Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach
Back in December of last year I put up a post which said in its entirety:
Very short post. I read today that Palestine has been granted full member status in the UNFCCC, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
I also recall from a few years ago that when Palestine was admitted to UNESCO, the US had to cut off funds to UNESCO because of US law. As an article at the time said, this was the result of “US laws that force an automatic funding cutoff for any UN agency with Palestine as a member” …
Do I see an opportunity for our lawmakers here? Yep. Will they act on it? Possibly not, but if it is indeed the law, seems like they could be forced to act …
Best to all, and I do hope some organization with money and legal resources takes up this question. At least the US could stop pouring money down a rathole, even if the rest of the world continued the lunacy.
w.
So as you might imagine, I was overjoyed today to read the following media release regarding a formal letter from a group of Senators to US Secretary of State John Kerry:
Senators to Sec. Kerry: U.S. Law Prohibits Sending
U.S. Funds to U.N. Climate Convention
UNFCCC granted full membership to the “State of Palestine”; current U.S. law prohibits taxpayer dollars from going to any such U.N. organization
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) led a group of 28 senators in sending a letter to U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry demanding that the administration follow the law and prohibit funding for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and its related entities.
On March 17, 2016, the “State of Palestine” was allowed to become a full member of the UNFCCC.
That action triggered a statutory restriction under the 1994 Foreign Relations Authorization Act that prohibits the U.S. government from providing taxpayer funds to affiliated organizations of the United Nations that grant full membership as a state to certain groups, like the Palestinians.
As an affiliated organization to the United Nations, the UNFCCC and its related entities – including the Secretariat, the Conference of Parties, and the Green Climate Fund – are prohibited from receiving U.S. taxpayer funds.
In their letter, the senators demand that no U.S. funds be given to the UNFCCC and its related entities after March 17, 2016.
The senators also raise concerns about the inability of the United States to prevent the Palestinians from attempting to circumvent the peace process.
“We request that you ensure that no disbursements of U.S. funds are made to the UNFCCC and its related entities after March 17, 2016. We believe that your failure to do so will constitute a violation of current law… We implore the administration to hold the Palestinians accountable for their actions in circumventing the peace process, and to abide by current law prohibiting U.S. taxpayer funds for the UNFCCC and its related entities and other UN affiliated organizations that recognize the ‘State of Palestine,’” the senators wrote.
In addition to Senator Barrasso, the letter was signed by Senators Roy Blunt (R-MO), John Boozman (R-AR), Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Bill Cassidy (R-LA), Dan Coats (R-IN), John Cornyn (R-TX), Tom Cotton (R-AR), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Steve Daines (R-MT), Mike Enzi (R-WY), Deb Fischer (R-NE), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Jim Inhofe (R-OK), Johnny Isakson (R-GA), James Lankford (R-OK), Mike Lee (R-UT), Jerry Moran (R-KS), Pat Roberts (R-KS), Mike Rounds (R-SD), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Jeff Sessions (R-AL), Dan Sullivan (R-AK), John Thune (R-SD), Thom Tillis (R-NC), Pat Toomey (R-PA), David Vitter (R-LA) and Roger Wicker (R-MS).
The full letter is here, it’s worth a read. My profound thanks to the Senators involved.
A final plea. Do not allow the dreaded thread drift to convert this into a referendum on the Israel-Palestine perennial dispute—it won’t be solved here, and this thread is about climate funds. Let’s just be happy that we have a chance to waste less taxpayer money on the hydra-headed UN climate boondoggle …
Regards to all,
w.
My Usual Request: Confusion is a huge stumbling block, so if you disagree with me or anyone, please quote the exact words you disagree with so we can all understand your objections. I can defend my own words. I cannot defend someone else’s interpretation of some unidentified words of mine.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“You want inhumane? Spending money on the UNFCCC to deprive the poor of inexpensive energy is currently causing sorrow, sickness, endless labor, and death around the planet.”
=========
Depriving the poor of inexpensive energy is a horrible thing to do.
“Israel steps up [U.S. taxpayer subsidized] bombardment of Gaza; territory’s only power plant”
-Washington Post, July 2014
Sorry, not interested in your ancient feuds … give it a rest.
w.
The problem with ancient feuds is the time and energy some people invest in keeping them alive. In this case, the omission of a single word from the actual headline substantially alters its meaning.
In deference to your request, I shall leave it at that.
The actual headline said ..
Middle East
Israel steps up bombardment of Gaza; territory’s only power plant struck
By Sudarsan Raghavan
, William Booth
and Ruth Eglash
July 29, 2014
GAZA CITY — Israel targeted the home of the top Hamas leader in the Gaza Strip on Tuesday in some of the heaviest bombardment of the ongoing conflict after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned his country to be prepared for a prolonged campaign.
