It was supposed to be Tin-Foil....

[Paragrouper]

Originally Posted by Sigaba

Equally telling, since 1985, union membership has declined across most sectors of the economy.

It's those damn ATM's again.

[Sigaba]

Originally Posted by Pete

I disagree on a minor point. And I'll use Greece and Wisconsin as examples.

There has been an explosion in government worker unions - yes folks teacher's unions are government worker unions also.

They don't strike per say but they are organized and can muster large number of folks in a short time.

They can flood local board meetings and state capitals in the blink of an eye.

NC is going through the budget nutroll and once again the school systems threaten to fire teachers - but not the three guys leaning on a truck watching the fourth cut the grass. Look for the teachers to fire things up.

QP Pete--

I think you're making a good point about teachers.

We're seeing the same thing in Los Angeles as the LAUSD has been talking about layoffs for a while now. They'll have to balance carefully their self interests with their rhetoric that their primary focus is the students. If they strike in large numbers, they'll jeopardize their credibility.

The teachers' union seems not to have any qualms about exploiting their students, who attend these events with their parents, in front of the news cameras. Yet they hollered like the damned when the Los Angeles Times put their ratings on line <<LINK>>. (Am I the only one who is increasingly bent out of shape by how frequently news outlets and bloggers turn to the cliched grading system for this that and the other?)

[Paslode]

I wonder how this would affect Cerberus Capital Management investments.

Researchers predict UN Arms Trade Treaty will be finalized by summer

By David Codrea, Gun Rights Examiner

“We predict that a global Arms Trade Treaty will come into force late this year,” a report in the Jan. 2012 issue of the Dillon Blue Press by researchers Paul Gallant, Alan Chwick and Joanne D. Eisen claims.

Diplomats are currently preparing for a final negotiating conference, to be held at the UN between July 2 and July 27, 2012.

“So, what might an ATT look like?” they ask. Here are two highlights from the report:

We predict that small arms will be included, because that’s what this treaty is all about in the first place. But ammunition has, at best, a 50-percent chance of inclusion.
We predict that a minimal Implementation Support Unit (ISU) will be approved, and will ultimately grow into a global BATFE on steroids.

What's the liklihood of administration support?

As for the US, it might seem confusing that the Obama government has taken a position against the inclusion of SALW [Small Arms and Light Weapons] and ammunition in the forthcoming Treaty. Yet, the US officially supports the inclusion of SALW into the UNROCA [UN Register of Conventional Arms] itself, as clearly stated in October 2011 by Laura E. Kennedy, one of the representatives to the UN.


And we know that Hillary Clinton is responsible for reanimating the discussion.

What are the chances of passage?

Recall that per the Constitution, the President “shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur…”

And per NRA:

58 members-- a majority--of the U.S. Senate have signed letters to President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton saying they will oppose any ATT that includes civilian firearms ownership.

Does this mean we need not concern ourselves, that any such talk amounts to “sound and fury, signifying nothing,” and that any effort spent by grassroots activists and their representative organizations would be a waste of "political capital"?

I would not make that assumption because I would not put any underhanded maneuver beneath the enemies of freedom, and that includes a caution to those who (correctly) maintain a treaty cannot supersede the Constitution—if the folks behind this power grab had any respect for rights, they would not be behind it in the first place. It is incumbent on each of us to be aware of threats, including those which may appear to be on a distant horizon, and to be prepared to mobilize and repel it not when our backs are against the wall, but while we have the time to do so without expending too much effort--kind of like speculative scenarios for an approaching asteroid. Better to deflect it a fraction of a degree when it is still far off than wait for it to enter the atmosphere.

It won’t hurt us or distract from our other efforts to take a mere five minutes of our time—today—to contact our Senators and convey our expectation that they oppose any UN Arms Trade Treaty that may make it to the floor for their consideration.

Just do it.

And while you’re at it, you may as well tell them to quit screwing around and just get us the hell out of the UN altogether. We’re quite capable of managing our international relations without a presumptuous overseeing body of global collectivists that has no Constitutional say in our affairs anyway.

Click here to read “THE ARMS TRADE TREATY: SOME PREDICTIONS” by Paul Gallant, Alan Chwick, & Joanne D. Eisen.

[Badger52]

Originally Posted by Pete

Look for the teachers to fire things up.

Headshot. They are without exception the "not an actor" demographic portrayed in the current television commercials (well-produced) that attest that fiscal honesty is working - to the extent that the recall campaign folks have decided to take the exact same marketing tack, with the commercials almost seeming identical. ('Course if the recall folks depicted themselves as hysterical as they are in public it wouldn't play well on TV.)

But you hit the nail on the head. And in many areas it will come down to supporting that which supports moving the trough back to the traditional feeding area. There are a variety of quid pro quo's available.

[dollarbill]

I can't help but think, if the goverment thinks the Wall Street Protest created a disruption in the flow of things, try to take fire arms away from its citizens. No matter what treaty or law is in placed, its not going to end well.

[Paslode]

Originally Posted by dollarbill

I can't help but think, if the goverment thinks the Wall Street Protest created a disruption in the flow of things, try to take fire arms away from its citizens. No matter what treaty or law is in placed, its not going to end well.

That will likely be true........As long as enough kids a proper education instead of indoctrination.

For example, all I heard on the way back from this past weekends BSA camp out from our 10 year old passenger was a dissertation about Subway having less safety violations and the food contained less fat than McDonald's.

[Paslode]

And the rumor mill thinks Obama is going to sign it on July 27, 2012.

No set of internationally agreed standards exist to ensure that arms are only transferred for appropriate use.

http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/ArmsTradeTreaty/

" the delegate from Mexico took the opposite tack, saying individuals' rights (i.e., the Second Amendment) are not an excuse for "products traded without controls." This statement continued Mexico's efforts to blame its drug cartel problem on American guns. The Mexican delegate then went on to say specifically that civilian firearms needed to be included in the ATT..

http://www.nraila.org/legislation/fe...-underway.aspx

During the 2009 meetings of the States, a perimeter was set down that the United States’ right to bear arms would be unaffected by the treaty. The draft says, “Acknowledging also the right of States to regulate internal transfers of arms and national ownership, including through national constitutional protections on private ownership, exclusively within their territory.” (Resolution adopted by the General Assembly. 64/48. The arms trade treaty.) However, many experts disagree. Potentially the treaty will create an international firearms registry, ban certain types of weapons, such as machine guns, add more laws domestically, barriers to trade weapons internationally, and completely stop hunting in other countries, such as Africa and Canada. As well as affecting United States ally protection. Currently there is a movement from Taiwan to oppose the treaty. Former President Ronald Reagan promised our continued support to Taiwan in 1982. Since Taiwan is not a member of the United States, the Arms Trade Treaty may prohibit the United States from selling and exporting weapons to countries at risk from hostile countries.

http://cheaperthandirt.com/blog/?p=23006

“There has been a decree by the administration by the president and the secretary of state saying that our president will sign the United Nations small arms treaty, which is about how we will buy sell and control individual private weapons,” Boykin warned. “That means the United Nations, an international body will decide how you and I as Americans can buy and sell our weapons, how we control those weapons, who is authorized to have those weapons and where they are. This is a dangerous trend.”

http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/obama-tol...-n-gun-treaty/