Posted on 02/16/2005 5:21:47 PM PST by Coleus
I really wish from day one our Founding Fathers instituted term limits. I'm sure it would have caused some problems but in the long run it would have solved many more.
Prominently behind LOST, Senator Lugar.
You can read more about LOST including the senate foreign relations committee report at Sen Dick Lugar (R. Indiana) site:
http://lugar.senate.gov/sfrc/sea.html
On February 25, 2004, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted 19-0 to send the resolution of ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty to the full Senate for advice and consent. The Bush Administration said on February 7, 2002, that there is an urgent need for Senate approval of the Law of the Sea Treaty.
The basic tenets of the treaty have been U.S. policy since first enunciated by President Reagan in 1982. Over the next dozen years the U.S. won in negotiations on the questionable aspects of the treaty, and signed on in 1994. The details are in the President's Message transmitting the treaty to the Senate that may be viewed using Adobe Reader. In October 2003, Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Dick Lugar held two comprehensive hearings on the treaty. The full transcripts of those hearings are part of the 187-page committee report that may be viewed using Adobe Reader.
If Bill Frist wants to be President, he'd better pay attention.
They are empowered with more power than we want them to have. They are drunk with it.
And their quest for even more, knows no bounds.
The thirst and lust for power has Lugar.
The big issue with LOST isn't about the ocean; it's about land use control.
This global bureaucracy will justify control of land use to "protect" the marine environment. It isn't hard to see. Many oceanic species breed in estuaries within the United States. Estuarine health isn't doing very well for a number of reasons (many of which politicized science will conveniently miss). The estuaries are fed by rivers. The rivers are lined with cities.
Marine sanctuaries and global biospheres are model for what is planned for LOST. If all we accomplish is to alter the treaty to gain protection for our military, we will have missed the point.
LOST is a straitjacket fully capable of crippling this nation (which certainly affects its ability to defend itself). That the White House says it knows nothing about it belies the fact that, according to the email I get from ALRA, the White House and Chuck Hagel are the instigators in pushing this treaty through in the dark of night after the Reagan Administration had rejected it out of hand.
Good one, Seadog Bytes!
Makes me think some of my tinfoil hat wearing friends are correct about Bush when I see he will sign the treaty.
The nexus of it is the UN. It is so twisted and intertwined with roads leading in all directions so as to confuse anyone trying to disect it. But disect it people can...if they have the guts to follow it through to where it ends up.
Tell Condi that...in her confirmation she was asked if LOST would be ratified....CONDI SAID YES!!!
This includes the Statue of Liberty, Thomas Jefferson's home at Monticello, the Washington Monument, the Brooklyn Bridge, Yellowstone National Park, Yosemite, the Florida Everglades and the Grand Canyon - to name just a few.
It boils down to controlling us or most likely profiting from us. It's disgusting.
If Bush approves this, we would deserve Hitlery. If we have become so apathetic to allow conservatives to bow to tyranny, we need a wake-up call. Maybe Hill can jolt America more than 9-11. I pray we never have to find out.
How ass-backwards is that? Our symbols of freedom, are in the hands of the very people who are taking our freedoms.
It defies logic, rhyme and reason.
Our governments in this country at all levels are taking our freedoms. We are all fools for thinking we are free. Just try not paying your property tax for a year or two.
"Some elements of the world community are without a doubt worthy of contempt."
I would go further and state the majority are without a doubt worthy of contempt. Most would like nothing better than to end the sovereignty of the United States and begin the income redistribution to the UN.
Then we can tell them what we want. That's why we elected them in the first place, to do our bidding, something they have forgotten.
"None of us can figure out why they support it. At first Bush was against it, but not now."
If I had to venture a guess, it's the administrations way of trying to mend the "fences" broken due to the Iraq war and really, it doesn't matter what their reasons. This will be a very bad thing for us all if signed.
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.