[Stultis]

This article is part of a series. Ronald Bailey of Reason (Magazine) Online is currently reporting live from the WSSD. His introductory article, Changing Everything, has been posted on FR. To find his reports you can search on exact phrase Ronald Bailey Live from WSSD. Use this link to view Bailey's latest WSSD dispatch, and an index of previous ones, at Reason's website.

For these and other articles on the UN's World Summit on Sustainable Development, click on the WSSD Keyword.

[Shermy]

Sounds like many of the "Greens" were really globalist-money front orgs. That's basically what "NGOs" have become.

[Stultis]

Tech Central Station is also doing some really excellent coverage of the WSSD with articles and reports by various of their editors and contributors. Their page also has a number of good links. I've posted a few of the TCS articles to FR:

An Energetic Victory (U.S. sides with developing nations against green euros at WSSD)

'Actions Are Better' (U.S. delegation at WSSD sheds timidity of past - lectures econuts)

Just a Climate Cowboy (Bush & Kyoto)

[TheBigB]

"The idea is that the General Assembly will select a UN agency to convene an international meeting aimed at devising a global Protocol on Corporate Responsibility and Behavior."

So...a group will form another group to call a meeting with the aim of ideally devising a framework for a possible piece of paper.

Wow. Even amoebas are more animated than this.

[What Is Ain't]

Environmentalism pays quite well. Take a look:

Laughing All The Way To The Bank

[JimSEA]

I guess ideological environmentalists are different than say "scientifically verifiable environmentalist Proposal supporters. Anti-capitalism has many names. If these yahoos actually wanted to accomplish something, their #1 proposal isn't a bad idea. It is doable by an internationally funded NGO. The problems are:

(1) Governments such as those in much of Africa and all of the Middle East/Muslim South Asia are incapable of sustaining the development of even the simple well by well water treatment methods that have long been available. Due to violence and corruption any monies for development are better used in campfires to cook food.

(2) Our European "friends" would expect the USA to foot the bill but hire their "experts".

(3) The other demands of the Enviro-wackos, if implimented, make clean water useless as the poor would already starve before the water systems could be built

[Democratic_Machiavelli]

Cutting people in half is a sick way of eliminating the poor.

(Sorry, couldn't resist.)

[sam_paine]

"The only new real target is halving the number of people without access to good sanitation by 2015,"

OH NO! Say it ain't so!!! Good sanitation means clean water and sewage treatment! Clean water means holes drilled into mother earth, and ELECTRICITY to move it around and purify it!! And of course we know that even treated sewage must eventually be returned back into the environment!!! Heaven forbid!

[chimera]

The only thing worthwhile is their first proposal. That would be the most cost-effective way to save lives. Trouble is, implementing it would require a significant amount of energy, beyond that available from "renewable" forms, and the wackos will oppose that. So in the end they're self-defeating. Instead of working towards helping poorer countries get clean water and sanitation, they'll be out protesting against nuclear energy, and agitating about AIDS, or ranting against capitalism, or any other among numerous kook agenda items.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

(7) strengthening the precautionary principle as an international regulatory tool

precautionary principle: the principle that all innovation is guilty of environmental harm unless the innovator can prove the negative that it is not guilty. The principle, IOW, that all innovation must cease forthwith.