United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST).

Source;   Conservative-Insurgent

In the quest to globalize the United States we as a nation are inching closer toward ratifying the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST).

President Bush endorsed this treaty in May and has since urged the Senate to ratify it. Initial reports indicated that the Senate may have attempted to ratify LOST before adjourning for the August recess.

The Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) entered into force in 1994 and has been ratified by 153 countries (click here for a list of recent LOST developments)..

The treaty gives the UN complete jurisdiction over the oceans and everything in them, including the ocean floor with all its resources, along with the power to regulate 70 percent of the world's surface.

LOST would encompass almost every aspect of the oceans whether the president, members of Congress, or other government officials will admit it or not.

According to a recent WALL STREET JOURNAL ARTICLE, the treaty is "set to come before the U.S. Senate next month for ratification." Former President Ronald Reagan originally rejected the ratification of LOST in 1982, but recent appeals from the Bush administration, some members of Congress, and the Council on Foreign Relations, has caused the treaty to resurface.

What does LOST mean to the United States?

National sovereignty: The treaty limits U.S. legal authority by granting power to a U.N.-created agency with its own court and bureaucracy, as part of a general expansion of international power. Ultimately, treaty-based laws could be enforced against the United States. Hell, we won't even be able to enforce the border laws we have with out going through the United Nations first and begging for their sanction.

National security: The treaty limits U.S. military activities especially relevant to anti-terror operations, such as intelligence collection and submerged travel in coastal waters (Articles 19, 20) and the boarding of foreign-flag ships on the high seas (Art. 110). Other provisions such as Articles 88 and 301 limit the sea to "peaceful purposes," which is said to restrict all military operations.

Navigation rights: One of the treaty's main selling points, legally recognized navigation rights on, over, and under straits, is unnecessary because these rights are not currently threatened. WTF, this means the UN will have jurisdiction over our shipping, commerce and our Navy.

Redistribution of wealth: The treaty would force U.S. corporations involved in seabed mining operations to pay taxes to the United Nations, further increasing the U.N.'s power. Oil drilling and recovery are considered mining operations, if you think your gas and heating taxes are high now, just wait until the U.N. taxes you and redistributes that resource.

Redistribution of technology: The treaty would force U.S. businesses involved in seabed mining operations to turn over economically and militarily relevant technology to other countries. Wow, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Libya would just love that.