Linky here: japan.usembassy.gov/e/p/tp-se0230.html

Link Posted: 10/6/2005 6:21:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By fxntime:

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By fxntime:

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:
My guess is that this is mostly to prevent the trafficking of arms to African countries like that Sudan and Congo - but I really don't know anything about this.

So tag.




No, this is a scheme baked up by the VPC, George Soros, and the Brady bunch, to limit and halt the sale of guns AND AMMO between Countries. It is intended to supercede Countries own laws. This is one reason I have been stocking up on ammo, if even a fraction of countries sign up, you can kiss a lot of surplus mil ammo goodbye forever.



The UN has zero authority to supercede soverign nations' laws. Simply won't happen.


Plus, it certainly would not be an international law to HALT the trade of guns between countries, because plenty of EU countries buy weapons (including small arms) from the U.S. and Canada.



As with so many things the U.N. does, I imagine this is the same kind of paranoid about pointless UN bullshit that will never have real relevance.
Like people imagining "UN soldiers" on U.S. soil give me a break



If a Country sign's on to it, the UN "law" will supercede the signing Countrys own. Kyoto treaty anyone? It is being aggressivly pushed by Soros lapdog ex secretary. Her name eludes me at the moment.




Exactly - UN "law" is strictly VOLUNTARY. A UN law or treaty can only affect the U.S. if the U.S. voluntarily chooses to join it.

The UN cannot pass a law that would supercede U.S. law. Period.

So how it that a threat? It's no different than U.S. politicians deciding to pass a law on their own.
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 6:31:41 PM EDT
But if a Country signs, it does put itself under UN laws. That is the part I do not like. Remember when the UN wanted the right to charge soldiers and citizens under UN law a few years ago. We did not sign on of course, but one can see where the UN wants to go in their policies.
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 6:34:44 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CRC:
Small arms means ANY firearms, grenades, ect.

That includes Granpappy's muzzleloader.




They will NEVER get my Granpappy's muzzleloader. lol
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 6:43:52 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/6/2005 6:44:41 PM EDT by Kihn]

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By fxntime:

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By fxntime:

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:
My guess is that this is mostly to prevent the trafficking of arms to African countries like that Sudan and Congo - but I really don't know anything about this.

So tag.




No, this is a scheme baked up by the VPC, George Soros, and the Brady bunch, to limit and halt the sale of guns AND AMMO between Countries. It is intended to supercede Countries own laws. This is one reason I have been stocking up on ammo, if even a fraction of countries sign up, you can kiss a lot of surplus mil ammo goodbye forever.



The UN has zero authority to supercede soverign nations' laws. Simply won't happen.


Plus, it certainly would not be an international law to HALT the trade of guns between countries, because plenty of EU countries buy weapons (including small arms) from the U.S. and Canada.



As with so many things the U.N. does, I imagine this is the same kind of paranoid about pointless UN bullshit that will never have real relevance.
Like people imagining "UN soldiers" on U.S. soil give me a break



If a Country sign's on to it, the UN "law" will supercede the signing Countrys own. Kyoto treaty anyone? It is being aggressivly pushed by Soros lapdog ex secretary. Her name eludes me at the moment.




Exactly - UN "law" is strictly VOLUNTARY. A UN law or treaty can only affect the U.S. if the U.S. voluntarily chooses to join it.

The UN cannot pass a law that would supercede U.S. law. Period.

So how it that a threat? It's no different than U.S. politicians deciding to pass a law on their own.



Picture Hillary as CIC, Schumer as Sec. of State and a pre-1996 type Congress like the one that brought us the gun ban of 1994. What do you think? Plausible?
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 7:11:47 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Kihn:
Picture Hillary as CIC, Schumer as Sec. of State and a pre-1996 type Congress like the one that brought us the gun ban of 1994. What do you think? Plausible?



THAT scenario would force me to leave this country. The problem is, where the hell would I go? Might have to buy my own island nation....
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 7:15:12 PM EDT
Laws like this would royally bone C&R collectors.

Expect me to start stocking up on surplus ammo
when/if this goes down.
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 7:19:47 PM EDT
MOLON LABE you UN pieces of rotted dick.
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 7:27:08 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:
My guess is that this is mostly to prevent the trafficking of arms to African countries like that Sudan and Congo - but I really don't know anything about this.

So tag.





Good fucking luck. A Kalashnikov in Africa is about as hard to find as a cell phone here in the states. We need to teach them to shoot and send more ammo, expediate the clusterfuck and stem pop. growth. Other than that I like George Carlins Entropy theory.
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 7:27:54 PM EDT
So Chirac and Annon can sell the arms on the Black Market........Fuck 'em
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 7:28:20 PM EDT


Link Posted: 10/6/2005 7:31:05 PM EDT

Originally Posted By sobekra70:
So Chirac and Annon can sell the arms on the Black Market........Fuck 'em


No, we'll trade them for food.
Link Posted: 10/7/2005 2:17:01 AM EDT
I guess I will wait for the war on illeagal immigrants, and or the race riot war, the the un, oh wait , I almost forgot about the attack from the du...ers.

