Posted on 12/19/2004 4:00:21 PM PST by MissouriConservative
The plan by the Inuit people of the Arctic to seek a ruling from the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights against the United States "for causing global warming and its devastating impacts" is just the tip of the iceberg of planned legal action by a host of different environmental organizations and state attorneys general.
A number of legal filings and complaints are being readied as green groups turn to the courts to seek redress against countries -- chiefly the U.S. -- and companies that environmental activists believe are causing catastrophic global warming.
Environmental groups ranging from Greenpeace to EarthJustice held seminars this week at the United Nations climate conference touting new legal strategies to go after the countries and companies they believe contribute to climate change.
A joint press release from Friends of the Earth International, Greenpeace and WWF on Thursday warned "there will be more [legal actions against countries and businesses] unless deep cuts are made in emissions and victims are compensated."
The California state attorney general, Ken Alex, made the trip to the Buenos Aires conference to promote his "first-ever climate change litigation against private companies."
Critics of the environmental movement see the shift in focus to the courts as evidence of the green groups' failure to convince the world of the righteousness of their cause.
"The Kyoto Protocol is dead for all intents and purposes, so environmentalists now go to Plan B: What they couldn't obtain through the open democratic process, they are now desperately trying to seek through the courts," said Chris Horner of the free market environmental group Competitive Enterprise Institute who attended the U.N. conference here. The CEI does not believe that science supports alarmist claims of human-caused climate change.
The greenhouse gas-limiting Kyoto Protocol is set to go into effect in February despite the fact that the U.S. will not participate. Horner believes that the agreement is meaningless because there are no enforcement mechanisms and the treaty exempts developing nations that will soon be the biggest emitters of greenhouse gases.
Many environmental groups also concede that Kyoto is too weak to even begin to address their concerns about "global warming."
Sheila Watt-Cloutier, chairwoman of the Inuit Circumpolar Conference, a United Nations-recognized, quasi-governmental group that is seeking a human rights declaration against the U.S., defended her group's planned human rights complaint against the U.S. as its only option.
"Without a radical rethinking of priorities, ... my culture could very well be doomed in perhaps even my grandson's lifetime," Watt-Cloutier said during a panel discussion this week at the U.N.-sponsored climate conference.
"They (the scientists) tell us that well within 100 years, all of [our way of life] could well be destroyed, and we have contributed very little to the problems of climate change, but yet we bear the heaviest impacts," she explained.
"Imagine if 300 scientists agreed on a projection that the way of life of your entire people was condemned to disappear in the way that we know it -- a hunting culture -- less than 100 years from now because of the actions of others. What would you do?" she asked, explaining the rationale for filing the complaint.
But when CNSNews.com asked Watt-Cloutier and other Arctic resident panelists on Wednesday about the available contrary scientific evidence that does not support her claims that human-caused "global warming" is rapidly warming the Arctic, the moderator of the panel discussion called the question "silly" and shut down the questioning.
'Nations go to war over less'
Watt-Cloutier remains convinced that U.S. greenhouse gas emissions are threatening her cultural heritage and said the U.S. is lucky that Inuits are not prone to violence.
"History -- and even recent history -- shows us that nations go to war over less. Now, fortunately, this is not how we are as Inuits; we are peaceful people," Watt-Cloutier said.
"We believe that the world does not want to see us disappear; we still have confidence that the world will do the right thing to address [climate change]," she added.
Robert Corell, chair of the international Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (ACIA), the alarmist climate report on which the Inuit people are basing their challenge to the U.S., said that because of human-caused global warming, Arctic indigenous communities are facing major economic and cultural impacts.
"If you are indigenous and you have lived with your ancestors for upwards of seven to nine thousand years and you had a subsistence living which has been dependent upon the existence of ice, that is now a serious problem," Corell explained.
Corell included the use of modern snowmobiles as part of a "subsistence" lifestyle. Corell said that among the tragedies that are occurring are Inuit-operated snowmobiles crashing through the thinning Arctic ice.
"Snowmobiles do not detect thin ice. I think you will find indigenous partners in this room who will tell you some of their close relatives who have not made it through the ice pack because they expected it to be more firm than it actually was, and their snowmobiles went through," Corell said during a presentation at the U.N. climate conference on Monday.
'A conscious choice'
But Horner of the CEI ridiculed the notion that a "subsistence" lifestyle included modern equipment like snowmobiles and charged that the Inuits themselves are responsible for ending their traditional way of life.
"They have an airstrip, they ride ... motor boats, have indoor climate control, electric tools and snowmobiles," Horner said.
"The disappearance of their lifestyle was made by a conscious choice, and the Inuit people themselves -- more than anyone -- have the ready ability to return to that subsistence existence which they are now romanticizing for an ideological agenda and possible financial gain," Horner said.
Horner sees the Inuits' complaint as nothing more than meaningless symbolism.
"It's a complaint before a panel that does not even have jurisdiction over the United States," he said.
"The Inuits and the environmental groups behind them are filing the complaint to get a determination that anthropogenic (human-caused) climate change violates human rights, which the plaintiffs (Inuits) then hope will qualify them to sue for money -- possibly to buy a nice, warm house and non-subsistence lifestyle," Horner said.
This is not a joke. They can cost U.S. taxpayers billions just in legal fees, and if they win a case the cost will be incalculable. Congress has to step in right now and forbid this kind of thing, as well as slapping sanctions on countries that host anti-U.S. forums of this or any kind. Let's make them pay for trying economic warfare against us.
What, are they all bartenders? This is a ridiculous statement.
"Congress has to step in right now and forbid this kind of thing, as well as slapping sanctions on countries that host anti-U.S. forums of this or any kind."
Well, considering they held a forum at the UN, I'd say this would give congress a great excuse to show them freeloaders the door. Let them move to Paris, where they would be far more comfortable. Not that we'd need an excuse to book Kofi out, but this would be a great one.
Great, more welfare. What are they going to do if we say "screw you"? Invade us on their dog sledges?
Must be a slow news day. If these fools want to waste their money on this nonsense, let'em. The fundamental question is this: What CONCLUSIVE proof do they have that global warming is caused by human intervention? What CONCLUSIVE proof do they have that products produced by a given corporation have led to, caused, or contributed to global warming? What CONCLUSIVE proof do they have that global warming isn't a normal event that is found in nature?
Case dismissed, next!
It is an interesting footnote to history that the Rennaisance was a consequence of a period of global warming. Where were the SUVs and fossil fuels then? It is also interesting to note that "scientists" have determined that the Martian polar caps are also "melting".
So, how much does a Martian SUV sell for these days?
"A fool and his money are soon parted." These folks are going to prove it.
Oh, I thought they said "global whining".
Or Mexico or India.
What, are they all bartenders? This is a ridiculous statement.
================================
LOL!!!
You are going to love this one.
My tagline says it all.
Is this story a put-on?
"Is this story a put-on?"
Nope.....as real as it gets. They say truth is stranger than fiction....lol
I see more & more of these stories where I think they might be true, or they might be a hoax, or farce.
The line has gotten blurry for me.
Head about a guy who had the wrong leg amputated in a surgery. He then had to have another surgery to amputate the correct leg.
He contacted a lawyer about filing suit, but was told he didn't have a leg to stand on.
LOL
So lets settle out of court and send them a few billion ice cubes.
A WAR consisting of snow ball fight.
They'll get you by feeding you high whale oil foods and seal blubber.
Why can't they just report the cold, hard facts? Why water it down?
In reality there is no time, no space, and no causality. These are percepts. Thinking that the US has caused Global Warming is thinking in dreamland.
The reporter is indeed treading on thin ice.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.