RE: Missouri Mall Shooting: Bonanza for Gun-Grabbers

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: Leo/FightNWO-Resisting World Government
Date: Apr 30, 2007 5:45 PM


http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=852


Visit Kurt Nimmo's Myspace Profile:>

Kurt Nimmo

Missouri Mall Shooting: Bonanza for Gun-Grabbers

Monday April 30th 2007, 9:44 am

Another day, another “deadly shooting spree,” this time at a mall in Kansas City, Missouri. But not to worry. The Inter-Parliamentary Union is on the case. “Parliamentarians around the world should press for urgent action on gun control, particularly in view of recent tragedies,” reports Reuters. “The statistics are damning. There are currently an estimated 640 million small arms and light weapons in circulation, from handguns and assault rifles to shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles,” Anders Johnsson, secretary general of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, and Martin Griffiths of the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue said. “Most of this arsenal, or about 60 percent, is in the hands of civilians. Recent dramatic events have proved the urgent need for action,” in other words, pushing for “gun control through drawing up national laws, improving implementation and enforcement, and leading public debate,” or maybe that should be orchestrating “public debate,” as usual. Naturally, part of the “debate” is to equate small arms, designed for self defense, with “shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles.”

The Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) is another globalist scheme, connected at the hip to the United Nations. “The IPU supports the efforts of the United Nations, whose objectives it shares, and works in close co-operation with it. It also co-operates with regional inter-parliamentary organizations, as well as with international intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations which are motivated by the same ideals,” explains the IPU web site. It fosters “Democratic mundialization,” that is to say globalism (”mundialization” is the English version of the French “mondialisation,” or globalism).

According to Wikipedia, “Democratic mundialization” is “a different way to economic globalization and [would] ‘make people closer, more united and protected’ though what this means in practice is only vaguely defined.” Of course it is “only vaguely defined,” because “mundialization” cannot “make people closer, more united and protected,” or is it the goal of the IPU or the United Nations to protect people from supposedly random violence at shopping malls.

IPU is associated with UNESCO, according to that organization’s “community” portal. “Sir” Julian Huxley was the first Director-General of UNESCO. Huxley was a eugenicist, that is to say he believed world population is in serious need of culling, a goal shared by the Rockefeller Foundation and the Population Council, the latter formed with the participation of John Foster Dulles, Secretary of State under Eisenhower. John Foster Dulles and his brother, Allen Dulles (the first director of the CIA), “believed the government should use mass psychology” and “social control … the control of human behavior” to impose world government, according to Dennis L. Cuddy. Obviously, “mondialisation” cannot be imposed so long as people possess firearms. “One of the ordinary modes, by which tyrants accomplish their purposes without resistance, is, by disarming the people, and making it an offense to keep arms,” Constitutional scholar and Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story wrote in 1840.

“For more than a decade the United Nations has waged a campaign to undermine Second Amendment rights in America,” wrote Texas representative Ron Paul in June, 2006, as a United Nations gun-grabbing conference commenced in New York. “UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has called on members of the Security Council to address the ‘easy availability’ of small arms and light weapons, by which he means all privately owned firearms. In response, the Security Council released a report calling for a comprehensive program of worldwide gun control, a report that admonishes the U.S. and praises the restrictive gun laws of Red China and France!” The United Nations believes “in global government, and armed people could stand in the way of their goals. They certainly don’t care about our Constitution or the Second Amendment. But the conflict between the UN position on private ownership of firearms and our Second Amendment cannot be reconciled. How can we as a nation justify our membership in an organization that is actively hostile to one of our most fundamental constitutional rights? What if the UN decided that free speech was too inflammatory and should be restricted? Would we discard the First Amendment to comply with the UN agenda?”

Is it coincidental “lone nuts” are embarking on shooting rampages at the same time the United Nations and the IPU are pushing their gun-grabbing agenda? Maybe. One thing, however, is certain—such incidents, widely sensationalized by the corporate media, are perfect tools for “mass psychology,” ultimately resulting in “social control … the control of human behavior” of the sort formerly advocated by the Rockefeller Foundation and the Dulles Brothers and not so coincidentally brought into the present by the likes of Anders Johnsson and the Inter-Parliamentary Union.