RUTHFULLY YOURS

Until world leaders can explain their way past two specific graphs, their gathering in Paris this week to combat so-called global warming might as well launch a War on Leprechauns.

It would be bad enough if President Obama and some 150 other heads of state were pursuing destructive solutions to a legitimate problem. Far worse, they are poised to adopt policies that will slow economic growth, spread poverty, and stymie human progress, all in slavish service to an utterly bogus “problem” of their own imagination. They are like madmen frantically swatting brooms at “bats” that flap their brittle wings solely inside these politicians’ febrile skulls.

Those who push this agenda once hollered about pending doom, thanks to “global warming.” A few years ago, they quietly retired that rhetoric and, instead, began shouting about “climate change.”

Why the jumped-up new slogan? “Global warming” stopped happening, and complaining about it increasingly made them look deranged.

As this graph clearly indicates, scientific observations from weather satellites have reported zero warming in global mean temperatures since February 1997, when readings from recent decades peaked. Simply put, despite the warmists’ high-decibel bluster, there has been no global warming for 18 years and nine months.

While world leaders in Paris this month push for sacrifice and austerity to save the planet, one American environmental group is boldly pushing back. A new breed of environmentalists — including many former hard-core greens — is promoting “ecomodernism,” a fresh approach that challenges the dogma of the traditional environmental movement.

Ecomodernists have a more optimistic, capitalistic, and sensible world view than their old-guard counterparts. And if the Paris conference fails to produce results, ecomodernists could represent a new path forward on both environmental and global-growth issues. “Instead of viewing environmental problems as a sign of the coming apocalypse, we instead view them as unintended consequences of development,” says one of the movement’s founders, Michael Shellenberger. “We are not going to solve global warming with all of us trying to live with less.”

Shellenberger is a lifelong liberal activist who once worked for groups such as the Sierra Club and Earthjustice. His environmental cred is stellar: Even as a kid, Shellenberger would cast off paper boats lit with small candles every August to commemorate the Hiroshima bombings. During the anti-nuke 1980s, he was swayed by the documentary The Day After and other films that showed doomsday scenarios about nuclear proliferation. “I was anti-nuclear my whole life.”

The American Anthropological Association (AAA) voted on Nov. 20 to boycott Israel, though the resolution—which would prohibit Israeli academic institutions from any involvement in the organization, such as participation in conferences and hiring events—must still be approved by the group’s full membership in coming months. Ten days later the National Women’s Studies Association voted to call for a boycott of “entities and projects sponsored by the state of Israel.” Boycott votes are also scheduled at the annual meetings of the American Historical Association (AHA) and the Modern Language Association.

The moral myopia and academic perversity of these boycotts have been widely discussed. Less well understood is that in many cases they also are illegal. Under corporate law, an organization, including a nonprofit, can do only what is permitted under the purposes specified in its charter.

Putin’s deployment of advanced S-400 system impacts a mainstay of Israel’s defense strategy, though coordination with Moscow mitigates the threat
Israel’s air superiority over its enemies has been a linchpin of its defense strategy for decades. The capacity of Israeli planes to carry out attacks well within enemies’ borders has prevented Syria and Iraq from creating nuclear weapons. The Israel Air Force’s unquestioned supremacy over neighboring forces has kept Syrian, Egyptian and Jordanian planes almost entirely out of Israeli airspace in the country’s wars.

But with the recent deployment of the Russian S-400 “Triumph” missile defense system in Syria, that absolute primacy is now in question.

http://jamieglazov.com/2015/12/01/robert-spencer-on-to-flood-america-with-muslim-refugees-on-the-glazov-gang-2/

This special new edition of The Glazov Gang was joined by Robert Spencer, the Director of JihadWatch.org and the author of the new book The Complete Infidel’s Guide to ISIS.

Robert came on the show to discuss To Flood America With Muslim Refugees, unveiling the meaning of the Islamic State threatening to flood Europe with 500,000 refugees in February, 2015.

Don’t miss it!

For the past few months, almost every day, Arab terrorists have ‎committed attacks on Israelis — mostly knife assaults, but also cars ‎plowing into Israeli soldiers or civilians, and some shootings. Two dozen ‎Israelis have been killed, and a far greater number have been wounded.

The ‎attacks followed a vicious incitement campaign by the Palestinian Authority, Hamas, ‎and other radicalized groups among Israeli and West Bank Arabs blasting out ‎repeated warnings that Israel and the Jews were mounting an assault on the ‎Temple Mount and Al-Aqsa mosque, with a design to change the character of ‎the arrangement that has existed there for nearly 50 years.‎

The warnings are false, of course, but also malicious, since the PA and its allies in ‎the slander campaign fully understand the power of the warnings about the alleged ‎threats to Al-Aqsa and Jerusalem, given the history of the conflict. No propaganda ‎campaign is more likely to incite attacks on Israel and Jews in Israel or elsewhere ‎than one focused on protecting Jerusalem and Al-Aqsa from the infidels ‎threatening it.

The campus moonbatocracy in the US has become obsessed with “micro-aggressions.” These are supposed to be seemingly harmless words or forms of behavior that make fashionable minorities feel oppressed. Things like wearing a sombrero on Halloween or telling a black women that you are proud that she graduated cum laude. I guess a macro-aggression would be to ask her if she’d like some watermelon. You can see a collection of alleged micro-aggressions here.

Well, it occurred to me that the jihad against micro-aggressions (and using the word jihad of course is a macro-aggression against Moslems) just invites us to balance the scales of sanity be defining a new concept.

Comrades, it is time we define micro-treasons and begin to take serious action against them.

Micro-treasons are acts that are far less blatant than macro-treasons. The latter would include joining ISIS or a Marxist group or Students for Justice in Palestine or Peace Now. Micro-treasons are far less obvious. They come in various forms. Here are a few examples:

– Referring to terrorists as militants or activists;

As campuses across the country are roiled in paroxysms of self-righteous indignation over race, groups of black students, perhaps inspired and emboldened by the anarchistic successes at University of Missouri, have formed coalitions and presented elaborate, and breathtakingly audacious, lists of demands which they have nailed to the doors of their respective university administrations.

An ever-growing list of these remarkably outrageous demands is even being archived at a site, The Demands.org, and which, as of this week, comprised the juvenile manifestos of groups on over 60 campuses, including calls for removals of college presidents (as happened at University of Missouri, as the most conspicuous and significant example), the renaming of buildings and schools named for racists and other moral reprobates (as happened at Princeton and indignation over its former president, Woodrow Wilson), and various similar calls for increased recruitment of minority faculty and students, enhanced centers and facilities for minority students, increased financial aid to “students of color” and other underrepresented groups, and a litany of other minority-centric benefits and amenities.

Despite the substantial funds that have been devoted to fighting anti-Israel forces on campuses, they have not been diminished.
The foundations of American Jewish life are under assault today in ways that were unimaginable a generation ago. Academia is ground zero of the onslaught. The protest movements on campuses are first and foremost anti-Jewish movements.

For the past decade or so, Jewish communal leaders and activists have focused on just one aspect of this anti-Jewish campaign. Jewish leaders have devoted themselves to helping Jewish students combat the direct anti-Semitism inherent to the anti-Israel student movements.

Despite the substantial funds that have been devoted to fighting anti-Israel forces on campuses, they have not been diminished. To the contrary, with each passing year they have grown more powerful and menacing.

Consider a sampling of the anti-Jewish incidents that took place over the past two weeks.

Two weeks ago, Daniel Bernstein, a Jewish student at University of California Santa Cruz and a member of the university’s student government was ordered not to vote on a resolution calling for the university to divest from four companies which do business with Israel.

Progressive Jews leverage their political power and funding outside of Israel in order to change Israeli policies, but they ignore the consequences.Cheers for US vice president Joe Biden’s criticism of settlements at the Reform movement’s recent convention reflect a long-standing position of the organization and a controversy that has divided Jewish communities and undermines support for Israel and Zionism: Are Jewish communities built beyond the 1949 Armistice Lines – the “settlements” – legal, legitimate, and part of the Zionist vision? Unfortunately, Israeli administrations and leaders have not addressed this question.

Recently, two American professors who claim to be Zionists wrote an op-ed in The Washington Post supporting campaigns to boycott Israel because of “Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory.”

Although criticism of Israel by Jews and Israelis is not unusual, few have crossed the red line of what is considered legitimate criticism.