WUWT readers and many others at other websites responded strongly to my post:
Obama Poised to Cede US Sovereignty in Copenhagen, Claims British Lord Monckton
Now the full video of the speech is available of Lord Christopher Monckton speaking on October 14th, 2009 at a climate skeptic event sponsored by the Minnesota Free Market Institute. As an added bonus, we have the Powerpoint presentation used. Unlike Al Gore’s presentations, Monckton’s presentations are not “secret” and are available to the public. Also I have a link to the draft Climate Change Treaty here
See the video below.
Here is the full video of Lord Monckton’s speech. It is one hour and 35 minutes long.
Monckton’s Powerpoint presentation used at that speech is available in PDF format here (warning large download 17.5 MB)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
you said Moncton’s presentations are “not available to the public” at the end. typo i presume?
REPLY: Fixed thanks – A
No one want to know in the MSM in Australia.
I linked to the UN copy of the treaty nad merely said “eyeryone should read this , it appears that we will have to pay a climate tax to the UN of 0.8% of GDP ” on both Lenore Taylor’s aricle at the Austrailian and twice at the
ABC
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,26228105-5017906,00.html
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/10/19/2717502.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/10/19/2717424.htm?section=justin
No comments were posted.
I would have thought that this would be big news.
Stupendous!
Right at the end of the speech, Lord Monckton notes that Pres. Obama absolutely will sign the Copenhagen treaty and describes the danger to U.S. sovereignty in our own Constitution – Article VI, Paragraph 2: All Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land.
However, the Authority of the President’s signature comes from a two-thirds approval vote of the Senate (Article II, Section 2, Paragraph 2). So contact your Senators and tell them to reject the Copenhagen treaty.
OT: Anthony, your World Climate Widget says solar flux = 70, but that is the radio flux, the irradiation is much different.
REPLY: I’m well aware of the 10.7 cm solar radio flux difference to TSI etc. Maybe it is too complex for some. Feel free to make suggestions on the widget page, just click on the widget – A
Ahem…
Mr. Watts, please forgive my Russian paranoia… but haven’t you been thinking about seriously improving the arrangements for your personal safety?
After all, you are doing some serious damage, in terms of reputation and financial well-being, to many people not known for their moral scruples.
For many people, coming to WUWT after browsing the MSM sites is like gulping a fresh air after swimming in a sewer. Therefore, your personal safety is our collective concern.
Monckton is a National Treasure in Britain, and a very amusing chap with a wonderful way with words, but his take on US sovereignty issues is not to be taken too seriously. Think of it as Andy Rooney or Gore Vidal or William F. Buckley, off on a long discursive idiosyncratic lecture only loosely tethered to reality.
Its fun if you are in the right mood.
Thank you for quick access to the pdf. My guests will be royally entertained and quietly educated. (I hope 🙂 )
Latest rubbish from UK
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8313672.stm
As Mr Brown is a renowned liar however, his words will probably be largely ignored here in UK.
The BBC also have this ‘Brief History of Climate Change’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8313672.stm
This mentions the what it calls ‘controversial’ hockey stick graph but it does not mention that it is discredited.
Also we have just had another incident of mad people attempting to break into a coal fired power station with the intention of shutting it down (thank goodness they failed). This resulted in injuries to several police officers who were sent to stop them. I hope those arrested get long jail sentences but I expect they will not serve any time at all. They will claim that they were acting for the greater good of the world and will get lots of sympathy from the Guardian newspaper. When will this madness end?
Is it possible to download the video as a file, rather than having to watch the video “live” from end to end on YouTube ?? I don’t mind how large the file would be, but the YouTube format forces one to spend the time all at one sitting.
Many thanks
Alan Haile (00:07:19) :
Latest rubbish from UK
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8313672.stm
As Mr Brown is a renowned liar however, his words will probably be largely ignored here in UK.
Too true, the current government is becoming a laughing stock, in some ways it’s a good thing – the more hyperbole the better as it just turns more and more people off (the same with protesters at powerstations – it simply marginalises them and their views even more, top stuff).
What a great line: “Negotiators have 50 days to save the world from global warming”… dum dum dum dum dum dum dum dum…. FLASH – AAAAHHHHHAA…
(Insert your choice of picture of Brian Blessed in feathers here…)
Cheers
Mark
Norm Beazer- you can download You Tube videos. You should download free software from dvdvideosoft.com. It can automatically convert the downloaded videos from the Flash standard used by You Tube into a more useful format such as AVI. Not a file, I know but at least you have a copy.
The sovereignty issue is a fascinating one. At the end of the day, of course the people of any country can bring political pressure to bear and get something thrown out – ‘de-ratification’ of a UN Treaty included.
However, those who think the US constitution will protect them from creeplng global totalitarianism overlook the impact and power of herd mentality – if every country in the world isolates – on UN instructions – any outliers, even the US is vulnerable.
The real question is, if the US and other powers agree in principle to creation of a world government mechanism, self-funding through international carbon levies or financial transaction taxes, then the foot will be in the door and by the time the American people finally realise what’s up and instruct de-ratification the costs of extrication will be much higher.
If the world entity eventually has enough military force under its jurisdiction then it will have the power to back up trade sanctions or the like.
I remembered reading something along these lines on Ian Wishart’s site when he launched Air Con, and have found it again:
http://www.thebriefingroom.com/archives/2009/07/global_governan.html
Some of the interesting quotes from the UN briefing paper:
“The question of legitimacy is at the heart of the ‘international system’. Legitimacy requires a certain degree of ‘global democracy’ that would gradually increase over time. At the same time, realistic global governance cannot ignore existing power relations in both the economic and military sense. A blueprint that ignores the resources controlled by various actors and their relative weights in the world would not be feasible. The reform agenda must try to balance three divergent requirements:
1. Global democracy, which in some fundamental sense must give equal weight to each human being;
2. Recognition of the endurance of nation states which do have ‘equal’ legal status as sovereigns and remain fundamental ‘units’ of the international system; and reflection of the divergent economic and military ‘capabilities’ of nation states. It is obvious that India, Japan, Sri Lanka and Barbados, to take four examples, while being “equal” sovereign nation states, have very different economic and defense capabilities which must be reflected in the architecture of the international system.
3. It is important to stress that a United Nations adapted to the needs and realities of the 21st Century should be the overall institutional setting for both the political and the economic sphere. The current arrangements need to be replaced by new ones, changing from the post World War II representation to constituencies, weighted votes and universal participation, and adjusting the policies of those institutions in favour of the actual needs of today’s world.”
“Military force is not a legitimate political instrument, except in self- defence or under UN auspices;
The development of military capabilities beyond that required for national defence and support of UN action is a potential threat to the security of people.
Weapons of mass destruction are not legitimate instruments of national defence.
The production and trade in arms should be controlled by the international community.”
“The UN should aim at a veto-free culture in the Security Council. There is no doubt that the veto-based decision-making structure has a number of negative features. Sensitive matters often trigger repeated vetoes, which means that the Security Council is unable to act in areas that are in fact clearly within its area of competence. One example of this is the Israel-Palestine conflict, in relation to which the Unites States has exercised a veto on several occasions, thus blocking any real decisions by the Security Council concerning the conflict.”
What is even more dangerous is if the treaty is treated as ‘not a treaty’ as is increasingly the case among these fascists. They may merely call it an ‘agreement’ which doesnt require a supermajority ratification, and they will claim it only requires a simple majority to enact the regulations to comply with the agreement.
I’d also recommend you to …recommend ppl to watch this video, by Cascade Policy Institute (Oregon) :
I think it puts the climate issue in its right context.
Myron Ebell says at 11:33 :
“We’re being told that what we need is more government control of the economy, and that we need to move back towards that model of the government telling people how much energy they can use, which is exactly what the Soviet Union did and which not only incredibly poverty and low standard of living but led to this huge environmental horror”.
The movie’s homepage: http://www.climatechains.com
I think that every success in reduction of poverty and increase of wealth in the world is due to less regulation, trade, and basically free market economy. Carbon trade will be devastating for economies and people.
Take a deep breath, get a glass of water, cool down.
Don’t go all hysterical on us.
Monckton’s sounding crazy, and if you bother to pay attention to what he says, he’s clearly inaccurate.
I got just that paragraph dealing with DDT, and there are easily a half-dozen factual errors in there. Either Monckton is one of the poorest researchers in history, or he’s telling tall tales.
How can we believe anything he says when he’s telling huge fibs about DDT and malaria? If he’s wrong on the small stuff, he’s most likely wrong on the big stuff.
Which is he, stupid or evil?
Anthony, this stuff from Monckton is way below your evidence quality. Should we regard this as a capitulation that your evidence is weak, and so the stuff Monckton makes up must be used?
I hope not.
“Alexander Feht
For many people, coming to WUWT after browsing the MSM sites is like gulping a fresh air after swimming in a sewer.”
Reply
…How strange. I was going to say almost the exact same thing. This site really is like breathing fresh air after all the sewage stench from the global warming industry.
If US sovereignty is as flexible as British Parliamentary sovereignty (particularly in relation to the EU) your politicians will claim they and their institutions are still sovereign, it’s just that they have agreed to go along with what the external body says – in effect to lend that external body the authority your politicians have been given by you.
They could change their mind at any moment. The key thing is they won’t.
I lost interest when he started god-bothering
The structure will most likely run like this:
States Rights superceded by Federal Rights superceded by UN Rights.
AGW (even the new & improved Climate Change brand) makes it’s own gravy.
It enacts it’s own dogma (labels unbelievers heretics), creates it’s own science (PolyScience), synthesizes it’s own data sets (computer re-generated) and wants to tax everyone. Finally, it will carry out climate experiments on a Global Scale given the chance.
Wake up, dear people. The guy is a National Treasure like I say. Would you take Andy Rooney seriously on this subject?
Norm Beazer (00:15:34) :
“Is it possible to download the video as a file, rather than having to watch the video “live” from end to end on YouTube ?? I don’t mind how large the file would be, but the YouTube format forces one to spend the time all at one sitting.
Install DownloadHelper in your Firefox browser and then play the file with VLC.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/3006
http://www.videolan.org/vlc/
Commenters aiming their shots at Monckton should, at least, be sure to read the Draft text, posted by Anthony on October 3, and ignored by the world at large ever since.
It is surely time to get some assurances from those eagerly signing in our names, at Copenhagen, that nothing will be done that cannot be undone.
Hard to imagine that zealous advocates might be so concerned.
Ed Darrell (01:31:46) : “I got just that paragraph dealing with DDT, and there are easily a half-dozen factual errors in there. Either Monckton is one of the poorest researchers in history, or he’s telling tall tales.”
I recommend this excellent article from a manufacturer of DDT. This is as up, close and personal to DDT as one can get.
(2nd edition – April 2008) by A.O. Kime
The DDT Insecticide Ban… What Was the Truth Behind it?
Deep throat and the ‘political decision’ to ban DDT
http://www.matrixbookstore.biz/ddt.htm
Excerpt: “As to the circumstances surrounding the banning of DDT, the November 1980 issue of Fusion magazine (page 52) stated: “When U.S. Environmental Protection Agency chief William Ruckelshaus was about to announce his decision to ban DDT in June 1972, he confided to a friend, “There is no scientific basis for banning this chemical — this is a political decision.”” The ‘friend’ was never identified however. In a commentary the magazine concluded (page 56): “The EPA and environmentalists must be held accountable for their crime: There was not a single human death from DDT usage; there have been untold thousands of deaths and millions of disease-stricken persons as a result of the DDT banning.”
Forgive me, but I fail to see the slick melodrama from Lord Monkton is this presentation that Al Gore uses in “An Inconvenient Truth”!
He is absolutely right about the politics though. This is serious stuff, everyone can see it, everybody knows, but few can or will do anything about it!