It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


United Nations Calls For IMMEDIATE Investigation Into Trayvon Martin Events

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 09:47 PM
You all are still sounding like fox news.

The UN is a waste of money for such a long time.
They are nothing more than a US puppet that has seen it's days.
And as for the killing of a teen in Florida,come on,REALLY,The UN wants to get involved???????????

posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 10:25 PM
reply to post by jakeistheone

I think that's over-simplifying the situation pretty heavily. First, I think back to the Cuban Missile Crisis as an example of very high stakes events playing out across the UN stage. That was definitely not, as history I read and watch recorded, a given for how it would all turn out. The UN definitely was no rubber stamp, as I heard my parents add their own perspective the one or two times it came up.

The my opinion...for U.S. power at the UN was during Reagan. The Soviets were in decline....China was feeling changes coming and otherwise distracted internally and most of the world just couldn't seem to argue the causes of that time.

Now? Well... I can't recall having read about let alone seeing a man MORE hard core conservative American at the U.N. than John Bolton and he got his butt handed to him often enough over his time there that I really can't see the UN as anything remotely bias TOWARD the U.S. anymore. If anything, it's swung out the other way and it's still going.

posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 10:56 PM
I find it interesting the Koch Brothers are trying to get into the UN.

Aspen may become hub for United Nations effort
Denver Business Journal
Date: Monday, March 19, 2012, 6:07am MDT
The United Nation's Mountain Partnership may find its North American hub in Aspen, the Aspen Daily News reports.

The partnership, which has members in North America but not a centralized presence, is preparing for a global environmental conference in Brazil this summer. Not wanting North America to go unrepresented, a group called the Aspen International Mountain Foundation jumped in with a report on North American mountains and the issues facing them.

Efforts are now under way to see that Aspen fills the role of North American hub.

Aspen International Mountain Foundation

What is AIMF?
The Aspen International Mountain Foundation (AIMF) is a Colorado nonprofit corporation dedicated to promoting sustainable development in the world's mountain communities. Formally organized in 2001 in the heart of the Rocky Mountains, AIMF evolved over a decade of working collaboratively with the United Nations' Environment Program (UNEP), the City of Aspen, the Aspen Institute, Aspen Sister Cities, and other public and private organizations that produced a series of international conferences focusing on issues facing mountain communities.

Aspen Institute

David Koch and many others.

I feel sorry for the mountains of the world. There all about to be raped and pillaged.

posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 11:50 PM
reply to post by GoldenRuled

What if???...

What if this whole thing isn't what it seems?
What if Mr. Zimmerman isn't charged with anything?
What if he is charged and found not guilty?
What if there is large scale rioting against these decisions in almost every major US city?
What if this proposed rioting cannot be controlled by local/state law enforcement?
What if because of this possible uncontrollable rioting, POTUS decides to his NDAA?
What if these are the reasons that DHS has contracted 450 million HOLLOW POINT rounds, 170 million rifle rounds, as well as how ever many "bullet proof guard shacks" over the last few months?
What if this is the beginning of infiltration of the US by the UN/NATO?

What if???...

posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 11:53 PM
reply to post by GoldenRuled

The UN, who brought you Agenda 21, Codex Alimentarius, The Treaty of the Child (allows marriage and sex at 9 years old) and of course let's not forget Nelson Mandela, the UN Poster Boy for Terror want to dictate, demand and/or enforce local law where they don't belong? The UN that pretends it cares and yet does nothing about civilian murders in multiple countries, that UN?

The UN can get stuffed. All UN treaties should be revoked and publicly burned.

Cheers - Dave

posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 02:03 AM

BACK your nose up....its sniffin around too close to me. makes me all jittery, and i punch when i get jittery.

posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 02:40 AM

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by DontTreadOnMe

.what IS this "UN small arms treaty" business anyway? I've actually seen TV commercials here so it would appear to be more than Email rumor.

It is fair to say though...The current case being chosen adds an emotional aspect that might kick that door open wider for them in America than they've previously been able to get. If so, it'll be the first of much to follow, I'm fairly sure.

Get This

U.N. Agreement Should Have All Gun Owners Up In Arms

Text It may not come as surprising news to many of you that the United Nations doesn’t approve of our Second Amendment. Not one bit. And they very much hope to do something about it with help from some powerful American friends. Under the guise of a proposed global “Small Arms Treaty” premised to fight “terrorism”, “insurgency” and “international crime syndicates” you can be quite certain that an even more insidious threat is being targeted – our Constitutional right for law-abiding citizens to own and bear arms.

What, exactly, does the intended agreement entail?

While the terms have yet to be made public, if passed by the U.N. and ratified by our Senate, it will almost certainly force the U.S. to:

1. Enact tougher licensing requirements, creating additional bureaucratic red tape for legal firearms ownership.

2. Confiscate and destroy all “unauthorized” civilian firearms (exempting those owned by our government of course).

3. Ban the trade, sale and private ownership of all semi-automatic weapons (any that have magazines even though they still operate in the same one trigger pull – one single “bang” manner as revolvers, a simple fact the ant-gun media never seem to grasp).

4. Create an international gun registry, clearly setting the stage for full-scale gun confiscation.

5. In short, overriding our national sovereignty, and in the process, providing license for the federal government to assert preemptive powers over state regulatory powers guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment in addition to our Second Amendment rights.

posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 02:49 AM
More to come:

Have no doubt that this plan is very real, with strong Obama administration support. In January 2010 the U.S. joined 152 other countries in endorsing a U.N. Arms Treaty Resolution that will establish a 2012 conference to draft a blueprint for enactment. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has pledged to push for Senate ratification.

Former U.N. ambassador John Bolton has cautioned gun owners to take this initiative seriously, stating that the U.N. “is trying to act as though this is really just a treaty about international arms trade between nation states, but there is no doubt that the real agenda here is domestic firearms control.”

edit on 7-4-2012 by azureskys because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 02:51 AM
Who cares what the UN says? Until last month they never heard of saint trayvon

posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 02:52 AM
reply to post by GoldenRuled

For the love of God the UN needs to investigate their own people before pointing fingers at a situation that is being dealt with.

I can see how the shooting death of a 17 year old should take priority over the billions in missing Un funds, the UN sending computer equipment to north Korea in violation of its own sanctions.. etc etc etc.

posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 02:54 AM
reply to post by azureskys

This is why the UN intiative will not work in the US, whether or not its ratified.

Link to post

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by queenofswords

The head money case is where to start in determining how foreign treaties are integrated into US law. SCOTUS in that case ruled foreign treaties are subordinate to the constitution. It also noted that no foreign treaties can remove or bestow any authority that is not specifically granted / prohibited by the Constitution.

As far as the second amendment goes -
District of Columbia v. Heller


McDonald v. Chicago

The second amendment is applied to the individual. The only way that guns are going away would be to remove / edit the 2nd amendment and I dont see that happening at all at any point in the foreseeable future.

Any foreign treaty the US signs makes that treaty a part of the Federal body of law. Because of that those treaties can be defined by the courts / congress in terms of legality and constitutionality.

Head Money Cases - 112 U.S. 580 (1884)

Article II, Section II, Clause II - Treaty Clause

American law is that international accords become part of the body of U.S. federal law.[1] As a result, Congress can modify or repeal treaties by subsequent legislative action, even if this amounts to a violation of the treaty under international law. This was held, for instance, in the Head Money Cases. The most recent changes will be enforced by U.S. courts entirely independent of whether the international community still considers the old treaty obligations binding upon the U.S.[1]

Additionally, an international accord that is inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution is void under domestic U.S. law, the same as any other federal law in conflict with the Constitution. This principle was most clearly established in the case of Reid v. Covert.[8] The Supreme Court could rule an Article II treaty provision to be unconstitutional and void under domestic law, although it has not yet done so.