Shit I hope my 2000 rnds get here like ups says it will, now if Eric has any 5.45 in stock 2000 will be in route.

I have yet to see the looter guy out side so I must be ok.
Link Posted: 10/7/2005 2:45:04 AM EDT
My American friends, the truth is SIMPLE and PLAIN:

EU govts are selling our asses (I mean of us european...) in exchange of advantages for the political classes..

They will transform EU in the biggest and most civilized open air concentration camp, where people is asked to be polite with illegal invaders, everithing will be centralized and a remote parliament will take every decision, even when you have to shit and what you have to eat.

It is already happening now: Italy has, with France, one of the RICHEST food traditions in Europe. Little by little they are killing all culinary and food traditions forbidding this, outlawing that, with the excuse of "standardization" and "health" problems. Notice that the Kreuzfeld-Jacob syndrome had a very sporadic appareance here in Italy, because we don't give a shit on our army, but Italians care a lot about our FOOD.

Furthermore, it is like we still didn't get the lesson of 60 years ago, about Communism and Nazism, to my eyes two faces of the same medal: dispotism. Both Commies and Nazi tried to impose dictatorship the hard way.

They failed.

Now the politic class is trying to impose their agenda using democracy (their distortion, not real democracy!), security problems, immigration, false tolerance: iron fist in velvet gloves.

I am afraid they are succeeding...
Link Posted: 10/7/2005 2:47:56 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By fxntime:

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:
My guess is that this is mostly to prevent the trafficking of arms to African countries like that Sudan and Congo - but I really don't know anything about this.

So tag.




No, this is a scheme baked up by the VPC, George Soros, and the Brady bunch, to limit and halt the sale of guns AND AMMO between Countries. It is intended to supercede Countries own laws. This is one reason I have been stocking up on ammo, if even a fraction of countries sign up, you can kiss a lot of surplus mil ammo goodbye forever.



The UN has zero authority to supercede soverign nations' laws. Simply won't happen.


Plus, it certainly would not be an international law to HALT the trade of guns between countries, because plenty of EU countries buy weapons (including small arms) from the U.S. and Canada.



As with so many things the U.N. does, I imagine this is the same kind of paranoid about pointless UN bullshit that will never have real relevance.
Like people imagining "UN soldiers" on U.S. soil give me a break



Actually....member nations that ratify an "arms" treaty are........ bound by "law" (may be UN law..which is similar to .. the strict law of the string cheese people but bound nontheless.)

I think. Thats what the NRA was saying once.
Link Posted: 10/7/2005 3:59:42 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/7/2005 4:27:40 AM EDT by Kihn]

Originally Posted By PaoloAR15:
My American friends, the truth is SIMPLE and PLAIN:

EU govts are selling our asses (I mean of us european...) in exchange of advantages for the political classes..

They will transform EU in the biggest and most civilized open air concentration camp, where people is asked to be polite with illegal invaders, everithing will be centralized and a remote parliament will take every decision, even when you have to shit and what you have to eat.

It is already happening now: Italy has, with France, one of the RICHEST food traditions in Europe. Little by little they are killing all culinary and food traditions forbidding this, outlawing that, with the excuse of "standardization" and "health" problems. Notice that the Kreuzfeld-Jacob syndrome had a very sporadic appareance here in Italy, because we don't give a shit on our army, but Italians care a lot about our FOOD.

Furthermore, it is like we still didn't get the lesson of 60 years ago, about Communism and Nazism, to my eyes two faces of the same medal: dispotism. Both Commies and Nazi tried to impose dictatorship the hard way.

They failed.

Now the politic class is trying to impose their agenda using democracy (their distortion, not real democracy!), security problems, immigration, false tolerance: iron fist in velvet gloves.

I am afraid they are succeeding...



Amen brother. Preach on... .

I remember a certain U.N. who was not afraid to use it's fist ( or not use it for PC reasons given certain circumstances and let what it may consider less-desirable factions be exterminated) i.e. Kosovo, Malaysia, Rwanda. It has the ability under the right circumstances to impose it's will into other nation's businesses as it has done so on occasion and at times it has had the ability to turn a blind eye (Rwanda/ Koffi Anon affair) to a desparate situation with a certain smugness. It has the power to change governments with economic/ military sanctions. It has the appearance of having a love of anything socialist/ communist in nature. It is an organization in conflict with itself and in love with itself. It is an organization/ world body that can do no wrong under the pretense of improving the overall condition of man. Yet it has all the failings of everything it is views as undesirable and deserving of change yet is immune to criticism or an ability to adapt because of the gross incompetence and corruption inherent within it's own organization. Nothing is to be deemed too small or too large to escape it's consideration/ scrutiny.
Link Posted: 10/7/2005 5:09:40 AM EDT
I'd be thrilled to gun down a UN soldier in the United States.

