Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

US Senate Gives UN Control Over 70% Of World's Land Mass
WorldNetDaily.com ^ | 2000 | Henry Lamb

Posted on 10/08/2004 2:46:54 PM PDT by Navydog

The U.N. Convention to Combat Desertification was ratified by the U.S. Senate on October 18, but few Senators yet know that it has been ratified. Senator Craig Thomas (R-WY) introduced a package of 34 treaties, all of which were ratified by a show of hands -- no recorded vote.

(Excerpt) Read more at worldnewsstand.net ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; US: Wyoming; Unclassified
KEYWORDS: craigthomas; desertification; henrylamb; propertyrights; senate; treaty; un; wy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last

1 posted on 10/08/2004 2:46:55 PM PDT by Navydog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Navydog

Well, if the UN is in charge everything will be OK.


2 posted on 10/08/2004 2:49:02 PM PDT by RtWngr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Navydog
There is no distinction between federal land and privately owned land when it comes to land use under the jurisdiction of the U.N.

Cold day in hell you third world ah*s!

3 posted on 10/08/2004 2:50:11 PM PDT by rocksblues (Sorry John, we remember and will never forget your treason!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Navydog

Why does this not surprise me?


4 posted on 10/08/2004 2:50:16 PM PDT by OpusatFR (Let me repeat this: the web means never having to swill leftist garbage again. Got it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Navydog
Your link is to a four-year old article.
5 posted on 10/08/2004 2:50:40 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Navydog

Another useless UN treaty that would not stand up to scrutiny.


6 posted on 10/08/2004 2:51:56 PM PDT by demlosers (The FreeRepublic Pajama Press!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OpusatFR

Don't shoot until you see the blue in their helmets.


7 posted on 10/08/2004 2:52:22 PM PDT by boofus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Navydog

4 year old article ?

So, is all the U.S. land now subject to UN rule ?


8 posted on 10/08/2004 2:52:22 PM PDT by stylin19a (Of all the things i have lost in my life, I miss my mind the most.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Navydog

The UN was created by man, it will be destroyed by God.


9 posted on 10/08/2004 2:52:40 PM PDT by Clump
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Navydog

Tinfoil hats on, please.


10 posted on 10/08/2004 2:54:21 PM PDT by RockinRight (John Kerry is the wrong candidate, for the wrong country, at the wrong time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Navydog

You know this article is 4 years old?

Is your beeber stuned?

Is this hugh and series?

Did a moose bite your sister?


11 posted on 10/08/2004 2:54:46 PM PDT by Poohbah (SKYBIRD SKYBIRD DO NOT ANSWER...SKYBIRD SKYBIRD DO NOT ANSWER)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Navydog

This makes no sense. The US Senate has no control over 70% of the world's land mass. How can they give control when they don't have it?


12 posted on 10/08/2004 2:55:03 PM PDT by HitmanLV (I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Navydog

The systematic relinquishing of U.S. sovreignty to the U.N. is enough to make my blood boil! Why do so many people pay so much greater attention to the President, who has relatively little power, than they do to the Congress, who regularly affect our day-to-day lives!?


13 posted on 10/08/2004 2:55:29 PM PDT by TChris (New pajamahadeen operative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Navydog
Withdrawal from the treaty cannot even begin until after three years of participation -- and then another year must pass before withdrawal is recognized by the U.N. -- assuming, of course, that there is some desire in the Senate to withdraw.

They think so? Seems to me all we'd have to tell the U.N. is where to go with their treaty!

That's like saying that the colonists needed the king's persmission slip before they could form their own independent nation.

14 posted on 10/08/2004 2:59:33 PM PDT by Fruitbat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Navydog

Special Report

US Senate Gives UN Control
Over 70% Of World's Land Mass

by Henry Lamb
© 2000 WorldNetDaily.com


globe


The U.N. Convention to Combat Desertification was ratified by the U.S. Senate on October 18, but few Senators yet know that it has been ratified. Senator Craig Thomas (R-WY) introduced a package of 34 treaties, all of which were ratified by a show of hands -- no recorded vote.

Initially, Senator Thomas' office told callers that the Senator had nothing to do with the ratification. On December 8, his office called to explain that Senator Thomas just happened to be on the Senate Floor late in the afternoon of October 18 -- and was asked by the leadership to handle procedurally, the package of treaties. Senator Thomas has asked the Foreign Relations Committee to explain how, and why, the Desertification Treaty was included in the package.

At the recent climate change talks in the Hague, Senator Larry Craig (R-ID) said the treaty had not been ratified, until corrected by one of his staff. Phone calls to Senator Fred Thompson (R-TN), and other Senators, caught staffers off guard: Nobody knew how their boss voted on the ratification. They could not know -- there was no recorded vote.

This treaty was signed by the Clinton administration in 1994. It has been locked up in the Foreign Relations Committee since. Normally, treaties of such monumental importance are debated in committee and then forwarded to the Senate floor for further debate and disposition.

Not this time. The treaty appeared in a package of 34 treaties -- most of which were single-issue treaties with single nations, dealing with stolen vehicles, criminals, and the like. The Desertification Treaty, however, is not a single-issue treaty with a single nation.

This treaty is one of several environmental treaties that emerged from the 1992 U.N. Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro. One of those treaties, the Convention on Climate Change, was ratified in 1992. The Convention on Biological Diversity failed ratification in 1994. The Convention to Combat Desertification was skillfully maneuvered through the Senate to avoid the public reaction which killed the Convention on Biological Diversity.

The Desertification Treaty claims jurisdiction over 70% of the earth's land area -- virtually all of the land that is not covered by the Convention on Biological Diversity. Moreover, this new treaty creates a structure through which all other environmental treaties are supposed to be integrated under a common United Nations implementation regime. A companion treaty is now being developed by the U.N. Commission on Water for the 21st Century. The United Nations is, in fact, creating the structure in international law and, through its extensive bureaucracies, to control the use of all natural resources on earth.

The U.S. Senate ratified the treaty on October 18, 2000 -- whether or not it knew what it was doing. On November 17, the Clinton administration delivered the ratification documents to the United Nations. The United States is now bound by the international law that claims the power to dictate land use in 70% of the earth's land.

The name of the treaty implies that it is concerned about deserts -- in fact, it is concerned about all land use. To combat desertification, the treaty seeks to prevent land use that its enforcers think may lead to desertification. Converting forests to pasture, for example, or pasture to row crops, or crop land to subdivisions, are all uses that may lead to desertification, according to literature produced by the United Nations.

There is no distinction between federal land and privately owned land when it comes to land use under the jurisdiction of the U.N. The U.N. sees its role to be the establishment of policy -- it is up to the participating nations to see that the policy is implemented. The recent rash of land acquisition measures promoted by the administration and Congress seeks to get more land under federal ownership. The vast expansion of regulatory control over land use by all federal agencies makes it easier for the United States to comply with its international obligations under a variety of international treaties. This new treaty extends even further the U.S. obligation to control land use.

According to the treaty itself, no reservations can be included in its ratification (Article 37). The Resolution of Ratification adopted by the Senate contains several reservations -- all of which will be ignored by the United Nations.

Withdrawal from the treaty cannot even begin until after three years of participation -- and then another year must pass before withdrawal is recognized by the U.N. -- assuming, of course, that there is some desire in the Senate to withdraw.

Henry Lamb is the executive vice president of the Environmental Conservation Organization and chairman of Sovereignty International.

Click here to pass this page to a friend.

Visit the Special Report Archives here


Wisdom and Freedom produced by WORLD NEWSSTAND
Copyright © 2000. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
page image by Boogie Jack

15 posted on 10/08/2004 2:59:47 PM PDT by deport ("Because we believe in human dignity..." [President Bush at the UN])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah

I did not post it as current events.


16 posted on 10/08/2004 3:00:40 PM PDT by Navydog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Navydog

Well, isn't that special. Heads should roll over this.


17 posted on 10/08/2004 3:01:11 PM PDT by hershey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Navydog

Now that they are in control of our federal lands, I expect them to send us billions of dollars in aid in order to protect them.


18 posted on 10/08/2004 3:17:48 PM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HitmanNY
I think they are referring to the biozones or such rather deliberately loosely defined description of lands which can be deemed essential for environmental balance.

It's real garbage and the congress should be held to task on hands votes. Ask your congresscritter how they voted?

Congress and all politicians had been real big on global governance because it meant global money in their pockets. Suddenly the globe has discovered that a few billion Muslems and their radical agendas make globalism a whole lot less paletable unless you have a few standing army divisions and an entire airwing overhead as your friends.

Islam has put globalism on the skids folks!

19 posted on 10/08/2004 3:19:42 PM PDT by blackdog (Can we possibly have just one more "Kidz-Bop"?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: farmfriend


20 posted on 10/08/2004 3:29:27 PM PDT by Libertarianize the GOP (Make all taxes truly voluntary)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson