 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal?
|
|
|
Subject: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Roger in Sheffield Date: 01 Apr 01 - 04:30 AM I could not see a thread on this subject which is extraordinary. The bbc world service has a discussion where you can comment instead of taking up Mudcat space. here Roger |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: wdyat12 Date: 01 Apr 01 - 04:37 AM I went to your link Roger. IMHO the USA is contolled by the big corporations, Nader was correct. I can't say right in the same sentence. wdyat12 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: katlaughing Date: 01 Apr 01 - 04:38 AM I didn't vote for him and I am ashamed for our country. Thansk for the link, Roger. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Mudlark Date: 01 Apr 01 - 05:20 AM Thanks for the link, Roger. I didn't vote for him either and this decision makes me feel like tuning in on the Stupid Americans show....ARGHHHHHHH......The arsnic in the drinking water setback isn't too great either.....hell in a handbasket..... nancy |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: RichM Date: 01 Apr 01 - 05:51 AM I'm with the Europeans on this one. It's a shameful reaction from the $American$ government. Unfortunately, in Canada, we have a 4 way split in national politics that effectively gives control forever to the Liberal Party, who have absolutely no principled stance on anything, other than kissing Uncle Sam's butt. If they bend any lower, they'll need back braces permanently. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: kendall Date: 01 Apr 01 - 08:16 AM Dont blame me, I didnt vote for that smirking doofus either. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: RichM Date: 01 Apr 01 - 08:45 AM Smirking Doofus? Heeheehee... sounds like an irish tune. Rich |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 01 Apr 01 - 12:24 PM Florida goes under water first, so that's appropriate enough I suppose.
LBJ used to talk it about it being better having someone inside the tent pissing out than outside the tent pissing in. Either choice sounds better than what you've got now though. What we've all got.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: catspaw49 Date: 01 Apr 01 - 01:02 PM The fuckin' tent is soaked and leakin' Mac. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: catspaw49 Date: 01 Apr 01 - 01:23 PM Hmmmmm........I think someone has taken a dump in here too..........and I notice we seem to have setup in the middle of a sludge bed. Looks like the tent may be a goner............... Ya' know, I don't mind that Dumbya is a stupid, insensitive, smirking, undesirable piece of crap. I mind that he's a dangerous, stupid, insensitive, smirking, undesirable piece of crap. Spaw |
|
Subject: Not that I know thing one... From: Clinton Hammond Date: 01 Apr 01 - 01:42 PM But of later there's been a add on Canadian TV for The Globe And Mail, I think...
...an opinionated rag if you ask me, but that's beside the point...
This add... Has people making blanket statements... ie
There's a quote from an article I read on a CNN page...
Smacks of another line from the Globe commercial
sad... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Peg Date: 01 Apr 01 - 01:54 PM I am horified by the Kyoto decision and no, I did not vote for this moron, either. I saw this yesterday and it is funy, scary and basically sums up my feelings on this greedy, smug dildohead. Peg From salon.com (copyright 2001 by Gary Kamiya) The unspeakable Bush As President Bush announces he won't hold any more press conferences, a relieved America comes together in gratitude. By Gary Kamiya March 30, 2001 The unelected president has become the unspeakable president. Literally. President George W. Bush, his spokesman announced Wednesday, will not be holding any more press conferences. Instead, he'll talk to reporters in a less "formal" way. "The president prefers an informality about certain things," said Ari Fleischer. Welcome to the wonderful world of George W. Bush's brain, where it's always Casual Friday! You can't really blame Bush for fleeing from the press with his larynx between his legs. You see, reporters have this annoying habit of asking questions. And when you don't know the answers and don't want to know the answers and there's no way when you're standing up in front of all these people for Dick or Colin to give you the answers, it's just like that horrible day in sixth grade when you had to give a report on the Mayans and you hadn't done any of the reading and didn't even know who the Mayans were and Jimmy Burton was going to slip you a crib sheet but he was sick that day and Mr. Snider made you get up in front of everybody and you couldn't get out of it and you had to say something so you said the Mayans were the people who invented Mayannaise. That was a really bad day. And when you're president, you shouldn't have to have days like that. Otherwise, what is the point of being president? And when you're the American public, you shouldn't be subjected to them either. It's embarrassing and hurtful to our national image. In fact, it's un-American. Even the people who voted for Bush knew he was a few beans short of a full burrito, so why make him stand up there and pretend he knows what he's talking about? That isn't him! It's unfair to him! And it's not why we elected him! What America, or at least five old geezers in black robes, wanted was a genial, figurehead-type CEO who is incapable of defending or even explaining the decisions made by his corporate masters on the board of directors, but who can make ignorance seem charming. And if that is what America wanted, that is what America should get! In the Age of Bush, silence is golden.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Clinton Hammond Date: 01 Apr 01 - 02:03 PM LOL!! Too funny Peg!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 01 Apr 01 - 02:13 PM As I understand it, even with the Kyoto agreement we're all way short of what needs to be done - the Kyoto deal was trimmed way way back below any kind of minimally realistic level of action, specifically with the aim of keeping the USA on baoard.
