I
confess that I watch Fox News. But I am a veteran consumer of the news as I do
not agree 100% with Fox. For example, I’ve have disagreed with both Bill
O’Reilly and Tucker Carlson in their analysis of the news. The key is knowing
which of the news personalities at Fox are straight news or commentators.
Laura
Ingraham is a Fox News commentator. In her show, The Ingraham Angle, she attacks
and challenges any or everything she perceives as liberal. She is usually on
target but last week she blew it. Ingraham criticized the Central Intelligence
Agency on its interest in climate change and even mocked its director, Ambassador
William Burns, on his presentation on why climate change would be important to
his agency. Ingraham labeled the CIA’s interest as part of the “woke” agenda
the Biden Administration is pursuing. I believe she is wrong for doing so,
First
of all, Ingraham’s researchers did her a disservice. From my initial research,
I discovered that the CIA has been interested in climate change and its
implications for national security at least since 2009. So, Ingraham’s analysis
is not news per se.
I
also confess that I believe in climate change. But not in the Socialist Green New
Deal version of climate change. Our planet has had multiple cycles of cooling
and warming throughout our existence. In the middle centuries of the last millilumen
the North Atlantic region of earth, including Europe and North America, experienced
what has termed a ”Little Ice Age” which had followed the Medieval Warm Period.
Severe winters, extreme frost, cool summers, shortened growing seasons, and
food shortages were characteristics of this cooling period. So, for example,
when the Pilgrims arrived in North America in 1620, they felt the extreme effects
of cooling on a new continent.
Therefore,
there is climate change regardless of human activity. Granted the changes may
be modified or enhanced by humans. The Green New Deal attempts to alter climate
change to artificial means through government intervention. Consider the damages
the Federal government has done to housing and higher education during the past
seven decades. Do we really believe it will be any different with climate
change? To answer my rhetorical question, the answer is No.
One
national security implication of climate change is water, or more specifically,
access to clean water supplies and the potential for conflict. This issue is
not “news” either. The Pacific Institute in 2012 reported, “There is a long history
of conflicts over water resources, extending back thousands of years…But even
now, in the modern world, disputes over access to water, the use of water as a
weapon, and the targeting of water systems during conflicts remain all too
common. (There are) complex and real relationships between water and security..”
The
CIA certainly can be criticized and has been criticized for failures of
imagination and possibilities that affect our national security in the past. Yet
the reality of climate change, water issues resulting from climate change, and
other scenarios are within the purview of the CIA as this agency attempts to
brief the president and other national leaders on what realities our nation may
face in the coming future as they impact our national security
In
closing, Fox News with Laura Ingraham‘s negative commentary on this issue has
scored a big zero with me. As long as the CIA analyses climate change and resultant
water supplies with integrity without political interference it is definitely
doing its job.
No comments:
Post a Comment