In Goldwater v. Carter,[9] Congress challenged the constitutionality of then-president Jimmy Carter's unilateral termination of a defense treaty. The case went before the Supreme Court and was never heard; a majority of six Justices ruled that the case should be dismissed without hearing an oral argument, holding that "The issue at hand ... was essentially a political question and could not be reviewed by the court, as Congress had not issued a formal opposition." In his opinion, Justice Brennan dissented, "The issue of decision making authority must be resolved as a matter of constitutional law, not political discretion; accordingly, it falls within the competence of the courts". Presently, there is no official ruling on whether the President has the power to break a treaty without the approval of Congress, and the courts also declined to interfere when President George W. Bush unilaterally withdrew the United States from the ABM Treaty in 2002, six months after giving the required notice of intent.[10]

The UN can say what they want and the US can sign the treaties however it does not negate the fact that international treaties are subordinate to the US Constitution, become part of the US Federal body of law which allows for congress and the courts to make changes in areas that are in conlfict with Constitutional / Domestic Laws.

The head Money ruling has been the baseline for how treaties affect the US, our laws and citizens. The ruling occured in 1884 and since then there have been no changes to the Supreme Court ruling.

The UN cannot pass an International Law banning gun possession in the United states, whether we sign onto the treaty or not. Any President who does so and any member of congress who signs onto it would be violating the Constitution.

posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 04:30 AM
This is why the UN wants an investigation:

Kiss your guns goodbye. I know I won't miss them.

posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 04:41 AM
The UN wants in our business because they want to control all the worlds weaponry.
along with food ,water etc...

ThE UN see's a major opportunity to get their grubby hands on our FREED/
The up rising over Trayvon Martin's death has given them the opening they've been looking for
to get that foot in the door.

And "We The People" can Not let them !

The Greatest possible threat to our 2nd Amendment is not the UN's" Small Arms Agreement "
The most dangerous threat to our freedom in the USA is ISACS
Many country's are succumbed to the UN imposing it's standards of conduct and performance on a global basis, ignoring the laws of each nation and the rights of their citizens.

The ISACS is what we need to be
about and worried as hell.
International Small Arms Control Standards.”

The UN has been actively working to disarm private individuals and a fair number of nations for thirty years. From its inception in 1982 to the current United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs, the organization promotes not only nuclear disarmament, but also and perhaps most especially “disarmament efforts in the area of conventional weapons, especially land mines and small arms…” (1) And 3 decades of effort have resulted in a program which hopes to impose international standards on virtually everything having to do with the types of weapons owned by some 130 million American citizens. For in its “Working Outline,” ISACS means to create and make mandatory:
1.) National controls over the manufacture of small arms and light weapons

2.) National controls over the end-user and end-use of internationally transferred small arms and light weapons

3.) National controls over the access of civilians to small arms and light weapons

4.) Stockpile management over both storage and DESTRUCTION of weapons and ammunition

5.) International legal cooperation, criminal offenses and investigations (2)

Phase 1 in the United Nations scheme is the same that has been dreamed of for years by gun grabbing organizations in the United States, mandatory and universal gun registration. Offered under the ISACS protocol as a necessary means for the tracing of weapons which have been put to illegal use, ISACS means to collect, catalogue and offer to law enforcement agencies worldwide the following information on every gun owned by either state or private citizen: make, model, caliber, serial number, country of manufacture, physical characteristics such as barrel length, type of action, magazine capacity and naturally all pertinent information on the owner. Of course pictures are also preferred!

According to its project summary, this immense, internationally accessible data base would make possible “…the timely and reliable domestic tracing of illicit small arms and light weapons from their manufacture, import…up to the last legal possessor of the weapon…” Naturally the ability to trace ammunition would also be mandatory which means all bullets would have to be marked and their purchasers made part of the same worldwide network responsible for the tracking of guns! (2)

After the global system of registration has been adopted by each UN member nation, Phase 2 of the ISACS plan will be implemented. And that of course involves the “Control Standards” incorporated in the ISACS acronym. This part of the scheme is defined as the ability of the United Nations to “work as one” with the nations of the world, or more properly, to impose standards of conduct and performance on a worldwide basis, blissfully ignoring the various laws of each nation along with the rights of their citizens.

To read more use these links:

The UN is Dangerous write to your congressman/woman now

posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 04:55 AM
reply to post by Xcathdra

Just because they have that power does not mean they will
Do you forget who our governing personage are

They certainly are not representative "Of The People"
The Gov. will do what looks good to them not for you and me.
They are like kids with their hand in the cookie jar.

Maybe this will refresh your memory. Do you really want these like minded type of people making this decision
for you

Although professing to support the Second Amendment during her presidential election bid, Hillary Clinton is not generally known as a gun rights enthusiast. She has been a long-time activist for federal firearms licensing and registration, and a vigorous opponent of state Right-to-Carry laws. As a New York senator she ranked among the National Rifle Association’s worst “F”-rated gun banners who voted to support the sort of gunpoint disarmament that marked New Orleans’ rogue police actions against law-abiding gun owners in the anarchistic aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

As an Illinois state senator, Barack Obama was an aggressive advocate for expanding gun control laws, and even voted against legislation giving gun owners an affirmative defense when they use firearms to defend themselves and their families against home invaders and burglars. He also served on a 10-member board of directors of the radically activist anti-gun Joyce Foundation in Chicago during a period between 1998-2001when it contributed $18,326,183 in grants to anti-Second Amendment organizations.

edit on 7-4-2012 by azureskys because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-4-2012 by azureskys because: sorry forgot.... addedmore

posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 05:02 AM

Makes no sense and is completely ludicrous!

posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 05:13 AM
reply to post by azureskys

Im familiar with the info... If you notice we still have the second amendment, and to drive the point home Obama and Hillary, while in the senate, failed to not only restrict the 2nd amendment, they failed to reauthorize the brady bill that limited gun related items but not the guns themselves.

When they both made it to the White House / Sec State they failed to get the legislation in. After appointing a few new justices to the Supreme Court, they not only ruled weapon restrictions in DC and Chicago were unconstitutional, they applied the 2nd to the people via the 14th.

As far as Govenors go... I put them in the same boat as the others.. They can try, but it wont be going anywhere.

posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 05:58 AM
reply to post by GoldenRuled

LOL that's funny. Who is the UN again....nobody. What does the UN do...nothing. They are the laughing stalk of the world nobody cares what they think or say.

posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 07:35 AM

Originally posted by mustangill
OMG, do you people not see what is happening? Its a race to the white house and Travon Martin is being used as a sling shot, get more votes.

It's not just the Trayvon Martin case either.


NAACP President Benjamin Jealous was part of the delegation to Geneva arguing that laws requiring voters to show ID violate civil and human rights by suppressing election participation, particularly from minorities, USA Today reported. Currently, 30 states have voter ID laws, seven of which were enacted last year.

The U.N. has no authority over American states, but Jealous told reporters last week part of the goal is to “shame them.”

“The power of the U.N. on state governments historically is to shame them and to put pressure on the U.S. government to bring them into line with global standards, best practices for democracy,” Jealous said, according to NPR. “There are plenty of examples — segregation of the U.S. to apartheid in South Africa to the death penalty here in the U.S. — of global outrage having an impact.”

posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 08:31 AM
Informative post

posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 09:02 AM
The UN can go screw itself. Before they start pointing fingers at anyone else, maybe they should get their own house in order for once. In the meantime, I'm sure the state of Florida is perfectly capable of handling its own investigation of that particular incident.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in