Reposted from comments on the new Urban Future thread here
Originally from the blog Fightin’ Words
[picapp src=”b/2/3/7/IOC_2016_Olympic_c1a5.jpg?adImageId=5771484&imageId=6683524″ width=”500″ height=”361″ /]
Above: Obama’s last visit to Copenhagen didn’t work out so well for the USA.
The Minnesota Free Market Institute hosted an event at Bethel University in St. Paul on Wednesday evening. Keynote speaker Lord Christopher Monckton, former science adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, gave a scathing and lengthy presentation, complete with detailed charts, graphs, facts, and figures which culminated in the utter decimation of both the pop culture concept of global warming and the credible threat of any significant anthropomorphic climate change.
A detailed summary of Monckton’s presentation will be available here once compiled. However, a segment of his remarks justify immediate publication. If credible, the concern Monckton speaks to may well prove the single most important issue facing the American nation, bigger than health care, bigger than cap and trade, and worth every citizen’s focused attention.
Here were Monckton’s closing remarks, as dictated from my audio recording:
At [the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference in] Copenhagen, this December, weeks away, a treaty will be signed. Your president will sign it. Most of the third world countries will sign it, because they think they’re going to get money out of it. Most of the left-wing regime from the European Union will rubber stamp it. Virtually nobody won’t sign it.
I read that treaty. And what it says is this, that a world government is going to be created. The word “government” actually appears as the first of three purposes of the new entity. The second purpose is the transfer of wealth from the countries of the West to third world countries, in satisfication of what is called, coyly, “climate debt” – because we’ve been burning CO2 and they haven’t. We’ve been screwing up the climate and they haven’t. And the third purpose of this new entity, this government, is enforcement.
How many of you think that the word “election” or “democracy” or “vote” or “ballot” occurs anywhere in the 200 pages of that treaty? Quite right, it doesn’t appear once. So, at last, the communists who piled out of the Berlin Wall and into the environmental movement, who took over Greenpeace so that my friends who funded it left within a year, because [the communists] captured it – Now the apotheosis as at hand. They are about to impose a communist world government on the world. You have a president who has very strong sympathies with that point of view. He’s going to sign it. He’ll sign anything. He’s a Nobel Peace Prize [winner]; of course he’ll sign it.
[laughter]
And the trouble is this; if that treaty is signed, if your Constitution says that it takes precedence over your Constitution (sic), and you can’t resign from that treaty unless you get agreement from all the other state parties – And because you’ll be the biggest paying country, they’re not going to let you out of it.
So, thank you, America. You were the beacon of freedom to the world. It is a privilege merely to stand on this soil of freedom while it is still free. But, in the next few weeks, unless you stop it, your president will sign your freedom, your democracy, and your humanity away forever. And neither you nor any subsequent government you may elect will have any power whatsoever to take it back. That is how serious it is. I’ve read the treaty. I’ve seen this stuff about [world] government and climate debt and enforcement. They are going to do this to you whether you like it or not.
But I think it is here, here in your great nation, which I so love and I so admire – it is here that perhaps, at this eleventh hour, at the fifty-ninth minute and fifty-ninth second, you will rise up and you will stop your president from signing that dreadful treaty, that purposeless treaty. For there is no problem with climate and, even if there were, an economic treaty does nothing to [help] it.
So I end by saying to you the words that Winston Churchill addressed to your president in the darkest hour before the dawn of freedom in the Second World War. He quoted from your great poet Longfellow:
Sail on, O Ship of State!
Sail on, O Union, strong and great!
Humanity with all its fears,
With all the hopes of future years,
Is hanging breathless on thy fate!
Lord Monckton received a standing ovation and took a series of questions from members of the audience. Among those questions were these relevent to the forthcoming Copenhagen treaty:
Question: The current administration and the Democratic majority in Congress has shown little regard for the will of the people. They’re trying to pass a serious government agenda, and serious taxation and burdens on future generations. And there seems to be little to stop them. How do you propose we stop Obama from doing this, because I see no way to stop him from signing anything in Copenhagen. I believe that’s his agenda and he’ll do it.
