Troops Ordered To Kill All Americans Who Do Not Turn In Guns

Please spread the Word.
http://www.infowars.com/un-gun-grab-f...
http://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/ERC/arms/fr...
http://www.infowars.com/army-manual-o...
http://www.prisonplanet.com/army-cour...
"Complete disarmament" of the American people
Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Monday, July 16, 2012
The UN Arms Trade Treaty that has been identified by observers as a flagrant threat to the second amendment and which Barack Obama is determined to sign has its roots in a 1961 State Department memorandum which explains how the United Nations will oversee "complete disarmament" of the American people under the ruse of preventing war. The UN Arms Treaty has caused so much controversy because it outlines a plan to target "all types of conventional weapons, notably including small arms and light weapons," according to Forbes' Larry Bell.
Former US Ambassador to the UN John Bolton also warns that the agreement "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."
A letter sent last month by 130 Republican House members to President Obama argued that the treaty should be rejected because it infringes on the "fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms". The letter adds that "...the U.N.'s actions to date indicate that the ATT is likely to pose significant threats to our national security, foreign policy, and economic interests as well as our constitutional rights."
Using the rhetoric of the threat post by terrorists, insurgents and "international crime syndicates," the UN is busy trying to imply that all weapons are somehow involved in illegal activity on a global scale and should therefore be controlled and regulated by a global authority.
This is precisely the same language used in a 1961 U.S. State Department briefing which outlined a long term agenda to carry out a "Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World."
Invoking the threat of nuclear warfare, the document spells out a plan to create a "United Nations Peace Force" that would "enforce the peace as the disarmament process proceeds."
While the document initially focuses on scrapping nuclear weapons, it later makes it clear that the only groups allowed to own weapons of any kind would be governing authorities, "for the purpose of maintaining internal order," and the UN "peacekeeping" force itself, which would require "agreed manpower."
"The manufacture of armaments would be prohibited except for those of agreed types and quantities to be used by the U.N. Peace Force and those required to maintain internal order. All other armaments would be destroyed or converted to peaceful purposes," states the document. While the memorandum outlines a broader mandate to destroy national sovereignty, eviscerate national armies and institute the UN as the planet's supreme authority with a world army, the document serves as a stark reminder that the plan for the United Nations to oversee the abolition of the second amendment has been in the works for decades.
As Bell points out in his Forbes article, the threat of the Obama administration relying on a UN treaty to do what successive administrations have tried but failed to accomplish -- taking a huge bite out of the second amendment -- is by no means far fetched.
After all, a plethora of UN treaties and international agreements have already stripped the United States of its sovereignty and its power to decide its own laws. The power to authorize U.S. involvement in wars and conflicts has now been almost completely stripped from Congress and handed to the United Nations.

• Category

  News & Politics

[RooT BeeR]

Ok, im an American and i own and enjoy shooting guns, however this document is 52 years old. IF you actually read some of it you would see y they were trying to use it.

1. They wanted to prevent world war 3

2. It during the cold war when they wrote this and the world was fearing the US and russia were gonna have a nuclear war

3. they thought the US and USSR would be the least compliant to hand over there weapons

4. this document would only go into action if the entire world was ready for peace

[The5admeets3vil]

we as Americans own firearms because it was our constitutional right to take up arms against the government when they tried to take the power from the people. I don't care how old the constitution is, we are the power in the US not our government and even if they take the legal guns away the criminals aren't going to say "oh guns are illegal now let me become a peaceful person and not use mine".

[BOMBray]

CNN ?

[Illuminati Nephilim]

i fucking hate conspiracy theorist !

[Joseph Gabrielli]

On a scale of 1 to 10, what is your IQ level?

[Benjamin Connoly]

You're a fucking crackpot. They're not gonna kill you.

[green lamp]

ur right man, this argument was taken totally out of context given the circumstances it was written in. although i dont expect much from alex jones they dont explain that THIS WAS A PLAN IF THERE WAS PEACE IN THE WORLD. it was a suggested plan in maintaining the peace and bringing all countries closer together- away from diplomatic isolation.

[nanocalp]

what? peace though civilian disarmament to stop government world wars? are you hearing yourself?

[soraxxmazoku]

We native indian folk owned this america as you call it before any of y'all white people did. :U All them bullets and silver feed our tribes for centuries. Lawl. Seriously, the native americans were the first here, you 'real americans' took the land from them.

[iloukinwe]

1. Prevent? They make money on war

2. That has nothing to do with taking protection away form the people

3. What?

4. And are we ready for peace now? Because they are taking the guns away as we speak.