Posted by
Jonathan Cooke on Monday, October 29, 2007 2:44:08 PM
If Bush has his way, U.S. wealth will be redistributed to foreign nations, and the U.S. Navy will be subject to U.N. regulations.
President Bush is dropping the draws of the United States and trying to have the Senate insert the United Nations Convention on Law Of the Sea (UNCLOS). Apart from walking oddly, this would subject the U.S. to oversight, regulation, taxation and legal tribunals held by foreign nations.
UNCLOS is part of the wealth redistribution agenda of the United Nations. It was written by European socialists, for the purpose of the transfer of wealth from modern industrialized Western nations (evil capitalists) into the coffers of the Third World (the guys in the white hats, or turbans at least), as well as nations openly hostile to the United States (white turbans again).
As an expansion of the world-government body it would also effectively give the United Nations direct legislative and economic control of over 70 percent of the surface of the planet. (That's the ocean, folks). That, of course, is not what is written on the box they are trying to sell, but it certainly is in the ingredients. It would seem the President is being distracted by the shiny wrapping paper and not seeing the true motives of the U.N., either that or he really is behind the concept of Global Government such as what appears to be some type of North American Union being blueprinted in the shadowy halls of the Council on Foreign Relations. (Shhhh, don't tell anyone. It's a surprise.)
Wealth Redistribution
There are several reasons why UNCLOS should not be ratified. First, a body of foreign judges, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Seas (it exists already, and has since 1982) would enforce regulations, taxes and fines on American companies pursuing mineral rights in deep seabeds. This money would go directly to a U.N. agency with the United States having little-to-no voice in how that money is used. The "fees" to private enterprise involve a quarter million dollar application fee for any drilling site, a one million dollar yearly "license fee" for each site, then on top of that fully 7% percent of all profits must be transferred directly to the U.N. A tribunal of international judges based in Germany will enforce compliance. One might have expected it to be based in Venezuela or Zimbabwe with such profit grabbing. Still, giving Germans control of too much of anything historically leads to Goose-stepping and rebuilding Poland. Such member nations of UNCLOS that would be helping to regulate American economic interests are not exactly nations with a history of prudent financial management, such as Zimbabwe, Somalia, Nigeria, Uganda, Namibia, Togo, Tanzania, Zambia and Botswana. I would feel more comfortable flying in a C17 loaded with nitroglycerin and a blind pilot trying to land on the roof of a detonator-cap factory than have those nations manage my cash. American oil mining profits would also be transferred to nations that are already oil rich, such as Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Bahrain, Brunei and Kuwait. Nations where you can barely build a basement without fear of it flooding with oil. Of course there is no provision in UNCLOS for those nations to transfer thier existing oil wealth to the United States however. If you take a look at the Money Compass you'll notice the needle is pointing due-"Doah!"
Technology Redistribution
It also would require the United States to share mining and navigational technologies with other nations. For instance, global satellite positioning (GPS) technologies used could have to be shared with China, Russia and other nations that pose a potential threat to the United States. Deep sea mining equipment would also have to be provided to landlocked African desert nations that have no ability to mine the sea floor, or for that matter even get to the beach. In other words, the greedy capitalistic proletariat must give its wealth to the poor oppressed workers of the bourgeoisie, and I thought Marx was long buried. Having to give deep sea mining equipment to countries surrounded on all sides by dirt makes about as much sense as giving an assault rifle to a French infantryman.
Environmental Policy Enforcement
A backdoor to Kyoto? Something's going in the backdoor, that's for certain, and without lubrication. Foreign environmental regulations would also be leveraged over the United States. Other nations would call a Tribunal and impose heavy fines on the United States for perceived infractions of the environmental regulations created purely by the U.N. For instance, an oil leak might be worth, oh, five billion. They set the price, they have the judges, you are at the mercy of foreign judges sitting on a foreign Tribunal. If UNCLOS gets passed the top of Al Gore's head might be in danger of falling off due to the sheer width of the smile he'll have on his face.
Sleeping With The Enemy
Not all nations signed up already are friendly to the United States, such as Russia, China, Cuba and Iran. No, despite what multiculturalistic kumbaya-singing granola-eating tie-dyed hairy hippy hogwash you may have heard, these countries are not our friends. Profits from American deep seabed mining would also be transferred to Muslim nations, many of which are extremely anti-American and/or openly voice hostility to us, such as Iran (99% Muslim), Indonesia (88% Muslim), Algeria (99% Muslim), Egypt (94% Muslim), Yemen (99% Muslim), Djibouti (94% Muslim), Bangladesh (88% Muslim) and Sudan (95% Muslim). I think we are inadvertently funding enough terrorist attacks on ourselves already, do we really need to fund more? Instead of fireman's boots I keep expecting to see donation turbans being passed around intersections any day now.
Military Regulation
I saved this for last. This body of foreign nations would also be able to restrict the passage of U.S. Navy vessels by allowing the filing of paperwork to create exclusion zones. If the U.S. "violated" any of these exclusions zones it would be subject to "penalties". This could be heavy fines, or the escorting of U.S. Navy ships out of territorial waters. I'd pay good money to be a fly on the wall if someone were attempting to escort the U.S. Navy out of somewhere it wanted to be folks, I'd pay real good money to watch that unfold. Anyway, it gets better. In international waters aircraft would be prohibited from taking off or landing. This would mean that the U.S. Navy aircraft carrier fleet would suddenly become the world's most expensive cargo ships in history. To further make the U.S. Navy impotent, UNCLOS also would require submarines in territorial waters to travel on the surface. This would mean the U.S. Navy would be the proud owner of the world’s largest fleet of sitting ducks. Brilliant. Shall we paint our submarine fleet blaze orange, install waterproof speakers, and have them blast Wagner's 'Flight of the Valkyries' as well perhaps? The sheer idiocy of the U.N. astounds me.
Closing Comments
The U.N. has a long history of attempting to impose a new order in the world by creating multi-national laws and have its own "super-state" government impose those laws on all member nations. For instance, the U.N. has for many years been attempting to remove the Second Amendment from the United States Constitution (Right to Bear Arms) in its attempt to ban firearms from the hands of private citizens across the globe. Disarming American citizens is a high priority of the United Nations. You don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to raise your eyebrows at that. I would welcome them to come and try to take my guns, but then I remember Ruby Ridge, and Waco. Maybe I'll not be too loud on that one.
Is it really in the best interests of the United States to outsource a portion, any portion, of its own national sovereignty to a body of foreign nations, many of which despise us? Would it be a good idea to do so even if those foreign nations all loved us and gave us hot cocoa and cookies and read us a bedtime story every night? Fluffy blanket and all. Tucked in too. If the President is able to pressure the United States Senate into ratifying UNCLOS then a piece of American freedom will be sold to European socialists, and freedoms sold are freedoms lost.
Jonathan RF Cooke
29 October, 2007
For more articles ...
[ Go to the main blog of Jonathan Cooke at http://coffee.townhall.com ]
Sources:
"U.N. Wants Global Gun Ban", NewsMax, 27 April 2001
U.N. website, www.UN.org/Depts/los/index.htm
"Law of the Sea Treaty on Fast Track to Ratification", Oliver North - Fox News Blog, 11 OCT 2007