Is Obama Poised to Cede US Sovereignty?
tags:
Stumble ThisOn 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...
Chuck Norris has an article in WorldNetDaily with a good analysis of the treaty:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE....
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.html
Lord 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 educate the public about the myth of global warming.
UPDATE:
Check-out this story from the 10/29/09 Wall Street Journal:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001...
A draft of the treaty can be read here:
http://www.globalclimatescam.com/docu...
Chuck Norris has an article in WorldNetDaily with a good analysis of the treaty:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE....
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.html
Lord 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 educate the public about the myth of global warming.
UPDATE:
Check-out this story from the 10/29/09 Wall Street Journal:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001...
But I am still stocking up on Axe body spray just in cases the Americorp army marches on my city. The Americorp happens to made up 75% of cute girls. They will utterly fail at any attempt to subjugate the masses but afterwards...I figure hey, lots of cute girls in town.
He never even gave a fact throughout the whole video... You can tell by the buzz words he is just another Right Wing hack. I'm sure the treaty sucks, but a "World Communist Government". Come on. There are hardly any Communist governments as it is now. Where are all the Commies supposed to come from I wonder.
-I- think they'll probably come from the same place as the rest of this delusion...from the asses of the right-wing loons.
I mean, are you serious? You actually want me to take a political analysis by Chuck Norris, of a completely outrageous conspiracy theory, and treat it as somehow meaningful? That'd be like getting my political analysis from Ted Nugent...and just as likely to happen. Although, I will admit that at least Norris is no chickenhawk. That doesn't seem to have prevented a few screws from coming loose, however. Maybe it's all those blows to the head.
He never even gave a fact throughout the whole video... You can tell by the buzz words he is just another Right Wing hack. I'm sure the treaty sucks, but a "World Communist Government". Come on. There are hardly any Communist governments as it is now. Where are all the Commies supposed to come from I wonder.
Yeah - because everyone who has an opposing viewpoint is a right-wing-conspiracy-theorist-terrorist-extremist-racist-teabagger. I forgot about that, sorry.
>> ^vaporlock:
He never even gave a fact throughout the whole video... You can tell by the buzz words he is just another Right Wing hack. I'm sure the treaty sucks, but a "World Communist Government". Come on. There are hardly any Communist governments as it is now. Where are all the Commies supposed to come from I wonder.
-I- think they'll probably come from the same place as the rest of this delusion...from the asses of the right-wing loons.
I mean, are you serious? You actually want me to take a political analysis by Chuck Norris, of a completely outrageous conspiracy theory, and treat it as somehow meaningful? That'd be like getting my political analysis from Ted Nugent...and just as likely to happen. Although, I will admit that at least Norris is no chickenhawk. That doesn't seem to have prevented a few screws from coming loose, however. Maybe it's all those blows to the head.
I didn't ask you to do anything, let alone pick out ONE article linked in the description that I copypasted to serve as the collective punching bag for this here sift. Do you have anything to actually say about the content of the video?
First, the links in the description don't work. Youtube seems to like to mangle them, so you can't just copy/paste and expect them to come across intact.
Second, the first two links are "globalclimatescam.com", obviously a respected nonpartisan entity with a credible reputation for factual, peer-reviewed studies, and World Net Daily (whose reporting on Obama being secretly born in Kenya has been absolutely impeccable) with an article containing the analysis of renowned international environmental policy scholar Chuck Norris.
Third, the PolitiFact article on this (which Dr. Norris dismisses as "left-wing") does a pretty good job of knocking down the sovereignty claims by way of a civics lesson on how treaties get ratified and enforced under American law. That is to say, by reminding people that binding treaties need a 2/3 majority of the Senate to approve, which means 67 votes, plus the President's signature.
Fourth, the entire concern starts from the presupposition that concerns about carbon emissions are made up or at least grossly overstated, and therefore poses no alternative solution superior to cooperation amongst national governments.
Fifth, it seems to presuppose that a global government can a) form, b) be overtly anti-democratic, c) impose unpopular/overtly harmful policy on the population of not just the US, but the entire world via force, and d) not be destroyed both from within and without. As someone who generally believes in the potential for government action to engage in large, successful endeavors, I have to say, I don't think such a thing would be possible.
Sixth, the comment "Yeah - because everyone who has an opposing viewpoint is a right-wing-conspiracy-theorist-terrorist-extremist-racist-teabagger. I forgot about that, sorry." is crap. When someone who is ideologically anti-government presents a conspiracy theory about how a treaty on environmental issues will end freedom unless people "stop" Obama, it's not out of bounds to call them a right-wing extremist with a conspiracy theory endorsed by teabagger-central (World Net Daily), who is suggesting violence against people with whom they have an ideological disagreement to discourage the implementation of that ideology (a.k.a terrorism).
Racism being mixed in with this particular issue would be out of place, though vaporlock just called him a "right wing hack" which seems fairly innocuous, and not particularly racial.
The people saying that Bush would suspend the elections last year deserve the same kind of ridicule.
>> ^Stormsinger:
>> ^vaporlock:
He never even gave a fact throughout the whole video... You can tell by the buzz words he is just another Right Wing hack. I'm sure the treaty sucks, but a "World Communist Government". Come on. There are hardly any Communist governments as it is now. Where are all the Commies supposed to come from I wonder.
-I- think they'll probably come from the same place as the rest of this delusion...from the asses of the right-wing loons.
I mean, are you serious? You actually want me to take a political analysis by Chuck Norris, of a completely outrageous conspiracy theory, and treat it as somehow meaningful? That'd be like getting my political analysis from Ted Nugent...and just as likely to happen. Although, I will admit that at least Norris is no chickenhawk. That doesn't seem to have prevented a few screws from coming loose, however. Maybe it's all those blows to the head.
I didn't ask you to do anything, let alone pick out ONE article linked in the description that I copypasted to serve as the collective punching bag for this here sift. Do you have anything to actually say about the content of the video?
Sorry, it -was- rather buried in my flabbergastation... But I think "... of a completely outrageous conspiracy theory..." pretty well sums it up.
By definition, treaties don't "cede US sovereignty"...since we (well, the Senate) have to both approve them, and then pass any supporting legislation needed.
On a side note, I have a really hard time understanding why some people (almost always right-wingers) seem to feel that -any- cooperation with other countries is somehow a bad thing.