I don’t minimize the difficulty. But on this subject – I don’t really do politics, because it’s not right. In the end, your politics is for you. The correct procedure is for you to get onto your representatives, both in the US Senate where the bill has yet to go through (you can try and stop that) and in [the House], and get them to demand their right of audience (which they all have) with the president and tell him about this treaty. There are many very powerful people in this room, wealthy people, influential people. Get onto the media, tell them about this treaty. If they go to www.wattsupwiththat.com, they will find (if they look carefully enough) a copy of that treaty, because I arranged for it to be posted there not so long ago. Let them read it, and let the press tell the people that their democracy is about to be taken away for no good purpose, at least [with] no scientific basis [in reference to climate change]. Tell the press to say this. Tell the press to say that, even if there is a problem [with climate change], you don’t want your democracy taken away. It really is as simple as that.
[Update: this section on a question from an attendee to the presentation has been removed from this WUWT article because even though Monckton clearly refuted it, it is turning into a debate over presidential eligibility that I don’t want at WUWT. If you want to see it and discuss it. Do it at the original blog entry Fightin’ Words – Anthony]
Regardless of whether global warming is taking place or caused to any degree by human activity, we do not want a global government empowered to tax Americans without elected representation or anything analogous to constitutional protections. The Founding Fathers would roll over in their graves if they knew their progeny allowed a foreign power such authority, effectively undoing their every effort in an act of Anti-American Revolution. If that is our imminent course, we need to put all else on hold and focus on stopping it. If American sovereignty is ceded, all other debate is irrelevant.
Edited to add @ 8:31 am:
Skimming through the treaty, I came across verification of Monckton’s assessment of the new entity’s purpose:
38. The scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention will be based on three basic pillars: government; facilitative mechanism; and financial mechanism, and the basic organization of which will include the following:
World Government (heading added)
a) The government will be ruled by the COP with the support of a new subsidiary body on adaptation, and of an Executive Board responsible for the management of the new funds and the related facilitative processes and bodies. The current Convention secretariat will operate as such, as appropriate.
To Redistribute Wealth (heading added)
b) The Convention’s financial mechanism will include a multilateral climate change fund including five windows: (a) an Adaptation window, (b) a Compensation window, to address loss and damage from climate change impacts [read: the “climate debt” Monckton refers to], including insurance, rehabilitation and compensatory components, © a Technology window; (d) a Mitigation window; and (e) a REDD window, to support a multi-phases process for positive forest incentives relating to REDD actions.
With Enforcement Authority (heading added)
c) The Convention’s facilitative mechanism will include: (a) work programmes for adaptation and mitigation; (b) a long-term REDD process; © a short-term technology action plan; (d) an expert group on adaptation established by the subsidiary body on adaptation, and expert groups on mitigation, technologies and on monitoring, reporting and verification; and (e) an international registry for the monitoring, reporting and verification of compliance of emission reduction commitments, and the transfer of technical and financial resources from developed countries to developing countries. The secretariat will provide technical and administrative support, including a new centre for information exchange [read; enforcement].
UPDATE: Thanks to WUWT reader “Michael” who post the URL on another unrelated thread, we now have video of Lord Monckton’s presentation:
Sponsored IT training links:
Join 1z0-053 online course to pass 642-812 exam plus get free link for 642-973 exam material.
[go away ~ charles the moderator]
A Brit- Wise words.
However people feel about Monckton’s style, and I agree that in using extravagant pomposity, the reverse of the norm for his class and breed, and probably counterproductive to his political career, this presentation is arguably the most emotionally galvanising demolition of AGW extremism ever to have been heard. There may be minor mistakes, even presentational liberties, but the fundamental message is more powerfully pursuasive than any other I have ever seen, aimed at a lay audience, and without notes. Truly amazing. Science, with its tradition of gentlemanly discourse and high ethical standards, became a sitting duck for abuse by agenda politics when the funding sources of institutions evolved from their origins in independent philanthropic benefaction, to politically managed project specific block grants. When all political factions sing from the same hymn sheet, and the media in falsetto with them, we are in big trouble.
I also applaud his recognition of Lindzen’s research, and how he has stood rock solid against massed onslaught, equal to the American hero any Hollywood movie.
Even if nothing else, surely Monckton’s expose of disgraceful climate propaganda to innocent schoolchildren represents a prurient low in the ordure of modern politics which must be contested, and to date, only he has successfully achieved this through the courts. We need men and women like this. Urgently.
As reported in the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2009/10/20/20climatewire-on-road-to-60-votes-for-climate-bill-senate-43836.html?pagewanted=1) — “Here’s the good news for climate advocates: E&E now finds that at least 67 senators are in play on the issue, enough not only to pass the climate bill but also to ratify an international treaty should sponsors actually run the boards and not lose a single member.” The US Congress is about to give Obama the power to sign the bill in Copenhagen.
The “2/3 majority required for confirmation” is not true.
It’s “2/3 OF THE SENATORS PRESENT.”
If anyone believes the Dhimms incapable of arranging a situation where only those inclined to ratify are “present” then you’re – frankly – an idiot.
They’ve already done so in the House – said “debate is over for the day” and waited for the Retardlicans to leave, then issuing a callback (which all the Dhimms knew was coming so they were still in the building) and running down a “unanimous” vote.
For a “Senate” example, witness Reid’s decision to use “reconciliation” to pass the biggest power-grab IN OUR HISTORY – thus jamming through the “health-care” takeover-bill which a majority of Americans have made painfully clear they don’t want, and which they know they don’t have the votes to pass.
Their deceit is limitless, as is their disdain for America. Never forget that these people are The Enemy – there is no limit to their deviousness.
DD
Obama may sign it but the American people have woken up and won’t allow it to be passed in the Senate. 2010 elections are terrifying many vulnerable Congressmen and they’ll err on the side of caution.
That said, CO2 isn’t a problem. New research shows the IPCC miscalculated the effects of carbon soot and other aerosol pollutants. Soot absorbs more energy than they thought, and it is the carbon that increases the melting of ice caps and glaciers. CO2 is as bad as thought. Personally, I like more CO2 because it increases the growth of Earth’s flora, and I’ve got 124 acres of timber. More importantly, if we reduce CO2, we reduce agriculture productivity. Reducing CO2 means more people in the third world – STARVE.
Correction on previous post. It should have read “CO2 is NOT as bad as thought.”
The point here is the global warming crowd really have a political agenda, which is simply wrapped up in a shoddy scientific wrapper.
Monkton is not a US constitutional scholar, but that doesn’t mitigate his point about the purpose of the treaty.
Obama is a puppet for Soros, who is an admitted proponent of one world government.
History tells us there is no limit to the addiction of power. The current crop of Democrats will be swept away as others have noted above.
Hitler knew the same thing Obama knows, the bigger the lie the easier it is to believe just like Al Gore with his Global Warming, and George Bush with the Weapons of Mass Destruction, and just like Abe Lincoln wanted to kill 600,000 Americans, it’s easy to do when you don’t have to face the enemy. It would be a lot different if our leaders had to lead our fighting men into battle, the cowards. History repetes itself for one reason, our STUPID leaders don’t believe History.
But they do believe that they are way better than anybody on the face of the earth. The only way to teach them is to put them in our shoes, see how they come out after a war or two. The last “Man” President that was in a real war was John F. Kennedy, he was down there where it was HOT. Bush was in a plane, Bama was in college, scary place.
Lord Mocknton is not correct in saying
>> “… your constitution says that it [ the treaty ] takes precedence over your constitution.”
The U.S. Constitution ALWAYS takes precedence over any treaty… the constitution is THE authority that gives ANY treaty authority.
Jeremy Rabkin from George Mason University spoke at a Hillsdale College sponsored event June 5, 2009, in Washington, D.C., in the “First Principles on First Fridays” lecture series sponsored by Hillsdale College’s Allan P. Kirby, Jr. Center for Constitutional Studies and Citizenship. It was printed in the July/August 2009 issue of Imprimis.
The Constitution and American Sovereignty
>> http://www.hillsdale.edu/images/userImages/jcarr/Page_4221/ImprimisJulyAug09.pdf
“The Constitution provides for treaties, and even specifies that treaties will be “the supreme Law of the Land”; that is, that they will be binding on the states.
“But from 1787 on, it has been recognized that for a treaty to be valid,
>> “it must be consistent with the Constitution —
>> “that the Constitution is a higher authority than treaties.
“And what is it that allows us to judge whether a treaty is consistent with the Constitution?
