Posted on 06/11/2007 9:29:54 AM PDT by processing please hold
Finally, on May 15, 2007, President Bush publicly urged the Senate to “to act favorably on U.S. accession to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea during this session of Congress.” He said that joining “will serve the national security interests of the United States, including the maritime mobility of our armed forces worldwide. It will secure U.S. sovereign rights over extensive marine areas, including the valuable natural resources they contain. Accession will promote U.S. interests in the environmental health of the oceans. And it will give the United States a seat at the table when the rights that are vital to our interests are debated and interpreted." His support, along with that of the Pentagon and State Department, as well as the Navy and Coast Guard, has created the political space to secure the support of 75 to 85 senators—far more than the 67 needed for accession.
(Excerpt) Read more at fpif.org ...
"seat at the table"- this means a seat on the technical committee.
"rights that are vital to our interests"- our rights to the oil on the continentnal margins that are beyond the 200 nautical mile boundry(EEZ).
"debated and interpreted"- the US has spent 20 plus years and lots of money mapping our shelf and margins. This data supports our right to submerged lands that extend beyond the 200 mile EEZ on 60% of our coast, including 600 miles north from the Alaskan coast and sizable distances on the Gulf and Atlantic coasts. If the US does not have a seat on the tech committee, those submerged lands can not be claimed and will fall into the hands Russia, Cuba, Mexico, or become part of the world's commons.
How do the countries vote at the un when it's us doing the asking?
A pisspot country, ran by a despot potentate will have as much power as we do.
I understand that you and others here have your sources of insight on this treaty. OTOH, I have different sources that are infinately more credible. In fact, what I see posted by the anti crowd is mostly mis-info.
Really? And who are your "infinitely more credible sources", Ben? Someone from the DNC or RINO Central?
What do you do when you aren't busy flacking for: (1) the pro-illegal alien/amnesty crowd, or (2) the CFR/NAU anti-US sovereignty elites.
As I did last time, and to show my good faith, I will provide the first link and then you can provide your link/source to dispute my link.
As I have already provided a summary, in my reply above, on the geology and the minerals issue of the treaty, I'll give you the link to an article from a crdible source dealing with that in greater detail.
How are you going to escort them out if the Admirals support the treaty?
I beliebe that the military of this country is still under civilian control. If we don’t ratify the treaty, it doesn’t carry any legal weight under US law. ( like Kyoto). Then US law applies. I believe we claim a 200 mile economic zone.
Congress can vote to extend that at any time. The US Navy and Coast Guard then enforces it. remeber the UN now has Zimbabwe on the Suatinable development commsion, Libya on Human rights, and Iran on disarmament. maybe China will get to run LOTS. NOT...
I fully expect this one to be pushed really hard once he’s gotten his amnesty for criminal illegal invaders.
And: http://townhall.com/columnists/PhyllisSchlafly/2007/05/21/deep-six_the_law_of_the_sea?page=full&comments=true
Sorry these aren't hot links--I've never managed to master that HTML code...
What your problem is I have no idea, and to be truthful, I don't care.
The Law Of Sea Treaty is being pushed and pushed hard now just like the shamnesty bill is, and by the same man...our president.
http://www.un.org/Depts/los/index.htm
http://www.unausa.org/site/pp.asp?c=fvKRI8MPJpF&b=393103
A loud resounding agreed!
Hang on to your box o’ treasure mateys. Captain Boosh is takin’ us down!
Each day, another nightmare. ;(
A non stop assault on the American people by a government that has run amuck.
God, help us!
Perfect expression.
While Phyllis Schlafly may be anti, her opinion is irrelevant in comparison to the admirals/pentagon's support. Gaffney's opposition is nothing compared to the US intelligence agencies' support. The sheer number and credibility of those supporting overwhelms the anti group, who can be characterized as reincarnated Birchers and Dixiecrats plus senile old-timers with a 30-50 year old worldview.
Ahh, you’re a one worlder, Ben, I understand now.
I’m asking because I don’t know, not to argue with you."
It's all of them, samtheman.
Our President has salted his administration with over 200 of the most powerful and well-connected "neo-con" globalists.
These "insiders" are the ones who are working feverishly toward one goal; a one-world socialist government run by (guess who?) themselves.
If you would like to do some further reading, and find out their names and their affiliations, pick up a copy of "The Insiders".
BTW: the appencices also list the corporate members as well.
One thing for sure, the world is getting smaller and smaller.
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.