The First Environmentalists

A UN panel explains Global Warmening forced the National Islamic Front government of Sudan to commit genocide in Darfur. It’s been burning villages and murdering their inhabitants since 1989 – way before GW became holy writ.

That makes Sudan’s leaders the pioneers of CO2 reduction – 400,000 dead villagers don’t exhale or drive SUVs.

Climate change – with its associated failure of rains and expansion of deserts – lies at the heart of the bloody conflict in Darfur, a panel of United Nations scientists said yesterday.

They gave warning that Sudan was unlikely to achieve peace until it tackled the accelerating environmental damage responsible for exacerbating tribal and political tensions.

“Political tensions” is UN Speak for (my ellipsis):

…conflict-affected civilians (have) grown to 4.7 million, according to the latest UN figures; and hundreds of thousands have died.

…the real explanation to genocide in Darfur lies not in the climate but in the ruthless arrogation of national power and wealth by the brutal regime that rules in Khartoum.

Since coming to power by military coup in 1989, deposing an elected government and deliberately aborting Sudan’s most promising chance for a north-south peace since independence in 1956, the National Islamic Front (which has innocuously renamed itself the National Congress party) has engaged in a vast campaign of ethnically-targeted human violence and destruction throughout Africa’s largest nation: in the Nuba mountains, in southern Sudan, in the southern Blue Nile, in the eastern provinces (particularly among the Beja), and most conspicuously in Darfur.

Back in 1989, we were just coming out of the Global Coldening Crisis. But the far-sighted National Islamic Party saw Global Warmening coming, and instituted its own firm-but-fair CO2 minimization.

The UN should – and doubtless will – give these guys a medal.


One Response to The First Environmentalists

  1. Yeah, this nut job at the UN had the audacity to suggest this after a study has been conducted already concerning this and I included it in a post on my own web site this week. The pertinent paragraph went like this:

    “NASA has examined the science behind his claim and used 18 climate models from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) from it 4th annual assessment report and showed that greenhouse gases played little or no role in the 1950-99 observed drying in Africa. This didn’t seem to temper what in its wake can only be described as the Secretary-General’s political announcement.”

    Also, what do you know about the fact that Mars is experiencing “global warming” as well, only withough humans or “martians” contributing to it. Does this enhance the argument that the cause for any measurable GW is normal sun cycles which would effect Mars just as the U.S.

    I was tipped off to this fact by a friend that is an inorganic chemist. He adds that the normal atmospher of Mars is CO2 and that the tilt of the planet causes normal oscillation of the poles with freeze thaw. So, do you have anything on this? ……steve

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: