Ban Ki-moon Tackles the Important Issues

Apparently a world in crisis isn't enough to keep this "world leader" occupied. Much like his kindred spirit in the White House who parties while the Mideast unravels, this dim bulb presses forward with the really important issues of the day.

Libya's aflame, Mexico's under siege, Iran's building nuclear weapons and what's the U.N. secretary-general doing? Pitching movie ideas to Hollywood bigwigs.

We kid you not. As the real world seemed to be coming apart at the seams, Ban Ki-moon swept into Tinseltown during Oscar week to urge the entertainment industry to produce more movies, TV shows and music about — drumroll, please — global warming.

During a daylong forum, some 400 writers, directors, producers, agents and network executives were briefed on recent heat waves, floods, fires and droughts that have been blamed on man-made climate change.

"Animate these stories!" the Los Angeles Times quoted Ban as beseeching. "Set them to music! Give them life! Together we can have a blockbuster impact on the world." And judging from the Times' unblinking account, ideas started flowing immediately.

Despite the fact movies about mythical global warming bomb at the box office, surely Hollywood will continue to pour money down the rathole.

The climate effort, managed by the same office, has broader ambitions. "You have power and influence to send to millions and billions of people around world," Ban told his Los Angeles audience. "To make planet Earth environmentally sustainable is a political and moral imperative."

Also speaking on panels were Indian economist Rajendra Pachauri — chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the group of some 2,500 scientists who won the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize for assessing the effects of greenhouse gases — and Costa Rican diplomat Christiana Figueres, who led global treaty negotiations in Cancun as the head of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change.

"There's a huge gap between what governments can do, given political constraints, and what they should do," Figueres told Hollywood executives. "That's where you come in. ... We need you to make it sexy and cool to bring about the energy revolution that has to happen."

King asked Pachauri if he had a "sexy story we could make into a film."

Please, don't ever mention Larry King and Patchy in the same sentence as the word sexy.

But Marshall Herskovitz, a veteran producer and director who has a climate-related project in the works, dismissed the comparison. "Everybody is interested in health," he said. "But audiences see climate change as a distant phenomenon that affects parts of the world we don't see."

Unfortunately, Herskovitz said, "the best messaging on climate change by far is by the deniers. Chevron has a brilliant TV campaign. They would lead you to believe that climate change is being solved by the oil business."

H/T.

UN Chief Laments 'Politics of Hate'

No word if he was looking directly at Barack Obama when he said this.

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warned kings, prime ministers and presidents Thursday of growing political polarization and social inequalities and implored U.N. members to show greater tolerance and mutual respect to bring the world together.

In his keynote speech to the opening of the General Assembly's annual ministerial meeting, the U.N. chief told leaders from the 192-member nations that "today, we are being tested."

Ban said people everywhere are living in fear of losing their jobs, too many are caught in conflict, "and we see a new politics at work - a politics of polarization."

"We hear the language of hate, false divisions between `them' and `us,' those who insist on `their way' or `no way,'" he said.

Does that cover people who dismissed opposition and said I won?

As to the "language of hate," has Moon ever read any leftwing media and blogs talking about Tea Partiers?

UN Orders 'Independent' Panel to Review IPCC Procedures

Raise you hands all of you who think for a second this will be anything but a whitewash?

In an apparent slap at the embattled chief of the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has ordered a newly formed outside scientific panel to review its "procedures and practices" -- and more significantly, its management.

The hastily assembled panel will be headed by Prof. Robbert H. Dijkgraaf, head of the Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences and co-chairman of the InterAcademy Council. The investigation will be carried out by the Council and will be composed of unpaid volunteer scientists. The panel's formation, it was acknowledged at a press conference Wednesday, was a direct reaction to criticism of the way the IPCC put together its last report on climate change.

Of course this "independent" panel won't have anything to do with all the junk science already promulgated by the discredited IPCC.

So what's the point?

But the IPCC has faced a torrent of criticism since November, when leaked e-mails raised doubts about its handling of data and its fairness. At least five significant errors have been reported in the panel's findings, and its credibility has been severely undermined both among scientists and the public.

