Once Again...Lose L.O.S.T.!

In previous posts on L.O.S.T. (10 all together), I pointed out how wrong as wrong can be the Law Of The Sea Treaty will be for the sovereignty of the United States. What the Leftinistra aren't telling anyone is this, among other examples...the United States Navy will have to seek permissions from the United Nations to operate. if anyone thinks this is a good thing for the defense of the United States, the Kucinich UFO has landed in their living room.

The "treaty" is also known as UNCLOS and that is short for United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea.

Matt Yglesias is so, so right about Friday Night Lights, my new favorite TV series (you needn't like football, high school, or Texas; I love only the third). So I am surprised he is not more skeptical about the Law of the Sea Treaty.

For background, here is Wikipedia, here is a Heritage critique, and here is a Cato critique. Here is an argument for the treaty. Here is another summary of arguments, and more details here. Note that many nations already have signed and ratified but the U.S. has not ratified.

In essence, the convention "guarantees" freedom of navigation (fine, noting that ocean navigation is currently free, but thanks mostly to the U.S. military, not the UN), defines territorial waters, and sets future guidelines for managing the sea's mineral resources (not so fine). The Convention "establishes an International Seabed Authority (ISA) to authorize seabed exploration and mining and collect and distribute the seabed mining royalty."

Economic mining of the deep ocean is decades away. But the ISA has veto rights over developing ocean resources and this hardly seems conducive to increasing the value of those resources. Nor does the "some regulatory framework is better than none, if only to alleviate uncertainty" argument apply. No entrepreneurs are sitting around waiting for the U.S. to ratify the convention so they can proceed with their deep sea mining platforms. there is a potential commons problem but right now it is best to simply wait; no current "solution" will end up sticking or much reflect the actual problems that will arise. [...]

Read the rest of the article from Marginal Revolution.

YIKES! Seeing that for the last few decades, the United Nations has been an utter failure in most respects, anything that organization is for, the United States MUST ignore or outright reject. Col North had these words of wisdom to orate upon...

[...] LOST also opens the door to a long-sought U.N. goal: the redistribution of wealth by taxing Americans. The International Seabed Authority (ISA), a bloated, multi-national bureaucracy headquartered in Jamaica, has the mandate to distribute revenues and “other economic benefits” on the basis of “equitable sharing criteria, taking into account the interests and needs of developing States.” In addition to acting as a global IRS, the ISA also decides which companies from what nations will develop mineral resources on the seabed. [...]

Not enough for you? Check these sources before you click out.
Heritage Foundation
USA Survival
Washington Times
Text of Treaty in pdf format
Open Market
Eagle Forum
NCPA
Another pdf file
Ocean Law (self-explanatory title this one)

The best President this country has ever seen, Ronald Wilson Reagan, was very much opposed to the defunct UNCLOS.

[...] Among the specific concerns with LOST identified by President Reagan in 1982 were: (1) the lack of adequate American influence within the decision-making bodies of the International Seabed Authority (ISA), in charge of regulating deep seabed mining in the oceans; (2) limitations on exploitation of the deep seabed; (3) mandatory technology transfers to the ISA and developing countries; (4) the competitive advantage given to a supranational mining company affiliated with the ISA known as the “Enterprise”; (5) the imposition of financial burdens on deep seabed mining operations; and (6) the potential for the ISA to impose regulatory burdens on the American mining industry. [...]

Redstate chimes in here.

I must confess that I feel much better about my position concerning the Law of the Sea Treaty when I see that Tyler Cowen is, at best, very, very ambivalent about the whole thing. And I really wish that Professor Cowen was invited to testify before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee before the Committee voted the Treaty to the full Senate favorably. The Senators would have done well to hear this: [...]

[...] I don't hold the extreme view that the UN always fails. It is possibly good when there is a general consensus for action (UNESCO World Heritage sites), or when a well-targeted military action has a defined purpose. The UN is very bad at developing and enforcing open-ended commitments, and very bad at constructing well-run institutions.

Ain't that a mouthful?

Another reason to be against it is this...the New York Slimes is for it, namely, Weasel Gail Collins.

[...] I would love to give you all the arguments about the virtues of the Law of the Sea Treaty, but it seems like a cruel thing to do to readers on a Saturday. One problem with the debate is that the earnestness of the proponents is equaled only by their lack of pizazz. [...]

Yet another Leftinistric, The Atlantic.com is for it. I wonder why ALL the anti-Americanists are for this and have dragged GWB into being for a treaty that would dampen the very spirit of America?

Paul Weyrich at Townhall explains most of the opposition and The Why to oppose L.O.S.T..

Cliff Kincaid isn't giving up defeating the UN, either.

The American Policy Center:

[...] As you no doubt remember, this very dangerous treaty will seriously diminish our national sovereignty by transferring jurisdiction over the world's oceans and everything in them to United Nations agencies and bureaucrats. Yet I would remind you of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Black's admonition in Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957), when he reminded us that our civil liberties cannot be subordinated by a treaty, by stating:

"It would be manifestly contrary to the objectives of those who created the Constitution, as well as those who were responsible for the Bill of Rights - let alone alien to our entire constitutional history and tradition - to construe Article VI as permitting the United States to exercise power under an international agreement without observing constitutional prohibitions. The court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty."

Yet today several U.S. Supreme Court justices are on record as using, and urging other justices to use, foreign law in deciding U.S. cases! [...]

If the Leftinistra want it; if the United Nations wants it; oppose it. It really is that simple.

Catch the wave

UNCLOS (LOST) Soon To Be...Defeated

Theoretically, all we need is for 34 Senators to be against this retarded "treaty" for it to be quietly removed from the Senate calendar.

Get on the phones...jam the email servers.

JUST SAY, "HELL NO!" TO GIVING AWAY OUR SOVEREIGNTY AND NATIONAL SECURITY to a defective, defunct and waste of an organization such as the United Nations. The ONLY thing the United Nations is united for is to be against the United States.

Paul Weyrich has a must read column at Townhall. We have until 11/1/2007 to swamp our Senators as we did with the Shamnesty deal.

Get off your rumps and make your voices heard!

Cliff Kincaid has an article at The August Review as well and it also is a must read.

Can the U.N.'s Law of the Sea Treaty not only be delayed but defeated outright in the Senate? That's the question that conservatives are delightfully pondering as a remarkable series of events has put the pact, supported by the Bush Administration and the liberal leadership in the Senate, in serious jeopardy. Perhaps the most significant development is the announcement by Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell that he will oppose the White House and vote against the treaty.

As opponents of the treaty make their case in advertisements and on cable TV and talk radio, Republican senators are increasingly hearing from their constituents that they don't want the treaty ratified because it will undermine American Sovereignty and hand more power over to the United Nations.

[...]

Read the two articles and I also have a herd of pieces on LOST right here.

Why Is The United Nations Cooking The Books?

I was doing my usual "can't sleep so why not read, surf and study" gig and I ran across this post at Gateway Pundit. It is about what the Israelis hit in Syria of which, Syria ADMITTED, finally, what the Israelis said they hit...a nuclear facility of some sort. I posted two articles on the subject here and here.

Now, the record of such event has "vanished" from the records at the United Nations. And we, the United States, are to trust the United Nations (I still don't know what they are united about) with the Law of the Sea Treaty? Turn OUR homeland shores over to them? The "vanishers" of documents? Please. Spare us of the ignorance and "udder" stupidities of that!

ALAS! I digress. Here is what one will find at Gateway Pundit.

[...]

There were news reports today that Syria had admitted that Israel had bombed a nuclear facility last month in northern Syria.
YNET News reported:

[...]

This is where it gets interesting. To get the whole drift, go read the post. It seems as though, the documents clearly showed the "confirmation" and then the next set the clarity is well, gone.

[...]

