Stop the U.N. from taxing Americans!

We're beating the United Nations - PLEASE HELP Your efforts are beginning to work!

Our members have sent over SIXTY THOUSAND faxes to ALL 55 Republican Senators, demanding that they REJECT passage of the United Nations "Law of the Sea Treaty" (LOST) -- the OUTRAGEOUS treaty that would impose UN taxes on the American people, and would entail history's biggest and most unwarranted voluntary transfer of wealth AND surrender of sovereignty.

This ridiculous treaty is the SAME treaty that Ronald Reagan REFUSED to sign, but Bill Clinton wanted passed -- and now some Senators are trying to push it through "under the radar" before anyone even notices!

The good news is, our sources on Capitol Hill are telling us that, because the grassroots constituents -- that's YOU and ME -- are making their voices heard to their Senators, the leadership of the Senate is now beginning to say that they might not bring this UN power-grabbing treaty up for a vote.

BUT -- and this is a BIG "but" -- we MUST keep the pressure on the U.S. Senate! So, we're expanding our efforts... we've set up our website so you can send Blast Faxes to EVERY SINGLE MEMBER of the Senate! Click here to fax every U.S. Senator AT ONCE, demanding that they REJECT passage of the anti-American "Law of the Sea" Treaty (LOST):

As we told you last week, the United Nations is at it again -- and this time, they may actually succeed in imposing TAXES on the American people!

U.S. adherence to this treaty would entail history's biggest and most unwarranted voluntary transfer of wealth AND surrender of sovereignty. LOST, which was a product of the Left/Soviet/non-aligned movement agenda of the 1960s and 1970s, created the International Seabed Authority (ISA). ISA is a new supranational organization with unprecedented powers:

The power to regulate seven-tenths of the world's surface area; The power to levy international taxes; The power to impose production quotas (for deep-sea mining, oil production, etc.); The power to regulate ocean research and exploration; The power to create a multinational court system to render and enforce its judgments! Send your Blast Faxes to EVERY SINGLE U.S. Senator NOW: https://secure.cartlight.com/merchant/lost/?afid=max2 LOST was drafted BEFORE -- and without regard to -- the War on Terror, and what the United States must to to wage that war successfully. As a result, U.S. national security interests will be severely undermined by several of the Treaty's provisions:

The sorts of at-sea interdiction efforts central to President Bush's new "Proliferation Security Initiative" (PSI) would be prohibited. Communist China has already been citing the Treaty to object to PSI maritime interdiction and boarding of vessels suspected of weapons of mass destruction or terrorism ties; The treaty effectively prohibits two functions vital to American security: intelligence-collection in, and submerged transit of, territorial waters; Mandatory information-sharing will afford U.S. enemies data that could be used to facilitate attacks on this country (for example, detailed imagery of underwater access routes and off-shore hiding places); Obligatory technology transfers will equip actual or potential adversaries with sensitive and militarily useful equipment and know-how (such as anti-submarine warfare technology). We must stop this treaty. Send your Blast Faxes to EVERY SINGLE U.S. Senator NOW:

The Treaty fails to address, let alone offer solutions to, the most dangerous flashpoints for military conflict facing the world. In fact, Communist China is using its own "unique" interpretation of this Treaty to justify its assertion of control over the strategic South China Sea!

LOST is a prime example of the way left-wing Democrats would like the world to be ordered and run. It is NOT consistent with conservative Republican governing principles and values -- or, more importantly, this country's VITAL INTERESTS.

This treaty MUST BE STOPPED! Send your Blast Faxes to EVERY SINGLE U.S. Senator NOW:

TAKE ACTION: President Reagan first REJECTED the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) in 1982. The U.S. Senate is now being asked to consent to ratification of exactly the same treaty Mr. Reagan found unacceptable!

LOST was a bad idea then; it is an INTOLERABLE one now. The Senate must NOT allow it to become binding on the United States.

Patriotic Americans across the country need to take action IMMEDIATELY. The Senate leadership must be warned that quick action on LOST will further alienate a conservative base that is ALREADY upset about recent GOP immigration and spending policy errors.

Progress on President Bush's priority agenda items (social security, tax reduction, spending restraint, etc.) will be in danger of failing if the Senate become bitterly divided over an issue like LOST. All of our Senators must be contacted IMMEDIATELY and urged to oppose LOST -- or at least not to commit to its ratification until hearings have been held to lay out the case for rejecting this anti-American treaty.

