The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 29

Thread: So now we are giving control of US waters to the UN?!!!

  1. #11
    Senior Member Buzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Brookings, South Dakota
    Posts
    6,816

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by david gibson View Post
    so to oppose these types of utopian ideas means you are a paranoid right wing fanatic.

    Maybe I don't believe everything I read on the internets.

    Anyone want to show me where in the law that it:

    -gives away ownership of America’s oceans to the United Nations

    -America will be forced to become a member of the UN Law of the Sea Treaty (aka: LOST), circumventing the normal two-thirds U.S. Senate vote necessary for ratification of any treaty.

    -All air space above the oceans, what operates in, through, on or is derived from underneath the water, will be subject to taxes as a world resource to the United Nations – Agenda 21. These areas will no longer be owned and managed solely by the United States, as they are newly defined as a global revenue, “social justice” source per the Law of the Sea Treaty.

    -This is the globalist bill designed to give away our land, oceans, adjacent land masses and Great Lakes to an international body, and makes us pay $900 million per year until 2040.


    I searched the law. Can't find a mention of the UN, UNLOS, the great lakes, or anything else.

    I call BS.
    "For everyone to whom much is given, of him shall much be required." -- Luke 12:48

    Raven - Moneybird's Black Magic Marker***
    (Esprit's Power Play x Trumarc's Lean Cuisine)
    Mick - Moneybird's Jumpin' Jack Flash***
    (Clubmead's Road Warrior x Oakdale Whitewater Devil Dog)
    Peerless - Moneybird's Sole Survivor
    (Two River's Lucky Willie x Moneybird's Black Magic Marker)

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Wetumpka, AL
    Posts
    2,957

    Default

    Where in HR 3534 does this "gives away ownership of America’s oceans to the United Nations, and sectors America into nine geographic areas..."? I looked for something as simple as "9" or "nine". That's not there.

    Where is there any reference to the Law of the Sea Treaty or even the word treaty? From what I can see, the Law of the Sea isn't referenced and the word "treaty" is merely used in a definition of a classification of Indian tribes.

    I've not read HR 3534 for details but appears to re-organize certain Dept of Interior components. Here's the summary of the bill:

    "To provide greater efficiencies, transparency, returns, and accountability in the administration of Federal mineral and energy resources by consolidating administration of various Federal energy minerals management and leasing programs into one entity to be known as the Office of Federal Energy and Minerals Leasing of the Department of the Interior, and for other purposes."

    Now, the practical side of the issue is that the bill must be passed before the end of December or it's dead. While it has passed the House, it hasn't even been assigned to a Senate committee yet. What is particularly telling is that the bill has but one sponsor and he's not in the Senate. IOW, there's no one to move this along even if there were more time or there weren't other weighty pieces of legislation.

    Eric

  3. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    3,928

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buzz View Post
    Maybe I don't believe everything I read on the internets.

    Anyone want to show me where in the law that it:

    -gives away ownership of America’s oceans to the United Nations

    -America will be forced to become a member of the UN Law of the Sea Treaty (aka: LOST), circumventing the normal two-thirds U.S. Senate vote necessary for ratification of any treaty.

    -All air space above the oceans, what operates in, through, on or is derived from underneath the water, will be subject to taxes as a world resource to the United Nations – Agenda 21. These areas will no longer be owned and managed solely by the United States, as they are newly defined as a global revenue, “social justice” source per the Law of the Sea Treaty.

    -This is the globalist bill designed to give away our land, oceans, adjacent land masses and Great Lakes to an international body, and makes us pay $900 million per year until 2040.


    I searched the law. Can't find a mention of the UN, UNLOS, the great lakes, or anything else.

    I call BS.
    i didnt read anything,i just explained to a reader why you libs scream and point - "right wing paranoia!!" all the time.

    but its the camel's nose under the tent knocking over the first domino. give them an inch and they take a mile. can you blame people when they take any move by the left and exagerrate its consequences?

    lets roll the clock back. all this worry and concern about hurting someones feelings has caused our govt. to grope and search 5 yr old kids the same as a 19 yr old exchange student from Yemen. so to avoid offending a male muslim smack in the middle of the terror profile description we find it acceptable to traumatize a 5 yr old kid with a groping strip search.

    liberalism brought us to this point, plain and simple.

    and liberalism WILL NOT get us out of it.

    i rest my case.

  4. #14
    Senior Member Buzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Brookings, South Dakota
    Posts
    6,816

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Johnson View Post
    Where in HR 3534 does this "gives away ownership of America’s oceans to the United Nations, and sectors America into nine geographic areas..."? I looked for something as simple as "9" or "nine". That's not there.

    Where is there any reference to the Law of the Sea Treaty or even the word treaty? From what I can see, the Law of the Sea isn't referenced and the word "treaty" is merely used in a definition of a classification of Indian tribes.

