Alberta fumes over Chretien's promise to ratify Kyoto

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Asher
Why do I need a degree in journalism to see that they split up the issue into a bunch of different articles on the same page? Tingkai sees one posted online and goes off on a tangent about how badly written it is since it doesn't talk about Chretien's reaction, when that was in another article.

Oh yes, the mysterious other news story. We know it exists because Asher would never lie about this. However, Asher doesn't want to post it because... Well I'm sure there is a good reason why he hasn't posted it, even though this seems quite out of character.

And of course if you go to the Calgary Herald website, you'll find the other article. What? You can't find it. How odd. The only story posted is that bit of government drivel (see the section under "Front Page")
http://www.canada.com/calgary/calgaryherald/

Now I'm sure we're all going to enjoy how Asher will attempt to prove that the Calgary Herald website provides a balanced and fair coverage of this particular news story. Where are the counterview points Asher?

Originally posted by Asher
In this case I also know far more about how the Calgary Herald structures its newspaper than Tingkai

Ah yes, since you're such an expert, you will know that the Calgary Herald staff went on strike three years ago because their articles were changed, without their consent, to provide favourable coverage of business and the government.

Simply put, the article posted by Asher was completely biased and a great example of how not to write a news story.

It demonstrates why the Calgary Herald is considered one of the worst newspapers in Canada. Luckily for Albertans, they have access to one of the best Canadian newspapers: the Edmonton Journal (although with Canwest running it, that may soon change).

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Asher
Social science degrees are a joke.

They're for people who are afraid of failure in the real degrees, for people who have failed out of the real degrees, or for pinky commies (who are, in fact, communist because they know they don't have job skills for a decent job! ).

Yup, all them economists are commies.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Tingkai
Oh yes, the mysterious other news story. We know it exists because Asher would never lie about this. However, Asher doesn't want to post it because... Well I'm sure there is a good reason why he hasn't posted it, even though this seems quite out of character.

And of course if you go to the Calgary Herald website, you'll find the other article. What? You can't find it. How odd. The only story posted is that bit of government drivel (see the section under "Front Page")
http://www.canada.com/calgary/calgaryherald/

Now I'm sure we're all going to enjoy how Asher will attempt to prove that the Calgary Herald website provides a balanced and fair coverage of this particular news story. Where are the counterview points Asher?

You still don't seem to understand that Canada.com is not the Calgary Herald Homepage. Canada.com staff seemingly arbitrarily select "local" news from the papers and put them on the site. The Alberta article was a "local" one, included on the same page was the Sierra Club's response and Chretien's committment to Kyoto (which happened to be Canadian Press articles, which is why they don't show up under the Calgary Herald banner).

I'm sorry if you don't believe me, but you've been basing this all off of assumptions and you don't seem to realize it. I'm still amazed you think the entire newspaper is published online, one quick look at the "website" and a dozen articles and most people with some common sense would clue in not every article is published online.

Ah yes, since you're such an expert, you will know that the Calgary Herald staff went on strike three years ago because their articles were changed, without their consent, to provide favourable coverage of business and the government.

Wanna post a link to it?
At least here when they were picketing their beef was with the Herald cutting local stories by up to 45% (and thereby local jobs)...

It demonstrates why the Calgary Herald is considered one of the worst newspapers in Canada. Luckily for Albertans, they have access to one of the best Canadian newspapers: the Edmonton Journal (although with Canwest running it, that may soon change).

I really like how you've changed your argument over the past 20 posts or so. First it was Albertans only get one side of the story, government propaganda, and now it's focusing on trashing a newspaper.

Are you really hoping no one else notices your attempts to change the topic every time you prove yourself wrong?

[blackice]

Journalists at The Calgary Herald have been on strike since early November in an attempt to gain their first collective agreement. But this strike is also a rebellion of sorts. A rebellion against what the journalists see as heavy handed attempts by management to make news stories more palatable to powerful political and business interests.

http://www.ualberta.ca/~parkland/Pos...integrity.html

Wanna post a link to it?

Digging a hole by Asher

[Asher]

Originally posted by blackice
Digging a hole by Asher

By asking for a link I'm digging a hole?

What's kinda funny is that, as I've stated before, the management now is CanWest Global, which is headed up by a butt-buddy of Chretien, so I'm not sure what the point is for all of this.

[blackice]

quote:Taki

Ah yes, since you're such an expert, you will know that the Calgary Herald staff went on strike three years ago because their articles were changed, without their consent, to provide favourable coverage of business and the government.

Quote Asher:

Wanna post a link to it?
At least here when they were picketing their beef was with the Herald cutting local stories by up to 45% (and thereby local jobs)...

Quote Blackice:

Journalists at The Calgary Herald have been on strike since early November in an attempt to gain their first collective agreement. But this strike is also a rebellion of sorts. A rebellion against what the journalists see as heavy handed attempts by management to make news stories more palatable to powerful political and business interests.

Link by Blackice to this report:

http://www.ualberta.ca/~parkland/Pos...integrity.html


Wow! you ok there Asher?

You asked for a link to show what taki said. I not only provided it but included a segment for your quick read.

Taki is right most people in Alberta or related to the media know he was right. Now you post that?

Hey why not go out tonight for a pint and relax?

Cheers

[Asher]

Originally posted by blackice
Link by Blackice to this report:

http://www.ualberta.ca/~parkland/Pos...integrity.html


Wow! you ok there Asher?

You asked for a link to show what taki said. I not only provided it but included a segment for your quick read.

Taki is right most people in Alberta or related to the media know he was right. Now you post that?

Hey why not go out tonight for a pint and relax?

Cheers

I don't know how many pints you've had, but I haven't heard the story about how the management was forcing them to do this or that, probably because the whole time they were picketing they were chanting about wanting a pay raise and chanting against the limited local stories they were doing at the time. That's why I asked for a link, and then was provided one, I just don't know why you're on the offensive for that one.

But I'm all ears to see how this is at all relevant to the Kyoto article, since it was published under management sympathetic to Chretien's Liberals rather than Conrad Black.

Any takers for that one?

This is all a little sideline argument started by Tingkai to draw attention away from his assumptions he made earlier thinking this was the only article that was published for us to read. What's more is he has since made even more assumptions that Canada.com is actually the real Calgary Herald homepage, when it's just CanWest Global selecting some "local" stories published by the paper and putting them online. Emphasis on some. Then he somehow manages to bring up his qualifications as a journalist, as of this revelation somehow changes the fact that he doesn't know what he's talking about and he's basing it all off assumptions. And then he somehow brings up a 3 year old contract dispute that the Herald journalists had with its old management, and somehow we're supposed to believe that's also relevant?

Tingkai's probably used to playing these games with people, but I'm not going to.

[blackice]

Your apology accepted you were wrong, takes a man to admit that so in a few years get ready to do it. For now you have a grace period.

[blackice]

Now feed on this:

Highlights of Federal Government Spending and Regulation Related to Energy Investments

37. One of the federal government's objectives in promoting improvements in energy efficiency was to help stabilize greenhouse gas emissions at 1990 levels by the year 2000, commonly referred to as Canada's stabilization goal. Promoting greater energy efficiency in all sectors of the economy was a key element of Canada's 1995 National Action Program on Climate Change. Under the Program, federal, provincial and territorial ministers of energy and the environment agreed to work together to achieve Canada's stabilization goal. We examined results of this effort and presented our findings in our May 1998 Report, Chapter 3, Responding to Climate Change - Time to Rethink Canada's Implementation Strategy.

38. In April 1998, NRCan established the Office of Energy Efficiency (OEE). The OEE originated out of Canada's commitment to reduce emissions of certain greenhouse gases to six percent below 1990 levels by 2008-2012. Canada made this commitment when it agreed to the Kyoto Protocol in December 1997.

