Islamic Doctrine Versus the U.S. Constitution: An Interview with Clare Lopez of the Center for Security Policy

 

Our recent interview with Clare Lopez of the Center for Security Policy on the topic of the Center’s new book Islamic Doctrine Versus the U.S. Constitution by Steven Kirby PHD.

 

And our Podomatic version which can be downloaded in an MP3 format:   https://www.podomatic.com/podcasts/shurtleffhal/episodes/2019-12-29T13_08_38-08_00

 

 

Climate alarmist banks go carbon-colonialist Africa must move forward without them, using fossil and nuclear energy to build prosperity Paul Driessen and David Wojick

Africa has the world’s lowest electrification rate. Its power consumption per capita is just 613 kilowatt-hours per year, compared to 6,500 kWh in Europe and 13,000 in the United States, African Development Bank (AfDB) President Akinwumi Adesina observed in July 2017. That’s 9.4% of EU and 4.7% of US electricity consumption. It’s equivalent to Americans having electricity only 1 hour a day, 8 hours a week, 411 hours per year – at totally unpredictable times, for a few minutes, hours or days at a stretch. It’s actually even worse than that. Excluding significantly electrified South Africa, sub-Sahara Africans consume an almost irrelevant 181 kWh of electricity per capita – 1.4% of the average American’s!  In Sub-Saharan Afria, over 600 million people have no electricity, and over 700 million rely on wood, grass and dung for cooking and heating. The region is home to 16% of the world’s population, and 53% of those without electricity. By 2050, its urban populations could increase by 600 million.

Determined to transform the “dark continent,” the AfDB launched a $12-billion New Deal on Energy in 2017 and a Light Up and Power Africa initiative in July 2018. It frequently emphasized that access to sufficient supplies of reliable, affordable modern energy – including fossil fuels – is critical for the continent’s social and economic development. Without energy, it is impossible to create jobs, increase productivity, reduce inequality, improve people’s health and wellbeing, or end poverty.

The bank’s lofty goal for its energy New Deal is 100% access to electricity in urban areas, and 95% in rural areas, by 2025. In July 2017, Mr. Adesina told the African Union Summit he was excited that “Japan has answered our call” to “adopt a balanced energy mix” that includes “its ultra-super critical clean coal technologies” that remove sulfur, nitrogen oxides and particulates, while greatly reducing CO2 emissions.
In 2018, the bank approved seed money for a Nigerian coal project and geared up to finance a 350MW coal plant in Senegal. It also initiated plans for a $2-billion coal-fired power station in the Kenya’s port city of Lamu, after the IMF, World Bank and other western lenders rebuffed Kenya.  But then Mr. Adesina and the AfDB caved in to carbon colonialist pressure. The bank now says almost nothing about coal or even natural gas. Its new themes include: responding to global concerns about climate change, gradually adopting a “low-carbon and sustainable growth path,” significantly reducing reliance on fossil fuels, and transitioning to “green growth” and “clean renewable energy,”

In September 2019, the bank announced that it planned to begin scrapping coal-fired power plants all across Africa, build “the largest solar zone” in the world, and pull funding for the Lamu power plant. “We’re getting out of coal,” Mr. Adesina said. “Coal is the past, and renewable energy is the future.” So the AfDB has joined the World Bank, Goldman Sachs and other Multilateral anti-Development Banks in caring more about climate alarmism and avoiding criticism from the likes of Greta, the perpetually aggrieved and angry Grinch of Christmas 2019 – than they do about safeguarding the lives, livelihoods, health and living standards of hundreds of millions of electricity-deprived Africans.

This 180-degree flip-flop is delusional, dysfunctional and disingenuous. For many, it will be lethal.
First, there is nothing “green,” “clean” or “renewable” about wind and solar energy. The vast amounts of land and raw materials, mines and factories required to build wind turbines, solar panels, batteries and transmission lines – to harness widely dispersed, insufficient, intermittent, weather-dependent wind and solar energy to benefit Sub-Saharan Africans – are anything but clean, green, renewable or sustainable. In fact, trying to meet those needs would require millions of turbines and billions of solar panels.

Second, The AfDB cannot possibly achieve its Energy New Deal or Light Up and Power Africa goals with wind and solar. It will never reach 100% or even 25% access to meaningful electricity that way. No country has ever built or sustained a modern economy this way – and countries that have tried to by mandating wind, solar and fossil-fuel-free economies are paying a terrible price. Headlines tell the story.  Germany’s green suicide: Industrial job losses top 80,000. German wind industry faces extinction. 340,000 German families have pricey electricity cut off. British steel faces insolvency; British families are already deeply in debt to their energy suppliers, before winter even sets in. Meanwhile, the fossil and nuclear-based US economy added another 266,000 jobs in November and wages also grew.

