The Biggest Fight American Sovereignty; Coming Very Soon
Posted: Monday, October 19, 2009
by Joel Hendon
http://hebronics.org/index.html
There are many controversial propositions in the works with the present administration and they all need to be resolved quickly. (1) Health Care Reform. (2) Cap and Trade Legislation. (3) More Stimulus. (4) Defense cuts and security. (5) Taxes. (6) Inevitable inflation. And more. All of these are highly important for the American people's safety and prosperity. And the solution to each is controversial.
I would prefer that all readers go and read the article with the details of this, but for fear that many will not, I will give a few quotes from it to let you know the extent of the seriousness involved. The information is from a speech given at the Bethel University of St. Paul on Wednesday, October 15, by Lord Christopher Monckton, former science advisor for Margaret Thatcher when she was Prime Minister of England. Here is the eye opening start of the speech.
"At [the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference in] Copenhagen, this December, weeks away, a treaty will be signed. Your president will sign it. Most of the third world countries will sign it, because they think they're going to get money out of it. Most of the left-wing regime from the European Union will rubber stamp it. Virtually nobody won't sign it.Re-read that blurb slowly and let it soak in a minute. What does this mean to you? This is why I hope you will visit and read this entire article. The writer promises to have the full transcript of the speech available soon but this portion along with his explanation is enough to awaken some eyes I believe. He goes on to say that this treaty, when signed and ratified will take precedence over our constitution and will be irrevocable, even by future administrations unless all parties agree to allow us to withdraw from it. And he adds that this would never happen because we would be the biggest payer. Here is another couple of paragraphs that let's you see how serious it is, at least to this distinguished speaker:
I read that treaty. And what it says is this, that a world government is going to be created. The word "government" actually appears as the first of three purposes of the new entity. The second purpose is the transfer of wealth from the countries of the West to third world countries, in satisfication of what is called, coyly, "climate debt" because we've been burning CO2 and they haven't. We've been screwing up the climate and they haven't. And the third purpose of this new entity, this government, is enforcement."
So, thank you, America. You were the beacon of freedom to the world. It is a privilege merely to stand on this soil of freedom while it is still free. But, in the next few weeks, unless you stop it, your president will sign your freedom, your democracy, and your prosperity away forever. And neither you nor any subsequent government you may elect will have any power whatsoever to take it back. That is how serious it is. I've read the treaty. I've seen this stuff about [world] government and climate debt and enforcement. They are going to do this to you whether you like it or not.I certainly hope that all readers will take heed to this and not only learn what it is all about, but let it be known to your congressmen and the president that you are against it. Before it is too late. I promise that I will add a new link to this article once the full transcript of the speech is available, but in the meantime, I encourage you to go to this one and read what is presently available.
But I think it is here, here in your great nation, which I so love and I so admire it is here that perhaps, at this eleventh hour, at the fifty-ninth minute and fifty-ninth second, you will rise up and you will stop your president from signing that dreadful treaty, that purposeless treaty. For there is no problem with climate and, even if there were, an economic treaty does nothing to [help] it.
http://fightinwordsusa.wordpress.com/2009/10/15/obama-poised-to-cede-us-soverignty-claims-british-lord/
Now that this subject deals with climate change, and since it becomes obvious why the United Nations is pushing this so very hard, lets talk about that. Since 1998, eleven full years ago, the atmospheric temperature has been declining and all signs indicate that it will continue to do so for some years. Those scientists not taken in by the "Chicken Little" screams of Al Gore and the like (primarily from the United Nations themselves) had been predicting this drop coming for several years. And they coincide exactly with what they said causes these fluctuations, solar storms. They said when the solar storms (spots) diminish, the temperature drops, and when they become very active, the temperature begins to rise again. And that is exactly what has happened. We have no control over sun spots, and neither are they caused by man made CO2.
CO2 is beneficial to the atmosphere in that it is vital and enhances worldwide vegetation growth. It is not a pollutant. Smoke particles and ashes, etc., are pollutants, not the chemical CO2. Even those pseudo scientists who have been selling the bill of goods, acknowledge that there is a cooling trend, but as they always do, they will not give up the argument, knowing full well that their lucrative grants would cease. They contend that this is only a temporary dip and it will start to rise again. That is absolutely a fact, but there is nothing man can do about it. And none of them know how many years it may be before it reverses. The sun controls it.
I, and numerous others have been writing and warning people about the subtle movements going on in the United Nations, and in our own government, especially with some in the Council On Foreign Relations, and in many of the large business firms hierarchies. I have been told that there are some in the leadership also of some covert organizations such as Freemasonry. It is widely known that these people are striving to create a global governance and this is their first bold attempt to gain a foothold. If they can get this farce universally accepted in an ironclad treaty, where no one can unilaterally withdraw from it. The rest will be relatively easy. But where does the good old U.S.A. appear then? Totally impotent without a full fledged war.
This Article has been viewed 247 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (3 total)Do you have no critical thinking skills whatsoever?I listened to Rush Limbaugh today for probably no more than 5 minutes and heard Lord Moncktons speech. I can't imagine the fear you must live in if you actually believe such dribble.Since when has the U.N. had any power over the U.S., much less the power to take away our sovereignty? This is fear mongering at its finest. While listening I was saying to myself, "who would believe such propaganda?" Limbaugh certainly is too smart to believe it himself. He's manipulating you, Mr. Hendon.Cap and trade cannot transfer the wealth of the West to third world countries, most businesses aren't carbon producers, so they will be affected minimally. Even the companies which are affected the most will only pay a small part of their revenue to cap and trade, and much of that money will be paid to other U.S. businesses, like farmers (Yay for the farmers, they need the money!) U.S. companies will then develop carbon neutral or carbon negative technologies which will then be sold around the World, which will transfer wealth TO THE USA!!!I'm sorry you're so scared, but think about it for a little bit before you buy into the scare tactics of the politicians who have been paid off by energy companies.Thanks for reading and commenting Anon. You can't speak without criticizing, can you? And you certainly can't understand what you read. And you say Limbaugh is manipulating me...no, I never listen to him, but you do. And if you listened to him no more than five minutes, you did not hear the complete speech.I don't care if you believe what Lord Monckton said or not. That is you perogative. But he has read the treaty and he is no fool. The United Nations has no power over us, but if we are stupid enough to sign an iron clad treaty that everybody agrees is going to cost trillions, where the only way we can get out of it is that all other members agree to allow it, we deserve trouble. And besides this, Your reference to Cap and Trade has nothing to do with this treaty, although it is an effort to accomplish the same thing, which is also worthless.I'm not afraid. You listen to Limbaugh and read my article. Maybe you are afraid of something. If you don't believe that there are movements, right now, who are attempting to create a global governance, then you should wake up.I'm sorry but you can't expect a serious discussion when one side is parroting a man who says our President is part of a communist plot to bankrupt our nation and surrender it to the rest of the World.For the rest of you, this is nothing new. If you want to know how this story ends, look up "McCarthyism" and "Salem witch hunts." We, as a nation, have been through this before.Joel, I'm commenting re: Anonymous. I don't offer this comment to defend you, for you speak your views for yourself very well. I offer this in hope of getting this "Anonymous" to reveal his or her identity when critiquing others. If "Anonymous" would apply his/her own recommended critical thinking he or she would consider that use of an "Anonymous" signature in this case takes away from his/her appearance of sincere convictions, since his/her real name will not be aligned with them. There is nothing to fear from using one's name.I also do not like personal attacks or name-calling being lauched against any SW writer.I think you are making some very valid observations here. I, too, wish anonymous would speak up under his/her name. MarijoThanks for commenting Marijo. I don't worry about anonymouses. They always have the highest of intellect. So whether or not they have valid information, they are always right.I don't get the connection between critical thinking and leaving comments without revealing one's name. Where I live, the whack-o nut cases who believe that the President is involved in a communist plot to destroy America are the same ones who brag about the guns that they own. I bet the same is true where you live. I'm simply not willing to publicly take on gun-toting whack-o's.These wild accusations leave only one of two possibilities that can exist. There is either an insidious plot where our President is conspiring with the communists to destroy America, or there is an insidious plot to manipulate the all-too-gullible for political reasons. I don't see any middle ground.I would guess that you know which insidious plot I believe it to be.We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.Copyright 2012 IcoLogic, Inc.Viewed from Cache.
Load time: 0.000 seconds.