Here is the original document from that meeting at the United Nations this morning:

Click to Enlarge
Here is the original text:

Moreover, Israel was the fourth largest exporter of weapons of mass destruction and a violator of other nations’ airspace, and it had taken action against nuclear facilities, including the 6 July attack in Syria. He vowed that whenever a right of reply was exercised, Syria would expose the underlying goals of the Zionist entity.

Now, take a look at the latest text of that same document:

Click to Enlarge
Here is the latest rewrite of United Nations record General Assembly GA/DIS/3345

Moreover, the entity that was the fourth largest exporter of lethal weapons in the world, that which violated the airspace of sovereign States and carried out military aggression against them, as had happened on 6 September against Syria, such an entity, with all those characteristics and more, had no right to go on lying without shame.

[...]

So, what's up with that? And, who is hiding what from whom and WHY?

On Colonel North and L.O.S.T.

Who supports this treaty that gives our nation's sovereignty away to the United Nations? We already know that George Soros will back anything that will destroy the United States Constitution and make way for a New World Order of Socialist Unions where everyone is on the same level(s)...except for the wealthy...like Soros.

This is an ideological Wet Dream.

President George Bush once stated...“America will never seek a permission slip to defend the security of our country.” He said that at his 2004 State Of The Union Address. Did he mean that or was he only referring to the terrorists and the Leftinistra?

Colonel North made note of this statement in his recent piece at Fox News. He then makes a statement which requires many answers to many questions:

[...]

...But if the U.S. Senate votes to ratify the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea — known as the Law of the Sea Treaty, or its appropriate acronym, LOST — he and his successors are going to need lots of permission slips.

[...]

Why is it that whenever an issue like this is tried to be shoved through on the quick and quicker before anyone finds out about it, it always turns out to be some colossal CF?

[...]

LOST also opens the door to a long-sought U.N. goal: the redistribution of wealth by taxing Americans. The International Seabed Authority (ISA), a bloated, multi-national bureaucracy headquartered in Jamaica, has the mandate to distribute revenues and “other economic benefits” on the basis of “equitable sharing criteria, taking into account the interests and needs of developing States.” In addition to acting as a global IRS, the ISA also decides which companies from what nations will develop mineral resources on the seabed.

[...]

Read the rest of the article and read the other posts I have on this subject in the Tag Section. The articles can be found under the heading of "L.O.S.T.".

The UN site can be found here, entitled United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982, Overview and full text.

More can be read at CATO.

FindLaw has a text article here. It was published in 2005.

Other sources:
Heritage Foundation
USA Survival
Washington Times
Text of Treaty in pdf format
Open Market
Eagle Forum
NCPA
Another pdf file
Ocean Law (self-explanatory title this one)

Reject The Law Of The Sea Treaty

Why, you ask? Because Ronald Wilson Reagan did and here is why he totally rejected the premise.

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea - commonly known at the Law of the Sea Treaty, or LOST - is the darling project of the transnational progressives, or "transies."

Their goal is nothing less than the establishment of world government at the expense of traditional sovereignty.

Any questions?


Another U.N. Power Grab
by William P. Clark and Edwin Meese, 10-8-07

Don't give U.N. keys to Earth's treasures
by Tom Marzullo, 5-18-07

The thing won't die!
by Henry Lamb, 5-17-07

How Americans lose under LOST
by Rebecca Hagelin, 5-17-07

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: The Risks Outweigh the Benefits
by Edwin Meese III, Baker Spring and Brett D. Schaefer, 5-16-07

A L.O.S.T. Presidency
by Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., 5-14-07

Bush to pressure Senate to revive U.N. sea treaty
5-13-07

Reagan Would Still Oppose Law of the Sea Treaty
by Edwin Meese III, 4-25-05

Law of the Sea Treaty
by Doug Bandow, 3-16-05

Out to Sea
Ed Feulner commentary, 3-08-05

Skeptical Senate eyes sea treaty
The Washington Times, 3-07-05

Should the U.N. be lord of the oceans?
Pat Buchanan column, 2-28-05

Conservatives denounce GOP support of treaty
The Washington Times, 2-19-05

Letter (signed by Phyllis Schlafly and others) to Sen. Richard Lugar (PDF), chairman of Senate Foreign Relations Committee, 2-18-05

Protect U.S. Sovereignty: Sink the Law of the Sea Treaty
Human Events, 1-28-05

Center for Security Policy

The Institute for Trade, Standards and Sustainable Development

The Liberty Committee

Ronald Reagan's concerns with LOST

LOST poses fundamental threats to U.S. sovereignty

LOST empowers the United Nations

LOST demands damaging technology transfer

LOST is a mechanism for international taxation

LOST will restrains the operations of the U.S. military

LOST will subject the U.S. to dangerous litigation and regulation

LOST creates rigged-game decision mechanisms

LOST provides a backdoor for U.S. accession to the Kyoto Protocol

LOST creates dangerous precedents for other "international commons"

LOST creates mandatory dispute settlement mechanisms

China can use LOST to undermine U.S. interests in Asia

Russia can use LOST to support its aggressive territorial claims

Absolutely amazing

CPAS

Everything you ever needed to know about the United Nations take over of American Soil.


Sink The Law Of The Sea Again
Phyllis Schlafly Column, 9-26-2007

Time To Stand Up for America
Phyllis Schlafly Report, June 2007

Deep-Six The Law Of The Sea
Phyllis Schlafly Column, 5-23-2007

Defeat the UN Law of the Sea Treaty!
Phyllis Schlafly Report, Feb. 2005

Opportunity Knocking: Defeat Law Of The Sea Treaty
Phyllis Schlafly Column, 2-09-2005

We Should Drown Law Of The Sea
Phyllis Schlafly Column, 3-17-2004

(10/9/07) Frank Gaffney, "A Navy LOST?" Washington Times

(10/5/07) William Scally, "Law of the Sea Treaty is Being 'Rubber Stamped,' Critics Charge," Congressional Quarterly

(10/5/07) Adm. James Lyons, "U.S. LOST at Sea?" The Washington Times

(10/4/07) Coalition to Preserve American Sovereignty, "Two Witnesses, Fifteen Minutes of Fame," CPAS Press Release

(10/04/07) Frank Gaffney, "Ronald Reagan Was Right: The Law of the Sea Treaty Was And Remains Unacceptable," Submitted Testimony to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations

Lose The L.O.S.T.!!....UPDATED

What is L.O.S.T.? The Law of The Sea Treaty was drawn up by The United Nations. That, in and of itself, is reason enough to oppose this treaty. to truly understand LOST, there is a video series here and therein one will find the treaty and the ramifications thereof fully explained. The treaty would subject the United States to the authority of the United nations. This is totally unacceptable.

We have been fighting for years to prevent Senate ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. This very objectionable treaty would put the United States in a de facto world government; it went into effect in 1994 but was never ratified by the U.S. Senate. Shocking as it is, President Bush is lobbying hard for passage of this massive, unprecedented redistribution of wealth from the United States to other countries. The Senate held a hearing last week, and is now poised to approve this treaty sometime before Congress' Christmas break. Please help us stop this very real threat to our sovereignty, security and economic health.

As you no doubt remember, this very dangerous treaty will seriously diminish our national sovereignty by transferring jurisdiction over the world's oceans and everything in them to United Nations agencies and bureaucrats. Yet I would remind you of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Black's admonition in Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957), when he reminded us that our civil liberties cannot be subordinated by a treaty, by stating:

"It would be manifestly contrary to the objectives of those who created the Constitution, as well as those who were responsible for the Bill of Rights - let alone alien to our entire constitutional history and tradition - to construe Article VI as permitting the United States to exercise power under an international agreement without observing constitutional prohibitions. The court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty."

Yet today several U.S. Supreme Court justices are on record as using, and urging other justices to use, foreign law in deciding U.S. cases!

The LOST convention's purpose it to benefit Third World countries by fining and punishing the wealth and technological advantages of the industrialized West. The convention would subject our governmental, military and business operations to mandatory dispute resolution. Any disputes would be decided by the U.N. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, a 21-member body representing 155 countries envious of American ingenuity and prosperity. The United States would have only one vote with which to protect American investment, and the transfer of sensitive, militarily useful and proprietary private technologies, and forced compliance with the Kyoto Protocol.

The LOST convention would be an open invitation to activist judges to interpret the convention's intentionally vague provisions against our national security and economic interests. In point of fact, were our Senate to approve the LOST convention, the odds are roughly 155 to 1 that the LOST tribunal would vote to cede U.S. claims to the North Pole and its oil riches to the Russians.

The LOST convention is a global tax mechanism, by which greedy U.N. hands will grab for billions of primarily American dollars to benefit corrupt nations around the world. The convention sets up a scheme to facilitate bribes and payoffs to U.N. officials that could make the U.N.'s oil-for-food scandal look like child's play. The Law of the Sea Treaty must be sunk!

This treaty cannot be allowed to be ratified and the ones cramming this treaty through the Senate must be arrested and tried for violating their Oaths of Office. This very treaty is an act of sabotage of American Sovereignty, plain and simple. International Law does NOT have authority over the Constitution of The United States unless, naturally, our CONgress Critters sign its citizens over to the United Nations.

Consider this an Emergency Action Alert.

ACTION TO TAKE

1. Contact your Senators (www.thomas.gov).

2. Contact Senator Mitch McConnell, Senate Minority Leader. Senator McConnell leads a block of 49 Republican votes - we only need 34 to stop LOST. Pressure on Senator McConnell is one of our best chances to stop this treaty.

3. Contact the White House (www.whitehouse.gov/contact/).

Tell them the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) remains a seriously flawed document, designed to transfer wealth and technology from industrialized states to those of the Third World. It is anathema to our Founding Principles and will threaten our national sovereignty.

Tell them the best protection of U.S. interests in the world's oceans is the U.S. Navy, which should not and must not be subject to orders or regulations made by any international tribunal.

Phone calls are the most effective way to contact your elected representatives. We may not have time to submit written letters. Call the Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121. The switchboard operator will connect you directly with the Senate office you request. To contact the White House, you have the choice of leaving comments at (202) 456-1111, or talk with a live switchboard operator at (202) 456-1414, or fax at (202) 456-2461.

E-mails and faxes are many times ignored. Members of Congress have been changing their e-mail addresses and fax numbers when we send out alerts. If you prefer, though, you can send an e-mail by going to each member's website at www.thomas.gov.

If you choose to write, and do not know your Senators' mailing addresses, you may simply address your letters as follows:

Office of Senator (Name)
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510

Should we do nothing, it won't be long before the United Stats is no longer the United States and we won't have a Constitution to stand on.

Join Senator Vitter:

Sen. Vitter Leads Assault on Sea Treaty

By Cliff Kincaid

The Senate battle over ratification of Law of the Sea Treaty (United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea - Provides universal control for the management of marine natural resources and shipping rights. Opened for signature on December 10, 1982 ) is heating up and may be brought to vote this month. If passed, it will destroy American Sovereignty. Sen. Vitter is bravely standing against all globalist forces that want to de-nationalize the United States. Now is the time for you to make your opinions known to your Senators!

We cannot stand idly by and watch the elitists sell us to the World Courts.

Which flag shall we fly?


This is NOT my flag...

Threat Level

SEVERE

Quin Hillyer
Michelle Malkin

Track back: Miss Beth's Victory Dance

Wake Up America

UPDATE: check Col North's article at Townhall. Permission Slip For The Sea

WASHINGTON -- In his 2004 State of the Union Address, President Bush said, "America will never seek a permission slip to defend the security of our country." Members of both parties and both houses of Congress applauded. But if the Senate votes to ratify the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea -- known as the Law of the Sea Treaty -- or its appropriate acronym -- LOST -- he and his successors are going to need lots of permission slips.

In 1982, Ronald Reagan, concerned about the treaty's implications for our sovereignty and national security, formally rejected LOST because it did "not satisfy the objectives sought by the United States." In 1994, William Jefferson Clinton, eager to appease One World Government advocates in his own party and at the United Nations, negotiated a parallel "agreement" that purported to address Mr. Reagan's concerns -- and urged ratification. Since then, LOST has gathered dust in the bowels of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee. All that may be about to change. The deeply flawed, Soviet-era agreement giving unelected, unaccountable international bureaucrats control over 71 percent of the Earth's surface is now on a fast track to ratification.

Advocates for LOST -- among them Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joe Biden, D-Del. -- claim that the Clinton-negotiated parallel "agreement" eliminates concerns about empowering international organizations to collect heavy fees or interfere with the U.S. military or intelligence collection. Yet a careful reading of LOST's 202 pages -- and the so-called agreement -- proves that's not true.

The U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea already has created a Byzantine array of international organizations to administer the provisions of LOST. Everything from compliance with global environmental agreements, to the collection of "user fees" from private companies, to disputes about military operations above, on or under international waters are subject to mandatory dispute resolution by one or more of these international bodies.

According to the U.N., the purpose of LOST is to preserve international waters for peaceful purposes. But Articles 19 and 20 of the treaty would proscribe the U.S. Navy from training with weapons, collecting intelligence or interfering with enemy communications in the territorial waters of other countries without their expressed permission. Military aircraft are prohibited specifically from taking off and landing in these waters, and severe limitations would be imposed on loading and unloading "any commodity, currency or person" including military equipment. Submarines are required to travel on the surface and "show their flag in territorial waters." Article 30 states that warships not complying with the laws of a coastal nation can be forced to leave. Disputes about these issues would be adjudicated by international lawyers. Right.

LOST's proponents discount these concerns by claiming the U.S. simply will exempt military activities from the treaty's compulsory dispute resolution requirements. However, the "opt out" clause in Article 298 fails to define such operations. In our own Congress, intelligence functions are not considered to be military activities, so it is far from certain that the U.N. would accept the U.S. position that intelligence operations over, on or under the seas are indeed military activities. If there is a dispute as to what is or isn't a military activity, LOST requires the matter to be resolved by international arbitration.

In 2003, Navy Adm. Michael Mullen, now the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that rulings from these arbitration panels "could have an impact on operational planning and activities, and our security." Last week, in response to questions from Sen. David Vitter, R-La., during a committee hearing, professor Bernard Oxman, a witness supporting LOST, admitted that if the parties to a dispute can't agree on the arbitration panel, the U.N. secretary-general will chose the arbitrators. Lawyers in Pyongyang, Havana and Tehran: Call Turtle Bay.

LOST also opens the door to a long-sought U.N. goal: the redistribution of wealth by taxing Americans. The International Seabed Authority, a bloated, multinational bureaucracy headquartered in Jamaica, has the mandate to distribute revenues and "other economic benefits" on the basis of "equitable sharing criteria, taking into account the interests and needs of developing states." In addition to acting as a global IRS, the ISA also decides which companies from which nations will develop mineral resources on the seabed.

In urging ratification, former President Bill Clinton described LOST as "a far-reaching environmental accord" that would "harmonize" U.S. laws to "prevent, reduce and control pollution" in the "best practical means." But Article 213 requires nations to adopt "laws and regulations to prevent, reduce and control pollution of the marine environment from land-based sources." Thus, LOST could become a means of enforcing another agreement we never ratified: the Kyoto Protocol on global warming. Al Gore, call your office.

Before casting a vote to ratify LOST, all 100 senators should read Article 314 of this onerous treaty and Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution. The U.N.-crafted document specifies that amendments to the treaty can be adopted -- and therefore enforced -- without the consent of any signatory. Yet our Constitution requires that two-thirds of our Senate concur in any treaty. Do 67 members of this Senate now want to surrender that authority to foreign governments?

Why do our CONgress Critters want to give our country away to foreign interests?

Also "sea": Eagle Forum

L.O.S.T.: Law Of the Sea Treaty

This is just plain old retarded. We have ignorant nibblers of turtle turds once again selling our sovereignty to the lowest bidders.

Supporters say we must be a signatory to guarantee our share of the resources to be found under the world's oceans and to avoid situations like the race to claim the sea bed under the Arctic between Russia, Canada and other states. But experience suggests a Law of the Sea tribunal won't protect interests we should be protecting ourselves.

[...]

LOST would create an International Seabed Authority (ISA) with the power to regulate and tax things like seabed mining, fishing rights and deep-sea oil exploration. The ISA would decide who gets access to the sea's resources, and the companies granted these rights would pay a royalty to the ISA.

[...]

Time was, Ronald Reagan's 600-ship Navy gave us freedom of the seas. But if Joe Biden and the Senate have their way, we'll need the permission of 21 judges in Hamburg.

[...]

In the 1980s, Libya declared the entire Gulf of Sidra to be under Libyan authority, and ships entering the Gulf needed Libya's permission first. Reagan's response was to dispatch a carrier task force that blew two Libyan patrol boats out of the water. His, and our, point was made.

Since the days of John Paul Jones, our access to and freedom of the seas has been guaranteed by the power of the U.S. Navy. If Joe Biden and the Senate have their way, our motto might soon be "We have not yet begun to negotiate."

The proponents of this are truly unAmerican,, non-patriotic, dumber than a box of Chinese toothpaste, more decrepit than a Chinese crib on top of being dumber than a box of turtle turds.

Save America First!

To hell with everyone else!

From Norman!

This is just to re-confirm previous e-mails about he "Law Of The Sea Treaty" (LOST) and emphasizes the need to expel, that's right, EXPEL, the likes of Kennedy, Pelosi, Reid, Biden, Kerry, et al from the U.S. Senate as soon as possible! Think I'm blowing smoke...think again; you're about to lose your country. And that my friends is an undeniable

FACT. OK, do nothing and start paying the United Nations taxes they're about to impose on you...and that's over andabove the thirty-million that's already in the legislative mill (also mentioned in a previous e-mail). Where's all thoseMinutemen from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts? You don't have to wait until they get to some bridge in Lexington to fire another shot heard 'round the world. They're already here, just waiting, for Biden to cram the billthrough Congress so the Kennedy-Clinton-Pelosi Clan can prepare for their Brave New World power grab.



Dear Friend of America's Survival, Inc.:

We have published our new report on the Russian grab for oil riches at the North Pole, a region already claimed by the United States. This is not only a grab for oil and other natural resources; it is theft of what is rightfully ours as a nation.

The Russians are counting on the U.S. State Department to try to stampede the U.S. Senate into ratifying the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea. Then, the U.N. will turn over the region to the Russians.

This is an absolute outrage, even worse than the Panama Canal giveaway.

You need to read our report, get motivated, and join our campaign against the treaty. Call your Senators and urge its rejection.

Please go to our home page , and read our report. Please distribute it to your family, friends and associates.

For America,

Cliff Kincaid,

President,

America's Survival, Inc.



And when you get finished with all of that take a few hours and figure this one out!!


The August Review

The Trilateral Commission: Usurping Sovereignty

The Trilateral Commission is approaching its 35th anniversary. Trilateral policy has been to create a "New International Economic Order" but the means to the end involved hijacking the Executive Branch of the U.S. government. Starting with James Earl Carter in 1976, every successive administration has been dominated by members of the Commission -- for 35 years, they have had their way with trade policy, creation of global treaties, monetary policy and the usurping or American Accordingly, the internal authority of the state supersedes that of all other bodies.', CAPTION, 'Sovereignty',BELOW,RIGHT, WIDTH, 300, FGCOLOR, '#CCCCFF', BGCOLOR, '#333399', TEXTCOLOR, '#000000', CAPCOLOR, '#FFFFFF', OFFSETX, 10, OFFSETY, 10);" onmouseout="return nd();">Sovereignty.