+1
Link Posted: 10/7/2005 5:14:42 AM EDT
You all think them controlling guns would be bad. Wait until they try to control the internet.
Link Posted: 10/7/2005 5:15:40 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/7/2005 5:16:46 AM EDT by LWilde]
Oh...so the EU/UN whatever wants to "ban" guns from private citizens around the world huh? Well, that's nice. They are welcome to try...but it won't apply here unless some liberal asshat like Hillary wins the presidency and the congress and SCOTUS suddenly become bastions of liberalism.

NOTHING the Euroweenies or for that matter any other group of world pussies can do will EVER take primacy over the Constitution of the United States. Sadly for the liberals, both aboard and at home, we do still have the Second Amendment.

Tsk...tsk...tsk. Too bad for YOU!

Link Posted: 10/7/2005 5:28:15 AM EDT
I posted this on another forum but thought it would fit well here as well:


UN Treaty on Your Firearms

by Don Bekeleski

Unless you have been on Mars or have not been informed through your NRA membership magazine, there is a great threat to our Bill of Rights and America’s sovereignty. The U.N. treaty to be ratified in 2006 claims our 2nd Amendment right is making the world a more dangerous place! It is a unilateral binding treaty on all countries.

I don’t know how many of you paid your cable TV supplier to see the debate on pay per view between Wayne Lapieere and Rebecca Peters, but you should have. She is the one that is spearheading this treaty. If you seen it, it should have scared the hell out of you. She commented that privately owned firearms “are the real weapons of mass destruction”. She said, “Americans should abide by the same rules as everyone else”.

That means we should turn in our weapons and give up our freedoms like other countries. Her attitude towards hunters and sport shooters was that they “should take up another sport that does not require a weapon”.

On the question of self- defense she said, “Handguns have no legitimate role in civilian hands”.

There is a conference coming up in 2006 to ratify this ‘Treaty on Small Arms’. Billionaire George Soros and six countries are heavily funding this. The countries are Great Britan, Sweden, The Netherlands, France Japan and Belgium that have contributed tens of millions of dollars with more to come. They want it so only Governments will have guns. Think back in history what happened when only the Government has guns. I’m sure the first guy that comes to mind had a short mustache and waved his right arm a lot!

For the United States to agree and go along with this treaty some future U.S. Senate body has to approve it and the President at that time has to sign it. In one sweep of the pen all your rights to gun ownership are gone. No more hunting, no more target shooting, no more self defense! It will be dialing 911, which I believe to be a government sponsored ‘Dial a Prayer”.

According to Gun Week newspaper Rebecca Peters has said opposition from the U.S. and its new Ambassador John Bolton could make the drafting of the treaty a difficult task, if not impossible. For right now thank God, we have the right person at the U.N.

This is very serious and you need to tell everyone who hasn’t heard about it. We need to watch who we elect to the Senate and the Presidency in future years. It must and can only be people who will staunchly defend our 2nd Amendment. The time to spread this news is now, because 2006 is right around the corner. It’s more than guns, it’s freedom!!

An ‘I don’t care’ attitude now could end up in a, “Don’t shoot me” plea later.

To give you an idea of what’s at stake, here’s an example of global plotting to take away your rights:

Many anti-gun individuals and groups from around the world convened in Rio de Janeiro in March, for the International Meeting on the Regulation of Civilian Ownership and Use of Small Arms. The aim of this meeting is to steer a global gun control agenda at the UN. Here’s an excerpt from the Chair’s Summary of the meeting:

Building on the principles noted in the Chair’s summary from the January 2005 meeting in Montreux and having examined the above instruments, as well as several national case studies, the experts proposed a number of principles that could form the basis for minimum standards to guide national small arms control policies and regulations:

Civilians should be restricted from acquiring or possessing small arms designed for military use.

Ownership of small arms should be contingent on obtaining a firearms license, which, in turn, could be based on the following minimum criteria, inter alia – meeting a minimum age requirement; lacking a relevant criminal history, including of intimate partner and family violence; existence of a legitimate reason to acquire weapons; observance of relevant gun laws as well as the safe and efficient handling of small arms.

Small arms licenses should be time-limited and subject to periodic renewal.

Measures should be in place to allow for the removal of small arms from owners whose licenses have been revoked or persons unfit to possess firearms.

Small arms ammunition sales should be restricted to those with a valid firearms license, and only for ammunition suitable for the type of gun specified on the license as well as limitation on the number of rounds of ammunition allowed.

States should ensure that adequate records are kept of all civilian-held small arms, including details of the authorized holder and unique serial number of the weapon.

Greater co-ordination of civilian focused small arms laws and enforcement practices should be encouraged to the greatest extent possible to ensure consistent good practices within regions as well as national uniformity.

Where feasible, States, international organizations and civil society should provide assistance and collaborate for the effective implementation of standards such as these.




www.isra.org/smalltalk/latest_column.shtml
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top