PDA

View Full Version : Yo Yardley et al...



Uncle Bill
04-22-2010, 02:42 PM
...how confident are you now about your 'chosen one' and his style of thuggery. And to think he would play by the rules. As I've stated many times before, he's playing you all for saps and fools...but then, you have known that all along, right?

UB

http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE59E0Q920091015 (http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE59E0Q920091015)

U.S. reverses stance on treaty to regulate arms trade

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States reversed policy on Wednesday and said it would back launching talks on a treaty to regulate arms sales as long as the talks operated by consensus, a stance critics said gave every nation a veto.

The decision, announced in a statement released by the U.S. State Department, overturns the position of former President George W. Bush's administration, which had opposed such a treaty on the grounds that national controls were better.

On Wednesday Obama Took the First Major Step in a Plan to Ban All Firearms in the United States. The Obama administration intends to force gun control and a complete ban on all weapons for US citizens through the signing of international treaties with foreign nations. By signing international treaties on gun control, the Obama administration can use the US State Department to bypass the normal legislative process in Congress. Once the US Government signs these international treaties, all US citizens will be subject to those gun laws created by foreign governments. These are laws that have been developed and promoted by organizations such as the United Nations and individuals such as George Soros and Michael Bloomberg. The laws are designed and intended to lead to the complete ban and confiscation of all firearms.

The Obama administration is attempting to use tactics and methods of gun control that will inflict major damage to our 2nd Amendment before US citizens even understand what has happened. Obama can appear before the public and tell them that he does not intend to pursue any legislation (in the United States) that will lead to new gun control laws, while cloaked in secrecy, his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton is committing the US to international treaties and foreign gun control laws. Does that mean Obama is telling the truth? What it means is that there will be no publicized gun control debates in the media or votes in Congress.

We will wake up one morning and find that the United States has signed a treaty that prohibits firearm and ammunition
manufacturers from selling to the public.

We will wake up another morning and find that the US has signed a treaty that prohibits any transfer of firearm ownership. And then, we will wake up yet another morning and find that the US has signed a treaty that requires US citizens to deliver any firearm they own to the local government collection and destruction center or face imprisonment.

This is not a joke, nor a false warning. As sure as government health care will be forced on us by the Obama administration through whatever means necessary, so will gun control.


We are being led like a lamb to the slaughter (Socialism/Dictatorship)

dnf777
04-22-2010, 02:49 PM
[COLOR=black]This is not a joke, nor a false warning. ]

'nuff said.

Internet chatter that claims to not be a joke or false warning, usually tends to be a joke or false warning most of the time.

Kind of like the letters that start with, "I never thought this would happen to me, but....."

Uncle Bill
04-22-2010, 03:14 PM
'nuff said.

Internet chatter that claims to not be a joke or false warning, usually tends to be a joke or false warning most of the time.

Kind of like the letters that start with, "I never thought this would happen to me, but....."


Know what??? Removing guns from your hands would not only be complete vindication of your ignorant foolishness in the way you vote, think, and spew platitudes, but would also be pure justice.

UB

huntinman
04-22-2010, 03:17 PM
Know what??? Removing guns from your hands would not only be complete vindication of your ignorant foolishness in the way you vote, think, and spew platitudes, but would also be pure justice.

UB

Only problem with that, is that we lose them if he loses them.

Franco
04-22-2010, 03:29 PM
This is the response from the organization know as Gun Owners Of America.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbx08fbb-L4

No doubt that Obama is doing an endrun around the 2nd Amendment.

Somehow, I get the feeling that Obama will not readily give up power in 2012 or 2016, whenever his Presidency ends.

dnf777
04-22-2010, 03:29 PM
Know what??? Removing guns from your hands would not only be complete vindication of your ignorant foolishness in the way you vote, think, and spew platitudes, but would also be pure justice.

UB

read RK's post, then join the club. Maybe its even worthy of "sticky status".
The rest of us here are trying to debate in a civil, mature manner, and are with one notable exception.....ah-hem.....

As far as you or anyone else removing my guns....I'm not even going there, in the spirit of our new civil tone! :)

As for your post, wasn't that already discussed here, and is old hat? I thought that internet rumor had already been debunked, despite it's claims to be "no joke".

YardleyLabs
04-22-2010, 06:30 PM
Treaties have the force of law, but do not preempt the Constitution. In addition, a treaty that has not been ratified by a two-thirds majority in the Senate has no standing at all. What does all that mean? It means that no treaty emerging from such discussions would have any effect whatsoever on the rights of US citizens to possess firearms. What a treaty could do is provide an international framework for limiting the flow of firearms between countries. Is that a bad thing? What part of the second amendment gives US citizens the right to purchase unlimited firearms for export to Mexico? I see that as gun running, and that has been illegal throughout our history.

Uncle Bill
04-23-2010, 02:36 PM
Treaties have the force of law, but do not preempt the Constitution. In addition, a treaty that has not been ratified by a two-thirds majority in the Senate has no standing at all. And you are willing to gamble on Obama, and his administration will abide by the Constitution, after he has ignored it whenever he's seen fit? Does the word 'gullible' have any meaning for you?


I see that as gun running, and that has been illegal throughout our history.
Precisely...so why the need for some 'additional' regulation, other than to hide some terminology in it, like additional gun control, that this administration is so fond of doing in bills they foist on the American society. They preach how important all these 'necessities' shoved down the throat of the sheeple, are so 'innocuous' and important. It's understandable how the ignorant lap dogs fall for this crap, but you claim to be educated and intelligent. How does this legerdemain continue to buffalo you?




Is there any hope that someday you might "get it", or do you enjoy grovelling among the SFN crowd?

UB

YardleyLabs
04-23-2010, 02:53 PM
I Quote:
Originally Posted by YardleyLabs http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?p=603409#post603409)

Treaties have the force of law, but do not preempt the Constitution. In addition, a treaty that has not been ratified by a two-thirds majority in the Senate has no standing at all. And you are willing to gamble on Obama, and his administration will abide by the Constitution, after he has ignored it whenever he's seen fit? Does the word 'gullible' have any meaning for you?


I see that as gun running, and that has been illegal throughout our history.
Precisely...so why the need for some 'additional' regulation, other than to hide some terminology in it, like additional gun control, that this administration is so fond of doing in bills they foist on the American society. They preach how important all these 'necessities' shoved down the throat of the sheeple, are so 'innocuous' and important. It's understandable how the ignorant lap dogs fall for this crap, but you claim to be educated and intelligent. How does this legerdemain continue to buffalo you?



s there any hope that someday you might "get it", or do you enjoy grovelling among the SFN crowd?

UB
I don't know what you are talking about when you say the Obama administration "he has ignored it [the Constitution] whenever he's seen fit". Has he been sending people out to search the files of shrinks to gather evidence on personal political enemies? Has he ordered the NSA to listen in on millions of telephone call without warrants or notifications to the FISA court? Has he been throwing people into off shore prisons and denying access to counsel? Or is it simply that he has proposed and supported legislation that you dislike but that has been passed in accordance with the rules of the house and Senate? That would certainly be evidence of despotic, un-Constitutional behavior. Does the word 'stupid' have any meaning for you?

How is some language going to be hidden in a negotiated treaty (that is actually never likely to materialize anyway) going to be "foisted" on the American people in a document that cannot become law without the support of two-thirds of the Senate? In addition, how can that document overturn the Constitution without the support of the Roberts Court? You claim to be an intelligent and thoughtful conservative. How does this email nonsense continue to buffalo you?:rolleyes:

Uncle Bill
04-23-2010, 03:07 PM
I don't know what you are talking about when you say the Obama administration "he has ignored it [the Constitution] whenever he's seen fit". Has he been sending people out to search the files of shrinks to gather evidence on personal political enemies? Has he ordered the NSA to listen in on millions of telephone call without warrants or notifications to the FISA court? Has he been throwing people into off shore prisons and denying access to counsel? Or is it simply that he has proposed and supported legislation that you dislike but that has been passed in accordance with the rules of the house and Senate? That would certainly be evidence of despotic, un-Constitutional behavior. Does the word 'stupid' have any meaning for you?

How is some language going to be hidden in a negotiated treaty (that is actually never likely to materialize anyway) going to be "foisted" on the American people in a document that cannot become law without the support of two-thirds of the Senate? In addition, how can that document overturn the Constitution without the support of the Roberts Court? You claim to be an intelligent and thoughtful conservative. How does this email nonsense continue to buffalo you?:rolleyes:

Primarily because I see how this current administration has gotten someone with obvious education to become such a shill for the rest of the fools that voted in this pathetic batch of thugs.

Like the straw that broke the camels back, there will come the time when your ox will be gored, and you will be flummoxed by why they are doing that to YOU of all people. Show them your sword wounds, Yardley.

UB