    I've not read HR 3534 for details but appears to re-organize certain Dept of Interior components. Here's the summary of the bill:

    "To provide greater efficiencies, transparency, returns, and accountability in the administration of Federal mineral and energy resources by consolidating administration of various Federal energy minerals management and leasing programs into one entity to be known as the Office of Federal Energy and Minerals Leasing of the Department of the Interior, and for other purposes."

    Now, the practical side of the issue is that the bill must be passed before the end of December or it's dead. While it has passed the House, it hasn't even been assigned to a Senate committee yet. What is particularly telling is that the bill has but one sponsor and he's not in the Senate. IOW, there's no one to move this along even if there were more time or there weren't other weighty pieces of legislation.

    Eric
    Law of the Sea is mentioned in this executive order signed by Obama. It's not in the law.

    http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/pdf/2010-18169.pdf

    Sec. 2. Policy.

    (a) To achieve an America whose stewardship ensures that
    the ocean, our coasts, and the Great Lakes are healthy and resilient, safe
    and productive, and understood and treasured so as to promote the wellbeing,
    prosperity, and security of present and future generations, it is the
    policy of the United States to:
    (i) protect, maintain, and restore the health and biological diversity of
    ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems and resources;
    (ii) improve the resiliency of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems,
    communities, and economies;
    (iii) bolster the conservation and sustainable uses of land in ways that
    will improve the health of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems;
    (iv) use the best available science and knowledge to inform decisions
    affecting the ocean, our coasts, and the Great Lakes, and enhance humanity’s
    capacity to understand, respond, and adapt to a changing global
    environment;
    (v) support sustainable, safe, secure, and productive access to, and uses
    of the ocean, our coasts, and the Great Lakes;
    (vi) respect and preserve our Nation’s maritime heritage, including our
    social, cultural, recreational, and historical values;
    (vii) exercise rights and jurisdiction and perform duties in accordance
    with applicable international law, including respect for and preservation
    of navigational rights and freedoms, which are essential for the global
    economy and international peace and security;
    (viii) increase scientific understanding of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes
    ecosystems as part of the global interconnected systems of air, land, ice,
    and water, including their relationships to humans and their activities;
    (ix) improve our understanding and awareness of changing environmental
    conditions, trends, and their causes, and of human activities taking place
    in ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes waters; and
    (x) foster a public understanding of the value of the ocean, our coasts,
    and the Great Lakes to build a foundation for improved stewardship.

    (b) The United States shall promote this policy by:
    (i) ensuring a comprehensive and collaborative framework for the stewardship
    of the ocean, our coasts, and the Great Lakes that facilitates cohesive
    actions across the Federal Government, as well as participation of State,
    tribal, and local authorities, regional governance structures, nongovernmental
    organizations, the public, and the private sector;
    (ii) cooperating and exercising leadership at the international level;
    (iii) pursuing the United States’ accession to the Law of the Sea Convention;
    and

    (iv) supporting ocean stewardship in a fiscally responsible manner.

    I don't see how perusing accession constitutes an "end run" around the normal approval in the Senate by a 2/3 vote.

    You can read about the history of UNCLOS here:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...Law_of_the_Sea


    I have not been able to find any discussion of this in any "mainstream news resource." Not even FOX.
    Last edited by Buzz; 11-22-2010 at 10:46 PM.
    "For everyone to whom much is given, of him shall much be required." -- Luke 12:48

    Raven - Moneybird's Black Magic Marker***
    (Esprit's Power Play x Trumarc's Lean Cuisine)
    Mick - Moneybird's Jumpin' Jack Flash***
    (Clubmead's Road Warrior x Oakdale Whitewater Devil Dog)
    Peerless - Moneybird's Sole Survivor
    (Two River's Lucky Willie x Moneybird's Black Magic Marker)

  5. #15
    Senior Member Buzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Brookings, South Dakota
    Posts
    6,816

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by david gibson View Post
    lets roll the clock back. all this worry and concern about hurting someones feelings has caused our govt. to grope and search 5 yr old kids the same as a 19 yr old exchange student from Yemen. so to avoid offending a male muslim smack in the middle of the terror profile description we find it acceptable to traumatize a 5 yr old kid with a groping strip search.

    liberalism brought us to this point, plain and simple.

    and liberalism WILL NOT get us out of it.

    i rest my case.
    Liberalism brought us to this point. Are you serious? It's been liberals who have been screaming for years about the government taking away rights in the name of "national security and safety." You're unbelievable.
    "For everyone to whom much is given, of him shall much be required." -- Luke 12:48