“Alexander Hamilton explained this in a pamphlet early on:
>> ‘A treaty cannot change the frame of the government.’
“And he gave a very logical reason:
>> “It is the Constitution that authorizes us to make treaties.
“If a treaty violates the Constitution, it would be like an agent betraying his principal or authority. ”
The debate has begun…
If ANY U.S. President signs a treaty that is contrary to the authority of the U.S. Constitution and cedes American sovereignty, is this an impeachable ‘high crime” offense AGAINST the U.S. Constitution???
What is NOT “protecting and defending” the U.S. Constitution authority if it is NOT a “high crime” against “we the people” of America?
Ceding American sovereignty by treaty definitely could be included in Obama’s statement before his inauguration, “… we are 5 days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America…”
Is ceding American sovereignty a “high crime” against we the people? Yes…? No…?
I vote yes!!!
Re: “…betraying his principal or authority” and the ‘IMPEACHMENT’ word… for rejecting and subverting the authority of the U.S. Constitution.
If, as President, Obama signs ANY treaty to surrender possession of U.S. sovereignty to an international body… IMPEACHMENT is the constitutional next step because by ceding U.S. sovereignty, Obama is NOT protecting and NOT defending the Constitution of the United States.
So, even if a treaty that cedes U.S. sovereignty can NOT be superior to the U.S. Constitution and binding on America… an impeachment proceeding for ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ MUST begin immediately if “high crime” means anything in America today… and if the whimpy Republicans and lap-dog Democrats are up for a constitutional fight to “protect and defend” the Constitution of the United States!!!
We should all keep in mind that not all treaties, laws, etc. have to be a two thirds vote. It is possible to pass with a simple majority. And as was said in one of the previous comments, people seem to have a “whats the big deal” attitude about this treaty. All we have to do is take a good look at some of these other countries like the U.K. and it doesnt take long to figure out the same will happen to us if we go that route. Our current administration has constantly shown its lack of concern of what the people think so i wouldnt put anything past them or our governing bodies. Elected by the people but not for the people. I hope we listen to our fellow Brits and dont make that mistake.
I cant believe the things I read. We had the worst President of history, Bush, disgrace our country and take it down lower than I ever thought possible. 8 years of financial rape and lies. And the first President in history to take away our constitutional rights with the Patriot Act – which reads exactly like Hitler’s enabling act, that was passed right after they had a major terrorist attack, which he also used for an excuse to start a war. Now Obama has got to turn the Titanic around with a big whole in it and people are criticizing him? Crazy! If he can undo a little bit of the damage the Bushite criminals have done to our country, then maybe we will make it. Dont blame others – people in this country closed their eyes while the republicans took this country down – look in the mirror if you want to see who is to blame. And now we are worried about some treaty and we might actually cooperate to bring about good things…… Shame shame shame
Ok, I am an Australian, but Monckton’s comments apply to us as much as the USA.
In Australia we are fighting a massive battle to keep our land ownership rights.
State and Federal govt have found a way to create a new form of govt INSIDE the constitution – one which operates under legislation rather than law, does not use common law, does not recognize constitutional rights, one which is now elevating govt bodies to constitutional status, completely against the wishes of the people.
Q 1 – your last few president’s also ‘played’ with your constitution – how do you know they did not create a new govt INSIDE yours?
Parliamentarians from several states (we only have 7) – have told me they are given between 2 – 6 days to study a proposed new act, analyse it, cross reference it against others and make a decision. As each new bill comprises 1,000s of pages, can you tell me they are agreeing with full knowledge? Or any knowledge of the impact a that new legislation. They are expected to vote the party line anyway and to add to that picture, there is often more than one act being voted on at one time.
Q2 – how many days do your politicians get to make their decisions? Do they vote party line? How many are they supposed to have researched at one time? How do you know they know what they are voting on?
The Aust govt brought in the Environmental Protections & Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 – one so important that it has its own website – the only aust act to be so favoured.
The act states in s3, that
1) The objects of this Act are:
(a) to provide for the protection of the environment,
The act then states in s528 Definitions that
“environment” includes:
(a) ecosystems and their constituent parts, including people and communities
Now, to read a govt act, you must realize that it is the adverbs and adjectives that define the intent of the act.
So, in this act, when it states that environment includes …..people and communities – the act is telling us that when govt make rules to protect the environment – they can therefore make rules to protect the people (as a collective).
The reason the collective is so important, is because our aust laws have already defined a person as being an individual (among other definitions). So they cannot make environment rules over a single person and have them be lawful. That single person being a sovereign unto his own free will.
However, people as a collective is an entirely different legal matter. As people, the Australians are now ENSLAVED to any law govt make for the environment.
Q 3 Check out your own acts & bills – you will probably find the same maniuplation of words allowing govt to “legitimately” rule over you and your rights.
Our govt also signed the Kyoto Treaty effectively making all farming in Australia the culprit for the propaganda of CO2 emissions.
This was completely against our constitution because it gave sovereignty of any enterprise that was unsustainable under this treaty to an international treaty!
The only way to get something like that overturned in Aust is for the High Court to be asked to validate such a treaty. And govt are very quietly trying to remove the High Court from our judicial structure.
In fact, the HC are creating real problems for the Aust govt as a recent ruling defined what is legitimate court and what isn’t. The fact being that the Aust govt have created a number of unconstitutional courts. If you get taken into court in Aust by govt, the judge has only one guideline – did you or did you not break that particular section of that particular part of that particular act. You did? Guilty. Defense? Act doesn’t allow for it. Sorry you lose.
We have even found parts of our criminal code that deal with public servants have no court home. By that I mean, they are legitimately listed as a ‘crime’ – you attempt to have a govt official charged and strangely – no court can hear the case, because the section you are using is essentially an orphan! Has no court that it is attached to!!
Q 4 When you say your govt could not agree to signing away your sovereignty, you are being awfully naive. Every international treaty does exactly that. But more importantly, if they do – what is your legal method of either stopping it or getting it overturned? Are your courts legitimate?
Don’t just say Mockton is wrong, or this can’t happen, because to every person that actually uses their brain and looks at how much govt have taken and how much you have lost – this has a very real potential.
As a further comment – why don’t you all write to your govt representatives and make sure they clearly know that you do not give permission for any such treaty to be signed. That you do not give them permission to sign the USA into one world government, removing your sovereignty and destroying your constitution.
Just in case Monckton might have it right.
And if he was wrong – you can all say “I told you so”
Worth the effort I think.
After the first acquiescence of the first ‘little sin’, the rest are easier to accept.
No one in congress objected to his illegal elevation of a sitting senator to the position secretary of state. He didn’t even bother with the ‘Saxbe fix’ to make it quasi legal. None in either house protested the Nobel one’s acceptance of the position of a foreign entity as its chief of the ‘security council’. Not one of our ‘protectors’ of the Constitution condoned the theft of $130 billion from a vital defense appropriation bill to fund a blatant attack on the 1st amendment (HR 1913/S 909).
By the end of 2009, the biggest treasonous sin will be committed by the chameleon and thief. It will drive the final nail in lid of Liberty’s coffin. Heed Lord Monckton, for he, and several PM’s, is our offshore Thomas Paine.
[snip, I’m sorry, but we don’t allow Bible passages on WUWT, no matter how relevant]
Thank you for reading this,
AW Loescher: acts11agabus@aol.com
AWL of PILMOA
Sue Maines: good post. I wish I had the knowledge to reciprocate properly, but in very loose, semi-informed terms:
Sometime in the 30’s I think the US passed an Act that essentially empowered the ‘Administrative Branch’ which sort of slid underneath the existing framework established by the Constitution.
Furthermore, most courts in the US operate under Admiralty Law which originally had more to do with international issues, and commerce, I think. Not common law. Under common law the individual US citizen still enjoys sovereignty but it is almost impossible to find justice under such jurisdiction, although some people have become skilled at circumventing the current conventions which usually go around this in order to get you to submit to Admiralty Law. How this relates to Federal Courts I am not sure.
In any case, both the Administration Act and the Admiralty Courts have operated for a long time to undermine both individual and national sovereignty.
But these are somewhat technical aspects and what always matters is the underlying dynamic of a society. Most people assume that most people are basically good as they are and that those above them are operating out of higher (better) motivations than themselves, since this is how they perceive higher and better in their own value system.
But every society has elements within for whom accumulation of power, not to mention cruelty and suppression, are the dynamic to which they are attracted, i.e. they have a very different, indeed contrary, value system, one which they often use deceptively in order to more effectively fleece the larger masses of well-meaning sheoples.
Every society since time began has an hierarchical structure, hierarchy being both vertical and horizontal, i.e. different classes/orders of people in terms of roles (horizontal) and rank/authority (vertical). Populations expressed in vertical hierarchical terms always look like a pyramid, with power being at the apex. And for those for whom power/control/domination are the driving motivations, there are always various factions in the upper middle to top levels, all of whom are in the minority population-wise, jostling for position.
A good societal system manages to harness the creativity and ambition of these dynamic go-getters whilst also curtailing their ability to exploit. Meanwhile, these titan-types (check out ‘asuras’ in the buddhist six realm cosmology) are always going to be working to undermine cooperative, ‘fair’ frameworks, using whatever means they can to achieve their goals, sometimes joining with enemy rivals, sometimes inciting the populace to go after these same rivals.
The point here is that any population will throw up a ‘baron’ class. It is inevitable given human nature. So a good system has to acknowledge this and set in place checks and balances that work.
Traditional monarchical systems from the ancient Sumerian and Asian models, which are essentially the same, and which functioned more or less as such in Europe until fairly recently, were designed to do this, with the supposed role of the Monarch being not so much Dictator as Sacred Mediator between what was best for the Realm as a whole, including all peoples therein, and the power networks of the baron classes whose focus and drive knit much of the societal fabric together in a way that made it vibrant and strong.
A Monarch’s authority was such that at any time they could take the entire property and/or life of any subject in the realm, through appropriation, execution or banishment.
Whether or not you approve of Monarchy in principle, when looked at in terms of a checks-and-balances system, it does have some things going for it that our current committee-based systems (literally ‘soviet’ systems basically) fail to provide, both in terms of directness, mandate and transparency.
Right now it seems that most western developed nations have increasingly phony structures and the barons are ruling the roost without a higher power (Monarch) principle to restrain them.
Writing to a congress person is helpful and good; but you cannot ‘forbid’ them to sign treaties etc., only express disapproval as a citizen-voter.
In theory I suppose you could go to a Court somewhere to sue that the legislation is illegal but I suspect it would be impossible to find a Judge in any Court that would be willing to hear the case and even if they were, probably no Court would have any jurisdiction on such a thing ultimately.
imho it is too late to build a better societal mousetrap using the current frameworks which have been compromised beyond rescue. Time for a reboot.
Reboots have rarely happened in history. Personally I can’t think of a single example although there must be some. Usually what happens (I think), is that strong, previously well ordered societies lose their momentum and virtue and then gradually degrade into ghosts, usually somewhat petty and wretched, of their former selves, often with long periods of plague, famine and murder in the mix. Out of such painful compost the garden of a revived decent society emerges.
But these things take time.
Wow. Here is what I read:
There MIGHT be something happening. I’M scared so you should be too. PANIC, shake,and cry. They are gonna GET you.
Very simply: If you believe this to be the truth DO what you have to.
If you don’t believe this (Or do understand that a staggering amount of crazy treaties pass the US way) then carry on.
Relax or act.
Just because people need to know who they’re reading about
http://www.ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/myths/christopher-monckton
October, 2009
Lord Monckton has found another way to “shamelessly” take advantage of his inherited title by thrusting himself into the position of being a ‘defender of American democracy’. He relies on building straw man arguments while he appeals to the emotions of the American people.
What is he saying now?
World Government; Communism, Global Climate Treaty; Transfer or Redistribution of Wealth; Climate Debt; CO2 less than 1/6 than IPCC estimates (Lindzen). He claims President Obama said during his election campaign that the US Constitution is only a piece of paper (one might think that that would have come up during the election campaign though?). Actually this sounds like a rehash of the rumor that President Bush said the constitution was ‘just a piece of paper’ in 2005. Monckton has merely replaced the name Bush with Obama. The degree of chicanery in Moncktons remarks remains high.