HELP US STOP THIS TERRIBLE TREATY! If we can FLOOD the offices of every single Senator, demanding that they REJECT the Law of the Sea Treaty, we CAN stop this thing dead in its tracks. But we need YOUR help. Send your Blast Faxes to EVERY SINGLE U.S. Senator NOW:

NOTE: As always, you can also send a FREE message to your U.S. Senators, demanding that they OPPOSE LOST - just go to http://www.rightmarch.com/020205.htm now. Be sure to send this Alert to EVERYONE you know who wants to help STOP the United Nations from being able to tax Americans and take away our country's sovereignty. Thank you!

Most are probably aware of this already, but I want to point out an entry from the 1963 Congressional record, Communist Goals. SPREAD THE WORD!!!!

http://www.uhuh.com/nwo/communism/comgoals.htm

11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces

-------

Here is the whole list: CURRENT COMMUNIST GOALS

1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.

2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.

3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.

4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.

5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.

6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.

7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.

8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.

9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.

10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.

11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)

12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.

13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.

14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.

15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.

16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.

17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

18. Gain control of all student newspapers.

19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.

20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.

21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.

22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms."

23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art."

24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.

25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.

26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."

27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a "religious crutch."

28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."

29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.

30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."

31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the "big picture." Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.

32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.

33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.

34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.

35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.

36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.

37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.

38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].

39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.

40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.

41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.

42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use ["]united force["] to solve economic, political or social problems.

43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.

44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.

45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction [over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction] over nations and individuals alike.

Update on the issue...Due to some marxist mole in USN, the DOD and GWB are on wrong side of the fence:

More LOST than Mobility
By Ryan Peterson
FrontPageMagazine.com | May 20, 2005

The political fight over the ratification of the United Nations Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) is threatening to divide those at the highest ranks of the conservative movement. Along with President Ronald Reagan, who rejected the international Treaty in 1982 citing comprehensive flaws, many conservatives today oppose ratification. Yet, curiously, the United States Navy, Department of Defense, and consequently, the Bush Administration have voiced their support for the Treaty and have requested it be sent to the Senate floor. Although their reasoning – namely, that LOST ensures and protects the navigational mobility of U.S. military vessels – is based on important concerns over national security, heedless insistence on this assured mobility has blinded them to the unforeseen secondary effects of signing onto the treaty, such as unprecedented infringements on the sovereignty of the United States.

In 2003 before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, officials from both the Navy and the Department of Defense testified in favor of LOST. Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Negotiations Policy, Mark Esper, argued, “The Administration supports accession to the Convention because the Convention supports navigational rights critical to military operations.” He continued, “These rights are essential to the formulation and implementation of our national security strategy.” Similarly, Admiral Michael Mullen, Vice Chief of Naval Operations of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, corroborated, “Entry into force [of LOST] for the United States will enhance the worldwide mobility our forces require and our traditional leadership role in maritime matters.”

Prima facie, the Administration puts forth a compelling case. In fact, in 1974 America sought negotiations for a treaty on the law of the sea for this strict purpose: to prevent coastal nations from excessive maritime territorial claims, which could in due course impede U.S. navigation. American delegates, then, aimed to codify a set of universal standards for the establishment of territorial waters. In turn, safe passage through these territorial waters, along with international waters, would be granted, all in accordance with customary international law and previous treaties such as the 1958 Conventions on the Law of the Sea. Thus, the fact that the present-day Treaty ostensibly protects navigational mobility is a diplomatic victory in itself.

The Law of the Sea Treaty, however, is significantly more than just a regime of protected navigational mobility. In fact, provisions specific to navigation and the protection thereof make up less than half of the actual treaty. The remaining provisions effectively create a supranational institution, the International Seabed Authority, to govern and regulate the oceans and also a supranational judicial body, the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea, to interpret and enforce the treaty. And still others set forth comprehensive environmental regulations, arbitration panels, codes and procedures for the exploitation of the sea bed, protocol for marine scientific research, and also duties for the redistribution of resources and technology.

It seems rather short-sighted then – and perhaps even a bit disingenuous – to merely evaluate LOST on the benefits it provides regarding navigational freedom. The scope of LOST is considerably more than navigation, and while the Bush administration may tout national security concerns in its rhetoric on mobility, a closer look reveals that the Treaty may in fact undermine U.S. security.

