Political Crossfire Forums

[shamus11]

The UN Kyoto Scam

By

James Bredin

Should the UN or Kyoto itself be shut down?
Would activist special-interest politicians frown?
With no place to make grandstand socialist announcements,
On how they’d like to fix the world and other pronouncements.

As their propaganda headlines scream; it has to be done,
All their environmental agenda has to be won,
Or the sky might fall and we would never breathe the air,
So we better obey or we’re on a wing and a prayer.

If Kyoto or the UN itself cannot be shut down,
And we don’t have one politician with guts or renown,
Their little communist system of spreading the wealth,
Will be forcibly introduced and implemented by stealth.

It makes sense to them that their policies should be enforced,
Found their little fellow travelers and had it all endorsed,
Spread the wealth to developing countries, made sense to them,
In the guise of the environment or else they condemn.

But the Americans didn’t buy this communist plot,
Won’t shut down factories because of this Kyoto lot,
Millions unemployed while developing countries receive,
Canadians can’t understand or even perceive.

Wednesday, February 16, 2005

http://tinyurl.com/6l4ex

[renwan]

Kyoto is necessary and so is the UN, even if they have screwed up, they have solved more than screwed, whoever wrote that is pretty dumb,

[eXploiTeD]

We need something MUCH more comprehensive then Kyoto. I think we had better get serious about pollution pretty soon.

[The_Right_Honourable]

Damn right we need to get serious. America needs to wake up and smell their own bulls**t.

[shamus11]

Kyoto is nothing more than a UN system of international communism where the developed countries will pay big bucks to the developing countries.

This is the reason why China and India (both big pollution producers) are considered developing countries and will be on the receiving end of the emission $credits.

The UN is using the environment and emission readings as the system of putting this communist system into action. But it is a form of international communism that is well disguised.

You have not heard it called a communist system before. Marx, Stalin and Lenin would love it. Castro loves it.

This is all according to the UN 2000 Millinnium Charter.

And you thought it was about pollution and a hole in the ozone.

[Tono]

I know, why don't we just outsource all of our jobs to China and India? Oh yeah. Liberals hate losing jobs. :roll:

[Diogenes]

eXploiTeD wrote: We need something MUCH more comprehensive then Kyoto. I think we had better get serious about pollution pretty soon.
You mean like restricting the polluting economies of the developing world, like China and India? Do you have any better evidence than demonstrably flawed computer models to show that pollution is a cause of global warming?

[The_Right_Honourable]

shamus11 wrote:



Kyoto is nothing more than a UN system of international communism where the developed countries will pay big bucks to the developing countries.

This is the reason why China and India (both big pollution producers) are considered developing countries and will be on the receiving end of the emission $credits.

The UN is using the environment and emission readings as the system of putting this communist system into action. But it is a form of international communism that is well disguised.

You have not heard it called a communist system before. Marx, Stalin and Lenin would love it. Castro loves it.

This is all according to the UN 2000 Millinnium Charter.

And you thought it was about pollution and a hole in the ozone.

Maybe. Though i doubt Stalin would give a s**t since he had no real ideology except what was best for him.

But the real issue is GLOBALWARMING not some kind of perceived conspiracy. Climate change is REAL, not some illusion made up by liberals to destroy evil industry. Sea levels are going to rise, the world will heat up. Britain will freeze. The world will go to s**t pretty damn fast.

Global emissions must drop. The USA uses more energy and is more wasteful than any other nation on Earth! I think the carbon trading deal is a damn cheap scam but its the only thing on the table.

If our world gets screwed America wont be able to magic a bubble of fantasy to protect it. Everyone will be f****d.

[shamus11]

Environment from Hell

By

James Bredin

Of course you’ll understand when they close the plant down,
And move to the US and you are left with a frown,
Because it’s for our own good politicians say,
We’ll breathe clean air and our added taxes will pay.

It’s the learning process of progress in reverse,
As Kyoto is imposed with no need to converse,
A mental illness virus plague straight from hell,
Environmental stuff they all managed to sell.

We seem to have bought it all, hook line and sinker?
Ottawa is noted for only one honest thinker,
Foundations get money and Sheila doesn’t know why,
They’re illusive as a UFO up in the sky.

Politicians nod their heads and we tend to believe,
Would politicians and foundations ever deceive?
They don’t need parliamentary approval,
Mysterious entities beyond our perusal.

And you can’t ask and you can’t tell and you don’t know,
Distracting media information comes like snow,
Important stuff in Africa or United Nations,
Are they more important than US relations?

Would the Adscam guys lie and what remains hidden?
Can’t look, can’t see, because they say it’s forbidden,
Did they shoot themselves in the foot or the neck?
Money laundering or equalization in Quebec.

Friday, February 18, 2005





Click here if you have some time to spare

[Chris29]

shamus11 wrote:



Kyoto is nothing more than a UN system of international communism where the developed countries will pay big bucks to the developing countries.

This is the reason why China and India (both big pollution producers) are considered developing countries and will be on the receiving end of the emission $credits.

The UN is using the environment and emission readings as the system of putting this communist system into action. But it is a form of international communism that is well disguised.

You have not heard it called a communist system before. Marx, Stalin and Lenin would love it. Castro loves it.

This is all according to the UN 2000 Millinnium Charter.

And you thought it was about pollution and a hole in the ozone.

well the reason China and India are on the receiving end of these payments are a) because they are in fact developing countries and b) because they are recently moving into the industrial sector and thus cannot promote greater economic growth with such standards. The payments allow them to ensure greater economic growth which ultimately benefits us all.

As for the, and I quote "UN 2000 Millinnium Charter". Well first you can't spell Millennium. Secondly there is no such thing as the UN 2000 Millennium Charter. There is the UN Millennium Development Goals which I have a link to in my signature and there is also the UN Charter but I do not know of any UN 2000 Millinnium Charter so either there is no such thing or the UN has kept it secret from the public for the past 5 years apparently. It sounds like to me you are talking about the UN Millennium Development Goals so here lets take a look at what they say regarding the environment.

The 7th goal highlited by the UNMDG is to ensure environmental sustainability. Under that the UN highlighted more specific goals:
-Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programmes; reverse loss of environmental resources
-Reduce by half the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water
-Achieve significant improvement in lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers, by 2020


ya damn those UN Millennium Development Goals for promoting access to water and improving the lives of slum dwellers, WHAT JERKS!!!!!!

Anyways there isn't even anything in the UN Millennium Development Goals that discusses Kyoto

[Chris29]

another important thing to note, while america has not ratified kyoto they have introduced very tough and very effective emissions standards and policies which many environmentalists have said work hand in hand with kyoto and at times go a step further

[shamus11]

Are you Tony Blair or Paul Martin in disguise?

Both of whom will be long gone in six months.

Could we leave the plight of Africa to the proud Africans?

[Jehan]

Whether you'd like to believe it or not, global warming will bring about the next ice age. If you think this statement is absolutely ridiculous, read on, for I will explain!

There is a reason why the Northern Hemisphere is not a hell of a lot more colder than it is: a moving belt of hot and cold water in the Atlantic Ocean. You see, Hot water from the Southern Hemisphere travels along the top of the ocean towards the Northern one, and slowly sheds its heat as it heads north until it has shedded enough and then sinks to the bottom of the ocean, and travels south, collecting heat as it flows south until it rises to the top of the ocean and travels north again, etc. etc.

Now, as we know, global warming will raise the average temp of the Earth, and with this new found heat, more and more of the polar ice caps melt. Well, when the ice caps at the north pole melt enough, they send a lot of fresh water into the ocean.

The problem?

This will cause the fresh water from the polar ice caps to mix with the water heading north to form brackish water. Because Brackish water is light than salt water, it will not sink, promptly putting a monkey wrench into the belt of moving heat. The effects on the Northern Hemisphere would be catastrophic.

[shamus11]

And the sky might fall next week.

[maxtsu]

shamus11 wrote:

And the sky might fall next week.
Nothing like burying your head in sand, and denying it.

[suns05]

shamus11 wrote:

Are you Tony Blair or Paul Martin in disguise?

Both of whom will be long gone in six months.

Could we leave the plight of Africa to the proud Africans?


no we cannot leave the plight of africans to the "proud africans", this is our role as human beings to unite when our fellow human beings are being killed off, what is your problem with wanting to save the lives of those in the third world?!?!?

[suns05]

maxtsu wrote: shamus11 wrote:

And the sky might fall next week.
Nothing like burying your head in sand, and denying it.

no kidding, although give him credit, it was one of his more thoughtful posts

[suns05]

shamus11 wrote:



Kyoto is nothing more than a UN system of international communism where the developed countries will pay big bucks to the developing countries.

This is the reason why China and India (both big pollution producers) are considered developing countries and will be on the receiving end of the emission $credits.

The UN is using the environment and emission readings as the system of putting this communist system into action. But it is a form of international communism that is well disguised.

You have not heard it called a communist system before. Marx, Stalin and Lenin would love it. Castro loves it.

This is all according to the UN 2000 Millinnium Charter.

And you thought it was about pollution and a hole in the ozone.

Shamus11, I think you should look into the Political humor forum rather than posting in a forum where we like to debate issues with some sort of intelligence.

the UN 2000 Miillennium Charter????

would you care to explain to me what exactly that is?

would you care to explain why it is that China and India should not be considered developing countries?

more importantly would you please consider arguing with some substance, the only thing worse then your one liners are those damn poems

[shamus11]

Sun05 If you pay attention to my posts you will notice there is nothing humorous about them.

The UN held a grandiose Millennium Assembly that cost $250 millionin 2000. The leaders of free nations rubbed shoulders with potentates, dictators and despots gathered to celebrate their own pomposity. They camouflaged it all with final declarations to emphasize that they were really statesmen.

Mr. Axworthy, Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs to the U.N. Security Council at the time wanted all this ongoing conflict and bloodshed in Africa to stop. He said, "What is more recent and disturbing, what provides the global community with a compelling reason for engagement today, is the increasing 'civilianization' of conflict. Active Council engagement would serve to reverse this situation. It would also reinforce the legitimacy of states. The Council's responsibility to protect civilians in armed conflict is therefore compelling, from a human security perspective, in terms of fulfilling the Council's own
mandate and in the interest of enhancing state sovereignty."

The socialists at the UN are bound to do good. They want to be judged by their good intentions. They want to change the name “peace-keeping” to “peace-enforcement” or “peace building”. That is another name for what the Allies did during WWII. Our soldiers would have to pick one side in this war and beat the crap out of the other side. Unless they got the crap beaten out of themselves instead because “other sides” and there are several “other sides” in these wars, have a tendency to fight ferociously. This type of war could go on for years with no peace and no final settlement.


Canadians would get nothing but body bags, more AIDS and more taxes. This in a country that already has a $600 billion debt.

I have lots more on this subject.

http://tinyurl.com/4d8xe

[Chris29]

shamus11 wrote:


Sun05 If you pay attention to my posts you will notice there is nothing humorous about them.

The UN held a grandiose Millennium Assembly that cost $250 millionin 2000. The leaders of free nations rubbed shoulders with potentates, dictators and despots gathered to celebrate their own pomposity. They camouflaged it all with final declarations to emphasize that they were really statesmen.

Mr. Axworthy, Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs to the U.N. Security Council at the time wanted all this ongoing conflict and bloodshed in Africa to stop. He said, "What is more recent and disturbing, what provides the global community with a compelling reason for engagement today, is the increasing 'civilianization' of conflict. Active Council engagement would serve to reverse this situation. It would also reinforce the legitimacy of states. The Council's responsibility to protect civilians in armed conflict is therefore compelling, from a human security perspective, in terms of fulfilling the Council's own
mandate and in the interest of enhancing state sovereignty."

The socialists at the UN are bound to do good. They want to be judged by their good intentions. They want to change the name “peace-keeping” to “peace-enforcement” or “peace building”. That is another name for what the Allies did during WWII. Our soldiers would have to pick one side in this war and beat the crap out of the other side. Unless they got the crap beaten out of themselves instead because “other sides” and there are several “other sides” in these wars, have a tendency to fight ferociously. This type of war could go on for years with no peace and no final settlement.


Canadians would get nothing but body bags, more AIDS and more taxes. This in a country that already has a $600 billion debt.

I have lots more on this subject.

http://tinyurl.com/4d8xe

well the only humorous part about your posts is the complete disregard to reality

so the UN Millennium conference held in 2000 which led to the UN Millennium Development Goals (not the 2000 UN Millinium Charter as you wrote) apparently is nothing more than a celebration of their pomposity??
well seems a little odd to me, here why don't I show you the UN Millennium Development Goals and you can explain to me where the emphasis on pomposity is evident:


Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger

Achieve universal primary education

Promote gender equality and empower women

Reduce child mortality

Improve maternal health

Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases

Ensure environmental sustainability

Develop a global partnership for development


Now onto Lloyd Axworthy, who by the way was Canada's Foreign Affairs Minister, not Foreign Affairs to the U.N. Security Council (there is no such thing lol). Well that statement was him advocating Human Security as opposed to State Security and nothing more than that. Also Lloyd Axworthy was also one of the stringest proponents of the UN and has worked with them most of his life.

As for the "socialists in the UN", well its hard to argue with someone who is obviously convinced the whole world is full of socialists or better yet commie pinkos out to get you but I will try to do my best. First off while there may be individual state ideas of changing peacekeeping to peace enforcement or peace building there is no motion being made by the UN collectively. Also the allies didn't call what they were doing "peacebuilding", even if they did that doesn't ensure that peacekeepers or whatever they would be called would have to pick a side. The UN Charter ensures that such a thing could not occur. But if you want to insist that the UN is working towards a system in which they would be involved in war (something which they have been created to fight) while defying their own constitution (which the UN is more proud of then americans are of their own constitution) then by all means go ahead.


Quote: Canadians would get nothing but body bags, more AIDS and more taxes. This in a country that already has a $600 billion debt.

well I read your poem on AIDS and the UN. I cant really say to much about it because its hard to argue once again with a guy that believes we should stop trying to save people from AIDS. The body Bags, wel I guess we would get that from that huge world war that will be started by the UN and of course the taxes, well in 2004 the average Canadian paid $1.25 that went towards the UN, now I suppose with the huge world war the UN will start that the taxes would go up so I guess I can see reason to worry there.

:roll: :roll: