Major Papers Who Protected Israel/Jew Haters Upset They Were Blocked From Entering Israel

By William Teach August 16, 2019 – 6:57 am

Both the Washington Post and the NY Times did all they could to protect Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar when they were making anti-Israel and anti-Jew comments, particularly Omar. They excused their nasty words about Israel and Jews, and have ignored their links to groups, such as CAIR, who are anti-Israel/Jew, and would like to see Israel wiped off the map. And have ignored their BDS (boycott, divestment, sanctions) links, said movement which is really based in Israel and Jew hatred. Personally, I think, and have written so, that Israel should let them in, because they will show that that they are anti-Semites, but, the editorial boards take it to new levels

Here’s the NY Times Editorial Board (featuring racist Sarah Jeong)

What Are Trump and Netanyahu Afraid Of?
Barring Representatives Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib shows weakness and intolerance, not strength.

It’s not even really necessary to go beyond the subhead, since the two Democratic Representatives have shown their intolerance towards Israel and Jews. Though that is barely mentioned in the editorial. In fact, most of the piece is about Trump, because Trump Derangement Syndrome.  But, they do have a bit, such as

The visit Ms. Omar and Ms. Tlaib were contemplating was not to Israel proper, but to the West Bank, where they were to visit Hebron, Ramallah and Bethlehem, as well as Israeli-occupied East Jerusalem, on a trip co-sponsored by a Palestinian organization, Miftah, that promotes “global awareness and knowledge of Palestinian realities.” A visit was planned to the Al Aqsa Mosque, on what Israelis call the Temple Mount, an especially volatile site in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. There is little question that their visit would have focused on Palestinian grievances over the Israeli occupation.

Perhaps the Times would like to mention a bit more about Miftah

They were also going to meet with DCI-P, which has links to Islamic terrorist outfits. And their itinerary shows their disrespect for Israel

But, the Times and the Washington Post forgot to include that type of information

Barring two U.S. lawmakers from Israel is un-Israeli. Trump’s cheering for it is un-American.

(the first four out of six paragraphs are Trump Derangement Syndrome)

Then there’s Mr. Netanyahu, who has dealt a blow to the U.S.-Israeli alliance in service to his prospects of winning a fifth term in next month’s Israeli election. His decision might appeal to his hard-line supporters at home. But as a former diplomat who worked extensively in the United States, he knows that Israel’s interests depend on cultivating strong ties with Republicans and Democrats alike. That stance was already strained by his hostile relationship with President Barack Obama. Now, by barring the two Democratic representatives, he has antagonized a broad swath of American Democrats who might not embrace their view of Israel but will be justly furious at the insult meted out, gratuitously, by an Israeli premier.

Well, Obama was hostile towards Israel and Netanyahu (hey, were are the complaints about Obama interfering in Israeli elections, ala Russia Russia Russia?). And why should Netanyahu care about antagonizing a broad swath of Democrats who are anti-Israel and anti-Jew?

Israel enacted a law two years ago authorizing officials to deny entry to supporters of the BDS movement. That was a sign of weakness: How could a country with a robust pluralistic democracy bar nonviolent visitors based on their political beliefs? That a U.S. president would lend support and credence to such a policy — at the expense of democratically elected members of Congress — is fundamentally un-American.

Why should they allow in people who hate them? The U.S. denies visas to people who hate the U.S. all the time. If someone was calling for the destruction of the U.S., would we let them in (excepting for the United Nations meetings)? No. Of course not. But, the Washington Post doesn’t bother explaining what the BDS movement really is, and has failed to slam either Democrat, nor Dems in general, for their Israel and Jew hatred.

Tlaib will now be allowed in to the West Bank to visit her grandmother, as long as she is not promoting BDS.

Read: Major Papers Who Protected Israel/Jew Haters Upset They Were Blocked From Entering Israel »

Posted in Democrats, Israel, Unhinged Tools | 48 Comments | Trackback URL

Say, Are You A Climahypocrite?

By William Teach August 15, 2019 – 3:19 pm

Despite the yammering of eco, these people are not environmentalists. They are climate cultists masquerading as people who care about the environment. And utter nags to boot

Are you an eco-hypocrite?
Recycling. Electric cabbing. Not eating meat. All in a day’s fighting back for Samuel Fishwick. Well sort of. Welcome to the conflicted life of a London climate helper

The only thing worse than an eco hypocrite is realising you are one. ‘Think of the turtles,’ I said to my friend at a Dulwich pub last December, impounding her plastic straw with the punctilious sanctimony of a teacher confiscating a pea shooter, then showing her the viral video of a sea turtle struggling as a 12cm plastic straw is dislodged from its nostril with a set of pliers. That friend and I haven’t been for a drink since.

Insufferable twits. You can bet it was that friend who stopped all future activities.

Still, I considered sacrificing my social life for sea life a noble cause, driving this plastic straw amnesty with zeal. I wrote newspaper articles about the damage caused by the surfeit of single-use plastics in the marine environment, tweeted about it vigorously and stored the fruits of my enforced cull in my rucksack. Then, one morning, nursing a hangover, I tried one of those paper alternatives that suck all the joy out of a McDonald’s milkshake, reached for one of the plastic straws in my confiscated collection and relapsed. What a sucker.

When it comes to taking an eco-cheat day, I’m in illustrious company. Prince Harry devoted a chunk of the Vogue September issue, guest-edited by his wife, Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, to espouse their determination to be kinder to the planet by having only two children. But he then drew widespread condemnation for reportedly boarding a private jet to Google’s climate camp in Sicily, alongside A-listers Leonardo DiCaprio and Katy Perry (the last leg of Harry’s journey was apparently by helicopter). Dame Emma Thompson, the actor and inveterate campaigner against climate change, rallied Extinction Rebellion activists from atop a pink boat in Oxford Street — prompting a backlash when it transpired she’d flown 5,400 miles to attend. ‘Unfortunately, sometimes I have to fly,’ she told the BBC, ‘but I don’t fly nearly as much as I did because of my carbon footprint and I plant a lot of trees.’ Extinction Rebellion demands we reach zero emissions by 2025, long before the Government’s promise of 2050. Inevitably, we are falling short.

What’s this we stuff?

Bradbrook points out that figures from climatologist professor Kevin Anderson show that 50 per cent of emissions come from 10 per cent of the population — so the burden should fall less on the individual than the state. Yet a climate of eco-anxiety is taking a toll on mental health. Caroline Hickman, a teaching fellow at the University of Bath and member of the Climate Psychology Alliance, who has been a psychotherapist for more than 20 years, says it’s imperative that we’re more forgiving. ‘That whole drive to perfectionism is worrying, particularly when it’s around young people. We’ve already got an epidemic of self-harming, body dysmorphia and eating disorders in young people, and we don’t need something else to feel bad about,’ she says.

It’s a nice cop out, blaming “the 10 percent”, but, really, so few do anything beyond token steps in their own lives. Maybe they wouldn’t fee so nutso if they practiced what they preach.

Read: Say, Are You A Climahypocrite? »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach August 15, 2019 – 1:00 pm

…is a hazy area caused by carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Irons In The Fire, with a post on the mayor of Oslo, Norway wanting to ban machetes.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 30 Comments | Trackback URL

Philly Mayor Calls For Gun Control In Wake Of Shooting

By William Teach August 15, 2019 – 10:30 am

Who is the criminal who shot 6 Philly police officers? (via Hot Air)

(Philly Inquirer) Police sources identified the gunman in a standoff at a Tioga apartment building that left six police officers injured as Maurice Hill, 36, a Philadelphia man with a lengthy history of gun convictions and of resisting attempts to bring him to justice.

Hill’s history in the adult criminal justice system began in 2001 when he was 18 and was arrested with a gun that had an altered serial number.

Public records show that he has been arrested about a dozen times since turning 18, and convicted six times on charges that involved illegal possession of guns, drug dealing, and aggravated assault. He has been in and out of prison; the longest sentence handed him came in 2010, when a federal judge gave him a 55-month term.

Fortunately, all 6 officers will be fine. But, of course

That goes to video, so, here’s for printed

Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney (D) called for increased gun control following an hours-long shootout between police and a gunman that wounded six officers.

“Our officers need help. They need help with gun control. They need help with keeping these weapons out of these people’s hands,” Kenney told reporters Wednesday night as the situation as ongoing.

“Our officers deserve to be protected and they don’t deserve to be shot at by a guy for hours with an unlimited supply of weapons and an unlimited supply of bullets. It’s disgusting and we have to do something about it.”

Kenney tore into both national and state lawmakers who he said were taking inadequate action on getting guns out of the hands of criminals, citing opposition from groups like the National Rifle Association (NRA).

