Tuesday, March 3, 2009

Kyoto Treaty and Global Warming Hypocrites

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/03/the_heat_is_on_true_believers.html

The above link is an article written in the New York Times about the hypocrisy and two-faced lying surrounding the majority of the member nations that signed the Kyoto Accord a few years back. For those of you who are unfamiliar, the treaty was designed to curb global greenhouse emissions and make our environment cleaner, or at least that is what they will tell you. In reality ( or at least my take on
reality) the treaty was designed to slow down economic growth in this little place called the United States of America. GW opposed it, and our Senate voted 95-0 against it when Clinton was still in office. When countries like China and India would be exempt from the same standards that the US would face, why would they agree to it? If you don't feel like clicking the link and reading the article, the best quote is this...

The author of the article, NY Times writer Debra Saunders, asked the UN Secretary General why China was exempt, he stated, "
that America has a "historical responsibility" to cut emissions, while China and India 'have their own positions.' Like the Kyoto crowd, Ban emitted more political ideology than science."

Let's just be honest people. We all need to be responsible with our actions, and do as much to conserve as is economically feasible. But the 'Green' movement is political, not environmental. Our environmentalists are really socialist wolves wrapped in the sheep's clothing of those concerned about our natural habitat. They want to weaken American influence. If they really cared about our environment, wouldn't they want to require that the largest producer of CO2 emissions, China, have just as stringent rules as we do? And to make matters worse, a large number of participating nations aren't even close to meeting their required greenhouse gas reductions. But who am I to question this movement? I'm just a heartless American capitalist polluter.

No comments: