World News & Breaking News II

EXCLUSIVE: While President Obama challenged China at the United Nations to follow the U.S. lead in pushing for drastic reductions in national carbon emissions to save the planet from “climate change,” it appears that China has dramatically different ideas. As in: no.

According to a document deposited at the Geneva-based U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in advance of a planned meeting next month, China -- now the world’s largest source of greenhouse gases -- insists that the U.S. and other developed countries endure most of the economic pain of carbon emission cutbacks, and need to make significantly more sacrifices in the months ahead.

Carbon emission cutbacks by China and other developing countries, the document says, will be “dependent on the adequate finance and technology support provided by developed country parties” to any new climate accord.

In other words, only if Western nations pay for it.

More specifically, only if Western taxpayers ante up. Among other things, the Chinese communist regime insists that the incentive payments it demands must come from “new, additional, adequate, predictable and sustained public funds" -- rather than mostly private financing, as the U.S. hopes.

In addition, the Chinese state:

-- A promised $100 billion in annual climate financing that Western nations have already pledged to developing countries for carbon emission control and other actions by 2020 is only the "starting point" for additional Western financial commitments that must be laid out in a "clear road map," which includes "specific targets, timelines and identified sources;"

--In the longer run, developed countries should be committing “at least 1 percent” of their Gross Domestic Product — much more than they spend on easing global poverty” into a U.N.-administered Green Carbon Fund to pay for the developing country changes;

--In the meantime, the $100 billion pledge to the same fund should be reached by $10 billion increments, starting from a $40 billion floor this year;

--Western countries also need to remove “obstacles such as IPRs [intellectual property rights]” to “promote, facilitate and finance the transfer” of “technologies and know-how” to developing countries in advance of any future climate deal;

CLICK HERE FOR THE PAPER

The Chinese submission is part of the paperwork submitted by a variety of nations in advance of negotiations on a new global climate treaty, which is slated to be unveiled at a grand climate summit meeting in Paris at the end of 2015. This week’s ballyhooed climate summit in New York City was intended to kick-start the diplomatic process that will wend toward the Paris finale.

The Paris 2015 treaty is supposed to replace the tattered Kyoto Protocol, which expires in 2020, and which the U.S. never ratified — in large measure because huge greenhouse emitters like China and India were given a pass from most of its strictures.

Since then, countries like Canada and Russia have left the protocol, and others, like Japan, have declined to tighten the screws further on carbon emissions in a time of faltering economic growth.

But while President Obama was telling the summit attendees in New York that “nobody can stand on the sidelines on this issue,” and advising world leaders that he had told China’s top delegate at their meeting that “we have a special responsibility to lead,” China has staked out its much tougher position in a nine-page position paper drearily titled, “Submission on the Work of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Durban Platform for Enhanced Action.”

The working group, part of the UNFCCC process, is pulling together international positions to develop a consensus starting point for the Paris treaty negotiations, which will supposedly be unveiled at a meeting in Lima, Peru, in December. The Chinese paper, however, went to an earlier preparatory meeting slated to begin in Bonn on October 25.

According to the Chinese, all of the additional Western action is necessary because developing countries have already done their part at greenhouse gas cutbacks—or, as the position paper has it, in typical U.N. climate-speak, “have already communicated and implemented ambitious nationally appropriate mitigation actions.”

Indeed, the paper continues, “Their contribution to global mitigation efforts is far greater than that by developed countries.”

That conclusion appears to largely draw on the fact that China believes that Western countries are “responsible for the current and future concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere because of their historical, current and future emissions,” while “developing countries have the right to equitable development opportunities and sustainable development.”

That was largely the logic behind the faltering Kyoto Protocol, in which China pledged only to reduce the “carbon intensity”—the relative greenhouse gas efficiency-- of its industrialization, without any effort at actual cutbacks.

Optimists now believe that China will move in the new round of climate negotiations toward an actual trajectory of cutbacks, but there is no sign of that ambition in the current position paper.

In fact, the paper argues that any new agreement should “be based and built” on the structures of the old Kyoto deal, with “developed country Parties taking the lead in greenhouse gas emission reduction.”

There is perhaps one major exception: “Commitments by developed country Parties [to the new treaty] on providing finance, technology and capacity-building support to developing country Parties shall be of the same legal bindingness as their mitigation commitments.”

In other words: pay-as-you-go on “climate change” means that so far as China is concerned, the U.S. and other advanced countries should do all the paying, and most of the going.

Click to expand...

Bernard said:

Wow China.. Pretty much is saying a big F U to everyone, in this article

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama is accepting the resignation of Attorney General Eric Holder and praising him for his deep commitment to ensuring all Americans receive equal justice under the law.

The president said during an East Room ceremony that it was a "bittersweet moment" to accept Holder's resignation after six years on the job. But he added that he was glad Holder would stay on until a successor is confirmed.

Obama praised Holder for his track record in a variety of areas, especially for reinvigorating the defense of civil rights.

Holder, for his part, said he was proud of what the department had accomplished but said that work remains to be done.

Click to expand...

SOMERVILLE, N.J. — After knocking her unconscious with a sucker punch to the face and strangling her neck, Gary Wilson stood over Carolyn Stone's naked motionless body and dropped a 25-pound cinder block on her head.

Then he picked up the bloody cinder block and dropped it on her head again.

That's what he told a hushed courtroom Wednesday, explaining that he had "snapped" after Stone, 45, laughed when he couldn't get an erection in order to have sex with her.

After the murder, Wilson said, he concocted a story about raping Stone because he didn't want her family to feel bad that she would cheat on her boyfriend with his friend.

But Wilson, 31, is not on trial. In 2011 he pleaded guilty to the 2009 Memorial Day weekend slaying of Stone and in July 2013 was sentenced to 45 years in prison.

Wilson, however, is not a witness for the prosecution, which is trying to convince a Somerset County jury that David Granskie Jr., the son of Stone's boyfriend, was one of three men who raped and brutally killed Stone.

Wilson is a witness for the defense and his testimony this week — that he alone killed Stone and that there was no rape — may strike a blow to the state's case, which hinges on an inconsistent confession by Granskie. The defense has said that the confession should not be believed because it is the product of a heroin junkie's drug-addled mind "parroting back" what police had suggested during the interrogation.

Somerset County Assistant Prosecutor Tim Van Hise rested his case Wednesday. He did not bring before the jury any witnesses to the crime and called neither Wilson nor Rocky DiTaranto, who agreed to a five-year prison sentence in exchange for pleading guilty to conspiracy to commit aggravated sexual assault and to testify against Granskie. DiTaranto already is out of prison because he spent four years and five months in jail after his arrest waiting for a trial that never happened.

With the jury out of the room, Granskie's attorney, Katherine Errickson, tried to have the case dismissed, arguing that the prosecution has not been able to corroborate Granskie's confession.

"This is a very unusual case for the prosecution to try a horrible offense and not call any co-defendants or any witnesses," Errickson said.

Superior Court Judge Robert Reed did not throw out the case saying that it's the job of the jury to determine the weight of the confession and any evidence.

Granskie091814b
David Granskie is accused of taking part in the sexual assault and murder of Carolyn Stone, who was murdered in 2009.(Photo: Kathy Johnson, The (Bridgewater, N.J.) Courier News)
But on the stand, wearing red prison garb and hand and ankle shackles, a slimmer-looking Wilson said everything that Granskie had confessed to doing or to seeing was not true.

Wilson said Granskie did not have vaginal or oral sex with Stone, that he did not drop the cinder block on her, and could not have seen anyone else drop the cinder block because Granskie was inside sleeping at the time of the murder.

Wilson and other guests had spent the afternoon and early evening drinking, smoking marijuana and snorting cocaine at the Granskie home. Wilson said Stone and Granskie Sr. had done drugs but was not sure whether Granskie Jr. did.

Wilson said Stone was acting "odd" by making fun of him for living with this parents and not having a driver's license.

Later on, she began rubbing his feet by the chiminea, an outdoor fireplace.

"It felt weird when her boyfriend is right there," he said about the affection.

Stone decided to go inside and sleep as the party continued outside, he said. Eventually Wilson's close friend left, leaving the Granskies, DiTaranto and Wilson. Wilson said he went to the bathroom and saw that Stone's bedroom door was open and that she was awake.

"I walked in, bent down to kiss her and made out," which he said was consensual. "I told her to come outside after Big Dave (her boyfriend) went in to sleep."

DiTaranto
Rocky DiTaranto is on trial in connection with the 2009 death of Carolyn Stone in Somerville, N.J.(Photo: Kathy Johnson, The (Bridgewater, N.J.) Courier News)
Later, Granskie Jr. went to bed. He was followed by his father, Wilson said. Stone came to the door when he and DiTaranto were outside. Wilson said he asked her if Big Dave was asleep. She said yes.

"I kissed her and decided to go to the backyard to hook up."

Wilson said he motioned for DiTaranto to join them. After Wilson took off his shorts, leaving just his swim trunks on, he said he needed to go to the restroom and told DiTaranto to "keep her company while I'm gone."

But in the restroom, Wilson said he realized that he probably would not be able to get an erection because "it has happened before" when he's had too much to drink and done too much cocaine.

After about five minutes, Wilson went outside and saw DiTaranto walking toward him.

"I'm done man," Wilson said DiTaranto said. "I'm going home."

Wilson said he went behind the shed and saw that Stone was on her knees, naked except a shirt around her neck.

Wilson said he told her that he wouldn't be able to have sex with her.

"What kind of man can't get aroused in front of a naked woman?" she said, according to his testimony.

"I tried to explain that I had been drinking too much and she just started laughing.

"I told her it's not funny; it happens. And she kept laughing.

"So I snapped and I punched her. She fell back unconscious. After I had hit her I began to choke her and she had no fight in her.

"I didn't want people to know that I had hit her or to find out why she was in the backyard. I didn't want Big Dave to know that I had betrayed his friendship. So I started to choke her so that he would never know we betrayed him.

"I know it doesn't make sense. It just seemed to be the logical thing to do at the time to get rid of the situation that I had made very bad. At that point it seemed like my only option.

"After choking her for a while I decided I had to finish what I started. It didn't seem like it was working. I saw a cinder block and knew from my work in construction that it was a very heavy object. I stood over her. I lifted it over my head. I looked down, said I'm sorry, and hit her with the cinder block.

"I decided to do it again. I didn't want her to suffer. It took everything in me to lift that cinder block back up again."

Wilson said he walked back to his parent's home in Bradley Gardens barefoot and shirtless. He told his stepfather to call police because he had killed someone.

"I needed to go to jail because I killed someone," he said. "That's where I deserve to be."

After being charged with murder, Wilson provided three statements to police but testified Wednesday that he was not completely truthful with them.

"The truth didn't seem fair," he said about concocting a rape story. "I wanted to make it easier for them. I did not want to drag her name through the mud."

Wilson, however, never told police that Granskie was involved. Even after being offered a 30-year plea deal to testify against Granskie, Wilson said he turned it down.

"Because he is innocent," he said.

Click to expand...

solarz said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I bolded the last part because it is the most disgusting part of the story, beyond even the crime itself. The police offered a self-confessed murderer a sentence reduction in order to convict an innocent man!

What the hell is wrong with law enforcement???

Click to expand...

​

CNN said:

British lawmakers meeting in emergency session approved a motion Friday to participate in airstrikes against ISIS targets in Iraq.

The 524-43 vote came after Prime Minister David Cameron told Parliament that the country had a "duty to take part" in international efforts to combat the extremist group.

The terror group is an organization of "staggering" brutality, he said, which has already killed one British hostage and threatens the lives of two more.

"This is not a threat on the far side of the world," he said, but one which menaces European nations directly.

In addition to an ISIS-inspired attack on a Jewish museum in Brussels earlier in the year, Europe's security agencies have disrupted six other ISIS-linked plots, he said.

Parliament was recalled by Cameron for the vote on military action in Iraq, which was approved after lengthy debate in the House of Commons and House of Lords. Any proposal to expand the strikes to Syria would require additional action by Parliament, according to the motion.

Cameron said Britain should join international allies in combating ISIS, a campaign that he warned would take years, not months. "The hallmarks will be patience and persistence, not shock and awe," he said.

The government insists such action is legal because Iraq's government has requested international help to tackle the Sunni extremist group, which has overrun vast swathes of Iraq and Syria and massacred religious minorities and Shia Muslims.

Cameron made that point again Friday, saying there was "no question" of the legality of action given the request by Iraq's leaders and the broad international backing for the campaign against ISIS.

Some MPs may be reluctant to back a bombing campaign in Iraq because of doubts over its effectiveness or unhappiness over past UK military intervention in Iraq.

But action has been backed by the governing coalition of the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, as well as the opposition Labour Party.

Labour leader Ed Miliband told lawmakers the United Kingdom "cannot simply stand by" against the threat of ISIS.

Now that it's been approved, military action could start within hours. UK forces have already been taking part in surveillance missions over Iraq, as well as aiding Kurdish forces with equipment.

'Past mistakes'

Cameron acknowledged that the memory of going to war in Iraq in 2003, when Labour's Tony Blair was Prime Minister, "hangs heavy" over the House of Commons. "This is not 2003, but we must not use past mistakes as an excuse for inaction," he said.
There is "no realistic prospect" of defeating ISIS without military action, he said, and Britain has unique assets that no other coalition partner can offer, including precision missiles and surveillance capabilities.

"It is also our duty to take part," he said. "Protecting the streets of Britain is not a task that we are prepared to entirely subcontract to other air forces of other countries."

Last year, Cameron suffered a painful defeat in the Commons when MPs voted against action in Syria in response to claims the Syrian government had used chemical weapons against its own people.

The motion approved by Parliament on Friday specifically rules out action in Syria unless a separate vote is held. It also rules out the use of UK troops in any possible ground combat operations in Iraq.

Cameron: 'Strong case' for Syria action

Asked about the possibility of a change of approach to Syria, Cameron said the situation there was "more complicated" than in Iraq and that he was not going to change strategy right now.

"ISIS needs to be destroyed in Syria as well as Iraq and we support the action the U.S. and five Arab states have taken in Syria and I do believe there is a strong case for us to do more in Syria," he said. "But I did not want to bring a motion to the house today which there wasn't consensus for."

British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond told CNN before the vote he was confident the MPs would approve Britain's participation in the Iraq air campaign against ISIS, but "there will be assurances that they want to receive."

On the likelihood of Britain's involvement in Syria, Hammond said that it is not inevitable but that the possibility hasn't been ruled out yet.

The United States and its coalition partners began bombing raids in Syria this week against ISIS targets.

U.S. aircraft had already been carrying out airstrikes against ISIS -- the group also known as ISIL, which calls itself the Islamic State -- in Iraq since last month.

'Haven for terrorism'

Miliband, explaining his support for the motion, said that ISIS' ambition to create an Islamist state risks destabilizing the region and make it more likely that Iraq would become "a haven and training ground for terrorism" directed at the UK.

He said some in the House of Commons may be wondering if this is a repeat of what happened in the run-up to the 2003 war in Iraq. "In my view, it is not," he said, arguing the circumstances now are "demonstrably different."

On Syria, Miliband differed from Cameron's view, saying that he would want to see U.N. authorization for action there before Britain stepped in.

Former Defense Secretary Liam Fox, a Conservative, said he believed there was a legal basis for action against ISIS in Syria and that it should have been up for debate too.

"Sooner or later we are going to have to do it. It would have been far better if we had said so today," he said.

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, the leader of the Liberal Democrats, said earlier this week that his party would support the air campaign in Iraq because it is legal and has been requested by the Iraqi government.

Also, he said, "It's part of a much bigger coalition, a whole array of countries, crucially including a number of Arab countries which deprives ISIL of the ability to somehow portray it as a 'West vs. the rest' crusade."

Click to expand...

bd popeye said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...