AMERICAN BORDERS
TO BE DISMANTLED
***********************************************
Law of the Sea Treaty
Another Admiralty & Treaty Court
The Hidden Agenda of the Law of the Sea Treaty
Hidden Agenda of the United Nations
The Law of the Sea Treaty is ALREADY active. It has a very active International Court.
The Treaty went into effect
without the U.S., But the Bush Administration
is pushing for the
U.S. to give up its sovereignty to the U.N. through this treaty. Senator Lugar - is also pushing for the passage of this treaty.
The
Law of the Sea Treaty - General Information - Overview
Introduction
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea was opened for signature at Montego Bay, Jamaica, on 10 December 1982. It entered into force 12 years later, on 16 November 1994. A subsequent Agreement relating to the implementation of Part XI of the Convention was adopted on 28 July 1994 and entered into force on 28 July 1996. This Agreement and Part XI of the Convention are to be interpreted and applied together as a single instrument.
The origins of the Convention date from 1 November 1967 when Ambassador Arvid Pardo of Malta addressed the General Assembly of the United Nations and called for "an effective international regime over the seabed and the ocean floor beyond a clearly defined national jurisdiction". This led to the convening, in 1973, of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, which after nine years of negotiations adopted the Convention.
The Convention establishes a comprehensive legal framework to regulate all ocean space, its uses and resources. It contains, among other things, provisions relating to the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the continental shelf, the exclusive economic zone and the high seas. It also provides for the protection and preservation of the marine environment, for marine scientific research and for the development and transfer of marine technology. One of the most important parts of the Convention concerns the exploration for and exploitation of the resources of the seabed and ocean floor and subsoil thereof, beyond the limits of national jurisdiction (the Area). The Convention declares the Area and its resources to be "the common heritage of mankind". The International Seabed Authority, established by the Convention, administers the resources of the Area.
Part XV of the Convention lays down a comprehensive system for the settlement of disputes that might arise with respect to the interpretation and application of the Convention. It requires States Parties to settle their disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention by peaceful means indicated in the Charter of the United Nations. However, if parties to a dispute fail to reach a settlement by peaceful means of their own choice, they are obliged to resort to the compulsory dispute settlement procedures entailing binding decisions, subject to limitations and exceptions contained in the Convention.
The mechanism established by the Convention provides for four alternative means for the settlement of disputes: the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, the International Court of Justice, an arbitral tribunal constituted in accordance with Annex VII to the Convention, and a special arbitral tribunal constituted in accordance with Annex VIII to the Convention.
A State Party is free to choose one or more of these means by a written declaration to be made under article 287 of the Convention and deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations (declarations made by States Parties under article 287).
If the parties to a dispute have not accepted the same settlement procedure, the dispute may be submitted only to arbitration in accordance with Annex VII, unless the parties otherwise agree.
htp://www.itlos.org/start2_en.html
I. Access to the
Law of the Sea Tribunal
States Parties to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
The Tribunal is open to States Parties to the Convention (Convention, article 291, paragraph 1; Statute of the Tribunal, article 20, paragraph 1). The entities referred to in article 305, paragraph 1(c) to (f), of the Convention may also become parties.
There are currently 145 States and other entities that are parties to the Convention
(status of the Convention and the Agreement relating to the implementation of Part XI of the Convention).
Entities other than States Parties
The Tribunal is open to entities other than States Parties in any case expressly provided for in Part XI of the Convention or in any case submitted pursuant to any other agreement conferring jurisdiction on the Tribunal which is accepted by all the parties to that case (Convention, article 291; Statute, article 20, paragraph 2).
II. Jurisdiction of the Tribunal
Contentious Cases
(a) Jurisdiction over any dispute concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention
The Tribunal has jurisdiction over any dispute which is submitted to it in accordance with Part XV of the Convention concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention (Convention, article 288, paragraph 1; Statute, article 21) and the Agreement relating to the Implementation of Part XI of the Convention.
Limitations on and exceptions to applicability of the compulsory procedures entailing binding decisions (Convention, Part XV, section 2) are contained in articles 297 and 298 of the Convention (declarations made pursuant to article 298).
Any dispute belonging to the categories referred to in articles 297 and 298 of the Convention may, nevertheless, be submitted to the Tribunal if the parties to the dispute so agree.
(b) Jurisdiction over any dispute concerning the interpretation or application of other agreements
Under article 288, paragraph 2, of the Convention, the Tribunal has jurisdiction over any dispute concerning the interpretation or application of an international agreement related to the purposes of the Convention which is submitted to it in accordance with the agreement. Under article 21 of the Statute, the jurisdiction of the Tribunal includes all matters specifically provided for in any agreement, other than the Convention, which confers jurisdiction on the Tribunal.
Seven multilateral agreements have been concluded
which confer jurisdiction on the Tribunal (relevant provisions of these agreements).
Pursuant to article 22 of the Statute, any disputes concerning the interpretation or application of a treaty or convention already in force and relating to the subject-matter covered by the Convention may, if all the Parties to such agreement so agree, be submitted to the Tribunal in accordance with the agreement.
(c) Jurisdiction of the Seabed Disputes Chamber
The Seabed Disputes Chamber has jurisdiction over disputes with respect to activities in the Area, as defined in article 1 of the Convention, falling within the categories referred to in article 187, subparagraphs (a) to (f), of the Convention. Parties to such disputes may be States Parties, the International Seabed Authority, the Enterprise, state enterprises and natural or juridical persons referred to in article 153, paragraph 2(b), of the Convention.
Disputes between States Parties concerning the interpretation or application of Part XI of the Convention and the Annexes relating thereto may be submitted to a special chamber of the Tribunal at the request of the parties, or to an ad hoc chamber of the Seabed Disputes Chamber at the request of any party (Convention, article 188, paragraph 1). Disputes concerning the interpretation or application of a contract referred to in article 187, subparagraph (c) (i), of the Convention are required to be submitted, at the request of a party, to binding commercial arbitration, unless the parties otherwise agree. However, a commercial arbitral tribunal has no jurisdiction to decide any question of interpretation of the Convention. When the dispute also involves a question of the interpretation of Part XI and the Annexes relating thereto, with respect to activities in the Area, that question shall be referred to the Seabed Disputes Chamber for a ruling (Convention, article 188, paragraph 2).
The Seabed Disputes Chamber has no jurisdiction with regard to the exercise by the International Seabed Authority of its discretionary powers and it has no competence to pronounce itself on the question of whether any rules, regulations and procedures of the International Seabed Authority are in conformity with the Convention or to declare them invalid (Convention, article 189).
(d) The Tribunal itself decides any question as to its jurisdiction
In the event of a dispute as to whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction, the matter shall be settled by decision of the Tribunal (Convention, article 288, paragraph 4; Rules of the Tribunal, article 58).
(e) Provisional measures
If a dispute has been duly submitted to the Tribunal and if the Tribunal considers that prima facie it has jurisdiction under Part XV or Part XI, section 5, of the Convention, the Tribunal may prescribe any provisional measures which it considers appropriate under the circumstances to preserve the respective rights of the parties to the dispute or to prevent serious harm to the marine environment, pending the final decision (Convention, article 290, paragraph 1; Statute, article 25, paragraph 1).
The Tribunal may also prescribe provisional measures in the case covered by article 290, paragraph 5, of the Convention. Under this provision, pending the constitution of an arbitral tribunal to which a dispute is being submitted and if, within two weeks from the date of a request for provisional measures, the parties do not agree to submit the request to another court or tribunal, the Tribunal may prescribe provisional measures if it considers that prima facie the arbitral tribunal to be constituted would have jurisdiction and that the urgency of the situation so requires.
(f) Prompt release of vessels and crews
The Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain an application for the prompt release of a detained vessel or its crew in accordance with the provisions of article 292 of the Convention. This article provides that where the authorities of a State Party have detained a vessel flying the flag of another State Party and it is alleged that the detaining State has not complied with the provisions of the Convention for the prompt release of the vessel or its crew upon the posting of a reasonable bond or other financial security, the question of release from detention may be submitted to the Tribunal if, within 10 days from the time of detention, the parties have not agreed to submit it to another court or tribunal (Convention, article 292, paragraph 1). The application for release may be made only by or on behalf of the flag State of the vessel (Convention, article 292, paragraph 2).
Advisory Opinions
(a) Advisory opinions under the Convention
The Seabed Disputes Chamber has jurisdiction to give advisory opinions at the request of the Assembly or the Council of the International Seabed Authority (Convention, articles 159, paragraph 10, and 191).
(b) Advisory opinions on the basis of other international agreements
The Tribunal may also give an advisory opinion on a legal question if an international agreement related to the purposes of the Convention specifically provides for the submission to the Tribunal of a request for such an opinion (Rules, article 138, paragraph 1).
htp://www.itlos.org/start2_en.html
General Information - Judges
Sessions
The Tribunal of the Law of the Sea presently holds two sessions a year to carry out functions
(not necessarily) related to cases. These include the preparation of budget proposals, adoption of an annual report to the Meetings of States Parties, consideration of organizational and
procedural matters related to the Tribunal and other reporting and publishing requirements.
To date seventeen sessions have been held by the Tribunal.
Dates of the sessions:
First Session 1-31 October 1996
Second Session 3-28 February 1997
Third Session 2-29 April 1997
Fourth Session 6-31 October 1997
Fifth Session 16 February-20 March 1998
Sixth Session 21 September-9 October 1998
Seventh Session 25 February-16 April 1999
Eighth Session 27 September-8 October 1999
Ninth Session 6-17 March 2000
Tenth Session 18-29 September 2000
Eleventh Session 5-16 March 2001
Twelfth Session 17-28 September 2001
Thirteenth Session 4-15 March 2002
Fourteenth Session 25 September-8 October 2002
Fifteenth Session 10-21 March 2003
Sixteenth Session 8-19 September 2003
Seventeenth Session 22 March-2 April 2004
Eighteenth Session 20 September -1 October 2004
Countries
that have already agreed
to give the U.N. Jurisdiction through the Law of the Sea Treaty
(LOST)
Chronological lists of ratifications of, accessions and successions to the Convention and
the related Agreements as at 01 February 2005
Last updated: 01 February 2005
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
148. Burkina Faso (25 January 2005)
147. Latvia (23 December 2004)
146. Denmark (16 November 2004)
145. Lithuania (12 November 2003)
144. Canada (7 November 2003)
143. Albania (23 June 2003)
142. Kiribati (24 February 2003)
141. Tuvalu (9 December 2002)
140. Qatar (9 December 2002)
139. Armenia (9 December 2002)
138. Hungary (5 February 2002)
137.
Madagascar (22 August 2001)
136.
Bangladesh (27 July 2001)
135.
Serbia and Montenegro (12 March 2001)
134.
Luxembourg (5 October 2000)
133.
Maldives (7 September 2000)
132.
Nicaragua (3 May 2000)
131.
Vanuatu (10 August 1999)
130.
Ukraine (26 July 1999)
129.
Poland (13 November 1998)
128.
Belgium (13 November 1998)
127.
Nepal (2 November 1998)
126.
Suriname (9 July 1998)
125.
Lao People's Democratic Republic (5 June 1998)
124.
European Community (1 April 1998)
123.
Gabon (11 March 1998)
122.
South Africa (23 December 1997)
121.
Portugal (3 November 1997)
120.
Benin (16 October 1997)
119.
Chile (25 August 1997)
118.
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (25 July 1997)
117.
Equatorial Guinea (21 July 1997)
116.
Solomon Islands (23 June 1997)
115.
Mozambique (13 March 1997)
114.
Russian Federation (12 March 1997)
113.
Pakistan (26 February 1997)
112.
Guatemala (11 February 1997)
111.
Spain (15 January 1997)
110.
Papua New Guinea (14 January 1997)
109.
Romania (17 December 1996)
108.
Brunei Darussalam (5 November 1996)
107.
Malaysia (14 October 1996)
106.
Palau (30 September 1996)
105.
Mongolia (13 August 1996)
104.
Haiti (31 July 1996)
103.
New Zealand (19 July 1996)
102.
Mauritania (17 July 1996)
101.
Panama (1 July 1996)
100.
Netherlands (28 June 1996)
99.
Sweden (25 June 1996)
98.
Norway (24 June 1996)
97.
Ireland (21 June 1996)
96.
Finland (21 June 1996)
95.
Czech Republic (21 June 1996)
94.
Japan (20 June 1996)
93.
Algeria (11 June 1996)
92.
China (7 June 1996)
91.
Myanmar (21 May 1996)
90.
Bulgaria (15 May 1996)
89.
Slovakia (8 May 1996)
88.
Saudi Arabia (24 April 1996)
87.
France (11 April 1996)
86.
Georgia (21 March 1996 )
85.
Monaco (20 March 1996)
84.
Republic of Korea (29 January 1996)
83.
Nauru (23 January 1996)
82.
Argentina (1 December 1995)
81.
Jordan (27 November 1995)
80.
Samoa (14 August 1995)
79.
Tonga (2 August 1995)
78.
Greece (21 July 1995)
77.
Austria (14 July 1995)
76.
India (29 June 1995)
75.
Slovenia (16 June 1995)
74.
Bolivia (28 April 1995)
73.
Croatia (5 April 1995)
72.
Cook Islands (15 February 1995)
71.
Italy (13 January 1995)
70.
Lebanon (5 January 1995)
69.
Sierra Leone (12 December 1994)
68.
Singapore (17 November 1994)
67.
Mauritius (4 November 1994)
66.
Germany (14 October 1994)
65.
Australia (5 October 1994)
64.
The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (19 August 1994)
63.
Viet Nam (25 July 1994)
62.
Sri Lanka (19 July 1994)
61.
Comoros (21 June 1994)
60.
Bosnia and Herzegovina (12 January 1994)
59.
Guyana (16 November 1993)
58.
Barbados (12 October 1993)
57.
Honduras (5 October 1993)
56.
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines (1 October 1993)
55.
Malta (20 May 1993)
54.
Zimbabwe (24 February 1993)
53.
Saint Kitts and Nevis (7 January 1993)
52.
Uruguay (10 December 1992)
51.
Costa Rica (21 September 1992)
50.
Dominica (24 October 1991)
49.
Djibouti ( 8 October 1991)
48.
Seychelles (16 September 1991)
47.
Marshall Islands (9 August 1991)
46.
Micronesia (Federated States of) (29 April 1991)
45.
Grenada (25 April 1991)
44.
Angola ( 5 December 1990)
43.
Uganda (9 November 1990)
42.
Botswana (2 May 1990)
41.
Oman (17 August 1989)
40.
Somalia (24 July 1989)
39.
Kenya (2 March 1989)
38.
Democratic Republic of the Congo (17 February 1989)
37.
Antigua and Barbuda ( 2 February 1989)
36.
Brazil (22 December 1988)
35.
Cyprus (12 December 1988)
34.
Sao Tome and Principe (3 November 1987)
33.
Cape Verde (10 August 1987)
32.
Yemen (21 July 1987)
31.
Paraguay (26 September 1986)
30.
Guinea‑Bissau (25 August 1986)
29.
Nigeria (14 August 1986)
28.
Kuwait (2 May 1986)
27.
Trinidad and Tobago (25 April 1986)
26.
Indonesia (3 February 1986)
25.
Cameroon (19 November 1985)
24.
United Republic of Tanzania (30 September 1985)
23.
Guinea (6 September 1985)
22.
Iraq (30 July 1985)
21.
Mali (16 July 1985)
20.
Iceland (21 June 1985)
19.
Bahrain (30 May 1985)
18.
Tunisia (24 April 1985)
17.
Togo (16 April 1985)
16.
Saint Lucia (27 March 1985)
15.
Sudan (23 January 1985)
14.
Senegal (25 October 1984)
13.
Cuba (15 August 1984)
12.
Gambia (22 May 1984)
11.
Philippines (8 May 1984)
10.
Côte d'Ivoire (26 March 1984)
9.
Egypt (26 August 1983)
8.
Belize (13 August 1983)
7.
Bahamas (29 July 1983)
6.
Ghana (7 June 1983)
5.
Namibia (18 April 1983)
4.
Jamaica (21 March 1983)
3.
Mexico (18 March 1983)
2.
Zambia (7 March 1983)
1.
Fiji (10 December 1982)
Countries
that have already agreed
to give the U.N. Jurisdiction through the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST)
To address certain difficulties with the seabed mining provisions contained in Part XI of the Convention, which had been raised, primarily by the industrialized countries, the Secretary-General convened in July 1990 a series of informal consultations which culminated in the adoption, on 28 July 1994, of the Agreement relating to the implementation of Part XI of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982. The Agreement entered into force on 28 July 1996.
The Agreement was adopted on 28 July 1994 and entered into force on 28 July 1996. It consists of 10 articles dealing mainly with procedural aspects such as signature, entry into force and provisional application. Its article 2 deals with the relationship between the Agreement and Part XI of the Convention and it provides that the two shall be interpreted and applied together as a single instrument. In the event of an inconsistency between the Agreement and Part XI, however, the provisions of the Agreement shall prevail.
