Prince Charles Bleats About ‘Climate Change” Being Root Of Syrian War

If mankind’s release of “carbon pollution” from all its activities, especially the use of fossil fuels, doesn’t that mean Prince Charles is at fault?

Prince Charles: Climate Change Is a Root Cause of Syrian War

Britain’s Prince Charles has pointed to the world’s failure to tackle climate change as a root cause of the civil war in Syria, terrorism and the consequent refugee crisis engulfing Europe.

The heir to the British throne is due to give a keynote speech at the opening of a global climate summit in Paris next week where the leaders of 118 countries will gather to try to nail down a deal to limit rising greenhouse gas emissions.

In an interview with Sky News that was recorded before the attacks in Paris, the prince said such symptoms were a “classic case of not dealing with the problem.”

“Some of us were saying 20 something years ago that if we didn’t tackle these issues, you would see ever greater conflict over scarce resources and ever greater difficulties over drought, and the accumulating effect of climate change which means that people have to move,” he said. “And in fact there’s very good evidence indeed that one of the major reasons for this horror in Syria, funnily enough, was a drought that lasted for about five or six years, which meant that huge numbers of people in the end had to leave the land but increasingly they came into the cities.”

Of course, this isn’t about scare resources or anything along the lines of the diminished resources as espoused by nutters since the early 20th Century, it’s about unhinged people following what their religion tells them to. I’m not a particularly big fan of Erik Erickson, but he makes a great point

Global warming is the cause of terrorism in the Middle East and around the world according to Martin O’Malley, Bernie Sanders, Barack Obama, and other Democrats.Let’s add in the Prince of Wales. With a straight face they make this claim, ignoring any and all other evidence to the contrary.

But if that is so, if global warming causes terrorism, then I think the Democrats need to answer this question: why does global warming only turn Muslims into terrorists?

There are Jews in the Middle East and Africa. There are Christians in the Middle East and Africa. There are animists, Zoroastrians, Hindus, and others. But only certain Muslims, often from wealthy families, turn into terrorists. The Jews, Christians, animists, Zoroastrians, Hindus, and the rest never seem to be affected by global warming in that way.

Why is that only Muslims are radicalized? Sure, there are your typical nutters amongst the other religious beliefs, but none have the large scale organized belief sets, nor violent leanings, that radical Islam does.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

4 Responses to “Prince Charles Bleats About ‘Climate Change” Being Root Of Syrian War”

  1. john says:

    in central Africa 5 million have been killed in the last 30 years 90% christian on christian remember the Lords Resistance Army ?

  2. gitarcarver says:

    christian on christian remember the Lords Resistance Army ?

    Yep. But apparently you don’t.

    From Wikipedia:

    The Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA), also known as the Lord’s Resistance Movement, is a rebel group and heterodox Christian cult which operates in northern Uganda, South Sudan, the Central African Republic and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.[5] Originally known as the United Holy Salvation Army and Uganda Christian Army/Movement, its stated goals include establishment of multi-party democracy,[6] ruling Uganda according to the Ten Commandments,[7] and Acholi nationalism,[8] though in practice “the LRA is not motivated by any identifiable political agenda, and its military strategy and tactics reflect this”.[9] It appears to largely function as a personality cult of its leader Joseph Kony,[8] a self-declared prophet whose leadership has earned him the nickname “Africa’s David Koresh”.[10]

    Is it your contention that following a cult leader and not Christ makes one a “christian?” How moronic are you?

    And of course, notice how little johnny charges that in his interpretation, the LRA cult is “christian” but yet often he says the term “radical Islam” is offensive and mislabels all Muslims as terrorists. He won’t make a distinction between those who claim to be Christians,but is offended when people point out there are Muslims – radical muslims – doing terror in the name of Islam.

    Once again, john shows that he is nothing more than an mis-informed troll.

  3. Jeffery says:

    The radical christianists of the LRA, the Inquisition, the KKK, the IRA, the Crusades, the Sovereigns, the violent anti-abortion movement of the US no more represent christianity than ISIS represents Islam.

  4. The KKK were Democrats who were religious, but based on hatred, not a religious mission.

    The Ira movement was not pushing any Christianity as their main mission .

    Sovereigns mission is not any about religion, nor are they planning and carrying out attacks on civilian populations.

    The Crusades and Inquisition ? Yes, religion based, and a long, long time ago. Pretty big stretch Jeff.

    Violent anti-abortion folks? Yes, Christian. So you got 1 right.

    I have no problem calling any christians who are outside the mainstream radical. Ones such as the Westboro Baptist church.

    Or, say, those like Jeremiah Wright, who preach hate filled black supremely ideology. Hey, didn’t someone famous listen to that radical Christianity for 20 years?

    Here’s the difference between you and me, Jeff: I’m willing to admit that some people in many movements are radicals, even violent extremists. You refuse to acknowledge the fanger within Islam, even going as far as to defend it, much like most liberals do.

Pirate's Cove