Stop L.O.S.T. and the UN!!

If ratified, the United States would yield sovereignty over all the world’s seas and oceans to a UN bureaucracy. Americans could be ordered by the UN to stop fishing or digging for clams on either coast. The LOST created the International Seabed Authority (ISA) with full jurisdiction over more than 70% of the world: the oceans and everything in them.

This includes the ocean floors and all the wealth they contain: “solid, liquid, or gaseous mineral resources” and the power to regulate them. The ISA, headquartered in Jamaica, has an assembly, a council and numerous commissions in a typically bloated bureaucracy, all paid tax-free salaries. If ratified, the United States would have one in 154 votes, and with envy and hatred of our country so widespread, this nation would lose every appeal of every decision.

These bureaucrats would have the power to levy international taxes, something Bilderberg has wanted for many years. Bilderberg prefers, as members have said many times at their meetings over many years, a UN tax on oil at the wellhead. Starting at perhaps 10 cents a barrel, Americans would be unaware they are paying a direct tax to the UN when buying gas. But, like the income tax, it would grow to usurious levels. But the principle is important to Bilderberg: a direct tax on people of the world would be a major step toward global government. Such a tax has been pending before the UN for years but unreported in the mainstream media.

The LOST taxes would be disguised as assessments, fees, permits or payments. But they will cost you money.

But the good news is, Bilderberg is upset that, as public knowledge and indignation rises, the plan for global government is years behind schedule. In the 1990s, Bilderberg was confident that, by 2000, the merging of Europe into a single superstate would be completed and the “American Union” would be well on the way to completion. But two nations failed to ratify the EU constitution, keeping it from taking effect. And outraged Americans have prevented NAFTA from evolving into the “American Union.”

The Law Of The Sea Treaty must not pass !

We will lose much more than what I have included in the above summary...

It's the beginning of the end of America...

Every American should read the bill and see for themselves...

Which will it be?

Wake Up America

Keep Red White And Blue

PS: Lets keep the $

No Amero$ allowed !!!

Stop L.O.S.T.!

This "Law Of The Sea" garbage MUST be lost in the cesspools of the world...where it belongs. It amounts to One World Government and International Socialism. Those that are proponents of it cannot be trusted with one sheet of toilet paper, let alone making life and death decisions.

Please review the video in my VODPOD.

How many of you trust the United Nations?

How many of you have read the LOST?

How many of you are actually concerned?

How many of you would like to Learn of LOST?

The issues are confusing.

And that is why I don't trust it.

L.O.S.T. has been coming along for quite some time.

JUST SAY, "NO!" to L.O.S.T.!

L.O.S.T....WTF?

L.O.S.T.?

L.O.S.T.?

Monday, May 14, 2007 9:57 PM

What am I missing here? Is anyone home? Hello? IS this another one of those Compassionate Conservative things? If so, I guess I am NOT a Compassionate Conservative and I pray I NEVER succumb to the adjunct thereof.

Can this be an attempt at distraction? Let’s hope so.

WASHINGTON – In a move that has already angered some of his most ardent supporters, President Bush has asked the Democratic leadership in the U.S. Senate to revive a proposal for ratification of the United Nation’s Law of the Sea Treaty, an international agreement defeated two years ago by Republican leadership in the upper house.

Critics say ratification would compromise U.S. sovereignty and place 70 percent of the Earth’s surface under the control of the U.N. – even providing for a “tax” that would be paid directly to the international body by companies mining in the world’s oceans.

The battle over the Law of the Sea Treaty first began 25 years ago, eventually being torpedoed by President Reagan. It resurfaced in 2004 under the sponsorship of Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., and was successfully defeated by then Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn.