Copenhagen Treaty

Open letter to a friend:

I watched the presentation of Lord Monckton on the YouTube link, which you provided.

My daughter and I have been discussing Lord Monckton and the Copenhagen Treaty. Monckton recently had an interview with Glenn Beck, and the details of that interview are on a Glenn Beck website. The subject matter of the interview is about the same as we have just seen on YouTube.

Lord Monckton claims to have been a science advisor to Margaret Thatcher. He also claims to be a nonscientist, and that is believable by his twice used term "burn carbon dioxide". Carbon dioxide doesn't burn. It is a product of combustion of fossil fuels. However, I have not seen that he makes any radical errors in judgment concerning political matters. In summary, I believe he is reputable and responsible, and we should listen to what he says.

With respect to the Copenhagen Treaty, Greenpeace is a leading proponent. Greenpeace is a non--governmental organization (NGO). Wikipedia estimates the number of internationally operating NGOs at 40,000. Many of these, including Greenpeace, are radical environmental lobbying organizations. While they do not have government power, they are strongly influential to our elected representatives. For example, Greenpeace has prepared a specific 61-page Treaty Proposal for the Copenhagen Meeting. It is entitled, "A Copenhagen Climate Treaty - Version 1. It can be downloaded from the Greenpeace Website at http://www.greenpeace.org/seasia/en/press/reports/ngo-copenhagen-treaty.

As I read through Greenpeace's "A Copenhagen Climate Treaty", it appears to be confined essentially to carbon dioxide emissions and does not include aspects of world government as implied by Lord Monckton. However, it is in my judgment a clear attempt to fleece the American public. The NGO Treaty calls for 160 billion US$ per year for four years ($640 billion total). Funds would come from industrialized countries (mostly the US).

We know from various bits of information that Pres. Obama has strong communist leanings. He also seems to have some belief in world government, which is rather surprising unless he has aspiration to be World Emperor. A Copenhagen Treaty as proposed by Greenpeace would contribute greatly to the construction details of world government, even though that is not specifically mentioned. Lord Monckton mentions world government as part of the Copenhagen Treaty. It may be there somewhere, but I could not find it directly.

The semi-good news is that all international treaties signed by the U.S. Administration must be confirmed by the U.S. Senate. No matter what Pres. Obama says or does at Copenhagen will be binding, unless Senate confirmation is obtained. This is contrary to what Lord Monckton said in his YouTube presentation. We can hope that the Senate will use good judgment in not confirming the Treaty. However, the Senate does not have a recent record of using good judgment. It is also loaded with liberal Democrats, who appear to endorse world government. This means there is a possibility of Senate endorsement. We can help to forestall this endorsement, by asking our US Senators from Texas to withhold endorsement, but this is likely to have little effect. Our Senators already seem to be convinced that we should not have a Copenhagen Treaty. The problem is that they are in the Senate minority. We need to encourage them to work across party lines with appeal to the common sense of some reasonable Democrats, who I am sure are present in the Senate.