Near- blizzard conditions from parts of the Mid-South into the Ohio Valley and Lower Great Lakes. February 1 – 4, 2009 time frame. Just thought I would give a bit of advance warning.

    localhost:9753   1/29  1:53:42am
  1.3             Display:     Temp/0/0          Power: AC  Battery: ok
             ---------- Outdoor -----------  ----------- Indoor -----------
Temperature: 24.4 F Hi 90.5 F  8/ 6  7:17am  68.2 F Hi 78.4 F  9/14  2:52am
                    Lo-39.1 F  1/14  9:12pm         Lo 47.5 F 12/29  1:06am
   Humidity:   64 % Hi   97*% 12/27 10:26pm    26 % Hi   71 %  8/29  5:48am
                    Lo   25 %  8/ 4  7:34am         Lo   23 %  1/26  2:12am
  Dew Point:   32*F Hi   70 F  9/13 10:41pm    32 F Hi   63 F  9/14  3:05am
                    Lo   32*F  1/29  1:53am         Lo   32*F  1/29 12:45am
Wind Gust:160SSE@  0.0 mph    Wind Gust Hi:035NE @  4.0 mph    9/21  4:32am
      Avg:159SSE@  0.0 mph      Wind Chill:  25 F   Lo: -40 F  1/14  9:12pm
Rain Rate: 0.00 in/h  Yesterday: 0.00 in Total:20.67 in since  1/ 1 12:00am
Barometer: Falling at 28.85 in  29.68 in  sea; 12-24hr forecast: Cloudy

The Last of the article on Global Warming.  Kind of makes a fellow think.

GLOBAL RAID ON AMERICAN WEALTH

But perhaps you still are not convinced. Maybe you still cling to the idea that such drastic action is necessary – that our president and the UN delegates are really in a panic over global warming and are trying to find a solution.

Then ask yourselves why the treaty will only bind developed nations to its draconian emission levels.

You see, only developed industrial nations will be bound by the treaty.

Undeveloped Third-World nations will be free to produce whatever they want. These will include China, India, Brazil and Mexico. And guess what? 82% of the projected emissions growth in coming years is from these countries.

Now ask yourself, if the Climate Change Protocol is all about protecting the environment – then how come it doesn’t cover everybody? The truth, of course, is that the treaty is really about redistribution of the wealth.

The wealth of the United States is and has always been the target. The new scheme to grab the loot is through environmental scare tactics.

If, today, you were to attend a UN session on the Climate Change Protocol you would find yourself in a discussion with excited delegates from Third-World countries. They would make comments to you like, “when the technology transfer takes place my country will begin producing this or that item.”

Translation – when the United States is stupid enough to fall for this scheme, the third world will take up the slack and get rich.

And international corporations, who owe allegiance to no nation, will bolt America and move their factories, lock, stock and computer chip, to those Third-World countries where they will be free to carry on production.

But that means the same emissions will be coming out of the jungles of South America instead of Chicago.

So where is the protection of the environment? You see it’s not about that – is it?

Still not convinced? One more thing. Hidden in the small print of the treaty is a provision that calls for the “harmonizing of patent laws.”

Now, robbing a nation of its patent protection is an interesting tactic for protecting the environment, don’t you think?

CAN IT BE STOPPED?

Bill Clinton, pushed by Al Gore and the massive green lobby, is determined to sign that treaty. The war has been engaged.

Industry is finally beginning to wake up to the terrifying threat of the green monster that it helped to create. For the past three decades industry has given into every outrageous green demand. And it has fueled the monster by filling green coffers with massive tax-deductible donations. Now industry finds itself trapped.

But more frightening is the fact that many prominent proponents of property rights and limited government still fail to see the danger in the treaty. Many say the Senate will never ratify such a treaty.

They point out that, in a vote of 95-0, the U.S. Senate rejected in a “non-binding” resolution the Climate Change Protocol. That overwhelming vote, they say, will stop Clinton in his tracks.

That resolution was presented by Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia. He, along with Congressman John Dingle of Michigan have led the opposition against the treaty. Republican leadership, so far, has been silent.

It is, of course, commendable that Senator Byrd and Congressman Dingle have taken the lead to do “something” to protect American interests. But both of them are established liberal Democrats, who have based their opposition solely on the fact that only industrial nations are tied to the treaty.

That’s not fair, they say, and so they oppose the treaty – “as now written.” Apparently they are taking the stand that if America must be enslaved, then it’s only fair that the rest of the world share our misery.

Not once have they said the whole concept is wrong. Not once have they challenged the validity of the science that is based on the supposed fact of global warming.

Is this then the wall of defense that we are to hide behind? Are we now to entrust the very future of our Republic onto the shoulders of Senator Byrd and Congressman Dingle? That appears to be the current wisdom of our leaders on Capitol Hill.

Wary Americans, of course, know what will happen next. The story is all too familiar. Very soon Clinton will summon Byrd and Dingle to the White House and offer them a compromise. Then everyone will smile for the cameras and the Republicans, in the spirit of bipartisanship, will give away the store. In fact, that process has already begun.

So Bill Clinton is moving full-speed-ahead with his plan to travel to Kyoto, Japan this December to sign the Climate Change Protocol. When he does, and after the Senate has ratified it, the final blow will have been struck.

The United States of America will begin a long, agonizing decent – strangled by its own hand.

The question now is; can it be stopped? And more importantly, will we even try.$ e target. The new scheme to grab the loot is through environmental scare tactics.