Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Dammmmmm un's at it again
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AKmoose" data-source="post: 2143201" data-attributes="member: 5917"><p><a href="http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/03/the-un-small-arms-treaty-talks-are-getting-serious-wheres-the-outrage/" target="_blank">http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/03/the-un-small-arms-treaty-talks-are-getting-serious-wheres-the-outrage/</a></p><p></p><p>March 18, 2013 by Dean Garrison </p><p></p><p>The UN Small Arms Treaty Talks Are Getting Serious Wheres The Outrage?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>From March 18-28 the United Nations will again meet with an updated draft to try to finalize passage of its Small Arms Treaty. However it doesnt seem to be a story, despite being less than 24 hours away. Conservative blogs and sites are as guilty as the Mainstream Media. Almost no one is speaking out against a Treaty that has the ability to change America, and the world as we know it, forever. To give credit where credit is due I will say that the NRA has not dropped this fight. It just seems that most everyone else views it as a non-story. As of this morning I found six total sources reporting the story within the last two days. I consider that unacceptable. Here is a quote from NRA opposes U.N. arms treaty, which was published earlier today in The Washington Post:</p><p></p><p> </p><p>The NRA is among the treatys most vocal opponents and a founder of the World Forum on Shooting Activities, an international coalition of gun rights activists and gun manufacturers who plan to speak against the treaty.</p><p></p><p></p><p>What we really object to is the inclusion of civilian firearms within the scope of the ATT, said Tom Mason, the groups executive secretary and a lawyer who has represented the NRA at U.N. meetings for nearly two decades. This is a treaty that really needs to address the transfer of large numbers of military weapons that leads to human rights abuses. We have submitted language that you can define what a civilian firearm is.</p><p></p><p> </p><p>The NRA also argues that the treaty could infringe on gun rights as understood in the United States and could force Americans onto an international registry.</p><p></p><p> </p><p>I applaud the NRA for standing up for our rights as American Citizens. Id like to share an important video testimony with you. It is only 6 minutes and will summarize the NRA stance very clearly and succinctly.</p><p></p><p>I cant help but think that the media is under some unofficial White House gag order over The UN Small Arms Trade Treaty. Think about it. This story should be all over every American news website today. We understand how everyone wants the scoop in journalism. Why is it that a small and obscure blog called The D.C. Clothesline is one of only a handful of sources covering this?</p><p></p><p>Its all about agendas. The Obama Administration did not officially endorse this treaty until after the 2012 election. Obama was elected on November 6th, 2012 and on November 7th, 2012 he officially endorsed the treaty. How convenient is that? The administration blamed Hurricane Sandy for the timing of the matter, but they always have an excuse. An excuse is not an explanation. To wait until after the election to declare a stance on such an important issue is, at the very least, not providing the American people with transparency that they need to make good decisions. Do Republicans do it too? Oh yes, without a doubt. This is one reason I consider myself independent. </p><p>Previously the administration had objected to the treaty and its inclusion of ammunition as part of the agreement. Egypt and Syria carried the same objection. Very interesting indeed.</p><p></p><p>The Chinese and Russians also objected for different reasons.</p><p>But now it seems like no one is objecting and my sincere hope is that our Senate will hold their ground, because it will take 2/3 of them to ratify. As of last year we had a majority of the Senate objecting to this treaty, but we have to remember that the Obama Administration was also objecting. Now that The King has spoken, many of his subjects will begin to follow. And with a democratic majority in The Senate it will take only a handful of RINO Senators to insure the ratification of the UN Small Arms Treaty.</p><p></p><p>The democrats currently have a 53-45 majority but in reality you could argue that it is 55-45. The two independents are generally left-leaning. If the democrats and independents vote in favor of the Obama Administrations position then it would take only 12 Republican votes to ratify this. I am not saying that this is likely, but it could happen.</p><p></p><p>Lets not forget what happened during Senator Rand Pauls historic filibuster:</p><p>Wednesday night in Washington was a big one for the future of the Republican Party. At the Capitol building, Sen. Rand Paul, a Kentucky Republican, was filibustering the nomination of John Brennan as director of the CIA. At the swanky Jefferson Hotel, Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, was convening a dinner with President Barack Obama and 12 other Republican senators. These simultaneous events revealed while elephants are no closer to resolving their party-wide identity crisis, there is a way forward.