Obama Seeking to Cede U.S. Oceans to UN

[Luddly Neddite]

I agree. There is also talk of them having control over gun control in the US and they want to regulate our energy use. Of course, when one utters "One World Order", the left jumps on them and calls them crazy, yet we have a joke of an organization called the U.N. having more and more control over our energy, economy and laws. What's left after the U.N. controls all that? An organization with radicals will run our country.

You don't have to look past Obama's Executive Orders, to see where he wants to take us. Whoever these Bastards are, pulling his strings, they need to be outed.

Cracks me up that rw's rely so heavily on these juvenile and really idiotic little Photoshopped lies.

Probably because the truth doesn't serve their agenda.

 

[thereisnospoon]

1. "President Obama’s ambitious plan for stepped up government regulation of the oceans includes an unreported effort to cede U.S. oceans to United Nations-based international law, KleinOnline has learned.

2. ...an executive order to be issued for a National Ocean Policy that will determine how the ecosystem is managed while giving the federal government more regulatory authority over any businesses that utilize the ocean....
based on the recommendations of Obama’s Inter-agency Ocean Policy Task-force, created in 2010 also by executive order.

3. The Task-force’s final recommendations, based in part on the supposed effects of “global warming, were released in a 78-page paper reviewed by KleinOnline.

4. The entire third section of the report recommends that the U.S. join the UN’s Law of the Sea Convention.

5. States the report: “The Task Force strongly and unanimously supports United States accession to the Convention on the Law of the Sea and ratification of its 1994 Implementing Agreement. The Law of the Sea Convention is the bedrock legal instrument governing activities on, over, and under the world’s oceans.

6. Until his CIA appointment in 2009, Panetta co-chaired the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, which is the partner of Citizens for Global Solutions in a push to ratify U.S. laws and regulations governing the seas.

7. Among its main recommendations is that the U.S. should put its oceans up for regulation to the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea.

8. The Joint Ocean Commission Initiative Leadership Council includes John Podesta, president and CEO of the Soros-funded Center for American Progress, which is reportedly highly influential in advising the White House on policy.

9. Panetta’s oceans initiative is a key partner of Citizens for Global Solutions, or CGS, which, according to its literature, envisions a “future in which nations work together to abolish war, protect our rights and freedoms and solve the problems facing humanity that no nation can solve alone.”
CGS states it works to “build the political will in the United States” to achieve this global vision.

10. CGS is a member organization and supporter of the World Federalist Movement, which openly seeks a one-world government. The World Federalist Movement considers the CGS to be its U.S. branch....the establishment of a global federal system of strengthened and democratized global institutions with plenary constitutional power accountable to the citizens of the world and a division of international authority among separate global agencies.

11. The movement’s headquarters are located near the U.N. building in New York City. A second office is near the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Netherlands.
The locations are significant, since the movement heavily promotes the U.N. and is the coordinator of various international projects, such as the Coalition for the International Criminal Court and the Responsibility to Protect military doctrine. That doctrine formed the basis of Obama’s justification last year to launch NATO airstrikes in Libya."
Obama quietly seeking to cede U.S. oceans to UN law: Shock recommendation buried in White house report. « Klein Online



Read carefully....a vote for Obama is a vote to end United States sovereignty.

Obama believes The USA is an evil country. He wishes to defer to foreign interests in all international issues. After that, he wishes to cede our sovereignty to the UN.
Obama is a one world government advocate.
Here is an example of what I think Obama thinks.
During the 2004 presidential campaign, I saw a man on the street interview of a British citizen. He stated that he believed other country's people should have the right to vote in OUR presidential election because the US has global influence...
What a dickwad.

 

[sparky]

During the 2004 presidential campaign, I saw a man on the street interview of a British citizen. He stated that he believed other country's people should have the right to vote in OUR presidential election because the US has global influence...

Citizens United did that

and you were worried about an ocean?

~S~

 

[Flopper]

The United States has accepted all parts of Conventions on the Law of the Sea many years ago with the exception of Part XI. Part XI of the Convention provides for a regime relating to minerals on the seabed outside any state's territorial waters or EEZ (Exclusive Economic Zones).

Since it's outside US waters, how can you claim US waters are being ceded to the UN?

The 1994 amendment to Part VI addressed US concerns that were first brought up by Reagan, which concerns deep-sea mining. Reagan was in favor of the treaty. Both Clinton and Bush pushed for approval by the Senate, however no action was taken. Now it seems, the Obama administration will have a try.

The fact is this treaty has little or nothing to do with global warming and primarily effects waters outside of the US territorial limits. It's important in protecting US fishing interest. The U.S. oil and gas industry benefits from the Convention’s rules concerning offshore resources. The navigational freedoms recognized under the Convention provide a stable environment for global commerce. However, once again right wingers who are oppose to just about any treaty involving the UN, are trying to block a treaty that would benefit the US for political reasons that have nothing to do with the treaty.

http://archive1.globalsolutions.org/...licy-paper.pdf

 

[Vidi]

And John Galt was not a union man at all and this meme some idiot blogger created that John Galt started a union is completely untrue.

