UN Climate Change plan would 'reorder' world economy

It appears to me that this document might be about 20 years too soon:

A 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.

Read the Fox article carefully. I think you'll see what the UN wants to accomplish just isn't possible - now.

The loss of sovereignty represented in that document will never fly in the US Senate no matter how many Democrats are there. Signing off on a "Copenhagen Agreement" that contains such draconian reductions in emissions as 20-40% by 2020 and 90% by 2050 according to a paper by a former British government official will never make it into law. We would have to destroy our economy to do it. And the same goes for most of the other items on the UN's agenda.

Ed Morrissey lays out some hard truths:

But by far the dumbest idea is to put the UN in charge of this regime.  Not only does it mean an end to sovereignty on trade, manufacturing, energy production, and business in general, but the UN has a horrible record on global trade controls.  Does anyone remember the UN Oil-for-Food Program, otherwise known as the largest corruption scandal in human history?  Tens of billions of dollars got stolen by bureaucrats and governments around the world, and it wound up enriching the man targeted for isolation — Saddam Hussein — beyond the dreams of Croesus.

If one tried to get as many foolish ideas into one 16-page document as the UN does here, they’d be hard pressed to do so.  If Obama cooperates with this, we will have willingly traded American sovereignty for rule by thieves and knaves.  Republicans need to win some seats back in the Senate to ensure this treaty never gets ratified.

The whole idea of allowing the UN to dictate economic activity on such a massive scale is laughable - now. Twenty years from now is a different story. By then, it is foreseeable that our sovereignty would have eroded to the point that we would accept such a plan from the UN. Some European countries are ready to do so now (obviously). But any senator today who voted to implement a treaty with these kind of conditions would be handily defeated for re-election.

What this document does, however, is give the lie to the idea that "fighting global warming" is actually about climate change. It has always been about a massive transfer of wealth from the developed to the developing world using global warming - like Obama is using the economic crisis - as an opportunity to implement a radical left agenda.

But give the liberals 20 years. They'll have the majority of the American people believing we should surrender our sovereignty to the UN with little problem. We are apparently going to surrender some of our foreign policy decisions to the One Worlders now. It's a simple matter to see how that will gradually undermine our independence until crowds will be in the street demanding the UN takeover the economies of the world 20 years down the road.