At 09:57 AM 4/26/01 -0700 Matt Grimaldi wrote:
>Just because I didn't contradict the article's claims and details
>doesn't
>mean that they're necessarily true. Jeroen is challenging the claim in
>the article that the possibility of U.S. acceptance of the Kyoto
>protocol
>was/is dead and will stay dead. Many people had hoped that it could be
>revived before Bush nailed the coffin shut.
I have a 95-0 vote that says that Kyoto always was and always will be dead
in this country.
Of course, just as it was with the International Criminal Court, and just
as it was with the landmine ban, the Europeans have repeatedly demonstrated
that there are more interested in scoring debating points against the
United States than seriously dealing with international issues. Indeed, I
think it was Mr. Easterbrook who argued (but I could be wrong) that given
the overwhelming scientific and economic evidence behind the US position on
carbon credits under Kyoto - it is hard not to wonder if the Europeans were
not deliberately trying to torpedo the treaty.
JDG
__________________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ICQ #3527685
"The point of living in a Republic after all, is that we do not live by
majority rule. We live by laws and a variety of institutions designed
to check each other." -Andrew Sullivan 01/29/01