John Galt was for laissez-faire capitalism.

""In economics, laissez-faire (English pronunciation: /ˌlɛseɪˈfɛər/ ( listen), French: [lɛsefɛʁ] ( listen)) is an environment in which transactions between private parties are free from state intervention, including regulations, taxes, tariffs and enforced monopolies. The phrase laissez-faire is French and literally means "let [them] do", but it broadly implies "let it be", or "leave it alone." A laissez-faire state and completely free market has never existed, though the degree of government regulation varies considerably."

Laissez-faire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

this post is for the morons with John galt formed a union in their sigline.

and how did Galt rebel against the Collective world?

He got all the best and brightest to join together and go on strike. Thats the entire point of Atlas Shrugged. They formed a UNION and went on STRIKE. that makes Galt a Union organizer.

This post is for morons who never actually read Atlas Shrugged, or The Fountainhead, or Anthem, and didnt bother to see the horrible movie made from the desecrated ashes of an Atlas Shrugged script.

Oh and Thank you Rush! ( the band not the pundit ) for turning me onto Ayn Rand when I was but a wee lad.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I agree. There is also talk of them having control over gun control in the US and they want to regulate our energy use. Of course, when one utters "One World Order", the left jumps on them and calls them crazy, yet we have a joke of an organization called the U.N. having more and more control over our energy, economy and laws. What's left after the U.N. controls all that? An organization with radicals will run our country.

You don't have to look past Obama's Executive Orders, to see where he wants to take us. Whoever these Bastards are, pulling his strings, they need to be outed.

aaron klein from world net daily is on it.

it will probably be soros, and bill ayers, with a chandelier in international waters.

Aaron Klein is the finest investigative reporter on scene.
Both of his books, "Red Army," and "The Manchurian President" are excellent.
And the documentation is meticulous.

 

[francoHFW]

Klein is a POS salivator for dupe money. It's so easy, dupe.

"Support Accession to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. As a matter of national security, economic self-interest, and international leadership, the Bush Administration is strongly committed to U.S. accession to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. The Administration urges Congress to provide advice and consent to this treaty as early as possible in the 109th Congress."

http://www.cmts.gov/downloads/US_ocean_action_plan.pdf


To review: more chic/dupe idiocy...change the channel ferchrissake...

 

[PoliticalChic]

Klein is a POS salivator for dupe money. It's so easy, dupe.

"Support Accession to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. As a matter of national security, economic self-interest, and international leadership, the Bush Administration is strongly committed to U.S. accession to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. The Administration urges Congress to provide advice and consent to this treaty as early as possible in the 109th Congress."

http://www.cmts.gov/downloads/US_ocean_action_plan.pdf


To review: more chic/dupe idiocy...change the channel ferchrissake...

'salivator'?


franco...which of his books did you read so as to arrive at your conclusion?

Oops! I forgot....we found that you never read!

You're a franco!
Good boy!
Sit!

 

[Si modo]

Let me be clear then. Signing the Law of the Sea convention will not cede US oceans to the UN (nor will it take away our freedom of speech). Nor are we giving up the ability to control its own destiny. It's just a rightie talking point of the day.

Part of our destiny is control of our territorial waters dimwit.

Despite what WND tells you, by ratifying this treaty we will not lose control of our territorial waters(12 miles). Nor will we lose our control of our exclusive economic zone (200 miles).

Oh, yes we will. Activities in the EEZs will be subject to approval by the UN.

 

[AmericanFirst]

1. "President Obama’s ambitious plan for stepped up government regulation of the oceans includes an unreported effort to cede U.S. oceans to United Nations-based international law, KleinOnline has learned.

2. ...an executive order to be issued for a National Ocean Policy that will determine how the ecosystem is managed while giving the federal government more regulatory authority over any businesses that utilize the ocean....
based on the recommendations of Obama’s Inter-agency Ocean Policy Task-force, created in 2010 also by executive order.

3. The Task-force’s final recommendations, based in part on the supposed effects of “global warming, were released in a 78-page paper reviewed by KleinOnline.

4. The entire third section of the report recommends that the U.S. join the UN’s Law of the Sea Convention.

5. States the report: “The Task Force strongly and unanimously supports United States accession to the Convention on the Law of the Sea and ratification of its 1994 Implementing Agreement. The Law of the Sea Convention is the bedrock legal instrument governing activities on, over, and under the world’s oceans.

6. Until his CIA appointment in 2009, Panetta co-chaired the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, which is the partner of Citizens for Global Solutions in a push to ratify U.S. laws and regulations governing the seas.

7. Among its main recommendations is that the U.S. should put its oceans up for regulation to the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea.

8. The Joint Ocean Commission Initiative Leadership Council includes John Podesta, president and CEO of the Soros-funded Center for American Progress, which is reportedly highly influential in advising the White House on policy.

