Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Fury on December 08, 2009, 07:46:51 AM
-
....and the US still has its sovereignty.
-
....and the US still has its sovereignty.
So you find it amusing that with the stroke of a pen and the ratifying vote by congress the UN whateverthefucktheywillb ecalledcouncil, will have the ability to dictate taxation, regulate financial systems, and redistribute said monies to some turd world shit hole?
It may not be giving away our sovernty, but it sure as fuck is a step in that direction.
Glad we have people like you here the US to stand up for America ::)
-
So you find it amusing that with the stroke of a pen and the ratifying vote by congress the UN whateverthefucktheywillb ecalledcouncil, will have the ability to dictate taxation, regulate financial systems, and redistribute said monies to some turd world shit hole?
It may not be giving away our sovernty, but it sure as fuck is a step in that direction.
Glad we have people like you here the US to stand up for America ::)
^^^
-
Loosing sovereignty is an exaggeration but we must watch this closely. Don't want any U.N. or international bodies having too much control over our country.
-
he's trolling again, pay him no mind.
I used to think he just got a bad rap, but now not so much
-
....and the US still has its sovereignty.
Obama has either arrived in Copenhagen today or will arrive tomorrow. He has not signed anything yet as the news implied it would happen on Monday. Nonetheless the fact that the potential is HIGH that he will sign it does not mean that at that second the pen hits the paper all hell breaks loose, but it opens the door for HELL to enter.
Before your DENIAL shows you to be fool hearty and unprepared...I would suggest that you like the rest of the world pay attention to what Obama and others do in regard to signing this treaty as it will usher in regulations and policies that will work to the detriment of everyone and every nation.
LAUGH NOW CRY LATER
-
But he does have a great ativar pic.
-
Hugo, I completely agree. That's how many bad ideas start and then steamroll. You can speed the trail up or slow it down but it's very hard to stop once it gets rolling.
I think this analogy not only applies to environmentalism/global CO2 reduction but also to the gov ran public option. That's why I am for reform but dead set against the public option. Liberals know if they can get the public option in, they can keep expanding it (just like we've done with medicaid).
-
it's always baby steps and before you know it, it's reality and well past the time to do anything about it. So really this is about direction, it's always about direction. If you don't want it going in that direction, stop it early before it's to late.
To me, the EPA ruling yesterday will do as much, if not worse, damage than this Copenhagen thing.
-
To me, the EPA ruling yesterday will do as much, if not worse, damage than this Copenhagen thing.
But did we lose our sovereignty? NO.
As usual the resident CT nut job and his apprentice are wrong.
-
But did we lose our sovereignty? NO.
As usual the resident CT nut job and his apprentice are wrong.
Actually, we are losing our freedom to the Fedzilla. Maybe not to an internation body, but to unaccountable govt agencies who will literally regulate every aspect of your life.
-
Actually, we are losing our freedom to the Fedzilla. Maybe not to an internation body, but to unaccountable govt agencies who will literally regulate every aspect of your life.
Again CT apprentice, did we lose our sovereignty as predicted?
-
Again CT apprentice, did we lose our sovereignty as predicted?
Not as predicted, but in an equal way domestically.
Just read any business paper or website about how horrific this EPA crap is for consumers and businesses.
Obnama is accomplishing single handidly what al Quada could only dream of.
-
Not as predicted, but in an equal way domestically.
Just read any business paper or website about how horrific this EPA crap is for consumers and businesses.
Obnama is accomplishing single handidly what al Quada could only dream of.
::)
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
equal way domestically...lol
-
::)
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
equal way domestically...lol
-
(http://www.banklawyersblog.com/.a/6a00d8341c652b53ef01156f777a8a970c-800wi)
-
then I'll take it that you entirely disagree with what I said?
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=310340.msg4423188#msg4423188
Nope, not at all.
(http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/media/anevilplot.jpg)
-
mockery?
No. sorry. Just thought the pic was funny in light of the discussion. I do agree with you. My point was on the advertisement of "Obama will cede our sovereignty if he signs...."
-
Again CT apprentice, did we lose our sovereignty as predicted?
Do you find it as funny as I do that the moonbot Samson is trying to completely spin this into something else? This wasn't a "possibility". They GUARANTEED that the USA would cease to exist yesterday.
-
Do you find it as funny as I do that the moonbot Samson is trying to completely spin this into something else? This wasn't a "possibility". They GUARANTEED that the USA would cease to exist yesterday.
Actually, I read that Copenhagen is falling apart because the Dutch leaked some damaging emails or internal docs revealing how bad this all is. I will try to drag it out.
-
From the UK Guardian
________________________ ________________________ ____________
Copenhagen climate summit in disarray after 'Danish text' leak
Developing countries react furiously to leaked draft agreement that would hand more power to rich nations, sideline the UN's negotiating role and abandon the Kyoto protocol
• Read the 'Danish text'
• In pictures: Copenhagen day two
Comments (255)
The UN Copenhagen climate talks are in disarray today after developing countries reacted furiously to leaked documents. Photograph: Attila Kisbenedek/AFP/Getty Images
The UN Copenhagen climate talks are in disarray today after developing countries reacted furiously to leaked documents that show world leaders will next week be asked to sign an agreement that hands more power to rich countries and sidelines the UN's role in all future climate change negotiations.
The document is also being interpreted by developing countries as setting unequal limits on per capita carbon emissions for developed and developing countries in 2050; meaning that people in rich countries would be permitted to emit nearly twice as much under the proposals.
The so-called Danish text, a secret draft agreement worked on by a group of individuals known as "the circle of commitment" – but understood to include the UK, US and Denmark – has only been shown to a handful of countries since it was finalised this week.
The agreement, leaked to the Guardian, is a departure from the Kyoto protocol's principle that rich nations, which have emitted the bulk of the CO2, should take on firm and binding commitments to reduce greenhouse gases, while poorer nations were not compelled to act. The draft hands effective control of climate change finance to the World Bank; would abandon the Kyoto protocol – the only legally binding treaty that the world has on emissions reductions; and would make any money to help poor countries adapt to climate change dependent on them taking a range of actions.
The document was described last night by one senior diplomat as "a very dangerous document for developing countries. It is a fundamental reworking of the UN balance of obligations. It is to be superimposed without discussion on the talks".
A confidential analysis of the text by developing countries also seen by the Guardian shows deep unease over details of the text. In particular, it is understood to:
• Force developing countries to agree to specific emission cuts and measures that were not part of the original UN agreement;
• Divide poor countries further by creating a new category of developing countries called "the most vulnerable";
• Weaken the UN's role in handling climate finance;
• Not allow poor countries to emit more than 1.44 tonnes of carbon per person by 2050, while allowing rich countries to emit 2.67 tonnes.
Developing countries that have seen the text are understood to be furious that it is being promoted by rich countries without their knowledge and without discussion in the negotiations.
"It is being done in secret. Clearly the intention is to get [Barack] Obama and the leaders of other rich countries to muscle it through when they arrive next week. It effectively is the end of the UN process," said one diplomat, who asked to remain nameless.
Antonio Hill, climate policy adviser for Oxfam International, said: "This is only a draft but it highlights the risk that when the big countries come together, the small ones get hurting. On every count the emission cuts need to be scaled up. It allows too many loopholes and does not suggest anything like the 40% cuts that science is saying is needed."
Hill continued: "It proposes a green fund to be run by a board but the big risk is that it will run by the World Bank and the Global Environment Facility [a partnership of 10 agencies including the World Bank and the UN Environment Programme] and not the UN. That would be a step backwards, and it tries to put constraints on developing countries when none were negotiated in earlier UN climate talks."
The text was intended by Denmark and rich countries to be a working framework, which would be adapted by countries over the next week. It is particularly inflammatory because it sidelines the UN negotiating process and suggests that rich countries are desperate for world leaders to have a text to work from when they arrive next week.
Few numbers or figures are included in the text because these would be filled in later by world leaders. However, it seeks to hold temperature rises to 2C and mentions the sum of $10bn a year to help poor countries adapt to climate change from 2012-15.
• For news and analysis of the UN climate talks in Copenhagen sign up for the Guardian's environment email newsletter Green light
-
if you agree with me and if Obama aids in that direction, what is the difference? If something like that happens and we lose a great portion of sovereignty and there is a global government, I'm quite sure no one man will be entirely to blame. It will have been from a long process with many to blame and thus all equally to blame.
He didn't sign it and if he did it wouldn't mean anything here. One man doesn't have the power to sign our country away.
I understand your caution and agree its something to keep an eye on. But to (not you) run around like chicken little.....