It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Conspiracy Realized: House & Senate pass Great Lakes Compact!

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 12 2008 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Conspiracy Realized: House & Senate pass Great Lakes Compact!


www.chicagotribune.com

Ohio moves to join Great Lakes agreement
By STEPHEN MAJORS | Associated Press Writer
5:06 PM CDT, June 10, 2008
Article tools
E-mail Share
Digg Del.icio.us Facebook Fark Google Newsvine Reddit Yahoo Print Reprints Post comment Text size: COLUMBUS, Ohio - After a two-year holdup, state lawmakers on Tuesday moved to make Ohio the sixth state to approve an agreement aimed at protecting the Great Lakes.

The Great Lakes Compact, a framework between eight states and two Canadian provinces, would prevent most diversions of water from the lakes' basin to arid states in the South and Southwest.

Ohio had been a major obstacle to the pact because of a disagreement over whether the plan would inadvertently violate property rights for groundwater on privately owned land. House Speaker Jon Husted, a Republican, and Democratic Minority Leader Joyce Beatty, reached a deal Monday to affirm private property rights and set the stage for Tuesday's vote.

The Senate passed the compact by a vote of 33-0 to join the House, which approved the compact last month. Gov. Ted Strickland said Tuesday he will sign it.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.watertechonline.com
www.hudsonhubtimes.com
toledoblade.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Great Lake States Unite!!




posted on Jun, 12 2008 @ 11:02 AM
link   
I thought this was just my fantasy: a US-Canadian agreement! There is hope, yet.
Oddly, the story is receiving little national press, but is of the utmost importance as an indicator of the future direction of the nation. Water will become a limilted resource.
Not exactly conspiratorial, but something seems strange about the ambivalence of the press toward this unprecedented development.

www.chicagotribune.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jun, 12 2008 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by djerwulfe
 


I agree with your reservations. This creates a precedent which could be - troubling to say the least. How do international treaties exists between only some states and a foreign nation? Or between only some provinces and a foreign nation?



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 07:34 AM
link   
Immigration is being passed form Feds to the States. I think the US may be reorganizing. Because of fuel, regions may be forced to become more self-sufficient. Recent discussions in Congress have brought up the formalization of English as our language. This is symbolic in many ways, but will have large-scale effects.
North America may be taking adopting some European strategies. We're getting too big for our Mega-transport economy to work effectively. Distance is becoming more of a factor.

BUT. It scares me. Locking down and formalizing culture is a well-known sign of a state's decline and the effects of "old-age," if you'll allow me. Regions specialize in certain products and this tendency is amplified in our current system.
You'll probably see more of these regional compacts. It's taking power from big business who only has to answer to Washington, and puts the answerability factor in the hands of the more localized civic powers. It is perhaps, the beginning of a FORCED decentralization.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 07:44 AM
link   
I forgot. The other thing that bugs me is the complete lack of interest and the absence of media coverage. This is large region-nation binding agreement regarding frsh water which IS becoming a commodity.


www.globalchange.umich.edu...
www.on.ec.gc.ca...

Added:en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 14-6-2008 by djerwulfe]



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maxmars
How do international treaties exists between only some states and a foreign nation? Or between only some provinces and a foreign nation?


Well, this is a shot in the dark, but I think that it is the provinces right (not the feds) to dictate the "use" of their lands. So when the developer of the waterline project goes to get his development permit from the province that will approve his pipeline "alignment", the province will say, "sorry, we do not approve of this alignment and the use of the "right-of-ways", so you cannot develop any water pipeline on any land we have control of". Of course, provincial lands by far outwiegh the land owned by the feds, municipalities, or any private owners, so there is no chance for a successful alignment to get a pipeline to run out of the lakes.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 08:10 AM
link   
Yes. I didn't know the words. But I would have to add, that there is little chance of commercial export of the water. Not 0.0% chance.

I think one of the differences with the Comapct as oppsed to the previous rule is that water development can be conducted, but it requires the approval and contribution from all Compacted (
) parties, i.e. the states of the Compact.

One of my fears is reckless interference with the lake system. But that's one of the other reasons for the pact. But I still fear something like damming of the St. Lawrence or something idiotic like that.
en.wikipedia.org...

* changed ..."Not 0.05..." to, "Not 0.0%..."


[edit on 14-6-2008 by djerwulfe]



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join