ShareThis Page

A very bad treaty

| Saturday, May 26, 2007

President Bush is pressing for Senate ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST).

The treaty would open the U.S. to litigation against "global warming" of the seas and subject U.S. defense, maritime, fishing and industrial interests to international bureaucracy and courts.

There also would be quotas on deep-sea mining, oil extraction and international taxes on these vital resources.

LOST is a Marxist-inspired "human rights" scheme to take earned wealth and earned sovereignty from capitalists and transfer it to those practicing tyranny, socialism and economic masochism.

It's been 231 years since the Declaration of Independence and Adam Smith's "The Wealth of Nations" and still vast stretches of the world are governed by philosophical illiterates.

Ronald Reagan, who became president after he came to believe he had something to do -- defeat the Soviet Empire -- opposed LOST. George Bush, who became president because of what he wanted to be , is a vessel who fills with dangerous nonsense. The war in Iraq and amnesty for illegals are chief examples.

The International Seabed Authority, an "autonomous" organization founded under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, is in charge of LOST. Its 153 members include Cuba and China.

World government would be less disgusting -- but not much so -- if its disciples weren't human-rights hypocrites. Sink the treaty.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me