Is Obama Poised to Cede US Sovereignty?
Submitted by sharpsteve on Sat, 10/17/2009 - 03:27
From mnmajoritydotorg on YouTube
On October 14, Lord Christopher Monckton, a noted climate change skeptic, gave a presentation at Bethel University in St. Paul, MN. In this 4 minute excerpt from his speech, he issues a dire warning to all Americans regarding the United Nations Climate Change Treaty, scheduled to be signed in Copenhagen in December 2009.
pants on fire!
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/oct/...
'Obama May Go to Copenhagen '..if he goes, he going to screw us!
Obama May Go to Copenhagen as Polluters Narrow Gaps
By Alex Morales
Oct. 19 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama may attend the December climate summit in Copenhagen, U.S. envoy Todd Stern said today in London.
Stern’s remarks at the Major Economies Forum meeting came after U.K. Energy and Climate Change Secretary Ed Miliband said the world’s biggest greenhouse-gas polluters had narrowed gaps in three key areas during two days of talks on climate change.
The U.S., China, European Union and 14 other countries moved closer to agreement on the need for more climate aid for developing nations, on how that money will be managed and on how commitments by developed and developing countries will be reflected in an international agreement, Miliband said.
“We know it’s an uphill battle to get an agreement in December,” Miliband told reporters in London, referring to the UN climate talks in Copenhagen. “It’s more doable today than it was yesterday.” He gave no specifics.
U.K. Prime Minister Gordon Brown earlier told delegates they cannot afford to fail to broker a deal to fight global warming at the climate summit. Brown said he will go to the Danish capital if needed to help break the deadlock, and urged fellow leaders including Obama to do likewise.
“We’re not writing anything off; we’re not foreclosing possibilities but we treat this as a ministerial meeting in the first instance,” U.S. envoy Stern said. “We’re not ruling out in the right circumstances some attendance by the president.”
Cut Greenhouse Gases
Leaders need to find up to 5 billion tons of additional greenhouse-gas cuts by 2020 to help limit temperature increases to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit), Brown said in an address to officials from the U.S., China and European Union.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aNwIR...
Yes He Is and Yes We Can
Yes Obama is poised to surrender America's sovereignty to the United Nations if Obama signs this treaty in Copenhagen the end of December. Yes, we can stop this by contacting Congress because the treaty will have to be ratified by the Senate according to Rush Limbaugh.
Rush Limbaugh (love him or hate him) he broadcast to over 20 million listeners today in his first hour and thereafter, this treaty info and British Lord Manckton's comments and Rush said Lord Monchton is right and we need to stop this.
Detective Krum Investigates:
http://victory1project.wordpress.com/
http://politicaltrackingnetwork.wordpress.com/
Detective Krum Investigates:
http://victory1project.wordpress.com/
http://politicaltrackingnetwork.wordpress.com/
I have an Idea
Let's get some wingnut, prehaps some british dandy, to go around, and purposely misrepresent the treaty, and misrepresent the constitution. Then once we have the opposition stirred up we will easily be able to undermine them, and make them look like illiterate rednecks.
The copenhagen treaty is bad, for alot of reasons, but not because of what this guy says.
"Is Obama Poised..."
I don't know.
Neither do you.
Neither does this guy.
Whatever happens, rest assured, you are powerless to stop it. If recent history has taught us anything, it has taught us that fighting them on turf they control (politics, court, media, etc.) is a losing proposition.
If you believe this is coming with the signing of this treaty, then you'd better ready yourself for what comes after it.
That you can fight.
I may not know the truth, but I know when I'm being lied to...
I may not know the truth, but I know when I'm being lied to...
How do we get the media to expose this?
I know Glenn Beck is a media whore, but only something like Fox News could get this exposed enough to cause some real impact. Any ideas?
The media is part of the NWO Wake up!
"Human beings with love and compassion are some of the most beautiful creatures in the universe... Those without are a plague on us all."
"Human beings with love and compassion are some of the most beautiful creatures in the universe... Those without are a plague on us all."
What a shame that none of the major conventional news media
establishments cannot find the basis to spend approximately four minutes to air this.
_________________________________________
"An economy built on fiat money is a society on its way to ashes."
_________________________________________
"An economy built on fiat money is a society on its way to ashes."
How is this more intrusive than the UN?
Can someone explain how this new agreement would cede greater sovereignty than current UN treaties or something like Kyoto?
