Monckton's Mexican Missive #3

The abdication of the West

From The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, Cancun, Mexico, Dec 9th, 2010

I usually add some gentle humor to these reports. Not today. Read this and weep. Notwithstanding the carefully-orchestrated propaganda to the effect that nothing much will be decided at the UN climate conference here in Cancun, the decisions to be made here this week signal nothing less than the abdication of the West. The governing class in what was once proudly known as the Free World is silently, casually letting go of liberty, prosperity, and even democracy itself. No one in the mainstream media will tell you this, not so much because they do not see as because they do not bl**dy care.

The 33-page Note (FCCC/AWGLCA/2010/CRP.2) by the Chairman of the “Ad-Hoc Working Group on Long-Term Co-operative Action under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change”, entitled Possible elements of the outcome, reveals all. Or, rather, it reveals nothing, unless one understands what the complex, obscure jargon means. All UNFCCC documents at the Cancun conference, specifically including Possible elements of the outcome, are drafted with what is called “transparent impenetrability”. The intention is that the documents should not be understood, but that later we shall be told they were in the public domain all the time, so what are we complaining about?

Since the Chairman’s note is very long, I shall summarize the main points:

Finance: Western countries will jointly provide $100 billion a year by 2020 to an unnamed new UN Fund. To keep this sum up with GDP growth, the West may commit itself to pay 1.5% of GDP to the UN each year. That is more than twice the 0.7% of GDP that the UN has recommended the West to pay in foreign aid for the past half century. Several hundred of the provisions in the Chairman’s note will impose huge financial costs on the nations of the West.

The world-government Secretariat: In all but name, the UN Convention’s Secretariat will become a world government directly controlling hundreds of global, supranational, regional, national and sub-national bureaucracies. It will receive the vast sum of taxpayers’ money ostensibly paid by the West to the Third World for adaptation to the supposed adverse consequences of imagined (and imaginary) “global warming”.

Bureaucracy: Hundreds of new interlocking bureaucracies answerable to the world-government Secretariat will vastly extend its power and reach. In an explicit mirroring of the European Union’s method of enforcing the will of its unelected Kommissars on the groaning peoples of that benighted continent, the civil servants of nation states will come to see themselves as servants of the greater empire of the Secretariat, carrying out its ukases and diktats whatever the will of the nation states’ governments.

Many of the new bureaucracies are disguised as “capacity-building in developing countries”. This has nothing to do with growing the economies or industries of poorer nations. It turns out to mean the installation of hundreds of bureaucratic offices answerable to the Secretariat in numerous countries around the world. Who pays? You do, gentle taxpayer.

Babylon, Byzantium, the later Ottoman Empire, the formidable bureaucracy of Nazi Germany, the vast empire of 27,000 paper-shufflers at the European Union: add all of these together and multiply by 100 and you still do not reach the sheer size, cost, power and reach of these new subsidiaries of the Secretariat.

In addition to multiple new bureaucracies in every one of the 193 states parties to the Convention, there will be an Adaptation Framework Body, a Least Developed Countries’ Adaptation Planning Body, an Adaptation Committee, Regional Network Centers, an International Center to Enhance Adaptation Research, National Adaptation Institutions, a Body to Clarify Assumptins and Conditions in National Greenhouse-Gas Emission Reductions Pledges, a Negotiating Body for an Overall Level of Ambition for Aggregate Emission Reductions and Individual Targets, an Office to Revise Guidelines for National Communications, a Multilateral Communications Process Office, a Body for the Process to Develop Modalities and Guidelines for the Compliance Process, a Registry of Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions by Developed Countries, a Body to Supervise the Process for Understanding Diversity of Mitigation Actions Submitted and Support Needed, a Body to Develop Modalities for the Registry of Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions, an Office of International Consultation and Analysis; an Office to Conduct a Work Program for Development of Various Modalities and Guidelines; a network of Developing Countries’ National Forest Strategy Action Plan Offices; a network of National Forest Reference Emission Level And/Or Forest Reference Level Bodies; a network of National Forest Monitoring Systems; an Office of the Work Program on Agriculture to Enhance the Implementation of Article 4, Paragraph 1(c) of the Convention Taking Into Account Paragraph 31; one or more Mechanisms to Establish a Market-Based Approach to Enhance the Cost-Effectiveness Of And To Promote Mitigation Actions; a Forum on the Impact of the Implementation of Response Measures; a Work Program Office to Address the Impact of the Implementation of Response Measures; a Body to Review the Needs of Developing Countries for Financial Resources to Address Climate Change and Identify Options for Mobilization of Those Resources; a Fund in Addition to the Copenhagen Green Fund; an Interim Secretariat for the Design Phase of the New Fund; a New Body to Assist the Conference of the Parties in Exercising its Functions with respect to the Financial Mechanism; a Body to Launch a Process to Further Define the Roles and Functions of the New Body to Assist the Conference of the Parties in Exercising its Functions with respect to the Financial Mechanism; a Technology Executive Committee; a Climate Technology Center and Network; a Network of National, Regional, Sectoral and International Technology Centers, Networks, Organization and Initiatives; Twinning Centers for Promotion of North-South, South-South and Triangular Partnerships with a View to Encouraging Co-operative Research and Development; an Expert Workshop on the Operational Modalities of the Technology Mechanism; an International Insurance Facility; a Work Program Body for Policy Approaches and Positive Incentives on Issues Relating to Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries; a Body to Implement a Work Program on the Impact of the Implementation of Response Measures; and a Body to Develop Modalities for the Operationalization of the Work Program on the Impact of the Implementation of Response Measures.

