--

*Sinister Secrets Of The U.N. Sea Treaty*

By Cliff Kincaid

November 5, 2007

NewsWithViews.com

http://www.newswithviews.com/Kincaid/cliff185.htm



The former editor of the New York Times editorial page says it is
"crazy" to be opposed to the U.N.'s Law of the Sea Treaty and she can't
understand why it has become a hot-button issue in the Republican
presidential race. Gail Collins declared in a November 3 column
<http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/03/opinion/03collins.html?hp=&pagewanted=pri
nt>
in the Times that the measure simply clarifies "rules for navigation and
mining in international waters" and sets up "a system for settling
disputes." Those opposed to it, she says, are spinning "conspiracy
theories." But Collins is doing the spinning.



What if there were evidence that the treaty was the product of those who
believe in world government financed by global taxes? Hold on to your
seats.



The true story of how the Law of the Sea Treaty came into being is a
fascinating one that I have investigated for several years. I researched
the matter at the United Nations Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law
of the Sea in New York City and at the Friends Historical Collection at
Guilford College in North Carolina. The Guilford College papers
demonstrate the activities that engaged Sam and Miriam Levering as they
wrote and promoted this treaty. The Leverings, a husband and wife team
who were Quakers and World Federalists, helped write the treaty and
lobbied for it through a non-governmental organization called the
Neptune Group.



You have probably never heard of them before. But the November 4 edition
of the Mount Airy (North Carolina) News gives a hint of the truth. It
reports
<http://www.mtairynews.com/articles/2007/11/04/news/local_news/local05.txt>
that Sam Levering "played a key role in formulating" the treaty and was
recognized for that role during a symposium there on October 12.



Is it possible this small-town North Carolina paper has information that
Gail Collins and the Times do not? Who is Sam Levering? And is it true
that he played a key role in writing the treaty? Here lies one of the
sinister secrets of the U.N.'s Law of the Sea Treaty that the major
media are either too lazy or too dishonest to report. It is a "secret,"
of course, only in the sense that it is kept from the American people by
papers like the New York Times.



The shocking truth is that the Law of the Sea Treaty, which could come
up for a full Senate vote at any time, was largely written by people
like Sam Levering, a World Federalist devoted to world government. And
since that is demonstrably the case, could the Law of the Sea Treaty be
considered a step toward world government? Or is it too conspiratorial
to even consider such a possibility? Let's continue our probe.



*The Names Have Been Changed*



The Mount Airy News was reporting on an October 12 symposium on the
treaty sponsored by a patriotic-sounding group called the "American
Freedom Association." The paper reported that "The event featured a
variety of speakers on the treaty, including Ralph Levering, whose late
father Sam played a key role in formulating the measure in 1982." The
paper quoted Marie Judson, the association's historian, as saying that
"one of the reasons she supports the treaty is to help carry on the work
started by Sam Levering, a strong advocate for peace, who among other
issues campaigned against nuclear arms proliferation."



The American Freedom Association was one of several groups which emerged
after World War II and were devoted to the concept of "world federalism"
or world government. Their reaction to the horrors of World War II
caused them to embrace world government as the solution to the world's
problems. But some of the world federalist groups were accused of being
infiltrated or manipulated by communists sympathetic to the Soviet
Union. For that reason, one of these groups changed its name to
"American Freedom Association" in the 1950s.



The group's website
<http://www.americanfreedomassociation.org/moreinfo.html> admits as
much. "Many of the founding members were members of the World Federalist
Society," it says. "The chosen name reflected a strong perspective on
the required conditions for American Freedom. It also reflected a need
for a name that was acceptable at the height of the era of Senator Joe
McCarthy." In other words, in order to avoid the taint of being
associated with the world communist movement, the name was changed.



A similar public relations strategy was also evident in 2004 when the
World Federalist Association changed its name to the more harmless
sounding "Citizens for Global Solutions." It is funded by major liberal
foundations and lobbies for ratification of the U.N. Convention on the
Law of the Sea. It also joined with the Open Society Institute of George
Soros to oppose John Bolton's nomination as U.S. Ambassador to the U.N.
They hired a crook <http://www.usasurvival.org/ck8.29.06.html> as part
of their lobbying effort.



*Global Taxes*



Back when it proudly called itself the World Federalist Association, the
group said that one of its main priorities was to "provide the U.N. with
sustained and independent sources of funding." How did they intend to
bring this about? Through the Law of the Sea Treaty.



The WFA book, /A New World Order: Can It Bring Security to the World's
People?/ declared, "One of the most popular concepts identified as an
independent source of revenue is the ocean and seabeds." It noted that
the treaty creates an International Seabed Authority to grant "leasing
rights to private corporations," provide "mining concessions," and
operate mining operations through something called the Enterprise.
"Certain fees and sharing of technology are also involved," it noted.
Revenues accruing to the Seabed Authority "are designated for
development assistance" or foreign aid.



Basic investigative reporting, which is apparently lacking at the Times
and other liberal papers, also reveals that the concept of the "common
heritage of mankind" was inserted into the treaty through the
aforementioned efforts of Sam Levering and his wife Miriam. They were
the left-wing Quakers and World Federalists who formed the "Neptune
Group" to lobby for the treaty over the course of decades. They worked
with Elliot Richardson, who was President Jimmy Carter's representative
to the treaty negotiations. He would later serve as national co-chairman
of the pro-U.N. lobby, the U.N. Association. (The U.N. Association is
funded by most of the major media groups, including the New York Times
Company Foundation).



The Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL), a Quaker group,
reports that "During the 1970s, Sam and Miriam worked out of FCNL's
office as they diligently and patiently advocated to keep the oceans
part of 'the common heritage of mankind' and negotiated with governments
on the treaty's final language." FCNL reports that the Leverings also
"entered the fray in 1970 as Congress debated the Deep Seabed Hard
Mineral Resources bill that promoted a nationalistic approach" to
mining. The Leverings were strongly opposed to that approach. Their
notion of the oceans being the "common heritage of mankind" stayed in
the treaty.



*The Birth of "Limited" World Government*



The results were what they intended. In its 1995 study, /National
Taxpayers, International Organizations: Sharing the Burden of Financing
the United Nations/, the U.N. Association admitted that the
International Seabed Authority was unique among U.N. bodies: "Only the
Seabed authority created by the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea,
which entered into force in late 1994, has authority today to directly
collect international revenue to finance its activities." Hence, global
taxes were born, a major step on the road to world government. But will
the U.S. Senate sign on to that scheme? That's what the battle over the
Law of the Sea Treaty is all about.



"My parents were world peace advocates," boasted Davidson College
history professor Ralph Levering. "They were deeply involved with the
World Federalist Movement from the 1930s through the 1950s, advocating a
federalist system binding all countries under a central world government
with limited power." There were other players involved and you can read
about them in this report <http://www.usasurvival.org/lost.shtml>.



An official 1997 WFA publication declared that the final version of the
Law of the Sea Treaty "marked real progress in establishing global
governance by.stipulating that mining of the seabeds beyond national
waters should require payment of royalties to the LOS [Law of the Sea]
organization, thereby creating a funding resource that would be
independent of voluntary contributions by the treaty member nations.
These are the elements of a limited world government in a very
restricted field that is nevertheless significant."



There you have it, Ms. Collins. You can call this a conspiracy theory if
you want to. But it is really not. It is an open secret that our major
media want desperately to conceal.



Defeating the Law of the Sea Treaty would not only stop the globalists
dead in their tracks. It would let the New York Times and other media
know that we have seen through their propaganda and disinformation. So
we will get two victories for the price of one. Isn't that worth the
effort? America's sovereignty is right now hanging in the balance. What
will you do? What decision will you make?



C 2007 Cliff Kincaid - All Rights Reserved



------------------------------------------------------------------------



Cliff Kincaid, a veteran journalist and media critic, Cliff concentrated
in journalism and communications at the University of Toledo, where he
graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree.

Cliff has written or co-authored nine books on media and cultural
affairs and foreign policy issues.

Cliff has appeared on Hannity & Colmes, The O'Reilly Factor, Crossfire
and has been published in the Washington Post, Washington Times,
Chronicles, Human Events and Insight.

Web Site: www.AIM.com <http://www.aim.com/>

E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>





--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: osint@yahoogroups.com
  Subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Reply via email to