My co-bloggers and I have founded a new blog called Sense of Events. This site will stay here, but new content at this URL will be very infrequent, if at all.

I actually started double-posting entries there at the end of October, but for the past few days I have posted content there that does not appear here.

Thank you for reading, and please add http://www.senseofevents.blogspot.com/ to your blogroll!

Is there such a thing? Kansas City Star columnist Jason Whitlock says yes, and it’s literally killing black men.

Arthur Herman, writing recently on OpinionJournal, says that Winston Churchill understood that the Jews are the bedrock of Western tradition.

A student of history, Churchill came to feel that Judaism was the bedrock of traditional Western moral and political principles-and Churchill was of a generation that preferred to talk about principles instead of “values.” For Europeans to turn against the Jew, he argued, was for them to strike at their own roots and reject an essential part of their civilization-”that corporate strength, that personal and special driving power” that Jews had brought for hundreds of years to Europe’s arts, sciences and institutions.

To deny Jews a national homeland was therefore an act of ingratitude. Churchill became a keen backer of the Balfour Declaration of 1917, which broached the idea of creating a Jewish homeland in Palestine. As a friend to Zionist leader Chaim Weizman, and as colonial secretary after World War I, Churchill made establishing such a homeland a matter of urgency. “The hope of your race for so many centuries will be gradually realized here,” Churchill told a Jewish audience in Jerusalem during his visit in March 1921, “not only for your own good, but for the good of all the world.”

That Churchill was a key figure in the establishment of modern Israel in 1948 can’t be denied, but Mr. Herman’s hagiographic essay is somewhat lopsided in its portrayal of Churchill as a supporter of the Jews and Israel from purely altruistic motives. Winston was, first and foremost, a man of the British Empire, and the interests of the Empire trumped eveything else for him.

As a reader points out on the response page, Mr. Churchill was not always so gracious about Jews. There are many examples but the first letter cites a recent lost Churchillian piece on the subject of discrimination.

More to the point, Herman apparently authored a volume called, “Gandhi and Churchill,” so I am very surprised that the blatant geopolitical rationale of the Jewish State is not mentioned. When the Empire took over the Presidencies and Territories from the East India Company in 1858 (can you imagine-India was the source of corporate ‘outsourcing’ since the subcontinent was a private corportation), the first project was to reduce communication and transportation times between Home and There.

In 1869, the first step was taken in Suez. But, the region was so unstable and so anti-Western that the Empire had to take further steps to bring order to the poor benighted masses laboring under local despots and thugs (a wonderful term named after an interesting cult group in Northern India that did not appreciate the incursion of the white man into Bharata). Mind you that the area had been a political football throughout the 19th century what with Crimea, the Iranian expedition, and various other actions requiring various fleets, admirals, generals, and gallants against the Turk and what not. WWI brought the program to a head. General Allenby, among others, criss-crossed the region slicing up the Ottoman armies and local resistance.

The ultimate goal of the empire was to put in place a new polity in the area to stabilize the region with Western Oriented Gentlemen who knew which end was up and were beholden to the Age of Reason and Enlightenment. Since Churchill was against slicing up the Empire, any love he may have had for the Jewish Nation would be more for their deportment to Palestine than anything else. San Remo and Balfour conventions, at the fall of the Ottoman Empire, were as much about planting a European (read: British) center of capitalism (those Jews and money) than anything else.

From my days in International Studies at the University of Washington, the received wisdom of the then dominant paradigm was that the opening up of a Jewish Homeland was along the same lines as fomenting the Muslim Hindu conflict or inter-caste/community conflicts-divide and rule. In fact, much of the current legacy of Israel/Palestine is from the Mandate-the British Administration. I am forever awed by how much Israeli legal bureaucratic structure resembles Modern Indian bureaucracy-The Raj. The buildings are the same, the “work to rule” is the same, and the incredible viscosity of getting anything done is the same.

No, from Herman’s examples I hear and can visualize the Conservatives and the Liberals debating a la Rhodes or Baden-Powell (the architects of colonialism and its bureaucracy) politely debating instituting the political importance of a new British colony, the Jewish Homeland, on the merits of 1000, 2000, or even 3000 years of history or the Abrahamic claim to the Cave of Makpalay in Hebron (bought for 400 pieces of silver and given to Isaac who gave it to Jacob/Israel). What a hoot! Winnie the Pooh only cared about Empire and history was its tool. Since when did the House of Commons pay attention to history other than to rewrite it?

About the images. Both were taken in Prague, 2005. I went with Susan who was on business to the annual meeting of the Claims Conference (the agency that has been fighting for reparations from the German and Austrian governments to material claims from WWII-yep, still going on). These pictures are taken on the edge of Jew Town. The first image is looking down the street into Jew Town. The dark building to the left is one of the oldest synagogues in Europe-the Maharal’s shul from the mid 13th century. On the right, in the foreground, there are a series of very nice building facades from about 1910, built during the economic spurt Prague experienced before WWI. These buildings were part of a world’s fair sort of deal, very swank, and have just been renovated during the post communist age. The one on the far right, is filled with couples from the different social classes of Prague-husbands and wives face each other silhouetted with their headgear/hairstyles, the coats of social station, and some sort of symbol of their class/station between them. Of course, at the top are the nobles, noblettes, and symbols of their station. A gorgeous building with delicate painted decorations restored with artistic grace and loving skill.

Prague: entering the Jewish section

The second picture shows the lowest floor above the doorway to the building. I looked all over for a reference to the Jews of Prague, who lived about 50 meters to the left. Susan spotted the frieze. Here is the Jewish couple with bent postures, hawk noses, and a pile of money between them. Yep, that’s how the Europeans saw the Jews in 1910. Either send them back home (Palestine) or find some other permenant solution.

Palestinian Media Watch reports,

Just a day after Israeli and Palestinian leaders at the Annapolis peace conference pledged to negotiate a peace treaty by the end of 2008, Mahmoud Abbas’s Palestinian Authority continues to paint a picture for its people of a world without Israel.

An information clip produced by the Palestinian Authority Central Bureau of Statistics and rebroadcast today on Abbas-controlled Palestinian television, shows a map in which Israel is painted in the colors of the Palestinian flag, symbolizing Israel turned into a Palestinian state.

The description of all of the state of Israel as “Palestine” is not coincidental, and is part of a formal, systematic educational approach throughout the Palestinian Authority. This uniform message of a world without Israel is repeated in school books, children’s programs, crossword puzzles, video clips, formal symbols, school and street names, etc. The picture painted for the Palestinian population, both verbally and visually, is of a world without Israel.

The fact that this campaign continues before the ink on the Annapolis agreement is even dry appears to contradict the central promise of the Palestinians at the Annapolis conference: that Israel has a right to exist.

You can view the video on PMW website.

Stephanie Coontz, a professor of history at Evergreen State College, asks why anyone needs the state’s permission to marry. It’s not an unreasonable question.

For most of Western history, they didn’t, because marriage was a private contract between two families. The parents’ agreement to the match, not the approval of church or state, was what confirmed its validity.

For 16 centuries, Christianity also defined the validity of a marriage on the basis of a couple’s wishes. If two people claimed they had exchanged marital vows — even out alone by the haystack — the Catholic Church accepted that they were validly married.

She recounts how the marriage license became intertwined with monetary benefits of survivorship in the middle of the last century, and why “the marriage license no longer draws reasonable dividing lines regarding which adult obligations and rights merit state protection.”

In 2004, I argued sort of conversely that it is the church that should get out of the wedding business - let the state worry about validating weddings and let the church worry about nurturing marriages. I still think it’s a good idea, and if you read Prof. Coontz’s essay and mine, you’ll see that they are actually congruent.

A UK Telegraph columnist reports,

… the latest US satellite figures [show] temperatures having fallen since 1998, declining in 2007 to a 1983 level - not to mention the newly revised figures for US surface temperatures showing that the 1930s had four of the 10 warmest years of the past century, with the hottest year of all being not 1998, as was previously claimed, but 1934.