On several occasions during Wednesday's press conference, Dijkgraaf said that the mandate of the new panel is not to look at past mistakes but to ensure that the IPCC's next report, its fifth, on the state of climate science will be accepted by the public and the scientific community.

Without admitting their previous reports were bogus, do they really expect people to accept their next report? Oh, and don't expect skeptics to be included in this "independent" report.

The assessment is to be completed by late August so that the findings can be used at the Oct. 5 meeting that will begin the effort to put out the latest report. Dijkgraaf admitted it will be a hurried task since no other members have been appointed and there still isn’t a budget for the panel.

Asked if there will be an effort to include climate change skeptics in the internal debates over which data are used, Dijkgraaf declined to answer.

"All scientists are skeptics," he said.

Can you say whitewash, boys and girls?

'We Must Seize the Moment to Seal the Deal'

Yes, you better seal the deal before the media catches on to ClimateGate. Not that there's any urgency to do that.

SUCCESS is in sight at the looming Copenhagen talks on climate change, UN chief Ban Ki-moon says, after encouraging signs at a summit of Commonwealth nations.
"We must not fail. Success in Copenhagen is in sight. We must seize the moment to seal the deal," said the UN Secretary General, urging all world leaders to attend the final days of the Copenhagen talks.

Ban said he was convinced that the talks would clinch a strong statement on setting targets to curb greenhouse gases, blamed for global warming.

Of course, there is no "global warming," but why quibble with reality?

Scandal? What scandal?

UN Fires Obama's Envoy To Afghanistan

This story is just full of irony and twists and turns that are only possible in the world of diplomats.

First the cast of characters.

Peter Galbraith, the UN's second in command in Afghanistan. He got the job at the insistence of the newly elected Barack Obama in light of strong opposition from the UN.

Ban Ki Moon, current head of the UN.

Kai Eide, a Norwegian who vehemently opposed the appointment of Mr Galbraith, and who was his boss in Afghanistan.

Throw in a dose of Richard Holbrooke and a controversial election and pure comedy ensues.

Mr. Galbraith just either quit or got fired from his posting in Afghanistan because he wanted the UN to put a more visible voice to the recent election and the irregularities that were reported. Mr. Moon and Mr. Eide told him to shut up. This has all the hallmarks of another UN scandal; not for the firing, but rather for what sort of backroom deals are going on at the UN that they would not more attention brought to the allegations of election fraud in Afghanistan.

Oh, don't think Galbraith is all that much of a knight in shining armor. In 2007, he authored a book entitled The End of Iraq: How American Incompetence Created A War Without End. Galbraith's solution? Partitioning the country into three parts, also known as the Biden Plan. Ironically, he was one of the very same people who led the charge to depose Saddam Hussein.

I supported President Bush's decision to overthrow Saddam Hussein. At Wolfowitz's request, I helped advance the case for war, drawing on my work in previous years in documenting Saddam's atrocities, including the use of chemical weapons on the Kurds. In spite of the chaos that followed the war, I am sure that Iraq is better off without Saddam Hussein.

At the time of his appointment back in March the Times Online had this to say.

Peter Galbraith, son of the late economist J.K. Galbraith, became the UN's second-in-command in Afghanistan, despite the protests from the man who will now be his boss. The appointment strengthens US influence over the UN operation in Afghanistan as the Obama Administration is about to reveal its new strategy to win the war against the resurgent Taleban.

As far as the title of ambassador, that didn't go so well either.

He served as US Ambassador in Croatia from 1993 to 1998 while Mr Holbrooke was brokering the peace in the Balkan wars. He became embroiled in controversy over his role in alleged US complicity in Iranian arms shipments to Croatia and Bosnia, in violation of UN sanctions.

So back in March when Barry O was dedicated to winning in Afghanistan he appointed this guy at the same time he was removing Christopher Hill from Korea and reassigning him to Iraq, because after all he did such a wonderful job with North Korea; people who might have been asking questions were so deep into Obama worship that moves that would have struck many people as being designed to purposely lose the wars we were engaged in simply flew under the radar.

I feel Galbraith was standing up for the right thing in advocating for an investigation into the election process in Afghanistan, but I wonder what he thinks of ACORN and their role in electing our president?

Don't you just sleep better at night knowing the Barry O international team is on the job now?

Fisk: Hey, How About a War Crimes Tribunal for the Israelis?

Why not just throw Bush and Cheney in there while you're at it, Bob? This deluded stooge will never escape bizarro world. The poor Hamas terrorists are never at fault. Does Hamas ever stop lobbing rockets at Israel? Of course not. But according to the drooling moron, the Israelis forced them to.

And history was quite forgotten. The Hamas rockets were the result of the food and fuel siege; Israel broke Hamas's own truce on 4 and 17 November. Forgotten is the fact Hamas won the 2006 elections, although Israel has killed a clutch of the victors.

And there'll be little time for the peacemakers of Sharm el-Sheikh to reflect on the three UN schools targeted by the Israelis and the slaughter of the civilians inside. Poor old Ban Ki-moon. He tried to make his voice heard just before the ceasefire, saying Israel's troops had acted "outrageously" and should be "punished" for the third school killing. Some hope. At a Beirut press conference, he admitted he had failed to get a call through to Israel's Foreign Minister to complain.

It was pathetic. When I asked Mr Ban if he would consider a UN war crimes tribunal in Gaza, he said this would not be for him to "determine". But only a few journalists bothered to listen to him and his officials were quickly folding up the UN flag on the table. About time too. Bring back the League of Nations. All is forgiven.

Naturally, Fisk's lunacy inspires the crazies.

Actually, the Israeli cold-blooded murder of innocent civilians and deliberate destruction of Gaza in front of the cameras is worse than the Nazi atrocities of WWII because the Nazi crimes came to light only after WWII. The Israelis are remorseless and cruel despite the daily condemnation by people all over the world. Just imagine, what would the Israelis do if there were no cameras or Internet like WWII?

Worse than the Nazis.

Just sick.

Here's another who should really consider strong medication.

What the Zionist/Israeli government and their military have planned is berserker policy to terrorize and demoralize the Palestinians incarcerated, without trial, in Gaza. All what the world witnessed was planned well in advance, it is entirely intentional, the crimes against the innocent, the crimes against humanity, the crimes against the peace, and every crime of war. Israel is berserker, unfit to sit at any civilized table, the words of berserkers are not fit for considering in civilized council, the honour of berserkers does not exist, to do so would be as to throw pearls to swine. Zionism has become swinish by believing their own lies and propaganda. All those who repeat this set of lies are themselves guilty of crimes against humanity simply by giving aid, support, and comfort to those committing the atrocities. Zionists and Israelis have become heart ugly. End it.

The ugliness goes on and on.

The Nazi Israeli regime was not targeting Hamas only, but was deliberately killing the palestinian. On the contrary, this brutal and criminal war on Gaza made Hamas stronger, and proved how organized and strog Hamas is and the Nazi rgeime could not achieve its evil and criminal goals.

Sick stuff. The folks at the Independent must be proud of themselves.

Saudi Headchoppers to Lead UN Conference on 'Religious Tolerance'

Is this some kind of sick joke?

Saudi Arabia, the oil-rich Islamic kingdom that forbids the public practice of other religious faiths, will preside Wednesday over a two-day U.N. conference on religious tolerance that will draw more than a dozen world leaders, including President Bush, Israeli President Shimon Peres and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown.

The event is part of a personal initiative by Saudi King Abdullah to promote an interfaith dialogue among the world's major religions. The Saudi leader agreed for the first time to dine in the same room with the Israeli president at a private, pre-conference banquet Tuesday hosted by U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. But Ban hinted that the two leaders -- whose governments do not have diplomatic relations -- were not seated at the same table.

"Normally, in the past, they have not been sitting in the same place like this. That is very important and encouraging," Ban said. "I wholeheartedly support the convening of the interfaith meeting that will be held here at headquarters tomorrow. The values it aims to promote are common to all the world's religions and can help us fight extremism, prejudice and hatred."

We're now officially living in bizarro world when those who are the most intolerant and preach hatred of others are leading an alleged interfaith dialogue. I think I'm going to be ill.

