• JUser: :_load: Unable to load user with ID: 387
Monday, 16 July 2012 08:20

UN Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) on Small Arms: Gun Grab Gradualism

Written by 

The United Nations is polishing up a global Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) this month in a New York convention that would create a global registry of private ownership of firearms. This treaty — which would also mandate creation of a national collection agency for those guns and is contrary to the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment — has the long-standing and enthusiastic backing of the Obama State Department, headed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

“Conventional arms transfers are a crucial national security concern for the United States, and we have always supported effective action to control the international transfer of arms,” Hillary Clinton noted as early as October 14, 2009. Clinton boasted that “the United States regularly engages other states to raise their standards and to prohibit the transfer or transshipment of capabilities to rogue states, terrorist groups, and groups seeking to unsettle regions.” Of course, that speech was delivered at the same time the Obama administration was transferring some 2,000 small arms to Mexican drug gangs in the “Fast and Furious” gun-walking scandal

The State Department website nevertheless absurdly continues to boast that “The United States has in place an extensive and rigorous system of controls that most agree is the 'gold standard' of export controls for arms transfers.”

In view of such obviously false public statements, one may question the sincerity of Obama State Department promises about “redlines” to the UN ATT, which supposedly protect the Second Amendment: “The Second Amendment to the Constitution must be upheld. There will be no restrictions on civilian possession or trade of firearms otherwise permitted by law or protected by the U.S. Constitution. There will be no dilution or diminishing of sovereign control over issues involving the private acquisition, ownership, or possession of firearms, which must remain matters of domestic law.” The Obama State Department also promises “There will be no mandate for an international body to enforce an ATT.”

So America's Second Amendment rights are safe, right? 


The draft of the treaty prepared earlier this year by the UN Preparatory Committee (PrepCom) explains that the treaty is aimed at crime control as well as rogue militias in developing nations: 

The majority of conflict deaths are caused by the use of small arms, and civilian populations bear the brunt of armed conflict more than ever. Also, small arms are the dominant tools of criminal violence.

The PrepCom report of February 2012 — despite protestations by the Hillary Clinton's minions — is not limited merely to international transfer of firearms. The draft treaty covers “transfers” as well as imports and exports of firearms: 

The international transactions or activities covered by this Treaty include those listed below and defined in Annex A:

(a) Import;

(b) Export;

(c) Transfer...

In this matter, the 2012 conference is merely following the goals of the 2001 UN Programme of Action on small arms, which required national gun registries and collection agencies for those guns once they've been registered. The 2001 Programme of Action requires nations: 

To ensure that comprehensive and accurate records are kept for as long as possible on the manufacture, holding and transfer of small arms and light weapons under their jurisdiction. These records should be organized and maintained in such a way as to ensure that accurate information can be promptly retrieved and collated by competent national authorities.

To develop and implement, where possible, effective disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programmes, including the effective collection, control, storage and destruction of small arms and light weapons...

The UN is still seeking this kind of broad control over private firearms ownership, and UN General Assembly resolution 66/47, adopted December 2, 2011 in advance of this month's conference that it seeks to ban “The illicit trade in small arms and light weapons in all its aspects.” [Emphasis added]

Moreover, the 2012 PrepCom report uses broad bans on any transfer of firearms: 

A State Party shall not authorize a transfer of conventional arms if there is a substantial risk that those conventional arms would: Be used in a manner that would seriously undermine peace and security or provoke, prolong or aggravate internal, regional, subregional or international instability.

Some 56 or more U.S. senators have written a letter to President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton opposing the UN global gun registry, according to the National Rifle Association. Senatorial opposition began with a July 26, 2011 letter claiming that “the establishment of any sort of international gun registry that could impede upon the privacy rights of law-abiding gun owners is a non-starter.”

The U.S. State Department already has a State Department Office of Weapons Removal and Abatement that could be used as a control agency for domestic controls on firearms transfers. 

The State Department policy on Conventional Weapons Destruction suggests: “The proliferation of illicit conventional weapons, including small arms and light weapons (SA/LW), in regions of the world suffering from political instability and violent conflict has proven a major obstacle to peace, economic development, and efforts to rebuild war-torn societies. In places like Afghanistan, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Sudan, and Colombia, thousands of innocent civilians have been killed and tens of thousands more displaced by ethnic and civil conflicts perpetuated in large part by easy access to illicit conventional weapons, particularly SA/LW.” 

Many of the countries listed by State Department officials are the very nations that most need "illicit" small arms to fight back against genocidal governments. “Illicit” is the new globalist jargon for “illegal,” though in most instances the sparse “illegal” weapons around the world are the ones that are being used by victims to shoot back against genocidal governments. This is certainly the case in Syria today, where perfectly legal small arms in the hands of the government are crushing a largely disarmed civilian population. It was also recently the case in the genocide in South Sudan, which recently won independence from Sudan — ending the genocide — after using “illicit” small arms in an independence effort.

In the 1994 Rwandan genocide, the “illegal” and “illicit” guns would have been those owned by the victims. And in Rwanda, the United Nations helped to facilitate arms deals to the government forces and was complicit in the genocide of some 800,000 innocent Tutsis. Gun control in Rwanda was so effectively implemented — in part with UN “peacekeeper” assistance — that much of the genocide against Tutsis was carried out by Hutu-aligned government forces with machetes — not guns!

Since the UN has traditionally backed genocidal governments over the victims who use “illicit” guns to defend themselves, it's not surprising that human rights violator Iran is one of several regional chairmen of the UN ATT convention. 


  • Comment Link Mark D Tuesday, 24 July 2012 08:03 posted by Mark D

    The author should be commended for a well written article that gets to the root of the evil of gun control being foisted on the people to eventually confiscate their God Given Right to Self Defense. The example of the 1994 UN sponsored Rwandan genocide is apropos to the issue of gun control by any government which seeks to impose it on the general population. So where does this lead globally should the ATT UN treaty pass and gun registration, confiscation and destruction take place. We don't need to look far to know that the New World Order tyrants are religious about population control. Simply Google and read “The First Report to The Club of Rome” or simpler still read the first of their ten commandments written on the Georgia Guidestones, “Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.”
    So why is it so difficult for Americans to see that their own government has plans in place to confiscate our guns, put any opposition in ICE detainment camps and then quietly exterminate them with vaccines tainted with their newest CON-cocted virus. Don't believe it?., well that's exactly what the Jews in Poland and Germany said right before the where herded into concentration camps; and we all know how that ended.
    If you think that this coming November we can just simply vote the problem out of office, well think again for the very people behind these evil plans vet each candidate either right or left to progress their agenda. Furthermore any independent candidates are simple excluded from the mass media coverage and debates, crushing any opposition; we've all seen it happen before. Thousands of years ago God warned us about turning to the right or left by following man made up laws that enslave, but we just don't seem to get it because the 501c3 controlled churches are telling their faithful followers to endorse one candidate or another instead of The King of kings and God's Perfect Royal Laws of True Liberty, written in the first five books of The Holy Bible.
    Deuteronomy:5:32 Ye shall observe to do therefore as the "I AM" your God hath commanded you: ye shall not turn aside to the right hand or to the left.
    Yet there is one voice out there that is encouraging the people to sing a New Song of Liberty, different from what we have known before since our lives have all been controlled and tailored from cradle to grave. Remember Morpheus's famous words in the Matrix ,“You are a Slave Neo”. This New Song is simple but not easy since we have all grown so accustom to sin in our daily lives due to the degradation of our morals through skools, the media and UN and Rockefeller sponsored progroms. We need to wake up and learn to sing the right Song again.
    For if we don't do so soon, these people are going to carry out their evil tax payer funded plans while the majority sit back and let them do it.
    There is something we can all do right now, get properly educated about “Who” has occupied the halls of power in this country since World War II ended. Please go to You Tube and Watch “The Nazi Bankster Crimes Ripple Effect” now.
    Then Please also support the 2012 Jubilee to put an end to all of this illegal legislation against God's Royal Laws of Liberty so “We the People” can be rid of this fraudulent debt the keep us all enslave to a very small minority.
    Finally the Only solution is to read, digest and help to enforce “The Plan”
    against these Nazi Bankster War Criminals and stop their evil plans.

    We should all graciously thank the Author of the above links and most especially for “The Little Stone”, Titled “The Way home or face The Fire” found for free at

  • Comment Link D.A. Wednesday, 18 July 2012 14:33 posted by D.A.

    I wonder if Christopher Newsom and Channon Christian had been carrying a weapon, would the outcome had been the same.... in case you don't know what I'm referring to... you mean Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson didn't comment?

  • Comment Link N.E. Patriot Monday, 16 July 2012 17:58 posted by N.E. Patriot

    If any of your readers have friends who still naively believe that gun control in any form will "save lives," they need to hear the message (in both words and song) behind the reason for the Second Amendment being included in our Bill of Rights in the first place! Send this link to everyone in your contact list, along with the recommendation to then contact their Congressman and Senators regarding the ATT as soon as they've finished listening!

  • Comment Link Robert LaLanne Monday, 16 July 2012 14:25 posted by Robert LaLanne

    In 1952, the Bricker Amendment to the Constitution was introduced in Congress to address the issue of treaties conflicting with or being superior to the Constitution. It did not pass but, since that time, some court decisions have established most of the limitations contained in the Bricker Amendment.

    Three of those cases are:

    Seery v. United States, 127 F. Supp. 601 (Court of Claims, 1955)
    Diggs v. Schultz, 470 F2d 461 (1972)
    Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957)

    So, the Constitution cannot be trumped by any treaty that is in conflict with it and that especially holds true for our Bill opf Rights.

Please Log In To Comment
Log in