Lord Monckton Discusses UN Climate Change Treaty in Glenn Beck Interview

(Credit: Thorne Enterprises)

Interest in Lord Christopher Monckton’s recent speech in Minnesota is raging across the internet, and both the excerpt and the full speech I’ve posted have been highly viewed.

Glenn Beck interviewed Lord Monckton on his radio program a couple of days ago.  Lord Monckton is a very witty man, often joking self-deprecatingly about his own status as a “lord.”

GLENN: Well, I know you are the 3rd viscount Monckton of Brenchley, but what the hell does that even mean? Who are you really? I mean, you sound honestly, a lot of people listening right now, Lord Monckton, he sounds like Dr. Bombay.

LORD MONCKTON: Well, how very kind of you. My

GLENN: (Laughing).

LORD MONCKTON: I am a hereditary peer. In other words, I did not achieve anything I achieved by merit. I had it thrust upon me, you know, as Winston Churchill used to say, some are born great, some achieve greatness, some have greatness thrust upon them. I had nobility thrust upon me by having very carefully chosen the right parents.

GLENN: Right, right.

LORD MONCKTON: So it’s only a matter of luck. I therefore can’t claim any special brilliance just because I am a Lord. On the other hand, the title does fascinate people, and I’m afraid I do exploit it quite shamelessly.

During the interview they discuss the UN Climate Change Treaty that most nations–including the United States–are expected to sign in December in Copenhagen.

This treaty (ostensibly to solve a problem that does not exist) would not only engineer a large transfer of wealth from the people of the evil Western nations to the pockets of the elites in the poorer nations (usually poorer because of the corruption and self-centeredness of those running those countries).

It would also create a de facto world government body to enforce climate regulations and ensure the free nations of the West are robbed of the fruits of their productivity transfer their wealth to the poorer countries.

This is the conference of the state’s parties to the United Nations framework convention on climate change, which is a hell of a mouthful, I know. But this has been in the planning for two years, ever since the same conference met in Barley. They always meet somewhere nice. This time it’s going to be Copenhagen. And at Barley it was planned. As soon as they had got George Bush out of the way, they would push through a climate treaty which would involve the vast transfer of wealth from the west to poorer countries, in the name of what is called reparations for climate debt. Now, the extraordinary thing about the draft treaty which I have now seen is that it goes far further than anything that was planned at any previous session. What they’re now going to do is to set up a world government, and the word “Government” actually appears in the treaty. But you heard it here first. The word “Election, democracy, vote, or ballot” does not appear anywhere in the 200 pages of the treaty.

Monckton goes on to elaborate:

And what it says is this: There will be a new vast interlocking bureaucratic entity created at huge expense to you and me and that bureaucratic entity will have three purposes, the first of which is twice stated to be government. The second purpose is stated to be the transfer or redistribution of wealth from countries like ours to third world countries in reparation for what is described in the treaty as climate debt. In other words, we’ve been burning CO2 in huge quantities. They say that’s altering the climate. Actually we now know it isn’t, but they say it is. And therefore they say we have to pay, get this, anything up to 2% of GDP every year to poorer countries. Now, the third element in the task of this new government will be what is called enforcement. In other words, the power of the new government to make Democratic countries hand over their cash, whether they like it or not. But more than that, there will be an interlocking series of so called technical panels which will have the right directly to intervene in the economies and in the environment of individual countries over the heads of their elected governments. So what we are talking about is a fledgling world government and because it’s not elected, it’s essentially a communist world government.

You can read it yourself here, page 19 section 38 where it outlines the governmental body for enforcement and for “compensation” (i.e. the theft of the property of citizens from Western nations to give to corrupt elitists in other areas of the world).

Well, you might say, congress has to ratify any treaty even if President Obama signs it.  That would certainly be the case…if we still lived in a country where our leaders respected our Constitution and were determined to keep their oath–but it is sadly obvious that we do not currently live in such a country.

LORD MONCKTON: Well, now I’ll tell you what has to happen. Under your Constitution, I think it’s Article VI, there has to be a 2/3 majority of the Senate in order to ratify it. Now, I don’t think that he’ll get a 2/3 majority in the Senate. I’m reasonably sure there are enough senators including blue dog senators who will realize that if they hand over your democracy and your Constitution and make it subject to this new treaty because that’s how your Constitution works, Article VI taken with the Vienna convention on the interpretation of international treaties means that an international treaty prevails over your Constitution. And so if he signs away your Constitution, he is signing away for the first time your democracy to an alien bureaucratic entity that you don’t elect. That’s the danger. Now, if he can’t get it through the Senate, during his election campaign he and his staff began saying that they didn’t like that part of the Constitution but meant they had to get 2/3 of the Senate to agree. And the way that he is proposing to do it and this was announced during his campaign is to get a simple majority in both houses, which he can of course get because he has a reasonable majority in both houses so that the treaty will be enacted into your domestic law. Now, that is slightly less drastic than if the Senate were to ratify it because at least in theory you can repeal a domestic law, whereas you can’t resolve from a treaty and once you sign a treaty, the only way you can get out of that officially is by getting all the other states parties to let you go. And since you’ll be the country that’s big most in the way of reparations, there’s no way they will let you go once they’ve got you into it.

Exactly how far this can be taken is open to some interpretation (and of course the socialists in our government will “interpret” everything to give themselves maximum latitude and minimum obedience to the Constitution).

Some say that it is customary among most nations, and is explicitly laid out in the 1969 Vienna Convention, that such a treaty is in force once signed, whether it is actually “entered into force” or not.

Remember, few if any countries in the world have an advanced constitution like ours that provides maximum protection to the liberties of the people, so the elitists of the world community may simply “wish away” the U.S. Constitution and arbitrarily declare it to be of no consequence because it stands in the way of their Glorious Revolution; they will likely consider a U.S. agreement at Copenhagen quite sufficient to obligate us to the treaty, and constitutional requirements concerning Senate ratification be damned.

And with “leaders” like Barack Obama entrusted with the guardianship of the American people and the Constitution, you can be sure he will not dare contradict his foreign betters.

Part 1

Part 2

Note: Reader comments are reviewed before publishing, and only salient comments that add to the topic will be published. Profanity is absolutely not allowed and will be summarily deleted. Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will also be deleted.