Also, we currently pay money into the UN, and that money gets spent on various UNESCO etc. projects in the third word... I suppose you can call that "redistribution of wealth.." Seems like the charge that this is "World Government" is a bit overblown. The prospect of a world central bank is much more worrying to me than a world climate enforcement organization.
Obama
must be prevented from re-entering the country.
On this page you will find
On this page you will find the four minute video and Lord Monckton's full 90 minute video and Power Point presentation: http://www.libertysarmy.com/2009/10/16/global-warming/lord-c...
He has read this treaty in its entirety and his warning is dire. We have five weeks to convince the Senate NOT to ratify this thing or America is essentially over.
Pat
BOHICA!!
Pat
BOHICA!!
I have to ask...
I mentioned this to an extremely bright co-worker last night, and explained my extreme concern. His reaction was a surprise: So what? Let them do it.
It doesn't make any difference.
Apparently, he spent a decade working on Capital Hill...and spent that decade at a dangerous level of anger at "the system". In order to not have a heart attack or an embolism or something, he's learned to look away. His point is not missed by me...we haven't used our American Constitution in nearly a generation now...if it goes away at this point, what would be different? Think of all that we can no longer do...assemble, privacy, speech, etc..and weapons, soon enough probably....
I sure hate to sound defeatist, but it is glaringly apparent that "VOTING" doesn't work. We can't peacefully elect our way out of this conundrum.
Civil War? Against whom?....besides, they're better armed and trained than you and me with deer rifles.
So...I ask the logical question: what can we do now? I want to get back to the proud old America of days-gone-by...the Ron Paul idea of America: friends, trading partners....not a welfare cash cow to the world.
How do we get this done? Our current route ain't cuttin' it.
------------------
BC
Silence isn't always golden....sometimes it's yellow.
------------------
BC
Silence isn't always golden....sometimes it's yellow.
When faced
with a group that is of the kind that we face, there will inevitably come a time when "looking away" is no longer an option.
This is what people need to realize.
There is no end to it, until we are totally in chains, or dead.
They will not stop.
It's not like they are going to come to some "stopping point" where they feel as though their need for domination becomes satisfied.
That doesn't happen.
Power is a very addictive drug, that knows no limits.
Their minds are not rational. And they cannot be dealt with as rational people.
Eventually, it is going to come to blood.
They will not allow it to be any other way, no matter how peaceful you want to be. The "push" is coming from them.
The only 2 questions are "how much will people take before they realize that they must fight?", and "will they have waited too long for any chance to free themselves?".
When Destruction Is the Cost of Denial
"If we recognize that denial represents valuing delusion more than reality, the seriousness of the danger carried by denial depends on the respective proportions of denial and truth in our lives. Our particular delusions may appear to provide us comfort and safety. As long as our lives continue to be sustained in significant part by what is true and healthy, denial will not seriously threaten our survival. But when what is true in our lives is overwhelmed by the lies we insist upon, our days grow shorter"
"This is a time of immense historic peril, when any vestiges of a concern with truth would demand that the ruling class finally begin to loosen its death grip on delusion. Yet the ruling class continues in its absolute refusal to surrender even one of the endless lies it tells itself. Destruction rushes ever closer, and the ruling class persists in its delusions, repeating them with greater frequency and in a louder and louder voice. Nothing will stop them as they hurtle themselves toward devastation. We have no choice but to be concerned with these matters; as the ruling class destroys itself, it may destroy many of us as well."
"The crisis may be ameliorated to a degree, and the worst of the consequences may be postponed for a while. But whatever "solutions" are implemented, whatever reorganization and reregulation is imposed, it will all be done in accordance with the ruling class's desires and goals. It will all be to protect their own wealth and power to whatever extent is possible, and to expand their wealth and power still more, if that remains at all feasible."
read in full:
http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/2009/02/when-destructio...
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/82482
******************
"I think we are living in a world of lies: lies that don't even know they are lies, because they are the children and grandchildren of lies." ~ Chris Floyd
"I think we are living in a world of lies: lies that don't even know they are lies, because they are the children and grandchildren of lies." ~ Chris Floyd
http://wattsupwiththat.co...
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/10/16/obama-poised-to-cede-u...
'I always thank of all you canvassors and precinct leaders and delegates who were at the front line and caucuses.
Good luck out there &Thank you. You're a gift.
Oh you have read the treaty
and the second purpose 0:46 is the transfer of wealth from the west to third world nations. All the wealth? Your making this up right? We are broke! Please, it is nonsense, where is this treaty your talking about? Can I read it?
and then you die
From a DP friend of mine
http://www.globalclimatescam.com/documents/un-fccc-copenhage...
thx
Fear grows in darkness; if you think there's a bogeyman around, shine the light.
It seems this is more about developing countries like China and India. Environmental regulations and the high cost of labor have reduced industrial pollutants here. What is made in America anymore?
http://www.greendaily.com/2009/08/27/the-copenhagen-climate-...
and then you die
Is Our Sleepy Sun Making Our
Is Our Sleepy Sun Making Our Planet Cold?
I’m trying to think of a good headline written on a 4th grade level for the sheeple to understand for an article I’m writing.
Our Sun has been in a low output state for more than two years which is a major reason why last year was cold and why this year will be even colder.
Does this sound like a good starting point for an article on why it has been getting so cold in recent years?
I look forward to seeing you people freezing your Fing a$$e$ off to make you realize global warming, global cooling, and climate change are not your fault.
You must speak out to stop Obama from signing the Copenhagen Treaty in December, based on Man-Made global warming. They want to take control of the worlds energy markets blaming it on you because you are causing global warming with your CO2.
This is sort of what the article will be like.
What do you think of the headline?
P.S.
This is a the press release for the live stream feed for this new movie tonight.
Not Evil Just Wrong
Stream of Conscience: Not Evil Just Wrong to Stream Live, for Free, Over Internet This Sunday
http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS172412+16-Oc...
that sounds about wright.
The country wakes up to find the Constitution.... and soon... they will wish they never did.... GRRRRRRRRRReat!
Throw in a lil Israeli bombin of Iran and we should have a white Christmas.... problem is... it aint snowflakes.... that would be ASH from the fallout....
Does my burka make my butt look fatwa?
Does my burka make my butt look fatwa?
Article VI makes Treaties paramount Over The Constitution
And I quote:
"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."
Read the Constitution Annotated and you will find all of the authorities.
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/constitution/pdf2002/016.pdf
The U.S. Constitution has no standing against a TREATY. The treaty is the Law Of The Land.
Case closed.
One cannot export Democracy at the barrel of a gun.
Treaties aligned but not superseding
It is outlining limitations for the States themselves. The Constitution, laws and treaties made supersede state's laws and rights BUT the treaty does not supersede the Constitution. No way, no way.
Healthnut4freedom
"Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge Him, and He shall direct thy paths." Proverbs 3:5,6
Healthnut4freedom
"Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge Him, and He shall direct thy paths." Proverbs 3:5,6
it doesn't
that means treaties must be in alignment with. not above.
The Treaty Prevails.
You are simply wrong. This subject is res judicata and has been settled for many years now.
I gave you the link to Article VI Annotated. read the annotation and subsequent case law for yourself and you shall see.
Think of it this way. Congressional Acts & a Treaty being two separate planets orbiting around the sun (Constitution.) The treaty must be ratified by 2/3 of the Senate. The House has no say. It is purely an executive action. A treaty is basically an agreement with a foreign nation.
All U.S. treaties stand supreme over the constitutions of the states, and under the doctrine of political questions, stand supreme over the U.S. Constitution as well, such as the Bill of Rights. The courts are denied jurisdiction to even hear a case involving most Treaties. There are a few circumstances a court could hear a treaty case, but very few indeed. If a citizen tried to sue the U.S. because the terms of the treaty denied citizens a right, the court would not accept the case. Your remedy is at the poll.
One cannot export Democracy at the barrel of a gun.
you are wrong
Here is what Article VI, paragraph 2 actually stipulates on the issue: "...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 [of any State] or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
"Under" designates that treaties are not over, not above, and not even equal to the authority of the United States granted to it by the States via the U.S. Constitution - but remain under, inferior to its jurisdiction.
This guy made a very good
This guy made a very good video please watch it:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5206383248165214524
Also, if you want the whole speech of the video in the headline:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stij8sUybx0
That would be awesome.
