Why are we DOING this kind of thing? Did the Left have a whole drawer full of "hate America first" legislation, old treaties, laws, etc., that it couldn't live without all these years and figured "now's the time!"? WHY? Check this out from the article:"The Senate is gearing up to ratify a Nixon-era U.N. treaty meant to create universal laws to govern the seas -- a treaty critics say will create a massive U.N. bureaucracy that could even claim powers over American waterways.
LOST -- the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, also called the Law of the Sea Treaty -- regulates all things oceanic, from fishing rights, navigation lanes and environmental concerns to what lies beneath: the seabed's oil and mineral wealth that companies hope to explore and exploit in coming years.
But critics say the treaty, which declares the sea and its bounty the "universal heritage of mankind," would redistribute American profits and have a reach extending into rivers and streams all the way up the mighty Mississippi."
Now, get a load of THIS:
"You have to pay royalties on the value of anything you extract (from the deep seabed), those royalties to be distributed as the new bureaucracy sees fit, primarily to landlocked countries and underdeveloped countries," said Steven Groves, a fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation. American money would also go to fund the International Seabed Authority, which Groves warned "would have the potential to become the most massive U.N. bureaucracy on the planet." (z: "..to landlocked and underdeveloped countries? whaaaat??)
"The whole theory of the treaty is that the world's oceans and everything below them are the common heritage of mankind," said Groves. "Very socialist.""
What good could possibly come from THIS? For American, that is....if anybody still cares.
z
22 comments:
Please don't laugh, but ALL of this sort of C-R-A-P is part of a "Communist Plot" hatched over a century ago.
The Mills of Malice Disguised as Altruism grind slowly, but relentlessly and exceedingly fine.
~ FreeThinke
LOST goes way back.
From this source, in 2004:
The Law of the Sea Treaty originated in the 1970s as part of the United Nations' redistributionist agenda known as the "New International Economic Order." The convention covers such issues as fishing and navigation, but the controversy arose mainly over seabed mining. In essence, the Law of the Sea Treaty was designed to transfer wealth and technology from the industrialized states to the Third World.
Please read it all!
BHO intends to redistribute wealth on a global basis. LOST is another tool for accomplishing that goal.
Treaties are extremely dangerous. From this comment at FPM on the power of treaties, on the subject of gun control, but the principle still applies:
...the Treaty would the trump US Constitution.
That is how our system of laws works and the enemies of freedom know it.
BTW, Frank Gaffney has done a lot of writing and speaking on the matter of LOST. There may even be some videos of that at YouTube.
Index of YouTube videos on the topic.
I know LOST goes way back, that's exactly the point. It's been pretty dormant for about thirty years.
SUddenly! BINGO! It's so important that the Dems are all over it......with the kind of information I and Always on Watch have shared with you here....just another thing to consider and ponder. WHY the huge jump into something which will, yet again, chip at sovereignty?
Always, some day, I'll tell you why I'm not a huge fan of Gaffney. He does say the right things, usually, though!
LOST's sole purpose is to provide a permanent TAX structure for funding the UN and transferring national sovereignties of all countries to this "unrepresentative" world body.
Easy to say how much good it will do. None at all, at least not to America.
Who is John Galt?
Even St. Ronnie Raygun supported the treaty.
FJ..it sounds like they're not even hiding that fact!
The Dems can't wait to 'all hail the UN' can they.
Shoprat..I've GOT to find my ATLAS SHRUGGED copy and read it again..it's been a LOT of years.
Ducky, even Republicans screw up from time to time. Can't let the Democrats get ALL the fun. I'd like to know who was advising him.
Picture Reagan (that's how it's spelled, by the way) giving away rights up the Mississippi. No, it's nothing Republicans would ever do.
Wow I knew of "LOST" but will anyone entity or country benefit from this? I read in the comments someone made mention of the UN - useless nations as many refer to them as. Would they benefit. I truly am not qualified to speak to this subject.
There are all sorts of "treaties" being touted at the U.N. that would enhance the power of the One Worlder's at the expense of national sovereignty. This is just one of them. They also have treaties they'd like to compel us to implement which prohibit firearms ownership, stipulate how parents must raise their children (no spanking, etc.) and any number of other "cram it down their throats" treaties they want to ratify. Given the propensity of the current power structure to worship at the alter of "Citizens of the World" some of these might actually become law here. But enforcing those laws would be a very interesting proposition for the Washington D.C. crowd.
The first observation is that "we" aren't doing this; the socialists are.
The major proponents of the Law of the Sea Treaty were UN members identifying themselves as “the New International Economic Order.” This group is exactly what they sound like. Their agenda calls for “fairer” terms of trade and development financing for emerging and under-developed nations. Simply stated, it is a convention for the transfer of technology and redistribution of national wealth.
One might argue that the scope of the treaty is not exactly earth shattering. Others might suggest, “it is the least we can do” to help out our fellow man who is living in a third or fourth-world cesspool. Okay. Now add the LOST treaty to other “global socialist” treaties, and you begin to understand how American seniors are paying three or four times as much for prescription medications than their “brothers” in Mexico. So it would seem that wealth redistribution is alive and well in America . . . and has been for several decades. No, this isn’t just the Democratic Party at work . . . it is both parties doing their utmost to screw their own countrymen.
LOST provisions include laws and regulations to control pollution of the marine environment. President Reagan rejected the treaty in 1982 because it inhibits free enterprise and economic liberty. LOST also establishes limitations on maritime jurisdiction and limits ocean area that a country might claim as exclusive economic zones of interest.
LOST is an example of global socialism, to which everyone in the current congress and white house subscribe. The treaty voluntarily relinquishes national sovereignty to the “new world order.” Obama (et. al.) must be wetting their pants over this. The Senate has never voted on this treaty; I’m sure they will shortly, however.
OY! Can it get any worse?
Obviously, one world central government and laws guarantee that the most successful, free countries have the most to lose.
We will be required to join the third world in mediocrity, and ultimately exist on mere necessities to breathe in and out, and even that is questionable.
All these guilty liberals evidently can't comprehend that if you take enough wealth from one in order to prop up others to level the playing field, the supply of wealth will diminish until it's gone.
Furthermore, the dictators and tyrants around the world will do what they've always done, and the wealth will be spent on palaces and "the good life" for the favored few. In other words, down the rathole.
Ultimately, that is the path we're being taken down. Like a snowball rolling downhill, the longer it rolls, the bigger it gets, the harder it is to stop.
Welcome to the "New World Order"!
Pris
Relative to the redistribution between countries (from the so-called rich to the so-called poor) it is very similar to redistribution in society.
Most of the so-called poor country are actually very rich - in natural resources. They just don't know how to exploit them - but they also don't want these white exploiters coming in to help them. So what is the next best idea: They stop worrying and wait for us to feed them. And what does that do? It makes them dependent on us for food (while they have nourished themselves for thousands of years), because by giving them food we took away the basis.
You can establish the analogy to our society yourselves. It is plain opposite to what the best approach should be. Unless you want to establish global communist dictatorship.
Mr.Z
the left is bent on choking the life out of civilization pure and simple z. and it may take a power greater than us to cease it!!...
actually, z, things started heating up a little over a year ago - i blogged on it then - read it here.
fj's right on the sole purpose of it all, but joe blow on the street has no idea this is going on. much less what it means for the u.s.
Ask Saddam Hussein how seriously the UN should be taken.
Who will enforce LOST? The Kenyan navy?
Z,
Mustang beat me to it. Reagan refused to sign the treaty in 82 because he felt it was against free market prinicples and he disliked weakening American sovereignty by submitting many disputes to world courts. There were other reasons. Heritage.org has good information on the treaty.
BTW, Ducky you really ought to get a new insult for Reagan. Calling him Raygun comes from 60s hippies when he was governor of California. That is so yesterday. That's what I'm going on about.
LOST shows its ugly head periodically-then is shut down--the Dark Side never gives up and is very clever-We must be ever watchful and ever willing to fight-
LOST also endangers our military-we must not let it go through this time either!
C-CS
Yeah i heard of this a while ago, back then the republicans were against it and the left were all for it. Gee what a shock eh, the left trying to emasculate America and empower a bunch of racist, Jew-hating, worthless parasites, otherwise known as the UN.
Please someone...send an alert to Fox News and other conservative news commentators about this treaty.
The general public needs to know.
Matisse
Post a Comment