Palestinian officials said Israel also hit a fuel tank at Gaza’s only electricity plant early Tuesday, forcing it to shut down.
When an international body accepts a non-existent “state” (there is no “Palestinian state”, nor have never been), it says all about that body.
It is a political body with an agenda, nothing else.
If America still gives it money – regardless of its own law, it tells everything about its government: no regards for the law. (UNESCO is also funded by the US and it is THE most biased and pure antisemitic body in the UN).
Sadly, I did not expect anything else.
Has Palestine submitted a programme for reduction of their well documented emissions?
PS – Be careful to not get a couple of letters wrong in UNFCCC.
The United States contributes about 22% of the funding for the UNFCCC according to the document listed below on page 31 so it would take a large chunk of the funding away. The total budget for 2016-2017 is EUR 54,648,484.
http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/10a03.pdf
It is not clear whether the prohibition would also apply to adaptation financing of third world countries which could be substantial.
Good try Willis Eschenbach, but you fool no-one.
How to split a united left -right opposition to climate pseudoscience in one easy lesson
Bryan April 21, 2016 at 12:13 am
Good try, Bryan, but without a quotation of my words I have no clue what you are talking about, and I am unwilling to guess. Here is my request once again, for the hard of reading …
Regards,
w.
This subject I researched and discussed for years, Willis, clearly you know nothing because you called it a “conflict”.
Palestine has never had a tank ship plane artillery piece or any army.
Israel has tanks bombs guns planes missiles nukes ships and the political and military backing of the largest military force in the world
I respect your work on climate science, if you had the slightest inkling you’d not have called it a “conflict”.
In general given the US media, I find Americans (in general) know less about Palestine than anyone else.
@Greg, pointless, there are millions there now, trapped, having their land stolen, farmers even have to pay for the IDF to throw their olive trees over the new walls built around their former farms.
There were no Israelis there either remember, such skewed thinking, there were Arabs, Jews Christian and Muslim, and NONE of them wanted the immigrants (seem familiar to today doesn’t it).
Sadly, the problems really got bad with the addition of 1 million right wing nuts that arrived in the region after the fall of the soviet union.
I served 2 tours in Lebanon as UN peace keeper during the Syria conflict years and one in Golan. I have been to the West Bank and been to Israel to look at Gaza from the outside.
It’s a tragedy, the UN need to get between two sides that just are at a point where reconciliation is made impossible by US mediation, yes mediating an occupation you fund and supply and protect.. yeah sure.
Bush stopped settlement building at the drop of a hat by stopping funding, but he only did it because of how brazen Israeli officials were with him about it.
The US mediating peace deals is like explaining to a bully’s big brother why the bully is bullying you.
The only solution is a secular state for all faiths as it was before the creation of Israel.
If anyone wants a schooling keep talking, otherwise lets move on before some embarrass themselves irrevocably. This subject is my bread and milk.
Liberal revision of history is only swallowed by the truly gullible !! You are their king !
Please tell me that Palestinians never had any rockets.
Mark,
As a long term intelligence analyst I have only one request for you. KEEP STUDYING. You missed the plot somewhere in the middle of your ideology.
“Mark April 21, 2016 at 4:05 am
Palestine has never had a tank ship plane artillery”
I worked with a Palestinian in New Zealand. He was a former airforce pilot.
Al Queda never had a tank, plane, ship, etc, either. Yet they managed to kill over 3000 Americans in a single day.
Who trained and armed the original core of Al Queda in Afghanistan?
MarkW,
For every Israeli killed, hundreds of Palestinians: men, women and children were killed. Schools and hospitals were bombed, their only power station was bombed and their only harbor destroyed and blocked forever. The Israeli words: an eye for an eye… was multiplied a hundredfold.
I do not support violence from the other side anyway, but the blind (?) destruction from the Israeli side was in no ratio to what the Palestinians had done.
Bryan, nice non-sequitor there. Did you have help with it?
Ferdinand, the Palis only have themselves to blame for their problems.
If they would stop trying to kill Jews at every opportunity, the Israelis would not be forced to fight back.
As to the kill ratio, so what, the initiator of violence has no right to whine when the victim strikes back.
MarkW,
If the Israeli’s use every opportunity to kill even a small start of any economical survival of the Palestinians, take their land at every opportunity even where their families lived for thousands of years, then the question is who is the attacker and who the victim…
Mark April 21, 2016 at 4:05 am
Was there something about the following which you found unclear the first time that you read it?