How long until we will be advised that the fight against global warming has succeeded in turning the dire situation around?

Not until there’s no more big money to be made or given in being alarmist.

I am reminded of the Candid Camera put-on when Peter Funt and crew set up a booth outside a big supermarket with a banner that said, “Save the Grand Canyon! Donate Here!” They studiously avoided explaining to people just what the Grand Canyon needed saving from, but told people who asked that they could help save it by putting money into the big, glass jar on the table.

Peter Funt

They collected a large sum of money during the day. The skit ended with Funt talking to someone about donating when Funt’s cell phone rang, right on schedule. Funt answered it, said,”Okay thanks, that’s great!” and hung up. Then he started taking down all the displays and the banner.

“What are you doing?” the other man demanded.

“Going home,” answered Funt. “They saved it.”

“Saved what?” said the man.

“The Grand Canyon,” said Funt. “They saved it. Well, bye.”

Back in the real world, environmental scientist Prof. Bob Carter writes:

[T]he accepted global average temperature statistics used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change show that no ground-based warming has occurred since 1998. Oddly, this eight-year-long temperature stasis has occurred despite an increase over the same period of 15 parts per million (or 4 per cent) in atmospheric CO2.

Second, lower atmosphere satellite-based temperature measurements, if corrected for non-greenhouse influences such as El Nino events and large volcanic eruptions, show little if any global warming since 1979, a period over which atmospheric CO2 has increased by 55 ppm (17 per cent).

Third, there are strong indications from solar studies that Earth’s current temperature stasis will be followed by climatic cooling over the next few decades.

And that really is bad news. “Global cooling” has happened before; climatologists call it the “Little Ice Age.”

Western Europe experienced a general cooling of the climate between the years 1150 and 1460 and a very cold climate between 1560 and 1850 that brought dire consequences to its peoples. The colder weather impacted agriculture, health, economics, social strife, emigration, and even art and literature. Increased glaciation and storms also had a devastating affect on those that lived near glaciers and the sea. …

The cooler climate during the LIA had a huge impact on the health of Europeans. As mentioned earlier, dearth and famine killed millions and poor nutrition decreased the stature of the Vikings in Greenland and Iceland.

Cool, wet summers led to outbreaks of an illness called St. Anthony’s Fire. Whole villages would suffer convulsions, hallucinations, gangrenous rotting of the extremities, and even death. Grain, if stored in cool, damp conditions, may develop a fungus known as ergot blight and also may ferment just enough to produce a drug similar to LSD. (In fact, some historians claim that the Salem, Massachusetts witch hysteria was the result of ergot blight.)

Malnutrition led to a weakened immunity to a variety of illnesses. In England, malnutrition aggravated an influenza epidemic of 1557-8 in which whole families died. In fact, during most of the 1550’s deaths outnumbered births (Lamb, 1995.) The Black Death (Bubonic Plague) was hastened by malnutrition all over Europe.

One might not expect a typically tropical disease such as malaria to be found during the LIA, but Reiter (2000) has shown that it was an important cause of illness and death in several parts of England. …

I’m not willing to trade one kind of alarmism for another, but it’s interesting to compare the reports of the effects of the Little Ice Age with those of the Medieval Warm Period.

The Daily Tech asks, “Will the UN’s scenario for AIDS repeat for global warming reports?”

A new report from the United Nations acknowledges the agency has routinely overstated both the size and growth rate of the AIDS epidemic. …

Critics have long maintained the U.N. overstated cases to gain political and financial support. “There was a tendency toward alarmism, and that fit perhaps a certain fundraising agenda” said author and AIDS expert Helen Epstein.

Daily Tech goes on to report,

Climatologist and IPCC expert reviewer Vincent Gray has called the IPCC process “fundamentally corrupt” and its predictions a fraud. Dr. Madhav Khandekar, another IPCC expert reviewer, has called the review process scientifically unsound, and notes the latest report fails to acknowledge a growing number of scientists now question the theory of greenhouse gas-based climate change.

Is there a linkage between the UN’s handling of AIDS and global warming? According to journalist Claudia Rosett, the UN routinely overstates crises to generate funding, then uses it to fund a massive system of kickbacks, payoffs, and lavish expense accounts. According to Rosett, IPCC climate pronouncements are just part of this long-standing pattern.

The idea of the bureaucracy of the United Nations being made up of selfless, altruistic servants of humanity, who toil tirelessly for the benefit of all humankind, simply can’t be held by objective people. In fact, corruption of the highest order pervades almost everything the UN touches.

That aside, there are compelling (IMO, convincing) reasons to assert that global warming alarmism is really nothing more than the latest cash cow to milk. Consider the view of Dr William Gray, “a pioneer in the science of seasonal hurricane forecasts,” reports the Sydney Morning Herald.

Dr William Gray, a pioneer in the science of seasonal hurricane forecasts, told a packed lecture hall at the University of North Carolina that humans were not responsible for the warming of the earth. …

“We’ll look back on all of this in 10 or 15 years and realise how foolish it was,” Dr Gray said. …

“It bothers me that my fellow scientists are not speaking out against something they know is wrong,” he said. “But they also know that they’d never get any grants if they spoke out. I don’t care about grants.”

As I wrote last February, environmentalism is not merely a religion, it is an apocalyptic religion. And just like the sleaziest televangelist’s pleas, this religion requires massive cash inflows to survive.

Another thing - if global warming is the dire crisis the UN says it is, then why is the UN doing this?

Endnote: for more on the UN’s corruption, read , “Seeing the UN Plain: Corruption as a Way of Life,” by a US State Dept. official and this essay by Richard Sanchez at Belmont Club.

Someone once wrote about the jet-setting, celebrity, global-warming alarmists, “I’ll believe global warming is a crisis when the people who say it’s a crisis start acting like it’s a crisis.”

I posted earlier about the “sky is falling,” forthcoming report of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC. The looming apocalypse of global warming is so imminent, we’re told, that unless drastic measures are taken right now to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions, “catastrophic” consequences will begin by 2020.

But that’s a trivial concern compared with the need for 10,000 UN bureacrats to have their tax-paid, global-warming conference at one of the plushest resorts on earth, Bali. That the UN is based in New York, and that the bulk of the conference delegates live in New York, is apparently of little consequence when it comes to telling others to live a way that the UN itself won’t adopt. Scott Kirwin points out the global-warming consequences of the UN’s air travel alone:

For this single trip, each participant from New York City will use 1,731 kg of fuel, producing 5,282 kg of CO2 with the warming effect of 16,146 kg. …

But 10,000 people are expected to attend the conference and so far I’ve been unable to find any type of geographic breakdown. So I’m going to make some assumptions:

4,000 participants from New York - that’s where UN headquarters is.1,000 from Los Angeles - for press, Hollywood UN groupies, and UN personnel stationed at west coast consulates.3,000 from Rome - for European NGO, UN and official contingents1,000 from Hong Kong - that will cover participants and press from Japan, China and SE Asia1,000 from Delhi - which will cover South Asia, the Middle East and Africa. …

I will update this post with better numbers as I find them. However my estimate is that the UN conference in Bali will spew over 40,000 metric tons of CO2 into the atmosphere in air travel alone. This CO2 has the warming effect of just over 122,000 metric tons of CO2.

According to this Wikipedia article, trees planted in the tropics remove 22kg of CO2 from the atmosphere per year. That’s roughly 100 trees to remove one metric ton of CO2.

So in order to cover the 40,000 metric tons we would have to plant roughly 4,000,000 trees in the tropics.

“Live simply so others may simply live”? Not for the Yoo-Enn-ocrats.

Here are five provocative and thought provoking essays by Asia Times essayist Spengler.

Israel, the hope of the Muslim world

They made a democracy and called it peace

Why Europe chooses extinction

Christian, Muslim, Jew - Franz Rosenzweig and the Abrahamic Religions

What the Jews won’t tell you