Copenhagen Climate Scam: Read the Treaty Obama Wants to Sign
[ABOVE: The UN Framework Convention for Climate Change is an event one-worlders will adore. The attitude of US taxpayers is another story. Will the Obama administration listen to them?]
“The desire to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it.”
- H L Mencken
READ the Draft of the Copenhagen Abomination Treaty:
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
It’s a 181-page pdf file.
ONE NOTE before watching this eye-opening four-minute video: The only piece of legislation that Obama worked on during his short US Senate term (four years, of which two were spent campaigning for president) was the Global Poverty Act. His bill would have transferred $845 billion to poor countries from US taxpayers to “end global poverty”.
* Obama’s Global Poverty Act: Spread U.S. Wealth Around the World
* McCain Works on Financial Crisis While Obama Touts $845 Billion Global Poverty Bill Funded by US Taxpayers
* Obama, Hagel, Cantwell: Fighting Global Poverty–One Speech at a Time
The Copenhagen Treaty will save Obama the trouble of having to pass the Global Poverty Act in the US.
NOW, invest four minutes of your life to watch this video. A further explanation of Lord Monckton and his background follow the video.
From Is Obama Poised to Cede US Sovereignty?:
On October 14, Lord Christopher Monckton gave a presentation in St. Paul, MN on the subject of global warming. In this 4-minute excerpt from his speech, he issues a dire warning to all Americans regarding the United Nations Climate Change Treaty that is scheduled to be signed in Copenhagen in December 2009.
A draft of the treaty can be read here:
http://www.globalclimatescam.com/docu…Page 18: Section 38 of the “Share vision for long-term cooperation action plan” contains the text for forming the new government.
Page 44-45: Section 46 “Objectives, scope, and guiding principles” contains the text for enforcement and establishment of the rule of law.
There has been considerable debate raised about Monckton’s conclusion that the Copenhagen Treaty would cede US sovereignty. His comments appear to be based upon his interpretation of the The Supremacy Clause in the US Constitution (Article VI, paragraph 2). This clause establishes the Constitution, Federal Statutes, and U.S. TREATIES as the supreme law of the land. Concerns have been raised in the past that a particularly ambitious treaty may supersede the US Constitution. In the 1950s, a constitutional amendment, known as the Bricker Amendment, was proposed in response to such fears, but it failed to pass. You can read more about the Bricker Amendment in a 1953 Time Magazine article:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/art…,9171,806676-1,00.htmlLord Monckton served as a policy adviser to Margaret Thatcher. He has repeatedly challenged Al Gore to a debate to which Gore has refused. Monckton sued to stop Gore’s film “An Inconvenient Truth” from being shown in British schools due to its inaccuracies. The judge found in-favor of Monckton, ordering 9 serious errors in the film to be corrected. Lord Monckton travels internationally in an attempt to educating the public about the myth of global warming.
This is probably the first article DBKP has ever published that could be considered in the “New World Order” category. We never put much stock in those claims.
Reading this treaty changed our minds. Hence, this article.
Thanks God that India and China will not sign this piece of trash treaty based on the scribblings of a psuedo-scientific consensual daisy chain of grant-grubbing academic hacks masquerading as real scientists.
REAL SCIENCE isn’t based on “consensus”–that would be politics, which globaloney clearly is. If Scientific Consensus were the way science is determined, we’d still be studying that the world is flat and that the sun revolves around the earth.
However, the Copenhagen treaty is not about science: it’s about taking more decisions away from US taxpayers about their money and giving them to an unelected body of officials.
If you think Congress is unresponsive to Americans’ concerns, wait until Americans’ taxes are decided by a UN-type body of faceless EU-lookalike bureaucrats.
h/t: Please Show This To Your Centrist, Moderate, Friends Who Trust Obama: Four Minutes Which Can Change Their Minds
UPDATE @ 0055 10-25-09: There May Be No Coping with Copenhagen.
