The stakes in the climate change/global warming debate are getting raised to levels many of us should really be concerned about now. As if the cap and trade/tax bill wasn’t enough to cause concern for the stability of our economy, there is now a treaty to be signed in Copenhagen at a UN meeting. Some are saying it would cede U.S. sovereignty and accountability to a global government who would essentially be in charge of redistributing wealth from the Western world to third world countries as a sort of penance for our assumed climate crimes.
Many are speaking out on this issue. On the one hand you have the skeptics, such as myself, whose voices are growing, even from within the scientific community (700 dissenting scientists from within the IPCC), who are very concerned about the real intentions of this treaty. On the other hand, you have those, such as Al Gore and the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, who are boldly saying we are all in agreement, all on the same page concerning the evidence as well as what needs to be done.
One such voice in opposition to the assumptions of the climate change evangelists is Lord Monckton, the former policy adviser for Margaret Thatcher. And he recently had these things to say:
Many people watching that clip will simply set aside such a dire warning as fear-mongering or nonsense. And the urgency of it certainly may be. But the three key points of the climate treaty he speaks of are definitely in the document. Read here (PDF).
A voice in favor of this climate treaty is Ban Ki-Moon, who wrote this article in the NYTimes and had this to say (emphasis mine):
“We need to step back from narrow national interest and engage in frank and constructive discussion in a spirit of global common cause.”
“A successful deal must strengthen the world’s ability to cope with an already changing climate. In particular, it must provide comprehensive support to those who bear the heaviest climate impacts. Support for adaptation is not only an ethical imperative; it is a smart investment in a more stable, secure world.
“A deal needs to be backed by money and the means to deliver it. Developing countries need funding and technology so they can move more quickly toward green growth. The solutions we discuss cannot be realized without substantial additional financing, including through carbon markets and private investment.”
What is he speaking about in the second and third paragraphs? The “climate debt” the Western world supposedly owes the third world for our climate-injuring crimes. The treaty will establish a climate tax that will be taken from Western member countries, given to the World Bank and IMF, and redistributed around the world as they see fit. This treaty literally establishes global socialism.
And the final kicker from the UN Secretary General himself?
“A deal must include an equitable global governance structure. All countries must have a voice in how resources are deployed and managed. That is how trust will be built.”
I can’t help but think Lord Monckton is right in his assessment, though I believe such a plan will be implemented over a longer period of time than just December.
Another voice in favor of this treaty is that of the infamous climate change evangelist himself, Al Gore, who also calls for a global government, setup as the vehicle for effecting this redistributive change, in the terms prescribed above of course:
I will say that I don’t know how serious this treaty is. If fully enacted to the T, as Lord Monckton is presuming in his assessment, it would indeed be signing over sovereignty of our economy and ultimate accountability of our nation to a global governing body, which is simply unprecedented and startling.
But a signed document, no matter what is in it, is only as good as its enforcement. If this treaty turns out to be another Kyoto protocol, not much will happen and it will be another “good will” treaty. On top of that, it appears, at least from media reports, the Copenhagen meeting is not as high a priority for President Obama as receiving his ever-so distinguished Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo at around the same time.
However, given President Obama’s knack for hiding what he’s doing and reneging on a slew of promises already, and since he’ll be in the neighborhood anyway, I wouldn’t put it past him.