Climate Treaty- Obama
If this "Treaty" is ratified by Congress, we will then have to live by it. However, Each State has the right to exercise 'nullification'. The 10th amendment should be explored in depth and each state may have to withdraw. The Federal Government receives its' power from the States and the States do not have to grant power that is not delegated to the fed by the Constitution. Good luck to Oregon if the status quo remains in control. Oregon is very liberal and the State Legislature is predominately Dems. It is appearing that the "nudges" are becoming shoves and people are getting more and more tense. This is NOT a healthy environment for our country, however, it is something we will ALL have to endure until some sort of recourse is found and implemented. For more discussion go to:
www.thelibertyconnection.ning.com
Your constitution says ...
"Your constitution says that it takes precedence over your consitution" -- 1:57
What a bunch of stupid crap this guy is spewing out. As if the constitution ANYWHERE gives the power for something to precede itself.
Come on guys, we're better than this.
See Article VI, U.S. Constitution Annotated
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/constitution/pdf2002/016.pdf
One cannot export Democracy at the barrel of a gun.
I caught the err but...
I must have missed the "bunch of stupid crap this guy is spewing out".
I may not know the truth, but I know when I'm being lied to...
I may not know the truth, but I know when I'm being lied to...
.
I think he mispoke or his accent screwed up what we heard. This new UN agreement supercedes the constitution.
If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking. - George S. Patton
still nonsense
nothing in our constitution allows for anything to supersede it. It can't be done unless the current government is abolished and we suddenly have new laws.
I mean, think about it, there's be no point of ever arguing about anything. We'd immediately have had a new king or some equivalent, because all a president would have had to do would be to make up some treaty to sign which would have superseded the constitution. It would have been the end of any stupid constitution discussion and the president would have been all powerful and could have had the treaty say he could stay for infinite amount of terms too. Pure nonsense of course.
See Article VI U.S. Constitution Annotated
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/constitution/pdf2002/016.pdf
One cannot export Democracy at the barrel of a gun.
not correct
The treaty would take precedence over any STATE constitution, but not our constitution. The supreme court can declare the rules in a treaty unconstitutional - since a treaty becomes the law of the land, once it was ratified by congress.
See http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/staterights/treaties.htm
The Reid Court (U.S. Supreme Court) held in their Opinion that,
"... No agreement with a foreign nation can confer power on the Congress, or any other branch of government, which is free from the restraints of the Constitution. Article VI, the Supremacy clause of the Constitution declares, "This Constitution and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all the Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land...’
"There is nothing in this language which intimates that treaties and laws enacted pursuant to them do not have to comply with the provisions of the Constitution nor is there anything in the debates which accompanied the drafting and ratification which even suggest such a result...
"It would be manifestly contrary to the objectives of those who created the Constitution, as well as those who were responsible for the Bill of Rights – let alone alien to our entire constitutional history and tradition – to construe Article VI as permitting the United States to exercise power UNDER an international agreement, without observing constitutional prohibitions. (See: Elliot’s Debates 1836 ed. – pgs 500-519).
"In effect, such construction would permit amendment of that document in a manner not sanctioned by Article V. The prohibitions of the Constitution were designed to apply to all branches of the National Government and they cannot be nullified by the Executive or by the Executive and Senate combined."
Did you understand what the Supreme Court said here? No Executive Order, Presidential Directive, Executive Agreement, no NAFTA, GATT/WTO agreement/treaty, passed by ANYONE, can supersede the Constitution. FACT. No question!
you see the federalist papers or the anti-federalist papers
.
BUMP
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they attack you, then you win!"
GANDHI
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they attack you, then you win!"
GANDHI
Mod
Why is this one front page when there is a previous post here http://www.dailypaul.com/node/111015 that is more informative? Just have palerider tone down his title and maybe add a link to the youtube video?
the video
is my guess, and I agree.
If true, that would be a wrap for the U.S.of A.
I am not familiar with Lord Christopher Monckton, but he is obviously well informed, sincere and is quite passionate about resisting the Copenhagen Treaty.
If true, this would be another evisceration of our rights as a sovereign nation. Bill Clinton gave away much with NAFTA and GATT, and now it appears that Obama will sign this Treaty.
By doing so, he will cede authority of the U.S. to a 'higher' government, and the Congress and our laws will become moot. Quaint remembrances of what we used to have.
He encourages the U.S. citizens to stop it, but doesn't say how that might be done. Our government has been unresponsive to the people's will for decades, so I am not sure how we can do it now - short of a military coup.
See:
Discussion is already under way.
See: http://www.dailypaul.com/node/111015