The world government’s powers: The Secretariat will have the power not merely to invite nation states to perform their obligations under the climate-change Convention, but to compel them to do so. Nation states are to be ordered to collect, compile and submit vast quantities of information, in a manner and form to be specified by the secretariat and its growing army of subsidiary bodies. Between them, they will be given new powers to verify the information, to review it and, on the basis of that review, to tell nation states what they can and cannot do.

Continuous expansion: The verb “enhance”, in its various forms, occurs at least 28 times in the Chairman’s note, Similar verbs, such as “strengthen” and “extend”, and adjectives such as “scaled-up”, “new” and “additional”, are also frequently deployed, particularly in relation to funding at the expense of Western taxpayers. If all of the “enhancements” proposed in the note were carried out, the cost would comfortably exceed the annual $100 billion (or, for that matter, the 1.5% of GDP) that the note mentions as the cost to the West over the coming decade.

Intellectual property in inventions: Holders of patents, particularly in fields related to “global warming” and its mitigation, will be obliged to transfer the benefits of their inventiveness to developing countries without payment of royalties. This is nowhere explicitly stated in the Chairman’s note, but the transfer of technology is mentioned about 20 times in the draft, suggesting that the intention is still to carry out the explicit provision in the defunct Copenhagen Treaty draft of 15 September 2009 to this effect.

Insurance: The Secretariat proposes, in effect, to interfere so greatly in the operation of the worldwide insurance market that it will cease to be a free market, with the usual severely adverse consequences to everyone in that market.

The free market: The failed Copenhagen Treaty draft stipulated that the “government” that would be established would have the power to set the rules of all formerly free markets. There would be no such thing as free markets any more. In Cancun, the Chairman’s note merely says that various “market mechanisms” may be exploited by the Secretariat and by the parties to the Convention: but references to these “market mechanisms” are frequent enough to suggest that the intention remains to stamp out free markets worldwide.

Knowledge is power: The Chairman’s note contains numerous references to a multitude of new as well as existing obligations on nation states to provide information to the Secretariat, in a form and manner which it will dictate. The hand of the EU is very visible here.

It grabbed power from the member-states in four stages: first, acting merely as a secretariat to ensure stable supplies of coal and steel to rebuild Europe after the Second World War; then as a registry requiring member states to supply it with ever more information; then as a review body determining on the basis of the information supplied by the member states whether they were complying with their obligations on the ever-lengthier and more complex body of European treaties; and finally as the ultimate law-making authority, to which all elected parliaments, explicitly including the European “Parliament”, were and are subject. Under the Cancun propsoals, the Secretariat is following the path that the plague of EU officials here have no doubt eagerly advised it to follow. It is now taking numerous powers not merely to require information from nation states but to hold them to account for their supposed international obligations under the climate-change Convention on the basis of the information the nations are now to be compelled to supply.

Propaganda: The Chairman’s note contains several mentions of the notion that the peoples of the world need to be told more about climate change. Here, too, there is a parallel with the EU, which administers a propaganda fund of some $250 million a year purely to advertise its own wonderfulness to an increasingly sceptical population. The IPCC already spends millions every year with PR agencies, asking them to find new ways of making its blood-curdling message more widely understood and feared among ordinary people. The Secretariat already has the advantage of an uncritical, acquiescent, scientifically illiterate, economically innumerate and just plain dumb news media: now it will have a propaganda fund to play with as well.

Damage caused by The Process: At the insistence of sensible nation states such as the United States, the Czech Republic, Japan, Canada, and Italy, the Cancun outcome acknowledges that The Process is causing, and will cause, considerable economic damage, delicately described in the Chairman’s note as “unintended side-effects of implementing climate-change response measures”. The solution? Consideration of the catastrophic economic consequences of the Secretariat’s heroically lunatic decisions will fall under the control of – yup – the Secretariat. Admire its sheer gall.

