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

Forbes ^ | 6/07/2011

[Carry_Okie]

I remember Helms being asked about that whole sequence of events and he mouthed the same words, "do your homework."

Perhaps we should start demanding a web cam in the Senate chambers now.

[philman_36]

I've read enough of your posts to know you're solid and can be counted on...
Thanks, Sal, I appreciate that.

He replied that it was our duty to know and that if we had done our "homework" we could have stopped it...
Some of us have done our homework in the intervening years. He probably doesn't like that either. He probably figured we would all remain static.

It makes me wonder just how many of these guys we're infested with. We know about the lefty ones, but what about the ones on "our" side...
Astute people have known that there are wolves in sheep's clothing on "our" side for quite some time.

Words indicate one thing, actions indicate another.

[philman_36]

I remember Helms being asked about that whole sequence of events and he mouthed the same words, "do your homework."
I'll see what I can find.

[Carry_Okie]

I think I read it on eco-logic.

I wrote and posted this article on FR in 2007 (no longer on the server).

In the last days of the 106th Congress, the U.S. Senate ratified a package of 34 treaties almost without notice. They were ratified as a package. There was no debate. There was no recorded vote. Two of them have implications nearly as broad as the Convention on Nature Protection: the International Plant Protection Convention and the Convention on Desertification. Property rights groups, long used to this kind of perfidy were caught totally by surprise. When the deed was done and Jesse Helms was confronted, he looked at the activists and said that we had dropped our guard. Here is an archive containing Henry Lamb's comments. Use the Acrobat search function to look up the word "stealth." I'll quote it now:

The Law of the Seas Treaty was rejected by Ronald Reagan in 1982. After some polishing around the edges of the treaty language, Bill Clinton signed the treaty in 1994, and sent it to the Senate for ratification. There it sat, dormant, until October 7, 2003. Mysteriously, the treaty appeared on the Foreign Relations Committee hearings calendar on October 14, and October 21, but no opposing voices were allowed to present testimony. This is precisely the same procedure used with the Convention on Desertification.

Next, a request for unanimous consent is issued. If no Senator files an objection within a specified period of time, then the treaty can be approved by a voice vote, with no votes recorded.

After the Convention on Desertification was ratified by unanimous consent, many Senators did not know it had even been considered, or that they had voted for it.

[philman_36]

Nothing on a quick search using homework amongst the keywords.

I'll try again later after thinking about some other possible combos.

[philman_36]

Next, a request for unanimous consent is issued. If no Senator files an objection within a specified period of time, then the treaty can be approved by a voice vote, with no votes recorded.
There it is!

Here and here.
"They need to formalize their intent to object."

Homework done!
This "signing a letter" BS is meaningless if proper action isn't taken.

[Carry_Okie]

These two articles on how this happened are useful:

This one.

And this one

[philman_36]

I got it to come up...@Skinning Cats: Legal Means to Disarm the Second Amendment (just pick the link and a new tab will open)

[Mat_Helm]

RPG's are good against vehicles, APC's, tanks without reactive armor, ect... but of no use against 10,000,000 marksmen with scoped rifles that actually know how to shoot out past 500 meters.

The only way to defeat the armed American populace would be to nuke them from orbit.

Also worth noting are all the inactive reserve, retired military, DOD, civilian contractors, etc... who are more than capable of operating modern military hardware from tanks to helicopters, to fighter aircraft that would fight against an illegal and tyrannical government that attempted to throw out the Constitution and enslave the people. If the government openly ever attempted to disarm this country it would not be an insurgent war but an open and strategic civil war as loyalties forced everyone to chose sides no different than in 1860. It would be beyond foolish for any government to force the 2nd Amendment to be the catalyst for the Civil War II.

[Windflier]

RPG's are good against vehicles, APC's, tanks without reactive armor, ect... but of no use against 10,000,000 marksmen with scoped rifles that actually know how to shoot out past 500 meters.

The only way to defeat the armed American populace would be to nuke them from orbit.

Yep, and you and I both know that The Powers That Be are fully aware of those facts. Without the 2nd Amendment, the American people would have been reduced to mere subjects of their government before the Founders were laid to rest. It's the ONLY thing that has prevented full blown tyranny in this country since day one.

They will never move against us by force. Their solution to the 'problem' is to chip away at our right to keep and bear arms until it's whittled away to little more than a suggestion. By that time, they hope to have reduced us to such sheeple condition that we'll willingly hand over our guns.

Good luck with that. The culture is actually moving in the other direction. They've already failed.

[Carry_Okie]

The only way to defeat the armed American populace would be to nuke them from orbit.

Oh I don't know about that. Once the food is gone and we're dealing with a smallpox attack, things will get pretty grim.

[Sal]

I remember Helms being asked about that whole sequence of events and he mouthed the same words, "do your homework."

Sigh. I guess I have to give up trying to find excuses for him. He was such a staunch protector of our sovereignty for so long, but something definitely changed. I wonder what it was.