For example, among the more problematic extra-navigational provisions are those that create mandatory dispute settlement mechanisms. According to LOST, recourse to four judicial bodies can be made in the event of a maritime dispute: the International Court of Justice, the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea, or one of two arbitration panels. In all cases, the rulings from these venues are both mandatory and binding. The United States, then, as a signatory to LOST, would be obliged to comply with the decisions of these bodies regarding international ocean policy, which is particularly peculiar in light of the Bush Administration’s insistent avoidance of international courts with compulsory settlement measures.

To anticipate the full effect of these judicial bodies, one only needs to look at a recent ruling by the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea (ITLOS). In December of 2001, the Tribunal (made up of 21 elected arbiters) heard a dispute submitted by Ireland involving the potential pollution of the Irish Sea by a United Kingdom nuclear power plant. Ireland alleged violation by the U.K. of provisions in LOST, specifically provisions obligating to “protect and preserve the marine environment.” According to the Irish Government, the operational discharges of British Sellafield Mox Plant, a facility that recycles plutonium, could potentially cause radiological contamination of Irish Sea. On this basis, they requested provisional measures from the Tribunal to suspend activities of the Mox plant and the transport of hazardous material to and from Sellafield.

The British disputed whether ITLOS had jurisdiction to even adjudicate the matter – one that involved predominately the activities of a power plant on British sovereign soil. As their defense, Britain claimed that the dispute concerned preexisting regional treaties, which provided mechanisms sufficient to resolve the issue. After all, according to Article 282 of the Treaty itself, disputes where other general, regional, or bilateral treaties exhibit competence can be excluded from the settlement mechanisms. Essentially, Britain argued that ITLOS was not competent to interfere in the regional affairs of the European community. This line of reasoning, consistent with the treaty, sought to effectively circumscribe the jurisdiction of ITLOS to those cases that cannot be resolved bilaterally.

ITLOS, however, did not agree. Instead, they ruled that the preexisting regional treaties cited by the British did not “deal with disputes concerning the interpretation and application” of LOST specifically. In its opinion, the Court stated, “since the [Mox] dispute…concerns the application and interpretation of [LOST] and no other agreement, only the dispute settlement procedures under [LOST] are relevant to that dispute.”

The implications of this jurisdictional decision are sweeping. Essentially, the dispute settlement procedures under LOST are relevant to any dispute concerning the interpretation and application of the Treaty. As a comprehensive treaty that entails virtually every aspect of the oceans and maritime activity, there simply is no limit to this jurisdiction. Any nation that contends a violation of LOST by another can file suit and be tried necessarily under one of the four dispute settlement mechanisms – as demonstrated by the Mox Case. What is more, activities on sovereign soil that may eventually affect the oceans do not reside outside of this purview, notwithstanding the countless activities that actually take place on the sea.

Among the many provisions Ireland cited to demonstrate Britain’s culpability was Article 192, which states, “States have the obligation to protect and preserve the marine environment.” The untold generality of this provision could potentially be employed to indict virtually any U.S. activity that may harm the marine environment, including activities on U.S. soil or even those activities of nuclear powered warships. Vital U.S. interests could be left in the hands of international arbiters – most likely ones who hold contempt for the U.S. and its unparalleled military force.

The military’s evaluation of LOST is a noble but myopic one. Navy officers and officials in the Department of Defense maintain very limited equities regarding LOST (i.e. navigational mobility). And simply because this Treaty confers those protections to its members, all of the Treaty is supported without due consideration of the whole: the International Seabed Authority, the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea, the environmental regulations, the arbitration panels, along with the other endless codes and procedures prescribed in the Treaty. The negative effects of the Convention on U.S. maritime interests, and perhaps even domestic interests, are without limit and far outweigh the benefits.

Uncompromising protection of US sovereignty and defense of American interests in the face of international threats and detractors has been the primary theme of George W. Bush’s Presidency thus far. Unfortunately, that legacy will stand in jeopardy if the US submits to a clearly restrictive and hostile international treaty on his watch. It would behoove the Bush Administration, then, to abandon its evaluation of LOST on the sole basis of navigational mobility, and consider as well the provisions that will give opponents of US foreign policy the wherewithal to hamper US objectives by way of debilitating “lawfare.” Perhaps then they will understand why Ronald Reagan opposed the Treaty so staunchly 23 years ago, and why it remains just as important to oppose it today.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.