Comments on: GOP ‘Sovereignty Caucus’ Battles Obama on Treaties

By: louis vuitton handbags

louis vuitton handbags — Fri, 06 Aug 2010 12:26:10 +0000

make the people understand that any treaty takes our sovereignty and Libery away. God bless America and may he remove this intrusive government that lied it's way into power. Amen.

By: donmitchel

donmitchel — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 18:23:59 +0000

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1676296/

By: donmitchel

donmitchel — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:23:59 +0000

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1676296/

By: Robert McManus

Robert McManus — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 19:22:09 +0000

I'm not sure who reads these, either. I shudder to think.
You want everyone to understand that “any treaty takes our sovereignty and Liberty away.” Really? You are opposed to ALL treaties, beginning in 1787? Is it your position that the US should repudiate, for instance, the postal convention? How about the treaties governing airline safety? Against those, too? Or the International Convention on the Regulation of Whaling (1949), pursuant to which the US government is obligated to control your whaling activities?
May I suggest that you don't know a single thing about a single treaty Obama (or anyone else) supports. Nothing. You just hear noise and respond by making more of it.

By: edwardasevenau

edwardasevenau — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 09:55:18 +0000

to whom reads these comments; I am an American Patriot and I will not ever allow our countries sovereignty be overstepped by an over ambitious puppy in Politics like Obama, Mr. Obama is treading on very thin ice these days with his Cap and Kill bill and this very bad Healthcare nightmare, the more Obama comes out to voice his support for these bills the more his poll numbers go down, we Americans must keep his numbers heading south even faster, so no one will back him in the senate on anything. So I pray that no one in our government would ever sell our sovereignty away to any country or organization of nations, it will send the American people into civil war mode real fast. I am hearing treaties that Obama wants ratified that would usurp our Bill of Rights and the Constitution, why don't our government take their oath of offcie seriously anymore, I believe that we should start putting congressmen and senators in jail for perjury if they break that oath, especially the president who takes that oath, our government must be made to remember that this country belongs to we the people not them the government, so that is why Obama's Health garbage and his cap and tax junk and any treaty must fail. I personally am getting real sick of fighting for rights I have been born with, leave my 1st, 2nd and all my Amendments alone, congress better never sell this country out, leave our right to keep and bear arms alone or they will find out just what that 2nd Amendment is truly for, we people have the right to remove a government that don't up hold our Constitution, and that means ratifying treaties that put international laws above our Constitutional law, that is an oath breaker and to me is treason. make the people understand that any treaty takes our sovereignty and Libery away. God bless America and may he remove this intrusive government that lied it's way into power. Amen.

By: Fair Seas Ahead for UNCLOS? » The Arctic

Fair Seas Ahead for UNCLOS? » The Arctic — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 06:41:08 +0000

[...] Although the group of senators actively opposed to UNCLOS is rather small, an actual ratification vote could be much closer. Under the aegis of the newly formed GOP “Sovereignty Caucus,” many senators contested the nomination of Harold Koh to his post of Legal Adviser of the Department of State due to his multilateralist leanings. He was confirmed with a vote of 62-35. A vote for UNCLOS – which would need 67 votes to be ratified, since it is a treaty – could be a hairraiser, as David Weigel of the Washington Post suggests. [...]

By: Robert McManus

Robert McManus — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 02:05:56 +0000

Ummmm, I'm not so sure what your complaint is, beyond the UN in some general sense. But you say “Obama wants to zone the oceans!” What on earth are you talking about? Do you even know?

By: bobccc

bobccc — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 16:48:55 +0000

I'm hoping we CAN get the UN out of the USA and this Sovereignty Caucus can stop certain agenda's the UN has!

Research their Agenda 21 in depth. Obama wants to zone the oceans! How about getting our economy going and stop worrying about the world…let them govern them selves, without the UN sticking their nose in their programs, and without sticking their nose in ours!

By: donmitchel

donmitchel — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 19:35:48 +0000

Dear Sir, Sorry to take such time to respond, as I am an amateur study of the politics, environmental, historical, and business aspects of ballast dumping and attend to my business full time. After reviewing several of my post I realize you are correct and I do appear to dislike the IMO. I have to apologize since historically they have and should / shall remain an important integral entity of any global solution to the problems. I believe the only solution that will solve the problem on an international basis is the mandatory use of technology that may or may not yet exist. The idea of dumping untreated water anywhere, is in my personal opinion unacceptable because of the natural effects nature plays in the distribution of pathogens,virus,toxins,pollutants,etc. Wind,Ocean currents,flooding,all living species, etc. , can then move them again even into The High Seas or the deep sea bed where sovereign economic interest may lie because of the lines being drawn on a map. I would like to see our country take the lead in environmental discharges of water as I believe it would ultimately have a ripple effect on other major powers and would help the IMO work with less prosperous countries so they , also implement new technologies as applicable to their resources. We led the way in space exploration in the 60's We should lead the ocean technologies need in this century. I also believe that if the web site about China, is valid, mandating ballast water from Mexico and the US be treated through the 200 mile Exclusive Economic Zone because of H1N1 that perhaps they may be taking the lead role in protecting health from ballast dumping, and I find it quite sad that we can not afford the same protection. I also believe that with ancient fresh water ice melting in the Arctic, with ancient virus and pathogens long lying dormant if dilute salinity is being drawn into ballast systems or dirty discharges could be very problematic. As bird flue etc. are known to be transmitted from areas where waterfowl congregate and knowing the way geese deposit feces in the water I see the probability of pollute ballast water growing in the world as global warming continues. Whether or not these issue are being addressed in the Law of the Sea, I am not privy to, so I speak out. Thank you.

By: Robert McManus

Robert McManus — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 19:23:12 +0000

I'm not sure what your point is relative to “the law of the sea,” but I hope you haven't bought in to the “sovereignty” crap used by Right Wing fund-raisers these days. You want a national clean ballast water policy? Do you have any problem with Art. 211, ¶4, of the Treaty, assuring coastal state “sovereignty” over vessel-source pollution in the 12 mile territorial sea? Or Art 33, permitting “sanitary regulations” in a broader (up to 24 mi.) “contiguous zone”?

You also want “all governments” involved, but you seem not to like the IMO, a cooperative venture of most governments, and virtually all those with commercial fleets.