The United Nations is waging a multi-pronged attack on the right to keep and bear arms and the forces of disarmament are marching to America.
Recently, a board of “government experts” approved a report on the United Nations Office of Disarmament Affairs (UNODA) to implement the group’s “Programme of Action on Small Arms and Light Weapons in All its Aspects (PoA).”
They certainly weren’t exaggerating when they gave that title to the scheme. It certainly does cover “all aspects” of gun ownership.
To get an idea of the trajectory the program will take, one needs only look at the list of the speakers called upon to discuss the disarmament deal’s progress. From the record of the meeting published on June 19:
“Statements were made by the representatives of Costa Rica, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Colombia, the United States of America, the Republic of Korea, the Sudan, New Zealand, Kenya, Mali, Iraq, Kuwait, Sierra Leone, Japan, Nigeria and Pakistan.”
That reads like a roster of who’s who of dictators and socialists.
Apart from the ongoing effort to abolish the Second Amendment through a multitude of multi-lateral international agreements, there was one item on the UNODA agenda that should bolster the resolve of all those who want to protect the right to keep and bear arms.
{modulepos inner_text_ad}
Agenda item Number 8 at the June meetings focused on “training for the full and effective implementation of the Programme of Action and the International Tracing Instrument.”
What is the International Tracing Instrument (ITI)? This is the description published by the PoA:
“Undertaking effective measures in marking, record-keeping and tracing is vital for curbing the illicit trade and combating the diversion of small arms to unintended users. Although many weapons are marked when produced and some when imported, international cooperation in marking and tracing of small arms is in its infancy.”
That means that the UN will not only track the buying, selling, transfer, and trading of small arms, light weapons, and ammunition, but it will continue developing technology that will help trace firearms and ammunition from the factory by way of “readable microchips” implanted at the factory. The UN will literally be able to trace every round and every weapon from factory to end user.
Such a plan was hatched during the convention on the UN’s Arms Trade Treaty held in March 2013 and attended by this reporter. During a conversation between committee meetings, the ambassador to the UN from Spain told me that there was a plan to equip ammunition with a microchip that would enable global tracking and destruction of individual rounds, if need be.
With regard to the marking and tracking of weapons, paragraph 24 states that members “reaffirmed the need to further strengthen national measures on the marking of small arms and light weapons.”
The United Nations demands that national legislatures (Congress) beef up laws pertaining to the placement of markings and microchips that will enable “appropriate law enforcement channels” to maintain lists of those who possess the small arms and ammunition that must be eradicated.
Nothing demonstrates the global gun grabbers’ haste to get firearms out of the hands of civilians like the following paragraph from the draft agreement: “States highlighted the utility of online technologies for further improving the effectiveness, efficiency and speed of tracing illicit small arms and light weapons.”
Governments, in other words, should take advantage of the Internet to speed up the process of tracing weapons and ammunition and identifying those unauthorized individuals or entities that are attempting to buy, sell, transfer, or trade them in violation of the POA.
Given the scope of the NSA’s online surveillance operations as revealed by Edward Snowden, it isn’t hard to imagine just how thorough the tracking program could be! Any mention of the purchase or use of guns or ammo on Facebook or in a text message or in an e-mail could potentially trigger the type of tracing the UN undoubtedly has in mind.
The preamble to the ITI declaration makes particular note of the fact that the mandates of the PoA and the ITI are “not limited to those manufactured to military specifications,” making it very clear that despite what proponents of the agreement might claim, the program is not restricted to trade and transfer of military-style weapons.
Also specifically targeted in the ITI preamble is the prevention of unapproved selling or buying of “ammunition and component parts” intended for use in small arms and light weapons.
History is instructive on this point as readers should remember that the “shot heard ‘round the world” on Lexington Green was fired because King George sent British troops to seize the patriots’ ammunition stockpile stored outside of that small Massachusetts village.
Perhaps the least shocking of all the provisions in the Programme of Action’s ITI is the identification in the document of just whose rights will be protected in the post-PoA world:
“This instrument does not restrict the right of States to acquire, manufacture, transfer and retain small arms and light weapons for their self-defence and security needs, as well as for their capacity to participate in peacekeeping operations, in a manner consistent with the Charter of the United Nations.”
Of course the “right” of states to buy, sell, trade, or transfer arms and ammunition is protected by the UN. A house divided against itself cannot stand, after all.
An irrefutable fact of armed violence unaddressed by the UN in its gun grab is that all the murders committed by all the serial killers in history don’t amount to a fraction of the number of brutal killings committed by “states” using the very weapons over which they will exercise absolute control under the terms of the Programme of Action.
That’s not surprising given the focus on the language of the UN’s founding document, rather that on that of the Declaration of Independence.
Article II of the UN Charter declares that all men have rights as a result of “membership” in the United Nations.
In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson wrote, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”
Replacing the Creator with the “state” as the source of rights is the ultimate aim of the United Nations and will ultimately aid them in eliminating the right of Americans to own weapons, the one right that would prevent them from being completely conquered by the globalists.
Within the terms of the PoA and ITT is also found the definition of what kind of weapon or ammunition would be considered “illicit” for purposes of the program. These prohibitions include those weapons, small arms, or ammunitions that:
are transferred in violation of arms embargoes decided by the Security Council in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, or,
not marked in accordance with the provisions of this instrument, or,
manufactured or assembled without a licence or authorization from the competent authority of the State where the manufacture or assembly takes place, or,
transferred without a licence or authorization by a competent national authority.
Take note of just who decides whether a firearm transaction is approved or not. The Programme of Action and its associated International Tracing Instrument are no less than a wholesale replacement of the sovereignty of the United States and the Bill of Rights with the United Nations Charter, international agreements, and the elimination of the centuries-old recognition of natural rights for the concept of a limited number of rights given and taken by an all-powerful world government.
President Obama and many members of Congress are in favor of fast-tracking these fundamental changes to the Constitution and heritage of Americans.
As I reported a few weeks ago, using the president’s new power to unilaterally negotiate and contract trade agreements with foreign powers, these “executive agreements” can cover any topic that the White House considers “trade.”
That includes firearms.
In this post-TPA era, the PoA, the ITI, and the UN’s Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) are no longer subject to senatorial debate. In fact, these binding agreements are not up for debate at all. TPA permits only a simple up or down vote on such presidentially brokered international agreements.
