Obama Poised to Cede US Sovereignty, Claims British Lord

[Aaron]

October 15, 2009

The Minnesota Free Market Institute hosted an event at Bethel University in St. Paul on Wednesday evening. Keynote speaker Lord Christopher Monckton, former science adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, gave a scathing and lengthy presentation, complete with detailed charts, graphs, facts, and figures which culminated in the utter decimation of both the pop culture concept of global warming and the credible threat of any

were

Lord Monckton received a standing ovation and took a series of questions from members of the audience. Among those questions were these relevent to the forthcoming Copenhagen treaty:

www.wattsupwiththat.com, they will find (if they look carefully enough) a copy of that treaty
I know at least one judge who shares your opinion, sir, yes.

Regardless of whether global warming is taking place or caused to any degree by human activity, we do not want a global government empowered to tax Americans without elected representation or anything analogous to constitutional protections. The Founding Fathers would roll over in their graves if they knew their progeny allowed a foreign power such authority, effectively undoing their every effort in an act of Anti-American Revolution

38. The scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention will be based on three basic pillars: government; facilitative mechanism; and financial mechanism, and the basic organization of which will include the following:

World Government (heading added)

(a) The government will be ruled by the COP with the support of a new subsidiary body on adaptation, and of an Executive Board responsible for the management of the new funds and the related facilitative processes and bodies. The current Convention secretariat will operate as such, as appropriate.

To Redistribute Wealth (heading added)(b) a Compensation window, to address loss and damage from climate change impacts [read: the "climate debt" Monckton refers to],With Enforcement Authority (heading added)(e) an international registry for the monitoring, reporting and verification of compliance of emission reduction commitments, and the transfer of technical and financial resources from developed countries to developing countries. The secretariat will provide technical and administrative support, including a new centre for information exchange [read; enforcement].

[Aaron]

The Copenhagen Treaty

Copy of treaty here:

http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/un-fccc-copenhagen-2009.pdf

[Aaron]

Climate Myths and National Security

American Thinker: Climate Myths and National Security

October 12, 2009 Climate Myths and National Security

By Viscount Monckton of Brenchley

The President of the United States recently told the United Nations that "global warming" poses a threat to national security and may engender conflicts as populations are displaced by rising sea levels, droughts, floods, storms etc. etc. etc. However, it is now clear that there is no basis for the notion that the barely-detectable human influence on the climate is likely to prove a threat to climate, still less to national security.

The first principle to which any national security advisor must adhere is that of objective truth. Though he must have an understanding of politics, he is not a politician: he is a truth-bearer. Therefore, he begins by narrowing down the issue to a single, central question whose answer determines whether the suggested threat is real. He then tries to find the truthful answer to that question, and draws his conclusion from that.

Quid enim est veritas? What, then, is the truth? The single question whose answer gives us the truth about the climate question is this: By how much will any given proportionate increase in CO2 concentration warm the world? We now know the answer. The oceans, which must store 80-90% of all heat-energy accumulated in the atmosphere as a result of the radiative imbalance caused by greater greenhouse-gas concentration, have shown no net accumulation of heat for almost 70 years, implying a very small influence of CO2 on temperature (Douglass & Knox, 2009). The devastating analysis of cloud-albedo effects shortly to be published by Dr. Roy Spencer of the University of Alabama at Huntsville will show that the UN has wrongly decided that cloud changes reinforce greenhouse warming, when in fact they substantially offset it. Repeated studies of the tropical upper troposphere (e.g. Douglasset al., 2008) show that it is failing to warm at thrice the surface rate as required by all of the UN's models, again implying very low climate sensitivity. The clincher is Professor Richard Lindzen's meticulous recent paper demonstrating - by direct measurement - that the amount of radiation escaping from the Earth's atmosphere to space is many times greater than the UN's models are all told to believe. From this, the world's most formidable atmospheric physicist has calculated that a doubling of CO2 concentration, expected over the next 150 years, would cause 0.75 C (1.5 F) of warming, at most: not the 3.4 C (6 F) that the UN takes as its central estimate.

Most analysts would stop there. Yet some might ask, "Suppose that the single satellite on which Lindzen's results depend is defective. What then?" They might consider the economic cost of attempting to mitigate the "global warming" which, as ourMonthly Reports demonstrate, is not actually happening. The figures turn out to be startlingly simple. To mitigate just 1 C (2 F) of warming, one must forego the emission of 2 trillion tons of CO2. The world emits just 30 billion tons a year. So the analyst, as a thought-experiment, would shut down the entire world economy, emitting no CO2 at all. Even then, and even on the incorrect assumption that the UN's exaggerated projections of the effect of CO2 on temperature are correct, it would take 67 years to mitigate 1 C warming. Preventing the 3.4 C (6 F) warming that the UN's climate panel thinks would occur in 100 years would take 225 years without any transportation, and with practically no electrical energy. The national security advisor would at that point advise his head of government that there has never been any security threat less grave, or more expensive to prevent, than the non-problem that is "global warming". It is the fearmongers that are the real national security threat.

[Aaron]

Resource page

Site:LRP:Climate Change Myth & The Agenda To Remove The Sovereignty of the United States - PESWiki

[rickoff]

Excellent posts, Aaron. I hope that we can stop this NWO plan somehow. I think we can safely assume that Obama will stick to the plan and sign the treaty. We need to create a loud ruckus of opposition, and fast. Protests should be held at all state offices of our elected representatives for high visibility and media coverage. If we don't make our representatives feel very uncomfortabe about this then they will surely go along with the plan. They don't bother to study the issues at all, and everyone should know that by now. Only one side of the Global Warming issue has been presented to them - the voodoo science side - while the true science is suppressed and unheard. To our legislators, it either must seem to them like all science is in agreement, or they know that isn't so and are part of the scam. Let's let them know they will be booted out if they go along with this. Phone them, e-mail them, visit their local office and speak with someone in person. Join or organize a protest group, take it to your representative's office, and let the media know when that is happening. Be prepared to state your case intelligently to your representative, and especially so to the media. They will probably only use a 5 to 10 second clip of your response, so you need to condense everything important into a one or two sentence reply which people will most likely get to hear when they turn on the news. Try e-mailing and phoning in to a major nationally syndicated talk radio show such as Sean Hannity (13.5 million listeners weekly) Sean Hannity

The Rush Limbaugh show featured the issue October 19th, and played sound bytes from Lord Monckton's speech. See video of the speech here:
YouTube - Is Obama Poised to Cede US Sovereignty?

[aljhoa]

Breaking News | Latest News | Current News - FOXNews.com

Al

[DrStiffler]

Sign Waving-Shouting Groups

Sorry! But I respectfully disagree that groups of people waving signs and shouting or mass emails proclaiming their lack of support will do anything to stop this president.

We have few options...

[rickoff]

I agree that this will have very little near term effect on the president, but if we strongly let our representatives know that we are very dissatisfied with the way they have been "representing" us, and that we will boot them out at our earliest opportunity if they do not mend their ways, I do feel that is our best hope to halt all the destruction. Like you say, we have few options. What would you suggest?

[aljhoa]

US Constitution and State Sovereignty Movement

I agree that this will have very little near term effect on the president, but if we strongly let our representatives know that we are very dissatisfied with the way they have been "representing" us, and that we will boot them out at our earliest opportunity if they do not mend their ways, I do feel that is our best hope to halt all the destruction. Like you say, we have few options. What would you suggest?

The Founding Fathers spelled out the functions of Federal Government and gave two options in the Constitution to deal with "moneychangers", the peaceful one is initiated by a few states see:

http://www.energeticforum.com/general-discussion/4028-state-sovereignty-movement.html#post50354

"The term 'United States' may be used in one of several senses. It may be merely the name of a sovereign in a family of nations. It may designate a territory over which sovereignty of the United States extends, or it may be a collective name of the States which are united by and under the Constitution." Hooven & Allison Co. v. Evatt
324 US 652 Pg. 672 & 673.
The term United States and its meanings.
Al

[Guest]

Blatent advertising, being spammed ?

Very luck to see this great post, I am in favor of the author's views. I will continue to monitor the site, hoping to learn something more, wanted to know more friends.ugg bootsugg bootsugg bootscheap jordan shoesnfl jerseys

Saw this fellow do this in anouther thread. Please if its just advertising for boots, can we get it despammed ?

Andrew T.
At least I try to say something useful, before i advertise.

[rickoff]

Ayuh, as they say here in Maine. Ditto that, Andrew. What the heck does footwear have to do with the subject at hand, unless of course one is shopping for an appropriate boot to use in booting our representatives out of office. For that purpose, I should think that any old pair of ****kickers would work just fine.