With the USA out of the picture it would now be possible to set some realistic levels that would have some prospects of maybe sorting things out in time.
After all, even if the 4% of the population who live in the USA is responsible for 30% of the pollution of the planet, that still leaves 70% of it split between the rest of us - and that's where the action has to be.
Look at it one way, having the USA on board was just an excuse to do sod all. Better off without it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Sorcha Date: 01 Apr 01 - 02:19 PM Unfortunately, whether we(personally) voted for him is not the issue. We have to deal with the moron. Maybe we could impeach him for Terminal Stupidity? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Ebbie Date: 01 Apr 01 - 03:08 PM Since this administration began, it's been a case of one shoe dropping after another. What will be next. I would really like to know who's running the show and what their ultimate goals are. It's certain that it's not Bush himself and maybe not even the most obvious, visible people grouped around him. I would like to see an analysis done of the leaders' profiles. "White guys, average age 84, reaganesque in the most air-headed sense, wealthy, many holdings in developing companies...fill in the blanks" Talk about impeachment! Before the last shoe is dropped, we may all be taking to the streets demanding action. The only comforting part is that I think these four years may be no more than a blip in the history of the world- this administration is Bush League in so many different meanings of the word. Better to have them pass through at this stage, imo, when there is still hope of mending damage, than to see them in power for longer than the foreseeable future. Ebbie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Peg Date: 01 Apr 01 - 03:16 PM good points all, Ebbie. I know the warning bells went off EXTRA loud for me on the day of the inauguration; when no fewer than THREE speeches included the words "our lord Jesus Christ." Now I am not anti-Christian by any means, but this to me represents a blatant violation of the separation of church and state... follow that up with the fatuous pro-right-wing "faith-based charity initiative", the recent pro-life-fuelled campaigns to restrict women's reproductive rights on international military bases, and, well, you can see that at least one major goal of the shrub's administration is to "take America back" from the heathen, baby-killing, gay-positive, devil-worshipping paradigm defined by the Bill-Hillary years... Be afraid, be very afraid.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Ebbie Date: 01 Apr 01 - 03:46 PM "Khomeini Bush"- kind of has a ring to it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: kendall Date: 01 Apr 01 - 04:05 PM Usually, I love being right. This time, GOD I wish I was wrong. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Naemanson Date: 01 Apr 01 - 04:30 PM Addressing the title of the thread: NO! Where are our resident conservatives to defend our dear president? Have they no words to defend his dishonesty and hatred of the future? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Peg Date: 01 Apr 01 - 05:15 PM Naemanson: my point exactly. There is no defending that monster. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Richard Bridge Date: 01 Apr 01 - 05:22 PM It surprised me too to see how long it took this thread to start. I have a personal interest. I just bought a house on the 5 metre contour! I think the Volvo will have to go - although I wonder whether the energy use in making a new car is not more damaging to the environment than the high energy use of the old one. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Peg Date: 01 Apr 01 - 05:28 PM I used to own a 76 Volvo; even the oldsters are better on mileage than the new SUV monstrosities so many people are driving...plus you are supporting the idea of reusing, reducing, erecycling. Many Americans think one must get a new car every couple of years just to "stay in step." This is ridiculous. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, and obviously don't get a new one... You can always put environmentally-aware bumper stickers on it! peg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Sorcha Date: 01 Apr 01 - 05:45 PM Will all the appalling stuff only stop when there is no planet to save???? The man is nutso!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 01 Apr 01 - 06:55 PM "although I wonder whether the energy use in making a new car is not more damaging to the environment than the high energy use of the old one." Almost certainly it would be more damaging - the right thing is to look after it, keep it going for ever, and use it as little as possible.