U.S. By Far Biggest Contributor to World Food Program, Oil-Rich Gulf States Give Almost Nothing

We're always reading how much everyone hates the United States and we're constantly told by the UN that we just don't do enough.

Well, this report should put to rest any notion we don't contribute enough of our largesse to help the needy.

Meanwhile, the fat-cat Arabs states spend more money on hate-preaching madrassas than to do to help feed the world's poor.

What a shocker.

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and his top lieutenants on Monday are convening the first meeting of the U.N.’s Task Force on the Global Food Crisis. Ban says it will “study the root causes of the crisis,” and propose solutions for “coordinated global action” at a summit of world leaders in June.

Ban might want to consider convincing the oil-rich nations of the Middle East to provide more than the near-invisible amount of money they currently give to the World Food Program (WFP), the U.N.’s food-giving arm, which is charged with alleviating the food crisis.

WFP internal documents show that the major oil producing nations of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) gives almost nothing to the food organization, even as skyrocketing oil prices and swollen oil revenues contribute to the very crisis that the U.N. claims could soon add 100 million more people to the world’s starving masses.

The overwhelming bulk of the burden in feeding the world’s starving poor remains with the United States and a small group of other predominately Western nations, a situation that the WFP has done little so far to change, even as it has asked for another $775 million in donations to ease the crisis.

Donor listings on WFP’s website show that this year, as in every year since 1999, the U.S. is far and away the biggest aid provider to WFP. Since 2001, U.S. donations to the food agency have averaged more than $1.16 billion annually — or more than five times as much as the next biggest donor, the European Commission.

Our friends the Saudis have apparently misplaced their wallets.

On the other hand, Saudi Arabia, with oil revenues last year of $164 billion, does not even appear on the website donor list for 2008.

Isn't that special?

And while Canada, Australia, Western Europe and Japan have hastened to pony up an additional $260 million in aid since WFP’s latest appeal, the world organization told FOX News, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), the international oil cartel, tossed in a grand total of $1.5 million in addition to the $50,000 it had previously donated.

The OPEC total amounts to roughly one minute and 10 seconds worth of the organization’s estimated $674 billion in annual oil revenues in 2007 — revenues that will be vastly exceeded in 2008 with the continuing spiral in world oil prices.

The only other major oil exporter who made the WFP list of 2008 donors was the United Arab Emirates, which kicked in $50,000. UAE oil revenues in 2007 were $63 billion.

What a bunch of lowlifes. These parasites probably spend more money on hookers than they do to help feed the poor.

Here's the donor list.

Think Food Prices Are High? Wait Until the UN Gets Involved

You can count on the UN to further screw up an already difficult situation. Now the UN, ever eager to regulate the free market, wants to get deeper into the food business.

Wonderful.

Key United Nations development agencies are meeting in Switzerland to try to develop solutions to ease the escalating global food crisis.

Led by secretary general Ban Ki-Moon, officials want to mitigate the impact of the steep rise in staple food prices and prevent food shortages worsening.

The only real "solutions" are to stop taking food out of the supply chain to make ethanol (might want to check with Saint Algore on that one) and increase the overall production of food. The food production aspect of this will happen due to the free market impact of higher profits due to the increased prices. Of course, neither of these solutions are within the purview of the UN, but it sounds good.

Others are also recognizing the reality that the UN can't do much.

But the BBC's Imogen Foulkes in Geneva said it was less clear how more deep-seated problems could be addressed.

These include the current impasse in global trade talks, general economic weakness and profound differences over the use of agricultural land for biofuels.

However, it's always a nice way to justify asking for more money, which is what this is really all about.

The WFP has launched a massive fund-raising appeal, saying it needs an extra $755m to purchase the necessary food to meet its obligations.

I bet very little extra food gets to anybody who is hungry. But it's also a good excuse to go after investors.

The authorities in Vietnam, meanwhile, have warned that market speculators forcing up the price of rice would face "severe punishment".

Speculators including food suppliers, commodity trading houses and other investors have started to buy rice, before selling it on for considerable profits or holding back supplies, thereby distorting the market further.

Understand this: somebody will make money on these higher prices. My take is the UN just wants to make sure that the "somebody" is them.

Law of Unintended Consequences Or Just Old Eugenics?

They're going to starve the children and kill all of the old people!

Not the Rethuglians, though. al-Gore, along with his cadre of schmuck scientists and hysterical psychophants.

UN chief calls for review of biofuels policy

• Ban Ki-moon speaks out amid global food shortage
  
• 33 countries facing unrest as families go hungry
  

The UN secretary-general, Ban Ki-moon, has called for a comprehensive review of the policy on biofuels as a crisis in global food prices — partly caused by the increasing use of crops for energy generation — threatens to trigger global instability.

"We need to be concerned about the possibility of taking land or replacing arable land because of these biofuels," Ban told the Guardian in Bucharest while attending this week's Nato summit. But he added: "While I am very much conscious and aware of these problems, at the same time you need to constantly look at having creative sources of energy, including biofuels. Therefore, at this time, just criticising biofuel may not be a good solution. I would urge we need to address these issues in a comprehensive manner."

How about a simple, straightforward German analysis? No sense in wasting any more time.

Climate change has been a priority for Ban since he took over from Kofi Annan, and he has embraced the potential of biofuels, derived from plants, as a long-term substitute for fossil fuels. But as food prices have soared — driven by rising demand, high fuel costs, and climate change — the cultivation of biofuels has come under fire for diverting fertile land from food production.

Some of the loudest criticism has come from within UN food agencies, which are struggling to keep up with commodity prices. Last month the World Food Programme issued an emergency $500m appeal to donors to help it meet its existing commitments to the world's hungry.

WFP officials say 33 countries in Asia and Africa face political instability as the urban poor struggle to feed their families.

There are also mounting concerns over the benefits of biofuels to the environment. They generally burn cleaner than fossil fuels, but fuels such as grain-based ethanol are energy-intensive to produce, and tropical rainforests have been cleared to produce palm oil for use as a fuel.

The role of biofuels is under review in Britain pending an inquiry into the indirect impact of their cultivation by the Renewable Fuels Agency.

How about considering these reviews? No sense in wasting any more time — or money.

Against this backdrop some senior UN officials are pushing for a change of policy, and attack Ban in private. "Ban is just out of touch," one said. " He doesn't know what is really going on in our agencies."

Ya nitwit! Why do think the movers and shakers nominated him?

The UN's own special rapporteur on the right to food, Jean Ziegler, called biofuels "a crime against humanity", and called for a five-year moratorium.

Let's see if anyone in The Hague has balls enough to at least investigate al-Gore for crimes against humanity. Profiting from the misery he's visiting upon the Third World and urban poor, it's not as if he can't afford a lawyer.

Better yet, just sue the bastard.

Ban rejected that proposal. "At this time I wouldn't make any definitive judgment or definitive plans, in particular vis-à-vis these biofuels," he said. "I know there are some concerns raised by certain quarters about biofuels. But biofuels are a renewable source of energy when we are experiencing extreme difficulties [with] resources."

But Ban conceded that there was a food supply problem and said the primary Millenium Development Goal of halving global hunger by 2015 looked harder to reach than ever. "This steeply rising food price is a new phenomenon," he said. "We have only seven years left to meet the target of 2015. This is very serious."

It was all forseeable, asshat. It's called supply and demand.

He said he was overseeing a multi-agency investigation of the issue involving the UN Energy Programme, the UN Development Programme, the Department of Economic and Social Affairs and the World Food Programme. "They are all working on this issue," the secretary-general said.

So were the UN's Oil for Food folks.

Via The Guardian.

When asked if man was ruining Earth, Czech President Vaclav Klaus replied, "Perhaps only Mr. Al Gore may be saying something along these lines: a sane person can't. I don't see any ruining of the planet, I have never seen it, and I don't think that a reasonable and serious person could say such a thing.... For example, we know that there exists a huge correlation between the care we give to the environment on one side and the wealth and technological prowess on the other side. It's clear that the poorer the society is, the more brutally it behaves with respect to Nature, and vice versa. It's also true that there exist social systems that are damaging Nature — by eliminating private ownership and similar things — much more than the freer societies. These tendencies become important in the long run. They unambiguously imply that today, on February 8th, 2007, Nature is protected uncomparably more than on February 8th ten years ago or fifty years ago or one hundred years ago."

Ouch. ;-)

Some things never change

Hey Obama, how about working on changing the UN where it might do some good if you are all about change. There is a new head of the UN but the same tired old rhetoric condemming Israel.

Ban said Israel had employed "inappropriate and disproportionate use of force" in its renewed attacks on the Palestinian territories and called for an immediate ceasefire by both sides.
Highlighting the deaths of women and children in the Israeli attacks he said, "I condemn these acts and call on Israel to cease them" in his speech to the Organisation of the Islamic Conference summit.

I guess he was just playing to the crowd but in reading the article I decided to take two sentences and move them around in the article to show what a difference it can make.

The attack came after a dozen rockets were fired at southern Israel from the Gaza Strip. Israeli planes on Thursday hit targets in the northern Gaza Strip, Israeli armed forces announced, effectively ending a five day lull in the violence.

You of course realize that the sentence starting with the Israeli action led the paragraph.

Ratcheting Up the Climate Hysteria

Now it's "unequivocal" and will have "abrupt and irreversible" impacts.

Forget the fact this is a total scam; these nitwits have an agenda, and no amount of facts can stop them.

A UN panel has agreed a landmark report on climate change, and says the world must act hastily to prevent the worst predicted effects coming to pass.

After arduous talks in Valencia, Spain, scientists agreed a document they hope will shape debate on the next phase of the fight against climate change.

It declared the fact of global warming "unequivocal", and said it may bring "abrupt and irreversible" impacts.

The text will be officially launched by UN chief Ban Ki-moon on Saturday.

Delegates to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) summarised thousands of pages of scientific analysis, bringing together elements of the three reports already released this year, on the science of climate change, impacts and adaptation, and options for mitigating the problem.

"This is the strongest report yet by the IPCC - but says that there is still time to act," Bill Hare, an Australian climate scientist and one of the authors, told Reuters.

Among the report's top-line conclusions are that climate change is "unequivocal", that humankind's emissions of greenhouse gases are more than 90% likely to be the main cause, and that impacts can be reduced at reasonable cost.

A reasonable cost? Sure. And guess who's going to foot the bill for this farce?

UPDATE: More here. Just what the people need: Another tax to fund this scam.

H/T: RadicalRon.

Moon Decries Violence Against Women; Expresses "Deep Concern"

Sure, it's all well and good, but how about naming names?

Curious how he omits mentioning a certain misogynistic death cult know as Islam.

The U.N. secretary-general warned that violence against women has reached "hideous" levels in some countries trying to recover from conflict, and the U.N. Security Council demanded an end to impunity for rape and other sexual abuse.

The council expressed deep concern Tuesday that despite its repeated demands for an immediate end to violence against women caught in armed conflicts, "rape and other forms of sexual abuse, as well as all other forms of violence, ... remain pervasive, and in some situations have become systematic, and have reached appalling levels of atrocity."

Of course, here in America, we've gone so far over the edge by declaring four-year-olds hugging is sexual harassment while ignoring the plight of women in certain countries.

Nothing like keeping tyhings in perspective.

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said "violence against women has reached hideous and pandemic proportions in some societies attempting to recover from conflict." He did not name any countries.

"Together, all of us need to strengthen our collective and individual response to it," Ban said. "This is essential if we are to reverse the damage done by conflict, and to build more inclusive, accountable and cohesive socieites, underpinned by viable democratic institutions."

Well, that diplo-babble is just peachy, but how about pointing out the offenders?

U.N. Undersecretary-General for Peacekeeping Jean-Marie Guehenno stressed the U.N.'s "zero tolerance" for sexual exploitation and abuse by its more than 80,000 peacekeeping troops.

Cleaning up your own house would be a start.

A Speech The Media Won't Cover

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moo has done the unthinkable.

Czech President Vaclav Klaus ---- Photo: CTK/Czech News Agency

U.N. invites Czech president to global warming conference

Czech President Vaclav Klaus will address a conference on global warming in late September in New York as he has been invited by United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to the event, Klaus's spokesman Petr Hajek told CTK Tuesday.

Klaus is known as a fierce challenger of both the human factor in and the widely forecast effects of global warming. He opposes the views advocated by people like Al Gore, arguing that the "hysteria" surrounding the warming issue threatens freedom and democracy.

One of his slogans is that freedom, not climate is endangered. He regularly lashes out against "ambitious environmentalism."

Earlier this year, he published "Blue, Not Green Planet", a book summarizing his opinions challenging some scenarios of the planet's further development with regard to global warming.

Klaus told Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) last week that he plans to deliver a very radical speech in New York.

"It will be a gathering of 'Gore-ites,' so they're going to be shocked that they invited me 'by mistake,' too. And I'm going to give a very tough speech," he told the radio.

Fat al-Goracle, dreaming of triple-scoop ice cream cones, was busy screeching about how when ice melts, it leaves behind . . . water.

UN Head Links Climate Change to Darfur

Call him Ban Ki-moonbat.

WASHINGTON - Climate change is partly to blame for the conflict in Sudan's Darfur region, where droughts have provoked fighting over water sources, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said in an editorial published Saturday.

"Almost invariably, we discuss Darfur in a convenient military and political shorthand — an ethnic conflict pitting Arab militias against black rebels and farmers," Ban wrote in The Washington Post. "Look to its roots, though, and you discover a more complex dynamic."

Rainfall in Sudan began declining two decades ago, a phenomenon due "to some degree, from man-made global warming," said Ban, who has made both Darfur and climate change priorities.

Is there anything these people won't link to this mythical climate change, or global warming, or whatever they're calling it today?

UPDATE: The hysteria continues.

People displaced by global warming -- the Christian Aid agency has predicted there will be one billion by 2050 -- could dwarf the nearly 10 million refugees and almost 25 million internally displaced people already fleeing wars and oppression.

"All around the world, predictable patterns are going to result in very long-term and very immediate changes in the ability of people to earn their livelihoods," said Michele Klein Solomon of the International Organisation of Migration (IOM).

Good grief.

Carnage in Gaza; Media Refuses to Call it Civil War

Maybe when nobody is left standing will they admit the obvious.

Bloody day in Gaza raises civil war fears

GAZA, June 12 (Reuters) - In what looked ever more like civil war, the forces of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas battled supporters of the Islamist prime minister across Gaza on Tuesday, the bloodiest day of factional fighting in months.

At least 27 people were killed and 70 wounded, hospital officials said, taking to 47 the number of dead in the coastal enclave since Saturday. Early on Tuesday, the Gaza homes of both Abbas and Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh of Hamas were fired on.

The largest force loyal to Abbas, who is favoured by Western powers, was ordered onto the streets to defeat what his secular Fatah group called a "bloody coup" by Hamas Islamists after Hamas gunmen stormed Fatah bases in the Gaza Strip.

Hamas later appeared to have control of one major Fatah base in the north and casualty data suggested it had the upper hand more widely. Fatah leaders threatened to quit a three-month-old unity government with Hamas if there was no immediate truce.

The European Union said there was an imminent risk of civil war if fighting went on, and U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon urged support for Abbas's efforts "to restore law and order".

Haniyeh and Abbas both called for restraint and talks but, as each side accused the other of siding with their Israeli adversaries, there was little sign of fighters paying heed.

The head of an Egyptian delegation in Gaza that saw its latest truce shot down on Monday, urged civilians to rally on Wednesday morning to show support for a new ceasefire.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, an arch-foe of Hamas, said for the first time that "serious consideration" must be given to posting international peacekeepers in Gaza, from which Israel withdrew troops and Jewish settlers two years ago.

"If the Gaza Strip ultimately falls to Hamas, this will be of great regional significance," he said, but added Israel could not enter Gaza to fight Hamas to help Abbas's "pragmatists".

Breathtakingly disingenuous.

The Jerusalem Post is a bit clearer in its assessment.

Gaza on verge of becoming Hamastan