RUTHFULLY YOURS

Finally, we may be getting some cosmic justice for the gang of warmists who have spread hysteria over their shaky theory of global warming. Owing to an outrageous act of witch-hunting dissenters, a congressional investigation has begun, and who knows what it will uncover?

It was an outrage when a group of 20 scientists published a letter to President Obama and AG Lynch demanding RICO prosecution of those who question the theory of global warming, based as it is on models that have failed to accurately predict the Earth’s climate for the last 19 years. Not only is criminalizing scientific investigation a bad idea, but the underlying contention that skeptics are funded by greedy polluters is false, a myth deliberately spread by the gang that profits from hysteria, as Russell Cook demonstrated on these pages yesterday.

The letter was published on the website of the Institute for Global Environment and Society (IGES), a nonprofit funded almost exclusively by government grants. The first sign that something was amiss was when IGES disappeared the RICO letter from its website. A bit later, the “404 not found” page was replaced by this:

The letter that was inadvertently posted on this web site has been removed. It was decided more than two years ago that the Institute of Global Environment and Society (IGES) would be dissolved when the projects then undertaken by IGES would be completed. All research projects by IGES were completed in July 2015, and the IGES web site is in the process of being decommissioned.

Inadvertently? Somebody is trying to cover his posterior, aware that misconduct has taken place. It is bad enough that the entire website is about to be taken down. Perhaps they got an inkling of what was headed their way. Lachlan Markay of the Free Beacon delivers the news:

A congressman is asking a taxpayer-funded environmental group to preserve records related to its president’s campaign to bring federal racketeering charges against climate change skeptics.

Rep. Lamar Smith (R., Texas), chairman of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, revealed the committee will be investigating calls from George Mason University meteorologist Jagadish Shukla and nineteen other scientists to bring civil racketeering charges against companies and organizations that pay for scientific research that questions catastrophic human-induced climate change. (snip)

“IGES’s recent decision to remove documents from its website raises concerns that additional information vital to the Committee’s investigation may not be preserved,” Smith wrote in a Thursday letter to Shukla.

America is still waiting for President Obama to share his insights on Kate Steinle. Kate is the woman murdered by Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, an illegal felon who, after being deported seven times, managed to find his way back to San Francisco where he shot the 32-year-old in the back with a stolen gun.

To date: “No comment.”

Conversely, much as he does whenever there is a mass shooting, Obama nearly tripped over his wingtips sprinting to the podium to blame Second Amendment advocates and the Republican-controlled Congress for the mass shooting on a community college campus in Roseburg, Oregon.

Yet every day, 4,000 babies expire in abortion clinics and dozens of people die at the hands of inner city thugs and illegal immigrant criminals, none of which the president responds to with grief or concern.

Unlike his indifference to the deaths of Americans killed by illegal aliens or the dismissive attitude he has toward the 60 million human beings who have been ferried from the abortion clinic to the incinerator, and much like the way he portrayed 9-year-old Tucson shooting victim Christina Taylor Green jumping in heaven’s rain puddles, while exploiting the Umpqua Community College victims for political expediency the president sounded like he was describing DREAMers:

Like the radical left-wing domestic terrorists befriended two decades ago by Barack Hussein Obama, the totalitarian mass murderers of the Islamic State are reportedly determined to kill millions of Americans.

Slaughtering Americans by the millions was a key objective of the Weather Underground Organization (WUO), which was led during the Vietnam War era by Obama’s close Chicagoland friend and Hyde Park neighbor Bill Ayers, among other individuals.

Ayers described the Weatherman philosophy as “Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, kill your parents, that’s where it’s really at.”

He was delighted in the 1980s when riot incitement and conspiracy charges against him were thrown out. “Guilty as sin, free as a bird,” Ayers gloated. “America is a great country,” he said for the first and only time in his life.

Obama infamously began his career in electoral politics at a fundraiser in 1995 in the home of the unrepentant small-c communist terrorist bomber Ayers and his wife Bernardine Dohrn, another former WUO leader.

The Swedes see the welfare systems failing them. Swedes have had to get used to the government prioritizing refugees and migrants above native Swedes.

“There are no apartments, no jobs, we don’t dare go shopping anymore [without a gun], but we’re supposed to think everything’s great. … Women and girls are raped by these non-European men, who come here claiming they are unaccompanied children, even though they are grown men. … You Cabinet Ministers live in your fancy residential neighborhoods, with only Swedish neighbors. It should be obligatory for all politicians to live for at least three months in an area consisting mostly of immigrants… [and] have to use public transport.” — Laila, to the Prime Minister.

“Instead of torchlight processions against racism, we need a Prime Minister who speaks out against the violence… Unite everyone. … Do not make it a racism thing.” — Anders, to the Prime Minister.

“In all honesty, I don’t even feel they [government ministers] see the problems… There is no one in those meetings who can tell them what real life looks like.” – Laila, on the response she received from the government.

The week after the double murder at IKEA in Västerås, where a man from Eritrea who had been denied asylum grabbed some knives and stabbed Carola and Emil Herlin to death, letters and emails poured into the offices of Swedish Prime Minister (PM) Stefan Löfven. Angry, despondent and desperate Swedes have pled with the Social Democratic PM to stop filling the country with criminal migrants from the Third World or, they write, there is a serious risk of hatred running rampant in Sweden. One woman suggested that because the Swedish media will not address these issues, Löfven should start reading foreign newspapers, and wake up to the fact that Sweden is sinking fast.

One promising approach could also help with other neurodegenerative disorders, including Alzheimer’s and Huntington’s disease.

Walking in the east London neighborhood of Shoreditch in the early 1800s, the physician James Parkinson noticed certain individuals who moved differently from the crowd. In 1817 he articulated their symptoms, such as tremor, rigidity, slow movements and stooped gait. His “Essay on the Shaking Palsy” became the first description of what is now called Parkinson’s disease. Toward the end of this classic document, Parkinson remarked in passing, “there appears to be sufficient reason for hoping that some remedial process may ere long be discovered, by which, at least, the progress of the disease may be stopped.”

Some 200 years later, the disease, which affects one million Americans and seven million people world-wide, still hasn’t been cured. While drugs such as L-dopa and surgeries such as deep brain stimulation can help manage the symptoms, all attempts to slow, stop or reverse the disease’s course have failed. Efforts to protect dopamine cells with drugs, to revive dopamine cells with special growth factors and, most controversially, to graft new dopamine-making cells derived from fetal tissue into the brains of Parkinson’s patients, have not panned out.

The recent Republican presidential debate is largely forgotten, but before the next one we thought at least one question is worth correcting: Moderator Jake Tapper’s effort to conscript Ronald Reagan into the ranks of climate-change activists.

Reagan “faced a similar situation to the one that we’re facing now,” the CNN anchor said to Senator Marco Rubio, referring to concerns in the 1980s about a hole that formed each year in the atmosphere’s ozone layer. Mr. Tapper invoked former Secretary of State George Shultz, who “says Ronald Reagan urged skeptics in industry to come up with a plan. He said, do it as an insurance policy in case the scientists are right. The scientists were right.” The point of Mr. Tapper’s tale: Why not “approach climate change the Reagan way?”

Messrs. Tapper and Shultz are reminiscing about the Montreal Protocol, a 1987 international treaty that phased out chlorofluorocarbons, then common refrigerants in freezers, air conditioners and other appliances. The worry was that the stuff eroded the ozone layer. Montreal is celebrated as the paragon of cooperative climate action, largely because the dire predictions—skin-cancer epidemics, for instance—didn’t materialize. Scientists say the ozone hole has stopped growing, though it still isn’t clear that the treaty is the reason.

Afghanistan’s chief executive says it was clear Kunduz would fall, for lack of military resources.

It was May 2014, and the war in Afghanistan would soon be over. Or so said Barack Obama.

“This is how wars end in the 21st century,” the president explained in a Rose Garden address. “Not through signing ceremonies, but through decisive blows against our adversaries, transitions to elected governments, security forces who are trained to take the lead and ultimately full responsibility.” Also prisoner exchanges, which is how the U.S. swapped Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl for five senior Taliban commanders long held at Guantanamo.

As with so many of Mr. Obama’s foreign-policy promises, things have not worked out that way. Sgt. Bergdahl, hailed by the White House for serving with “honor and distinction,” was charged last month with desertion and misbehavior before the enemy. Afghanistan’s political system nearly came undone last summer amid bitter allegations of electoral fraud in the second-round presidential contest between Ashraf Ghani and Abdullah Abdullah. The Afghan army has been beset by high desertion rates, record casualties, poor logistics, and inadequate air and intelligence capabilities. The Taliban is resurgent under its new supreme leader, Mullah Akhtar Mansour.

And Americans are still fighting. This week, U.S. Special Forces advisers and pilots fought alongside the Afghan army to reclaim the northern city of Kunduz, which had fallen to the Taliban in a predawn attack on Monday. It was the first time since 2001 that the insurgents had gained control of a major Afghan city.

Nadya Savchenko, a Ukrainian officer, had finished tending to soldiers wounded in a firefight with pro-Russian separatists when her yellow scarf caught the eye of an enemy patrol in eastern Ukraine.

Lt. Savchenko, the first woman trained as a fighter pilot in Ukraine, surrendered at gunpoint. “Here she is,” one separatist said, “a woman sniper.”

The pro-Russian rebels yelled taunts, blindfolded her and forced her to her knees, according to a video from June 17, 2014, the day Lt. Savchenko began her perilous journey into Russia’s justice system.

She is accused of guiding a mortar attack that killed two Russian TV journalists that day in a criminal case that spans 39 volumes of evidence and testimony. Lt. Savchenko, who has been held in Russia for more than a year, is now on trial. She has denied the charges against her, but even her lawyers expect guilty verdicts and a lengthy prison term.

Her case illuminates the war in Ukraine—including the role of TV propaganda and the apparent involvement of Russian agents. To Kremlin critics, it also brings to light the revival of an old Soviet institution: the show trial, intended not to establish innocence or guilt, but to reinforce the party line and punish dissent. While Russia’s domestic opponents have faced such prosecutions for years, the war in Ukraine has added an extraterritorial dimension.

German-speaking emigres like Frank Auerbach dragged British culture into the 20th century. But that didn’t go down well in Stepney or Stevenage.

Next week Frank Auerbach will be honoured by the British art establishment with a one-man show at Tate Britain. It’s a fitting tribute for an artist who’s widely (and quite rightly) regarded as Britain’s greatest living painter. Yet although Auerbach has spent almost all his life in Britain, what’s striking about his paintings is how Germanic they seem.

Born in Berlin in 1931, Auerbach was only seven when he came to England (his parents subsequently perished in the Holocaust). By rights, he should stand alongside British artists such as Peter Blake and David Hockney, yet his work feels far closer to German painters like Georg Baselitz or Anselm Kiefer. Auerbach is a one-off, a unique painter with a unique vision. However he’s also part of a vast wave of Germanic immigration that has transformed British cultural life — mainly for the better, but at a price.

During the 1930s, 100,000 refugees fled to Britain from the Third Reich. Britain had weathered other migrations, but this one was entirely different. Nazism had transformed a liberal democracy into a violent, superstitious tyranny. These refugees weren’t only fleeing from anti-Semitism. They were fleeing from a pogrom against western civilisation. This wave of immigrants wasn’t just another huddled mass — it was the cultural élite of Central Europe, the best and brightest from every avenue of academia and the arts.

Dictator – the last in Robert Harris trilogy on ancient Rome – focuses on Cicero and his secretary Tiro and ‘the most tumultuous era in human history’Marcus Tullius Cicero was the ancient master of the ‘save’ key. He composed more letters, speeches and philosophy books than most writers of any epoch; but more important than any particular work was that so much survived to define his time. He had a secretary, Tiro, who can reasonably be given the credit for researching, correcting, copying and casting out his master’s words. In Robert Harris’s three novels of Cicero’s life, Marcus Tullius Tiro, the freed slave who took his name as well as dictation from his boss, gets his full reward. Over more than 1,000 pages, the secretary is the narrator of how the world’s first great republic slipped into empire, a story that, thanks to the luck of literary survival, centres on Cicero as so many histories have before.

Dictator draws on the final 14 years of Cicero’s writings, beginning in the year 58 bc when, still famed and shamed for killing the Catilinarian conspirators in his consulship five years before, he chooses exile rather than an open fight with bigger, fiercer and suddenly united beasts, the plutocrat Marcus Crassus, the butcher-turned-constitutionalist Gnaius Pompeius and the genius of war and prose, Julius Caesar. How honest is Cicero — in public and in private — about why he is going? Compromise clashes with principle, events with expectations, until a triumphant return, and one by one the murders of all those beasts and his own murder.