PDA

View Full Version : 1961 state documents outline strategy of UN /US banning guns



Pete
02-04-2013, 09:28 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyfkQkchlu4

So is this a fake or real document. Infowars seems to exhibit seemingly authentic documentation on a variety of issues.

What is your opinion on this site for those who have watched a couple of clips?
Thanks
Pete

MooseGooser
02-04-2013, 10:17 AM
During the campain,, I posted links to the small arms treaty act.
I was laughed at....

Before the debates,,, the topics that were to be allowed during them were discussed.. ALL talks of gun control were off the table...
No questions were raised about the state department and Obama's support of this small arms treaty act were allowed...

All I can say is,,,, What the he!! did you all expect???

The U.N. and its twisted knot pistole' will rule us yet...

Gooser

Pete
02-04-2013, 10:32 AM
Gooser
I certainly didn't write you off.
I have been aware of the constitution eroding for over 25 years. Nothing is really subtle any more. Its all out in the open.I hope some of the viewers here watch the entire video so they can see the military beating down doors and beating up old ladies.
I have a very good understanding how our young men will be able to do this in the name of freedom.
Pete

MooseGooser
02-04-2013, 10:42 AM
Here is what I have posted several times...

Slowly, but surly it will come about.. there is no doubt in my mind...


Gooser



http://www.davekopel.com/2a/Mags/oas-treaty.htm (http://www.davekopel.com/2a/Mags/oas-treaty.htm)

zeus3925
02-04-2013, 11:16 AM
The US constitution takes priority over any treaty-- UN or any other. As far as I know the US is not a signatory of any treaty that contrary to the Constitution.

MooseGooser
02-04-2013, 11:31 AM
The US constitution takes priority over any treaty-- UN or any other. As far as I know the US is not a signatory of any treaty that contrary to the Constitution.


So far!

Just keep that head a yours burried in the sand.

Gooser

jeff evans
02-04-2013, 11:40 AM
The US constitution takes priority over any treaty-- UN or any other. As far as I know the US is not a signatory of any treaty that contrary to the Constitution.

Sarge, you must be a very trusting man, which in some ways I admire but Hillary Clinton was scheduled to sign that treaty this summer but at the last minute pulled out. "there not ready yet." is what they decided. I have to ask did you take a look at the entire NDAA bill that was signed? Without that bill they could never pass gun control, but they passed it and things are running right along. It's mind boggling to me that folks are not protesting the signing of the NDAA. We as Americans NO LONGER HAVE A RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS! Due process protects us against a tyrannical gov just as much as gun rights do. To be quite honest I am a Believer and the Bible spells the road map for what's going on. We're progressing to a one world order quite nicely....

zeus3925
02-04-2013, 01:07 PM
Sarge, you must be a very trusting man, which in some ways I admire but Hillary Clinton was scheduled to sign that treaty this summer but at the last minute pulled out. "there not ready yet." is what they decided. I have to ask did you take a look at the entire NDAA bill that was signed? Without that bill they could never pass gun control, but they passed it and things are running right along. It's mind boggling to me that folks are not protesting the signing of the NDAA. We as Americans NO LONGER HAVE A RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS! Due process protects us against a tyrannical gov just as much as gun rights do. To be quite honest I am a Believer and the Bible spells the road map for what's going on. We're progressing to a one world order quite nicely....

Clinton made it very plain that the US would not go along with any provision that would conflict with the Constitution. Treaties must be ratified by 2/3 vote of the Senate and signed by the POTUS. Clinton's signature is no good--she wasn't POTUS. What do you think is the chance of it getting through the Senate? Just about zip. If they to manage by a miracle in Hell to pass it, I'll be there in D.C. protesting right along side of you and sending in what cash I can spare to challenge it in SCOTUS.

Dustin D
02-04-2013, 01:29 PM
So is this a fake or real document.

It's Real.
Check the URL address; Look down about 5 sections to see State Department Publication 7277
http://www.senate.gov/reference/reference_index_subjects/Publications_vrd.htm

http://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/ERC/arms/freedom_war.html (http://www.senate.gov/reference/reference_index_subjects/Publications_vrd.htmhttp://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/ERC/arms/freedom_war.html)

zeus3925
02-04-2013, 01:49 PM
It's Real.
Check the URL address; Look down about 5 sections to see State Department Publication 7277
http://www.senate.gov/reference/reference_index_subjects/Publications_vrd.htm

http://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/ERC/arms/freedom_war.html (http://www.senate.gov/reference/reference_index_subjects/Publications_vrd.htmhttp://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/ERC/arms/freedom_war.html)




You had a dead link in the first instance. The second citation has to do with reduction of arms among nations and does not apply to individual gun ownership. Like other UN resolutions this one is largely a statement in principle. Other than a limited reduction in nuclear weapons there has been little interest in adhering to this resolution in the half century since.

Dustin D
02-04-2013, 01:54 PM
You had a dead link in the first instance. The second citation has to do with reduction of arms among nations and does not apply to individual gun ownership. Like other UN resolutions this one is largely a statement in principle. Other than a limited reduction in nuclear weapons there has been little interest in adhering to this resolution in the half century since.

http://www.senate.gov/reference/reference_index_subjects/Publications_vrd.htm

road kill
02-04-2013, 02:23 PM
You had a dead link in the first instance. The second citation has to do with reduction of arms among nations and does not apply to individual gun ownership. Like other UN resolutions this one is largely a statement in principle. Other than a limited reduction in nuclear weapons there has been little interest in adhering to this resolution in the half century since.
.....until now!!!:cool:

zeus3925
02-04-2013, 05:35 PM
.....until now!!!:cool:

Stan, Please read the document. It doesn't apply to individual firearm owners.

Dustin D
02-04-2013, 06:54 PM
Stan, Please read the document. It doesn't apply to individual firearm owners.

....until now!!!












ROFL! Sorry couldn't help it :p

I just answered his question. Yes, it's real.

Eric Johnson
02-04-2013, 08:11 PM
Please explain to me:

1) how the 1961 document applies to individual gun owners, and

2) what document moves this from a State Dept position paper to a piece of legislation?