“In December, Obama may — emphasis may — make another visit to Copenhagen. If he does, watch out, as the stakes will be far greater than the well-being of a single city. What appears to hang in the balance is nothing less than the future of our country’s ability to determine its own destiny.”
MORE from PJM:
…if Mr. de Boer and the one-worlders of the environmental movement get their way in Copenhagen, the United Nations will finally have transformed itself from its original design — as “an international organization whose stated aims are facilitating cooperation in international law, international security, economic development, social progress, human rights, and the achieving of world peace†— into a de facto unelected government, complete with its own tax and spending authorities and its own powers of enforcement.
There’s a natural tendency to dismiss statements such as the one just made as overwrought hyperbole. I would suggest resisting that urge. First, I have been through the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-Term Cooperative Action’s “revised negotiating text,†which is in essence a mock-up of the treaty containing many multi-bracketed items representing matters that remain to be ironed out.
From Free Republic (h/t NipFan): AIM 40th anniversary dinner video.
The climate change panel begins around the 59:00 minute mark and is quite good. The panel is composed of Lord Monckton, the lady who made Not Evil Just Wrong, among others. Worth a view.
by Mondo Frazier
images: I love Carbon Dioxide
It’s no surprise that constitutionally ignorant US citizens, including constitutionally clueless Obama, are overlooking a MAJOR problem with the Copenhagen Treaty.
More specifically, given that the federal Constitution is silent about climate issues, the 10th Amendment automatically reserves government power to regulate climate issues to the states, not the Oval Office and Congress. So regardless that Obama has constitutional authority to negotiate treaties, he cannot use that power as a back door to force foreign laws and regulations on US citizens.
But if you don’t believe me then perhaps you’ll believe Thomas Jefferson.
“Surely the President and Senate cannot do by treaty what the whole government is interdicted from doing in any way.” –Thomas Jefferson: Parliamentary Manual, 1800. http://www.constitution.org/tj/tj-mpp.htm
Jefferson also indicated the following basic remedy concerning the exercise of nonexistent powers.
“Where powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy.” –Thomas Jefferson: Draft Kentucky Resolutions, 1798. http://tinyurl.com/oozoo
Reply
admin Reply:
October 25th, 2009 at 00:45
Thanks for the links and info!
…and for stopping by and taking the time to comment.
Reply
[...] 25, 2009 in News Headline Alerts http://deathby1000papercuts.com/2009/10/copenhagen-climate-scam-read-the-treaty-obama-wants-to-sign/ Categories Select Category Christianity and Spirituality Daily News Summary Health and Wealth [...]
You know that fair play requires that the party used to telling others what to do should get a chance to be told what to do for a change. The US has lorded it over as much of the rest of the world as would let them get away with it, and now it’s America’s turn to be told to jump and it had better start learning to ask “how high?” The country that produces 25% of the whole world’s polution every year has no moral or ethical position to complain when it is time to clean up the mess it had a great part in producing in the first place. Never mind the grousing just fix the problem.
Reply
admin Reply:
October 27th, 2009 at 17:57
Archie1954,
You know that fair play requires that the party used to telling others what to do should get a chance to be told what to do for a change.
Okay, fair enough, Arch. How far back you gonna go on that one? 1900? Is Germany/Great Britain going to pick up the lion’s share?
How about 1812? The UK and France gonna do it?
1500? Spain? Portugal?
1000? Turkey (Byzantine Empire/Constantinople)?
255? Italy (Rome)?
Why start in 2009? Or is the US the only country that’s got a big enough class of tools volunteering other people’s money?
Never mind the grousing just fix the problem.
I see the “grousing” as “debate”–it’s what people do when there’s a disagreement of opinion.
The problem you see may be different from the one I see. I see the problem as a small cabal of people gaming the system for personal profit and power. I also see a problem with volcanoes. They’re spewing more CO2 in one year than the combined efforts of all mankind. Make those bastards pay–and then check with me.