The Agreement has an annex, divided into nine sections, dealing with the various issues that were identified as problem areas during the informal consultations. These include costs to States Parties and institutional arrangements; decision-making mechanisms for the Authority; and future amendments of the Convention.
htp://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_part_xi.htm
Agreement relating to the implementation of Part XI of the Convention
121. Botswana (31 January 2005)
120. Burkina Faso (25 January 2005)
119. Latvia (23 December 2004)
118. Denmark (16 November 2004)
117. Lithuania (12 November 2003)
116. Canada (7 November 2003)
115. Honduras (28 July 2003)
114. Albania (23 June 2003)
113. Mexico (10 April 2003)
112. Kiribati (24 February 2003)
111. Tuvalu (9 December 2002)
110. Qatar (9 December 2002)
109. Armenia (9 December 2002)
108.
Cuba (17 October 2002)
107.
Cameroon (28 August 2002)
106. Kuwait (2 August 2002)
105.
Tunisia (24 May 2002)
104.
Hungary (5 February 2002)
103.
Costa Rica (20 September 2001)
102.
Madagascar (22 August 2001)
101.
Bangladesh (27 July 2001)
100.
Luxembourg (5 October 2000)
99.
Maldives (7 September 2000)
98.
Indonesia (2 June 2000)
97.
Nicaragua (3 May 2000)
96.
Vanuatu (10 August 1999)
95.
Ukraine (26 July 1999)
94.
Poland (13 November 1998)
93.
Belgium (13 November 1998)
92.
Nepal (2 November 1998)
91.
Suriname (9 July 1998)
90.
United Republic of Tanzania (25 June 1998)
89.
Lao People's Democratic Republic (5 June 1998)
88.
European Community (1 April 1998)
87.
Gabon (11 March 1998)
86.
South Africa (23 December 1997)
85.
Portugal (3 November 1997)
84.
Benin (16 October 1997)
83.
Chile (25 August 1997)
82.
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (25 July 1997)
81.
Philippines (23 July 1997)
80.
Equatorial Guinea (21 July 1997)
79.
Solomon Islands (23 June 1997)
78.
Mozambique (13 March 1997)
77.
Russian Federation (12 March 1997)
76.
Pakistan (26 February 1997)
75.
Oman (26 February 1997)
74.
Guatemala (11 February 1997)
73.
Spain (15 January 1997)
72.
Papua New Guinea (14 January 1997)
71.
Romania (17 December 1996)
70.
Brunei Darussalam (5 November 1996)
69.
Malaysia (14 October 1996)
68.
Palau (30 September 1996)
67.
Mongolia (13 August 1996)
66.
Haiti (31 July 1996)
65.
New Zealand (19 July 1996)
64.
Mauritania (17 July 1996)
63.
Panama (1 July 1996)
62.
Netherlands (28 June 1996)
61.
Malta (26 June 1996)
60.
Sweden (25 June 1996)
59.
Norway (24 June 1996)
58.
Ireland (21 June 1996)
57.
Finland (21 June 1996)
56.
Czech Republic (21 June 1996)
55.
Japan (20 June 1996)
54.
Algeria (11 June 1996)
53.
China (7 June 1996)
52.
Myanmar (21 May 1996)
51.
Bulgaria (15 May 1996)
50.
Slovakia (8 May 1996)
49.
Saudi Arabia (24 April 1996)
48.
France (11 April 1996)
47.
Georgia (21 March 1996)
46.
Monaco (20 March 1996)
45.
Republic of Korea (29 January 1996)
44.
Nauru (23 January 1996)
43.
Argentina (1 December 1995)
42.
Jordan (27 November 1995)
41.
Micronesia (Federated States of) (6 September 1995)
40.
Samoa (14 August 1995)
39.
Tonga (2 August 1995)
38.
Zimbabwe (28 July 1995)
37.
Zambia (28 July 1995)
36.
Serbia and Montenegro (28 July 1995)
35.
Uganda (28 July 1995)
34.
Trinidad and Tobago (28 July 1995)
33.
Togo (28 July 1995)
32.
Sri Lanka (28 July 1995)
31.
Nigeria (28 July 1995)
30.
Namibia (28 July 1995)
29.
Jamaica (28 July 1995)
28.
Iceland (28 July 1995)
27.
Guinea (28 July 1995)
26.
Grenada (28 July 1995)
25.
Fiji (28 July 1995)
24.
Côte d'Ivoire (28 July 1995)
23.
Barbados (28 July 1995)
22.
Bahamas (28 July 1995 )
21.
Cyprus (27 July 1995)
20.
Senegal (25 July 1995)
19.
Greece (21 July 1995)
18.
Austria (14 July 1995)
17.
Paraguay (10 July 1995)
16.
India (29 June 1995)
15.
Slovenia (16 June 1995)
14.
Bolivia (28 April 1995)
13.
Croatia (5 April 1995)
12.
Cook Islands (15 February 1995)
11.
Italy (13 January 1995)
10.
Lebanon (5 January 1995)
9.
Seychelles (15 December 1994)
8.
Sierra Leone (12 December 1994)
7.
Singapore (17 November 1994)
6.
Mauritius (4 November 1994)
5.
Belize (21 October 1994)
4.
Germany (14 October 1994)
3.
Australia (5 October 1994)
2.
The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (19 August 1994)
1.
Kenya (29 July 1994)
htp://www.un.org/Depts/los/reference_files/chronological_lists_of_ratifications.htm#The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
CODEX ALIMENTARIUS / WTO/ CAFTA / FTAA ACTION PAGE
How to Fight Codex Alimentarius Commission
(Codex)
How to Fight NAFTA, CAFTA, FTAA & WTO, Anti-Freedom Legislation
Get Real Information & Start Making a Difference
Click here to reach our CODEX ALIMENTARIUS/ CAFTA Action Page
*****************************************************************
Law of the Sea Treaty - Actual Treaty - 202 Pages - PDF
GAO REPORT - United Nations & Need for Sustained Oversight (PDF)
Select Bibliography on Settlement of Disputes concerning the Law of the Sea - PDF (33 Pages)
Law of the Sea Agreement on the Privileges and Immunities of Tribunal PDF
Relationship between UN and LOST Tribunal PDF
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
RIGHTS RESPECTED IN AMERICA
* Limited Government Power
* Rule of Law
* Equal Justice
* Respect for Women
* Freedom of Speech
* Religious Tolerance
* Private Property
Codex Alimentarius
: Guidelines for Vitamins and Minerals - Optional or MANDATORY ?
Read the short analysis - PDF
We would love to hear from you.
Please Feel Free to write to us and share your comments, and your concerns and questions. We can be reached at codextruth@yahoo.com
Please
Note: We do try to be accurate. If you see anything which you believe
Is not
correct on our website, please do bring it to our attention.
Thank you
Electronic Privacy Information Center - Practical Privacy Tools
Microsoft XP Spying on You
Microsoft has programmed Windows XP to contact other computers and transfer information from the user's computer to the other computers:
a) If you have only three DVDs that your children watch sometimes on your home machine that is always connected to the Internet (through a broadband connection), you may not care that Microsoft knows when they watch them. If you seldom use the Windows XP help facility, you may not care that Microsoft is able to know the level of expertise of the people who use your computer.
However, if you are using Windows XP in a large corporation or a government, the fact that another organization believes that it can gather data from you may be completely unacceptable.
This article is support for your own investigation.
The Microsoft article tells how to disable the hidden downloading. However, the disabling is very time-consuming. Also, Microsoft has a history of using defect fixes and security fixes to change the operating system settings. This means that all the settings would need to be checked after every defect fix or security vulnerability fix.
Source: http://www.hevanet.com/peace/microsoft.htm
Article in Spanish http://www.hevanet.com/peace/microsoft-es.htm
*****************************************************************
In Christianity, being an "extremist" means being an extremist in Love.
This does not mean that all Christians succeed. But they will be a lot closer to success for having tried,
than if they had not made the effort at all.
People become like the Gods (God) that they worship.
Those that worship a God of Love become more loving.
Those that worship Gods of Conquest and Forced Conversions (Islam) become less tolerant,
and more hateful and violent. Whatever the characteristics of Allah, few have ever described him as
a God of Love, or Unconditional Love.
Christian Conversions - According to the Bible - Can NEVER be forced.
Any Conversion to Christianity which would be "Forced" would NOT be recognized by God. It is in
His True and KIND nature, that those who come to Him and choose to believe in Him, must come to Him OF
THEIR OWN FREE WILL.
Don't Let anyone tell you that Christians support Forced Conversions.
That is False. True Christianity is NEVER forced.
Please Note that we have no idea how long these links will stay up.
Please ensure that you retain the information you wish