</p><p></p><p>OK, so what were they talking about at that dinner? You wont get a straight answer, though Im sure at least one or two Rand Paul barbs came out. But again, how many votes would need to come from Republicans to ratify? Potentially as few as 12. How many Republican Senators dined with the President while Rand Paul was fighting for America? Thirteen.</p><p></p><p>I think that part of the reason that more conservative blogs and sites are not running this story is simply because they think this has no chance to make it through the Senate. I would respectfully disagree.</p><p></p><p>I think we are in a fight and I think it is time to raise some major awareness on this issue. Whether you can share this on social media or bombard your Senators with emails anything will help. We must raise awareness before its too late.</p><p>Is this another backdoor attempt to suspend conditions of the 2nd amendment? Or is it just another step in the process to systematically grind it away? It does not matter because accepting the terms of this agreement is a clear violation of our constitutionally protected rights.</p><p>The second amendment guarantees us the right to bear arms and those rights shall not be infringed. McCain and Graham may still be picking caviar from their teeth but they need to remember the words of our constitution, as do their RINO friends.</p><p></p><p>Mr. Obama is not our King.</p><p> </p><p>The United Nations has no authority on American soil.</p><p></p><p>These are the facts. We are protected in this country by a Constitution which the current lawmakers seem determined to rip to shreds.</p><p></p><p>This will not happen on our watch. We are the American Patriots. </p><p>You will not take our guns and you will not infringe on our rights that are protected by the Constitution, but more importantly endowed by Our Creator.</p><p>It is time to get vocal. There is a plan in place and you cannot count on our Senate to hold the line this time. We must make sure that they hear our voices and realize that there will be consequences if they cross this line.</p><p></p><p>So today we draw another line in the sand and tell them not to cross it. This time we have to mean what we say. We can not keep endorsing and protecting people who do not have our best interests at heart.</p><p></p><p>Read more: <a href="http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/03/the-un-small-arms-treaty-talks-are-getting-serious-wheres-the-outrage/#ixzz2O2hrNb4E" target="_blank">http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/03/the-un-small-arms-treaty-talks-are-getting-serious-wheres-the-outrage/#ixzz2O2hrNb4E</a></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AKmoose, post: 2143201, member: 5917"] [url]http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/03/the-un-small-arms-treaty-talks-are-getting-serious-wheres-the-outrage/[/url] March 18, 2013 by Dean Garrison The UN Small Arms Treaty Talks Are Getting Serious Wheres The Outrage? From March 18-28 the United Nations will again meet with an updated draft to try to finalize passage of its Small Arms Treaty. However it doesnt seem to be a story, despite being less than 24 hours away. Conservative blogs and sites are as guilty as the Mainstream Media. Almost no one is speaking out against a Treaty that has the ability to change America, and the world as we know it, forever. To give credit where credit is due I will say that the NRA has not dropped this fight. It just seems that most everyone else views it as a non-story. As of this morning I found six total sources reporting the story within the last two days. I consider that unacceptable. Here is a quote from NRA opposes U.N. arms treaty, which was published earlier today in The Washington Post: The NRA is among the treatys most vocal opponents and a founder of the World Forum on Shooting Activities, an international coalition of gun rights activists and gun manufacturers who plan to speak against the treaty. What we really object to is the inclusion of civilian firearms within the scope of the ATT, said Tom Mason, the groups executive secretary and a lawyer who has represented the NRA at U.N. meetings for nearly two decades. This is a treaty that really needs to address the transfer of large numbers of military weapons that leads to human rights abuses. We have submitted language that you can define what a civilian firearm is. The NRA also argues that the treaty could infringe on gun rights as understood in the United States and could force Americans onto an international registry. I applaud the NRA for standing up for our rights as American Citizens. Id like to share an important video testimony with you. It is only 6 minutes and will summarize the NRA stance very clearly and succinctly. I cant help but think that the media is under some unofficial White House gag order over The UN Small Arms Trade Treaty. Think about it. This story should be all over every American news website today. We understand how everyone wants the scoop in journalism. Why is it that a small and obscure blog called The D.C. Clothesline is one of only a handful of sources covering this? Its all about agendas. The Obama Administration did not officially endorse this treaty until after the 2012 election. Obama was elected on November 6th, 2012 and on November 7th, 2012 he officially endorsed the treaty. How convenient is that? The administration blamed Hurricane Sandy for the timing of the matter, but they always have an excuse. An excuse is not an explanation. To wait until after the election to declare a stance on such an important issue is, at the very least, not providing the American people with transparency that they need to make good decisions. Do Republicans do it too? Oh yes, without a doubt. This is one reason I consider myself independent. Previously the administration had objected to the treaty and its inclusion of ammunition as part of the agreement. Egypt and Syria carried the same objection. Very interesting indeed. The Chinese and Russians also objected for different reasons. But now it seems like no one is objecting and my sincere hope is that our Senate will hold their ground, because it will take 2/3 of them to ratify. As of last year we had a majority of the Senate objecting to this treaty, but we have to remember that the Obama Administration was also objecting. Now that The King has spoken, many of his subjects will begin to follow. And with a democratic majority in The Senate it will take only a handful of RINO Senators to insure the ratification of the UN Small Arms Treaty. The democrats currently have a 53-45 majority but in reality you could argue that it is 55-45. The two independents are generally left-leaning. If the democrats and independents vote in favor of the Obama Administrations position then it would take only 12 Republican votes to ratify this. I am not saying that this is likely, but it could happen. Lets not forget what happened during Senator Rand Pauls historic filibuster: Wednesday night in Washington was a big one for the future of the Republican Party. At the Capitol building, Sen. Rand Paul, a Kentucky Republican, was filibustering the nomination of John Brennan as director of the CIA. At the swanky Jefferson Hotel, Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, was convening a dinner with President Barack Obama and 12 other Republican senators. These simultaneous events revealed while elephants are no closer to resolving their party-wide identity crisis, there is a way forward. OK, so what were they talking about at that dinner? You wont get a straight answer, though Im sure at least one or two Rand Paul barbs came out. But again, how many votes would need to come from Republicans to ratify? Potentially as few as 12. How many Republican Senators dined with the President while Rand Paul was fighting for America? Thirteen. I think that part of the reason that more conservative blogs and sites are not running this story is simply because they think this has no chance to make it through the Senate. I would respectfully disagree. I think we are in a fight and I think it is time to raise some major awareness on this issue. Whether you can share this on social media or bombard your Senators with emails anything will help. We must raise awareness before its too late. Is this another backdoor attempt to suspend conditions of the 2nd amendment? Or is it just another step in the process to systematically grind it away? It does not matter because accepting the terms of this agreement is a clear violation of our constitutionally protected rights. The second amendment guarantees us the right to bear arms and those rights shall not be infringed. McCain and Graham may still be picking caviar from their teeth but they need to remember the words of our constitution, as do their RINO friends. Mr. Obama is not our King. The United Nations has no authority on American soil. These are the facts. We are protected in this country by a Constitution which the current lawmakers seem determined to rip to shreds. This will not happen on our watch. We are the American Patriots. You will not take our guns and you will not infringe on our rights that are protected by the Constitution, but more importantly endowed by Our Creator. It is time to get vocal. There is a plan in place and you cannot count on our Senate to hold the line this time. We must make sure that they hear our voices and realize that there will be consequences if they cross this line. So today we draw another line in the sand and tell them not to cross it. This time we have to mean what we say. We can not keep endorsing and protecting people who do not have our best interests at heart. Read more: [url]http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/03/the-un-small-arms-treaty-talks-are-getting-serious-wheres-the-outrage/#ixzz2O2hrNb4E[/url] [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Dammmmmm un's at it again
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom
