Doc's Talk: Lies, damn lies, and opinion polls

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Lies, damn lies, and opinion polls

Allan Nadel
As a life member of the Sierra Club, I enjoy a subscription to their bimonthly magazine. A small item in the Nov/Dec issue caught my eye: the University of Maryland's Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) surveyed 19 countries asking, "How high a priority should addressing climate change be for your government?...on a scale of 0 (not a priority) to 10 (very high priority)." Not surprisingly, considering our "slacker mentality," the United States ranked dead last, with a score of 4.7. Let's see how some other contestants fared, countries whose people apparently care far more about Planet Earth than our own benighted citizens Mexico, 9.1 (top score!) According to the World Bank,

In 2002, half the population in Mexico was living in poverty and one fifth was living in extreme poverty... the rates for access to electricity, water and sanitation were 98, 90 and 80 percent, respectively.

Mexico Child Link provides more detail:

The bottom 40% of the population share only 11% of the wealth...Many families live in total poverty and children are compelled to work on the streets in order to supplement the family income... ...Amnesty International has highlighted tortures and disappearances within Mexico in recent years....The Mexican standard of living is way below the US or Europe...There is little or no welfare state and no unemployment benefit. ... it is officially claimed that unemployment is only 2%-3%. A more realistic employment estimate would be 40% unemployed or underemployed.

But not all Mexicans are poor. In 2002 Mexico ranked 15th in the world in terms of income inequality, right between Burkino Faso and Zambia. Mexico City, home to almost 20% of Mexico's population, has a serious problem with pollution

...from pervasive incomplete combustion including low-temperature household cooking and heating and from vehicle emissions. In 1998, for example, the total volatile organic compounds emissions from the MCMA is higher than that from Los Angeles, the most polluted mega-city in the United States.

But Mexicans want their government to do more about global warming!

Also well ahead of the United States is Nigeria, with a score of 7.8. In addition to global warming, Nigeria has other concerns:

Despite total earnings of over $400 billion USD in oil revenue since the early 1970s... the vast majority of its 140 million citizens have seen little benefit from this legacy of wealth. Nigeria ranks 159th out of 177 on the UN Human Development Index. More than one third of the population lives in extreme poverty-defined by the World Bank as earnings of under $1 per day-while 9 out of 10 Nigerians live on under $2 per day. Most people lack access to basic services such as clean water, electricity, and health care...The combination of poverty, poor governance institutions and environmental damage has also spawned a violent insurgency in the Niger Delta

PBS recently reported:

Transparency International has consistently ranked Nigeria among the world's most corrupt countries. Much of the shady business takes place in or is related to the Delta -- a part of Nigeria that has earned an unfortunate superlative of its own: one of the five most-polluted spots on Earth, according to a recent assessment by a team of international experts...Even so, pollution is not the top concern for the average Delta inhabitant. Hunger is.

But Nigerians want their government to do more about global warming!

Russia's score is 7.4. In Russia, alcoholism is bad, and getting worse. The 35,000 deaths from AIDS in 2007 was several times that of all of Western Europe. But this erstwhile superpower's biggest problem is that it's vanishing: The average age of death for Russian men is 60, compared to 76 in other European countries, and the gap in life expectancy between Russia and other developed countries has steadily risen for the last several decades. Although Russia's "main problem" is high mortality in middle age, infant mortality is higher than all other developed countries except for Moldova, Bulgaria, and Rumania. Furthermore, half of all pregnancies to Russian women end in abortion, which is actually an improvement from the 1990's, when it was two thirds. Thus the net reproduction rate is just over half the replacement rate. Combined with an increasing mortality, the Russian Federation is depopulating at a rate of one million people per year. A loss of 14 million working age people is predicted to occur between 2009 and 2025.

But Russians want their government to do more about global warming!

Egypt's score is 7.2. According to this 2007 article

The proportion of Egyptians living in absolute poverty has risen...to 19.6 percent from 16.7 percent of the population... One in every five Egyptians cannot meet their basic living needs...Egypt's goal is to cut the proportion of people living on under $1 a day to 12.1 percent by 2015, from 20.2 percent now, a U.N. document said.

But Egyptians want their government to do more about global warming!

Let's not even talk about Iraq and the "Palestinian Territories." This is so far-fetched, I'm afraid that if you asked people there about global warming, they might die laughing.

So: Mexicans, Nigerians, Russians, Egyptians-beset by poverty, pollution, corruption, disease....are all clamoring that their governments acts more forcefully about-global warming! Are the people in these countries insane? Wouldn't clean water, basic health care, etc. be a higher priority?

Let's find out more about this study. According to their website,

The Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) studies public opinion on international issues. PIPA is a joint program of the Center on Policy Attitudes (COPA) and the Center for International and Security Studies at Maryland (CISSM), University of Maryland.

PIPA initiated and manages World Public Opinion

...an international collaborative project whose aim is to give voice to public opinion around the world on international issues.

which links to the actual study and its questionnaire/methodology (pdf). Apparently WPO doesn't conduct the polling itself, but contracts this out to its "Research Partners" which comprise the World Public Opinion Network (pdf). All of this is supported by many of the usual suspects: the Rockefeller Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Carnegie Foundation, Ben and Jerry's Foundation, and so on. Another one of its sponsors is the United States Institute of Peace. Are you familiar with the USIP? Here's its history:

In 1979, a provision was successfully added to the Elementary and Secondary Education Appropriation Bill for the establishment of the Commission on Proposals for the National Academy of Peace and Conflict Resolution...A nonpartisan group consisting of appointees named by President Jimmy Carter and the leadership of the House and Senate, the Commission worked for over a year and half.

So apparently USIP is paid for by American taxpayers, which may help to explain its new digs on the northwest corner of the National Mall. It has a Public Education Center; I wonder if they have an exhibit about the Kellogg-Briand Pact. You can learn more about the USIP here in English or in Arabic (both pdf) but in no other language for some reason.

Anyway, back to PIPA and WPO.org. Here are some more of their recent studies: After finding last year that all 22 countries surveyed preferred Barack Obama to his Republican opponent by a 4:1 margin, he is now the world's most trusted leader, with Ban Ki-moon (Secretary-General of the United Nations, you ignorant rube) first runner-up. An interesting headline, from just last month: Global Poll Shows Support for Increased Government Spending and Regulation. Even more recently: Key Health Care Proposals Get Bipartisan Public Support Despite Debate's Increased Political Polarization:

...there is bipartisan support for numerous key reform proposals, including a limited public option, new constraints on the health insurance industry, tort reform, and cross-state purchasing.

(Funny, I don't recall much Democratic support for tort reform and cross-state purchasing in the various bills working their way through Congress.)

So let's sum up. Taxpayer dollars fund the United States Institute for Peace, which funnels money to WorldOpinion.org, which contracts out to WorldOpinion.net for "opinion polls" which are really nothing more than propaganda suggesting worldwide support for various leftist causes. I'm sure that WPO can defend their polling methods as objective and scientific but, at least in the case of the global warming survey, their conclusions are so preposterous that their methods must certainly be faulty.

The wasted tax money is chump change (pdf). The real tragedy is this: millions of people are suffering from grinding poverty, pervasive corruption, and premature death. But apparently the readers of Sierra Magazine and the consumers of World Public Opinion drivel have such an insular, myopic viewpoint that they can believe their concerns about climate change are widely shared throughout the world. And so the pressing, day-to-day problems of people are ignored, in favor of costly solutions to global warming.

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk