More U.S. sovereignty LOST to the U.N.

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Oct, 16 2007 @ 07:09 PM
link   

More U.S. sovereignty LOST to the U.N.


newsblaze.com

Should the United States Senate ratify the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST), the UN would not only have control of the earth's oceans; the United States would turn its sovereignty over to an inept organization bent on diminishing the power of the United States and bolstering the power of tyrannical regimes hostile to the US.

(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Oct, 16 2007 @ 07:09 PM
link   
Call or e-mail your Senators now and demand this be voted down, This is up for a vote very soon in the Senate.
It should be considered an act of war not a bill of law.

newsblaze.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Glen Beck was just screaming about it on CNN.

[edit on 16-10-2007 by Sky watcher]



posted on Oct, 16 2007 @ 07:39 PM
link   
I don't see how this would be downing the U.S. at all. If anything it would just make the U.N. a little more wealthy.


Under LOST, the UN would have unprecedented power to tax and regulate anything that remotely affects the sea beds of the oceans. The UN would have to power to enforce quotas for mining and oil production, reap undeserved royalties, and control ocean exploration and research, courtesy of US taxpayers who fund nearly a quarter of the organization's budget.


This article is really biased against this. All I can see it does is tax any navy out at see.. not just the U.S. To me this might be a good idea. Maybe it will stop navies from flaunting nuclear subs and loaded carriers.



posted on Oct, 16 2007 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Techsnow
I don't see how this would be downing the U.S. at all. If anything it would just make the U.N. a little more wealthy.


Under LOST, the UN would have unprecedented power to tax and regulate anything that remotely affects the sea beds of the oceans. The UN would have to power to enforce quotas for mining and oil production, reap undeserved royalties, and control ocean exploration and research, courtesy of US taxpayers who fund nearly a quarter of the organization's budget.


This article is really biased against this. All I can see it does is tax any navy out at see.. not just the U.S. To me this might be a good idea. Maybe it will stop navies from flaunting nuclear subs and loaded carriers.


I'm really glad you posted that. I was going to bang off about how Europe is doing that to us, but yes, fish travel and are not the preserve of any country. They need feeding grounds and if a treaty is going to keep them safe, then good. But if any treaty tries to take away your liberty, then we're gonna be as paranoid as you. (Whatever the government says).



posted on Oct, 17 2007 @ 02:37 PM
link   
So your OK with giving up our territorial waters so Russia or China can fish, drill for oil or gas right off our beaches or say park war ships right off the coast. I don't think you do. The U.N. couldn't control a kids soccer game let alone something like this and to have them tax us. The U.N. is a corrupt organization bent on destroying the sovereignty of this country.



posted on Oct, 17 2007 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Sky watcher
 

International waters are separate from territorial waters. If we can agree a common environmental strategy on them, a. that does not hit the rights of a country, and b. has to help the good lands that we all share.



posted on Oct, 19 2007 @ 07:36 AM
link   
Thank you for contacting me regarding the Law of the Sea Treaty. I appreciate hearing from you.

As you may know, the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) established a legal regime governing activities on, over, and under the world’s oceans. While supporting most of the treaty, the United States and other industrialized countries did not sign the Convention and announced they could not ratify it without significant changes to the sections addressing deep seabed resources beyond national jurisdiction.

In April 1993, the Clinton Administration announced it would actively participate in consultations on the deep seabed portions of the Convention. These consultations led to the adoption of Resolution 48/263 by the U.N. General Assembly in July 1994, which amended various seabed-related parts of the Convention.

We must weigh the benefits of being a party to LOST against the potential loss of U.S. sovereignty on and under the seas. I share your interest in preserving our nation’s sovereignty, and I will carefully consider the implications of this treaty to ensure it does not harm the interests of the United States. Please know that I will keep your thoughtful comments in mind should the Senate consider this issue.

Again, I appreciate hearing from you. Do not hesitate to contact me with any additional questions or comments. For more information about issues and activities important to Florida, please sign up for my weekly newsletter at martinez.senate.gov....

Sincerely,

Mel Martinez
United States Senator



posted on Oct, 19 2007 @ 10:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Sky watcher
 


If that's not really mental sarcasm, then no I did not know about LOST, but we have had enough problems with the EU in getting fishing quotas down, we've got plummeting supplies. I must state that I find it sad how man made issues make the biggest problems for nature. I'm no legislator, but find it frustrating how often the needs of nature get completely ignored in words. Again, if that's not mental sarcasm, thank you for your reply and I hope it wasn't me that blew your cover.




new topics
top topics
 
0

log in

join