Is America about to lose her Sovereignty?

On October 27th, 2009, I received an e-mail regarding a lecture that was given on a Minnesota College. The e-mail contained a four-minute YouTube clip of one Lord Christopher Monckton, a supposed Climate Change Expert. In the clip this gentleman explains an upcoming conference on Climate Change that will take place in Copenhagen in December 2009. He goes on to state that President Obama, along with many other world leaders, will sign the United Nations Climate Change Treaty. It was the information that was stated next that caused me to do back-up the clip and listen to it again. Lord Christopher Monckton said, “…That a world government is going to be created…the second purpose is the transfer of wealth… and the third purpose of this new entity, this government is enforcement…so at last the Communist who piled out of the Berlin Wall and into the environmental moment…are about to impose a communist world government on the world. You have a president who has very strong sympathies for that point of view…of course he’ll sign it. If that treaty is signed your constitution says it takes precedence over your constitution.”

I began to do my research. First of all who is Lord Monckton and is anything he is saying true? Here is what I found.

There seems to be much controversy about Lord Christopher Monckton as to whether or not he is indeed an expert on Climate Change. However it is not definitive as to the accuracy of the assertion of being an expert. Therefore the conclusion is uncertain.

Regarding the Treaty and his claims about it forming a One World Government, I am also uncertain. Having read through the proposal I cannot say definitively that such an assertion is correct or false. One thing I do know is that politicians are masters at presenting legislation that has “hidden” provisions in them. I say this because it is possible because the use of the word “government” is mentioned in the document.

Concerning the financial element of his speech, I did find a section—listed below—that caused concern.

Annex I

A shared vision for long-term cooperative action

33. In the light of a shared vision based on historic responsibility/emissions, debt/per-capital emissions convergence/an equitable allocation of a shared atmospheric resource, [and in accordance with the provisions of the Convention,] Annex I Parties shall provide new and additional financial resources to meet the full costs incurred by developing country Parties [in complying with their obligations under Article 12, paragraph 1, and the full incremental costs of implementing measures that are covered by Article 4, paragraph 1] [, particularly the most vulnerable countries including LDCs and SIDs, of meeting their commitments, towards the full, effective and sustained implementation of the Convention]. They shall also provide new and additional funding to cover the full incremental costs incurred by developing countries in implementing nationally appropriate mitigation actions undertaken in the context of sustainable development. Annex I Parties commit the amount of [ ] billion [Euros/dollars] in order to enable mitigation and adaptation actions in developing countries for the period now up to 2012. The [Conference of the] Parties shall periodically review the adequacy of levels of financing required to support mitigation and adaptation actions in developing countries, including a comprehensive review not later than 2011.

Based on this statement, it does appear true that money will be paid by countries that emit O2 into the atmosphere, thus concluding that what Monckton said would be correct.

The last claim about the US Constitution making such a Treaty binding is also unclear. Article VI - Debts, Supremacy, Oaths, of the constitution states:

“All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation. 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.”

It appears to me that the phrase, “all Treaties made, or which shall be made,” give credence to what Monckton states.

Granted I am neither a Politician nor a Lawyer; but as a citizen it does cause me to question why this hasn’t been heralded across the land on every media outlet? If it is false, then why hasn’t the media so stated its inaccuracy’s thus calming any fears? Please do not tell me that NOT reporting it was the prudent thing to do because the silence of the media would mean it never happened.

If on the other hand it is true, why hasn’t anyone screamed for action to be taken to prevent such a horrid crime against America?

This is what concerns me about our Country and the media. The very people our constitution is designed to protect are being left in the dark, or given “spun” information that does not allow us to make intelligent decisions about the matters that concern us. When will this nonsense stop? When will the media do what they were created to do—report news? When will Americans put a stop to this?

One of the many great things about American’s is the fact that we do not always take things at face value. We will probe, dig and persist until we find the answer. If the media will not give it to us straight, American’s will find out anyway.