Senators hear how UN Law of the Sea Treaty will cripple national security

Center For Security Policy. ^ | March 25, 2004 | CFSP

[B4Ranch]

The New World Order promoters think the UN is GREAT!

[Boot Hill]

"The land use control gained by this global bureaucracy will gain via LOST will be justified to "protect" the marine environment."

You nailed it, Carry_Okie, that is a gigantic back door into private property rights via treaty. It's got to be stopped.

--Boot Hill

[esta2410]

This is submitted in reply to Mr Gaffney's article in this forum on U.S. Accession to the Law of the Sea. I consider myself to be one of the most conservative people I know, yet I am aghast at the description of the Law of the Sea hearing that Mr Gaffney is writing about - and which he testified at. I attended that hearing, and have attended every recent hearing that has been held on this treaty, including the two hearings that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee held in late 2003. In fact, I was also at the hearing held yesterday (May 12, 2004) by the House International Relations Committee. But it sounds like I attended a different hearing than Mr Gaffney describes.

Mr Gaffney states that this treaty would be bad for the U.S. for a variety of reasons, yet other experts refuted that testimony, including the Vice Chief of Naval Operations (this time) and the Chief of Naval Operations (in previous hearings). Are you saying they don't know what they are talking about when they say they need the U.S. to accede to this treaty to fulfill their national security mission? The State Department as well strongly support sthis treaty. Another expert on the Law of the Sea (John Norton Moore) masterfully & successfully blew every point of yours out of the water in his testimony at various of these Hill hearings. Was he is error, too? The shipping folks have come out in favor of U.S. accession to this treaty, stating they need it for the protection of unarmed commercial vessels. Are they in error too? I understand your concerns - I have them too (enough to spend my time attending these hearings). I despise the United Nations and am very leery of multinational treaties. But I still haven't seen it demonstrated exactly how this particular treaty would be anything but positive for the U.S. To misrepresent the Hearings as you have here in this forum is truly exasperating. I'm tired of liberals claiming that conservatives are one-sided in their arguments, yet that is exactly what I see here in this forum. Over and over witnesses have successfully refuted your Congressional testimony and even said you were "180 out" on your statements and assertions. If you're "going to a knife fight" at least bring a knife and prove your points!

[Paul Ross]

I consider myself to be one of the most conservative people I know

? Jumpin Jim Jeffords! Is that you?!

...yet other experts refuted that testimony, including the Vice Chief of Naval Operations (this time)

Liberal.

and the Chief of Naval Operations (in previous hearings).

Sorry, another liberal. Let's face it, your side can't survive critical dissent. Not to mention that you have systemmatically suppressed it. And flat out lyingly ignored Reagans REAL reasons for terminating the Law of Sea Treaty...which was evidenced by his FIRING all of its negotiators. Permanently. Clearly for BAD FAITH. They were not trustworthy. Clinton brought them back...and here we have the same schmucks palming off the same crap.

Reagan's wonderful and long-overdue approach to curing what ails Foggy Bottom and the Globalist Lobby...needs to be applied again.

Are you saying they don't know what they are talking about when they say they need the U.S. to accede to this treaty to fulfill their national security mission?

Yes. And Damn yes! Let's get a sense of the REAL non-liberal Brass in the Navy ...the actual "fighters" in the Navy...not the blithering idiot desk jockies who never had the Russkies scraping hulls with them.

The State Department as well strongly support sthis treaty.

Big surprise that the communists at Foggy Bottom are still at it.

Another expert on the Law of the Sea (John Norton Moore) masterfully & successfully blew every point of yours out of the water in his testimony at various of these Hill hearings. Was he is error, too?

Not only in error. He lied. As are you. Have you even read what the terms are? Not the promises mind you that the Xlintons hoked up with their fellow world croneys at the UN. Which will be all "non-operative" the second the US surrenders to this piece of filth.

The Authority must never be given suzerainty over US jurisdiction on the High Seas. Ever.

But I still haven't seen it demonstrated exactly how this particular treaty would be anything but positive for the U.S.

Do you at all understand the analogy of the "camel's nose"?

[pissant]

Is this guy still a freeper? LOL

Let’s elect Duncan Hunter. This is our best insurance against any supranational, sovereignty usurping boondoggles.

[Paul Ross]

esta2410 hasn't created an about page. Account created May 13, 2005. Never heard from before this issue...or since.

I think if you show again...the admin moderators need to track you down for the troll you are.

I think it fair to say that not one thing you said of yourself was true.

I don't believe you have a scintilla of conservatism in you.

Nor do you have any likely "concerns" as these asserted:

I understand your concerns - I have them too (enough to spend my time attending these hearings). I despise the United Nations and am very leery of multinational treaties.

Rooooooooooight!

[Paul Ross]

Is this guy still a freeper? LOL

He was never a FReeper. He was a schill for the UN. If you notice...he never ever breaks down a single issue that shows how Frank Gaffney was "refuted". He relies only stacking up supposed "experts" who blathered against Gaffney's points. esta never once mentions what they actually had by way of substance.

Let’s elect Duncan Hunter. This is our best insurance against any supranational, sovereignty usurping boondoggles.

I agree. We need him badly...

[Paul Ross]

LOST is a straitjacket fully capable of crippling this nation (which certainly affects its ability to defend itself).

Agreed.

That the White House says it knows nothing about it

...President Bush explicitly declared that to Gaffney...and I believe Gaffney.

... belies the fact that, according to the email I get from ALRA, the White House and Chuck Hagel are the instigators in pushing this treaty through in the dark of night after the Reagan Administration had rejected it out of hand.

Either Bush is lying point blank to a mainline Reagan national security official...or he is less-than-a-puppet with someone else actually running the show.

I confess I lean heavily to the conclusion that when confronted on the White House's ulterior liberal foreign policy agendas... Bush is not above lying to us. He is not conservative. He feels no common ground.

As for Chuck Hagel...his little run for the Presidency needs a good set of "LOST" torpedoes up his fan-tail....this really needs to be made an issue in the debates Wednesday...

[Admin Moderator]

He made one post in 2004, I would let it go.
Thanks

23 posted on 05/13/2004 12:13:13 PM CDT by esta2410

[Carry_Okie]

As for Chuck Hagel...his little run for the Presidency needs a good set of "LOST" torpedoes up his fan-tail....this really needs to be made an issue in the debates Wednesday...

Fox News is soliciting questions...

[Czar]

"...the White House and Chuck Hagel are the instigators in pushing this treaty through in the dark of night..."

And lets not overlook that little RINO faux conservative weasel, Orrin Hatch of Utah, who has been a prime advocate of LOST.

The 2006 midterms have taught the GOP nothing. They deserve another good whacking from the conservative base in 2008. And they're well on the way...

[James W. Fannin]

Good luck getting Murdoch’s crew to focus on hard news that makes the RINO establishment look bad.

[Carry_Okie]

No kidding.

I just want them to hear it, over and over. They still have to keep the preferences of their audience in mind.

[Paul Ross]

Good luck getting Murdoch’s crew to focus on hard news that makes the RINO establishment look bad.

You got that right. Fox News just had Orrin Hatch as a featured panelist this morning for their debate coverage spin.

They are apparently not going to be so rude as to reveal that these emporers have no clothes...