Your author always enjoys quick responding, emotionally charged and void of facts self-proclaimed liberal types who make declarations before considering the macro picture. Readers should always see the macro-view of any issue when it is applicable just as they should often follow the money trail when trying to get to the core of an event. The macro-view will show the reader how the pieces of a puzzle fit together and the money, well; it shows who stands to gain.
Just recently the esteemed UN leader Kofi Annan warned of global warming and the affects while in Africa. Annan will soon step down as the UN leader, having left behind an organization ill-equipped to take action against Iran and their uranium development, despite his organization’s multiple and hollow warnings. He will leave behind Haiti, an island country riddled in corruption, poverty and violence as the UN has been there every step for the past decade with little to show in the way of results. Foreign aid to Africa has dropped off by 40% and the UN head acts stunned. Why? Why should funds continue to be flushed down the drain when military intervention to rid the continent of guerilla leader thug types is the bigger part of the equation? The UN along with Hollywood lambasted the public, specifically conservatives, because there hasn’t been an immediate response to the situation in Darfur. Why? Removing Saddam Hussein from power has been ripped up and down by these two institutions yet Darfur requires our immediate attention? Your author could continue but doesn’t wish to tar Annan’s achievement, be what they may although he can’t find many to comment about.
While in Nairobi, Kenya Annan convened over a climate conference on the issue of global warming, which your author is on the record of not believing because little proof exists and furthermore there are folks lining up to profit if policies are tailored around such claims. The proponents are the same bunch who in 1970 at the first Earth Day pow-wow claimed there would a food shortage in thirty years. They are the same gaggle of mislead people who professed fear of an impending ice age. If the reader questions monetary motivations all they have to do is look at former Vice President Al Gore, whose whole life seems to revolve around this notion of global warming, when he starred, narrated and did everything but sweep the floor during the production of his scare docu-drama entitled “An Inconvenient Truth”.
UN General Annan hasn’t been able to pull off a successful policy since God knows when. So in last few weeks of office he has decided to take up global warming. Does the UN or global warming believers really think that Africa is exactly the ideal location to host such a meeting? Here is a continent that for the most part can’t get it together. Countries such as Liberia are so dependent on foreign aid it has become a necessary component to maintain their economy. This scene is played out time and time again but yet Annan feels the need to tell them about global warming. Parts of Africa or at least those people that live there won’t have to worry about global warming if civil wars and random large-scale violence continues. He then went on to compare global warming, as it relates to issues of immediate urgency, with being on par with weapons of mass destruction and terrorism. Sell your cars and lock your doors, because we are all going to fry!
While taking in the African sun Annan called on Canada to lead the way in combating global warming. This means follow our playbook. What is their blue print? Why it is the Kyoto Treaty. That little gem that will call for Canada to bring their growing economy, remember they drill in Alberta for that evil commodity known as oil, to a grinding halt. It’s that same treaty that just about every left leaning socialist country in Europe has signed. Thankfully Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, a member of the Conservative Party, has publicly said he doubts the existence of global warming and risking Canada’s economic future is not worth complying with happy feel good conventional thinking types. The UN has all but pointed their finger at the US as being the chief polluter of the world for not signing Kyoto while not justly placing criticism on India and China, who are two of the world’s worst as it relates to environmental wrong doings.
The Kyoto Treaty rewards undeveloped countries but punishes advanced ones. Within the treaty exists a clause known as ‘carbon credits’. This marvelous idea would allow countries and their industries that emit over their approved levels to buy credits from other nations and their industries that do not go over these amounts.
A likely scenario is an underdeveloped country with an emerging economy who is a natural polluter must accrue an unnecessary expense. This will be felt with that country’s citizenry and all to appease the UN. What about a case of the United States and if they emit beyond their acceptable level? Would this not open them up to be a possible victim of extortion?
The UN assumes that countries act on their best behavior and with the greater good at heart. We know this is not the case as evidenced by the UN sanctioned oil for food program with Iraq, which turned into a scandal littered with graft and corruption. This is where, much like the UN, liberalism fails. Liberals or progressives as they liked to be called now believe society will act with the best intentions. If this theory held water then there wouldn’t be prisons or ones to inhabit them. A conservative would say that such theory is nice and one to strive for but let’s don’t design policy around it.
So this is the modern day UN, an organization without oversight that the American left attempted to bolster in relevancy as it related to the Iraq War and not having their approval to engage in action. They have been proven ineffective when action is needed. They chase goals based on lofty theories. There should be no question in the reader’s mind that when a pundit spews what has become a common phrase “America has lost legitimacy with their global neighbors”. More importantly and what is not asked is if these same neighbors are marching the beat of the United Nations’ failed drummer.
