Bush allies slam his support of maritime treaty - The Boston Globe
WASHINGTON -- Some of President Bush's allies are criticizing him for promoting a landmark maritime treaty that would commit the United States to obeying hundreds of pages of international law, including provisions allowing foreign officials to order the US Navy and Coast Guard to release certain detained ships.
I am not really sure what to think about this treaty because I have not read it. There are some very important military officials that say it will be good for the country and good for our security, and it is also going to expand our oil rights further than what we are currently allowed which would possibly increase our domestic production and lessen our need for foriegn oil.
There is also the argument that we are submitting ourselves to the will of the United Nations and losing more of our national sovereignty. I am not a fan of anything that increases the power of the One-world government. I think that it would be best to stay away from anything that forces American to become less 'free' as a nation.
I would really like to hear some comments from people who know more about the subject- I will also return later on this week after looking up some information about it.
read more digg story
5 comments:
Bush is achump - I woundnt belive anything that fool said. You knowit is bad for the USA i that adminstration wants to approve of it.
Dont be fooled by this stuff,
Please, don't leave lame blanket anti-Bush statements here- we aren't that kind of platform. This treaty is something that has a lot of pros and cons.
I would appreciate some comments from people who have actual insight into the treaty and what kind of effect it could have on our country and the maritime industry.
I looked this over and it appears we are slipping more to a one world government or at least a one world maritme industry. It is just a matter of time before they use this standardation to justify the fall of the Jones Act. If the maritime indusrty uses all the same standards, they can argue that it does not matter who is on the ships they are all trained to the same level.
Just Look what is being built for ships, and ask where are they going to find the people to man these ships, if companies cannot man what they have now. It is no mistake this is comin up at this time. Just wait and see!!
I linked to your post in Maritime Monday 70, and included some selected bits and pieces from the Treaty on my Blog.
Thanks Fred for posting this- I think it is a very interesting story and also a very dangerous proposal. I am against anything that I do not fully understand- it seems that you understand this subject a little better than I do.
Your comments, and clips on this subject bring to light some of the interesting dangers hidden in this treaty. I am against any one world order- or even one world maritime industry.
We have our soverienty for a reason- and I think that people are all too eager to sell that away.
The socialist overtones of this treaty, paying out the money to the 'poor nations' is scary. These poor nations act as funnels to countries such as Iran, Syria, the former USSR for weapons - the actual poor people never see a dime. Remember the oil for food scam? Yep- more socialist crap helping the poor.
We don't need this, but I must admit having more access to oil on the shelf would be great. It is probably that greed for oil that will lure us into a bad deal.
Post a Comment