"Blue Hulls
Asked about the possible development of a squad of "Blue Hulls" to police the world's oceans as a marine equivalent of U.N. "blue helmets," Leitner said while not specifically spelled out in the LOST, it's very likely.
The problem is "there's nothing limiting the International Seabed Authority from going out and attempting to raise a navy or have contributing member states contribute vessels or act on behalf of the Authority to enforce its rules," he explained.
Leitner said the "blue hull" concept came from a report written by the Center for Naval Analysis in 1993, at the time of the earlier negotiations. The Center is a "gold-plated think-tank," funded by tax dollars, but is not a government agency.
"One of the things the Center recommended was that in the post-Cold War era – when we had a relatively large Navy before Clinton dismantled most of it – was an operational mission for the Navy." The idea was for the Navy to donate vessels and crew to the Seabed Authority "to assist them in enforcing their judgments and rules."
"So there were these two things. The think-tank for the Center for Naval Analysis writes a report suggesting this, and you look in the treaty and there's absolutely nothing prohibiting that from happening. And in fact if they ever got the U.S. into the treaty, I think there's a very good chance that they would actually do something like this. So it's not required or specifically spelled out, but it's possible and people have been thinking about it and actually suggesting it."
Taxing matters
While not having specific authority to send American citizens a tax bill, a very large revenue stream will be generated by American companies for the International Seabed Authority.
The Enterprise is the operating arm of the Authority and would be the part "that will actually go out and do something active to generate additional capital," Leitner explained. The revenue flow would come from the fees "just for a simple permit," for activities on the continental shelf beyond national jurisdiction, beyond the 200-mile limit. A company would also have to pay royalties on the sale of extracted resources, and the royalties and all payments would go to the International Seabed Authority.
As a by-the-way, Leitner added that the annual capitalization of the International Seabed Authority is required from all signatories of the treaty, and it's based on the U.N. formula of 25 percent for the U.S.
"So basically the United States will pay at least 25 percent of the cost of the Seabed Authority – that's required as part of the price of admission to the treaty," he observed. "
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1103893/posts? In a recent meeting with conservative leaders, President Bush, when asked, said he new nothing about the treaty.hmmmm....somehow, I don't believe that.
Seems to me that the professed ignorance of this NAFTA, FTAA, WTO, GATT, amnesty-loving White House about this latest U.N./globalist/anti-freedom outrage is right in character based on their performance to date.
I'm to believe that a major piece of legislation is moving on the Hill and the WH knows nothing of it? No way that's possible.