Scuttle the Law of the Sea Treaty

 

 

Scuttle the Law of the Sea Treaty!

The Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) is another grand scheme of the United Nations. LOST would give control of roughly 70 percent of the Earth's surface to the U.N., establishing rules which would govern the use of the world's oceans. LOST is back, and on a fast track for ratification because the Bush Administration is now calling for accession to this convention. We have stopped LOST several times in the past, and we should be able to stop it again, with enough outcry.

It's important to remember the United Nations is not a country or government. It is a private organization that tries to tell sovereign nations when to jump, and how high, under threat of military intervention.

For an excellent education on the legal consequences of treaties on domestic Americans, please read Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957), a Supreme Court case very relevant to the issue of international treaties. As Justice Black opined in this case, under our U.S. Constitution, our civil liberties cannot be subordinated by a treaty, stating:

"It would be manifestly contrary to the objectives of those who created the Constitution, as well as those who were responsible for the Bill of Rights - let alone alien to our entire constitutional history and tradition - to construe Article VI as permitting the United States to exercise power under an international agreement without observing constitutional prohibitions. The court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty."

The LOST convention, part of the United Nation's redistributionist agenda known as the "New International Economic Order," was cobbled together in the 1970s to benefit Third World countries wanting to fine and punish the wealth and technological advantages of the industrialized West.

For instance, a seabed mining company would be required to pay a $250,000 application fee for access to a mining site and for a bonus site the International Seabed Authority (ISA) could utilize for its own mining efforts. That corporation would have to pay an annual royalty fee of $1 million (up to 7 percent of annual profits) and agree to "principles" that guide the use and distribution of mining and navigational technology. That corporation would be unable to file suit, but must rely upon its country of origin to address its concerns before the ISA. It should be noted here that the United States would have one vote out of 140, and no veto power, as it has on the U.N. Security Council.

Former President Ronald Reagan torpedoed LOST in 1982 as it conflicts with the basic free market principles of private property, free enterprise, and competition. Former President William Clinton floated a revised version to the U.S. Senate in 1994. The Senate refused to ratify it, and the U.S. provisional participation expired in 1998. The treaty bobbed back up in 2004 under the sponsorship of Senator Richard Lugar, R-IN, (then-Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee). It was again sunk, this time by then-Senate Majority Leader, Bill Frist, R-TN.

Apparently hoping to take full advantage of the power shift in D.C, President George W. Bush has announced his intention to salvage LOST. This decision was immediately and forcefully opposed by conservative grass-roots organizations such as Eagle Forum, the Center for Security Policy, the Leadership Institute, the Free Congress Foundation, and the Heritage Foundation.

President Bush claims the U.S. military sought reintroduction of LOST, as it would place 12-mile territorial limits on other nation's claims to coastal waters. Perhaps our military has not read the restrictions and regulations the treaty would impose on intelligence and submarine maneuvers in territorial waters. Or, perhaps the American people face a graver threat than traitors in Congress.

Action to take:

The Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) remains a seriously flawed document, designed to transfer wealth and technology from industrialized states to those of the Third World. It is anathema to our Founding Principles and will threaten our national sovereignty.

     

  1. Contact the leadership and members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Senator Joseph Biden is the Chair, and Senator Richard Lugar is the Ranking Republican. 

    You can write the committee at: 439 Dirksen Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510

    You can call the committee at 202-224-4651, or fax it at 202-224-0836.

     

  2. Contact your Senators by going to www.thomas.gov. 

     

  3. Contact Senator Mitch McConnell, Senate Minority Leader. Senator McConnell leads a block of 49 Republican votes - we only need 34 to stop LOST. Pressure on Senator McConnell is one of our best chances to stop this treaty. 

     

  4. Contact the White House by going to www.whitehouse.gov/contact/.Tell these guardians of We The People that you categorically oppose the Lost of the Sea Treaty for the following reasons:
       

    • LOST accession exceeds the Senate's Constitutional authority, as the Senate may not obligate the United States and its citizens to an international agreement that contravenes our Constitution. 

       

    • LOST seeks to redistribute wealth and technology to irresponsible Third World governments with a history of corruption and squandering foreign aid. 

       

    • LOST seeks such financial transfers even to "peoples who have not attained full independence or other self-governing status." Can anyone spell P-L-O? 

       

    • LOST creates a complicated multinational bureaucracy that would be highly politicized, potentially discriminatory against Americans, and a subsidized competitor. 

       

    • LOST mandates transfer of mining technologies to Third World companies if these Third World competitors are "unable to obtain" desired equipment commercially. 

       

    • LOST's mining scheme cannot guarantee that seabed mining will ever be commercially viable. 

       

    • LOST contains no transparent system for recognizing mine sites and resolving disputes. 

       

    • LOST's provisions which could be considered beneficial (provisions regarding the environment, resource management, and rights of transit) reflect what is already customary international law - so there is no need to ratify the treaty. 

       

    • LOST's provision restricting and regulating intelligence and submarine maneuvers would achieve what the Russians (navy rusting in port) and the Chinese (no blue water naval capability) cannot. 

