It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

UN declares arms trade treaty to go into effect Dec 24

page: 5
14
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 07:51 PM
link   
 


IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS
MOD NOTE: Posting work written by others

 




edit on Mon Nov 10 2014 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 07:53 PM
link   
a reply to: ATF1886

Wow - he can copy and paste entire paragraphs from Wikipedia...

Well done! I'll go and put it on the fridge next to the macaroni art...

What was the point in all that, aside from breaking T&C's by copying huge lumps of text, not quoting properly and not providing a source?

EDIT: And I am still puzzled what this has to do with the topic? I'm not advocating taking your guns away, if that's what get's your rocks off, more power to you. This thread (that you created) is about the UN Arms Trade Treaty...
edit on 10/11/14 by stumason because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 07:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: antar
a reply to: duaneology

People like you are why we love our guns. You are a toilet.


Lol? Oh well...hug your gun extra tight tonight while you cower in fear



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 07:58 PM
link   
Im glad you caught on i guess proving a point to a lobsterback that look at all the bs u have to go through for a firearm its a joke it wasent even worth the cite and most intelligent people would know it came from wiki no reference need to point out a countries stupidity in firearm control... reply to: stumason



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 08:01 PM
link   
Cower never that so what do you blokes do in a situation were someone pulls a gun on you cower in fear call the cops i mean explain your defense in a situation like that??a reply to: duaneology



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 08:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: ATF1886
Im glad you caught on i guess proving a point to a lobsterback that look at all the bs u have to go through for a firearm its a joke it wasent even worth the cite and most intelligent people would know it came from wiki no reference need to point out a countries stupidity in firearm control... reply to: stumason



Lobsterback? Haha, whatever dude. If you feel the need to start throwing insults around, that just shows your infantile mentality.

And again, what has the UK's gun control laws got to do with your thread and why are you banging on about them? Is it because you know that you have been caught out in a lie with the OP and are now trying to deflect by pissing all over someone else?

I don't care about gun control - if you guys want guns, great, but guns were never a part of UK culture the way they were in the States because we didn't have to defend ourselves from wild animals or Natives whose land we were stealing. I get the impression you think your "winning" some argument here, but it's an argument only you are having. I haven't advocated gun control in the US and nor will I, although it varies from state to state anyway with some having gun control laws as tight as the UK. We actually have constitutionally protected Gun rights too, you know, and it isn't anywhere near as restrictive as the Wiki page makes out.

And yes, you do need to provide a source link and us the correct quote tags. What you just did was simple plagiarism. It's all in the T&C's, but then you couldn't wrap your head around this UN treaty so I shouldn't be surprised you can't understand ATS T&C's either.
edit on 10/11/14 by stumason because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 08:07 PM
link   
What it has to do is that this article began as a question and statement, avout this treaty you then jumped in 3pages later to state that i had not read the treaty which i did, i then stated to you that i commented on my concern in the linguistics and certain sections of the treaty, which then you went on an insult tangent stating that i did not read the treaty, which then the situation became personal between two Allied countries , hence the Argument between a "BRIT" and "HONKEY"a reply to: stumason



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 08:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: stumason
FYI - this might be a shock to you as clearly you're not that well versed in anything outside the US - but guns aren't illegal here, so you can the whole "taking god given rights" thing.

I auno maybe this post???



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 08:10 PM
link   
a reply to: ATF1886

If you read the Treaty, why post an OP that contains claims about said Treaty which are blatant lies?

Why continue to think the Treaty is an effort to control guns in the US?

It is clear you haven't read it, as you';re claiming it is something it isn't.

And if you think that stating "it is clear people have not read the Treaty" is an insult, you're a bit of a wet blanket and need to grow up.



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 08:12 PM
link   
Im glad someone is so versed in ATS T&C seems you have alot of time on your hands.. ok regardless f the page i posted explain why the UN has to impose treatys on other countries what has the UN ever done for the world...a reply to: stumason



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 08:13 PM
link   
a reply to: ATF1886

Which was a reply to you bringing up UK gun control in this post on page 3:



Lol seems you are not to keen on reading mate i listed my concerns after reading the full treaty but it seems someone was to busy powdering his wig this argument excludes you in the sense that this is happening in a state where we actually stand up for our rights and dont allow our government to step on us like roaches you remind me of piers snot morgan your just another brit sticking his nose were it doesnt belong sir good day!!!


Which was just the first in a series of posts that were actually quite derogatory against the British.



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 08:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: ATF1886
Im glad someone is so versed in ATS T&C seems you have alot of time on your hands.. ok regardless f the page i posted explain why the UN has to impose treatys on other countries what has the UN ever done for the world...a reply to: stumason



Dear lord.....

The UN isn't "imposing" anything.

And with that, it shows that not only haven't you read the Treaty, but haven't understood how it came about, nor how the UN works.



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 08:15 PM
link   
You wouldnt understand im sorry you have to result to childish insults i guess we are both wet blankets that need to grow up. a reply to: stumason



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 08:18 PM
link   
a reply to: ATF1886

Haha, I wouldn't understand?

Understand what?

That you got led up the garden path by some rabid blog, failed to do your own research and don't understand how international politics, the United Nations or in fact pretty much anything works?

And if you're so bent out of shape about being called a "wet blanket", perhaps you should shut the fudge up with the "wig powdering", "lobsterback" and other moronic insults you started throwing around long before I said that.

It's true what another poster said - the more vociferous "pro gun" lot do have self-esteem issues....



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 08:25 PM
link   
Once again DEAR JESUS...
Article 20 #3 this means that a vote by the UN can change the treaty as seen fit... you know this is becoming personal and we cant come to an agreement and to not offend anyone ill make this easy your right have a trophy enjoy the victory reply to: stumason



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 08:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: ATF1886
Once again DEAR JESUS...
Article 20 #3 this means that a vote by the UN can change the treaty as seen fit... you know this is becoming personal and we cant come to an agreement and to not offend anyone ill make this easy your right have a trophy enjoy the victory reply to: stumason



No, it doesn't.

What it actually says is this:



3. The States Parties shall make every effort to achieve consensus on each amendment. If all efforts at consensus have been exhausted, and no agreement reached, the amendment shall, as a last resort, be adopted by a three -quarters majority vote of the States Parties present and voting at the meeting of the Conference of States Parties. For the purposes of this Article, States Parties present and voting means States Parties present and casting an affirmative or negative vote.The Depositary shall communicate any adopted amendment to all States Parties.

Once again, link to treaty text


And even then, a Treaty needs to be ratified by a countries own Legislature. There is no "imposing" anything. If the US, for example, didn't like an amendment it doesn't have to ratify the Treaty or abide by it. Just like the Convention on Cluster Munitions - the US hasn't ratified or acceded to it, so it has no weight in law concerning the USA.

Of course, being such an astute, leaned, worldly person, you knew this.

I'm not sure what you think the UN is, but clearly you are barking up the wrong tree, in the wrong forest. We're not going to come to an agreement because you are wrong - why would I agree with someone who is so clearly confused and deluded?
edit on 10/11/14 by stumason because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 08:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: ATF1886
Cower never that so what do you blokes do in a situation were someone pulls a gun on you cower in fear call the cops i mean explain your defense in a situation like that??a reply to: duaneology



I'm not British as you assume. And furthermore SHUT UP ...you're making Americans look dumb

edit on 10upm11America/Chicago2014Monday2014814 by duaneology because: typo

edit on 10upm11America/Chicago2014Monday2014814 by duaneology because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 08:54 PM
link   
And the insults continue wanker ehh rubbish my hostility is towards my president and all the executive orders now my fear is that he hands over power to the UN whether ratified satisfied whatever the UN has done what??? You defend the UN with your claws out you read the posts they put on the website an believe it word for word last time i checked this was a conspiracy website not a lets all hug and love each other website... like i said continue to insult and act like a grown child cause your no different than i your self righteous and act like an incompetent fool enjoy your night keep the argument going by your delusional self... reply to: stumason



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 08:59 PM
link   
a reply to: ATF1886

Oh deary me.... You've genuinely lost the plot (and apparently the ability to punctuate properly now, as well)

The worst I have said is to ask you to stop being such a wet blanket and that was after you used several insults directed at me and also made disparaging remarks about the UK. Now you're calling me a "wa**er".. Nice...

What I have gathered from that diatribe of yours is that I shouldn't believe the Treaty text (or use precedent to cite how these treaties work such as the Cluster Munitions Convention) but instead believe the interpretation of said treaty by a right-wing, Christian blog instead that claims it says things that it does not?

Okay then...



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 09:04 PM
link   
Star for your intelligence a reply to: stumason




new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join