See Comments down arrow

The latest climate news from Gaza

10 Apr 2024 | OP ED Watch

People’s ideas about the world seem to correlate in such a way that, for instance, if you know someone’s attitude toward COVID restrictions you can guess with remarkable accuracy their view of climate alarmism. Which made us take hostile notice of the Reuters “Sustainable Switch” newsletter on April 2 that said “This week opens with devastating news from Gaza as citizens from Australia, Britain and Poland were among seven people working for celebrity chef Jose Andres’ World Central Kitchen (WCK) who were killed in an Israeli airstrike in central Gaza on Monday, the NGO said.” Which has about as much to do with climate, or the environment more generally, as Florida’s new abortion law. Which they also condemned.

There is much to be said about the situation in Gaza, including that after this airstrike the Israeli authorities promptly expressed regret and launched an investigation, something Hamas did not do after its Oct. 7 massacre of innocents except to try to figure out how to butcher more civilians. But what’s it doing in this newsletter? And why was their top story on March 26 “UN vote on Gaza ceasefire passes” and why did it refer to a “ceasefire between Israel and Palestinian militants” instead of, say, “terrorists” or even, for those who like their reality real, “Hamas terrorists”? Why was almost that entire email, including the Quote of the Day from WHO’s disreputable Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, devoted to Gaza?

Why for that matter are Green parties so reliably wrong on the Middle East that, for instance, Australia’s Labour Party Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, himself so off-balance on the region that he’s willing to fund UNRWA, nevertheless found himself angrily denouncing a Green party MP for speaking of Jewish groups’ “tentacles” in politics? It’s a classic antisemitic trope and difficult to comprehend coming from people who won’t shut up about their inclusion. And in any case, Israel has a remarkable environmental record including “making the desert bloom”. Why are Greens so hostile to it?

Eventually the April 2 “Sustainable Switch” email staggered back onto their home turf with “Venezuela is battling a record number of wildfires, according to data released on Monday, as a climate change-driven drought plagues the Amazon rainforest region.” Or as some place is always having more fires than usual because the world is big, complicated and has a lot of fires. And then they were back to that famous climate issue:

“Racial diversity among law students declined by as much as 17% in the wake of state affirmative action bans over the past 28 years, a new study has found, with a reduction of up to 47% at top law schools.”

It was almost a relief when they had climate change killing chocolate toward the end though, again, if they’re so sure they should bet on higher prices in the futures market. But here’s the thing. If they tell you that belief in devastating man-made climate change necessarily comes as part of a package with a whole series of crazily left-wing views including vicious ones about global affairs… believe them. And think accordingly.

5 comments on “The latest climate news from Gaza”

  1. As anyone who has ever served in combat for the United States Army or Marine Corps will tell you, the two most fearsome enemies of infantry and mechanized troops on the battlefield is friendly artillery and friendly air support and the US military has the best fire control in human history! In combat the sad fact is that "shit happens"!

  2. Any idea how much 'racial diversity' has changed among graduates of these top law schools? UC Berkeley's law school used to admit a lot of black students, but they graduated very few. Probably a consequence of climate change. But taking black students who would probably graduate from other law schools and failing them seems a very poor way to improve 'diversity' in the legal profession.

  3. Here again is evidence of my theme that the internet is full of blogs which are good at one topic and garbage about almost everything else. The problem is they do not really know how to know; how to examine a topic and derive the essential facts about it before taking it into their model of reality. The correct information is available about the Israel-Palestine situation. People who one would expect to know better, refuse to look for it or refuse to take it in. Such people would have also bought into the Nazis explanations about the Jews. In fact, the best debunk of the Israeli propaganda "baby killer" account of the start of the Gaza war was made by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz.
    Here is my most recent article about the Gaza situation. My next one will be out soon, about the potential of the conflict to spin up into a nuclear war. https://adultsincharge.blog/2024/01/08/gaza-and-zionism/

  4. @tim rourke: I fully agree with your assessment of blogs.
    In war and when people are being slaughtered, many people have an immediate response to choose a side. Sometimes it's because they know people on one side of the conflict, sometimes it's the media, sometimes it's just a random choice.
    We all do this and it's not a shame to admit it. The adult thing to do though is to take some time to reflect on your stance, your knowledge and your sources AND actively try to see the situation from the other side.
    Then you choose a side with some objectivity. In most war cases though, if you actually do this honestly, you will conclude that both sides are wrong and choosing to side with the rapist over the murderer is just an arbitrary choice. It's best to get them both to stop.

    Also, I hope OP is aware of the irony of posting a one-sided political piece on a blog about the climate while at the same time complaining that someone else is posting a one-sided (albeit the other side) political piece in a newsletter about climate change.

    I love this blog, but until you learn to objectively reflect on these kind of subjects, I implore you to leave the non-climatic political comments out of here.

  5. You just can't bring yourself to criticise Israel's slaughter of Palestinians, of which, over 14,000 being children.

    I don't condone the Hamas attack, killing people is wrong, period.
    Regardless of what you think of Hamas, can't you say that Israel's response, which has killed tens of thousands, is wrong?

    To do so is not supporting Hamas, it's supporting humanity, and to criticise the Israeli state, is not the least bit antisemitic. No more than criticising western gov'ts, is an act of anti-christianity.

    Grow the fk up, and stop reducing yourself to the same position of being as morally bankrupt, as the politicians you criticise, such as Trudeau.

    That's what you sound like now, just another disingenuous political mouthpiece for authority.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *