Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Earth Changes / Global Warming / Chemtrails / Weather Warfare

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 20-10-2009, 01:04 AM   #1
1776
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: 40.126N -74.049W
Posts: 2,582
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Exclamation Obama is Poised to Give Control of US to the World

Obama is Poised to Give Control Of America To The World



United Nations Climate Change Conference
Copenhagen, Denmark December 7-18, 2009
http://en.cop15.dk/



Lord Monckton: Copenhagen treaty will establish Marxist World Government

October 16, 2009 by John Charlton
http://thepostnemail.wordpress.com/2009/10...rld-government/

OBAMA WILL ATTEMPT TO SLIP IT THROUGH CONGRESS TO ACHIEVE HIS GOAL OF MARXIST WORLD DOMINATION

(Oct. 16, 2009) — One world government, ruled by heartless and godless Marxists might be here sooner than you think. And the objectives of international Communists might explain all the money and power behind putting Obama into power.

But the mechanism for establishing this one world Marxist government has only recently been revealed: The Copenhagen Treaty on Climate Change.

So says Lord Christopher Monckton, former science adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, who, according to Fightin’ Words Blog, gave a scathing critique of the treaty at the recent Minnesota Freemarket Institute Conference:

Here are some excerpts of Lord Monckton’s closing speech, as transcribed by Fightin’ Words Blog, from the audio recording of the conference:

Quote:
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.

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 satisfaction 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.

How many of you think that the word “election” or “democracy” or “vote” or “ballot” occurs anywhere in the 200 pages of that treaty? Quite right, it doesn’t appear once. So, at last, the communists who piled out of the Berlin Wall and into the environmental movement, who took over Greenpeace so that my friends who funded it left within a year, because [the communists] captured it – Now the apotheosis as at hand. They are about to impose a communist world government on the world. You have a president who has very strong sympathies with that point of view. He’s going to sign it. He’ll sign anything. He’s a Nobel Peace Prize [winner]; of course he’ll sign it.
There is a lot more to what Lord Moncton says, and The Post & Email urges its readers to stop over at Fightin’ Words blog to read more about it. Fightin’ Words also has a link to the recent Copenhagen Conference Working Document, so that you can read for yourself what is entailed in its subterfuge.
1776 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-10-2009, 01:35 AM   #2
kappy0405
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Chicagoland, Illinois
Posts: 8,256
Likes: 646 (387 Posts)
Default

The Rothschild/Rockefeller-controlled Club of Rome made public their desire for a system of world governance based on combating climate control decades ago. This treaty, which probably originated with COR lobbying, could very well evolve into THE NWO when combined with solutions to other manufactured crisis, such as the financial crisis, the coming WW3, etc. This is not looking good.

These guys really need to stop saying 'Communist' though!! We're already paying out money and partaking in this global fake-welfare through IMF, World Bank, etc.. By saying Communist, they're continuing to imply that this a left/right issue. We need to get away from that. This isn't about 'spreading the wealth' over the globe - this is about further centralizing their power over the globe. That's not Communist, that's Fascist - and it's a right wing agenda as much as it is a left wing agenda.
kappy0405 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-10-2009, 01:43 AM   #3
1776
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: 40.126N -74.049W
Posts: 2,582
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kappy0405 View Post
These guys really need to stop saying 'Communist' though!! We're already paying out money and partaking in this global fake-welfare through IMF, World Bank, etc.. By saying Communist, they're continuing to imply that this a left/right issue. We need to get away from that. This isn't about 'spreading the wealth' over the globe - this is about further centralizing their power over the globe. That's not Communist, that's Fascist - and it's a right wing agenda as much as it is a left wing agenda.
I agree whole-heartedly! This is fascism in it's purest form!
1776 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-10-2009, 04:09 PM   #4
lizzy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,287
Likes: 31 (18 Posts)
Default Obama Poised to Cede US Sovereignty

http://www.libertysarmy.com/2009/10/...s-sovereignty/
lizzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-10-2009, 06:09 AM   #5
lizzy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,287
Likes: 31 (18 Posts)
Default

the above post has a copy of the Copenhagan Climate Change bill.....

Once this is signed in Dec......the NWO is a totally done deal......it's MSM and the sheeple still don't either get it or care......

.N. 'Climate Change' Plan Would Likely Shift Trillions to Form New World Economy
Friday, March 27, 2009
By George Russell

Print ShareThisA United Nations document on "climate change" that will be distributed to a major environmental conclave next week envisions a huge reordering of the world economy, likely involving trillions of dollars in wealth transfer, millions of job losses and gains, new taxes, industrial relocations, new tariffs and subsidies, and complicated payments for greenhouse gas abatement schemes and carbon taxes — all under the supervision of the world body.

Those and other results are blandly discussed in a discretely worded United Nations "information note" on potential consequences of the measures that industrialized countries will likely have to take to implement the Copenhagen Accord, the successor to the Kyoto Treaty, after it is negotiated and signed by December 2009. The Obama administration has said it supports the treaty process if, in the words of a U.S. State Department spokesman, it can come up with an "effective framework" for dealing with global warming.

The 16-page note, obtained by FOX News, will be distributed to participants at a mammoth negotiating session that starts on March 29 in Bonn, Germany, the first of three sessions intended to hammer out the actual commitments involved in the new deal.

In the stultifying language that is normal for important U.N. conclaves, the negotiators are known as the "Ad Hoc Working Group On Further Commitments For Annex I Parties Under the Kyoto Protocol." Yet the consequences of their negotiations, if enacted, would be nothing short of world-changing.

Getting that deal done has become the United Nations' highest priority, and the Bonn meeting is seen as a critical step along the path to what the U.N. calls an "ambitious and effective international response to climate change," which is intended to culminate at the later gathering in Copenhagen.

Just how ambitious the U.N.'s goals are can be seen, but only dimly, in the note obtained by FOX News, which offers in sparse detail both positive and negative consequences of the tools that industrial nations will most likely use to enforce the greenhouse gas reduction targets.

The paper makes no effort to calculate the magnitude of the costs and disruption involved, but despite the discreet presentation, makes clear that they will reverberate across the entire global economic system.

• Click here for the information note.

Among the tools that are considered are the cap-and-trade system for controlling carbon emissions that has been espoused by the Obama administration; "carbon taxes" on imported fuels and energy-intensive goods and industries, including airline transportation; and lower subsidies for those same goods, as well as new or higher subsidies for goods that are considered "environmentally sound."

Other tools are referred to only vaguely, including "energy policy reform," which the report indicates could affect "large-scale transportation infrastructure such as roads, rail and airports." When it comes to the results of such reform, the note says only that it could have "positive consequences for alternative transportation providers and producers of alternative fuels."

In the same bland manner, the note informs negotiators without going into details that cap-and-trade schemes "may induce some industrial relocation" to "less regulated host countries." Cap-and-trade functions by creating decreasing numbers of pollution-emission permits to be traded by industrial users, and thus pay more for each unit of carbon-based pollution, a market-driven system that aims to drive manufacturers toward less polluting technologies.

The note adds only that industrial relocation "would involve negative consequences for the implementing country, which loses employment and investment." But at the same time it "would involve indeterminate consequences for the countries that would host the relocated industries."

There are also entirely new kinds of tariffs and trade protectionist barriers such as those termed in the note as "border carbon adjustment"— which, the note says, can impose "a levy on imported goods equal to that which would have been imposed had they been produced domestically" under more strict environmental regimes.

Another form of "adjustment" would require exporters to "buy [carbon] offsets at the border equal to that which the producer would have been forced to purchase had the good been produced domestically."

The impact of both schemes, the note says, "would be functionally equivalent to an increased tariff: decreased market share for covered foreign producers." (There is no definition in the report of who, exactly, is "foreign.") The note adds that "If they were implemented fairly, such schemes would leave trade and investment patterns unchanged." Nothing is said about the consequences if such fairness was not achieved.

Indeed, only rarely does the "information note" attempt to inform readers in dollar terms of the impact of "spillover effects" from the potential policy changes it discusses. In a brief mention of consumer subsidies for fossil fuels, the note remarks that such subsidies in advanced economies exceed $60 billion a year, while they exceed $90 billion a year in developing economies."

But calculations of the impact of tariffs, offsets, or other subsidies is rare. In a reference to the impact of declining oil exports, the report says that Saudi Arabia has determined the loss to its economy at between $100 billion and $200 billion by 2030, but said nothing about other oil exporters.

One reason for the lack of detail, the note indicates, is that impact would vary widely depending on the nature and scope of the policies adopted (and, although the note does not mention it, on the severity of the greenhouse reduction targets).

But even when it does hazard a guess at specific impacts, the report seems curiously hazy. A "climate change levy on aviation" for example, is described as having undetermined "negative impacts on exporters of goods that rely on air transport, such as cut flowers and premium perishable produce," as well as "tourism services." But no mention is made in the note of the impact on the aerospace industry, an industry that had revenues in 2008 of $208 billion in the U.S. alone, or the losses the levy would impose on airlines for ordinary passenger transportation. (Global commercial airline revenues in 2008 were about $530 billion, and were already forecast to drop to an estimated $467 billion this year.)


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,510937,00.html
lizzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-10-2009, 06:12 AM   #6
1776
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: 40.126N -74.049W
Posts: 2,582
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Obama is Poised to Give Control Of America To The World

I beat you to it, mate.

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=87473
1776 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-10-2009, 06:19 AM   #7
lizzy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,287
Likes: 31 (18 Posts)
Default

http://www.libertysarmy.com/2009/10/...nhagen-treaty/

Monkton with Glen Beck

more......

Last edited by lizzy; 21-10-2009 at 06:36 AM.
lizzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:58 PM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.