9. Panetta’s oceans initiative is a key partner of Citizens for Global Solutions, or CGS, which, according to its literature, envisions a “future in which nations work together to abolish war, protect our rights and freedoms and solve the problems facing humanity that no nation can solve alone.”
CGS states it works to “build the political will in the United States” to achieve this global vision.

10. CGS is a member organization and supporter of the World Federalist Movement, which openly seeks a one-world government. The World Federalist Movement considers the CGS to be its U.S. branch....the establishment of a global federal system of strengthened and democratized global institutions with plenary constitutional power accountable to the citizens of the world and a division of international authority among separate global agencies.

11. The movement’s headquarters are located near the U.N. building in New York City. A second office is near the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Netherlands.
The locations are significant, since the movement heavily promotes the U.N. and is the coordinator of various international projects, such as the Coalition for the International Criminal Court and the Responsibility to Protect military doctrine. That doctrine formed the basis of Obama’s justification last year to launch NATO airstrikes in Libya."
Obama quietly seeking to cede U.S. oceans to UN law: Shock recommendation buried in White house report. « Klein Online



Read carefully....a vote for Obama is a vote to end United States sovereignty.

Obamaturd is a socialist, fits that he would do this.

 

[Moonglow]

The United States has accepted all parts of Conventions on the Law of the Sea many years ago with the exception of Part XI. Part XI of the Convention provides for a regime relating to minerals on the seabed outside any state's territorial waters or EEZ (Exclusive Economic Zones).

Since it's outside US waters, how can you claim US waters are being ceded to the UN?

The 1994 amendment to Part VI addressed US concerns that were first brought up by Reagan, which concerns deep-sea mining. Reagan was in favor of the treaty. Both Clinton and Bush pushed for approval by the Senate, however no action was taken. Now it seems, the Obama administration will have a try.

The fact is this treaty has little or nothing to do with global warming and primarily effects waters outside of the US territorial limits. It's important in protecting US fishing interest. The U.S. oil and gas industry benefits from the Convention’s rules concerning offshore resources. The navigational freedoms recognized under the Convention provide a stable environment for global commerce. However, once again right wingers who are oppose to just about any treaty involving the UN, are trying to block a treaty that would benefit the US for political reasons that have nothing to do with the treaty.

http://archive1.globalsolutions.org/...licy-paper.pdf

article VI was shelved by the UN because it gave the US an economic disavantage in international waters.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Klein is a POS salivator for dupe money. It's so easy, dupe.

"Support Accession to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. As a matter of national security, economic self-interest, and international leadership, the Bush Administration is strongly committed to U.S. accession to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. The Administration urges Congress to provide advice and consent to this treaty as early as possible in the 109th Congress."

http://www.cmts.gov/downloads/US_ocean_action_plan.pdf


To review: more chic/dupe idiocy...change the channel ferchrissake...

Klein is smarter than your dumb ass.

 

[Moonglow]

nothing better than a polichic troll/flame thread

 

[Moonglow]

Klein is a POS salivator for dupe money. It's so easy, dupe.

"Support Accession to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. As a matter of national security, economic self-interest, and international leadership, the Bush Administration is strongly committed to U.S. accession to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. The Administration urges Congress to provide advice and consent to this treaty as early as possible in the 109th Congress."

http://www.cmts.gov/downloads/US_ocean_action_plan.pdf


To review: more chic/dupe idiocy...change the channel ferchrissake...

Klein is smarter than your dumb ass.

nothing better than a right winged fundie spreading lies and misinformation.

 

[Moonglow]

Part of our destiny is control of our territorial waters dimwit.

Despite what WND tells you, by ratifying this treaty we will not lose control of our territorial waters(12 miles). Nor will we lose our control of our exclusive economic zone (200 miles).

Oh, yes we will. Activities in the EEZs will be subject to approval by the UN.

Did you know that Obama can't ratify a treaty?

 

[Si modo]

Despite what WND tells you, by ratifying this treaty we will not lose control of our territorial waters(12 miles). Nor will we lose our control of our exclusive economic zone (200 miles).

Oh, yes we will. Activities in the EEZs will be subject to approval by the UN.

Did you know that Obama can't ratify a treaty?

Who said that he could?

Oh, that was you.

 

[Si modo]

Getting on board with this is an end to mare liberum.

And, the seas remain free because of the US.

 

[Moonglow]

The US Navy and marines.

 

[Moonglow]

Oh, yes we will. Activities in the EEZs will be subject to approval by the UN.

Did you know that Obama can't ratify a treaty?

Who said that he could?

Oh, that was you.

yes i said it, to show the falicy of the OP that states that Obama is giving away our control of the seas.

 

[Dick Tuck]

This is why I truly PRAY that Obama loses in november........sure Romney may not be a 5 star candidate but at least he isn't actively hurting our country or actively destroying its sovereignty

Since the proposed treaty position was done under Bush, Romney is going different from Bush in what way?