I might be on board then.
Thanks for stopping by and commenting.
Reply
Thanks for the info…..and LOVE your reply to Archie1954!
Reply
[...] Lord Christopher Monckton has been raising the alarm against the dangers of the loss of sovereignty that the Copenhagen climate change conference treaty presents. [MORE on Copenhagen: Copenhagen Climate Scam: Read the Treaty Obama Wants to Sign] [...]
If most of the conrties of the world are going to sign this treaty and give all power to the UN than that would be bible prophecy (in the books of daniel and revelations). If you would like to know more please reply. thanks
Reply
Yes, it is all about Bible prophesy. Obama is just a token. I truly and personally believe that he is manipulated by his underground mafia. Others have stated that he leans left toward socialism, or possibly communism and so on…I believe he leans toward a one world government that is mentioned about in the bible. This has never been done. There is no copying other horrible controlling governments of the past. This is all new. I say, beware world. We have always been noted per Bible scolars as the “Paper Lion”…this treaty is about Paper…Money. Nuff said.
Reply
This is it? An act of God? How is that for pyschological disarming….Revelations is a revealing, not a prophecy…
We’re you there when the book was written? Christ! …..and the gaurdians walk right in to rule us while we digg our own graves.
Reply
this bill can and will get signed by obama without the consent of congress. IN 1913, THE FEDERAL RESERVE WAS
ESTABLISHED BY FOREIGN BANKERS WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF CONGRESS!!!!!
Reply
“All of us are joined in one fragile experiment vulnerable to happenstance, bad-judgment, and malice. If we hope to be safe and prosperous while drawing down the habitability of the earth, we are hoping for what has never been and what can never be. We are all co-members of one enterprise that stretches back through time immemorial, but forward no farther than our ability to learn that we are, as Aldo Leopold once put it, ‘plain members and citizens of the biotic community’. Preface David Orr.
Almost 80% of the Earth’s original forests have already been degraded or completely destroyed
The bad news is, we’re close to crossing most of the rest of the boundaries. Estimates say, that we currently allow 9.5 million tons of phosphorus to flow annually into our oceans, mostly because of fertilizer use, and that past 11 million tons we may well trigger “large-scale ocean anoxic events.â€(Dead zones in oceans and water where no productive life can longer inhabit) Ozone concentrations in the atmosphere— 290 Dobson units before the Industrial Revolution and 283 at present — can’t dip below 276 without catastrophe, the authors note.
Oh, and the worse news is, we’re already well past 3 of the borders. We’re removing almost 4 times as much nitrogen from the atmosphere for human use as is safe, and the result are things like wide-scale water pollution and the addition of heat-trapping gases like nitrous oxide into the atmosphere. The species extinction rate, the authors argue, is probably 10 times the tolerable level of 10 species per million species per year, though they add that they’re less certain of this than other numbers it’s probably more. “However, we can say with some confidence that Earth cannot sustain the current rate of loss without significant erosion of ecosystem resilience
In Australia, agriculture has altered or destroyed half of all woodland and forests. Around 70% of the remaining forest has been damaged by logging. Loss of habitats is behind 80% of threatened species, the report claims.
•Nearly half the world’s people are crowded into urban areas, often without adequate sanitation, and are exposed to epidemics of such diseases as measles and flu.
•With 1.2 billion people lacking clean water, waterborne infections account for 80% of all infectious diseases. Increased water pollution creates breeding grounds for malaria-carrying mosquitoes, killing 1.2 million to 2.7 million people a year, and air pollution kills about 3 million people a year. Unsanitary living conditions account for more than 5 million deaths each year, of which more than half are children.
•Air pollution from smoke and various chemicals kills 3 million people a year. In the United States alone about 3 million tons of toxic chemicals are released into the environment — contributing to cancer, birth defects, immune system defects and many other serious health problems.
•Soil is contaminated by many chemicals and pathogens, which are passed on to humans through direct contact or via food and water. Increased soil erosion worldwide not only results in more soil being blown but spreading of disease microbes and various toxins.
Environmental woes that might be considered catastrophic in some countries can seem commonplace in China: industrial cities where people rarely see the sun; children killed or sickened by lead poisoning or other types of local pollution; a coastline so swamped by algal red tides that large sections of the ocean no longer sustain marine life.
China is choking on its own success. The economy is on a historic run, posting a succession of double-digit growth rates. But the growth derives, now more than at any time in the recent past, from a staggering expansion of heavy industry and urbanization that requires colossal inputs of energy, almost all from coal, the most readily available, and dirtiest, source.
China’s problem has become the world’s problem. Sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides spewed by China’s coal-fired power plants fall as acid rain on Seoul, South Korea, and Tokyo. Much of the particulate pollution over Los Angeles originates in China, according to the Journal of Geophysical Research.
• 75% of all the fish stocks in the world are already either: exploited, over-exploited or recovering. 27% of coral reefs have already been, and 70% of Earth’s coral reefs will cease to exist within the next 38 years. The world has lost half of its coastal wetlands, including mangrove swamps and salt marshes.
• In the next 30 years, as many as 1/5 of all species alive today will become extinct. 23% of all mammals and 12% of all birds’ species were considered “threatened” in 2003
yea…please don’t listen to this guy. We literally and sadly can’t afford to get out of this aggrement just for pride, political freedom to systematically ruin the world some more, and for money. It’s sad but the US has made no acknowledgment responsibility or taken active steps to do anything about the environment. And if it takes a global agreement to make the world stop, listen and act, than it’s necessary and prudent to support this aggreement. It’s the legacy the industrial revolution has left the world and someone has to clean it up, and yes it will cost money up front, and we will fund other nations, but to solely assume and postulate that means all world domination, and the apocalype now, is inaccurate, and irresponsible on this gentlemen’s part to spread that uninformed idea. Thank you for your time.
Reply
admin Reply:
November 17th, 2009 at 00:30
Emily,
Hard to know where to begin, so I’ll just mention one point:
75% of all the fish stocks in the world are already either: exploited, over-exploited or recovering.
Are there any choices other than those three?
On the bright side, there’s more forested acres in the USA than when the Pilgrims landed here in 1620.
Thanks for stopping by and commenting.
Reply
Emily Reply:
January 19th, 2010 at 03:07
Why yes, there are other choices for fish stocks they could be harvested sustainably and harvested using selective catching and fishing which indigenous people have done for centuries and also what organic and sustainably run fish companies practice today… That’s the only options exploited, over exploited, or recovering, that’s the sad reality of fish stock today, but has only been common for the last 250 years. No there are other choices….Show a little imagination there kid .
–Also before European settlement, forests covered nearly 1 billion acres of what is now the US. Since the mid-1600′s, about 300 million acres of forest have been cleared, primarily for agriculture during the 19th century.
Look outside and chances are yes you do see some trees, but if you knew what you were taking about, those are not naturally occurring trees. They are most likely Aspen and other fast growing species of trees logging companies plant and replant because they grow quickly or city and government planners grow for aesthetics, or invasive persistent species like Buckthorn. These are genetically engineered biologically impoverished remnant forests and these changes of habitats, along with many other numerous and exasperating factors, have driven many species and plants to extinction and to become endangered. (Not to mention all the CO2 these past and presently logged and cleared forests released into the air and continue to.)
“Overall, deforestation has been taking place at a pace of about 130 000 km2 (13 million hectares) per year during the period 1990–2005 (an area the size of Greece), with few signs of a significant decrease over time. Though deforestation continues at an alarming rate, the annual net loss of forest area is decreasing due to tree planting and natural expansion of forests in some countries and regions.
Thus when taking into account both estimated gains and losses, the total net loss in forest area between 1990 and 2000 was about 89 000 km2 per year. Thereafter, in the period between 2000 and 2005 estimated net loss in forest area was somewhat lower with 73 000 km2 per year, equivalent to a loss of 200 km2 of forest per day.”http://www.greenfacts.org/en/forests/l-3/2-extent-deforestation.htm#2p0
“One of the main “techniques” used by the US Forest Service and other agencies in their attack on the natural forests has been clearcutting (even-age logging) and its associated practices of roadbuilding, slash burning, site preparation and pesticide use. Since the Forest Service adopted even-age logging as the primary method about 35 years ago, many of the ecologically richest federal forests have been wiped out, mangled by clearcutting. The irony is that the Federal government is paying billions of dollars per year to the Forest Service and other agencies to administer our national forests, which includes the logging program. Billions of taxpayer dollars have been lost”
No thank you for your reply….
Reply
admin Reply:
January 19th, 2010 at 03:38
Emily,
What the hell do you know when I look outside? That’s a bit presumptuous, I’d say.
I don’t see anything but trees. In all directions.
And facts from “GreenFacts” won’t win many arguments here. Link to something that isn’t pure propaganda for a religious cult, please. I’m not sure I’d win you over by linking to Genesis 6-16,17: basically, “Go forth and multiply.”
There are people who come out from the city and try to tell us how to run our land.–Greenies. Sorry.
If you’re taking care of your land, your land will take care of you. Don’t be telling people how best to take care of their own land.
Buy your own and let it grow up to your hearts’ content–but that usually doesn’t make the Greenies very happy. Because it not about the Green, it’s about the Red. As in Red Comrades know best how to live your life and run your land. The Government’s land? Sell it. Then the Greens can bid for it just like everyone else. If they want it to lay there, that’s okay with me and most other people too.
Thanks for stopping by and adding to the discussion.
Reply
What the hell are you talking about? person above, a religious cult that’s the last thing most biologists, chemists, ecologists, meteorologists, botanists, marine biologists, students, and teachers etc. are. Even if they are religious which some most likely happen to be (about God and personal beliefs), of course, they listen and if they’re worth their salt at all, are objective and just observe and interpret data, and have been relaying this information to governments, industries, and people for years what they’ve seen, experimented on, spent their lives learning about, and what’s happening, and also have been forecasting many probably measurable calculations of what may happen in the future, and ways to prevent this. I mean if you want to go outside and jump off a building be my guest, if you really think, gravity’s just scientific mumbo jumbo and an interesting theory voiced by cult propaganda, be my guest. But chances are, just so you know, you’re going to fall. You may see trees outside but why don’t you go to your nearest college or science department and have them help you, or teach you how to take water and soil samples, etc. Then come back and tell me how great your local environment’s health really is…. I don’t unconditionally accept everything I hear unlike you, it seems, I’m willing to educate myself and I personally check many sources before believing anything or letting it come out of my mouth. I’m the most place based person you’ll meet that’s exactly what people should get back to, and many biologists would agree. People should learn how to take care of their land and communities and be self sufficient again, and interact again with areas and life around them sustainably, and let it flourish also. Also, how they do this, should absolutely be based off place based observations and experiences unique to their locations, plants and animals, and will most likely differ from place to place. Now, of course, this will not likely ever happen (and it’s people like u who are a part of the problem), but maybe you should just talk to a biology professor or researchers and see who you’re calling a greenie, and yea don’t talk to me again, you have nothing to say, and I base that on your BS behavior and words toward me and other respectful researchers out there. It’s not scientific, I just don’t like you. Ya seem like a huge jack ass…. wow
Reply
admin Reply:
January 20th, 2010 at 00:03
Emily,
Put your money where your considerable mouth is: I’ll bet I’ve taken more a) soil samples and b) water samples in one year than you have in your lifetime. And I’ll spot you 15 soil samples if you’re a “researcher.” And by researcher, I mean someone who is paid for their research.
I don’t dislike you. I don’t know you. I do know your type.
Oh, and keep lecturing.
It’s one reason you’re doomed to fail winning converts to your cause.
Reply
I don’t know why I keep arguing with you but it’s probably because I’m bored here waiting for the train. No I do not get paid for my research. Science is not infallible nothing is, no person is, and I can absolutely see and admit that. Science is made to be disproven and only when you can again and again support something very heavily with evidence, and others have tested the experiments etc. can it be published. Nothing’s ever proven in science you can’t prove anything, you can just support it again and again. It’s constantly questioning itself, and people like you obviously question it also, and so it deals with this and it should, you can only support something in science. There’s a lot wrong w/ so many things, but to say that people like scientists and regular concerned people, are preachy know it alls who don’t care is probably the opposite of the truth. People don’t care about anything anymore, to dead matter, we owe nothing. Animals are soulless creatures here for people’s pleasures and the land is solely for extraction, poor people working for us is a necessary evil, dumping millions of gallons of pesticides and fertilizers into our lakes and rivers is ok, because someday a kind God might save us. That’s just the tip of the ice berg of all the degretive destructive things happening. People in developing countries are suffering right now too, because of all the pollution, and developed nations, like the US, dumping all their toxins in their areas like Asia and especially in Africa. And industries and companies, station very harmful industries in their regions and pay them next to nothing for their labor, and treat them like crap, and ruin their natural areas while they’re at it. I assume you’ve heard about outsourcing jobs. Out of sight out of mind that seems to be your motto. So if all this is just A ok with you, and your just going to lay down, and say that’s fine and that’s cool, and roll over and say, please sir can I have another, go right ahead. But “people like my type” who don’t think its ok, and can be ethical truthful people, students and researchers, we’re assholes and really off base. Most of the reasons these people become researchers is because they care and are prudent and the only way unfortunately anyone’s going to consider listening to you or you can actually help, (and still no one usually does) is if you have a shitload of analytical evidence backing up your claims that somethings harmful, so they work to research and discover it if it’s there, and then move forward or reevaluate with whatever’s discovered and observed. Like the Aral Sea, dead zones, the leviis breaking in New Orleans tons of researchers who probably get paid for their work, said the levvis were going to break and city planners were basically creating a cement bowl out of the area, and that using rivers to irrigate deserts for farm land, away from the Aral sea was a terrible idea, and forecasted consequences that turned out to right and even worse in reality, etc. (Btw, What did your soil samples say? When did you take them? you can say you took them, but so what are your results? How many healthy amphibians were there in your area? If I’m so off base why don’t you share your results, and have other people also test them, and recheck them to make sure your being mr. ethical like you say and think you clearly are.) I don’t know why your being so short, and closed off toward researchers, or probably indigenous people, or sustainable farmers, ranchers, naturalists, people who care, etc. That seems to be where you sound like your standing. Anyways I do kind of feel bad about calling you a jackass, but you sure are typing like one, and don’t call people “greenies,” I know companies say they’re green or clean coal, or car companies say they’re green, to make themselves look good and that’s obviously propaganda, because they may do some sustainable things but that hardly accounts for all the energy and other unsustainable practices they use, that cause much more harm than could be offset, by little actions they do. But I don’t buy into that, and you’re correct not to unconditionally believe that too. But all these little things do help some and it’s a small start, so that’s better than nothing. So anyhow you don’t have to believe or listen to me, you never did, and you probably shouldn’t, no find out for yourself. So anyways all these reply s I wrote to you were way too long and I’m sure you’ll rebuttal me saying I’m satins reincarnate and a paid researcher whose full of crap, but I really don’t care, bye
Reply
[...] http://deathby1000papercuts.com/2009/10/copenhagen-climate-scam-read-the-treaty-obama-wants-to-sign/ [...]