Damage to world trade: As the power, wealth and reach of the Secretariat grow, it finds itself rubbing uncomfortably up against other supranational organizations. In particular, the World Trade Organization has been getting antsy about the numerous aspects of the Secretariat’s proposals that constitute restrictions on international trade. At several points, the Chairman’s note expresses the “decision” – in fact, no more than an opinion and a questionable one at that – that the Secretariat’s policies are not restrictive of trade.

The Canute provision: The conference will reaffirm the decision of its predecessor in Copenhagen this time last year “to hold the increase in global average temperature below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels”, just like that. In fact, temperature in central England, and by implication globally, rose 2.2 Celsius in the 40 years 1695-1735, as the Sun began to recover from its 11,400-year activity minimum, and rose again by 0.74 C in the 20th century. There has been no warming in the 21st century, but we are already well over 2 Celsius degrees above pre-industrial levels. The Canute provision, as some delegates have dubbed it (after the Danish king of early England who famously taught his courtiers the limitations of his power and, a fortiori, theirs when he set up his throne on the beach and commanded sea level not to rise, whereupon the tide came in as usual and wet the royal feet), shows the disconnect between The Process and reality.

Omissions: There are several highly-significant omissions, which jointly and severally establish that the central intent of The Process no longer has anything to do with the climate, if it ever had. The objective is greatly to empower and still more greatly to enrich the international classe politique at the expense of the peoples of the West, using the climate as a pretext, so as to copy the European Union by installing in perpetuity what some delegates here are calling “transnational perma-Socialism” beyond the reach or recall of any electorate. Here are the key omissions:

  • The science: The question whether any of this vast expansion of supranational power is scientifically necessary is not addressed. Instead, there is merely a pietistic affirmation of superstitious faith in the IPCC, where the conference will “recognize that deep cuts in global [greenhouse-gas] emissions are required according to science, and as documented in the [IPCC’s] Fourth Assessment Report.
  • The economics: There is no assessment of the extent to which any of the proposed actions to mitigate “global warming” by cutting emissions of carbon dioxide or to adapt the world to its consequences will be cost-effective. Nor, tellingly, is there any direct comparison between mitigation and adaptation in their cost-effectiveness: indeed, the IPCC was carefully structured so that mitigation and adaptation are considered by entirely separate bureaucracies producing separate reports, making any meaningful comparison difficult. Though every economic analysis of this central economic question, other than that of the now-discredited Lord Stern, shows that mitigation is a pointless fatuity and that focused adaptation to the consequences of any “global warming” that may occur would be orders of magnitude cheaper and more cost-effective, the Cancun conference outcome will continue to treat mitigation as being of equal economic utility with adaptation.
  • Termination: Contracts have termination clauses to say what happens when the agreement ends. Nothing better illustrates the intent to create a permanent world-government structure than the absence of any termination provisions whatsoever in the Cancun outcome. The Process, like diamonds, is forever.
  • Democracy: Forget government of the people, by the people, for the people. Forget the principle of “no taxation without representation” that led to the very foundation of the United States. The provisions for the democratic election of the new, all-powerful, legislating, tax-raising world-government Secretariat by the peoples of the world may be summarized in a single word: None.

How did this monstrous transfer of power from once-proud, once-sovereign, once-democratic nations to the corrupt, unelected Secretariat come about? The story begins with Sir Maurice Strong, an immensely wealthy UN bureaucrat from Canada who, a quarter of a century ago, established the IPCC as an intergovernmental, political body rather than as a scientific body precisely so that it could be maneuvered into assisting in the UN’s long-term aim, reiterated at a summit of senior UN officials this May by Ban Ki-Moon himself, of extinguishing national sovereignty and establishing a world government.

The Process began in earnest in 1988, when the IPCC was established. Shortly thereafter, on a June day in Washington DC deliberately chosen by Al Gore because it was unusually hot, his political ally and financial benefactor James Hansen appeared before a Congressional committee and put before it a wildly-exaggerated graph predicting global warming over the coming 20 or 30 years. Yet June 2008, the 20th anniversary of his testimony, was cooler globally than June 1988, and worldwide warming has happened at less than half the rate he predicted.

The Rio Earth Summit in 1992 allowed environmental groups and world “leaders” to grandstand together. From that summit emerged the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, which began holding annual conferences on “global warming”.

The Kyoto Protocol in 1997 committed its signatories to cut back their national CO2 emissions to 1990 levels by 2012. Most are not going to make it. The US Senate, with Al Gore as its president, voted 95-0 to reject any treaty such as Kyoto, which bound only the West while leaving developing nations such as China to emit carbon dioxide without constraint.

Very little progress had been made by the time of the Bali conference in 2007: but at that conference a “road-map” was constructed that was to lead to a binding international treaty in Copenhagen in 2009.

Just one problem with that. The US Constitution provides that, even if the President has signed a treaty, his signature is meaningless unless the treaty has been debated in the Senate, which must ratify it by the votes of at least 67 of the 100 Senators. It became clear to everyone, after the Obama administration failed to cajole or bully even 60 Senators into passing the Waxman/Markey cap-and-tax Bill, that no climate treaty would pass the Senate.

Worse, the Secretariat grossly overreached itself. Believing its own propaganda to the effect that none but a few vexatious, fossil-funded sceptics believed that “global warming” would be small enough to be harmless, it drafted and posted up on its website a 186-page draft Treaty of Copenhagen, proposing to turn itself into an unelected world government with unlimited powers to impose direct taxation on member nations without representation, recourse or recall, to interfere directly in the environmental policies of individual nations, and to sweep away all free markets worldwide, replacing them with itself as the sole rulemaker in every marketplace (treaty draft, annex 1, articles 36-38). Some quotations from the draft reveal the sheer ambition of the UN:

“The scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention will be based on three basic pillars: government; facilitative mechanism; and financial mechanism. … The government will be ruled by the Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change 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.” (Copenhagen Treaty draft of September 15, 2009, para. 38).

The three central powers that the UN had hoped to grant itself under the guise of Saving The Planet from alleged climate catastrophe were as follows:

“Government”: This use of the word “government” is the first use of the term to describe a world government in any international treaty draft.

“Financial mechanism”: The “financial mechanism” was a delicate phrase to describe a new power of the UN to levy unlimited taxation directly on the peoples of its member states: taxation without representation, and on a global scale.

“Facilitative mechanism”: This mechanism would, for the first time, have given the UN he power directly to coerce and compel compliance on the part of its member states, by force if necessary. The Treaty draft describes it as –

“… a facilitative mechanism drawn up to facilitate the design, adoption and carrying out of public policies, as the prevailing instrument, to which the market rules and related dynamics should be subordinate.”

In short, there was to be a New World Order, with a “government” having at its command a “financial mechanism” in the form of unlimited rights to tax the world’s citizen’s directly, and a “facilitative mechanism” that would bring the rules of all formerly free markets under the direct control of the new UN “government”, aided by an already-expanding series of bureaucracies.

At no point anywhere in the 186 pages of the Treaty draft do the words “democracy”, “election”, “ballot”, or “vote” appear. As the EU has already demonstrated, the transfer of powers from sovereign democracies to supranational entities brings those democracies to an end. At the supranational level, in the UN, in the EU and in the proposed world government, decisions are not made by anyone whom we, the voters, have elected to make such decisions.

The exposure of the draft treaty in major international news media panicked the UN into abandoning the draft before the Copenhagen conference even began. Instead, the UN is now legislating crabwise, as the European Union does, with a series of successive annual agreements, the last of which was the Copenhagen Accord, each transferring more power and wealth from individual nations to its supranational bureaucracy. The latest of these agreements is being finalized here in Cancun.

The European Union, which has stealthily stamped out democracy over the past half-century by a series of treaties each transferring a little more power and wealth from elected hands in the member states to unelected hands in Brussels, has been advising the Secretariat on how to do the same on a global scale.

After the spectacular bloody nose the Secretariat got in Copenhagen, it was most anxious not to endure a second failure in Cancun. To this end, it obtained the agreement of the German government to host a monthly series of conferences in Bonn in the early part of 2010, some of which were open to outside observers and some were behind closed doors in a comfortable suburban palace, where the new way of legislating for the world – in secret – first came into use.

The Chinese regime, anxious to get a piece of the action, agreed to host an additional session in Tientsin a few weeks ago. The purpose of this near-perpetual international junketing – which the national delegates have greatly enjoyed at our expense – was to make sure that nearly all of the elements in the Cancun agreement were firmly in draft and agreed well before Cancun, so as to avoid what too many journalists have tediously and obviously described as a “Mexican stand-off”.

It is precisely because of all this massive and expensive preparation that the note by the Chairman, whose main points are summarized above, may well reflect what is finally decided and announced here in a couple of days’ time. The Chairman is not simply guessing: this Note reflects what the Secretariat now confidently expects to get away with.

However, following the Copenhagen disaster, our grim future New Masters are taking no chances. They persuaded their friends in the mainstream news media, who cannot now easily back out of their original declarations of blind faith in the Church of “Global Warming” and are as anxious not to lose face as the Secretariat is, to put it about that at Cancun this year and even at Durban next year very little of substance will occur.

The intention is that, after not one but two international climate conferences, the second of them in Rio in 2012 on the 20th anniversary of the Earth Summit that began it all, the Secretariat will have become so wealthy and will have accreted so much power to itself that no one – not even the US Senate – will dare to resist ratifying the Treaty of Rio that brings democracy to an end worldwide and fulfils Lord Mandelson’s recent statement that “we are now living in a post-democratic age.”

Over my dead body. The people know best what is best for the people. The governing class no doubt knows what is best for the governing class, but does not necessarily know what is best for the people, and must always be kept in check by the ballot-box.

If we are to have a world government at all (and, as the science of “global warming” alarm continues to collapse, the current pretext for world domination by a privileged few is wearing more than a little thin), then it is essential that the world government should be an elected government, and that, as Article 1, Section 1 of the US Constitution makes plain when it grants “All legislative power” to the elected Congress and to the now-elected Senate, none shall make laws for the world or impose taxes upon the world except those whom the people of the world have elected by universal secret ballot.

How can we, the people, defeat the Secretariat and keep the democracy we love? Simply by informing our elected representatives of the scope, ambition, and detail of what is in the Cancun agreement. The agreement will not be called a “Treaty”, because the Senate, particularly after the mid-term elections, will not pass it. But it can still be imposed upon us by the heavily Left-leaning Supreme Court, which no longer makes any pretense at judicial impartiality and may well decide, even if Congress does not, that the Cancun agreement shall stand part of US law on the ground that it is “customary international law”.

What to do? Send this blog posting to your legislators. It is their power, as well as yours, that is being taken away; their democracy, as well as yours, that will perish from the Earth unless this burgeoning nonsense is stopped.


newest oldest most voted
Notify of

“self-snip” them!
I never voted for any of those dictators. Democracy is indeed dead. I heard there is a storm coming and it’s not related to the Earth’s climate but rather the political climate. Climate is weather and it will get stormy for the ruling class.


What a wonderfull prescription for global chaos!

And our elected representatives will blindly sign up just the way that they have with every other stupid UN missive and charter.
Why is the abandonment of national responsibility by the elected representatives such a pervasive world-wide malaise?

Pull My Finger

I feel quite comfortable that the US will not be signing off on this atrocity.


Is there a link to an electronic copy of the document?

jeff 5778

Why do our elected officials never speak of US sovereignty? Who in their right mind would take on oath to upohld the Constitution and then approve such an agreement or treaty?


The Norwegian prime minister Jens Stoltenberg is the head of the Advisory Group on Climate Change Financing, which made the plans for raising the 100 billion dollars. Other members of the group are Nicholas Stern, Lawrence H. Summers and George Soros. The wolves are already seated at the table.
Stoltenberg is a die-hard internationalist, a socialist-democrat, and is convinced that this brand of socialism should be exported to the rest of the world. And since most countries are not interested, why not skip the national level altogether and create it from the top, starting with the UN?
If a small mechanism can be put in place – say the power to collect and redistribute taxes for climate purposes, then this can easily be expanded to other areas – gradually shifting power from the national states to the UN.
And from democracy to a faceless, unelected bureaucracy.

Laura Hills

We are being led into a dystopia beyond Orwell’s. Who would have thought that all the feel-good issues of the sixties – ecoactivism, anti-colonialism, sharing resources would have led to a secretive unaccountable totalitarian gigabureaucracy?

John R T

C. Figueres, Exec. Secý, UNFCCC, made all this clear when she stopped at home, during the lead-uop to Cancun:
¨¡Eso es lo fantástico! ¡Es una oportunidad única para recobrar la atención del mundo!¨
Industrialized nations have no choice: Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions [NAMA] will be supported with mandated expropriations. In response to la Nacion´s Vargas, Figueres says,
¨“Todo eso, se sistematiza como un plan de inversión. Se cuantifica y se lleva a la comunidad internacional para que lo aprueben y financien”.
Q. ¿Cuáles países estarían en la obligación de financiarnos?
A. En obligación van a estar todos los países industrializados, pero eso no está totalmente decidido todavía; esas son parte de las negociaciones que se verán en la próxima cumbre en Cancún (noviembre). Mejor digamos que ya han mostrado interés Alemania, Estados Unidos, Francia y Japón.
Q. ¿Qué ganan esos países financiando nuestras acciones?
A. No es que quieran. Es que ellos van a tener que hacerlo y financiarnos. Van a tener que crear un fondo para canalizar las donaciones desde los países industrializados hacia los países en desarrollo. Lo que ocurre es que no todos los países en desarrollo van a poder aprovechar la oportunidad de optar por estos NAMA.¨
Monckton, above:
¨¨… a Registry of Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions by Developed Countries, a Body to Supervise the Process for Understanding Diversity of Mitigation Actions Submitted and Support Needed, a Body to Develop Modalities for the Registry of Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions,…¨
Welcome to the future; No es que quieran. They do not want this.

So the UN Convention’s Secretariat will become the new world government.
Sad that my children will not only be left with a planet in the state it is, but far worse, we have saddled them with a petty bureaucratic dictatorship
Come to think of it, I think the planet is doing just fine on its own – it’s just us who are allowing ourselves to be subjugated.
Now that’s a real legacy I am ashamed to leave behind.

James Sexton

And I thought you said you wouldn’t include any humor! The reference to Canute always gives me a chuckle(especially in reference to CAGW). Any way, Christopher, its easy to get down when you’re surrounded by a bunch of loons. But, the world is changing and so too, is the perception of alarmist advocacy groups such as the group you’re hanging with down in Cancun. I suppose its easier for me to be more optimistic, in that I haven’t had to live under EU rule. But those power hungry whack-jobs have been exposed and its only going to get worse for them. A common idiom in the English language is apt; it’s all over but the shouting. And shouting, we will hear, more loud and more shrill, but as a recently deceased American icon was known for singing(a Willie Nelson tune) once the outcome of an American football game was decided, ……
[N/C]Turn out the lights, [G]
[D7] the party’s o-[G]ver
They say that all
[D7] good things must end
Let’s call it a night,
[G]the [G7] party’s o-[C]ver
And tomorrow starts the same [D7] old [Bb7] thing a-[G]gain…….
But make no mistake, the party is over. The CAGW crew is like a party-goer that doesn’t know when to call it. But soon, the people of the world will lose patience with our intrusive guests and run them out of the house.

R. de Haan

Lord Monckton at his best.
Now how are we going to tackle this scheme.
Getting active in a UK Minority party won’t save us.
We have to undertake something substantial which requires a relentless attempt of “thinking out of the box” for starters.
What do the freedom loving people of the world undertake when their world is stolen from them by a bunch of MAFIOSI?
I say we declare war and start to address any person in Government responsible for signing this hubris. So the first step is to send them an ultimatum ASAP.
So what do we need:
Collecting as much signatures as possible providing Lord Monckton with a legitimate backing an support to deliver the message to each individual Government that is going to sign this agreement.
This could become the biggest party in the world and IMO the only way out of the woods for now.
It’s time to act now before these crooks have finished their structure and taken over our nations, our defenses, our resources and our freedom.

It’s a Coup d’état!!!


Lets kick them out!
Thank you Lord Monckton for this fantastic summary and analyse. We have to get the democratic “teapartymovements” all ower the world to gather anf realize that we have a common cause.The gouverning class has to go! Its simple as that.I think its important to stick ONLY to the strict democratic principles to gather the people.
Its important to keep this from getting a to be left/right issue.
I have a lot of friends that would choose democracy on first hand and left/right there after.Because its the basic democratic principles that are abused the reason why comes second hand. The power and respect of the people must be restored.
MSM has betrayeled the people and is now a partner with the governing class.
Once again I really apriciate your engagement.


Although Mr. Monckton is laying it thick, his overall point is very pertinent. Cancun could turn out to be a stealth version of Copenhagen. Only a couple of days left and the pressure is mounting: some kind of agreement will be signed and the whole charade will start again at the next Climate Conference. This is a war of attrition, the warmists are much more numerous and hold the positions of power.

Stephen Brown

Link to the .pdf copy of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action
under the Convention
Thirteenth session
Cancun, 29 November 2010–*, as referenced:


That’s just a summary of the main points of the Chairman’s note? I wish someone would write a summary of the main points of Monckton’s summary. He is very verbose.


This has been sent to my Senator. The rest of my fellow “Yanks” should do the same, please.

alan eggleston

Lord Monckton has again shone the penetrating light of reason into the otherwise murky depths of the the world government conspirators

John from CA

It isn’t possible (I hope) for Congress to enter into an international treaty that violates the US Constitution. If this occurs, the Act will be taken to the Supreme Court and will be soundly overturned.
The UN is nuts if they believe the Free World will buy into this ignorance.


Oslo says: December 9, 2010 at 10:57 am
The Norwegian prime minister Jens Stoltenberg is the head of the Advisory Group on Climate Change Financing, which made the plans for raising the 100 billion dollars. Other members of the group are Nicholas Stern, Lawrence H. Summers and George Soros. The wolves are already seated at the table.
Oslo. I see you mention Larry Summers. He has a lot to answer for. It seem that he managed to help pave the way for the Sub Prime debacle in the US and has hardly covered himself in glory since. He got rid of Brooksley Born who just might have protected the US from the extravagances of the Casino Banks. I don’t see him as a patriot – just a far too clever jerk.
As for Stern and Soros !!!! You can tell them by the company they keep – birds of a feather.
We have reason to be afraid.

Viv Evans

Telling our elected representatives about this is useless – they’ve signed off our rights to the EU already, in the hope of cushy, well-paid jobs once their political career is over.
There is only one thing to do: cry everywhere, at the top of our voices, ‘no taxation without representation’!
Appointed place-holdes are not our representatives.
Why not start a global TEA party?

Henry chance

The UN is far too corrupt to distribute money. They do think they can gather money.
I can’t see the next congress signing this.
Sovereignty is a serious issue.


This is quite depressing. So depressing in fact, that if the Chairman’s wet dream ( The Note) does come to pass I fully expect an escalating cycle of violent rebellion and suppression of same. Is this the proverbial SHTF scenario? Perhaps it’s time to take the guillotines out of storage.


“Who would have thought that all the feel-good issues of the sixties – ecoactivism, anti-colonialism, sharing resources would have led to a secretive unaccountable totalitarian gigabureaucracy?”
Yea, who would have seen that coming.
Wake the hell up people.

Vince Causey

I recall that his Lordship made a similar pronouncement leading up to CoP15. Is this more of the same being dished out at Cancun or is it a whole different beastie?

Gareth Phillips

I must admit that being a bit of an old lefty and inspired by the beauty of the American Founding fathers constitution, the line “The governing class in what was once proudly known as the Free World” holds no terror for me. I believe in common with others that everyone is created equal, and there are no such things as “Governing classes” and hope there never will be. The rest of the Hon. gentleman’s missive as usual contains some interesting points peppered with odd ideas of revolution and world government. I imagine that presses the right buttons for some of our more radical colleagues in the Americas.
Personally I believe the climate change fiasco is the most clever money making scam ever inflicted on the West by capitalist forces, but that my opinion, and very coloured by my own political beliefs. Think of the good we could for all peoples with a fraction of the cash discussed at Cancun. So although I believe our sceptic Peer is a strange fellow, he arrives at similar conclusions, so I have a soft spot for him. However I do wish he could be more precise and not ramble!

Mike Spilligan

I keep saying to myself that this is some kind of hoax. Is this serious? Surely, the UK hasn’t got anyone at Cancun with the authority to sign up to this?


Lord Monckton repeatedly mentioned the European Union’s policy of very gradually replacing democratic rule by the rule of the bureaucracy. Eurosceptics sometimes compare the EU to the USSR and call it the EUSSR.
A few years ago Vladimir Bukovksy, a former Russian dissident, claimed that the European Union is on its way to becoming another Soviet Union and said it must be destroyed before it develops into a fully fledged totalitarian state.
Perhaps Bukovsky was exaggerating the dangers but the way in which global warming or climate change is being used to by-pass normal democratic processes, not just in Europe but around the world, is rather worrying.


Lord Monckton is not the only one who has been reporting from Cancun. A few minutes ago I received an email message from a member of Here are some extracts:
“[T]he climate is changing much faster than these negotiations are moving.”
“Meanwhile, out in the real world, climate impacts are all too visible. Since the negotations began 10 days ago, climate disasters have struck all over the world: flooding in Australia, Venezuela, the Balkans, Columbia, India; wildfires in Israel, Lebanon, Tibet; freak winter storms in Europe and the United States. These events have been devastating–hundreds are dead, and hundreds of thousands have been affected.”

G. Karst

What does it mean…? When the little hairs, on the back of the neck, stand up straight??

Ed P

The whole world is being led into a greater disaster than in the 1930s, when good, honest people would not believe the warnings. Perhaps there’s an end of species death wish embedded in humanity – if these proposals are ratified it’s the end of all democracy & freedom forever. But maybe the increasingly aggressive Islamic lot will use their nukes to good effect in Rio 2012.

Barry L.

How can we, the people, defeat the Secretariat….
General Strike:


“Who would have thought that all the feel-good issues of the sixties – ecoactivism, anti-colonialism, sharing resources would have led to a secretive unaccountable totalitarian gigabureaucracy?”
Anyone who paid attention to the following watershed piece of their worldview — “the ends justify the means.” Once you accept that, you’ve aligned youself with Torquemada, Stalin, Pol Pot, and Osama bin Laden, and you’ll do *anything* for the cause.
Why would you be surprised why those losing the battle for world opinion would “do what it takes.”

John from CA

“What to do? Send this blog posting to your legislators.”
Anyone got a complete list of the New Congress handy?

Dave Andrews

Vince Causey,
Don’t be fooled into thinking that just because the Copenhagen did not provide the ‘necessary result’ attempts will not be made to achieve the aims in other ways and in other forums.
The IPCC and UN are operating to their own agenda – bureaucracies, however enlightened, inevitably come to do this. Think of it as ‘group think’, only on a larger than usual scale.
The underlying issues remain the same, however.


The Rise Of The Bureaucrats.
With 1.5 percent of global GDP we can obviously install an international caste of parasites about 90 million head strong. We will need entire new cities for them, or alternatively, let them occupy most of the holiday resorts permanently for endless Caipirinha-fueled congresses.


It looks like the bottom line, from the global warming elites is because we say so.
It is the abdication of the leadership of the West when elected representatives allow their duties to be bypassed by an organization such as the UN, treaty or regulation.

Gareth Phillips

Mike Spilligan says:
December 9, 2010 at 12:27 pm
I keep saying to myself that this is some kind of hoax. Is this serious? Surely, the UK hasn’t got anyone at Cancun with the authority to sign up to this?
Gareth says, of course it’s a hoax. We have a Parliamentary democracy and rumours of decision to devolve our governance to some dictatorship without Royal or Parliamentary consent are patently nonsense. However in the same way warmists try to convince by exaggeration of minor climatological changes, Lord Monckton is using the same tactics to put his point across. I’m not sure it’s a wise strategy though.


Roy says:
December 9, 2010 at 12:35 pm
“Lord Monckton is not the only one who has been reporting from Cancun. A few minutes ago I received an email message from a member of Here are some extracts:
“[T]he climate is changing much faster than these negotiations are moving.”

If it changes fast, that’s a sure sign it’s weather. Bill McKibben should know that.

“There is a tide in the affairs of men, Which taken at the flood, leads on to fortune. Omitted, all the voyage of their life is bound in shallows and in miseries. On such a full sea are we now afloat. And we must take the current when it serves, or lose our ventures.”

Vince Causey says:
December 9, 2010 at 12:16 pm
I recall that his Lordship made a similar pronouncement leading up to CoP15. Is this more of the same being dished out at Cancun or is it a whole different beastie?
Chris Monckton is indeed scare mongering just as he did at Copenhagen.
In the run-up to last years jamboree, prior to the CRU leak/Climategate these traitors were able to kid themselves that they had a scientific consensus for AGW. This gave them the crucial alibi of plausible deniability. When they had finished committing treason by selling out their individual Nations Sovereignty, all they had to do was claim that it was the scientists that made them do it. But by then it would be too late, “Global Governance” would already be in place and it would not be possible to overturn it.
A year on and things are very different. It is clear to most who are paying attention that there is nothing like a scientific consensus. Neither is there one single piece of real world evidence to support CO2 induced ‘global warming’. And finally the entire Norther Hemisphere is currently in the grip of the coldest winter since records began. A trend. for which there is a real consensus, that is 15 years in the making. During a time of unprecedented industrialisation by our cousins over in India and China and in many other parts of the world.
So I say let these traitors sign along the dotted line. Let them commit treason in Cancun.
They have built their own gallows. They have braided their own ropes. They have tied their own nooses.
Now let them hang themselves.

Power Grab

This is all tied up with the currency catastrophes, isn’t it?


All UNFCCC documents at the Cancun conference, specifically including Possible elements of the outcome, are drafted with what is called “transparent impenetrability”. The intention is that the documents should not be understood, but that later we shall be told they were in the public domain all the time, so what are we complaining about?”
I’ve often wondered at times if they were doing this because you can find these things and they are often vague.


@Ed P
I can believe that an economic crisis is manmade, because we invented the bloody thing.
But I can’t believe that we’re responsible for a climate crisis, since we did not think up the climate and nor de we understand it. We are just along for the ride and get scared sometimes when we hit a bump.


WGN radio in Chicago, aired a two hour interview with the author of the book:
“Radical In Chief, Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism”.
This is MSM, with a 500+ mile radio reception range depending on atmospheric conditions and a website where a replay of the interview may be heard at this link:,0,4277408.mp3file
(patience, website can be slow).
It’s one of the last?, bastions of reason I know of.
The moderator (Milt Rosenberg) has been on the air for about 25 years or so.
The last half of the radio programs invite telephone calls from listeners, for comments.
Any other good talk radio out there??


What we need right now is for someone to release the rest of the cru files……


I expect all that wikileaks chaff is keeping all the reporters & politicos busy or something, you’d think someone mite have noticed these constitutional issues.


I just got done looking for the FCCC/AWGLCA/2010/CRP.2 document and came across these excerpts in one of the documents that came up in the google search results:
[Noting the need for developed country Parties to compensate [developing country Parties, especially] the economies of Africa, least developed countries and small island developing States for environmental, social and economic losses arising from the implementation of climate change response measures in the context of environmental justice and environmental refugees,]
[In order to guarantee the compliance of Annex I Parties with the goals adopted in paragraphs x and y, a climate court of justice will be developed.]
I have no idea what the brackets mean, but I find what’s between them telling…

Tom in Florida

Now one can realize the value of the 2nd Amendment to the U. S. Constitution. World “leaders” often forget that private American citizens are armed.