Essentially, he is making a false argument. Monckton states:
“What they’re now going to do is to set up a world government and the word government actually appears in the treaty. But, you heard it hear first, the word election, democracy, vote, or ballot, does not appear anywhere in the 200 pages of the treaty. It’s going to be a dictatorship.”
and
“What we are talking about is a fledgling world government and because it’s not elected, it’s essentially a communist world government.”
A veritable litany of error and contextual misrepresentation (see spin here & here). First the document he is referring to is a ‘draft document’. It is trying to set up governance (administration) for the treaty (and yes, governments will need to be involved in the treaty). Without governance, how can the treaty be enforced (without enforcement, why make a treaty)? Second, it is unlikely it will be signed this year anyway, based on all that we are hearing about how things are going with COP15.
Monckton is making the rounds on CNN, Glenn Beck, etc. He has figured out how to get the spotlight to shine on himself and will hold on to that as long as he can.
I tip my hobo cap to the “Lord” from jolly old England. As a country they love dogs, protect their ale and stout, and let eccentric characters thrive. We had bughouse square in the Depression era USA for the same public proclamation of charcters and eccentrics. Today, there is little tolerance from the devout zealout liberals who denounce intolerance! Al Gore gets to make his multi millions from the climate change cult members and nobody bothers him. Why can’t we let the Lord present his cockeyed views? I even like TEA!
if they want us in their world government…come let them conquor us. Good luck with that impossibility.
Just a reminder, when nations sign treaties, they aren’t binding, just a statement of general agreement with what’s stated. For the material in a treaty to become law at a national level, it must follow the same process as any other law, passing through the House and Senate first.
I do not understand, WordPress.com, that you do not want to politicize your site. I understand that you just want to give out information to folks. Well, then, if you want to do the right thing, you should take a stand. Stand up for the United States of America and its citizens, as well as, the rest of the uninformed world. This story sounds like we need to hear it since our President will not tell us the truth about it!!
Hey, people, most of your comments are based on the fact that in our future we will still have a choice. You are assuming too much! I will be kind, uninformed.
It’s truly amazing to read what has been left by other fellow Americans. It’s also very amazing how many of you don’t know what the government has been working on for so long now. New World Order? No, it’s not a conspiracy THEORY. It’s gradualism, not an overnight realization that’s going to put this country under. The government knows that if you do ANYTHING gradually you can keep people calm because they say “Oh it’s just….” But many people didn’t know and still don’t about the North American Union Treaty that was signed when Bush was in office. It’s just a treaty…..but it includes new monetary funds for the entire north american section, not just america. Guess what they’re wanting to call it….Amero. Rings a bell, kinda sounds like Euro? This treaty also includes dropping the lines between Canada, America, and Mexico and combining together as one. They haven’t done it because they have plans to integrate slowly (gradualism). But of course THIS particular treaty that he’s talking about now could never be signed. This treaty could never be that important. And most importantly this treaty would NEVER give way to a new world order. Because the government cares about the American citizens and our freedom. Right. And guess what? I’m a veteran. We’re losing our freedom and there’s little to do about it if we don’t get a handle on “We The People” real soon.
New World Order= United Nations founded in 1945. This is the shell of government. The TREATIES that are added are adding to the government power slowly. At the moment it is not at full power. But the more that is added to it the more government it becomes. Why can’t everyone see this? Look up the word gradualism and see what the online encyclopedia has to say about it, you’ll find that it is a well-known government tactic. America may never see the north american union truly come to light but it will be used to usher in the new world order with the border breaking power that it holds. To those who care not to listen, line up as cattle and make loud noises as you unknowingly wait for your freedom to be slaughtered.
United Nations Treaty Collection
http://treaties.un.org/Pages/Home.aspx?lang=en
Look and you’ll see as of now on that page in the middle
2009 TREATY EVENT TOWARDS UNIVERSAL PARTICIPATION AND IMPLEMENTATION
They have their own court for trial. They are hitting on issues that we may already be taking care of but the UN feels that ALL countries should be doing what they have RULED on. Ultimate rule comes from the UN. It’s not complete yet, but you have to see how it’s slowly progressing. It’s a beast that will not be tamed by any country in the end. And there’s communism playing a major role. Obama even doesn’t feel that it’s wrong to take from the haves and give it to the have nots. There should be a line there. Capitalism will die without the haves and government will be in control of businesses because the haves will no longer exist. The government will ultimately become the haves and we will have what they decide to give us for our hard work in THEIR factories and stores. Obama took over companies. Not all of them, but come on people. Open your eyes.
New World Religion-founded in 2000. Created by the United Nations. They have a GLOBAL COUNCIL. This organization includes all religions including Wicca/ Witchcraft. They even have a preamble (they call it that) which states-
We, people of diverse religions, spiritual expressions and indigenous traditions throughout the world, hereby establish the United Religions Initiative to promote enduring, daily interfaith cooperation, to end religiously motivated violence and to create cultures of peace, justice and healing for the Earth and all living beings.
***We respect the uniqueness of each tradition, and differences of practice or belief.
***We value voices that respect others, and believe that sharing our values and wisdom can lead us to act for the good of all.
***We believe that our religious, spiritual lives, rather than dividing us, guide us to build community and respect for one another.
Therefore, as interdependent people rooted in our traditions, we now unite for the benefit of our Earth community.
We unite to build cultures of peace and justice.
****We unite to heal and protect the Earth.
We unite to build safe places for conflict resolution, healing and reconciliation.
We unite to support freedom of religion and spiritual expression, and the rights of all individuals and peoples as set forth in international law. (note)
We unite in responsible cooperative action to bring the wisdom and values of our religions, spiritual expressions and indigenous traditions to bear on the economic, environmental, political and social challenges facing our Earth community.
We unite to provide a global opportunity for participation by all people, especially by those whose voices are not often heard.
We unite to celebrate the joy of blessings and the light of wisdom in both movement and stillness.
We unite to use our combined resources only for nonviolent, compassionate action, to awaken to our deepest truths, and to manifest love and justice among all life in our Earth community.
Purpose
The purpose of the United Religions Initiative is to promote enduring, daily interfaith cooperation, to end religiously motivated violence and to create cultures of peace, justice and healing for the Earth and all living beings.
Principles
1. The URI is a bridge-building organization, not a religion. (OK)
***2. We respect the sacred wisdom of each religion, spiritual expression and indigenous tradition.
3. We respect the differences among religions, spiritual expressions and indigenous traditions.
4. We encourage our members to deepen their roots in their own tradition.
5. We listen and speak with respect to deepen mutual understanding and trust.
6. We give and receive hospitality.
7. We seek and welcome the gift of diversity and model practices that do not discriminate.
8. We practice equitable participation of women and men in all aspects of the URI.
9. We practice healing and reconciliation to resolve conflict without resorting to violence.
***10. We act from sound ecological practices to protect and preserve the Earth for both present and future generations.
11. We seek and offer cooperation with other interfaith efforts.
12. We welcome as members all individuals, organizations and associations who subscribe to the Preamble, Purpose and Principles.
****13. We have the authority to make decisions at the most local level that includes all the relevant and affected parties.
14. We have the right to organize in any manner, at any scale, in any area, and around any issue or activity which is relevant to and consistent with the Preamble, Purpose and Principles.
15. Our deliberations and decisions shall be made at every level by bodies and methods that fairly represent the diversity of affected interests and are not dominated by any.
16. We (each part of the URI) shall relinquish only such autonomy and resources as are essential to the pursuit of the Preamble, Purpose and Principles.
17. We have the responsibility to develop financial and other resources to meet the needs of our part, and to share financial and other resources to help meet the needs of other parts.
18. We maintain the highest standards of integrity and ethical conduct, prudent use of resources, and fair and accurate disclosure of information.
19. We are committed to organizational learning and adaptation.
20. We honor the richness and diversity of all languages and the right and responsibility of participants to translate and interpret the Charter, Articles, Bylaws and related documents in accordance with the Preamble, Purpose and Principles, and the spirit of the United Religions Initiative.
21. Members of the URI shall not be coerced to participate in any ritual or be proselytized.
http://uri.org/
Well, at least we, Us Fellow Americans are waking up! However, now that we are, what are we going to do about it? Got any ideas? We can talk about all day long, but now is the time to take action. For there will be not much time left that we will still be able to talk freely over the internet. They, Obama and his Administration and our Congress are working on making new bills to stiffle this form of communication. So what do we do, got any ideas, or do we just talk about it.