Saturday, May 26, 2012

BAN ON USING TAXPAYER MONEY TO PASS U.N. GUN TREATY PASSED

Posted By Woody Pendleton

FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER   WFZR


Tester-Moran Amendment to Block Use of Taxpayer Money to Lobby for UN Gun Ban Passes by Voice Vote

Posted on May 25, 2012
Print

Email


As we reported last week, every gun owner concerned about the future of our Right to Keep and Bear Arms should be aware that the United Nations and the global gun eradication movement are attempting to eliminate our Second Amendment freedoms by drafting a U.N. Arms Trade Treaty. This treaty would cover tanks, helicopters, and other heavy weapons but could also include civilian rifles, shotguns and handguns. The treaty's language will be finalized by the U.N. this July during a four week conference.

In an attempt to thwart this serious threat to our sovereign rights and freedoms, earlier this year, Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kans.) introduced S. 2205--the "Second Amendment Sovereignty Act." S. 2205 would prohibit the Administration from using "the voice, vote, and influence of the United States, in connection with negotiations for a United Nations Arms Trade Treaty, to restrict in any way the rights of United States citizens under the second amendment to the Constitution of the United States, or to otherwise regulate domestic manufacture, assembly, possession, use, transfer, or purchase of firearms, ammunition, or related items, including small arms, light weapons, or related materials."

This week, during consideration of the Fiscal Year 2013 State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs Appropriations Bill, Senator Moran took additional steps to safeguard our rights and joined Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) in offering an amendment to protect the rights of American gun owners from being undermined by the proposed ATT. We're pleased to announce that the amendment passed by a voice vote.

The amendment will block any taxpayer dollars from being used to advocate or agree to any provision that would restrict in any way the rights of United States citizens under the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, or that would otherwise regulate the domestic manufacture, importation, assembly, possession, use, transfer or purchase of firearms, ammunition or related items.

"The United Nations must be prevented from interfering with our constitutional freedoms. Equally important, American taxpayers should not be forced to foot the bill for the U.N.’s efforts to restrict our Right to Keep and Bear Arms," said NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris W. Cox. "The NRA would like to thank Senator Tester and Senator Moran for their leadership in offering this amendment to protect American freedom."

A similar amendment, offered by Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.), was adopted by the House Committee on Appropriations in the Fiscal Year 2013 State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs last Thursday by a bipartisan vote of 30-20.

DEBT RATING MAY BE LOWERED AGAIN SOON

Posted By Woody Pendleton

FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER  WFZR

Rating Agencies Warn Further Downgrade Without Deficit Plan

Saturday, 26 May 2012 10:24 AM
By Newsmax 

Share:


Rating agencies say they need to be convinced that lawmakers have a real plan in the works to reduce the growing debt if the nation is to avert future downgrades, according to a report by The Hill.

“If Congress doesn’t put in place a process that assures people that this will be addressed in a real manner . . . then there is no doubt in my mind that our sovereign debt will be downgraded,” said Steve Bell, the senior director of economic policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center. “Markets throughout the world are going to be looking at the action of the United States government.”

“It’s highly uncertain . . . because of the political circumstances,” said Steven Hess, Moody’s lead analyst for U.S. ratings. “Our stance at this point is to wait and see.”

“We’d have to assess the actual content of any temporary agreement,” Hess added. “How likely is it that that will require a credible plan to be implemented within whatever time frame they come up with? It’s the actual deficit and debt trajectories that we expect that will be the most important determinant.”

Fitch and Moody’s have both put the United States on notice that future downgrades are coming without a change in course. Furthermore, Fitch identified 2013 as a crucial year for the United States to take action on its debt. Currently, it sees better-than-even odds that it will downgrade the United States.

Senator Tom Coburn, R-Okla., a member of the Simpson-Bowles debt commission and a long time spending hawk, agrees with the findings.

“We’re going to get another downgrade. I can tell you right now. You can have a great legal case for suing the rating agencies for not downgrading us again because we have not demonstrated the political will to solve the problems,” he said in a recent interview with Bob Schieffer for CBS’s Face to Face.

Coburn argues that last year’s downgrade of the nation’s credit rating from AAA to AA+ by the ratings agency Standard and Poor’s was just the beginning, according to the CBS report. The agency made its decision just days after congress passed an 11th hour compromise to raise the nation’s debt ceiling.

Standard and Poor’s in a statement at that time said it was “pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the Administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government’s debt dynamics any time soon.”

Coburn agrees. “We should see another downgrade because we have not done the structural things that will fix our country. If you look what’s getting ready to happen to us, in another five years, we’re going to have $22 trillion worth of debt. We’re going to have 120 percent of our total GDP in debt. If you look at historic interest rates, we’re going to be paying $800 billion a year in interest. Where are we going to get that money?” he warned in the Face to Face interview.

Despite all the negative consequences of delay, any substantive action on the debt almost certainly won’t happen before the election, notes The Hill report. Lawmakers will tangle mightily in lame-duck sessions in November -- when Congress must decide whether to raise the debt ceiling, extend the Bush tax rates and replace $1.2 trillion in automatic spending cuts set to begin in January 2013.

Lobbyists on K Street are betting on a short-term deal in the lame duck that would kick down the road longer-term decisions on taxes and spending into 2013. The expected compromise, according to The Hill: extend current tax rates in the short term while nudging up the debt ceiling.

The maneuver would allow more time for lawmakers to reform the tax code.

Beth Ann Bovino, deputy chief economist for Standard & Poor’s who does not set ratings as part of her job description tells The Hill that she expects lawmakers will compromise in the nick of time – with a “credible medium-term plan, which is what investors and the economy would need.”

© 2012 Newsmax


Read more on Newsmax.com: Rating Agencies Warn Further Downgrade Without Deficit Plan
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

OBAMA TELLS CONGRESS TO PASS SEA TREATY

Posted By Woody Pendleton

FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER  WFZR


U.N. Law Of The Sea Treaty Must Be Stopped

Posted
John Kerry, chairman of the Senate committee considering the Law of the Sea treaty, holds up an ad in support. AP
John Kerry, chairman of the Senate committee considering the Law of the Sea treaty, holds up an ad in support. AP View Enlarged Image
Geopolitics: The administration begins the push for ratification of a 1982 treaty that would end America's sovereignty on the high seas, limit our freedoms on land and speed up the global redistribution of wealth and power.
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told Sen. John Kerry's Senate Foreign Relations Committee last Wednesday that the freedom of the sea once guaranteed by the British Royal Navy and then the U.S. Navy should be in the hands of United Nations bureaucrats in Montego Bay, Jamaica, enforcers of the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) he said we must ratify.
It used to be that a carrier battle group led by 90,000 tons of American diplomacy was sufficient to ensure that no nation could threaten our freedom of navigation and that of other countries.
But the nation whose motto was "we win, they lose" under President Reagan is replacing it with President Obama's "mother, may we?"
"If we are not a party to this treaty and can't deal with it at the table, then we have to deal with it at sea with our naval power, and once that happens, we clearly increase the risk for confrontation," Panetta told members of the committee.
Once upon a time, other nations were afraid of us; now we're afraid of them.
LOST would codify the "global test" Kerry uses to assess the validity of U.S. activities. For example, Communist China, a LOST signatory, contends the treaty bans the Proliferation Security Initiative under which we can stop and search ships on the high seas suspected of transporting WMDs on behalf of or for use by terrorists.
What would we do if China's claim to undisputed sovereignty over the 1 million square miles of the South China Sea were honored by this new international body to which we would be subservient? Would the U.S. Navy quietly keep off their grass?
LOST establishes an International Seabed Authority with the power to regulate 70% of the earth's surface, placing seabed mining, fishing rights, deep-sea oil exploration and even the activities of the U.S. Navy under control of a global bureaucracy.
It even provides for a global tax that would be paid directly to the ISA by companies seeking to develop resources in and under the world's oceans.
The treaty was originally finalized in the 1980s but rejected by Reagan over concerns it would cede U.S. sovereignty to the ISA and could force the United States to hand over sensitive technology to Soviet-allied states.

NINTH CIRCUIT COURT TAKES $1M MAUI VACATION

Posted By Woody Pendleton

FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER   WFZR

Federal Judges Get $1 Miillion Hawaiian Junket at Taxpayers’ Expense

Written by Gary North on May 23, 2012
Print Friendly
Too bad you’re not a judge with the Ninth Court of Appeals. If you were, you would be making plans for a summer vacation on Maui.
Of course, you would face a gruling schedule of investigations, becoming more alert to crucial legal issues.
When exposed by Breitbart, the Court had a ready answer.
The Ninth Circuit is in receipt of the May 18, 2012, letter from Senators Grassley and Sessions, Ranking Members of the Senate Judiciary and Senate Budget Committees, respectively, regarding the upcoming Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference. The letter is being reviewed at this time and a response to the Senators will be forthcoming.
As part of the Third Branch of government, the Ninth Circuit is fully aware of its responsibilities as a steward of public funds. The conference is authorized by law “for the purpose of considering the business of the courts and advising means of improving the administration of justice within the circuit.” [§ 28 U.S.C. Sec. 333] The conference fully adheres to these goals, providing an exceptional educational program and the opportunity to conduct numerous business meetings that further circuit governance. Judges and other attendees take seriously their obligation to participate fully in the conference. Costs for lodging and air travel to attend the conference are comparative to those found at mainland venues. Any sporting and recreational activities are paid for by individuals and are not reimbursable.
It is indicative of the nearsightedness of the Breitbart news organization that it to understand the tremendous opportunities that Maui offers to dedicated judges to advance the science of jurisprudence. Were it not for the dedication of judges like these, who specialize in bankruptcy cases, the government would not be as close to bankruptcy as it is. It moving toward bankruptcy, it’s a million here, and a million there. Pretty soon it adds up.
So, I am standing behind our federal judges. I think other circuit courts are not seeing their opportunities and taking them. They should look to the Ninth Circuit Court for guidance.
Tagged with
, ,

Friday, May 25, 2012

OBAMA APPOINTS JOHN BRENNAN AS HIS ASSASSINATION CZAR


Posted By Woody Pendleton

FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER     WFZR

US Dictator Barack Hussein Obama has announced he has given his latest Czar (John Brennan) the “right” to assassinate those whom Obama chooses

Obama Hires his Personal Murder Czar and Dems continue to Threaten SCOTUS

Author
- Sher Zieve Friday, May 25, 2012
(4) Comments | Print friendly | Email Us

When any country’s leader reaches comprehensive dictator status, he begins either incarcerating or killing off his opponents (aka enemies). One need only look at the rich and murderous histories of Josef Stalin, Adolph Hitler, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot and other tyrannical rulers to know that this is a fait accompli in all totalitarian regimes. In one way or another, each of these tyrants conducted their own personal genocide(s).

In fact, Barack Obama’s FCC “Diversity” Czar Mark Lloyd has touted as legitimate the usage of a willing and malleable press (as was done with the media-based “Big-Lie” that the Tutsis planned to enslave the Hutus which resulted in the Rwandan slaughter of 800,000 Tutsis within a period of 100 days) to conduct just such a genocide for “social change.” The openly Black Liberation (Marxist) Lloyd also praises Venezuelan Marxist Dictator Hugo Chavez and has said the “whites” need to be forced to step down allowing blacks and other minorities to have their turn at power. ObamaCzar Lloyd also says that free speech is overrated and “This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very least, blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a distraction from the critical examination of other communications policies.” And with regards to the American people, one of Lloyd’s patently racist comments is: “There are few things I think more frightening in the American mind than dark skinned black men. Here I am!”

Now, in a similar manner to Lloyd’s comments, US Dictator Barack Hussein Obama has announced he has given his latest Czar (John Brennan) the “right” to assassinate those whom Obama chooses. One of the few—if only—outlets actually providing any reportage on this issue is the Associated Press. The AP article:
“Who will drones target? Who in the US will decide?” advises: “White House counterterror [sic] chief [aka “Murder Czar] John Brennan has seized the lead in guiding the debate on which terror leaders will be targeted for drone attacks or raids, establishing a new procedure to vet both military and CIA targets.”
In the past, the Joint Chiefs of Staff had substantial input into this process. Now, however, appointee-Brennan has been given (by his boss Obama) the role of holding the decision trump card(s) as to when, where and whom will be ‘taken out‘ by the recently enabled and enacted drone aircrafts. One thing the AP story did not cover is the fact that the Obama-drones are now being used—nationwide—for domestic surveillance within the United States. One must—logically, I believe—surmise that it won’t be a great deal longer until Obama uses the Brennan-controlled drones for Obama’s opponents (aka “domestic enemies”). That, after all, was largely why the “domestic-enemy” NDAA bill was crafted by the Marxist pair McCain and Levin. And, now Brennan has been given license to choose who will be killed.
The US Police State is well underway, folks, and I suspect (if the Obama syndicate remains in power) that soon a ‘Berlin Wall’ type scenario will exist here.
Then there’s this continuing lunacy from Congress. Not to be outdone by his boss, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) decided it was his turn to threaten and attempt to intimidate SCOTUS—and specifically Chief Justice John Roberts. Although the majority of the American people oppose the forced imposition of the ObamaCare monstrosity, Leahy warned C.J. Roberts that Congress had passed it and he had better uphold Congress‘ decision ‘or else‘. Essentially, Leahy told C.J. Roberts that he must put aside the 1803 Marbury v Madison decision, which established the basis of Judicial Review under the US Constitution’s Article III. Note: It appears, as Obama has already subordinated Congress to his Executive Branch, Congress is attempting to place the US Supreme Court (and specifically Roberts) in an inferior position to Congress. Note 2: For those who have recently spent the last 16 years, or so, in the government school system you may not be aware that the US federal government is comprised of three co-equal branches: Executive (POTUS), Legislative (Congress) and Judicial (SCOTUS).
Folks, SCOTUS seems to be We-the-People’s last hope toward bringing some semblance of sanity back to the now thoroughly corrupt and insane other-two-governmental-branches and allowing at least one last vestige of liberty. Amongst others, we MUST win this fight or relegate ourselves to our own slavery. If we and the USA are to have any chance, whatsoever, of survival Mr. Obama and his syndicate must be removed from office.
As a last note, Obama is issuing multiple Executive Orders on an almost daily basis to place us more firmly into bondage and to better ensure the complete dismantling of the USA—in case he IS voted out of power in November. Let’s make sure he is voted out—in a landslide—and ensure that all of his subjugating E.O.s are overturned when the new POTUS is elected! Remember that Reagan overturned virtually all the E.O.s President Carter had put into place. There is real hope and change if we make it so and remove the Obama cabal.
“If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land”—2 Chronicles 7:14

OBAMA'S " SONS" ? DOES MICHELLE KNOW?

Posted By Woody Pendleton
FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER  WFZR

Obama Twice Mistakenly Mentions ‘My Sons,' While Defending Contraception Mandate

President Barack Obama in Des Moines, Iowa, on May 24, 2012 (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
Barack ObamaIn two campaign speeches over the last two days, President Barack Obama has twice mistakenly mentioned “my sons” when defending his administration’s regulation requiring virtually all health-care plans in the United States to provide women, without any fees or co-pay, with sterilizations and all Food and Drug Administration-approved contraceptives, including those that can cause abortions.
Obama, of course, has two daughters--10-year-old Sasha and 13-year-old Malia--but no sons.
On Monday, 43 Catholic dioceses and organizations across the country--including the archdioceses of New York and Washington, D.C. and the University of Notre Dame and Catholic University of America—filed 12 different lawsuits against the Obama administration arguing that because the sterilization-contraception-abortifacient mandate would force Catholics to act against the teachings of their faith it violates the First Amendment right to freedom of religion.
At the Iowa State Fair Grounds on Thursday, Obama said: “We don’t need another political fight about ending a woman’s right to choose, or getting rid of Planned Parenthood or taking away affordable birth control. We don’t need that. I want women to control their own health choices, just like I want my daughters to have the same economic opportunities as my sons. We’re not turning back the clock. We’re not going back there.”
Both the transcript of the Iowa speech distributed by the White House and a video of it posted by the Des Moines Register indicated that Obama mistakenly said “my sons.”
The video of the speech posted by the Des Moines Register also shows that despite his slip about "my sons," the president was speaking with the help of a teleprompter.
On Wednesday at the Fox Theatre in Redwood City, Calif., Obama made the same mistaken reference to “my sons.”
“We don’t need another political fight about ending a woman’s right to choose, or getting rid of Planned Parenthood, or taking away access to affordable birth control,” Obama said, according to the White House transcript of his speech. “I want women to control their own health care choices, just like I want my daughters to have the same opportunities as my sons. We’re not rolling back the clock.”
In other recent speeches, Obama delivered virtually the same line as he did at the Iowa State Fair Grounds and at the Fox Theatre but said "your sons" instead of "my sons."
In Denver on Wednesday, for example, according to the White House transcript, Obama said at a campaign event at the Hyatt Regency: "We certainly don’t need another political fight about ending a woman’s right to choose, or get rid of Planned Parenthood, or taking away affordable birth control. I want women to control their own health choices, just like I want my daughters to have the same opportunities as your sons."
Obama also delivered the line that way on May 10 at a campaign event in Seattle.
Earlier this month, at a campaign event at the Rubin Museum of Art in New York City, Obama made a similarly mistaken reference to “my sons” while defending of the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which expanded the statute of limitations for filing lawsuits alleging discrimination in employment compensation.
“The first bill I signed, the Lilly Ledbetter Act--a simple proposition--equal pay for equal work. I don’t want my daughters treated differently than my sons,” Obama said, according to the White House transcript of that speech.
Obama made yet another similar rhetorical slip back on Jan. 12, while speaking at a campaign event at a private residence in Chicago, Ill. At that event, according to the White House transcript, he also mistakenly mentioned “my sons” in the context of talking about the Lily Ledbetter law.
“The first bill I signed--a bill that said that we’re going to have equal pay for equal work because I want my daughters treated the same way as my sons,” said Obama. “We got that done.”
In that instance, the Washington Post and Politico both took notice of the president’s slip of the tongue. Post columnist Al Kamen wrote: “Breaking news! President Obama, speaking last night in Chicago at a fundraiser at a private home, unloaded this bombshell: Obama, according to the White House transcript, talked about ‘The first bill I signed--a bill that said that we’re going to have equal pay for equal work because I want my daughters treated the same way as my sons.’ Sons? What sons? How many? Where? Names? Do the girls know? (More importantly, does Michelle?) Will the boys be joining him on the campaign trail?”
Politico picked up on Kamen’s piece, posting a short item by Byron Tau that said: “The Washington Post's Al Kamen catches this nugget in President Obama's address to supporters yesterday in Chicago: ‘The first bill I signed--a bill that said that we’re going to have equal pay for equal work because I want my daughters treated the same way as my sons.’ It's not the first time that a rhetorical hypothetical has tripped up the president, as when a ‘Muslim faith’ reference was taken wildly out of context.”
Obama, as noted, does not have sons. Nor was he born in Kenya. Nor is he a Muslim.
But it is a fact, as the White House itself reported in its transcripts of his speeches, that on four occasions this year President Obama has rhetorically slipped up and mistakenly talked about “my sons”—nonexistent though they are.
And in the last two days, in two separate speeches, he mistakenly talked about “my sons” in defending his mandate to force Catholics and Catholic institutions to act against the teachings of their faith in buying and providing health plans that pay for sterilizations, contraceptives, and abortifacients.
The Catholic teachings on sterilization, contraception and abortion that Obama’s mandate would force Catholics to violate are based in part on the premise that man has no right to veto God’s decision to bring a new life into the world.
“It is to be anticipated that perhaps not everyone will easily accept this particular teaching,” Pope Paul VI said in the 1968 Encyclical Letter Humanae Vitae. “There is too much clamorous outcry against the voice of the Church, and this is intensified by modern means of communication. But it comes as no surprise to the Church that she, no less than her divine Founder, is destined to be a ‘sign of contradiction.’ She does not, because of this, evade the duty imposed on her of proclaiming humbly but firmly the entire moral law, both natural and evangelical.
“Since the Church did not make either of these laws, she cannot be their arbiter—only their guardian and interpreter,” said the pope. “It could never be right for her to declare lawful what is in fact unlawful, since that, by its very nature, is always opposed to the true good of man. In preserving intact the whole moral law of marriage, the Church is convinced that she is contributing to the creation of a truly human civilization.”

HAWAII VERIFIES OBAMA A DUAL CITIZEN: NOT QUALIFIED FOR PRESIDENCY

Posted by Woody Pendleton

FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER   WFZR


HAWAII VERIFIES OBAMA A DUAL CITIZEN: NOT QUALIFIED FOR PRESIDENCY

Published May 25, 2012 21 Comments
©2012 drkate
Hawaii verified two things that are fatal to Obama’s qualifications for the presidency: first, he has a foreign father who was never an American; second, Obama is a dual citizen.
Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett’s Milquetoast email request for Hawaii to confirm the ‘information on Obama’s birth in Hawaii, and to accept an email response, got him what he, the republicans, and Obama wanted: another false ‘official’ statement from Hawaii’s Department of Heath (HDOH) supposedly validating Obama’s birth in Hawaii. Ah, more ‘stuff’ that they can hide behind, claiming ‘due diligence’ has been done.
Hoping to put an end to the story,those pesky ballot challenges and Sheriffs, Hawaii and the AZ SoS perpetuate the myth and meme of ‘born in the USA”, or “American citizen”–as the only qualifying factor for President– to deceive the voting public. The Hawaii release did not authenticate Obama’s 2011 electronic version of the Birth Certificate, leaving Sheriff Arpaio’s investigation in tact and relevant. Hawaii also did not verify anything about Obama’s adoption.

We told you.
CLICK BELOW TO READ MORE AND PIC.

OBAMA GIVES AWAY OIL RICH ISLANDS

Posted by Woody Pendleton
FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER  WFZR

This Never Made It To Our News - Why Not? ... Obama Donates 7 Alaska Islands to Putin for Zero Dollars
Monday, May 21, 2012 10:51
100% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.
126

From: Billy-Joe: M.
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2012 6:07 AM
To: Undisclosed-Recipient:;
Subject: This Never made it to our News - WHY NOT???


This is what our beloved (?) president Obama has done in 2012 for America so far this year. This was just sent to me, and got very little press to keep it unknown from the American public. Please read the following to see what is happening. Why is he getting away with all of this?
Is there a "REST OF THE STORY"?
This article on Feb. 16, 2012 appears in very few places.Apparently, the regular "professional reporters" consider Obama giving away islands belonging to Alaskaand part of the United States as no big deal. Obama is giving these islands to Russia for free, no cost, $zero money or any other consideration. Guess what? The state legislature in Alaska (still one of our 50 states) voted several times in opposition to THE GIVEAWAY! The islands have billions of barrels of OIL and Obama could let oil companies lease parts of the islands and start drilling for MORE OIL!! Should you suspect Obama was trying to sneak this by...? Why??

WorldNetDaily.com<worldnetdaily.com//. Obama's State Department is giving away seven strategic, resource-laden Alaskan islands to the Russians. Yes, to the Putin regime in the Kremlin. The seven islands in theArctic OceanandBering Seainclude one the size of Rhode Island and Delaware combined. The Russians are also to get the tens of thousands of square miles of oil-rich seabed's surrounding the islands. The Department of Interior estimates billions of barrels of oil are at stake.

The State Department has undertaken the giveaway in the guise of a maritime boundary agreement between Alaska and Siberia. Astoundingly, our federal government itself drew the line to put these seven Alaskan islands on the Russian side. But as an executive agreement, it could be reversed with the stroke of a pen by Pres. Obama or Sec. Clinton.The agreement was negotiated in total secrecy! The State of Alaskawasnot allowed to participate in the negotiations, nor was the public given any opportunity for comment.This is despite the fact the AlaskaLegislature has passed resolutions of opposition - but the State Department doesn't seem to care.

The imperiled Arctic Ocean islands include Wrangel, Bennett, Jeannette and Henrietta. Wrangel became American in 1881 with the landing of theU.S.Revenue Marine ship Thomas Corwin. The landing party included the famed naturalist John Muir. It is 3,000 square miles in size.

Northwest of Wrangel are theDeLong Islands, named for George Washington DeLong, the captain of USS Jeannette. Also in 1881, he discovered and claimed these three islands for theUnited States. He named them for the voyage co-sponsor, New York City newspaper publisher James Gordon Bennett. The ship's crew received a hero's welcome back in Washington, and Congress awarded them gold medals.

In the Bering Sea at the far west end of the Aleutian chain are Copper Island, Sea Lion Rock and Sea Otter Rock. They were ceded tothe U.S .in Seward's 1867 treaty withRussia.

Now is the time for the Obama administration to stand up for U.S.and Alaskan rights and invaluable resources. The State Department's maritime agreement is a loser - it gives us nothing in return for giving up Alaska's sovereign territory and invaluable resources. We won the Cold War and should start acting like it. Also see Link 1,2 below
And you can "Google" many more links with "Alaskaisland giveaway"
I tried to check this out on Google and here is what I found:

BLACK-GOLD BLUES

OBAMA'S GIVEAWAY: OIL-RICH ISL

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...