As they said in the war "Is your journey really necessary?" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Sorcha Date: 01 Apr 01 - 07:00 PM Newest vehicle around here is an '86 Toyota wagon, but I use it way too much. It's 4 blocks to the grocery, and I drive......(but--it's across railroad track and a right of way full of goatheads, aka stickers!!) Hell, I can't afford a new car; they cost more than my house did! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Mark Clark Date: 01 Apr 01 - 07:36 PM In case you missed The Nation's cover depicting Dubya as Alfred W. - Mark |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: bigchuck Date: 01 Apr 01 - 08:27 PM I've been afraid for years that the only thing that would get people motivated enough to take the drastic steps we really need to take to guarantee the continued habitability of the planet would be some sort of major environmental disaster. I suspect that the odds have just gone waay up. May even be for the best, although I sure hate thinking that way. I'm glad I'm old and decrepit. I'll be gone before the worst happens. Sandy |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: kendall Date: 01 Apr 01 - 08:34 PM So will I, but, my grandchildren wont. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: bigchuck Date: 01 Apr 01 - 09:08 PM And that's the hell of it Kendall. Mine will have to live through it too. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Ebbie Date: 02 Apr 01 - 02:18 AM Will Bush ignore this open letter that will appear in Time Magazine tomorrow? ( ...Bush said he opposes the pact, signed by former President Bush in 1998 but never introduced in the Senate, because he thinks the economic costs outweigh the benefits. The move has triggered a storm of criticism from around the world.) The open letter said that while the provisions of the Kyoto treaty were debatable, ``the situation is becoming urgent, and it is time for consensus and action''. ``There are many strategies for curbing greenhouse-gas emissions without slowing economic growth. In fact, the spread of advanced, cleaner technology is more of an economic opportunity than a peril. We urge you to develop a plan to reduce U.S. production of greenhouse gases. (em>Emphasis mine) ``The future of our children -- and their children -- depends on the resolve that you and other world leaders show,'' the letter said. It was signed by Gorbachev, actor Harrison Ford, former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, former U.S. Sen. John Glenn, financier George Soros, primate researcher Jane Goodall, former CBS news anchor Walter Cronkite, Celera Genomics (news - web sites) chief J. Craig Venter, biologist Edward O. Wilson and physicist Stephen Hawking. These are pretty big guns- it seems probable that he will find a way to retract or modify his stance, don't you think? If he doesn't, in my view not only is he stupid, with no understanding of public relations, but certifiably insane. Ebbie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: wdyat12 Date: 02 Apr 01 - 02:38 AM Nader was correct! wdyat12 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Linda Kelly Date: 02 Apr 01 - 04:39 AM I watched a programme recently which suggested that, because of the change in our climate due to the impact of greenhouse gases, that there was possibility of a landslide on a small volcanic island in the Canary Islands. This in itself did not seem particularly disastrous until it mentioned that the subsequent tidal wave caused by this, would be sufficient to create a Mega Sunami which would wipe out most of the east coast of the United States to a distance of some 23 miles inland. washington, New York etc would be swamped to a depth of 1/2 mile. Now if Mr Bush needs a little focus....... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Naemanson Date: 02 Apr 01 - 06:01 AM I don't understand how global warming could cause that landslide, Ickle. I know that kind of thing happens but I can't see how warming and greenhouse gases can cause it. Can you find a website that would explain it further? Ebbie, the problem is not that he would ignore the letter. He will never see it. The president (any president and any leader from high up on the chain) lives in a glass bubble, carefully protected from anything that might upset him. So he will not be allowed to see the letter. Even if he does it is unlikely he will have the courage to face down his handlers and the puppet masters who control him. He was carefully chosen to be their robot. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Brendy Date: 02 Apr 01 - 06:03 AM But it has to happen first, before these people pay much attention. Such is the way of the world. B. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Brendy Date: 02 Apr 01 - 06:12 AM From 'The New Scientist' B. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: GUEST,JTT Date: 02 Apr 01 - 07:43 AM In a way, Bush's reneging on the Kyoto Protocol may be the best thing ever - because it's made people start talking about the problem in a more real way. I was listening to the BBC World Service today, and two people were on from Tuvalu and Bangladesh, both countries which may cease to exist in the next few years as a result of rising water levels - the Bangladeshi rep was saying "Will America take this flood of refugees when we have no country?" One scary thing on the programme: a scientist was saying that if carbon (like the surface of most of England) is heated, it gives off carbon dioxide. If the climate gets 2 degrees warmer, he said, the amount of carbon dioxide being produced by the carbon surface of the earth will increase the greenhouse effect - and so on, in an unstoppable effect at an exponential rate. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Peg Date: 02 Apr 01 - 09:39 AM The Hopi had it right. They made no decision affecting the entire tribe (i.e. detoruing a water way, cutting down a forest, slaughtering aherd, etc.) until they had determined how it would affect the tribe *seven generations into the future." Nw, people buy brands of semi-recycled toiler paper called "Seventh Generation" and think that's all they need to do. sigh. It's not enough! Even if every American idiot consumer started TODAY to do what he/she could to walk more lightly on the earth, MAJOR changes in industrial standards would still need to be made to halt the damage. Greenhouse gas damage is cumulative and slow. The results of what we are doing NOW won't be felt for another 20 years or so. Our culture of immediate gratification assures no one gives a shit about what will happen two decades from now; as long as it does not interfere with what we wanna do NOW. We are going to hell in a handbasket; and we ALL have a part in this. We must take a stand. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Naemanson Date: 02 Apr 01 - 09:56 AM Peg, we were given the opportunity back in November to take a stand and came back with a resounding "MAYBE!"
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Peg Date: 02 Apr 01 - 10:00 AM If you are talking about the election, Naemanson, I believe the prevailing understanding is that Bush didn't actually win... (but I am not trying to go THERE if you know what I mean--we made our bed, we must now lie in it--just make sure you put on some 60SPF sunscreen first) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Jim the Bart Date: 02 Apr 01 - 11:08 AM Bush's moves are purely political. His administration has picked up on the Clinton philosophy (It's the Economy, Stupid) and without the curse of vision can act on what they see to be America's most immediate and pressing concern - re-electing George Bush. Let's face it, the rest of the Kyoto signees don't vote here. It's really easy to look at the treaty and say "Clean up your 70% of Co2 emissions before you start telling us how to run our country". Keep in mind, also, that many of the folks who supported GWB to begin with don't like us "entangled" by any kinds of treaties, much less ones unfavorable to the good old US of A. When you add in the army of "scientists" that can be trotted out to debunk global warming as "bad science", ditching the accords becomes way too easy. It is imperative that American voters begin to understand that there is no cheap energy. It all has a cost, either in hard dollars or environmental degradation. One expense is immediate, the other is long term and terminal. Between now and the nest election there will be a lot of horrible decisions made in the name of providing cheap, conventional energy sources. This is wrong-headed and ultimately disastrous. It's the cultivation of alternative sources that is needed. The short-sightedness of the Bush administration will bring it down, but only if US voters understand this - before they vote again. P.S. For any American who sat at home on election day, or voted for Nader because "voting for Bush is the same as voting for Gore": it's not about being right on all the issues, it's about who holds the office. Remember that YOU put George Bush where he is today. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Richard Bridge Date: 02 Apr 01 - 11:29 AM Rain is filling up vertical water reservoirs in the mountains of the Canaries. THe reservoirs are caused by vertical strata (well, you know what I mean) of impervious rock - lava from previous eruptions. When water pressure exceeds cohesion, the side of the mountain falls off. THat's the theory. The date, however, is a matter of geological timing, when the next second and about a million years are both "soon". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Brendy Date: 02 Apr 01 - 11:39 AM That's what that link to The New Scientist was all about, Richard. B. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Richard Bridge Date: 02 Apr 01 - 11:44 AM Yes. Handy to have a summary here, no? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Troll Date: 02 Apr 01 - 11:45 AM Judicial Watch did a ballot recount of all the counties in Florida. Bush still won. Frankly, if you want to make changes, gassing on forums is the least profitable use of your time. Start now. Start organizing a grassroots political organization. Go to meetings, raise money, canvass, poll voters, hold information pickets, sign up volunteers. Let your local politicians know what you expect from them and clobber them in the elections if they don't deliver. You say people need to be educated? Educate them! Then enlist them in your environmental army. When you control the local elections, the big boys WILL listen and you can then make demands on a state and national level that will get consideration. Of course, if you'd rather be part of a mutual mastrubation society that sits around and congratulates each other on their "awareness" and smugly predicts the end of the world... Enjoy troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Grab Date: 02 Apr 01 - 11:51 AM As someone said earlier, at least now the US is out of the Kyoto agreement, they can actually make some progress - GWB can heckle from the sidelines, but he can't actually stick his oar in now, and the other countries don't have to pussyfoot around the Americans. The most telling feature of GWB's argument is, "well, the 3rd World countries aren't doing anything". After a few years of the rest of the 1st World actively assisting the 3rd World in cleaning up their act, that will at least be one argument he (or the next Pres) can't use again. Let's face it, it won't take long to get the 3rd World working more efficiently than the US. As an analogy, South Africa was in denial about AIDS until recently - the problem wasn't intellectual, it was that it was going to cost mucho money to do anything about it. It basically took a year or two of global public ridicule and campaigning by SA citizens to turn them around. As research into the effects of carbon production on global warming continues, hopefully there'll be enough unequivocal data to beat the US with until they'll look (even more) like fools for ignoring it - the only question left is whether enough ppl in the US will care to make it a political issue. Graham. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Brendy Date: 02 Apr 01 - 12:39 PM Indeed Richard. I didn't realise that that was what you were doing. Apologies all around, B. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: Ebbie Date: 02 Apr 01 - 12:45 PM "The decisions that the Bush administration have made to date are certainly not pleasing to anyone who is concerned about the environment." Pretty euphemistic, aren't you! Not pleasing, indeed. Troll, I do hope you count yourself among those people. I would be embarrassed not to be - the environment is where I live. And you. Ebbie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 02 Apr 01 - 06:07 PM Actually it's a great sense of relief not having to worry about keeping the USA sweet. No excuses, no alibis, no saying it's all the fault of the Americans.
The Iron Curtain's gone, the Bamboo curtain looks pretty decrepit these days. In rolls the Smog Curtain, first new candidate for Evil Empire of the 21st Century.
I think the rest of us should concentrate on sorting out our chunk of the planet. I'm sure the Americans will in time recycle Bush very effectively.
(From what I could see in that New Scientist article, the impending Canary Island wipeout isn't anything to do with atmospheric pollution. It's just that the USA ought to have it a bit higher up its worry list. Along with this scary little item about about Yellowstone Park
Wasn't it great when all we had to worry about was whether some nut in the White Hoi use or the Kremlin would press the nuclear trigger? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Kyoto: Was US right to ditch the deal? From: mousethief Date: 02 Apr 01 - 06:55 PM Peg: How horrid that somebody elected president should be allowed to have religious views, or mention them in public. Nobody in the business of running the state should go to church. To do so would be a clear violation of the separation of church and state. Hmpf. Alex |