7 words of Russia, which caused an international crisis

At the UN Climate Change Conference, the representative of Russia said only 7 words, but they caused an unprecedented international crisis.

This writes the German edition of Der Spiegel in the article "Warum Russland sein Schweigen bricht". The publication writes that usually Russia at such meetings is silent and does not make statements. Conference participants are already accustomed to this. But not at this time. The crisis was started by the representative of Saudi Arabia, who, instead of the program’s expected approval from the program, only “took it into account”. In the midst of passion and pressure on Saudi Arabia, a representative of Russia suddenly stood up and silence instantly set in the hall. The Russian said only 7 words:

"Just to note it in this case"

And no approval. The position of Russia polarized the views of other states and the United States and Kuwait immediately joined it. All of this made it impossible for the UN to continue its work and sign the final document, which castrated the very idea of ​​"global warming" and "climate change."

a reply to: RussianTroll


Then wouldn't it have been:


Просто отметить в этом случае
Prosto otmetit' v etom sluchaye

So, we should thank Russia that we are not going to pay all those high climate change taxes which are sent to some predominant figures in Europe to blow to bribe scientists with research funding? Where will the rest of the money go, maybe to host expensive conferences with all sorts of extravagant foods and for airfare so their climate elite can fly all over to convince people the tax is good.

Yeah, now the climate people funded a study in Sweden to show that organic farming is way more of a carbon problem than chemical farming. So that way they can tax organic foods and cow farts.

To think the presence of industry does not affect the planet is ultimate stupidity and of course, oil loving Russia and others reaping the profits in one way or another, however when the ultimate bill comes in from mother nature herself, who will pay that I wonder?

originally posted by: rickymouse
So, we should thank Russia that we are not going to pay all those high climate change taxes which are sent to some predominant figures in Europe to blow to bribe scientists with research funding? Where will the rest of the money go, maybe to host expensive conferences with all sorts of extravagant foods and for airfare so their climate elite can fly all over to convince people the tax is good.

Yeah, now the climate people funded a study in Sweden to show that organic farming is way more of a carbon problem than chemical farming. So that way they can tax organic foods and cow farts.

All that study demonstrates is that organic farming takes up more land to grow the same output of crops as chemical based farming. And is thus less efficient.

This is pretty obvious stuff really. And has nothing to do with taxing organic foods more.

only good outcome of an climate conferance is an decrease of 2/3of the human population

its the planet ore humans you have to choise for !

originally posted by: Painterz

originally posted by: rickymouse
So, we should thank Russia that we are not going to pay all those high climate change taxes which are sent to some predominant figures in Europe to blow to bribe scientists with research funding? Where will the rest of the money go, maybe to host expensive conferences with all sorts of extravagant foods and for airfare so their climate elite can fly all over to convince people the tax is good.

Yeah, now the climate people funded a study in Sweden to show that organic farming is way more of a carbon problem than chemical farming. So that way they can tax organic foods and cow farts.

All that study demonstrates is that organic farming takes up more land to grow the same output of crops as chemical based farming. And is thus less efficient.

This is pretty obvious stuff really. And has nothing to do with taxing organic foods more.

phys.org... This article implies intent to punish those who consume by taxes I suppose.

phys.org... Trying to make people think taxing beefeaters is best.

And here is the article I was referencing. Look at the conclusion, they are trying to say even though organic food may be better for the environment, it is worse for climate change. This was done to directly increase evidence that organic food should be taxed in my view. The idea that those who cause polution should be paying more is what fuels the tax on carbon. www.sciencedaily.com...

They do not want anyone excluded from the taxes, in fact multiple levels of taxation.

Don't be blind to the intent of these greedy people, if they were worried about environment they would not target organic foods. Plus, grassfed cows fart less than corn fed cows, but they ignore real evidence and create their own evidence and consensus to wager taxation on everyone.