That LOST treaty is scarry, and I don’t understand why VP Cheney and Condi Rice support it. Do they want us to be under the thumb of the U.N. and pay taxes to the U.N., as well?
Well if you support the SPP, then Lost isn’t a big stretch is it?
Makes me sick.
Condi is and always was a global power freak with no clue of the domestic damage LOST would do. From what I can tell, Cheney wants to help his friends in the mining business... little do they know the domestic damage LOST would do to them as well when our creditors will get the first piece of the action. LOST would consolidate permitting for seabed mining under the most corrupt bureaucracy on earth.
But that isn't the worst of it.
As I posted over three years ago,
The big issue with LOST isn't about the ocean; it's about land use control.
This global bureaucracy will justify control of land use to "protect" the marine environment. It isn't hard to see. Many oceanic species breed in estuaries within the United States. Estuarine health isn't doing very well for a number of reasons (many of which politicized science will conveniently miss). The estuaries are fed by rivers. The rivers are lined with cities.
Marine sanctuaries and global biospheres are model for what is planned for LOST. If all we accomplish is to alter the treaty to gain protection for our military, we will have missed the point.
LOST is a straitjacket fully capable of crippling this nation (which certainly affects its ability to defend itself) (bold emphasis added for pissant's indigestion :-). That the White House says it knows nothing about it 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.