Roland
Active Member
Is it good or bad???
Well I think it is bad, and by saying that i by no means do not care about the environment. This question, is as in so many other cases is VERY (left) biosed over here in Europe. However i will be very interested in the result of this poll. After all, we are all petrol-heads .
When i have the chance to throw a litte shit on those sneeky bastards the democrats in the US i will of course take it... When Clinton signed the protocol in 1997 he already knew it was actually illegal. The Byrd-Hagel resolution (which was accepted with the numbers 95-0 in the US senate) states that the US shall not sign any protocol which will result in weakening the american economy. The Kyoto protocol clearly does this. Clinton was just scoreing some show-off points. This is in large part why G.W. Bush draw back the US support for the protocol (thank god). But i bet u lefties on the board didn't know that, because it just always got to be good old Bush's fault, doesn't it
Well I think it is bad, and by saying that i by no means do not care about the environment. This question, is as in so many other cases is VERY (left) biosed over here in Europe. However i will be very interested in the result of this poll. After all, we are all petrol-heads .
When i have the chance to throw a litte shit on those sneeky bastards the democrats in the US i will of course take it... When Clinton signed the protocol in 1997 he already knew it was actually illegal. The Byrd-Hagel resolution (which was accepted with the numbers 95-0 in the US senate) states that the US shall not sign any protocol which will result in weakening the american economy. The Kyoto protocol clearly does this. Clinton was just scoreing some show-off points. This is in large part why G.W. Bush draw back the US support for the protocol (thank god). But i bet u lefties on the board didn't know that, because it just always got to be good old Bush's fault, doesn't it