The ENTIRE TREATY can be viewed here...
http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/closindx.htm
The Law of the Sea Treaty, formally known as the Third United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, or UNCLOS III, was adopted in 1982. Its purpose is to establish a comprehensive set of rules governing the oceans and to replace previous U.N. Conventions on the Law of the Sea, one in 1958 (UNCLOS I) and another in 1960 (UNCLOS II), that were believed to be inadequate.
Negotiated in the 1970s, the treaty was heavily influenced by the "New International Economic Order," a set of economic principles first formally advanced at the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). That agenda called for "fairer" terms of trade and development financing for the so-called under-developed and developing nations.
Another way the New International Economic Order has been described is "redistributionist." NEW WORLD ORDER!
The Law of the Sea Treaty calls for technology transfers and wealth transfers from developed to undeveloped nations. It also requires parties to the treaty to adopt regulations and laws to control pollution of the marine environment. Such provisions were among the reasons President Ronald Reagan rejected the treaty in 1982. As Edwin Meese, U.S. Attorney General under President Reagan, explained recently, "...it was out of step with the concepts of economic liberty and free enterprise that Ronald Reagan was to inspire throughout the world."
In additional to the economic provisions, the treaty also establishes specific jurisdictional limits on the ocean area that countries may claim, including a 12-mile territorial sea limit and a 200-mile exclusive economic zone limit.
Some proponents of the treaty believe that the treaty will establish a system of property rights for mineral extraction in deep sea beds, making the investment in such ventures more attractive.
Notwithstanding concerns raised about the Law of the Sea Treaty - and there have been many - the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee recommended U.S. accession to the treaty in a unanimous vote in March 2004.
Thirty-one senators signed on to a letter by Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) opposing ratification of the United Nations’ Law of the Sea Treaty, potentially dooming the pact that opponents say compromises U.S. sovereignty.
In the letter to Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), the senators acknowledge Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry’s (D-Mass.) ratification push and vow to vote against the treaty.
“By its current terms, the Law of the Sea Convention encompasses economic and technology interests in the deep sea, redistribution of wealth from developed to undeveloped nations, freedom of navigation in the deep sea and exclusive economic zones which may impact maritime security, and environmental regulation over virtually all sources of pollution,” the Republicans wrote.
“To effect the treaty’s broad regime of governance, we are particularly concerned that United States sovereignty could be subjugated in many areas to a supranational government that is chartered by the United Nations under the 1982 Convention,” they added. “Further, we are troubled that compulsory dispute resolution could pertain to public and private activities including law enforcement, maritime security, business operations, and nonmilitary activities performed aboard military vessels.”
Nebraska Republican Mike Johanns was the latest to sign on, leaving the treaty — which needs two-thirds of the Senate for ratification — just three votes away from being blocked.
Heritage Action is targeting Sens. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), Thad Cochran (R-Miss), Bob Corker (R-Tenn), Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) to similarly secure promises of a “no” vote.
McCain, however, has supported the treaty along with Sens. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine).
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/07/12/treaty-overboard-just-three-more-no-vows-needed-to-block-law-of-the-sea/
http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/closindx.htm
The Law of the Sea Treaty, formally known as the Third United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, or UNCLOS III, was adopted in 1982. Its purpose is to establish a comprehensive set of rules governing the oceans and to replace previous U.N. Conventions on the Law of the Sea, one in 1958 (UNCLOS I) and another in 1960 (UNCLOS II), that were believed to be inadequate.
Negotiated in the 1970s, the treaty was heavily influenced by the "New International Economic Order," a set of economic principles first formally advanced at the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). That agenda called for "fairer" terms of trade and development financing for the so-called under-developed and developing nations.
Another way the New International Economic Order has been described is "redistributionist." NEW WORLD ORDER!
The Law of the Sea Treaty calls for technology transfers and wealth transfers from developed to undeveloped nations. It also requires parties to the treaty to adopt regulations and laws to control pollution of the marine environment. Such provisions were among the reasons President Ronald Reagan rejected the treaty in 1982. As Edwin Meese, U.S. Attorney General under President Reagan, explained recently, "...it was out of step with the concepts of economic liberty and free enterprise that Ronald Reagan was to inspire throughout the world."
In additional to the economic provisions, the treaty also establishes specific jurisdictional limits on the ocean area that countries may claim, including a 12-mile territorial sea limit and a 200-mile exclusive economic zone limit.
Some proponents of the treaty believe that the treaty will establish a system of property rights for mineral extraction in deep sea beds, making the investment in such ventures more attractive.
Notwithstanding concerns raised about the Law of the Sea Treaty - and there have been many - the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee recommended U.S. accession to the treaty in a unanimous vote in March 2004.
Thirty-one senators signed on to a letter by Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) opposing ratification of the United Nations’ Law of the Sea Treaty, potentially dooming the pact that opponents say compromises U.S. sovereignty.
In the letter to Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), the senators acknowledge Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry’s (D-Mass.) ratification push and vow to vote against the treaty.
“By its current terms, the Law of the Sea Convention encompasses economic and technology interests in the deep sea, redistribution of wealth from developed to undeveloped nations, freedom of navigation in the deep sea and exclusive economic zones which may impact maritime security, and environmental regulation over virtually all sources of pollution,” the Republicans wrote.
“To effect the treaty’s broad regime of governance, we are particularly concerned that United States sovereignty could be subjugated in many areas to a supranational government that is chartered by the United Nations under the 1982 Convention,” they added. “Further, we are troubled that compulsory dispute resolution could pertain to public and private activities including law enforcement, maritime security, business operations, and nonmilitary activities performed aboard military vessels.”
Nebraska Republican Mike Johanns was the latest to sign on, leaving the treaty — which needs two-thirds of the Senate for ratification — just three votes away from being blocked.
Heritage Action is targeting Sens. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), Thad Cochran (R-Miss), Bob Corker (R-Tenn), Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) to similarly secure promises of a “no” vote.
McCain, however, has supported the treaty along with Sens. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine).
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/07/12/treaty-overboard-just-three-more-no-vows-needed-to-block-law-of-the-sea/
Senate Poised to Give the UN Control Over Everything About the Oceans by Ratifying LOST ratification vote is possible as early as June 2012.
http://www.votervoice.net/core.aspx?AID=972&Screen=alert&IssueId=28745&APP=GAC&SiteID=-1&VV_CULTURE=en-us
GAFFNEY: False-flag operation on LOST Treaty would compromise U.S. sovereignty, not enhance it.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/14/false-flag-operation-on-lost/
Stop the UN's Law of the Seas Treaty
http://www.dailypaul.com/237468/stop-the-uns-law-of-the-seas-treaty
No comments:
Post a Comment
Don't Troll, if you can't add anything helpful, don't post.