Hurricane Alley… by J. D. Longstreet

Posted in UN/One World Government by J. D. Longstreet on November 2, 2007

Hurrucane Alley Palm Tree logo

Lose “LOST”
******************
This is the second article, now, concerning the Law of the Sea Treaty now in the US Senate. Still, you may never have heard of it. So why is it important? OK, lets look at some reasons why the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) is important to you as an American and to all inhabitants of the earth.


Why We Lose if LOST Wins:
By asserting UN authority over seven-tenths of the Earth’s surface, LOST would be the largest territorial conquest in history.
In principle, the treaty would assert UN jurisdiction over U.S. territorial waters, and eventually over waterways within our country.

It would create a huge bureaucratic entity called the “Enterprise” which would regulate and tax all commercial uses of the high seas.

By taxing all efforts to develop the wealth of the seabed, the UN would be given a huge revenue stream, independent of national governments, to push its agenda for international socialism.

The treaty would require the redistribution of cutting-edge technology from the U.S. to all governments in the “developing world,” including extremely repressive governments.

Get the picture??? It’s that cussed “One World” crap again! You know… the “GLOBALISTS” at work.

So, where do we stand today on LOST? Not good, I’m afraid.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee Approved LOST earlier this week! The U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations voted to ratify the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) on Wednesday, October 31, by a vote of 17-4. With the committee’s approval, the full Senate will now be faced with a final vote on ratification of the treaty.

As of October 31, there is no scheduled vote on LOST in the Senate. However, previous reports indicated that the Senate would vote on LOST prior to the end of the year.

Here’s another source of info for you:

Washington, D.C. – As the Senate Foreign Relations Committee votes on the controversial Law of the Sea Treaty October 31, The National Center for Public Policy Research is unveiling

a new website providing educational resources on the Law of the Sea Treaty (also known by the acronyms LOST and UNCLOS).

“The Law of the Sea Treaty is a terrible deal for the U.S. It would threaten our sovereignty, place a significant portion of the world’s resources under the control of a U.N.-style body, and complicate our efforts to apprehend terrorists on the high seas by subjecting our actions to review by an international court unlikely to render decisions favorable to the U.S.,” said National Center Vice President David Ridenour.
“The Law of the Sea Treaty would help radical environmentalists achieve what they haven’t been able to achieve through legislation,” Ridenour added. “Greenpeace has said ‘the benefits of the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea are substantial, including its basic duties for states to protect and preserve the marine environment and to conserve marine living species.’ The Natural Resources Defense Council challenged the Navy’s use of ‘intense active sonar,’ arguing that it violates the treaty by posing a danger to marine life. The Navy ultimately agreed to scale back use of this technology. The Law of the Sea Treaty has also been used by Australia and New Zealand in an attempt to shut down an experimental blue fin tuna fishing program and by Ireland in an attempt to shut down a plant on land in England.”

The website, the United National Law of the Sea Treaty Information Center, contains a collection of research papers, commentaries and blog entries about LOST from a variety of think-tanks, scholars, opinion writers and bloggers. It can be accessed at

http://www.unlawoftheseatreaty.org.

“Although the Law of the Sea Treaty has been around for decades — the National Center for Public Policy Research first worked on it in 1982 — relatively few people know much about it,” said Amy Ridenour, president of the National Center for Public Policy Research. “The United Nations Law of the Sea Treaty Information Center website is designed to help correct this.” The National Center for Public Policy Research is a non-partisan, non-profit educational foundation based in Washington, D.C.

It is more important now then ever before to contact your senators and urge them to oppose the Law of the Sea Treaty.

If you are still not satisfied with your level of knowledge concerning “LOST” then we recommend you go to:

http://www.jbs.org/node/2935

….. and read the article entitled:

“Sink the Law of the Sea Treaty!” by William Norman Grigg.

Look, this is serious stuff. And we are not hearing about it in the MSM. A good question is… WHY?

We here at Hurricane Alley urge you to educate yourself and do so quickly. First, however, get on the phone, or send an e-mail, or a fax, to the offices of your US Senators and ask them to vote no on the Law of the Sea Treaty. As of this moment, we only know it will come before the entire Senate sometime before the end of the year.

Every so often, we get a chance to use our constitutional rights for good. This is one of those times.

Longstreet

Filed under:

Advertisements

One Response

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Caitlyn said, on April 27, 2008 at 7:50 pm

    If your information was correct, then I assume that all of the Chiefs of Naval Operations who have served in that position since 1967 wouldn’t support US accession to the convention, nor would all of the Commandants of the Coast Guard since the 1970s. But your information is faulty, and all those line officers do support the convention.

    The LOS Convention is primarily an agreement among nations about the rules that apply to ocean use and about the extent of national sovereignty seaward. For example, the Convention moved our territorial sea from 3 nautical miles to 12, created a 200 nautical mile zone in which we control economic exploitation and, once recognized by a committee of geologists, our continental shelf as far as 600 nautical miles or more north of Alaska (and even more territory in the Sea of Alaska, the Atlantic and the western Pacific).

    At the same time, the rules adopted in the Convention define and update the rules of the road that we adopted in 1958. The update assures that states have high seas freedoms beyond 12 miles from shore and free transit through international straits even when in the territorial seas of other states.

    Beyond that, the convention recognizes the sovereign immunity of warships and ships on government service. It also recognizes our authority to prohibit foreign vessels from conducting military activities within our own territorial sea, including using force, if necessary, to force submarines to surface and offending vessels to leave our seas.

    Oil companies want the US to join the convention because they need international recognition of national jurisdiction over the extended shelf before they can obtain debt financing or foreign partners.

    Maritime shipping and subsea cable owners want the US to join the convention because it provides protections for them when operating in foreign territorial seas and laying and maintaining cables on the continental shelf.

    In 1983, President Reagan identified six areas that had to be corrected in the convention, all in the section dealing with deep seabed mining. He issued an order that in all other areas the United States would abide by the Convention. If he had objected to the rest of the convention, then he would not have issued that order.

    I can’t fathom where you got the idea that the “Enterprise” would regulate all uses of the sea. There is no entity that does that. The International Seabed Authority issues regulations and recognizes exclusive rights to mine deposits on the deep seabed beyond national jurisdiction, but its authority extends only to minerals and no other activity. Even there, once the US joins we will have a permanent seat on the council and a veto over the adoption of amendments, the adoption or modification of regulations and the financial decisions of the Authority. The “Enterprise”, when it is created, will be a joint-venture operation subject to the same rules and oversight as the private miners. Thanks to the changes made in accordance with Reagan’s directions, the last vestiges of decision-making authority have been moved from the Assembly of all members to the Council where the US has a veto over the most critical issues and can block all other substantive decisions with the aid of two like-minded council members.

    I could provide you with a ton of relevant information, but I’ll hold myself to one link. This is by RAdm. William Schachte, a US combat officer in Viet Nam (Swift Boats) who later earned his law degree and worked in the JAG Corps. His paper, “The Unvarnished Truth” addresses most of the security related misinformation that has been spread about the convention by a small group of Washington DC-based think tanks.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: