From WorldNetDaily: Thatcher adviser: Copenhagen goal is 1-world government
"At [the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference in] Copenhagen this December, weeks away, a treaty will be signed," Lord Christopher Monckton told a Minnesota Free Market Institute audience on Thursday at Bethel University in St. Paul.
"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 regimes from the European Union will rubber stamp it. Virtually nobody won't sign it," he told the audience of some 700 attendees.
"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 satisfaction 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." . . .
Monckton argued that President Obama will sign the Copenhagen treaty at the December meeting, without seeking a two-thirds ratification of the treaty by the Senate, or any other type of Congressional approval.
"So, thank you, America. You were the beacon of freedom to the world. It is a privilege to stand on this soil of freedom while it is still free," he continued. "But, in the next few weeks, unless you stop it, your president will sign your freedom, your democracy, and your humanity away forever.
"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 the climate and, even if there were, an economic treaty does nothing to [help] it."
11 comments:
Whether one speaks of health care, global warming or taxation, the issue is not what meets the eye. The underlying issue is one of control, power and money. American Exceptionalism has allowed us to remain relatively free and in control of our own destiny in addition to elevating the lot of the rest of the world. The liberal progressive agenda is based on the premise that American Exceptionalism has been a destructive force and must be abated. Agenda items as those mentioned are simply tools to that end.
Lord Mockton should get his facts straight before he runs his mouth. According to the NY Times, the treaty is nowhere close to being ratified, & neither Obama or his delegates to the conference have any plans to sign the treaty anyway. Who is this guy anyway? Another right wing Obama basher? I'm sure we can all look forward to this blowhard's appearance on Fox News. He'd make a good guest. Why let the facts get in the way of the truth?
Uh - Monckton was on this issue long before Obama was even a candidate.
While I'm not sure about his interpretation of the US Constitution (which I intend to check into eventually), which facts -- the Scientific Ones -- has he gotten wrong?
I've studied a lot of science -- earth science in particular -- and I didn't hear anything that sounded wrong. I also lived through (and lectured upon) the last earth-sci related controversial theory: Continental Drift. Evidence on both sides of the issue was presented. No one had to say "the debate is over" -- No one had to claim a "consensus believes" -- No one clinging to the old theory was called a "denier" or some other pejorative. The new theory eventually prevailed over the old based on the weight of the evidence itself.
The global warming proponents NEED to use hyperbole, name calling, and consensus claims because the weight of the evidence itself is minimal.
"Why let the facts get in the way of the truth?"
Typically, those who dare disagree with the gospel of the left are personally attacked. They've been milking Bush bashing for years, added greedy Wall St., insurance comapnies and now trained their guns at Fox News.Their constant straw man mentality is infantile and boring.
Considering the fact that Obama has no intention of signing the treaty, Mockton't rant should be relegated to the garbage bin, where it belongs. Fox "News" has been attacking Obama since day 1 of his presidency, & will not rest until another Bush/Cheney clone is back in the W.H. The shills on Fox claim to love this country, but think nothing of attacking of leader of the free world on the world stage beacause he isn't one of the right wing's chosen few.
See my first comment to a similar "Anonymous" comment above.
The important points of Monckton's lecture that everyone, regardless of party stripes and regardless of how one feels about the current and former president, are the following:
(1) The alleged scientific evidence of a "Global Warming Crisis" is bogus.
(2) The "Global Warming Crisis" is being used as a pretext for setting up a global government that will threaten US Sovereignty if we sign on to it (which many people of BOTH PARTIES seem to want to do).
Talking about Obama and political views is a distraction from the above points which are "inconvenient truths" for party leadership on both sides. The Leftists running the Democrats like the idea of government control over everything. The silver-spoon Multi-National Corporate Elites running the Republicans like the idea of universal government control as long as they are part of it and can use their positions in government to crush their competition and steer vast amounts of money into their pockets.
Individuals and their freedoms are being led to slaughter by both parties to satisfy the lust for power and money by a few. Global Warming is the means to the end for the world's elite.
It's time everyone wakes up to this.
BTW - It's my understanding that Lord Monckton will be on FOX this coming week.
If global warming is bougus, how do you account for vast glaciers in Iceland & Greenland disapearing? Or how about ice shelves of Antartica falling into the sea? Scientists are now predicting that the north pole will be ice free during the summer months within 5 years. I agree that the jury is still out on what is causing the above. But govt. experts, not just those in the private sector are sounding the alarm. I'd like to know your views on what is causing the above.
You left out the vast mile-thick glacier that existed over Upstate NY 18,000 years ago that also disappeared . . . (from which our area is still "bouncing back" -- the cause of local earthquakes). You also left out the 300 ft rise in sea level since then (which submerged what is called the Hudson Canyon off of NY City). These things occurred long before mankind could have had an influence.
It is textbook geologic history that the Ice advanced and retreated 4 times during the last Ice Age -- and many believe that we are currently in one of those warmer "inter glacial" periods now -- meaning the ice will come again.
Against this backdrop what we see now is not that different from what the Earth saw before . . . and the cause is most likely the same. In my view it is most likely a variation in the amount of energy reaching Earth from the Sun, but there could be Earth based factors as well... having nothing to do with mankind.
It's no surprise that Fox is now the new Bush. Where would the left be without name calling and hysteria? So, what if the earth has cooled for the past nine years and the computer models missed it? Let's disregard reality, change the name from global warming to climate change and tax ourselves to the poorhouse anyway. And as we tax and dither, virtually all other nations with energy resources are developing them. But, boy, we sure feel good about, "saving the planet."
I think we need to stop focusing on "left" vs "right" and start focusing on "right vs wrong."
We are being asked to trash our entire economic system and cede control over ourselves to a global elite on the basis of a mere theory on which there is still a lot of disagreement (in spite of what the corrupt membership of the UN wants us to believe). That's simply "wrong."
The left and right clash sparks debate and ideas out of which one may come closer to arriving at the truth.
Post a Comment