Government Policy on GHG Emissions

At the Kyoto Summit in December of 1997, Canada's federal government agreed that Canada would reduce its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 6% from 1990 levels by the year 2010. If implemented, this commitment will most certainly impact the $19.1 billion of planned investment in Alberta's oil sands. However, at this time the extent is not known as it is highly dependent on the combination of techniques used to meet the targeted reductions in GHG's. Use of internationally tradable emission permits and of joint implementation projects with developing ountries offer the greatest potential for meeting the targets for reducing global GHG's while minimizing the disruption to the economies of energy producing countries like Canada.

This shows not only did the Alberta government understand the need for GHG's reduction but it also projected it as a fact now. They had agreed to the same thing as koyoto only 5 years before.

All facts point to one basic reality. Not only did Klein know but he did nothing. Hansards has more. Klein is lying to you and the rest of Canada. While I do not think Cretien is a saint Klein is a master of turd too.

3. The National Oil Policy, introduced in 1961, established a protected market for Canadian crude oil producers at prices that were linked to international prices. Consumers west of the Ottawa Valley bought domestically produced oil; those east of it bought imported oil.

4. The days of the National Oil Policy ended in September 1973 when the federal government announced the extension of the interprovincial oil pipeline to Montreal (completed in 1976), froze prices of domestic crude and certain oil products, and sought to control export prices. The federal government announced this change in policy so
that supply problems in the United States would not automatically raise prices for Canadian consumers.

This report and all others shows that for 12 years Alberta's oil industry was protected at world prices by the feds and all provinces west of the Ottawa valley had to buy Alberta oil. All the Nep was to do was to stablize the Canadian economy. But nooooo let the eastern bastards freeze in the dark we heard....After 12 years of support and investment and tax breaks. 90 billion dollars that is a joke... Your own government says 21.2 billion. That went to offset the east coast because they had to buy at world prices simply because there was no way to get the oil to them cheap enough from the west. Alberta and the tar sands went on...

I do not know who tells people of Alberta some of the crap I read here but it is wrong.

Natural Resources Canada
The Green Plan reported Canada's commitment to stabilize greenhouse gas emissions at 1990 levels by the year 2000, commonly referred to as Canada's stabilization goal.Efficiency and Alternative Energy (EAE) Program

10.18 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. In 1992, Canada signed and ratified the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, in which Canada reconfirmed its prior commitment by agreeing to aim to stabilize its greenhouse gas emissions at 1990 levels by the year 2000. In response to this international commitment, federal, provincial and territorial ministers of energy and the environment approved Canada's National Action Program on Climate Change (NAPCC) in February 1995. The NAPCC sets out the strategic directions Canada will follow, a key element of which is promoting greater energy efficiency in all sectors of the economy.

Obviously Canada and the provinces committed to the early days of Koyoto. Obviously then we agreed at that time to do what Klein now is whinning about. So Klein wtf do you mean their has been no meetings, wtf do you mean this comes as a surprise.

What a joke. Canada and the provinces have been involved with this for years. The provinces all agreed to do what Koyoto asks and was implimented years ago. So we pi$$ed away 5 years and now they whine.

10.19 The Voluntary Challenge and Registry Program. One of the initiatives originally envisaged under the 1991 EAE Program was the Energy Efficiency Challenge initiative. The Climate Change Voluntary Challenge and Registry (VCR) Program, launched in early 1995 by federal, provincial and territorial energy and environment ministers, builds upon this proposed initiative as well as on federal-provincial and multi-stakeholder consultation relating to climate change. The federal government considers the VCR Program to be another key element of Canada's National Action Program on Climate Change, as do the provinces.

10.20 The Minister of Natural Resources, acting as the champion of the VCR Program, has issued a challenge to Canadian companies and organizations, including all levels of government, to develop action plans to voluntarily limit or reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. A registry currently maintained by NRCan records commitments, plans and progress.

10.21 A common goal of NRCan's energy efficiency initiatives and the VCR Program is to limit greenhouse gas emissions. Within the action plans developed for the VCR Program, the participants can use NRCan's energy efficiency initiatives and provincial and company-specific programs to reduce their energy use and their emissions of greenhouse gases. For example, the VCR Program provides opportunities for participants to apply NRCan's Industrial Energy Efficiency Initiative and the Energy Innovators Initiative as part of their involvement in the VCR Program. The federal government's own action plan, submitted to the VCR Program in November 1995 and updated in November 1996, includes the use of two of NRCan's energy efficiency initiatives: the Federal Buildings Initiative and the Fleet Energy Program (FleetWise).

The bottom line is the savvy Cretien is going to wait till Klein acts more the baffoon, the CA looks like the idiots they are then he will strike. Taking out both in one fell swoop assuring a liberal landslide in the next election. We have the west to thank for that this time...
Thanks.

This is no surprise at all none what so ever...The agreement the provinces and Canada came to is exactly what they already agreed to except the time frame under Koyoto has provided 10 more years to do it....Surprise! Klein is a flake just like the rest of them.

[blackice]

So not only have the provincial governments been involved in these talks from the onset. It has been going on for several years. Not only is Koyoto the same as the Canadian made agreement but all provices again agreed to it.

Eat it up Asher Klein is nooooo different than Cretien.

[Asher]

I am so totally and completely confused by what you're doing. You're showing that Canada, or more specifically Alberta, has sought its own initiatives to reduce pollution without Kyoto.

You somehow draw some conclusions that Klein is no different than Chretien (just how much did you have to drink?), and go on to talk about how the province has been involved in these talks from the onset.

What happened five years ago is pointless, what we're dealing with is what's happening now.

Kyoto is a flawed treaty that doesn't give Canada clean energy export credits, that allows countries to buy and sell credits, and that is supported only by countries that don't produce oil in any kind of scale. Does that really seem like it'll be a successful treaty in any sense of the word?

The EU is now pissed at Canada because Canada won't sign Kyoto unless we get our own clean gas exports -- and Alberta is fine with this. Klein and the Alberta environment minister has said all along that if we get natural gas export credit we wouldn't have a problem with the deal. The problem is the other Kyoto countries won't let us get credit for it, because they'd rather we buy credits from them later.

I'm not sure you even know what you're arguing about, blackice, because it's completely nonsensical. Perhaps it makes perfect sense to you, but to everyone else reading we're scratching our heads wondering why you're citing these sources and proving Alberta is up to reducing pollution without Kyoto.

It's like you're aimless.

[blackice]

Back to thick as a brick later.

[Asher]

blackice, words cannot describe just how stupid you are.

If you're going to keep posting, perhaps you should read my posts because it seems you have the completely wrong idea for what my position is. You should also actually clarify what it is you're trying to say, rather than randomly copy and paste stuff without citing the source or even explaining the relevance. Afterwards you make some kind of conclusion in poor english which doesn't even seem to be related to the stuff you copy/pasted from elsewhere.

Then when someone asks for you to clarify it you just call them thick as a brick.

[blackice]

Now now do not get testy little boy you have read nothing so far.
You do not want to either obviously, you are stuck on this "we have been wronged again" tripe and no one will displace it.

The information is there Your mission, should you decide to accept it is to read... Mission Impossible.

[Asher]

Arrrrgggggh...

Forget it, blackice. Give up on me, I'm a stupid stupid little boy with no hope. Now go away so people who have the capability to write sentences can play.

[blackice]

my how bitter and displaced you get when you are wrong and or simply do not understand a simple concept.

As I said before Asher just say I do not know and learn something.
It is far less stressful then I know it all and then try to bs your way through it. Look at the way you are now...
I suppose a beer with friends was not such a bad idea after all hum?

You'll learn some day.

[Asher]

Originally posted by blackice
my how bitter and displaced you get when you are wrong and or simply do not understand a simple concept.

As I said before Asher just say I do not know and learn something.
It is far less stressful then I know it all and then try to bs your way through it. Look at the way you are now...
I suppose a beer with friends was not such a bad idea after all hum?

You'll learn some day.

I have no idea what you're talking about, I have no idea why you're citing what you're citing, I have no idea why you're telling me these things as if to counter my argument because they certainly don't, and I have no idea why you refuse to explain them when asked.

I've told you many times now that I simply don't understand your argument or why you're saying what you're saying, and instead of actually clarifying it you're just call me thick and tell me to read it.

I'll be blunt, blackice, you have no clue how to express yourself. You need to work on it. Start by explaining in more detail WHY you're quoting stuff, WHERE they come from, and WHAT relevance they have.

Is that good? Or do you prefer to sit there and use the smilies and tell me to read more?

I'm not bitter, I'm frustrated. And beer sucks.

[blackice]

Thick as a brick, I guess the point is exactly that you have no clue. Quit pretending to know everything, you don't that is clear.

Now if you chose to read the information to get a clue great. If not at least move aside and let people who chose to be informed converse. Simple really.

[Asher]

Originally posted by blackice
Thick as a brick, I guess the point is exactly that you have no clue. Quit pretending to know everything, you don't that is clear.

Now if you chose to read the information to get a clue great. If not at least move aside and let people who chose to be informed converse. Simple really.

That is just great, you still refuse to clarify.

You tell me to read. I read it, I ask you what the point is and where you get it from, you call me thick. I ask again, you call me thick. And you do it again just for good measure.

I don't know everything, blackice, and I'd love for you to find somewhere where I said I did. I find it particularly amusing because I'm telling you I don't know why you're doing this stuff, and you've said in a couple posts in a row now about how I say I know everything.

If anything you're the one that acts like he knows everything. You act so condescending with everything you do, copying and pasting stuff randomly without any relevance then calling people thick when they don't understand it. It's poor form, it's offensive, and it's childish, and most of all it's stupid.

[Asher]

I'm done with this thread. Tingkai has shown he resorts to threadjacking and ignoring people's comments to get through a debate and blackice tries to set up smoke and mirrors to win his.

I don't have the energy to put up with it for tonight, and I'm definitely not in the mood.

Tingkai and blackice can now use the thread to circlejerk their egos about saving the planet, since that's all they're willing to see anyway.

[blackice]

My my you do lose bad

One day you too will see the grand illusion do not say you were not warned...

[DRoseDARs]

Gaa! Too much to read through just to find any prior mention of this:

Gee...maybe Alberta should petition the United States government to become the 51st State. Or would that be 52nd after Puerto Rico...?

[Tingkai]

Asher, either you still don't get it, or you refuse to admit that you're wrong.

You posted an article and I criticized the article for being one-sided and an example of poor journalism.

In response, you claim that I don't know anything about journalism and you try to defend the article saying that it is normal to print one-sided propaganda. (I would agree that this is probably true for the Herald. )

You then claim that there were other articles that provided the opposing viewpoints, but you have yet to post these mysterious articles.

Besides which, the article you posted appeared on the Calgary Herald website under the heading Front Page, and five will get you ten that this means the article was on the front page of the Herald. The article appeared on the website by itself so where is the balance that you claim exists.

What you don't realize, or refuse to accept, is that every news story is supposed to be balanced. Claiming that other news stories provide the balance doesn't wash. Any news article that only provides one side of the story is biased and an example of either lazy journalism or incompetent journalism.

You then claim that I have made assumptions about the bias in that article when in fact my comments are based on that article. In other words, my comments are based on facts not assumptions.

But I suppose I don't have the right to comment on this Herald article because I haven't read the Herald's sports coverage.

What's really funny is that you accuse me of being obsessed with this issue and threadjacking when you're the one who continues to talk about the Herald.

You now claim that I have slammed the entire Alberta media, and then changed to slamming only the Herald. That is a complete lie. I have only slammed the Herald, (although the Sun chain could easily be criticized). I have never, ever claimed that the Edmonton Journal was a propaganda mouthpeice for the Albertan government, nor would I because the Journal is a respected newspaper, unlike the Herald.

You continue to dig yourself further into the ground by claiming that the Calgary Herald does not have a homepage, even though I posted a link to the Herald homepage.

As for complaints about the Herald management, you are correct that the strike occurred during the Black regime, but if you paid attention to the news you would know that things have gotten worse under the Canwest regime.

And even though you claim you're "done with this thread" we all know that you'll be back.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by DRoseDARs
Gaa! Too much to read through just to find any prior mention of this:

Gee...maybe Alberta should petition the United States government to become the 51st State. Or would that be 52nd after Puerto Rico...?

Actually, the plan is to turn the US into the Province of Southern Alberta.

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by Tingkai


Actually, the plan is to turn the US into the Province of Southern Alberta.

That would go along very well with the Nevada state initiative to legalize posseccion (sp?) and use of a small amount of "Mary-Joe-Wanna-Toke?" and the push up north to legalize in Canada.

Vote YES on question number...uh...hmm...dang, I'm hungry...

(A medicinal version passed in 2000, don't know if that's the same initiative...I do know that Nevada law requires initiatives to pass twice to become law)

(Vote NO NO NO on Question#2 Defence of Marriage (DoM pronounced: "dum")

No, not trying to threadjack, so if you want to respond to something in THIS post, start a new thread. Comprende?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Tingkai
In response, you claim that I don't know anything about journalism

Not once did I say anything of the sort, in fact I knew you had a journalism degree. I said you didn't know anything about how that issue of the Calgary Herald was structured. There is a difference, I hope you can see it...

and you try to defend the article saying that it is normal to print one-sided propaganda. (I would agree that this is probably true for the Herald. )

It is normal for an article about something to address one side, then have it be accompanied by several other articles on the same page. Usually this page is titled something like "Kyoto". You prefer that every specific article balances both sides of the issue as a comparitive piece, and most of the time that's what should happen. Sometimes the paper does a whole page layout about the issue with "one sided" articles, each from a different perspective. That's what you don't know about, since you don't get the paper, and that's why you shouldn't be assuming things.

You then claim that there were other articles that provided the opposing viewpoints, but you have yet to post these mysterious articles.

They're Canadian Press articles. Surely you've seen them before?

Besides which, the article you posted appeared on the Calgary Herald website under the heading Front Page, and five will get you ten that this means the article was on the front page of the Herald. The article appeared on the website by itself so where is the balance that you claim exists.

You still don't understand.
Canada.com is not the Calgary Herald website. It's CanWest Global selecting a dozen stories from the entirity of the paper and putting them online. The entire paper isn't online, only a very small minority of it is, and it's selected by Canada.com, not the Calgary Herald.

You still don't understand that, apparently.

But I suppose I don't have the right to comment on this Herald article because I haven't read the Herald's sports coverage.

No, you do have a right to comment on it, it just makes you look like an idiot when you don't even know it. You still don't understand the concept of groups of article tackling an issue from a different perspective on the same page.

What's really funny is that you accuse me of being obsessed with this issue and threadjacking when you're the one who continues to talk about the Herald.

What are you doing right now?

You now claim that I have slammed the entire Alberta media, and then changed to slamming only the Herald. That is a complete lie.

So why did you say you see why I have the opinions that I did, because that's all that's printed out here?

As for complaints about the Herald management, you are correct that the strike occurred during the Black regime, but if you paid attention to the news you would know that things have gotten worse under the Canwest regime.

And CanWest is a Chretien sympathizer...what is your point?

And even though you claim you're "done with this thread" we all know that you'll be back.

You know it, I can't stand you spreading misinformation.

Face it, Tingkai: Canada.com is not the Calgary Herald, it doesn't have the same layout and is staffed by Canada.com employees, not the Calgary Herald. You are assuming things when you blast an article for being one sided. Deal with it.

[Asher]

yay, Tingkai, there's more horribly biased news from the Herald

http://www.canada.com/calgary/calgar...-2ADFAAA3C73A}

Credit demand threatens Kyoto

Herald News Services

The future of the Kyoto accord was thrown into chaos Thursday after Natural Resources Minister Herb Dhaliwal confirmed Canada has no intention of meeting the conditions of the treaty on greenhouse gases.

The government's position flabbergasted other signatories to the 1997 accord, appalled environmentalists, puzzled opponents and left some Liberals scratching their heads.

Dhaliwal was backed up by Prime Minister Jean Chretien, who said Canada should ratify now and worry about implementation later.

"We have a goal, it's to ratify Kyoto and the goal is 2012," Chretien said following a cabinet meeting. "So we have the time to manoeuvre in a solution that will permit Canada to meet its international obligations."

The manoeuvring has already begun.

Dhaliwal said an implementation plan would be presented at a joint federal-provincial energy and environment ministers meeting in Halifax on Oct. 21.

That plan, he said, will start from the premise that Canada's emission reduction targets for 2012 are now almost 30 per cent less onerous than those laid out in the accord Canada signed.

That's because Canada wants credit for its sale of relatively clean natural gas to the United States, a demand that has been explicitly and repeatedly rejected in negotiations with the other Kyoto signatories.

"Canada will include clean energy exports in our obligations under Kyoto," Dhaliwal said. "Our program will be based on (reducing annual emissions by) 170 megatonnes, not 240."

However, a spokesman for the European Union delegation in Canada said Thursday the accord "is not open for renegotiation."

Roy Christiensen said Canada's position will fail as a negotiating ploy and threatens to undermine the protocol.

"Either you're ratifying the accord or you're not. . . . If Canada does this, others may follow Canada's lead and then we no longer have one international agreement."

But Dhaliwal was intransigent about the clean energy credits.

"They can say no, but we've put it on the table and it will continue to stay there," he said.

The contradiction left many questioning whether Canada has any semblance of a plan for implementation or even any expectation the accord will ever be brought into force.

"The only conclusion I can come to . . . is they're convinced Kyoto will never be implemented, that they'll never get the 50 per cent of countries (representing) 50 per cent of emissions, so it will never come into effect," said Dave Chatters, the Canadian Alliance natural resources critic.

"We're going to ratify it but we have no intention of meeting our commitments? That doesn't give you a lot of credibility in the eyes of the world, does it?"

Chretien surprised observers on Monday when he unexpectedly announced in Johannesburg that Canada would ratify the accord by the end of this year. He made no mention of clean energy credits.

The prime minister compared implementing Kyoto with slaying the federal deficit. The Liberals couldn't say in 1993 exactly how they would reverse the $40-billion budget shortfall, only that it would happen.

"We didn't have a precise plan," Chretien said Thursday. "The government took a series of decisions. This is exactly the same thing."

Premier Ralph Klein says he sees some hope in Ottawa's demand for credits, but said far more information is needed before Alberta softens its opposition to Kyoto.

Klein said the federal government's position on the accord has degenerated into a ball of confusion, but standing firm on the credit demand could be a tiny step toward bringing national consensus on a strategy to combat global warming.

"Maybe it's a starting point, but I'd like to know exactly what it is they would like to achieve, and how. And what these environmental credits are all about," said Klein.

The kyoto accord gives Canada until 2012 to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to six per cent below 1990 levels, a real-term reduction of 240 megatonnes.

Alberta has crafted an alternative plan, setting similar targets, but doubling the timeline to meeting them.

Klein acknowledged Chretien could conceivably use the credits demand as a way to bow out of Kyoto, but said the whole matter has become impossibly murky.

"I guess he could, but again, I don't know what it is he's talking about," said Klein.

"I'm not saying the Alberta plan is the end-all and the be-all. I'm saying the federal government should consider all plans and all options, and there should be full consultation with industry, with environmental groups, with scientific groups, that they examine in detail the kinds of technology being developed to achieve cleaner burning coal, to obtain emissions efficiencies relative to the development of fossil fuels."

Meanwhile, former premier Peter Lougheed said the wording of Chretien's demands over credits will be key to whether it qualifies as an exit strategy for Ottawa.

Lougheed said asking for credits is one thing; it's quite another to hold a hard line if the answer is no.

"I call it condition-precedent," said Lougheed. "The Canadian government says we will not ratify Kyoto unless you at least let us count our natural gas exports.

"But then you have the other element. If they make it a condition-precedent, and the Europeans say, 'No way,' then they have an out. The question is whether the prime minister will take that out."

Even with the reduced targets, Lougheed said Canada shouldn't touch Kyoto. And he said no global warming strategy should be adopted -- including the made-in-Alberta strategy -- until a clearer scientific picture has emerged on potential economic and other costs.

"It's my opinion the science is clearly mixed. I think the most important thing is to find a mechanism where the science can be assessed more closely."

© Copyright 2002 Calgary Herald

[Asher]

And with that, let the misinformation begin.
This time I'm seriously gonna stop posting in here. I realize Tingkai and blackice will post followups with more misinformation to try to lure me back, but I can't be arsed anymore.

Think what you like, say what you will, Kyoto isn't the only way to reduce emissions, and there are other alternatives to it. Personally, I honestly don't care anymore because by the time it does get implemented in Canada, I won't be here.

[blackice]

Silly wabit tricks are for hookers, lets do some fishing.

Misinformation heh that's the governments for you
Can't get a straight arrow out of the lot.
On the other hand makes for some good typing practice.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Asher
It is normal for an article about something to address one side, then have it be accompanied by several other articles on the same page. Blah, blah blah... (Asher repeats his previous misconceptions of the news and once again tries to prove that he is the media expert, but just digs himself deeper into the ground.)

Asher, try to understand something simple. There is no such thing in the news business as a "comparitive piece." Every news story should be balanced and fair.

This story was on the front page, right. So your crazy theory about other articles providing balance doesn't hold water.

Why don't you just admit the fact that you're full of it on this one.

Originally posted by Asher
You still don't understand.
Canada.com is not the Calgary Herald website. It's CanWest Global selecting a dozen stories from the entirity of the paper and putting them online. The entire paper isn't online, only a very small minority of it is, and it's selected by Canada.com, not the Calgary Herald.
[AND AGAIN]
Face it, Tingkai: Canada.com is not the Calgary Herald, it doesn't have the same layout and is staffed by Canada.com employees, not the Calgary Herald. You are assuming things when you blast an article for being one sided.

Absolutely unbelievable. You're actually trying to defend your this rubbish.

The funniest comment is the one where you write "it doesn't have the same layout."

No kidding. Wow, a website with a different layout than a newspaper. Next you'll be telling us that newspapers are printed on paper and websites are on the Internet.

Here's the Calgary Herald website:
http://www.canada.com/calgary/calgaryherald/

You will notice that the address says Calgary Herald. If you go to that webpage and click on "about us" it will tell you about the Calgary Herald. The Letters to The Editor are written to the Herald. The columnists are the ones who work for the Herald. The advertising is for the Herald.

This is the one and only Calgary Herald homepage.

Yes, for efficiency reasons, the website is operated by CanWest Interactive (Calgary Division), whose offices are located in the Calgary Herald building. However, the editor and publisher of the Herald determine the content of the website just as they do the with the paper. The website staff are not independent of the Herald publisher and editor.

Why in the world are you trying to claim that the Herald website is not a part of the Herald? This is the most ridiculous thing you have ever tried to say, well one of the most ridiculous.

Originally posted by Asher
Blah, blah, blah... You still don't understand the concept of groups of article tackling an issue from a different perspective on the same page.

Cut the crap. It is really getting tiresome. That story was not part of a "Kyoto package" and you know it. It was a single story on the frontpage.