    Raven - Moneybird's Black Magic Marker***
    (Esprit's Power Play x Trumarc's Lean Cuisine)
    Mick - Moneybird's Jumpin' Jack Flash***
    (Clubmead's Road Warrior x Oakdale Whitewater Devil Dog)
    Peerless - Moneybird's Sole Survivor
    (Two River's Lucky Willie x Moneybird's Black Magic Marker)

  6. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    3,928

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buzz View Post
    Liberalism brought us to this point. Are you serious? It's been liberals who have been screaming for years about the government taking away rights in the name of "national security and safety." You're unbelievable.
    are you serious? yes, govt needs to take away the rights of those that fit the profile of our enemy! so it is conservatives that decided we cant profile air passengers?????

    see what i mean about liberals?? to them even people that fit the profile of those that want to or have killed fellow americans in the name of the peaceful religion of Islam deserve the same scrutiny as a 5 yr old born in Shiner, Texas. so using the same rules we have now, how would WWII have turned out? you libs give too many rights to too many people, so therefore:

    we have 5 yr old kids getting searched the same as 19 yo foreign exchange students from yemen because we dont want to offend anyone.


    now please - address the above statement as true or false. if false, please tell me what is going on with TSA today.

    you will literally defend obama even if he spat on a nun, so you have zero credibility but try anyway!

    IMAGINE regards.....
    Last edited by david gibson; 11-22-2010 at 11:31 PM.

  7. #17
    Senior Member JDogger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    MRGV New Mexico
    Posts
    3,430

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buzz View Post
    Liberalism brought us to this point. Are you serious? It's been liberals who have been screaming for years about the government taking away rights in the name of "national security and safety." You're unbelievable.
    If these threads cause the loss of gray matter, why do you keep on reading them?
    When you quote him, we have to see them again. At least pretend that you have him on 'ignore'....please.

    JD
    One cannot reason someone out of something they were not reasoned into. - Jonathan Swift

  8. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,347

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by david gibson View Post
    are you serious? yes, govt needs to take away the rights of those that fit the profile of our enemy! so it is conservatives that decided we cant profile air passengers?????

    see what i mean about liberals?? to them even people that fit the profile of those that want to or have killed fellow americans in the name of the peaceful religion of Islam deserve the same scrutiny as a 5 yr old born in Shiner, Texas. so using the same rules we have now, how would WWII have turned out? you libs give too many rights to too many people, so therefore:

    we have 5 yr old kids getting searched the same as 19 yo foreign exchange students from yemen because we dont want to offend anyone.

    N
    now please - address the above statement as true or false. if false, please tell me what is going on with TSA today.

    you will literally defend obama even if he spat on a nun, so you have zero credibility but try anyway!

    IMAGINE regards.....
    None of us 'defend' Obama as you say. We often criticize him for his policies. But you, and many on this site, attempt to demonize everything about the man. You don't acknowledge what he HAS accomplished. And you go so far as to criticize him vehemently for implementing and / or sticking to the policies of his predecessor, in whom you fail to acknowledged for the same failures.
    There is a word worth mentioning. Ideologue. From dictionary.com

    An ideologue may be defined as a mad intellectual. He is not interested in ideas, but—almost the exact contrary—in one idea. When he erects this idea into a system and forces the system to give birth to a way of life, confusion often results, usually to his great surprise. Two examples are Robespierre and Lenin. The intellectual is occasionally blamed for the work of the ideologue, which is like condemning the psychiatrist because he and the patient are both involved in the same thing, mental illness. The ideologue is often brilliant. Consequently some of us distrust brilliance when we should distrust the ideologue.... The ideologue is often more persuasive than the intellectual because he has a simpler line of goods to sell and never questions its value. Sometimes he achieves great success by attacking the real intellectual

  9. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,347

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JDogger View Post
    If these threads cause the loss of gray matter, why do you keep on reading them?
    When you quote him, we have to see them again. At least pretend that you have him on 'ignore'....please.

    JD
    Well, it's fun. Besides, we all have one thing in common here. We care enough to have an opinion.

  10. #20
    Senior Member Hew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    2,082

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buzz View Post
    Liberalism brought us to this point. Are you serious? It's been liberals who have been screaming for years about the government taking away rights in the name of "national security and safety." You're unbelievable.
    No, more accurately, it was liberals who screamED for seven years about the govt. "taking away rights" when they thought it was a convenient point to oppose Bush. Now that Obama is President, with the Patriot Act left unchanged and the new administration fighting tooth and nail in court defending the Bush national security agenda, the liberals (including all the liberals, progressives, socialists or whatever you're calling yourselves nowadays on this message board) have largely remained as quiet as church mice about our rights. So spare us your unbelievable notions of liberal high-mindedness about our civil rights because it's all just cheap political rhetoric.
    I'll take the river down to still water and ride a pack of dogs.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •