Obama Poised to Cede US Sovereignty in Copenhagen, Claims British Lord Monckton

The Lord is slightly off on his assessment of the USA constitution. A treaty is only a treaty once ratified by the senate, I believe 2/3 for memory. A president signing a treaty is merely a statement that his administration intents to follow the treaty. From memory only, this happened to the SALT II treaty.
As to impossible to break, it would take a constitutional amendment to change. Three fourths of the states.
IMO, unless the weather stops turning colder, this treaty will be a forgotten document in 10 years.

Is it me or is Lord Monckton becoming the Al Gore of our side? Our president can’t sign any treaty that will mean anything to our country without our Senates approval. I think Monckton is just riding the wave of his early success and milking it for all it’s worth.

The limitation is this, Obama loses re-election, the next president can reverse by executive order. As to how the american public actually feels about this issue, i am unsure. I believe it is possible that the majority of americans will actually support this treaty.
If the American public supports a bad idea (i.e too small a military in the 1930’s), it is a failure of the american people, not our system or our leaders. We elect our leaders, and we are responsible for there actions.

Walter Scott Hudson (00:35:34) :
“There is a flaw in passively relying on the “limitations” built into the executive office. Those limitations really only exist if enforced.”
I don’t know where you are from, but the things you speak of are strictly specified in our constitution. I know that our current president is circumstancing some executive limitations by allowing appointed agencies to create dictates (laws), but they are going to have to pass judicial review if challenged.

Obama won’t sign anything. He is a do nothing governmental lefty. Heck, the White House made a big deal about the fact that he is now in a “decision making mode’ about what to do in Afghanistan. That what “progressives” do: They sit around and talk and talk, but nobody makes a decision. So no it is a big deal that Obama is in “decision” mode. I am sure that if he even makes one, it will be his first.
So don’t expect much from him as he freezes his arse off at Copenhagen. He will just probably give a cute smiling speech. And then go get laid.

Gawd, my typing is bad.

Blimey!! I don’t think this is a very good look for those good people who want to question the science of AGW, as a matter of fact I don’t want to be associated with someone who is starting to sound like a shrill political conspiratorial nutter, leave that rubbish to the other side and stick with the science.

I normally take heed at least of what Monckton is saying, but this does sound a little outlandish and playing to the American right gallery. However, moves in Europe such as the Lisbon Treaty do point towards the development of a super state structure becoming rapidly removed from a democratic brake, as the people of Ireland recentlyfound out.Surely, the UN is currently a form of world government but is rather unwieldy and inefficient. I cannot believe that world leaders would become turkeys voting for Christmas,indeed the opposite would seem to apply- namely that self interest will always triumph with governments attempting to appear decisive without conceding very little. Give Obama some credit!

Politics at WUWT.
What’s up with that?
Don’t get me wrong, I’m grateful you picked the story up. I just didn’t expect it. I’ve noticed very few political articles make its way here and those that do always seem to have science to prop it up, so to speak.
Does this mean we should expect more coverage from the political front lines leading up to Cop15 ?
If that’s the case, WUWT readers should buy lots of popcorn, because the show is about to get a whole lot more interesting!
-David Alan-

Scary, that this administration would even consider these things.

Figthing CO2 or in alternative global warming or climate change is a old plan with other propaganda methodes and objectives. The real plan is Morgenthau Plan and was introduced in west by the URSS american spy Harry Dexter White.
You can learn about that plan in the book The Morgenthau Plan: Soviet Influence on American Postwar Policy, by John Dietrich.
That plan was rejected by Allys but during the Cold War was inplanted in West and the Green Party in Germany made his first paradigm and inspiration.
Today The Morgenthau Plan is the climate change fight or CO2 fight because to ensure that West will turn to agriculture society without industry the russian soviets knew CO2 is the main gas produced in the economic produtive system. And eliminating CO2 emissions is aliminating industry and weapons capacity, the main goal of URSS during the Cold War.
Please learn about that plan because is so important to understand today that kind of new communism: radical environmentalism.
anti-comuna

“(q) [Adhere to] the precautionary principle [, agreed upon in Principle 15 of the Rio
Declaration and Article 3.3 of Convention, in adaptation planning, decision-making and
implementation, with regard to the scale and nature of adaptation actions and to prevent
maladaptation. Any lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason to
postpone or scale down action on adaptation];”
It not about the science.

I find the responses here to Lord Monckton’s revelation depressing. If our side has a carefree, “can’t happen here” attitude towards this dangerous treaty, then what hope is there?
I would like someone who believes in the invincibility of Constitutional limitations to explain to me please the existence of Social Security. Or Medicare. Or the countless other programs, taxes, and laws which stomp all over State and individual rights despite the very clear language and intent of the 10th Amendment. Explain to me please campaign finance reform in light of the 1st Amendment, or asset forfeiture laws in light of the 5th. How about the many czars who escape Congressional oversight despite the fact that these czars now hold real power and authority in our government?
And would someone who thinks our Constitution still has a shred of force today please explain to me how that could be true when we have a president who is not a natural born citizen, and when the people who point this out are run out court, derided as conspiracy theorists and racists. And no, I’m not speaking about Hawaii or birth certificates. For most of this nation’s history there was no question that a “natural born citizen” was a person born on American soil to parents who where both U.S. citizens. “Natural born citizen” was a legal phrase which implied that the U.S. had complete and sole legal jurisdiction over the person, with no possible competing interests. At birth Obama held dual citizenship, the son of a man who was a British subject, regardless of his actual place of birth. He was a citizen through his mother, but he never has been and never can be a “natural born citizen” even if he had been born on the White House lawn.
Our Constitution is in pieces. Our president has no respect for it. Our own Senators, House Representatives, and even Supreme Court justices violate it at will. Obama will sign this treaty and will enforce it through agencies, czars, and executive orders unless there is massive protest from the people and from Congress.
Judging from the responses here, I have little hope that massive protest will ever materialize. With friends like these…
You people don’t understand how late the hour is, or how desperate the situation has become.

“the best way to eat an elephant is in small bites”, if all countries sign the treaty in Copenhagen, it is of little consequence, most commitments to date are aspirational and meaningless. Politicians will be guided by public opinion, discredit the agw opinion makers and you gain more skeptics. Monckton has done us no favours with this rush of blood, give Copenhagen as much rope as it wants and people will start to question the science much more seriously.
I still believe this BBC ad on carbon is a no brainer for challenge, do we have a legal mind in the house?.

Ladies & Gentlemen, please do not fall into that trap that “no way” would the senate vote for this treaty. Famous last words, like one of your Civil War officers, I forget which, who said something along the lines of “Don’t be ridiculous, they couldn’t possibly hit us from that dist………”!
History is littered with “no way” treaties, agreements, understandings,rules, that got passed because of complacency, the worst of all traits. One rather extreme example, I received an email from a friend a long while back, it was the transcript of an interview with a very old man, who lived in a country that had never really known democracy. He told the tale of a man who got elected, by a not great majority. He was a bit of a crank, had a few weird ideas about how things ought to run. The old man said most thought he was a crank who wouldn’t last long, everyone would see through him & his cronies. He’d soon be gone. Then of course they didn’t see through him until it was too late, things had gone too far, control had been siezed of every part of the state. The military was given full priority over funding. Propaganda reigned supreme. So did the state police. Dissent was ruthlessly & brutally dealt with. True this is an extreme example of what I am trying to put across but I hope you see the bigger picture. I don’t suggest that the UN would be so controlling or brutal, just well meaning, well intended, every one having a group hug around the world, like they were over AIDS, DDT, Ethiopia, Somalia, Iraq, Rawanda, ignorant & stupid yet impotent, as they have been so many times before in many of their endeavours.
The UK is all but finished. We’re flat broke, we’re in the EU, (Europe was a place where Britain leant a helping hand on many occasions to prevent tyrany & maintain freedom in whatever form it then took) we’re ruled & controlled by the EU – left leaning Comissioners rule us from the European Comission, we have a puppet European Parliament with no power whatsoever,(overpaid, over -expensed & they flaunt it) other than to cede more control to the Commission, which is unelected, undemocratic, unaccountable, & unsackable, corrupt as they come, (money regularly goes missing) most of the commissioners are failed left-wing/left-leaning politicians from their own once proud but now mere provincial states. Our own parliament is a sham, with professional politicans who have never run anything in their lives before, not even the school tuck shop! AND they want us all to sign up to this absolute lunacy of more of the same only worse. Imagine the bureaucracy involved, millions of taxpayer funded people from all over the world dictating to everyone else about how they should live their lives based soley on a false premise! Good luck America, I truly wish you well, I am a true Ameriphile. Hollywood has predicted the end for many years now, in its futuristic films of varying kinds, they all show one thing in common though, domination & control by a higher authority, benevolent on the surface, but sinister on the inside, with all involved taking their cut from the trough at our expense!
Oh & the country in the old man’s story? Germany. The man he was talking about, Adolf Hitler & his Nazis, but I think you already knew that. The Matrix this ain’t, it’s reallity!

The fact that Christopher Monckton thinks American Presidents can sign foreign treaties without reference to Congress, and the failure of WUWT to point that out to him, suggests, alas, an ominous similarity to the repeated lack of concern for the full truth that is so evident in so much “global warming/climate change” alarmism. Standards at WUWT need to be a lot higher than this.

ralph (01:01:30) :
>> He’ll sign anything. He’s a Nobel Peace Prize [winner]; of
>> course he’ll sign it.
> Is this why they suddenly gave Obama that ill-deserved Nobel Pize? I wonder…
He got it because the leader of the Nobel comittee Thorbjørn Jagland admires Obama (three of the five members argued against). No other reason. Jagland is like Jar Jar Binks. He’s a walking disaster. A well-meaning fool who should never have been in politics. Norwegians have watched his carreer and wondered how on earth he’s got into the various positions, such as: prime minister, foreign minister, president of the parliament. His education is not that much to speak of, his work experience even less: he’s been occupied full-time in politics since his youth. If anyone can give this man a position in which he’s unlikely to do harm, Norway will be thankful.

A couple of things to note.
Clinton did sign the Kyoto. The Senate voted a resolution 95-0 to not ratify it until all developing nations also signed. Clinton did not even submit Kyoto to the Senate since the resolution clearly indicated the votes were not there to pass it. The document signed by Clinton may be worth something on Antiques Road Show but that’s about the only place.
However, if carbon taxation is passed, Obama and the Executive can implement just about all of whatever comes out of Copenhagen. Most are not aware of the power ceded by Congress to the various departments and agencies. Consider CO2 is a pollutant and about to be regulated by the EPA. The Treasury was granted vast control over close to a trillion or so dollars. The Czars Of Obama The First are running things in their areas as extra-Constitutional officers. Some of the things the Obama administration does through these mechanisms will be extraordinarily difficult to reverse. With the enormous number of pages some bills have, it would be very easy to slip in obtuse wording in even unrelated bills that would implement most of Copenhagen. Never forget these folks have been working on this for a long, long time and they’re expert at creating “unintended consequences” intentionally.
The political reality is all about how to save as many Democrats in 2010 as possible. Take, for instance, the carbon tax bill (presuming nationalized health care passes). With Lindsey Graham jumping into the Democrat caucus with a strong “Yes on the carbon tax”, it will pass. Regardless of all the posturing and punditry about moderate Democrats the bottom line is all Senate Democrats will always vote for cloture. Period. Then of unpopular issues, like national health care, expect about nine of them to vote against the final bill. This technique allows them to claim they opposed the bill and voted against it in their next campaign. They’ll explain, if anyone ever asks them, their vote for cloture was to allow “an up or down vote, in all fairness on such an important issue”. My guess is national health care, the carbon tax, amnesty and the tax bill will pass the Senate 52-48 (presuming Byrd is rolled in) but after cloture votes of 61-39.
Any never forget the power of payoff. Any Congressional Democrat they absolutely need to get something passed they’ll simply pay off in one way or another (think
Wexler). Think Snowe and Specter on the stim bill. This opportunity, for them, will likely never occur in their lifetimes. How much is a Democrat Congress worth these days anyway?
One could even predict they’ll be another three or four or more on the GOP side that will jump on board the carbon tax bill. If you through in the usual RHINOs (Snowe) they’re awfully close to the 67 votes needed to pass Copenhagen.
It looks like freedom is dimming along with the Sun.

