Legislative Action Alert: Law of the Sea Treaty is not good for the U.S.

It seems there are U.S. Officials who want to act disloyal with harmful effects to the United States and Americans. With the unfortunate condition of individuals in the U.S. government, who choose to break their oath to the U.S. Constitution and be anti-America seeking some kind of global government, surely as Congress is in session Americans have to worry about bad actions being taken against them and the Nation by their own Congressmen and Presidential Administration. It is today, May 23, 2012 that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and the Navy Admiral Chief spoke before the Senate on Foreign Relations Committee to suggest the Senate ratify an international Treaty — the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) (also called the Law of the Sea Convention — called by those who want you to think its just a friendly little convention rather than one of those binding, entangling, U.S. infringing Treaties).

Here are some of the affronted facial promotions for LOST that they want conveyed to you to make you think that it is a good thing just a Treaty to get along with the “international community”.

— LOST is an opportunity (that if not taken now will be well…lost) to “get in on the deal” where 162 other Nations are already LOST members and if not then these 162 other Nations will just go ahead with plans about divvying up the oceans resources

—-LOST will give the U.S. a seat at the table for influence and show the U.S. as a responsible player that makes the U.S. an example of good conduct when then the U.S. calls other foreign Nations to requirements about abiding international laws and obligations

—- LOST provides navigational Rights to provide better National Security — this being the NAVY chief’s argument — that the UN will “allow” the US Navy to police the world against things like drug trafficking, arms dealing, nuclear proliferation.

—- LOST is a plus for commercial, business interests of getting resources from the ocean — Lockheed Martin was sited as a company that wants LOST — Lockheed Martin is a CFR global friendly company that sees a future of “global security” rather than just U.S. security

What Backers of the Treaty won’t tell you about is the detailed wording in the Treaty that has the U.S. just acceding and giving up its current ownership wealth of its vast resources of 200 miles from shoreline (including inland waterways) and having all such resources coming under UN control and authority.

Since 1982 when then-president Ronald Reagan refused to sign the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, better known as the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST), it has been kept on a legislative backburner awaiting a ratification vote in the U.S. Senate. Suddenly in early May, both Senator John Kerry (another progressive fixture in the US Congress who doesn‘t belong), Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Leon Panetta, Secretary of Defense, both announced that they were in favor of getting LOST ratified this year. According to some pundits, Kerry would have already scheduled hearings on LOST, but postponed them to avoid hurting the chances of key LOST supporter, Senator Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), in his primary face-off with tea-party-backed Richard Mourdock It turns out that Lugar lost anyway, Lugar’s globalist un-American RINO attribute is on display here with his support of LOST.

At this point, it’s hard to predict when a ratification vote might occur. We have to expect it could occur as early as June and as late as a lame-duck session after the elections in November.

Most of the opposition to LOST is based on opposition to its creation of the International Seabed Authority (ISA), which has been established to administer the natural resources of the seabeds and ocean floor. If the United States ratifies LOST, American entrepreneurs who mine the ocean floor would be required to pay substantial royalties to and share technology with the ISA, thus providing a revenue stream for an arm of the UN.

Read this statement from an official UN document, “25th Anniversary of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea,” Oct. 17, 2007:
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea … is perhaps one of the most significant but less recognized 20th century accomplishments in the arena of international law…. Its scope is vast: it covers all ocean space, with all its uses, including navigation and overflight; all uses of all its resources, living and non-living, on the high seas, on the ocean floor and beneath, on the continental shelf and in the territorial seas; the protection of the marine environment; and basic law and order…. The Convention is widely recognised by the international community as the legal framework within which all activities in the oceans and the seas must be carried out. Notice that this UN document, which was posted by the UN’s Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea, reveals that the UN’s understanding of LOST is that it gives the UN authority over everything, over, on, in, and under the oceans and seas of the world. That includes both military and economic uses. That’s why it is so important that the U.S. Senate does not ratify LOST.

And, remember under the UN division that administers LOST, our nation wouldn’t have veto power like we do in the UN Security Council. We’d have just one vote among 163 votes. As it stands anyway, the U.S. is highly disfavored in the UN where the majority of Nations vote against the U.S. all the time, and the UN continues to act against the U.S. Nation in most of its endeavors to impose laws that go against America’s Constitutional laws.

Even worse, Annex 3, Article 13 of LOST sets out the “financial terms of contracts” for the ‘Enterprise’ so the treaty gives the UN’s International Seabed Authority (ISA) the power to levy international taxes, under the guise of “assessments,” “fees,” “permits,” “payments,” or “contributions.” Ultimately, this taxing power would force U.S. corporations involved in seabed mining corporations to pay billions of dollars to the International Seabed Authority. Bureaucrats could then transfer U.S. wealth to so-called “developing countries,” which all too often are socialist, anti-American nations ruled by corrupt dictators. Of course, the treaty claims that this is for “the benefit of mankind as a whole.” And so here we have U.S. dollars being put to a global re-distribution of wealth or global socialism. Herein seems to be the UN’s tipoff that it has a problem with property ownership that is quite Marxist to say the least.

LOST would establish international rules on what is sovereign U.S. territory. Article 2, paragraph 3 of the treaty explicitly states: “the sovereignty over the territorial sea is exercised subject to the Convention and to other rules of international law.” As applied to our country, the phrase “territorial sea” refers to territory, 200 miles out from the shore, presently belonging to the United States. Under LOST, U.S. sovereignty over that territory would be ceded to the UN.

Article 170 of LOST describes the ‘Enterprise’, a UN organ that would that would supervise all scientific, commercial and military use of “the AREA”. “The AREA” being all regions of the world’s oceans, including the seabed..

LOST gives the International Seabed Authority the power to regulate ocean research and exploration, and to impose quotas for deep-sea mining and oil production, or to deny access to such resources altogether, many of which the United States needs for national defense and other important industries.

The International Seabed Authority could require the United States to share intelligence, technology and even military information. LOST could impose restrictions on intelligence-gathering by U.S. submarines, activities that are essential to national defense.

The treaty also would create the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, with the power to judge all disputes and enforce its decisions. There is no guarantee that the United States would have even one judge on this 21-member international court, and it is reasonable to assume that there would be an inherent bias against the United States by the anti-American countries whose representatives would be on the tribunal. And no appeals are allowed. LOST is dangerous to national security.

The main and key thrust of passing this Treaty is to produce a revenue stream for the UN that circumvents its funding coming from legislative bodies in Nations and empower and advance the UN as a viable authority. Collecting royalties on the commercial use of the seabed will leave the UN awash in $$Trillions. Eventually to thrust the UN as the ultimate law and governing body over all humans. Also included in LOST is the use of connectivity of the sea to waterways that will provide the means to expanding UN jurisdiction over rivers, streams that leads to inland UN governance over U.S. soil that conjoins the legislative desires of the UN’s Agenda 21 — to control all global human activity in the name of global warming or global environmental extremism. Your U.S. tax dollars and U.S. resources being funneled to the UN to empower the UN to override the U.S. Constitution.

Those who want to claim that defeating LOST is a desire for isolationism, protectionism or for the U.S. to be a selfish bully are deceitful and misguided socially as this is the knee-jerk label reaction toward Americans and Officials who stand up for the U.S.‘s sovereign well-being, who do have the best interests of the U.S. at heart. America is and should remain the worlds leader, as the example and last place of Freedom. America already embraces international relations, trade and is involved in more foreign affairs then it needs to be doing right now given its domestic condition, is the most generous and giving Nation, takes in the most immigrants worldwid as it currently stands now anyway, as well the U.S. by its exceptional standing, foundations and global involvement already has defacto status of being at the seat of the international community both economically and militarily.

Yes, 162 nations have already ratified LOST, and yes, the United States has already been implementing nearly every chapter of the Law of the Sea Treaty since it went into force in 1994 when 60 nations had ratified it. However, U.S. ratification would provide that final stamp of legitimacy for the UN’s power grab over the oceans and seas and constitute a major step into world government.

A vote FOR LOST is an act by a Senator or govt official to subjugate the U.S. Constitution under UN law or foreign international law and treat the U.S. Constitution as a token document to be ignored and not as the Supreme law of the land (U.S. Land being U.S. soil, 200 miles out of continental shelf and all its waterways). A vote FOR this Treaty will be considered an act of treason and an act to undermine and subvert U.S. authority and well-being to its own affairs.

The LOST Treaty is not good for the U.S. —
Call and write all U.S. Senators (see http://www.congress.org for info) — Let your Senators know that they must not ratify LOST (here is pre-written letter that can be sent)

For added info here are couple articles written on LOST — http://www.heritage.org/research/commentary/2011/07/law-of-sea-treaty-could-cost-us-trillions and


Also Glenn Beck on LOST — http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJRDxpFUElQ

This entry was posted in news national, TEA Party, US House, US Senate and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Legislative Action Alert: Law of the Sea Treaty is not good for the U.S.

  1. The Destructionist says:

    Reblogged this on The Destructionist and commented:
    Here’s news that slid under the radar (for most of us)…

  2. Pingback: Law of the Sea Treaty « Petunias

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s