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.
Dr Richard North here in the UK on his blog EU Referendum warned about the existence already of global organisations, in effect a world government, a year ago. Hidden in plain sight as this extract says:-
“…when it comes to looking for secret conspiracies to dominate the world, there aren’t any. That doesn’t mean conspiracies don’t exist. The thing is, they are not secret.
They are there, they are real, they are visible and (relatively) easy to find, if you know where to look – and can be bothered. But, because they are so visible, no one takes a blind bit of notice of them, instead preferring to look for fantasy conspiracies of their own making.
The most obvious and visible “conspiracy”, of course, is the European Union. It has its agenda, it makes no secret of it, it has been steadily pursuing that agenda for the best part of fifty years and, over that period, has had a modicum of success.
Yet, there is perhaps a bigger conspiracy here – the “conspiracy of silence” amongst our own ruling elite and chatterati, who will simply not talk about the European Union and its ambitions. Guido, of course, does not expose this – he is part of the conspiracy.
But this is boring. If you want a real conspiracy, go for that shadowy group of anonymous bankers, who meet in secret to hatch up plans to control the world’s financial system. You want it? You got it! It is called the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS).
Take a moment to think about this. How much do you know about this committee? Who are its members? How often to they sit? Where do they meet? And what is its real agenda?
Whether you know anything about it or not, it is part of our government. More to the point, it is part of our global government. You didn’t know we had a global government? Well, you do now, and this is part of it. Other parts include the Codex Alimentarius committee, the IASB, IMF, OECD, World Bank, OIE, ISO, WHO, WTO, ICES, INTERPOL, ITU, ITSO, UNECE, ICAO, IOSCO, IOML, IMO, WMO the IPPC and a whole host of other organisations in this alphabet soup, all linked together through formal and informal networks. Most of them, in their own way, make “laws” and decisions which reach down to affect our daily lives and our prosperity, some more than others….”
To read the whole piece:-
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/10/hidden-in-plain-sight.html
You can watch the video and PDF on the same page here: http://tr.im/ChGV
Easier to follow. I also included the climate chains video.
I don’t quite get the DDT thing. Like its broad-spectrum insecticidal use, pundits seem to be using the DDT story as a broad-spectrum rebuttal.
I’m not going to pretend that I know its history with accuracy but I’m not going to discount Lord Monckton’s speech either. I suspect a grain of salt is needed when viewing. He is however entertaining, witty and articulate and the general thrust of his speech is accurate to me.
Again, if we don’t like it, please; some of the scientists stand up and carry the torch. I’m more than willing to chip in financially.
Anthony, sorry mate but the World Climate Widget thread was locked for comments so just a quick post here.
Any chance of getting this turned into an iphone app.
Cheers.
If the USA were to promise to pay the developing world there will be a financial sticking point. The USA now has a 1.4 trillion dollar debt. I don’t know in detail it is owed to countries like China. So it will be can you borrow money from the developing world to pay it back to them? I also notice there is much talk of per capita emissions in the agreement for Copenhagen. If China and India control the per capita emissions to say a half of the USA then the rise in emissions will be very large.
I am on the right side of centre politically and I like christopher monckton but , while i have only viewed the slides and not had time to see the talk yet, I was put off by the personal attacks that made it seem like a polemic that i should not trust… could be that it was delivered jokingly in the talk it comes across in the slides as, “this is not worth taking seriously if it demeans itself to such a level.” which is a shame…..
Ed Darrell Just for you
http://www.eco-imperialism.com/content/article.php3?id=68
n Sri Lanka, in 1948, there were 2.8 million malaria cases and 7,300 malaria deaths. With widespread DDT use, malaria cases fell to 17 and no deaths in 1963. After DDT use was discontinued, Sri Lankan malaria cases rose to 2.5 million in the years 1968 and 1969, and the disease remains a killer in Sri Lanka today. More than 100,000 people died during malaria epidemics in Swaziland and Madagascar in the mid-1980s, following the suspension of DDT house spraying. After South Africa stopped using DDT in 1996, the number of malaria cases in KwaZulu-Natal province skyrocketed from 8,000 to 42,000. By 2000, there had been an approximate 400 percent increase in malaria deaths. Now that DDT is being used again, the number of deaths from malaria in the region has dropped from 340 in 2000 to none at the last reporting in February 2003.
I think they are over reaching,I don’t think Rudd or Obama will sign,I hope they insist on changes.I do think they will promise money though.I hope that the leaders who sign or pledge money ask for an accounting of how the money is spent.False hope I feel.
Denis, just watch the speech and find out. It is very much infused with British humor.
Re the US sovereignty: The Supreme Court has already weighed in as to whether a treaty can be used to usurp US law. They ruled that ratification of a treaty does not override existing US law or create new legislation. Further clarification of this policy came from Medellin v. Texas, 552 US (2008), in which the Supreme Court recognized the “distinction between treaties that automatically have effect as domestic law, and those that . . . do not by themselves function as binding federal law” and stated definitively that
while treaties “may comprise international commitments . . . they are not domestic law unless Congress has either enacted implementing statutes or the treaty itself conveys an intention that it be ‘self-executing’ and is ratified on these terms.” [cited from Igartúa-De La Rosa v. United States 417 F. 3d 145, 150 (2005)]
Later, the court further stateed that
[t]he terms of a non-self-executing treaty can become domestic law only in the same way as any other law — through passage of legislation by both Houses of Congress, combined with either the President’s signature or a congressional override of a Presidential veto.
If any part of the treaty were at odds with the Constitution, Congress would have to go through the Amendment process for it to become law.
One caveat, though. Obama may have the chance to appoint enough Supreme Court Justices to change that decision. Let us pray that our Justices stay healthy for at least three more years.
Ed Darrell,
I have just followed your link to the website that claims that Monckton just tells lie after lie. It uses the same tactic employed by all propagandists, to pick minor holes which they use to infer that the whole argument is false, and then to excoriate the victim in the most disgusting manner Let’s look at some of the DDT points made.
1) Monckton claims DDT was the only effective method against malaria.
Rebuttal is: DDT was very effective but not the only method. (You can use nets as well.)
[So DDT wasn’t the only method, it just happens to be the best!]
2) Monckton claims a nobel prize was awarded for DDT.
Rebuttal is: The nobel prize was won for the discovery that DDT killed insects.
[I don’t ned to comment how this is hair splitting of the highest degree]
3) Monckton blamed the malaria deaths on a lack of DDT.
Rebuttal is: Malaria deaths are influenced by the lack of effectiveness of drugs to kill the infection.
[This is a bait and switch argument: it’s not the mosquito’s fault – we should be after the agent that they carry]
The “rebuttals” on economic issues are even more ludicrous. On the Waxman Markey bill, Monckton mentioned “closing down parts of the economy”. The rebuttal to this is supposedly a link to a clause in the bill that talks about giving funds to boost industry.
What utter nonsense! If this is the argument used by supposedly intelligent people, that “funds will be given to boost industry” then I’d like to know what fantasy island school of economics they believe in. Money does not come out of thin air (except these days with QE). The simple economic truth is that there is at any one time, a fixed amount of land, labour and capital in existence, and if you invest in one particular area, you have to shift resources from existing areas. The Madrid study has shown that for every “green” job created, 2.2 real jobs were lost. It is also an undisputed fact that if you make an input more expensive (energy), then the supply curve moves to the left. Basically, less goods will be produced at a higher cost. Consequence: parts of the economy will shrink. Monckton was absolutely right!
It ends with 2 paragraphs of excoriating ad hominem attacks. For example, at the end of the article he defends Gore’s refusal to debate Monckton by saying “It’s more likely that Gore simply refuses to get into a urination contest with a known skunk.” The fact that Al Gore is guilty of the same crime of telling “lie after lie” as he accuses Monckton of doing, is somehow, amazingly, completely overlooked. The hypocricy is breathtaking. The vitriolic and loathing is palpable. They should rename the site “eye8monckton” and that will be more comensurate with its intellectual level.
I won’t be going back there any time soon.
What’s going on? Monkton and Tea Baggers….you are losing me. I come here for real stuff, not propaganda and crazy stuff from the right!!!
Totally off topic…
Has anyone seen this on the BBC news website.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_8311000/8311373.stm
Basically trees grow more when there are more cosmic rays hitting the earth. Read on in the article and it explains that trees tend to grow more when there is increased cloud cover and more diffused light.
Apparently the tree ring growth was more correlated to the cosmic rays than any other climatic factor.
Just adds further evidence to Svenmark’s theory if you ask me.
More on DDT
http://asiancorrespondent.com/jfbeck/the-left-s-war-on-science.htm
In my opinion, Lord Monckton’s overstated and potentially inflammatory comment that signing the Copenhagen agreement would irrevocably bind this country [USA] to a common world government damages the overall credibility of his whole presentation.
I would prefer to see the climate change issue go on the back burner for a few more years to see if we really do have a problem. I am not sure this type of presentation is really productive to that end.
My guess (my hope) is that Obama will sign whatever nonsense emerges from Copenhagen, and then put it away in a drawer, as Clinton did with the Kyoto protocol. That way he can have all the publicity of saving the world without risking a rebuff from the lawmakers.
The crazier the agreement, the less likely he is to trouble the Congress with it, so the crazier the better.
Michel
It is all in the slides.
So, spare us the ad-hominem stuff, please. Disparagement and belittlement are forms of defamation, and expressed in public are corrosive of common standards. So don’t be a rotter, old chap! Try to raise your game! Show us how it should be done!
a) Go through the slides, and work out what you would change.
b) Then, let us see your proposed edits.
That’s how it works. Can you rise to the occasion?
Moncton is a bloviating, windbag. He’s an entertaining speaker, but, extremely lazy with his facts. And, he’s totally wrong about how our Constitution works. He should stay in England where he might “have a clue.”
Norm Beazer (00:15:34) : You can do it with Real Player.
Kum Dollison (05:53:25) :
Moncton is a bloviating, windbag. He’s an entertaining speaker, but …
Coming from Kum –
Riiiiiiight …
Spector 5:25: I wish we could do as you wanted and let the science develop at a more considered pace. But Copenhagen won’t wait. The warmists want to lock in the political payoff from their decade-long campaign of distortion, deception and fearmongering. This is their big moment and if they succeed in getting ink on paper then a tipping point in law will have been reached. Ironically even though laws are intangible things, less “real” than a trace gas or its interaction with water vapor, that tipping point will be quite real. We will be immiserated by unelected and nameless time-servers issuing bales of regulations from Geneva or Brussels, written to please their ignorant sentimental vision of how things “should be” and to enrich themselves and their circle. The next few months are therefore more important than they ought to be. We didn’t ask for this fight, but we appear to be stuck with it.
dhmo (04:11:31) : ” The USA now has a 1.4 trillion dollar debt…”
Correction, this year’s deficit is $1.4 trillion. The national debt is somewhere around $11.9 trillion. As a reminder, the Democrats have been in the majority in Congress since 2007.
This gifted orator should be a script writer for “Yes Minister” instead of pedling alarmism.
Anthony,
Don’t destroy any genuine credibility your work has achieved by promoting this poisonous man’s inflated self importance. He may sound the part but here in the UK he is an embarrassment to those who have grave doubts on the science behind AGW.
Regards,
Charles,
London, UK
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.
____________________
Norm, I use a little freeware device called Download Helper to save YouTube video.