So what you in the US may be about to experience is what we in the UK have suffered from for years – eroding power. For years we have given the EU more and more power over our government. Now the EU sets laws which we have to adhere to, not the UK government, the EU. Indeed there is often conflict, and we CANNOT bring in a new law on something because it contravenes an EU law – and the EU laws have presidence. Bit by bit we sign up to more and more. Recently, a new treaty gives more powers to the EU. It’s only a matter of time before the EU even controls the UK’s defence.
All this is why many like me want out of the EU as soon as possible. Without the UK it will collapse. So be it. It should have stayed a group of trading nations, which was the original intent. If the US moves ANY distance toward a world government then you should take to the streets, because it will come drip by drip, so the people don’t even notice. That’s what has happened in the UK.
A friend of mine goes through life not signing anything. He says that when you start that it will never end, and no one can do anything to you if you haven’t signed. Not true, perhaps, but I’m beginning to think he has a good idea. Don’t sign up to ANYTHING.

I will repeat myself:
“Only the Chamberlains of today can believe that you can fight fascism with words on a piece of blog.”
Winnie, where are you?

So if he signs it, who’s going to challenge it?
When was the last time the States voted 3/4 to overturn anything?

I can think of 63 votes without a problem 60 democrats/independents 2 senators drom maine and Mccain lets see then there is a guy froom the carolinas also a Repub can’t think of his name thats 64 only need 3 more
Medic 1532 off the air

After reading The Great American Bubble Machine article in Rolling Stone, I’m starting to think this is more about creaming cash from private citizens/industry than it is about `Global Warming’. Actually I kind-of thought that before, but after reading the whole article, I’m ready to sign up to a direct action group, not that there are any, yet.

You should give Lord Monkton the Congressional Gold Medal that Tony Blair never collected! It is a pity that Lord Monkton is virtually ignored by the Brit media.
Mike O, Hants

Oh, Chris, there is a Biblical precedent too:
Elijah was a man with a nature like ours, and he prayed earnestly that it would not rain, and it did not rain on the earth for three years and six months. James 5:17

“”(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. “”
And all of this will somehow result in reduced GLOBAL emissions?
Simply by transfering assets from one country to another is a CURE?

cedarhill (04:01:23) : I agree. I fear the regulatory system and cap and trade much more than I do the Copenhagen treaty. I do not believe that 2/3 of the Senate will ratify. I do believe that most of what is desired by way of the treaty will be accomplished through cap and trade and the regulatory process, where the devil is in the details and nobody reads the law except those that write it.

If Monckton is right that the treaty is about ceding sovereignty to a world government, then the Chinese will not sign it, never mind Obama. Not only that, I doubt the EU would sign. Why would they cede to someone else the very powers they’ve spent years scheming to win for themselves?
We in the UK have already ceded most sovereignty to the EU which is imposed by a series of edicts issued from Brussels, called EU directives. These directives have to be passed into national law by an act of parliament which is a cunning method of disguising their origin from skeptical voters. Not many realise how many acts of parliament are actually edicts issued from unelected bureaucrats.

One type-o in here….anthropogenic, not anthropomorphic.
Although….given the almost mythological tone of the Warmers….perhaps anthropomorphic is an accurate term.
Regardless…thank you for this post. Lord Monkton has alot of ***** continuously standing up against what will go down in one of the biggest scientific errors in human history (and the agenda behind it).
It is now up to us to sound the alarm.
Printing out a copy of this 200 page treaty and reading over the weekend…
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA

gtrip (00:41:36) :
Is it me or is Lord Monckton becoming the Al Gore of our side? Our president can’t sign any treaty that will mean anything to our country without our Senates approval.
—-
With the current Senate political configuration, you don’t think the Dems could pass such a treaty, thanks to squishy RINOs like Graham, Snowe, Collins, McCain, and the rest? We now have a political aristocracy who no longer take marching orders from we the people, but who rule us by diktat, for our own good, of course, as they know better.
If they can pass a 1,300 page stimulous bill without reading the damn thing, why would they not pass a treaty that Obama wants? To think otherwise is to think we actually have a Constitutional Republic at the moment rather than our current Banana Republic.
—-
gtrip (01:01:49) :
I don’t know where you are from, but the things you speak of are strictly specified in our constitution. I know that our current president is circumstancing some executive limitations by allowing appointed agencies to create dictates (laws), but they are going to have to pass judicial review if challenged.
—-
Treaties are not reviewed by the Judiciary.
—-
ralph (01:01:30) :
Is this why they suddenly gave Obama that ill-deserved Nobel Pize? I wonder…
—-
No wonder required. It’s all of a piece. Obama is the most unqualified President in our Nation’s history, and that’s saying something, yet he was given the D’Oh-bel Peas Prize for his ‘good intentions’. He didn’t campaign for President of the United States, he campaigned for President of the World, what with a campaign stop in Berlin and the Palestineans running phone banks to raise money for his campaign. Also see his sitting in on the UN Security Council, the first President to do such a thing.

I find any comparison of Monckton to Gore to be highly offensive and outrageous. Even if Monckton has overstated the danger somewhat, at least as far as the U.S. constitution is concerned, the danger of loss of freedom is a very real one with enormous consequences to humanity. Al Gore isn’t just peddling his Alarmist fear- mongering garbage; he is selling an ideology based on lies, which is the basis for fascism.

The Prime Minister of Australia can be trusted to sign anything the UN shoves in front of him. He’s a toady.

Every day take the time to explain to someone that you know or do not know that AGW does not exist. Educate explain that the ice caps are growing and the temperatures are falling. Explain the solar minimum. Facts help, spread facts. CO2 is not a pollutant. Lisa Jackson, Pelosi, Waxman and Obama are wrong. They are trying to do very bad things to the U.S. and the world.

I read this blog looking for something to balance the global warming debate for me. From the questions you put as relevant I have to ask, are you a birther? If so it gives me great pause at taking this site seriously.
REPLY: No and this section on a question from an attendee to the presentation has been removed from this WUWT article because even though Monckton clearly refuted it, it is turning into a debate over presidential eligibility that I don’t want at WUWT. If you want to see it and discuss it. Do it at the original blog entry Fightin’ Words – Anthony

The first step to utopia.
This NoKo clip is Obama’s vision of America:
HEROIC WORKERS’ FACTORY:

Wasn’t that cheerful!

Welcome USA to the wonderful world of the EU
where yes means yes, and no means yes as well
Ian (UKIP)

Could you please tell me if the UK is also going to sign this infernal thing and if so, what recourse do we poor bast***s have on this side of the pond?

Prais Kim Obama Il, errr I mean King Jong Il.
Sing it!

