Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zoltan! who wrote (164152)	7/24/2001 10:19:45 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769667

Tonight cable news leader FoxNews highlighted the extreme Left/anti-Bush bias spewing out of the parochial NYTimes. As opposed to FoxNew's universally admired impartiality. What a giggle.

To: Zoltan! who wrote (164152)	7/25/2001 5:54:01 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Shameful, both for the Europeans, and for the Times.....

To: Zoltan! who wrote (164152)	7/25/2001 6:26:56 AM
From: ColtonGang	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769667

Wash post..........In the absence of U.S. support, Japan became the critical player as the world's second biggest polluter. The treaty must be ratified by 55 nations responsible for 55 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions to enter into force -- and that threshold can only be crossed with Japan's backing. The compromise was a victory for Japan, which was at the center of the marathon negotiations in Bonn. Japan scored twice in the final agreement: It won a significant reduction of the tough requirements of the protocol, which will appeal to Japanese industry, and Japan also appears to have "saved" the global environment treaty first drafted in 1997 in its historic capital. Japan signaled it will now support ratification, having achieved most of what it wanted in the negotiations. Under the compromise reached today, the reductions in harmful emissions will not be as deep as originally envisioned. One major reason is a provision on which Japan insisted allowing nations to take increased credit for so-called "sinks," forested areas that absorb the carbon dioxide gas, seen as a chief culprit of global warming. This also benefits Canada and Russia. Emissions trading, in which developed countries cut their compliance costs by buying and selling pollution credits, was also crucial for Russia, which stands to gain as much as $10 billion per year because it expects to have a large amount of its quota to trade away. Massive closures of Soviet-era factories have already slashed its pollution levels since 1990.

To: Zoltan! who wrote (164152)	7/27/2001 4:49:11 PM
From: J_F_Shepard	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

" FoxNews highlighted the extreme Left/anti-Bush bias spewing out of the parochial NYTimes." The above quote is the lead line in the post you used to answer my challenge to you to show evidence in the NYT that it is biased. You said,"The NYTimes, unlike the LATimes and WP, refused to report that because of Bush's leadership Japan secured provisions that made Kyoto essentially meaningless." In fact neither the LATimes nor the WP reported that the new agreement made Kyoto "essentially meaningless". Those words were never used. The Post, in fact, called it a "breakthrough and a major diplomatic setback for the Bush Administration" The LATimes headline reads, "Nations Adopt Climate Pact Without U.S." Their coverage said, in part, "With the United States isolated, those seeking to combat climate change say the solidarity shown here should provide impetus for clean energy initiatives worldwide, even in the U.S. Congress. " Then you said, "The liberal NYTimes refused to report the most important concession made to Japan: that penalties contained in Kyoto are not legally binding on signatories." This, of course, is not true.....here is the statement from the Times article from the details printed on the right hand side of the article. It won't copy and paste so I'll quote: Under the section titled ENFORCEMENT, it says, ""Countries failing to meet targets must reduce emissions an added 1.3 tons for every ton above the target. Japan balked at making these penalties" legally binding" so such discussion was left out of the agreement."" You further said "the liberal NYTimes turned Pres Bush's victory on Kyoto into defeat." Perhaps I'm missing something here but how can losing a vote 178-1 be considered a victory?. How can being isolated and criticized by the rest of the world be considered a victory? If the agreement were a victory for Bush one would think he would have signed it, not so? So, dear Zoltan, you have failed to show the NYTimes bias you claim and you failed to turn a Bush defeat into a victory....