“Whether it’s our six officers who were shot or it’s some 16-, 17-, 20-year-old kid on the streets of Philadelphia who gets shot with guns that shouldn’t be in people’s hands,” he said. “It’s aggravating. It’s saddening. And it’s something that we need to do something about.”

Enhanced background checks wouldn’t have worked. Nor would restricting magazine size nor banning “assault weapons.” Philadelphia is already top ten in the nation’s cities for gun control. It was already illegal for Hill to have a gun. Are we going to make it extremely illegal? He wouldn’t have passed a background check. So, Kenney’s idea is to make it more difficult for law abiding citizens?

How about cracking down on criminals? Democrats never seem to want to do that.

Read: Philly Mayor Calls For Gun Control In Wake Of Shooting »

Posted in Democrats | 17 Comments | Trackback URL

Democrats Running Around The Nation In Fossil Fueled Vehicles Hammer Fossil Fueled Companies Or Something

By William Teach August 15, 2019 – 8:27 am

An extreme case of Other People syndrome

When I write the aforementioned phrases, what I’m referring to is the notion that Warmists want Someone Else, That Guy, Other People, to suffer for the beliefs of the Warmist(s), but the Warmist(s) do not want to suffer themselves. The regulations, rules, laws, penalties, taxes, cost increases, etc, should not apply to the Warmists.

Of course, their Other People policies would mean that the cost of living would go way up for everyone.

Democrats’ newest climate platform: Hammering fossil fuel companies

Democratic White House hopefuls are getting increasingly aggressive on climate change — and calling for oil, gas and coal producers to pay for their role in climbing temperatures, rising seas and catastrophic weather.

The sharpened tone includes former Vice President Joe Biden’s promise to “take action against fossil fuel companies,” as well as Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders’ charge that the businesses committed “criminal activity” by knowingly producing the greenhouse gases that worsen climate change. Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren is proposing legislation that could pave the way for lawsuits against the companies, while Washington Gov. Jay Inslee has accused fossil fuel producers of “killing people” and New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand wants to create a fossil fuel “excise tax.”

The rhetoric echoes the fervor of the climate change activists who have pushed Democrats to embrace an ambitious “Green New Deal” that would wean the U.S. off fossil fuels in a decade or more, and comes amid lawsuits from states, cities and citizens accusing the companies of hiding the evidence that their products are harming the planet.

Interestingly, the article never once mentions the climahypocrisy of these Democrats, whose use of fossil fuels is well, well above that of the average American.

But Republicans say they welcome the trend, too, accusing Democrats of pushing a radical attack on an industry that has provided one of the brightest spots in the economy and has reduced U.S. dependence on foreign oil.

“The deeper and the longer the Democrats talk about this, the happier the Trump campaign is,” said Ford O’Connell, a Republican strategist who speaks regularly with the White House and President Donald Trump’s reelection effort. “They see fodder not so much in the issue but in the solutions being proposed by the Democrats.”

And that is a political line of attack that they need to hammer Democrats on, because the hate fossil fuels policies would, again, cause the cost of living to skyrocket for citizens.

Polls indicate that voters increasingly see climate change as one of the biggest issues facing the country, in contrast to past election cycles. A survey of 5,000 people by the Yale Project on Climate Communication found 57 percent of Americans believe fossil fuel companies are responsible and should pay for the destruction caused by climate change, and 50 percent support suing those companies. The Yale group found that protecting the environment and climate change were the second- and third-most important issues to liberal Democratic voters, a result that director Anthony Leiserowitz described as “stunning.”

Perhaps so, especially when the climate cult members in the media constantly yammer about the coming soon (fake) doom scam. But, remember, most people refuse to pay more than $10 a month. What would be the monthly cost of the Dems hate fossil fuels policies? Nothing has increased the prosperity of people than fossil fuels.

Read: Democrats Running Around The Nation In Fossil Fueled Vehicles Hammer Fossil Fueled Companies Or Something »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Democrats, Energy, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Surprise: 145,000 People Not Included Into Background Check System In North Carolina

By William Teach August 15, 2019 – 8:08 am

A system is only as good as the data put into it

SBI: Local law enforcement behind gaps in gun background check system

Seventy-eight people have been blocked from buying guns in recent months because old criminal convictions in North Carolina were finally uploaded into the federal background check system, officials said Tuesday.

In announcing a gun safety directive Monday, Gov. Roy Cooper noted that the State Bureau of Investigations had found 284,289 convictions that were never reported to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS.

“When someone goes to buy a gun and there’s a background check, that check is only as good as the information that’s in it,” Cooper said.

SBI Special Agent in Charge Wyatt Pettengill said Tuesday that the convictions, some of which date to the 1980s, involved about 145,000 people – greater than the population of Wilmington.

Pettengill said the problem starts at the local level, where arrests aren’t always reported to the SBI, which is responsible for uploading information to NICS.

It is sometimes easier for an officer to cite a person and let them go rather than booking them, so, that information doesn’t make it into the NICS. And, of course, this doesn’t mean that everyone not reported would be barred. In the above case, though, these people would have been. The SBI has caught up and put everything into the database. But, how many were legally able to purchase a firearm? A second WRAL article notes that both sides are rather upset

The revelation that the convictions of about 145,000 people in North Carolina weren’t included for years in a federal database used to determine whether someone can buy a gun irritates people on both sides of the gun debate. (snip)

Although the backlog of unreported convictions has been cleared, Pettengill said it’s impossible to know how many people were able to buy a gun over the years who shouldn’t have been because of a criminal record.

How often does this happen around the nation?

“I’ve been talking about this for a couple of years now and the last time I brought this up on television as a real problem I was screamed at and shouted down,” former NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch tweeted late Tuesday, including a link to WRAL’s story. “We going to take it seriously yet?”

Jessica Burroughs of MomsRising, a group that advocates against gun violence, praised Cooper and the SBI for getting the convictions into the NICS database and said other states should follow suit.

“Unfortunately, across the country, there has been an under-investment in the NICS system, with state and local law enforcement agencies failing to keep the information they submit up to date,” Burroughs said. “This leads to loopholes where people who should not be allowed to purchase guns are able to access them.”

It’s not under-funding, and these aren’t loopholes. They are gaps,chinks, and failures in the system. Remember, the Air Force and other military branches failed to report lots of convictions to the NICS. There are millions of records missing from the system, “a gap that contributed to the shooting deaths of 26 people in a Texas church (in 2017) this week.” In both those cases, a failure to report allowed them to purchase a firearm legally.

Gun rights have no problem with a background system. We WANT people who should have guns due to criminal convictions to be denied. We also know that some will get those guns illegally. Who wants to bet that the Philadelphia gunman obtained his illegally?

Liberals are going hardcore at the Supreme Court and other courts to Do Something, to get emotional. They’re threatening to restructure it and pack it if they win the White House. The NY Times argues that the Court is “out of step”, and needs to get emotional, especially since they agreed to hear a case against the City of New York over their draconian gun restrictions on law abiding citizens. The Law is supposed to be blind and unemotional, the better to stop kneejerk, emotional rulings. Hilariously, it includes this line from an interest group over a briefing to the Court

“This court should decline the invitation to claim for itself the authority to set nationwide firearm policy and instead leave these sensitive decisions to the political process.”

Interesting. Leftists constantly want the Court to set nationwide policies when it helps them, like with gay marriage, gender confused rights, allowing open borders, etc. And even gun control, when it helps them. As long as it is a win, they’re good with the Court.

Read: Surprise: 145,000 People Not Included Into Background Check System In North Carolina »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Current Affairs | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

The Climate Change Scam Is Making Warmists All Sorts Of Crazy (Part Lots)

By William Teach August 14, 2019 – 4:48 pm

It’s a circular problem: high poobah’s in the Cult of Climastrology make Dire Pronouncements Of Doom, which are then broadcast by the compliant Credentialed Media, filter to the Warmist blogs and such, out to social media, with the Doom being magnified each time. Then they tell us how much this is giving people all sorts of mental health issues and such, and then the people say they are having mental health issues, which gets printed, which makes more a bit nutty

From not having kids to battling anxiety: Climate change is shaping life choices and affecting mental health

Revelle Mast wanted to be an architect when she was a kid. She changed course in high school, deciding to pursue chemical engineering to address the threat of climate change. But, last year, she made another life decision: to go into politics.

“I realized about a year ago that was not feasible on the time scale that climate change is happening,” Mast said. “Nine months ago, I quit my engineering job and went full time into political work.”

As global warming – the gradual increase in temperature of the Earth’s atmosphere –accelerates, people are grappling with the idea that disastrous conditions may appear as soon as 2040. The reality of this potentially existential crisis greatly impacts the way some people, especially those who have dedicated their lives to stopping climate change, make life decisions – whether that’s going vegan, living in a certain part of the country or deciding against having children. It even impacts their mental health.

People living in the Medieval Warm Period would wonder what’s wrong with these wankers

Maunus dived deeper into environmental issues in college and learned how the crisis implicates every part of our society. Now, she’s a political and legislative coordinator for the Sunrise Movement, a youth-led movement advocating political action on climate change.

She lived through two hurricanes, things that have always happened, so, decided to be a professional nag.

Christene Dejong would be awake at 2 in the morning, panicking over impending environmental “apocalyptic scenarios.”

She was always aware of environmental concerns, the Amherst, Massachusetts, native said.

But after the 2017 Paris Climate Agreement withdrawal coupled with the 2019 U.N. report that says up to 1 million species are at risk of extinction, “some switch flipped and I just started freaking out all the time.”

This anxiety has gained so much traction in the national consciousness that it is starting to needle its way into popular media. On an episode of the popular HBO drama “Big Little Lies,” the daughter of one of the main characters has a panic attack while learning about climate change.

Again, that’s where all this press coverage is coming from: a stupid TV show.

Read More »

Read: The Climate Change Scam Is Making Warmists All Sorts Of Crazy (Part Lots) »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming, Unhinged Tools | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach August 14, 2019 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrible weapon of war needed due to climate change wars, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Victory Girls Blog, with a post on Senator Whitehouse having some stupid thoughts on the 2nd AMendment.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Bummer: Dreamers Dream Is Dead, Plans To Self-Deport

By William Teach August 14, 2019 – 10:41 am

Cue the tiny violins for this illegal alien, brought illegally by her parents. Tawheeda Wahabzada is a “Dreamer”, who, unshockingly, is working as a researcher for a non-profit in D.C., one that appears to be all about intersectionality and pushing “equality”. And she’s totally going to leave in 2020!

No Need to Deport Me. This Dreamer’s Dream Is Dead.

I am a Dreamer. I have lived in the United States since 1995. I plan to self-deport in early 2020.

I grew up in Carson City, Nev., from kindergarten until I left for college in Reno. I’ve celebrated Thanksgiving for as long as I can remember. I participated in local soccer leagues as a kid. I pledged allegiance to the American flag. This is the country I call home.

Because of circumstances beyond my control, I am undocumented. I was born in Toronto and was brought to the United States at age 5 by my parents, who were refugees from Afghanistan. I am one of the approximately 700,000 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients in America today. As a result, I have lived my life in perpetual limbo — and in the shadows.

When I turned 18, I watched my friends vote in the 2008 presidential elections and could not do the same. I could not receive federal financial aid for colleges that other prospective students applied for. I watched my classmates get jobs and obtain a driver’s licenses, but I could not work or drive legally.

Blame your parents for putting you in this position, rather than seemingly scapegoat your classmates and others.

DACA changed my life. In May 2012, I graduated from the University of Nevada, Reno, with a double major in international affairs and French. I was worried, uncertain and ready to leave the country. There were zero possibilities for me to work legally. Serendipitously, President Obama introduced DACA the next month, so I decided to stay. Until then, I had no idea what future I could have. My dream was to pursue a career in human rights and international affairs. I saw that as an absolute pipe dream, because someone with undocumented status cannot freely travel abroad.

You took the college spot and soaked up taxpayer money that should have gone to a legal U.S. citizen, and, instead of getting a degree with value, you got those.

Under DACA, I obtained my driver’s license. I later earned my master’s degree from the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin. While I was a graduate student, I interned for former Senate majority leader Harry Reid. I eventually found work in Washington, where I am pursuing a career at an NGO promoting the transparency and accountability of governments throughout the world. I could even travel abroad for work purposes. This has been a lifeline, for which I am grateful. But DACA is not a permanent fix.

So, whiny left wing agitator.

In 2012, when DACA was introduced, I thought it could be a steppingstone to having permanent status. However in September 2017, the Trump administration announced its plans to terminate DACA by March 5, 2018 — though injunctions from lower courts allowed applications to still be received. Recently, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, but with a conservative-leaning court, there is greater potential for DACA to end.

This is why I am leaving the United States. I am 29. I have waited 24 years for a solution. Like all DACA recipients, I have been living my life in two-year increments — the duration of my temporary status. I will no longer keep waiting for the idea of a pathway to citizenship.

Bye.

The ugly politics of the United States leave me with no desirable choice. I no longer wish to be a bargaining chip for a border wall. I am no longer willing to be another sob story to win votes. I can no longer go to bed every night with the anxiety of such an unsecure future. But I am privileged that by chance I was born in a high-income country to which I can easily return. I am privileged to have the agency to leave.

Isn’t that the great irony? To live the American dream of opportunity and autonomy, I must leave.

She loves the country but takes every chance to demean it, all because she can’t get her way. This is a problem with these Dreamers, and so many illegals: they demand. They demand healthcare, education, housing, money, and easy citizenship, but, are more than willing to slight America at the drop of a hat. They aren’t humble, they don’t say please. So, bye bye.

Of course, we all know that, just like all the leftards who’ve stated that they would leave if Bush 43 won re-election/Trump won in 2016 that they would leave, they didn’t, nor will Tawheeda Wahabzada.

Read: Bummer: Dreamers Dream Is Dead, Plans To Self-Deport »

Posted in Illegal Immigration | 38 Comments | Trackback URL

Central America Needs A Green New Deal Or Something

By William Teach August 14, 2019 – 7:43 am

Exporting Socialist authoritarianism to replace other authoritarianism in Central America

All or Nothing: A Green New Deal for Central America

…..

The US, Canada, China and Europe are the world powers which have contributed to the fast deterioration of the quality of life of Central Americans through exploitation schemes and political pressure. From the destruction of local economies as a result of the signing of the Dominican Republic-Central America Free Trade Agreement (DR-CAFTA), to the reinforcement of commercial policies which avoid compliance with human rights, and to the Association Agreement between the European Union and Central America, which protects and consolidates the domination and control by large corporations of the energy matrix of Central American countries. (snip)

Would it be possible for the developed world to imagine a moratorium for the countries which are the most unequal, violent and vulnerable to climate change, allowing their people enough flexibility to exceptionally apply another economic model? Clean energy? Decent jobs? Native seeds?

Central America accounts for 7% of the world’s biodiversity despite its small size. It leads the ranking of the most unequal countries in the world and of the poorest countries in the Americas, and it is home to four of the fifty most violent cities in the world. If economic slowdown is added to extreme vulnerability to climate change, lack of active public inclusion policies for women and marked racism to indigenous and Afro-descendant populations, it is obvious that the number of people willing to migrate to the North, even risking everything, will only increase.

A Green New Deal for Central America would allow for the possibility of conducting pilot testing, giving concrete shape to and defending a different future – no longer as an idea, but as a proven reality. Replacing fragile and failed institutions with architecture that results from economic and ecological transformation, empowering indigenous and peasant communities, regaining control of the natural commons, reversing the fast disappearance of unique species, preserving the remaining oxygen reserves in the region, compensating Central American countries for the impact that 10% of the world inflicts on them, putting them on the map of the countries most at riskfrom the global climate crisis. These changes do not depend on the congresses of these countries. They depend on Washington, Brussels and the international financial institutions.

First, are you getting the idea that this so-called Green New Deal push has almost nothing to do with either the environment nor ‘climate change’? Second, it’s rather strange that 1st World nations get blamed for the problems in Central America, then the blamers want to ignore the lawmakers of those Central American nations to allow the 1st World nations to dictate policy.

This humanitarian crisis summarizes the failures of the system that the world inflicts on the poor, pushing them to cross seas and deserts, and to risk everything while seeking a better life. At the same time, it is also an opportunity for a radical change, for transcending discourses which promise palliative “sustainable futures” that nobody is willing to finance. It is an opportunity for raising international solidarity on the basis of a concrete plan – beyond words and paper.

If the Green New Deal does not work here and now, if it cannot surpass humanitarian camp reactions and massive exoduses and produce a positive agenda, tomorrow will be too late. If we seal a new social contract, we must include everyone, we must make sure that no one is left behind – starting with those to whom we owe the most.

Da, comrade. You will be forced to comply. Enforced poverty for all, with government in complete control of your life.

Read: Central America Needs A Green New Deal Or Something »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Global Warming | No Comments | Trackback URL

Bad Behavior has blocked 5869 access attempts in the last 7 days.