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.

 

Fast and Furious / UN Small Weapon Treaty

page: 1
11

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 26 2012 @ 08:30 PM
link   
Amidst the scandal enveloping the DOJ and the Attorney Generals office regarding the fast and furious, another story is developing around the world. As we approach the conference next month that is scheduled to take place in New York, the United Nations and it's delegates will be meeting to discuss the trade in international arms transfers and export / import controls surrounding light arms and small weapons.

The question I am trying to answer is: Was the ATF using the UN's international tracing instrument to locate and trace weapons walking across the border in order to implement the programme of action to promote the small arms treaty, by allowing straw purchases from law abiding American gun shops of light weapons in order to ban or decrease the amount of such arms?

First thing I think is important is locating a press release coordinating such an effort through or with the UN and the ATF using small arms markings and tracing. On April 17-18 2008, the UN held a 2-day workshop on the implementation of international marking and tracing instrument. Note that the ATF was present during the event.

Source

LOMÉ, 22 April (Office for Disarmament Affairs) -- A workshop to support the implementation of the International Instrument to Enable States to Identify and Trace, in a Timely and Reliable Manner, Illicit Small Arms and Light Weapons (International Tracing Instrument) held its session on 17 and 18 April, in Lomé, Togo.

It does make sense if this is the case because it would fall in line with the UN's fire arms protocol in regards of preventing the use of such weapons by Transnational Organized Crime, which drug cartels would be designated, and the stated reason why the Gun Walking project was initiated.



On 8 March 2012 the European Union adopted a new regulation to implement Article 10 of the United Nations Firearms Protocol ahead of the above mentioned gathering next month in New York.

Source

On 8 March 2012, the European Union Council has finally adopted a new European regulation that sets the rules and procedures to be followed by Member States on export, import and transit authorizations of firearms for civilian use (such as hunting weapons and sporting weapons), their parts and components, and ammunition, to and from the EU. These new rules therefore only address firearms transfers with non-EU countries. They complement the existing European legislation on civilian firearms and thereby strengthen the fight against illicit trafficking.

(Alternative source)
Source



Well I'm still left with the question: When the Administration invoked Executive privilege over fast and furious documents, was it because it details a lengthy project involving the ATF and the UN's collusion to implement gun controls?

ETA: The implementation of the small arms treaty as in it's original intent to prevent atrocities and transfer of weapons to afflicted countries where organized crime runs rampant, will help to curb violence and proliferation in these areas, which is great.

The question being posed is not against the implementation, but rather how it will affect America and countries where legal weapons are accessible and sold.

Disclaimer: Any of the information being posed is not conclusive or concrete in supporting the questions posed, and does not represent any actual or VALID proof but mere speculation and conjecture.





edit on 26-6-2012 by Daedal because: Edit




posted on Jun, 26 2012 @ 09:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Daedal
 


Good question. Now that you mention it, I am wondering if Obama got that Nobel Peace Prize for his work on that treaty? There have been a lot of things going on that make me scratch my head. Most of the things I question are done behind the scenes so that worries me the most.



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 06:51 AM
link   
Excellent post. I think your assessment is correct and Obama doesn't want it known that he was using Fast and Furious to give ammunition for the UN small arms ban. Why they never bothered to trace the guns after they went across the border is a bit mysterious though, it seemed to serve no purpose at all.
Never trust a lame duck President in their final year of office. That's when you find out just how radical their ideology truly is.



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 07:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Asktheanimals
 


I wouldnt call him a lame duck.....lame chicken maybe.....but not lame duck.

Ah the plot thickens.......



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 10:00 AM
link   
I was hovering around the same thoughts few days ago on another thread on ATS. To me it definitely makes sense as this is the reason the POTUS used the executive privilege. It also could be part of the backdoor deal probably made between the UN and US with respect to the Middle East agenda and local Gun Laws. I do know that even China was making some noise about Human Rights & US Gun Laws too few weeks ago.

ATS_THREAD



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 02:31 PM
link   
Nothing here trolls... move along..



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 02:34 PM
link   
No need to ban small arms.

Look at the price and shortage of ammunition since Obama was elected. For a few months it was nearly impossible to find .38 and .22 anywhere. All they have to do is tax the ammo so much that no one will be able to afford to shoot, it's ingenious, effective, and sneaky.



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dreine
No need to ban small arms.

Look at the price and shortage of ammunition since Obama was elected. For a few months it was nearly impossible to find .38 and .22 anywhere. All they have to do is tax the ammo so much that no one will be able to afford to shoot, it's ingenious, effective, and sneaky.


I think the EPA has tried to outlaw shells by claiming that the lead being spent is creating an environment hazard for animals, and with little or no scientific proof to back the claim. Banning lead from ammunition would really put a dent in purchasing it.



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Daedal

Originally posted by Dreine
No need to ban small arms.

Look at the price and shortage of ammunition since Obama was elected. For a few months it was nearly impossible to find .38 and .22 anywhere. All they have to do is tax the ammo so much that no one will be able to afford to shoot, it's ingenious, effective, and sneaky.


I think the EPA has tried to outlaw shells by claiming that the lead being spent is creating an environment hazard for animals, and with little or no scientific proof to back the claim. Banning lead from ammunition would really put a dent in purchasing it.


IIRC...lead was banned in bird shot around 15 years ago. I can see the EPA trying to ban it in all ammo to further erosion of our second amendment rights.

Des



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 03:09 PM
link   
B-I-N-G-O!!!! Thank you for posting these vids, OP. Larry Pratt hit the proverbial nail squarely on the head, imo.

Keep a sharp eye on the negotiations and any treaty Obama and his minions may consider next month when the UN Small Arms Trade Treaty negotiations go into final considerations. Here is why:

We should not underestimate "norming". Pratt explained what it means and used an example of it during the Clinton administration. Once a treaty is signed, even if the Senate does not ratify it, it can go into effect by using international "norms". IMO, Obama is an internationalist first. American interests and our Constitution are secondary and, imo, he has a hidden agenda being covered up in the Fast and Furious debacle.

Demand transparency and insist on the truth. It shouldn't matter whether you're a Dem or a Repub, one should insist on the truth.




top topics



 
11

log in

join