Wednesday, December 12, 2007

Activia Turns Stool Dark Brown

No Referendum for Europe ... SHAMEFUL



The last European Council in Brussels on 23 June 2007 decided Entrusting an Intergovernmental Conference to work by the end of the year to draft a new EU treaty "simplified", following the rejection by French and Dutch peoples of the Constitutional Treaty.

The President of the French Republic, then his foreign minister, nevertheless explained the outlines of this new "simplified" treaty. It appears that

about the system and the mode of European decisions, social issues, values that constitute the Union and significant action on the readability of the Union.

The new "simplified" treaty will have major consequences and to direct the lives of our citizens and our institutions.

This implies that it is subject to a referendum.

Firstly, under the French Constitution, therefore, that this new Treaty will amend the functioning of our institutions should be subject to popular approval.

Secondly, if the need exists to reconcile completely the European Union and the peoples of Europe, so this Treaty shall also be their case.

The previous Treaty, said Constitutional showed that the parliamentary vote was not the route by which people could identify. And if this new Treaty is a synthesis between the proponents of the "no" and "yes" and said the President of the Republic, then what can he fear from a referendum? The arguments of the Minister of Foreign Affairs according to which ratification by parliament avoid the drawbacks previously found could not be admissible.

Democracy is not negotiable. She can not suffer a sidelining of a lack of ownership by the European peoples of the European construction. The return policy requires that our people be consulted. He defeated the previous treaty. He must speak to this new treaty. It's a double requirement: national and European level.

We therefore solemnly call on the President of the French Republic to submit the new treaty for ratification of our people and to decide how to organize a referendum.

Whether you're for or against this new Treaty, Europe will not be against the people. It will not happen without them. It will necessarily be with them!

Tuesday, December 11, 2007

Wood For A Boat Interior

A patch for the Planet by Danny Stive


Environment. A bonus-malus penalizing polluting vehicles and encouraging the purchase of "clean" cars will be introduced from 1 January.

First effect of the Grenelle Environment: The bonus-malus imposed on vehicles depending on their degree of pollution CO2 - which plays a major role in the greenhouse effect - will be introduced from 1 January 2008. Powerful symbol in the timing: no one expected so soon; symbol weaker in its effect on the environment, bonuses and penalties are balanced and do not emit any room from, for example, transport.

The government has opted for a "purely hortatory." The bonus (200 euros) will be paid at the time of first registration, the purchaser of a car emitting between 121 and 130 g / km of CO2, that is to say at present 30% of sales. It will rise to 700 euros between 101 and 120 g and may reach 1 000 for vehicles emitting less than 100 g. At this premium will be added a "super bonus" of 300 euros when the purchase of "green vehicle accompanied by the scrapping of old vehicles of more than fifteen years."

Conversely, vehicles, heavy emitters of carbon dioxide will apply a penalty of 200 euros for emissions between 161 and 165 g / km (25% of sales). It will rise to 750 euros between 166 and 200 g / km, then 1 600 euros between 201 and 250 g, and finally 2600 euros beyond, which will concern only "the big sedans, or 1% of vehicles new '. No bonus or penalty will apply to vehicles in the neutral zone, whose emissions are between 130 and 160 g, about 45% of acquisitions. Levels will be gradually hardened, 5 g / km of CO2 every two years to encourage manufacturers to continue their efforts in the development of clean vehicles, announced the Department of Ecology.

known sooner that decision, the federation France Nature Environment and Acting for the environment, while acknowledging its importance, regretted that the device returns to a "right to pollute lump" that does not " invest in public transport systems and alternative "and not conducive to a" minimum use of private cars. " The associations noted that "these measures penalize lower income" and that on this subject, all were in the Grenelle agreement "for the establishment of a social component."

Side automotive professionals, we question because the system ignores the second-hand vehicles, the most polluting. While approving the bonus-malus, the French Federation of Automobile Clubs expressed "very cautious", "scalded "By the former road tax" which would "improve the lives of seniors." "We know how that ended. "



Released in the humanity of December 6, 2007

Thursday, December 6, 2007

Sample Seminar Prayers

After Kyoto in fog (article Humanity)

Environment. Nearly two hundred states must negotiate from today, Bali (Indonesia), the follow-up to the Kyoto Protocol, which expires in 2012. Resistance to further efforts are numerous.


leaden sky and horizon blocked on the archipelago Indonesia. Will there thinning on Bali? Not sure. The 190 countries that meet there from now until 14 December to discuss the future climate of the globe, will decide. They have less than two weeks to at least set a new framework for negotiations, with timetable and deadline to boot. Clearly, to give the Kyoto Protocol offspring, or leave orphaned. Storms in sight.

Designed in 1992, drafted in 1997 and ratified in 2005 but lapsed in 2012, the Kyoto Protocol will have barely had time to already exist need to invent a sequel. And possibly very quickly. The UN, conductor of this great rout of Indonesia, were given two years. At that time, the international community must have adopted a new treaty to reduce drastically the emission of greenhouse gas emissions. For now, only 36 industrialized countries must reduce their emissions. Others may stick to policy objectives. As for the poorest, nothing is imposed on them (see box).

At first glance, the context is favorable to proponents of a rapid, effective and collective. Climate change will seldom occupied much space inspired media and political discourse. To believe that everything has been orchestrated to prepare for this decisive week. In February last the cream of climate research found himself in Paris to deliver the first part of the IPCC report, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The same IPCC had inspired the drafting of the Kyoto Protocol, a decade earlier. Confirmation of scientists: the climate is warming rapidly and strong, and man is largely responsible. In early April, the same as exposing the serious social and economic consequences. In May, researchers were exploring ways to mitigate the impact of future climate rushed. "If we continue to do what we do now, we have serious problems," warned one of the leaders of the study. In other words, we must articulate the political, economic and technological faster.

In the aftermath, the British economist Nicholas Stern hustled her world by publishing a report explosive. He said the cost of inaction on climate change is not commensurate with an investment quickly. GDP eroded and fragile economy: its arguments did fly, beyond the usual circles. And now a former Vice-President of the United States, narrowly defeated by George W. Bush in the presidential election of 2000, covers the whole screen. With his documentary An Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore finally pierce the bubble media.

Result: October 12 last, a few weeks before the Bali meeting, the former vice president and research IPCC received the Nobel Prize for peace. The message to the Heads of State and Government meeting on the Indonesian archipelago is clear. They will seize it?

In mid-November, the United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon had paved the way: "We can not afford" to leave Bali without "a real breakthrough towards a comprehensive agreement among nations." More direct, Yvo de oer, executive secretary of the UN climate convention, described the inaction "criminal and irresponsible, poor countries are more exposed and vulnerable than their industrialized counterparts.

Especially as responsibilities become clearer. Last week's report GEO-4, the program of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) explored four models, the more "liberal" than "sustainable" involving the collaboration of governments, civil society and private sector. The first, which builds on the current lead the world toward "abrupt and irreversible". The latter, unsurprisingly, the most mitigate the magnitude of climate change. Alas, the Kyoto Protocol is essentially a liberal economic system (read our interview).

short, the warnings are recurrent. States' responses, they remain more discrete. The United States led by the Bush administration persists in its refusal to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. From there to discuss a ... more binding new treaty, therefore, wait for negotiations with the U.S. government but must fiercely resistant to any economic compulsion, and may be renewed within one year? Should we wait and count on the Democrats, more likely to accept new rules? Or insist on integrating the United States in the process? The strategy is not without risk: too want to hang up the land of Uncle Sam in the context of a global agreement, the international community might be tempted to cut back on its ambitions. It is unlikely that new sanctions are the day.

Shy thinning: the recent election of a Labour prime minister in Australia, who had promised during his campaign to "ratify Kyoto." A new deal that would make the U.S. the last economic giant to escape the obligation to reduce its emissions. Hence the appeal of the foot of the European Commissioner for Environment Stavros Dimas: "I hope the Americans will follow the example of Australians. "It will also

convince developing countries were lukewarm to the idea of curbing their meager growth. Last week a member of the Brazilian government has refused to advance any "numerical target for developing countries". Still, the United States and China, the undisputed champions of emissions of greenhouse gases, will focus the most attention. "Without a commitment from them to Bali to launch negotiations, I do not see how we will be ready on time" has made no secret Yvo de Boer. It will nevertheless

ambition. The IPCC estimates that maintaining the average temperature increase to 2 ° C requires reduction of 80% by 2050 compared to 1990 global emissions. When the Kyoto Protocol proposed to reduce by 5.2% between 1990 and 2012 ... Time (very) mixed in Bali.

Vincent DeFeo

Wednesday, November 28, 2007

Waxing Products Watson

Agreements in Annapolis?

Saturday, November 24, 2007

Snowmobile Wrecking Yards Ontario

Annapolis Conference: a possible future for Palestine? The fight between students

Interview with Palestinian delegate in France before the Annapolis conference in the Journal of Humanity :


Saturday, November 17, 2007

Galvanized Boat Trailer




" I really want to fight this law! Even if I have to face the leftists, fascists who follow me in the evening to the bottom of my home ... "(Morgan, activist UNI Orleans)

What about what this girl said ... Aside from his recklessness, his simplicity and especially its lack of general history and culture that seem to undermine the objectives of the University. Indeed, a history lesson is not without reminding him that there is some significant difference between the left and fascism. In short, this article is for everyone, especially those who doubt the significant hazard that is the law on the freedoms and responsibilities of universities (LRU), commonly called Pécresse law.

Also before entering the heart of the matter, I only remember that students who are on strike against this Act or blocking their University are not horrible leftist, wicked, violent and anti-democratic!




THE DANGER OF WITHDRAWAL OF THE STATE

The will of this Act is to provide, within 5 years, all universities autonomy, allowing them to manage their budgets in particular. Thus, the first problem, of course, the disengagement of the State, State undoubtedly take the opportunity to withdraw in favor of private investment uncontrolled! Our dear Minister, is trying to discredit the current moves by saying all the media that " with an additional EUR 1 billion for the university in the 2008 budget, the state has never made such an effort . However if we take a closer look reveals that everything is a lie from the government. Indeed, it appears that for the most part, it's late payments, tax credits ... In other words, it is indeed a withdrawal of the state in a public service as more essential that Education is!

Another danger inherent in the two Universities speed. We can only note that there are already large disparity between Paris University (Paris 1, 2 etc.) and the Universities of Ontario. Autonomy will amplify this observation, although under the pressure of the first French student organization, autonomy was to be optional, will ultimately and for all ... But this will not help stem the gap is widening. There will probably tend to develop short supply chain and production in small universities lacking medium, while the powerful can do Universities do more easily.
A risk too, that the suppression of certain pipeline in some universities. Thus, non-productive sector, that is to say non-profitable because they can not directly produce wealth are in jeopardy.

Who says autonomy said increased fees . The critic of this view argue that the law states that it will make an inspection to avoid any increase in fees. But as everyone knows, the universities are already calling the "beautiful illegal registration fees! Furthermore, to see in our Voison, like England, where the fees are exorbitant, while forcing students to borrow. But in the Christian tradition which until further notice is ours, opposes this view of Anglo-Saxon is ready for anything. Indeed, It is inconceivable that a student coming out of his studies is already a loan (because of his studies) to repay!


DEMOCRACY IN DANGER

Moreover, this law endangers democracy academic in the sense that it reduces drastically the " powers" of students and contributes very exaggerated the powers of presidents University (right of veto over appointments, distribution of bonuses, etc.). These so real bosses.



SELECTION CONCEALED

The dream of all university presidents, who would like their University Paris-Dauphine to choose the best students, seems to be emerging with the guidance system is active and the possible abuse. Active guidance which undoubtedly will exacerbate social inequalities ...