Mark, I don’t care if you researched and discussed this since before you were born, this is not the place for it. Take it elsewhere. Your single comment engendered a whole host of responses, and as a result YOU HAVE BROUGHT YOUR ETERNALLY VERDAMMT ANCIENT FEUD INTO MY THREAD, AFTER BEING SPECIFICALLY, POLITELY, AND REPEATEDLY ASKED TO NOT DO SO!!
I implore you, please take it elsewhere! It will not be solved here, it is not wanted here. All you are doing is acting like a spoiled brat insisting on discussing what you want on any thread, regardless of the subject. TAKE IT ELSEWHERE!
I do not care in the slightest if you are right or wrong, your arguments are wasted. This is not the place for it.
Thanks,
w.
I seem to recall that President Obama signed an executive order stating that all subsequent executive orders have the power to circumvent public law. He then issued an executive order appointing himself as king. Then keeping with his promise to be the most open administration ever, everything was redacted and subsequent FOIA requests have been ignored.
Or maybe it just seems like he did all of this based upon his actions… so I suspect that consistent with his behavior over the past 8 years, he’ll ignore the law that requires him to stop funding the UN.
Dear Willis,
Sorry to see such a political laden story from your side. Most of the time I agree with your stance and even agree with de-subsidizing of the UNFCCC as it has no function other than putting poor people into worse conditions with its de-carbonization plans.
If you take that US law to an extreme, you have to de-subsidizing Unicef too, as they do a lot of work in Palestine territory for the children, and better life conditions for everybody there like fresh water supplies and waste water treatment…
Just an example of the wasp nest you are referring to: recently Israel did bulldozer a children’s playground, build with money from the Belgian development aid. Maybe to show children how to get future suicide bombers instead of just playing like children everywhere in the world?
Ferdinand, I asked specifically for you and others not to bring your damned politics into it. You have disappointed me greatly. I’m not taking sides, I don’t care, take it elsewhere.
w.
Willis,
If you bring a political point like this, you can’t separate the law – that one can’t subsidize any part of the UN where the Palestine state is part of – from the more general stance in this blog that no money should go to any project that does promote (C)AGW. The first is purely based on politics, against their own believes in the case of AGW (an unintended consequence of the law in their view), the second is based on science. By promoting the political law to reach the real goal, you are using politics (and inherently taking the political side of that law), not science.
It was your choice to bring that extremely laden political point here, not mine…
Ferdinand, most people were able to follow my request. Most were able resist the temptation to prove that they are jerkwagons by bringing in their pet feuds.
The fact that you decided you couldn’t let this opportunity pass without being a jerkwagon yourself is not my problem, nor is it a general problem. It is your own inability to follow a polite request that is the problem, not the subject matter.
w.
Willis,
In the past I & many others on here have admired your clear analytical thinking on climate related subjects.
Rightfully, you always include a variation of –
“My Usual Request: Confusion is a huge stumbling block, so if you disagree with me or anyone, please quote the exact words you disagree with so we can all understand your objections. I can defend my own words. I cannot defend someone else’s interpretation of some unidentified words of mine.”
Why are you stooping to name calling – “uncaring douche” “jerkwagon” just because people make comments you don’t like
You have disappointed me greatly.
As I said in another post –
‘remember YOU opened the Palestinian Pandora’s box here not us, so don’t complain that YOU are pissed off & don’t start calling people names (“makes you look like an uncaring douche.”), we get enough of that from warmisters.’
Willis,
To be clear, I abhor violence, no matter from which side it comes. In this case from both sides.
I don’t think it is a good idea to (ab)use a law from 1996 because it fits what you want to happen. That law is pure politics, as it clearly blames one side for the violence and has nothing to do with the science of (C)AGW. By approving to use that law you implicitly agree with its viewpoint, even when you ask not to discuss its underlying politics.
That is my point…
Ferdinand Engelbeen April 22, 2016 at 11:26 am
Thanks, Ferdinand. I don’t see how this is “abusing” a law. Where is the abuse? As I said above, the UNFCCC is causing the suffering, sickness, impoverishment, and death of the people around the world. Perhaps you are too … well, too whatever to use any tools at had to stop that monstrous crime.
I’m not, particularly when there is so little downside. Where is the loss in using this law for this purpose?
w.
Willis,
Depends of how far you want to go to stop the UNFCCC…
Take that some time in the (near) future a new president and congress of the US implements a law to put all pro-(C)AGW scientists in jail. Mission accomplished? Or should we fight that law because it is against everything which you and I believe would be open discussion as science should be?