       

    • LOST accession by Brazil, China, India, Malaysia, North Korea, Pakistan, and others has not prevented these countries from making ocean claims deemed excessive by others. 

       

    • LOST does not define the "military activities" exempted from control. 

- Admiral Michael G. Mullen, the vice chief of naval operations, states a LOST tribunal could rule adversely and harm U.S. "operational planning and activities, and our security."

- Further, Admiral Mullen warned that treaty ratification did not "suggest that countries' attempts to restrict navigation will cease once the United States becomes a party to the Law of the Sea Convention (Treaty)."

- Free passage on the seas would be problematic at best if the power of the U.S. Navy was anchored by LOST.

- International law did not prevent North Korea from seizing the USS Pueblo in 1988, and approval of LOST would offer no real additional protection.

Phone calls and letters are the most effective way to contact your elected representatives.

E-mails and faxes are many times ignored. Members of Congress have been changing their e-mail addresses and fax numbers when we send out alerts. If you prefer, though, you can send an e-mail by going to each member's website at www.thomas.gov.

Alternatively, you may phone the United States Capitol switchboard at 202-224-3121. A switchboard operator will connect you directly with the Senate office you request.

If you choose to write, and do not know your Senators' mailing addresses, you may simply address your letters as follows:

Office of Senator (Name) United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510

Send this message to at least ten more people! APC is now offering you a quick and easy way to multiply your efforts and help win more battles! Simply click here to send this APC Action Alert to up to TEN of your friends! It's fast, it's easy and most of all, it's extremely effective in killing oppressive policies!

Do Yourself and the Nation a Favor - Expose the NAIS Lie!

If you can believe USDA, over 385,000 premises have registered with their National Animal Identification System (NAIS). These Americans all registered voluntarily, of course. After all, the USDA assures us the NAIS is a purely "voluntary State-Federal-Industry partnership (view here) designed to: 1) Protect your premises and your livelihood; 2) Reduce hardships caused by an animal disease outbreak or other animal health event in your community; and 3) Protect your access to markets."

Unfortunately, none of this is true. The USDA does not specify how many Americans were registered without their knowledge. The USDA does not admit how much money they've spent with various entities that have solicited registrations. And the USDA does not acknowledge that many registrations have been coerced so producers can participate in 4-H events, county fairs, and other shows.

When the NAIS was introduced in April, 2005, the USDA claimed that by tagging every animal in the United States with a unique ID, containing an RFID chip, they could track every food animal in the nation 24/7. This, they claimed, would enable USDA to identify points of disease outbreak within 48 hours. This, in turn, would protect producers from loss of sales due to consumer fears, and ultimately protect the consuming public by intercepting unsafe product before it hits store shelves.

Again, nothing in this program would achieve what is claimed. USDA's claims are pure hogwash. All the NAIS claims and literature are pure sleight-of-hand, designed to distract you from the true purpose and effect of the program. The truth is, as admitted by USDA Undersecretary Bruce Knight in a press interview a couple of years ago, the government wants to "know where the food is." The government needs this information to control your productivity and access to market, as the United States slides into "economic integration" with the rest of North, Central, and South America.

Many groups and individuals across the nation have sprung up to oppose implementation of the NAIS, and continue to do so even now that USDA claims the program is purely "voluntary." You see, we've heard assurances from the government before about "voluntary" programs. Can anyone spell "IRS?"

USDA's NAIS is a complete scam. The USDA cannot protect your premises or livestock from disease. The USDA cannot prevent an animal disease outbreak. The USDA cannot guarantee your access to market. The USDA cannot eliminate contamination in packing plants. The USDA cannot safeguard your personal information (view here); indeed, the government has no duty to protect information you give them voluntarily. Finally, the USDA cannot provide any information about how a person can withdraw from this "voluntary" program. What?

Well, that was before Carol and Calvin Whittaker of Idaho found their premises had been registered when they renewed their brand registration. For months, the Whittakers were told by both the Idaho Department of Agriculture and the USDA that nothing could be done. But within days of the Whittaker's plight being publicized, the USDA agreed to develop a program whereby a person's registration could be removed from the "voluntary" NAIS database.

Action to take:

We now have a golden opportunity to separate fact from fiction. Let's all poke Big Brother in the eye!

     

  1. You can, and should, find out if your premises have been registered by contacting your state NAIS coordinator. 

     

  2. If your premises are registered, and you don't want them to be, you must write a letter (please send via certified mail) to your state NAIS coordinator. 

     

  3. Formally request your premises registration be removed from the NAIS database. The state coordinator must then advance your request to the USDA. 

When USDA removes your name from their database they notify your state NAIS coordinator. It is the state coordinator's responsibility to notify you that your registration has been removed.

The Liberty Ark Coalition is monitoring the process to measure the time required to complete the removal process, and any bureaucratic obstacles encountered.

Send this message to at least ten more people! APC is now offering you a quick and easy way to multiply your efforts and help win more battles! Simply click here to send this APC Action Alert to up to ten of your friends! It's fast, it's easy and most of all, it's extremely effective in killing oppressive policies!

Visit the American Policy Center 70 Main Street Suite 23 Warrenton, Virginia 20186

 

 

Copyright © 2007 Freedom.org. All