Obama aint ceding nothing.
But we’re ceding everything.

I don’t have confidence in the US Government-I’m part Cherokee.However this is not going to go down with out one heck of fight. Here in the US we have a curious breed of Democratic Pol called a “Blue Dog.”They are fiscally conservative and usually represent conservative areas.Nominally the South and Mid West,they are, for the most part squeamish when it comes to a lot of this stuff as they are worried about their seats.
The Cap and Tax bill isn’t even on the table,in the senate-yet and may not make it before Copenhagen.Even in the Blue side of Oregon Pete DeFazio isn’t drinking that kool-aid.He’s a Warmist but somewhat luke warm, he sees this as the next big bubble to burst.Our Senatoral contingent is hopeless,but they too are looking at the polls. and polling is that people are really,really mad.latch on to your Congresscritter and Senator.You might not think you can do any good- but sometimes a Jack Russell can get the best of the Rottweiler it takes a grip on the right spot…

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
So true that quote.
Good or bad intentions=same result the majority of the time.
America has always stood up for itself.Other countries could not dictate what Americans could or could not do,that has changed,now developed countries are dictated to by a handful of people.
Want me to cut emissions by making my people suffer the equivalent of a recession?I can do that,where do I sign?While suffering the recession,you want me to pledge billions to governments who keep their people in poverty?I can do that,it’s our fault that these people are suffering,all the aid over the years has not been enough,we should have given more,I will offer penance for my people,please accept,and tell me what more I can do.I am always eager and willing to hear your wisdom.
Strange times we live in.Who would have predicted after the war that one day The President of The United States of America would offer his bended knee to a group of people in Europe,or anywhere else in the world.

John Egan (06:26:39) :
I cannot believe that you would reprint this garbage – even as a quote. …
If you wish to tailspin into the “Birther” movement that is, certainly, your prerogative, but you will lose all legitimacy in the larger political and scientific community.
Why? Shouldn’t all sides of a debate be presented, then allowed to be judged on merit?
One of the essential problems about political polarization in this country is the inability of the extreme right to accept the legitimate electoral results of the American people. If such sentiment is represented here – then there really is no possibility of discourse.
That, coming from the side that screamed that George Bush was “Selected, not elected” for eight years is hilarious.
REPLY: this section on a question from an attendee to the presentation has been removed from this WUWT article because even though Monckton clearly refuted it, it is turning into a debate over presidential eligibility that I don’t want at WUWT. If you want to see it and discuss it. Do it at the original blog entry Fightin’ Words – Anthony

You ought to be aware that, under Article 11 of the Treaty of Paris (1783), should any of the 13 former North American colonies wish to relinquish their sovereignty, it passes to the legitimate heirs and successors of His Majesty King George III.

This is where the US is right now, and I hope it clarifies what is happening and what is at stake for all of us:
The Obama administration is hoping to win new commitments to “fight global warming” from China and India in back-to-back summits in November, including the first Indian emissions trading scheme.
The US hopes the new commitments will revive negotiations to seal a global treaty on climate change in Copenhagen in December, by setting out what action each country will take. But such bilateral deals also risk seriously weakening any Copenhagen agreement by allowing the idea of a global limit on greenhouse gas emissions to be abandoned.
The US’s twin diplomatic push will see Barack Obama meeting China’s president Hu Jintao in Beijing on November 16-17 before playing host to India’s prime minister Manmohan Singh at the White House on November 24. The visits appear timed to provide a much-needed boost to a proposed law to reduce US emissions now before the Senate, as well as to the Copenhagen talks.
The US wants to move away from a legally binding global agreement to one where individual countries pledge cuts in their national emissions. US officials are hopeful that breakthroughs with India and China could still provide the underpinnings for at least a limited deal at Copenhagen. “China and India are both critically important to achieving our international goals on carbon reduction. We need them as part the system,” said Senator Ben Cardin, a Maryland Democrat who serves on the foreign and environment and public works committees.
Indian officials are looking to their prime minister’s visit to Washington to replicate an energy agreement signed between the US and China in July. India is preparing to unveil new measures to reduce its surging growth of so-called “greenhouse gas” emissions: its own version of a carbon cap-and-trade scheme, in which polluters can buy and sell emissions permits, and a new solar project. They will introduce a domestic cap-and-trade programme, but the cap will be on energy intensity, not carbon. This would limit how much carbon can be emitted for each unit of energy produced, which will slow the rise of emissions rather than cutting them back, and allow the Indian economy to continue to grow and alleviate poverty.
Obama’s visit to Beijing amy produce concrete commitments from China on how it would reduce its large and rapidly rising emissions. China has now overtaken America as the world’s largest single polluter, producing 23% of global “greenhouse gas” emissions. India is producing an increasing share of the world’s emissions, but it is responsible for just 5%. President Hu announced at a UN summit last month that China would reduce energy intensity by “notable margins”. “If the US and China can come to some sort of view on this then I think it will unlock a lot of things,” said Björn Stigson, president of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development. “If that is not the case than i think we will not see a very comprehensive agreement in Copenhagen.” The council represents 200 global companies with a combined value of $7 trillion, including household names such as Shell, Toyota, DuPont, adidas and PricewaterhouseCoopers.
Nonetheless, as well as unlocking the Copenhagen negotiations, new moves from India and China would help Obama at home, where his Democratic allies in the Senate face a tough struggle trying to pass a climate change bill to cut US emissions.
Democratic leaders in the US Senate will begin an intense push on October 27 to craft a final bill. But that leaves barely three full working weeks before Copenhagen to try to put that bill to a vote.
The White House – which has been focused on trying to get a healthcare bill through Congress – persuaded Democrats to hold off on opening up debate in the Senate on climate change. The first draft – an 821-page work that calls for reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 20% over 2005 levels by 2020 – has been on hold for two weeks. Now the date for a showdown has been fixed for 27 October. With Republicans predicting disastrous economic consequences from carbon taxes, and rustbelt Democrats fearing job losses in dirty industries, most commentators say there is only a slim chance of producing legislation before Copenhagen.
Big US Companies Want Their Share of the Global Warming Bonanza.
US business leaders say a deal between the US and China on climate change could make or break the negotiations at Copenhagen. The last round of negotiations in Thailand exposed the divide between the industrialised and developing worlds over responsibility for “causing global warming” and “compensation” for the poor countries, which will be hit the hardest.
“If the US and China can come to some sort of view on this, then I think it will unlock a lot of things,” said Björn Stigson, president of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development. “If that is not the case than I think we will not see a very comprehensive agreement in Copenhagen.”
What is this strange new body “The World Business Council for Sustainable Development” which most people have never heard of before?
The council represents some 200 global companies with a combined value of $7 trillion, including household names such as Shell, Toyota, DuPont, and Adidas. Other executives said the US and China could come to a larger accord through joint ventures in technology development – especially carbon capture and storage. “I have come to believe that there needs to be a ladder of co-operation between US corporations and Chinese corporations, US cities and Chinese cities,” said Jim Rogers, the CEO of Duke Energy.

I love the smell of boiled frog in the morning…(sniff)
Mike

I may be a total idiot… but the constitution, if you read it,

Article 6
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

All such treaties must be made under the authority of the united states, and it does not affect the U.S. constitution, solely the states constitutions are overriden. Further, if it is not within the express, delegated powers granted to the government by that constitution (and alienation of those powers was not granted) it is null and void as though it was never passed.
The government cannot make treaties affecting powers it does not possess, nor can it make treaties that cede its powers (granted and possessed by the people) to persons not under the control of those people.

The ambitions of these elites is no less than the complete dis-enfranchisement of the commons.
But if the commons is only interested in baseball and footie, beer and bingo, they may well succeed.

I work in an IT environment. I see daily the attacks from the internet (spam, viruses, etc) trying to invade our system and compromise our businesses. We continually have to maintain our guard and update our defenses to keep us safe.
This is just like the current (local, state, country, world) political environment. A minority of people trying to compromise our liberty by continually attacking our system trying to weaken our liberties, restrict our freedoms and take from us what we earn all under the guise that they know what is best of us and are trying to save us. These are age old scams that was represented by snake oil salesmen, sin eaters and rain makers of past generations.
Once you become aware of these relationships you can see it in everything that goes on.
Our allegedly free, unbiased, news outlets are supposed to be a defense against these freedom robbing predators. Unfortunately the news organizations have been compromised and are aligned with the charlatans. I know that they know that I know that this is true but they know that I know the they know the average citizen is stupider than a box of nails and can easily be pied pipered into total submission.
I thought I would never live to see the day when a obvious grab for money and power would produce bad science. The last time I read about that was when a society of manipulators thought that Blond Haired Blue Eyed people were the chosen race.
Serenity now………………..

The sovereigns in the USA are the people, they cannot be ceded by the government. It is the government that serves the people not the other way around.
People need to brush up on their Constitutional theory and history.
I doubt Obama gets the whole consent of the governed thing.

anthropomorphic climate change.

I think you mean anthropogenic … the climate can’t change to look like a human.

This backs up what Monckton spoke to: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/10/15/tom-borelli-cap-trade-apollo-ceres/
“Big Business Teams Up With the Left to Sell Cap-and-Trade
Every day we have an opportunity to vote with our wallets by letting companies know there is a price to pay for colluding with those who oppose our values.”

MartinGatkins
“You could not possibly be more wrong. The EU and UN are just different heads on the same monster. They’re both working together with the goal of global governance. The UN is the tool of the European socialists and has been almost from the outset.”
Good point – I missed that angle.

Zero-carbon society. Here it is:
53 minutes of eye-popping info:

Hell is always at your doorstep.

My own bet:
— There will be a watered down “treaty” coming out of Copenhagen
— The US will “sign” it
— It will never be ratified by Congress, hence will never be put into effect in the US
— Politicians will go on talking about climate change, GHG emissions will go on rising, the Copenhagen Treaty will have little effect.
— Climate will do what it would have done without a treaty

Dave B,
I don’t think that raising income and prosperity in third world countries is the real aim, if so these global governance people would be pushing free market solutions with a minimum of interference. The real objective is the destruction of the sovereignty of the United States and a means of control over production and population through regulation imposed by non elected officials with no accountability to real live constituents.

tarpon (07:37:07) : While I agree with you in theory, I sometimes believe it is our ruling elite in DC who “need to brush up on their Constitutional theory and history.” When you review what has happened to many of our rights, say property rights taken under the guise of government regulations by the EPA, it becomes clear that our rights have eroded through the years. And unfortunately, the “sovereigns” have done nothing to stop it.
Look also at the way Obama has chipped away at our 1st Amendment Rights with his colloraboration with Egypt in the UN. While the resolution he introduced is not binding on the US, it certainly makes our 1st Amendment appear to be fatally flawed.
“The U.N. Human Rights Council approved a U.S.-backed resolution Friday deploring attacks on religions while insisting that freedom of expression remains a basic right.
The inaugural resolution sponsored by the U.S. since it joined the council in June broke a long-running deadlock between Western and Islamic countries in the wake of the publication of cartoons depicting the Muslim Prophet Muhammad.
“Egypt’s cosponsorship of the resolution on freedom of expression is not the result of a real commitment to upholding freedom of expression,” said Jeremie Smith, Geneva director of the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies.
“If this were the case, freedom of expression would not be systematically violated on a daily basis in Egypt,” he said.
Others warned that the resolution appears to protect religions rather than believers and encourages journalists to abide by ill-defined codes of conduct.
“Unfortunately, the text talks about negative racial and religious stereotyping, something which most free expression and human rights organizations will oppose,” said Agnes Callamard, executive director of London-based group Article 19.
“The equality of all ideas and convictions before the law and the right to debate them freely is the keystone of democracy,” she said.
Although the resolution was passed unanimously, European and developing countries made it clear that they remain at odds on the issue of protecting religions from criticism.”
I never thought I’d live to see the day when a President of the USA would put forth a resolution at the UN that basically says that our First Amendment guarantees too much freedom of expression.

I also question the wisdom of relying on the limitations of power and restrictions written in the Constitution. As an example, look at the people and government of Honduras, who correctly followed their constitution and removed from office a President who violated one of the six unchangeable tenets of their constitution. This properly deposed President, who committee an act of treason, has gathered widespread international support demanding his reinstatement.
What their constitution states is, apparently totally irrelevant to the demands of the international community. I don’t believe our Constitution would get any more respect–it has been referred to recently as a ‘quaint historical document’. I believe the only member of congress that actually takes it seriously is Rep Ron Paul and he is ridiculed.

O/T…
California to vote on TV ban for energy savings:
LA times has an article referenced by Drudge, but it doesn’t give any details.
This article (older) on Wired covers it pretty well:
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/03/california-tv/
JimB

The reference Monckton made to passing the treaty using majorities in both the House and Senate does have some legitimate standing and history. If a country wanted to become part of the US, it would theoretically require a treaty signed between that country and the US to be accomplished. However, an indpendent country (Texas) became a part of the US through a joint resolution requiring only a majority of both the House and Senate. The courts have upheld the legitimacy of the method used – witness Texas still being a state in the US.
On the other hand, history is littered with broken treaties and at least one ignored Supreme Court ruling.
Skip

Don´t tell me now that we are not living in interesting times….:-)
Why do these kind of “changing times” are coincidental with changing climates..
Far ahead in the future there will appear scholars studying these changes and relating them to different causes…and perhaps discussing them in a blog like WUWT….who knows!

h/t Jeff Id
http://www.climatechains.com/view-film.html

SNIP, sorry, this section on a question from an attendee to the presentation has been removed from this WUWT article because even though Monckton clearly refuted it, it is turning into a debate over presidential eligibility that I don’t want at WUWT. If you want to see it and discuss it. Do it at the original blog entry Fightin’ Words – Anthony

If any American is naive enough to believe that the WON will not sign such a treaty, if in fact this is on the up and up, you are beyond stupid. This so called leader is not a leader, he is not a President, he is a follower of his Regime and of Muslim dictates. He is also little more than a rhetorical wonder and even then, he misues words for definition correction, he misues English language skills, such as “I haven’t got,” and this guy is smart..come on now!
It is time for impeachment and he has done many acts that are impeachable, from treason to not thinking kindly, acting kindly in the best interest of the nation and its constiuents. Call your Congressmen/women and demand impeachment proceedings start and start now before he completely takes us out of being Americans and some freedoms that are left into oligarchy and/or Communisim at its finest……………….

SNIP, sorry, this section on a question from an attendee to the presentation has been removed from this WUWT article because even though Monckton clearly refuted it, it is turning into a debate over presidential eligibility that I don’t want at WUWT. If you want to see it and discuss it. Do it at the original blog entry Fightin’ Words – Anthony

Another thought, perhaps benign, but worth posting.
We have Botox Pelosi, power hungry, greedy, multi-millionaire female that will vote for anything that will get her name in “lights.” We have Reid, who, essentially, must be off balance wanting to go out like a “lightning rod,” hence, both will push this if it comes to that and get to to the WON for signing for which he will and zip, there goes the nation. Then we have the WON, as posted previously, that thinks he is God, envisions himself asthe leader of the whole world and in reality is little more than the Chicago thug that he was as a Senator.
If anyone is interested, you will find a wonderful expose’ in the book EXPOSED. It is well researched so you can draw your own opinions, research their research, etc. if you prefer. If you like living in America and being an American and you want freedom, then you will likely develop a headache, stomach ache and perhaps even need to vomit at what is coming down the road for us. Nevertheless, if you know something, you can fight it and get others to fight it also.
Please, please, all of you posting, we have a vital threat to our country even if this piece of journalism is off base. Our morals have divided this nation, now weakened, we are somewhat at the beck and call of every other country that would like to see us fail and no one wants to see that more than countries like Norway, the EU for their own political and selfish purposes.
[SNIP – a bit over the top, please tone it down, policy issues – Anthony]
Suggest you also study and hopefully join Goooh (get out of our house), and help work toward saving this nation..the larger this group gets, the better chance we have of doing some good for all.

There’s a couple of things in that Treaty.
1.) The mention of a Secretariat (sounds highly Marxist)
2.) REDD’s – could not find the definition in the paper
3.) Work camps
The rest of the paper is pretty straightforward: All the technology and money is to flow to someplace other than the US. Tells me we will have NO recovery here, as none is planned ($787B in the Stimulus is going bye-bye).

“It looks like freedom is dimming along with the Sun.”
The proud, who govern, think they’ve won.
They’ve made our science come undone.
They’ve put our offspring in a hole.
Have they assassinated Sol?
Will his face with sunspots fill,
Or will his storms begin to still,
Will minimum now bring the chill
That springs the brutal ice age kill?
The sun has drifted off to sleep.
He cares not if we pray or weep.
He’s shut his eyes in slumber deep.
Life’s promise now is ours to keep.

Anthony –
I have no problems with you removing the materials from the article in question and the comments – in fact, I welcome it. I recognize that I am in a small minority at this website with regards to my political affiliations. And, trust me, I am in an even smaller minority when I question AGW orthodoxy at other websites.
But, if this website is to focus primarily on issues of climate – and, specifically, on rigorous verification of climate change research findings, then it would be to the benefit of those skeptical of AGW to have a site which is not entirely exclusionary of those from the political left.

REPLY: It was my mistake for not realizing that even though the issue had been refuted by Monckton in his response, somebody would take up the torch again here. If you’ll go through comments on other WUWT threads, you’ll notice that there are a number of entries from what I would label (as you have) the Political Left. I welcome all discussion, provided they aren’t done in a hostile or 4 letter derogatory way. That being said, some of the worst comments that are either just too hateful or inflammatory, that add nothing material to the discussion, don’t get posted, or get posted with snips. Like all blog operators, I’m human, with human failings. Even so, I think we have a better track records here of posting alternate viewpoints than RC, “Open Mind”, or Climate Progress. WUWT’s traffic certainly beats all of those so I must be doing something right. – Anthony

Hoi Polloi (06:03:11) :
I’m an AGW skeptic, but I hesitate to use the Lord Mockton for reference as the AGW should refrain from using Al Bore. These people do the case more harm than good. I put Monckton in the same class as Monbiot, politcal activist. I rather refer to scientist like McIntyre, Pielke or Spencer. The less attention to Monckton the better for our case.
Lord Monckton may not be the statistician genius McIntyre is, nor have the scientific acumen of Spencer, Pielke, or McIntyre….but he is no Al Gore, either.
He is a far cut above Al Gore so your comparison is not valid.
Even if he is going overboard with some of what he is alleging here, it pays to listen to the meat of what he is saying.
I think we, with good reason, should beware this Copenhagen Treaty and it takes a whistleblower like him, with his breadth of knowledge and powerful oratorial skills, to sound the alarm to the world.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA

I too think E.M.Smith (02:36:04) hit the nail on the head. There are two issues: science and politics. Ideally, these issues would be discussed separately. However, the warmists are using politics to achieve their goals. Since in the short term politics trump science, provided the anti-AGW response is clearly labeled as politics (which Anthony did when he placed this thread under the categories of “climate_change, politics”), I see nothing wrong with using politics to thwart the AGW alarmist goals. In the long run, science will triumph, but by then it may be too late for the USA, individual responsibility, and freedom–or if not too late, at least late enough to result in massive human suffering. In total, I applaud Anthony’s posting of this thread.

I am amused by the comments of “I am dismayed WUWT would post this” type. AGW is about politics, first of all and above all. Debunking the pseudo-science justifying the current environmentalist power grab is important but it’s only a part of the picture.
According to the Czech President Vaclav Klaus, modern environmentalist movement is the last refuge of the collectivist totalitarians. Lord Monckton does a good job fighting these totalitarians on their own political turf. Do you really think tobacco heir Al Gore and his buddies give a damn about science of this whole thing?
The other amusing typical comment is “if you are a birther, you are nuts, there’s no talking to you.” Reminds me of the “debate is over, global warming is real” argument.
I am not nuts. I am a well-informed, highly educated person fluent in several languages, able to land a plane and to play several musical instruments.
Nevertheless, being sanae mentis et bonae memoriae, I haven’t seen any convincing proof of Barack Obama’s birth place. Maybe he was born in Hawaii. Maybe not. Nobody really knows, since no real birth certificate has been ever produced. (Several forensic experts concluded that the one published on Internet is a crude forgery.) Why the mystery? What, exactly, is he hiding? It is a legitimate question.
“Birthers are not to be taken seriously” notion isn’t based on anything but a desire to ignore the problem instead of solving it. Calling people names is not an argument.

A friend wrote me in response to the article:
“The US Constitution allows no such thing. The language of Article VI is commonly misinterpreted that way by ignoramuses, but the historical record regarding the original intent is emphatically clear that the Constitution itself is the supreme law of the US, and no lesser law or treaty has the power to circumvent it. Which is in fact the originally intended semantics of the language in Article VI (read very carefully):
“****This Constitution****, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”
The Constitution also states that the only way to change it is to officially amend it–and treaties are not, de jure, amendments.
Unless it is officially amended, treaties are subject to the same limitation as any Act of Congress: They must a) not violate the restrictions the Constitution places on government action, and b) be justified by an explicit enumerated power granted to the government by the Constitution. The power to make treaties does not grant any power to violate the Constitution itself, any more than the power to make laws does. Laws can be declared Unconstitutional in spite of the language of Article VI–and so can treaties, for the same reasons.”

This treaty makes an excellent case for a Regent.
Would a King or Queen with power sign away thier own country?
Just a thought. Of course, Royalty can go bad for an entire lifetime or more, which is why we revolted in the 1st place.
How do you stop your government from ceding all power to another government once they start? Washington would ostensibly become merely a bureaucratic appointee outpost. Political Parties and Elections might vanish.
The history of civilization shows that the same old suspicions would tear the new government apart after so many years. But then, once that fails, the infrastructure of soverign government is also vanished.
Sounds like global chaos.

Ignorance is more powerful toll in decision making than people give it credit.
My strength is economics. I have spoken to many people on the environmental side of the agenda. None of them know anything about how free markets, trade, globalization help the plight of poor people and in turn can help the environment. I invariably know every argument they make about how international treaties are the ‘only’ solution to ‘pollution’ moving across national borders. There is no balanced discussion on these issues of environment in classrooms or conferences.
They than watch anti-globalization movies about how evil capitalism and western wastefulness robs culture and prosperity from other nations.
That is why Indur’s recent guest post was so important. Fact based discussion of economics and benefits to the poor from modern technology and trade is critical. I attended one of Bill Clintons recent seminars where he stated that America has to stop sending food to Africa and start shipping know-how and seeds. The problem with that is the North American Agricultural industry makes more money when CARE buys food: http://povertynewsblog.blogspot.com/2008/10/clinton-praises-bush-on-food-aid.html
I get a cheap chuckle out of Moncton’s Speeches and others who mock or demonize those they oppose. Maybe the Moncton’s are necessary, however, my personal public demeanour is to (try) to stick to the fundamentals. 99% of the people who back these world treaties see it as the only way to solve the problem. Even if you could prove that the other 1% were the most evil people in the world what difference would it make. This is the same argument of the far left hardcore environmentalist when they try to attach everyone who disagrees with them to evil oil and tobacco companies. Al Gore doesn’t see himself as doing anything wrong when he accuses people who read or contribute to sites like this as either evil, immoral, or stupid.
I believe Kevin Trenberth is being honest when he makes statements like “I have found that the only scientists who disagree with the IPCC report are those who have not read it and are poorly informed.” That is his belief he would pass a lie detector on that. When you only hang out with people who agree with you it’s hard to find someone who doesn’t. He is a victim of one of the greatest examples of group-think in history. That is why calling the AGW crowd malicious is counterproductive. They truly believe they are saving the earth. Anyone accused them of being evil is laughed of as extremist rhetoric and dismissed. They also see no irony in that they do it themselves.
Sites like this should continue to appeal to the logic of the people who are capable of learning and make people like Gore and Trenberth lonely.

jorgekafkazar (11:11:12) : Has your coffee tasted like watermelon, lately?

LOL. Funny. For me, a foreigner, those one pint polyurethane cups diluted coffees and its “self service” custom it is abominable.
To taste a good coffee it must be, at least, a “spresso” or a “cafecinho”, seated in a table and served by a waiter.
Who knows, perhaps this is the root reason why you are in such troubles. Got to learn to live well…those “in a hurry fast drank coffees” and all that garbage food are crippling your well being and who knows even provoking climate change/global warming, and, last but not least, “el gordo’s” belly. 🙂

My… The teeth gnashing in this thread looks like RC after MacIntyre spills the beans on shifty “research.” The good Lord Monckton correctly notes in the Q&A that he does not do politics. The climate debate is growing if anything, and the flimsy piece of paper that likely won’t get signed by G8 in Denmark has little real meaning. Certainly none scientifically. Politically, perhaps some good as movement away from ($700B annual) foreign oil imports is a good thing for the United States.
But let’s look at the observable world. Seems that all major indicators from solar minimum, to SST downward drift, to regional cold records, to Antarctic’s 5 percent growth, to lack of tropo heating – it all indicates a natural message. The Earth is NOT heating catastrophically. Man’s brief moment of fossil fuel burning this last century is coming to a close. There are viable nukes and alternatives on the way, relatively easy conversion of coal to NG and rapidly lowering demand as we electrify transportation.
Though not in keeping with WUWT empirical scrutiny – consider the cosmic meaning of this small band of skeptics standing athwart the climate train yelling, “Stop!”* And how the observable world is reacting. We probably don’t need it written in the stars to know the message is, “Stay calm, you’re not destroying the climate, they’re not castrating the Constitution – it’s natural variation.”
The Ringmasters will argue. Their business is your froth. The more you froth, the more fannies they get in seats. Hence, the famous quote from Alexander Graham Bell in his moment of pain:
“What hath God Froth?”
* Thanks Wm F. B.

For Lord Monckton to accept a “birther” question and discuss it — that is disappointing and lowers my estimation of his judgement. (I do not know why Obama doesn’t simply obtain and display a copy of his actual birth certificate rather than a summary of it, and I do not know why he defers the question to a doctor who says that he has seen the actual certificate but cannot display it due to privacy practices. Nevertheless, there is no traction to be gained in the “birther” issue.)
I think that many commenters fail to see the difference between the constitution-as-practiced vs. the constitution-as-written. We continually ignore the 10th amendment. Also, we wage wars without the required declaration of war. About half of the Supreme Court members see the constitution as a living / flexible document. I have no doubt that Obama will be able to enforce the treaty without the ratification process spelled out in the constitution.
Speaking of ratification, one useful insight on Global Warming Treaties was offered by George Bush the 1st in the early 90s: If we ratify an environmental treaty, our courts will hold us to it; however, other countries can easily ignore the requirements and walk away from it.

The New World Order has a plan to implement a global border-less government. A global border-less government requires funding with a global border-less taxation system. Tax laws will need to change. This could pose insurmountable problems because national and international tax laws are already highly complex and would surely become even more so with the imposition of a global border-less form of government.
What is required is a totally new form of taxation. One which is not concerned with issues such as whether the taxpayer is domicile or non-domicle or weather they are migrant workers moving from one place to another and thus hard to track and even harder to tax.
What is needed in a globalized world such as the one the New World Order of the Rothschild/Rockerfella clans have planned, is a one size fits all kind of taxation system. A border-less tax which is in essence a tax on life itself. Enter the CARBON TAX.
This form of tax is a centuries old wet dream of the ruling elite and they are just moments away from realising such a dream. The Climate Change summit at Copenhagen this coming December is set to be the platform from which this tax on life will be imposed.
The pseudo environmentalists will be cheering loudly, suffering under the illusion that a carbon tax will protect the environment from that nasty CO2 pollution that we are pumping into the atmosphere year in year out. Totally oblivious to the real implications of a border-less taxation system.
Global government is a direct threat to National sovereignty which in tern is derived from individual sovereignty. Individual sovereignty simply means individual freedom, or human rights. Global government and global taxation is a direct threat to the freedom of all the peoples of the world.
The only way to beat the New World Order is to deny them their funding. If these Nazi fools have to dig into their own pockets to fund their plans for world government, it will be far less likely to succeed. This can only be achieved by exposing the “Man Made Global Warming scam”.
If you would like to know more about the AGW fraud and carbon tax, download this free .pdf book
[snip – self promotion ]

An Inquirer (11:51:04) :
If we ratify an environmental treaty, our courts will hold us to it
That is because you take it seriously and you are used to fulfill the law while third world countries are not used to. You will not figure out how it works: If a law goes against what the majority of people thinks, feels or or are accustomed to, then everybody lends a blind eye !!, believe me!.
Of course, they will sign all the papers if needed, and follow just apparently all instructions given by, but nothing, really nothing will happend.

Adolfo Giurfa (12:17:38) :
REDD=Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD).
Yes, but the Environmental Lawsuits shut down all efforts at Reforestation.
The brush grows faster than the trees, plus the dead trees from the last fires make for ever bigger forest fires. The money to Reforest comes from Salvage Sales, which are destroyed when the Env. Suits stop them long enough for the salvagable lumber to go bad.

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1892368,00.html
Who needs congress to act on CO2? EPA has already declared CO2 a pollutant, which means the Clean Air Act applies. Obama can sign the treaty, and the EPA can immediately start penalizing (read taxing) various CO2 “polluters”.

Well, all I have to say is that Alex Jones got it right in his film “The Obama Deception” – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQNACwaLw
Ps. Obama works for Wall Street – not Main Street…

“Adolfo Giurfa (11:38:02) :
To taste a good coffee it must be, at least, a “spresso” or a “cafecinho”, seated in a table and served by a waiter.”
You should watch NCIS (episode in Africa; they import US coffee), go to Brazil (where the people drink it standing (the drinker, not the coffee)), or drink traditional American coffee while eating your steak. McCoffee is progress.

all of those who rely on a written constituion – take head of what has happened in the UK where our WRITTEN constitiution (yes we have/had one) has been ignored and broken by succesive governments.
http://www.magnacartaplus.org/1689-rights/
for the document on which the US constitution is based & which has no more ability to constrain governments than a piece of wet paper.
Do NOT rely on a written constitution; but instead on some of the rights you still have.
The UK government has ILLEGALLY :
given away sovereignty (EU treaties)
abolished the right of Habeus Corpus (replaced by the OPTIONAL human rights act)
and generally allowed our guarented freedoms and rights to be trampled on; including the right not to be fined except through a court of law.
WAKE UP – bits of paper are as useful in stopping governments as hockey sticks are proving AGW

Regarding Article 6, second paragraph of the US Constitution, “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” While this is typically interpreted to mean that a treaty can, with 2/3 vote, be made part of the Supreme Law of the Land, it still cannot be above the Constitution or above the powers of the Supreme Court.
That being said, if the treaty of Copenhagen is ratified, that places a foreign power in a position to declare binding law (in the form of the treaty) on the US Citizenry as long as there are no Constitutional objections by the SC. All in all, it’s a slippery and dangerous precedent and I think that there are plenty of reasons to be concerned, Lord Monctons hyperbole notwithstanding.

Climate Chains and Lord Christopher Monckton
http://www.globalclimatescam.com/?p=552
Lord Christopher Monckton Speaking at Bethel University