Thoughts?
Further to this:
Trump's (given) reasons for pulling out are in here. I'm not sure they make much sense, though.
Well, he's wrong there, isn't he?
My guess would be that he doesn't want to sign up in part because many of his supporters are Climate Change deniers and in part because he has investments in fossil fuels.
Another reason I should have mentioned here is :- he wanted out simply because Obama wanted in.
He is dangerously deluded. I dread to think of the repercussions of what he decided today. At least US will not be held in such high regard now! Syria also didn't sign up...ironic, huh!?
Trump has now alienated himself from much of America with this bad decision and they are becoming proactive!
He is dangerously deluded. I dread to think of the repercussions of what he decided today. At least US will not be held in such high regard now! Syria also didn't sign up...ironic, huh!?
Nicaragua didn't sign either. They said Paris didn't go far enough and they would be putting their own targets in place.
Trump has now alienated himself from much of America with this bad decision and they are becoming proactive!
I read this. Between this and the EU is pulling together more now, as well.
On another forum, there's a breaking fake news thread. I had some fun composing this post there:-
TRUMP WANTS TO MAKE THE PLANET GREAT AGAIN!
He was found last night crying in a corner, weeping about his sudden, swift decline in popularity, muttering something about China taking his crown!
After a brief hospitalised night in a rubber room, in a straight jacket, he emerged humbled - almost unrecognisable and asking if he could sign up to the climate change agreement. His wife patted him on the head and gave him a dummy to pacify him. The world heaved a sigh of relief!
Thoughts?
I wouldn't trust The Guardian to give an honest account of anything. They present a pious, holier than thou image and although they talk about many important issues I absolutely despise their divisive agenda and identity politics. They are constantly race baiting, all done under this nonsensical, so called 'progressive' guise of standing up for marginalized groups who in fact are treated very well in our society. I don't deny the challenges facing the environment but I would not trust The Guardian to inform me on the issue in an honest way.
I wouldn't trust The Guardian to give an honest account of anything. They present a pious, holier than thou image and although they talk about many important issues I absolutely despise their divisive agenda and identity politics. They are constantly race baiting, all done under this nonsensical, so called 'progressive' guise of standing up for marginalized groups who in fact are treated very well in our society. I don't deny the challenges facing the environment but I would not trust The Guardian to inform me on the issue in an honest way.
Let me guess....do you favour the Daily Wail?
I wouldn't trust The Guardian to give an honest account of anything. They present a pious, holier than thou image and although they talk about many important issues I absolutely despise their divisive agenda and identity politics. They are constantly race baiting, all done under this nonsensical, so called 'progressive' guise of standing up for marginalized groups who in fact are treated very well in our society. I don't deny the challenges facing the environment but I would not trust The Guardian to inform me on the issue in an honest way.
What is it that you disagree with in the article? Or is it simply that you dislike The Guardian? Why do you think that Clive Hamilton specifically is lying? Because, if you know The Guardian at all, you know that - apart from the news pages - each contributor has his or own viewpoint.
Which marginalized groups?