Soros Propaganda Supporting UN Global Gun Control Hits MainstreamJuly 5, 2012
By Susanne Posel
George Soros’ Media Matters (MM) has released propaganda to support the UN’s endeavor to create an international control over guns. MM calls the equation of the UN’s Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) to the eradication of the 2nd Amendment in the US as “laughable conspiracy [that] has no place in reality.”
MM goes on to claim that “top officials from the United Nations, the United States, and other high profile supporters have repeatedly and clearly said that the treaty does not aim to restrict anyone’s ‘freedom to own’ a gun. Indeed, the U.N. General Assembly’s resolution on the treaty makes clear that countries will ‘exclusively’ maintain the right within their borders to ‘regulate internal transfers of arms and national ownership, including through national constitutional protections on private ownerships.’”
At the UN’s ATT Conference being held in NY, the US representatives are complaining about retaining their ability to continue selling military armory internationally and how the treaty would restrict their sales to nations with more human rights records.
The chair of the Preparatory Committee for the UN Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty, Ambassador Roberto García Moritán of Argentina, has stated that the definitive goal of the small arms treaty “is to try to have common standards to be applied by all countries when they export or import weapons.”
The Obama administration is in full support of the ATT. Both Susan Rice, US ambassador to the UN and Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State said in a letter that they “strongly urge the United States to take a leadership role in pushing for a strong, verifiable Arms Trade Treaty.”
More than 150 countries are represented at the conference where the UN hopes to finalize the ATT that will legally bind all nations of the world to their rules and regulations on gun control and individual gun ownership.
While using the illegal arms market as their platform of reform, the UN aims to override sovereign nations and their citizen’s rights to own firearms.
The current draft of the ATT states that governments must obtain UN approval before selling arms to a country where there is a “substantial risk of a serious violation” of human rights. This provision directly affects Russia and Syria, as they are involved in a lucrative arms trade relationship.
Considering how the UN and the US are working with Israel to vilianize Syria and justify their forceful regime change, this provision in the treaty would aid in their agenda.
The ATT states that “controls on a comprehensive list of weaponry, including small arms and light weapons,” as well as strict admonishments on ammunition. To hide their true agenda, the UN have wrapped their over-reaching demands in the mantle of advancing “human rights” and preventing international violence.
Foreign Ministers for central banking controlled countries like Britain, Germany, France and Sweden want to add a provision to the ATT and are willing to “ defy Washington ” at the conference.
Anna Macdonald, the control arms campaign manager at Oxfam , said: “The United States is a really key player in these negotiations. It is very positive that they are [treaty] supporters, but if ammunition is excluded, it really weakens the treaty. Ammunition is the fuel of conflict. The treaty must unambiguously require governments to not authorize any arms transfers where there is a clear risk they will end up fuelling poverty, conflict and human rights abuses.”
William Hauge, British foreign minister asserted that he would be supporting “strong provisions on human rights” in the ATT while admonishing the UN to responsibly agree to “robust, effective and legally binding arms trade treaty. Now is the time for us to deliver.”
The UK government wants to “include all conventional weapons, from fighter planes to rifles, bombs to bullets. Arms brokering must be controlled and corrupt practitioners prosecuted.”
These nations are pushing for specific language that confines government’s ability to sell weapons to nations that have proven to retain a “substantial risk of a serious violation” of human rights.
Most of the attendees at the conference believe that it is “crucial that a treaty includes strong provisions on human rights and international humanitarian law.”
The US representatives want to be able to “consider” human rights violations before choosing to sell arms to a nation without having to worry about the transaction being approved by the UN. According to one diplomat: “The US has been supportive of the treaty, but it does have some issues with it. Parts of the US system don’t favor the inclusion of ammunition … but we will be arguing hard for this. We cannot promise what the outcome will be. We can promise what we are fighting for.”
The Obama administration would also like to have ammunition excluded from the treaty to retain more options when selling armory to other countries.
Clinton remarked that the ATT is an “opportunity to promote the same high standards for the entire international community that the United States and other responsible arms exporters already have in place to ensure that weaponry is transferred for legitimate purposes.”
By arming nations that have been singled out as human rights violators the US wants to make sure their financial investments internationally are secure, regardless of the UN’s treaty.
Brian Wood, of Amnesty International , said: “US negotiators have tended to adopt a minimalist approach to the rules needed in the treaty compared to most of their strategic allies. They have been accused of trying to appease Moscow, Beijing and other players in the talks. Just listing principles to take into consideration is more or less saying you can feel free to ignore those principles if you want to. And if this is how the criteria on international human rights and humanitarian law will be reflected in the treaty, it will simply not prevent arms fuelling atrocities and abuses.”
Back in April, Thomas Countryman, assistant secretary of Washington State commented that the US government was “hugely impractical” to include ammunition. “We do not want something that would make legitimate international arms trade more cumbersome than the hurdles United States exporters already face.”
While the UN and the international community go back and forth about who will control guns and specifically how they will be controlled, the Obama administration is pushing for ratification of the treaty once it is finalized. As a sovereign nation who has empowered its citizens to defend themselves by right of the 2nd Amendment of our Constitution, we are dangerous to the UN’s agenda of total global control.
Disarming Americans would be a huge step toward One World Government for the UN. And they are trying their hardest to make that dream a reality. If we do not recognize the elephant in the room, we may soon wake up to find the 2nd Amendment has been eradicated by international mandate.