I do fully agree to stop the UNFCCC, but not with the current law, as that is too political one-sided againts one population and in no way connected to the science of AGW…
Ferdinand Engelbeen April 22, 2016 at 1:28 pm
I would fight that hypothetical law, just as you would. Why? Because the downside is huge.
However, I see little downside in the use of this law. Who will be the losers? I certainly didn’t notice any great losses when the US defunded UNESCO for the same reason, either to the Palestinians or anyone else … so who are you claiming this action would hurt?
This is especially true since my tax money spent on the UNFCCC goes toward shafting the poor all around the planet, millions and millions of people.
So this move to me is almost all upside and almost no downside … what’s the problem?
If you can come up with actual evidence that the previous defunding of the UN agency actually hurt people you might have a case … but to date I haven’t seen any.
Regards,
w.
Willis,
I know, it is difficult to see from the remote US view, but the law does discriminate between Israel and Palestine, putting all the blame of the violence on the Palestinians, even not using them by name. By using that law to get a completely unrelated goal, you implicitly endorse that law, even unintended. That makes that your call not to discuss the whole Israel-Palestine question is in fact broken by yourself, by using that argument…
BTW, on 29 November 2012, Palestine was declared a “non-member state” of the UN, factually making it a state and thus conflicting with the US law…
Ferdinand Engelbeen April 23, 2016 at 1:19 am
Ferdinand,
I know, it is difficult to see from your remote location, but this thread is NOT ABOUT ISRAEL!!! I said NOTHING about Israel, I asked people particularly to keep away from the question, and here you are being a jerkwagon and insisting that it is right and proper to spew your ancient feuds all over a thread about climate.
I’m surprised. I had thought better of you.
Sadly,
w.
I understand your frustrations Willis, but I don’t think it is possible to separate ancient feuds from your thread in this instance.
Lots of folks have heeded my call to give it a rest … some haven’t. Since some have separated their ancient feuds from this thread, it must be possible.
w.
Why? The senators didn’t. They wrote,
The text of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act is here: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/103/hr2333/text/enr
Nowhere in the Act does it mention the ‘State of Palestine.” Nowhere in the Act does it say it establishes a prohibition of “U.S. taxpayer funds” to any UN entity that recognizes the “State of Palestine.”
In fact, the Act says,
What the Lobby behind this senatorial missive is fearful of is that by granting membership in this UN entity it might help establish an ’internationally recognized attribute[s] of statehood’. That fear underpins the conditional statement introducing their objection
So it’s a stab in the dark they hope will stick. Only 27 out of the total 100 senators signed it, the majority of whom are up for reelection this year and need donor dollars and support.
These senators should, instead, be passing laws overnight for the American people, their constituents, who still need jobs and a recovered economy. Let the Israelis and Palestinians duke it out themselves.
MRW, you and others miss the fact that this law has already been used to stop UN funds from going to UNESCO because they admitted Palestine as a state. So no, it’s not a “stab in the dark”, it is something which has already happened to another UN agency for doing EXACTLY what the UNFCCC did.
w.
Well, Willis, you are cheering a side fallout from US policy in the debate over Palestine, while avoiding discussion of the underlying law.
FTR, the problems is behavior of persons supposedly representing “Palestinians”, who the UN recommended be given a state in 1948. Several Arab states blocked that, making war on Israel. Many Palestinians bet with their feet that Israel would lose, and moved across the border – those are the origins of the refugee camps that profligate hypocrite Yasser Arafat did nothing to help. Those who lost the bet gave up jobs in the relatively free state of Israel.
Keith Sketchley April 21, 2016 at 11:10 am
Indeed I am, and for a good reason—any discussion of the underlying law is useless. The problem will not be solved on this blog, it will merely engender bad feelings.
w.
Hello Willis.
No , Willis I am not going to violate your request. But I will point out the the issue is way beyond climate science and CAGW.
The move to allow the PLO a seat on UNFCCC was political coup against the United States. They know from past experience what our legal response would have to be. They have dumped a political hot potato on this country. What are President Obama’s choices? He can follow the Law, and in effect cancel out on his Paris climate change promises. While many here would cheer such a “Forcing” it would not sit well with me that a cabal of other nations can manipulate our national policy. Such a decision would/will cause accusations and recriminations from sections of the population that is still of the belief that AGW is real. (The way to win the climate war is to use truth and education to sway the public, not take advantage of an enemy’s mechanisms. But we’re stuck with it.)
Of course the President can simply use executive orders to give a waver in this case and cause a constitutional crisis.
He can come hat in hand to get congress to enact the waver, (Best choice) there by letting them fight all the battle you had hoped to avoid here.
Now remember the parties that enacted this most likely have stratagems in the event that we do withdraw from UNFCCC which would be towards isolating us and making us a pariah. Possibly sanctions.
The link below is about Mr Obama’s “trip” to Saudi Arabia. It did not go will.
So yes Willis I hope that the senate force the President to follow the law to the letter, but it is going to be messy. Oh and fun. Lets just go into it eyes wide open.
michael
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/saudi-officials-give-obama-chilly-reception-in-riyadh/
Shouldn’t the letter have gone to the Secretary of the Treasury? It’s the Treasury that actually
spendsdisbursesthrows away the money.The US Treasury, and hence the Secretary of the Treasury, is only the accounts receivable/accounts payable department of the executive branch. It doesn’t set foreign policy.
Neither do US senators for that matter, no matter how much some of them view themselves as mini-presidents. They are members of the legislative branch (with the House), not the executive branch, and their constitutional duty is to domestic issues and the American people, including formal declarations of war that send American citizens into the abyss. (Yeah, yeah, I know about the recent sleights of hand that have allowed the President to act unilaterally in that regard.)
Foreign policy is the sole constitutional purview of the President as Head of State (Executive), not Head of Government (Legislative), with the exception of treaties that can possibly override domestic US law and require a majority % of the Senate to ratify.
This letter has (political) special interest group written all over it, and apart from the surface joy of getting the UNFCCC kicked in the keister, it represents no national security interest to the United States. In fact, it shows untoward meddling by a foreign nation in our national institutions.
. . . . in our national policies and institutions.
MRW April 21, 2016 at 5:17 pm
“Foreign policy is the sole constitutional purview of the President as Head of State (Executive), not Head of Government (Legislative), with the exception of treaties that can possibly override domestic US law and require a majority % of the Senate to ratify.”
Hi MRW, all treaties come under the advise and consent clause. And no, foreign policy is not the “sole purview of the President. shall I say lend lease FDR, and Boland Amendment R. Reagan? Did you sleep through constitutional Law 101?
michael
“United” Nations.
People like the idea of “united”. But what are they united for? To prevent war? After WW2 that’s what was desired and how it was sold to the people (American and the rest). Just like the League of Nations was marketed after WW1, but the US citizens didn’t buy it.
Neither group did or has stopped War, their “Prime Directive”.
What the UN has done that the League failed to do is gain the US’s membership and more cash and authority.
A “good cause” gone bad.
Willis Eschenbach
April 20, 2016 at 9:46 pm
Sorry, not interested in your ancient feuds … give it a rest.
===========
It might help your diseased conscience to pretend that 2014 is “ancient.”
But thus shall ye deal with them:
ye shall destroy their altars
and break down their images,
and cut down their groves,
http://www.juragentium.org/pics/olives.jpg
and burn their graven images with fire.
http://willyloman.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/gaza-strike-29.jpg
For thou [art] an holy people unto the LORD thy God:
the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself,
above all people that [are] upon the face of the earth.
Deuteronomy 7:5-6
Not sure what any of that meant, one thing I do know, is that the Israelis hit back 10 times as hard.
The UN set up present day Israel and Palestine. Then abdicated all responsibility for its actions.
Let us know when you torch the UN.
(If torching or the UN is too extreme, how about we just defund them? To prevent more damage.)
Small sort-of-typo.
“(If torching or the UN is too extreme, how about we just defund them? To prevent more damage.)”
I originally typed:
“(If torching or flying planes into the UN is too extreme, how about we just defund them? To prevent more damage.)”
By I changed my mind. I just missed backspacing the “or”.
the LORD thy God hath chosen thee
Receptionist; God will see you now Mr Goldstein.
God; YES MR GOLDSTEIN?
Mr. Goldstein; Uhm…. well, uhm, you see….well its just that…look, I’m the representative of the Jewish people downstairs….. and uhm, we have a question.
God; YES MR GOLDSTEIN, WHAT IS YOUR QUESTION?
Mr. Goldstein; Well, uhm, we just wanted to know. Is it, uhm, true that, well, that we’re the chosen people?
God; YES MR GOLDSTEIN. YOU ARE THE CHOSEN PEOPLE.
Mr. Goldstein; OK. Uhm. Right then. Can I ask one more question?
God; YES MR GOLSTEIN?
Mr Goldstein; Well then, if we’re the chosen people, would you mind choosing someone ELSE for a change?
God; Ah! But that was My secret!
I’ve chosen everybody. My son paid the “cover charge” for all.
Now, who will choose to accept they need him to get in? You’re all in “stage two” now. Everybody will have gotten their just desserts by “stage three”.
Oh! In case you’re wondering, his life also covered for all the OT dudes that believed Me. (Sort of like a credit card. When the bill comes due, his life made the life of a passover lamb “good”.)
All will receive what I’ve promised. Whether you life or death
(Sorry, Willis. I’m done now.)
Khwarizmi April 21, 2016 at 4:45 pm
Fine. I’m not interested in your modern feuds either, not here. This thread is for climate, and you want to turn it into a list of your damn endless grievances … you know what? ALL THAT DOES IS PISS PEOPLE OFF, INCLUDING ME!!!
I ask you again: take your ugly thoughts and your war pornography elsewhere. They are not wanted here, and they are losing points for your side. Whenever either side tries to jam your accursed endless war into every available conversation, PEOPLE WANT THAT SIDE TO LOSE. You are not helping your side, you are actively turning people against you.
Let me be clear. You are wanted here, your scientific comments are valuable. But your claims about the Middle East? There are hundreds of threads on the web where people love to discuss this stuff.
Take it there. Trying to stuff your ugliness in here AFTER BEING ASKED TO NOT DO THAT just makes you look like an uncaring douche.
w.
Willis,
I think you’ve just proved the law of unintended consequence; remember YOU opened the Palestinian Pandora’s box here not us, so don’t complain that YOU are pissed off & don’t start calling people names (“makes you look like an uncaring douche.”), we get enough of that from warmisters.
In science we should always follow the data/evidence where ever it leads without trying to influence the outcome (unlike John Cook, Mr. Mann & various government departments).
I think you were correct to bring the subject up because exactly like CAGW, the Middle East is now nothing to do with science or history & everything to do with politics.
The CAGW war will never be won by science (if that were the case this site would have been redundant years ago) & the Middle East will never be won by history or morals; both will be solved by politics, but there will be a lot of collateral damage to the poor (no change there) whilst we allow the existing corrupt politicians to hold power.
1saveenergy April 22, 2016 at 6:08 am
1save, if you think claiming “hey the house door was open” is an excuse for theft of the contents of the house, that’s your business.
In any case, no, I didn’t “open the door”. I tried to discuss a peripheral issue, and I specifically closed the door and requested that others leave it closed … but uncaring douches like yourself insist that it’s fine to ignore polite requests.
w.
Willis,
FFS, stop calling people names, you are acting like a petulant child that can’t get its own way, it does this brilliant site no favors & makes you look silly.
Have a beer/go for a sail & relax, then get back to your normal excellent writing on climate.
1saveenergy April 22, 2016 at 11:00 am
1save, you could have asked people to stop acting like jerkwagons, but instead, you think the problem is that I’m pointing out that they are acting like jerkwagons.
In other words, you could be part of the solution, but instead you insist on being part of the problem.
Given your past history, I’m not entirely surprised, but actually I’d expected better of you. Ah, well …
w.
Willis,
This is getting tedious, so lets recap…..
You said you were “overjoyed today to read the following media release regarding a formal letter from a group of Senators to US Secretary of State John Kerry:”
regarding the political use of a US law involving the Palestinians – that was a political move on your part.
You must have had a naive moment if you thought Middle East politics would not be discussed as you had introduced the subject.
You started SHOUTING AT PEOPLE
You started calling people names
When that was pointed out, You continued SHOUTING AT PEOPLE & calling them names –
“uncaring douche.”, “impotent fool”, “jerkwagons”….. that’s probably not the best way to persuade anyone to your point of view.
Regarding my 2 comments on the subject, I carefully took no side as I don’t have a dog in the fight & don’t have any “ancestral feuds”.
I’m intrigued to know what you consider my “past history” is.
saveenergy April 22, 2016 at 6:07 pm Edit
saveenergy, I did not bring the Israeli-Palestinian problem into this. I discussed the fact that the Senators have sent a letter to Kerry about the effects of the Palestinian admission into the UNFCCC. That was the topic I introduced. Palestinian admission to the UNFCCC and the effect on US funding.
I did NOT introduce the Israel-Palestinian conflict, other than that I politely requested that people not turn this into a referendum on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Most folks graciously acceded to my polite request, and avoided obvious partisanship. Some tried to support me in keeping the conversation on track.
Others decided that this was the perfect opportunity to tell the world about their ancient hatreds.
And yes, I called the people who decided to impose their ancient hatreds on my thread despite being asked to give it a rest “jerkwagons” and “douches” … what do you call someone who ignores a polite request to put a cork in it for everyone’s sake? I call them jerkwagons, and that’s because I’m being polite.
Finally, there are people like yourself, who simply want to whine and bitch about how I’m doing it all wrong. Your claim seems to be that as soon as one says the magic word “Palestine” everyone is justified in telling me how badly the mean men on the other side are treating them. Sorry, it doesn’t work like that.
All I can say is, either lead, follow, or get out of the way. You are not making the situation better by whimpering about all the things you think I’m doing wrong. You are just rabble-rousing and making trouble.
w.
PS—Please don’t think that I am taking sides in the Middle East questions, or that I think they are unimportant. All of the questions raised on this thread are real, important questions … but THIS IS NOT THE THREAD FOR DISCUSSING THOSE QUESTIONS!
Why is this so hard for people to understand? All I asked for is some danged politeness and an attempt to avoid thread drift …
Ron Manley April 22, 2016 at 8:48 pm
Ron, you had a choice. You could have joined in my call for folks to not bring their ancient hatreds into this thread. You know, you could have said something like “Well, Willis could be more polite in his response, but I also agree that people should politely refrain from burdening us all with their claims of historical mistreatment”.
But nooo … instead of standing up for civility you want to whine about the way I’m handling the fact that a minority of the people are being absolute jerkwagons, and lecture me about how I shouldn’t hurt their tender feelings by calling them jerkwagons when they act like jerkwagons, and make me the bad guy all around.
Like I said to someone upstream, either lead, follow, or get out of the way. I asked people politely to refrain from spewing their venerable Mideast rivalries on this thread.
And yes, Ron, when people respond impolitely I do the same. I think of it as internet karma—they come in here to sell their ancient hatreds, after being politely asked not to, and they get handled roughly … so sue me.
[Note: The commenter “Ron Manley” is an impostor/ID thief who is commenting under Mr. Manley’s name. therefore, all the impostor’s comments were a waste of time: Deleted. -mod]
w.
Willis,
You say “I did not bring the Israeli-Palestinian problem into this.”
Sorry, but you did; all be it unintentionally & you opened a Pandoras Box….
1 ) The title “Palestine Redux” means ‘Palestine revived or brought back’.
Maybe a bad choice, I can see how that could raise the hackles on both sides.
2 ) the law you want to use was born from the conflict – where one side has gained advantage by intense lobbying of US government, that law has a back story, another point of conflict.
See also Ferdinand’s comment April 23, 2016 at 1:19 am :
As I stated earlier (you’ve just proved the law of unintended consequence).
• Willis you say – “Some tried to support me in keeping the conversation on track.”
you may like to note I was one of those that said “So lets keep on topic.”
but you then attack me “… but uncaring douches like yourself “.
Do what you do best – comment on & simplify scientific & ecological subjects for us.
Diplomacy is obviously not for you.
I wish you well.
1saveenergy April 23, 2016 at 7:36 am
Sorry, but I did NOT bring that in. Instead, I specifically asked that it be left out. Show me where the word “Israel” appears anywhere in my post, either directly, inferentially, or by implication.
1saveenergy, you can piss on my boots, but you can’t convince me it is raining. When I say someone is Irish, or if I write a thread about say Irish whiskey, is that an invitation to shower me with ancient hatreds and tales about the Uprising of 1916? If I say my grandma was part Irish, is that “opening a Pandora’s box” and inviting people to tell me about the terrible things the British did?
If I have a thread about surfing in South Africa, does it mean I want people to dump the entire history of South African apartheid on that thread?
Absolutely not. Every mention of South Africa is not an invitation to discuss apartheid, and every mention of Palestine is not an invitation to shower the thread with pornographic war pictures and stories of past wrongs, PARTICULARLY WHEN I ASKED PEOPLE TO LEAVE THE ANCIENT WARS ELSEWHERE. I pointed out that there are lots of threads where the Middle East conflict is actually the subject, and I invited people politely to take it there.
And many did … but then there are the jerkwagons. Everyone gets to choose, whether to agree to a polite and reasonable request, or whether to be a jerkwagon and try to cram their ancient hatreds onto threads where they don’t belong.
Up to you, amigo …
w.
Khwarizmi,
What makes you think that passage from Deuteronomy applies to any events in 2014. It was intended for a people who believed and served their God, which they have not done for at least 2400 years. Of those who call themselves Jews, the majority are non-religious, most of the remainder are Pharisaic (as were the priests who crucified Christ) and between 1% and 6% are Christian.
As a nation, they never seem to learn that when they disobey God they are persecuted, and when they turn back to Him they are restored. It is way too late for them to return to Old Testament practices. Their only path to peace is to accept Jesus Christ as their Messiah.
It is a good letter, well-written, and very specific. Unfortunately, I’m not sure it will matter, as far as money being sent to various entities. The reason it won’t matter, is because the last Continuing Resolution (used to bypass the unfortunate fact that the US government has not had a budget in nearly 9 years) was set to fund a whole bunch of stuff through most of 2017. I would question, then, whether this is simply grandstanding on the part of these senators. The US federal government keeps funding failing “green” technology. And they really like failing UN “green” technology, as that passes out money throughout the world. I would like to believe that we have some good and competent people in our US government, who have their feet firmly planted on the ground. But whenever I get my hopes up, it turns out to be smoke-and-mirrors. Let’s hope this is actually real, and can make a difference.
I’ve been trying for years to get people focused on the UN. It is the head of the serpent. We need to cut its head off.
Defund the UN asap.
I agree, Terry. The Root-Cause-Analysis of this problem, is that the UN can do whatever it bloody well wants to do, and uses mostly US dollars to do it. Perhaps our next president will reconsider a lot of treaties that we have been tied to, including our membership in the UN. Defunding green projects, whether in the UN, or in the US proper, would also be a proper concern of a new administration.
Eugene WR Gallun April 22, 2016 at 1:28 am
Got to laugh. Another impotent fool wants to tell us all about his view of the ancient feud.
Please take it elsewhere, Eugene. I know this may seem odd to you but YOUR VIEW OF YOUR OWN ANCIENT HATREDS IS NOT APPROPRIATE ON THIS THREAD.
Thanks,
w.
Willis ~ When the PA joined UNESCO in 2011, the US and Israel walked out together in a show of solidarity.
At the signing ceremony yesterday, the PA complained (predictably) that Israeli settlements were destroying the environment. Israel complained (predictably) that the PA was more interested in advancing their agenda than in solving the climate problem. No where was a single word spoken about the illegality under US law of the PA being there. Not even the most rabid right wing over the top pundits in Israel are whispering a peep about this, though it is their obvious advantage to do so. There is a clear tacit agreement (sadly) in this case, to quietly not enforce the US law. A mere 28 senators signing a letter will change nothing.
As for your complaint about ancient hatreds, I have no particular interest in them. But at the age of 6, I was beaten by school mates for (apparently) my hand in killing Jesus. It matters not that I have no interest in the ancient hatreds. The ancient hatreds have an interest in me. It was my first lesson in the matter, but by no means the last.
May I respectfully suggest that in the future you close comments entirely at the outset. The purveyors of misinformation and hate will not respect your request under any circumstance. The only people likely to respect your request at all are those that the the ancient hatreds take a current interest in victimizing.
David, thanks for your thoughts. First, you say:
Probably that is because it is NOT illegal under US law for the PA to be there …
The US law doesn’t say that at all. Instead, it requires the US to cut off paying money to the UNFCCC if Palestine is there, which is very different.
As to people in the Middle East not mentioning it, that may well be because they are unaware of it … hence, my two articles on the subject, to try to spread the word. I see no evidence of a “tacit agreement” to not enforce the law … who are you saying that this “tacit agreement” is between? The US and Palestine? The US and Egypt? The US and Israel?
Next, I’m nowhere near as pessimistic as you are about this law being enforced. It has been enforced in an identical situation in the past, what is different here?
Next, I know that the “ancient hatreds” have an interest in you. And sadly, they also have an interest in me, and in everyone. That’s why I have asked folks to leave the ancient hatreds off this thread. And considering that thousands of people have read the thread, and dozens and dozens of folks have commented, and only a few jerkwagons have insisted on bringing their hoary grievances and dumping them on the thread, I’d say it has been mostly successful.
As to your suggestion of closing the thread to comments … why? Allowing comments gives us all a chance to practice staying on topic. It gives us a chance to try leaving our differences aside in order to discuss a related question. How else will we learn to do so other than by practicing? We certainly won’t learn by slamming the door on the comments …
In fact, to me this is one of the beauties of WUWT … the moderation is done with a light hand, and people have the time and space to figure things out for themselves.
Best regards,
w.
Probably that is because it is NOT illegal under US law for the PA to be there …
I meant as a member of the UNFCCC, which they were.
I’d say it has been mostly successful.
True. But a lot of misinformation and outright lies were not discredited. Leaving the thousands of people who read the thread and have no other background on the matter with distorted information.
Getting back to the main issue you raised, there was little political cost to anyone to withdraw from UNESCO. I think protecting world heritage sites is a wonderful thing. But it doesn’t change much in terms of geopolitics. Unfortunately, UNFCCC has a potentially heavy influence on geopolitics, to the detriment of the billions who will suffer and starve under its lash. Excuses for keeping a hand in the mix will be found.
And again, I would be delighted to be completely wrong.