United Nations raison d'struction

"A climate change response must have at its heart a redistribution of wealth and resources ... ."

Duh

Here's some pleasant news  from the United Nations global warming conference.  With virtually no fanfare or press coverage,   this ... “ ... a panel at the IPCC conference titled "A Global CO2 Tax" took a step that will have a more lasting impact than an empty agreement. It urged the U.N. to adopt taxes on carbon dioxide emissions that would be "legally binding to all nations." And guess who would be hit the hardest? That's right, the tax, if levied, would put an especially high burden on the U.S. "Finally, someone will pay for these costs" related to global warming, Othmar Schwank, a global warming busybody from Switzerland, told Sen. James Inhofe's office. We imagine Schwank, a panel participant, took great glee in saying the U.S. and other developed nations should "contribute significantly more to this global fund." Schwank estimates the CO2 tax would generate "at least" $10 billion to $40 billion a year in revenues; but anyone who believes that has not paid attention. ” I'm trying to figure out how this band of dictators and third world swamp dwellers have the right to impose any "legally binding" anything on the United States?  Even with Barbara Boxer's approval?  But wait, there's more. “ Eco-activists have been so successful in distracting the public from their real intentions that they're becoming less guarded in discussing their ultimate goal. "A climate change response must have at its heart a redistribution of wealth and resources," Emma Brindal, a "climate justice campaign coordinator" for Friends of the Earth Australia, wrote Wednesday on the Climate Action Network's blog. ” Which of course is why the MFCS Democrat party has been so eager to climb aboard this Trojan Horse.  Lock and load if ya gottem. That be for you, Othmar Schwantz.