[foxfield]

Here's a partial list of FR threads on this subject:

• Global Taxation Treaty (UNCLOS, LOST) Comes Before U.S. Senate
• Will Senator McConnell Take on the U.N.'s Seasick Lawyers? (unCLOS)
• LOST and found (u.n. law of sea treaty)
• An Administration LOST at Sea
• LOST At Sea
• Paradise LOST

And some good background information:

• Forest Warden at The Conservative Voice provides a very good summary of the current status of LOST in in his article UN given authority over US Navy.
• Web site Reject The Law Of The Sea Treaty that really nails down all of the problems and concerns.

See text of UNCLOS/LOST at http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/closindx.htm.

The treaty touches on many various subjects and areas of concern, e.g., sovereignty issues, environmental restrictions, royalties (taxes) to be paid to the Seabed Authority, redistribution of wealth to undeveloped countries, sharing of technology, resolution of disputes, and more.

One aspect of the treaty that peaked my interest but has received virtually no attention is the "Enterprise". The treaty would create the "Enterprise", a multinational corporation, wholly owned by the Seabed Commission, to engage in exploration and mining operations for the benefit of the Authority and funded in part by the royalties paid by member states. This is the first time that I can think of that the UN has sought to create a business enterprise that would actually compete with businesses of its member states.

[Scotsman will be Free]

Yeah, and the UN’s “business” would be subsidized by us and private enterprise. They’d end up putting everyone else out of business, because they would not have any overhead(we would pay it) and they would never lose money.

[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

BUMP