Posted on 09/10/2007 12:03:48 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued
Angering conservatives on the critical issue of national sovereignty, the Bush Administration is supporting a plan by Senator Joseph Biden, D-De., to stage a Foreign Relations Committee hearing on September 27 in order to usher the controversial U.N. Law of the Sea Treaty to the Senate floor for a quick vote. Biden, chairman of the committee and a Democratic presidential candidate, was a leader of the effort to defeat Bush’s pick of John Bolton as U.S. Ambassador to the U.N.
Conservatives are hoping the facts about President Reagan’s rejection of the measure, mainly on the grounds that it was a socialist trap for America that subjected U.S. companies to a global tax, can eventually persuade 34 Senators to block its ratification.
The treaty has never come to the Senate floor for a vote because of strong opposition from conservatives. Senator Jesse Helms, longtime chairman of the Foreign Relation Committee, blocked it for many years. Then-Senate Republican Majority Leader Bill Frist also kept it away from the Senate floor, insisting that its flaws be exposed and studied by the Senate. Senator James Inhofe, R-Ok., did so, becoming the leading Senate opponent of the pact. But the liberal Democratic takeover of Congress in 2006 moved the measure,formally titled, the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), up for action. Biden and his advisor and staff director, Antony Blinken, a former Clinton Administration official, have decided that now is the time to act. They are counting on big corporations and the U.S. Navy to make the case for UNCLOS.
(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...
This is open borders from the oceans, and its logic is waterlogged.
Is this a treaty?
So Jorge Arbusto is giving away our right to defend ourselves.
Yes, one that was proposed decades ago and never confirmed. Globalists are trying to get it rammed through again.
No, it's a travesty.
Well, we’ve been waiting for this one to rear it’s ugly head. Bush pushing another democrat proposal.
Duncan Hunter:
#13. Do you support the Law of the Sea Treaty? If not, will you revoke it if it passes before you take office?
Hunter: No, in the past I have opposed the Law of the Sea Treaty. I expect that to continue. There are serious issues of sovereignty involved, and as in the past, I have no intention of letting US sovereignty be eroded.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1880600/posts
“Its provisions give Third World countries “preferential treatment at the expense of American interests and force U.S. mining firms to share their profits and provide free mine sites to a new U.N. agency.”
“The “dispute resolution” provisions of the treaty are defective. The treaty includes tribunals and panels to resolve disputes.”
“The U.N. bureaucracy created by the treaty will inevitably “grow” over the years.”
Just more evidence that internationalists have gotten control over Jorge that he’d favor this further surrender of US sovereignty to the corrupt UN and as yet uncreated, new international tribunals. It also would grant the UN taxing authority over ocean mining activities.
The key quote from the article:
“Ultimately, it is the U.S. Navy, not a treaty, “that will guarantee American interests.” The U.S. has “protected its navigational interests for over 200 years without a comprehensive law of the sea treaty.”
Why are Jorge and others so eager to cede any part of US sovereignty to, in effect, third world nations and the corrupt UN?
I did’nt think I would ever ever say that I’m beginning to despise Prez Bush too. There, I said, it, WOW
Open borders, pro-amnesty, anti-sovereignty...DUmocrats wouldn’t be able to get that much out of any of their own candidates!
True, but conservatives were able to stop amnesty with Bush in the White House. They forced him and his cronies in the Senate to back down. That would not have been the case had a Democrat been President.
Here is a link to the UNCLOS Treaty contents.
unclos.htm
Address:http://www.univie.ac.at/RI/KONTERM/intlaw/konterm/vrkon_en/html/doku/unclos.htm
The treaty calls for "financial transfers to developing states and even "peoples who have not attained full independence or other self-governing status" - code for groups such as the PLO. Whatever changes the treaty has undergone, a constant has been Third World pressure for financial transfers."
The above excerpt from "Sink the Law of the Sea Treaty" by Doug Bandow at:
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=2567
The supporters of this treaty also deserve to have it folded five ways and shoved where the sun don’t shine.
Leave it to that slimy slug, Biden to bring this up again.
And shame on George W. Bush for supporting it. I don't know the man I voted for as governor of my state and president of my country at all anymore.
Have you ever noticed how some of the devastating national security or sovereignty issues that blow his pet projects out of the water...are never even acknowledged by this President??
And then the few he does, he answers that some "assurance" in some scrap of paper, by some party or other, makes it all go away.
He thinks the American People are fools.
Sigh.
Ping
Unfortunately, the one man who would drive a stake through its heart is in the House, not the Senate.
This is horrid, all the way around. What is Bush thinking?
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.