Arjay:

"Monckton said that World Govt was mentioned several times.It was hidden in stratas of gobbly-de-gook."

We've already established that many, if not most, consider Monckton a few cans short of a six-pack. So you're going to have to do better than "he said it was mentioned several times."

Kindly point to this "gobbledygook" which allegedly mentions world-government. Because frankly, it sounds to me like the very definition of a cop out.

"Once Rudd had signed us up to that treaty,we would have been bound by it's edicts"

You're proceeding from point A to point B without establishing point A has any credibility.

Which, incidentally, is my main beef with stupid conspiracy theories, and why I feel the need to put an end to this silliness right now.

Consider Rudd for example. At what point, was the lad from Nambour, brainwashed into a global conspiracy? He's already the leader of a country. Kindly explain the *benefit* of joining some international secret cabal?

How did this induction look, hmm? Did they sit him down at a table and come in wearing robes? Was it more of a sooper-dooper-secret blackmailing affair?
And more importantly, how did they manage to coordinate the legion of co-conspirators? Same goes for 9/11 and this JFK rubbish. Honestly people, how wide is this ridiculous cabal?
And how can you honestly believe that all the media and government circles just go along with these things?

Are you honestly that divorced from reality? Hundreds of thousands of public servants, journalists, politicians and public figures are just what, going along for the ride?

Anyhow, I'm clearly off on a tangent. My apologies.

Arjay, before proceeding to points B then rushing to Y and Z, kindly provide something to validate point A.

Monckton is dead wrong about Global Warming, but I think there is a large grain of truth in his claim that Global Warming is being used as an excuse to further the interests of some of the the global corporate elite, particularly with the Emissions Trading System scam.

A good many who reject Monckton's views on Anthropogenic Global Warming also reject the ETS as a solution.

These include NASA scientist James Hansen (http://solveclimate.com/blog/20100113/people-vs-cap-and-tax) and David Spratt (http://climatecodered.blogspot.com) author of "Climate Code Red".

For further information, see also http://candobetter.org/taxonomy/term/10 http://johnquiggin.com/index.php/archives/2010/01/29/my-response-to-moncktons-conspiracy-theory/

---

TurnRightThenLeft wrote, "Same goes for 9/11 and this JFK rubbish".

The same does NOT go for 9/11 and the JFK assassination. Anyone who claims to accept the official accounts of either of these events is either a complete fool or a corporate/government shill.

This has been shown conclusively, amongst many other places, in the forum discussion "JFK.E Howard Hunt Ex CIA, Accuses LBJ" at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3330&page=19 and "9/11 Truth" http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2166&page=83

Hey, here's something we can agree on, daggett

>>A good many who reject Monckton's views on Anthropogenic Global Warming also reject the ETS as a solution.<<

Hooray. It took some finding, but there it is.

ETS will fail to achieve any of the goals set for it, except to make a huge wad of cash for the Traders.

In fact, it is almost designed to fail.

Apart from the simple concerns about leakage, which in themselves will establish an enormous grey market based on "emission arbitrage", there is the straightforward stupidity of taxing emission at source, rather than at the end-user.

Reducing demand, as opposed to restricting supply, has always been a far more effective - and far less corruptible - means to control markets.

But it is sadly a question no longer open to logic, having been solidly buried in political gamesmanship and policy horse-trading.

It's not going to be pretty.