I want Nick to answer this, because all I ever hear from people who are for "doing something" is certitudes and platitudes about the alleged problem.
I'd like Nick to explain why Copenhagen's attempt to create a "global governance" and establish the concept of "climate debt" and exempt India and China is a good idea that will help fix things, and why he's OK treatying away our Constitutional safeguards in exchange for... what? - Publius On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 6:18 PM, Pete Theisen <[email protected]> wrote: > Publius Maximus wrote: > >> What are the essential provisions in the Copenhagen treaty, and why >> are they a good idea? > > Hi Bob, > > There are 32 points. One thing that hit me right away was that it is to > replace the Kyoto Protocol. > > There is an assumption in the language that all this stuff is some kind > of fact, no acknowledgement that the scientists have been caught lying > through their teeth - in other words, same old, same old. A *lot* of > generalizing, big buzzwords and plenty of money, of course. > > Not a word about the lap dances. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_treaty > http://www.scribd.com/doc/23831690/Copenhagen-Climate-Change-Agreement > > It appears from the Guardian article that the developing countries' rep > thinks it snubs his constituents. > > http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/dec/09/copenhagen-summit-danish-text-leak > > Of course, since the whole thing is a farce we need to bag it all up and > stuff it into Al Gore's back yard. At least it isn't 2000 pages. > -- > Regards, > > Pete > http://pete-theisen.com/ > http://elect-pete-theisen.com/ > [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