Third, there is no evidence to support claims that temperatures, droughts and weather anywhere in Africa are unprecedented or due to carbon dioxide from fossil fuels – or from wood, grass and dung fires. They and other climate changes have been common throughout history, and an energy-rich, prosperous Africa will be far better able to deal with future changes than a poor, energy-deprived continent could.

Fourth, China, India, Indonesia and other countries are not going stop building coal- and gas-fired power plants – and emitting enormously more CO2. Why should Africa and the AfDb go down a different path?
Finally, banishing fossil fuels (and nuclear), and focusing on pseudo-renewable energy will mean millions of children and parents will continue to suffer and die needlessly every year from diseases of poverty and energy deprivation. This eco-manslaughter at the hands of climate activists and banks must not continue.
Africans have a fundamental human right to more than the few light bulbs, cell phone charging stations and one-cubic-foot refrigerators that can be supported by a wind turbine and solar panel economy.

Thankfully, Botswana, Tanzania and other countries recognize that their continent is rich in coal, oil, natural gas, hydro and uranium. They intend to utilize those resources, take charge of their destinies, develop their economies and improve their people’s lives – by building coal- and gas-fired power plants, hydroelectric facilities, and pebble bed modular or other nuclear power plants. They will also install wind turbines and solar panels in distant villages until electrical grids bring 24/7/365 power to the villages.
No single solution will work everywhere. But “under no circumstances are we going to apologize” for developing Africa’s oil, gas and coal fields, Equatorial Guinea energy minister Gabriel Obiang Lima has said, adding it is “criminal” for any non-African to suggest that Africa should ignore any resources it has.

“Energy is the catalyst for growth,” says Gwede Mantashe, South Africa’s new Mineral Resources and Energy Minister and national chair of its African National Congress. Africa has long exported its oil and gas to the rest of the world, while remaining energy-deficient itself, he noted during a recent Africa Oil Week conference in Cape Town. That is no longer tenable. His new Integrated Resources Plan includes coal and nuclear, and all forms of energy, as appropriate to a given time and situation.  South Africa’s trade unions now see that solar and wind will not create jobs or prosperity; they promote coal power for inland areas where coal is plentiful, and nuclear for coastal regions where water can cool reactors. Zambia, Kenya, Nigeria, Ghana and Rwanda all appear prepared to join SA in going nuclear – and Zambia has a new Zambian Atomic Energy Agency (ZAMATOM), headed by Dr. Roland Msiska; it has begun building a nuclear center and preparing for a new generation of small modular nuclear reactors.

“I am tired of being lectured by people in rich countries who have never lived a day without electricity,” says Nigerian Sam Bada. “Maybe they should just go home and turn off their fridge, hot water, laptops and lights. Then live like that for a month and tell us, who have suffered for years, not to burn coal.”  Energy deprivation perpetuates economic deprivation – and creates breeding grounds for terrorist groups in weakened African nations. Recent Islamic State attacks underscore this growing danger. Meanwhile, too many banks lack the moral decency to stand up for fossil fuels or nuclear, or question climate alarm doctrine. If they continue to balk, China could well step in – and gain greater influence and expanded control of Africa’s raw materials in the process. It would be much better if Africa stood up for itself.

Every new power plant generates electricity, jobs, better living standards, and more tax revenues to build more power plants, transmission lines and prosperity. Every country can do this, just as China, India and other nations have already. There’d be no better holiday gift than to banish Greta the Grinch from Africa.

Paul Driessen is senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow https://www.cfact.org/    and author of books and articles on energy, climate change and economic development. David Wojick is an independent analyst specializing in science and logic in public policy.

The Weekly Sam: A New Book by Sam Blumenfeld “School-Induced Dyslexia and How it Deforms a Child’s Mind”

Sam Blumenfeld’s library and papers contained  numerous unpublished manuscripts.  We at Camp Constitution, and the Samuel L. Blumenfeld Literacy Foundation are pleased to announce that School-Induced Dyslexia and How it Deforms a Child’s Mind is the first of these works  that is now in print.   This 86-page book was originally completed in 2011.  It contains a foreword written by Chuck Morse, an author, radio talk show host, and close friend  who was the last person to interview Sam prior to his passing.

In this book, Sam makes an excellent case that the look-say method of teaching children to read is the main reason behind Dyslexia and Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD)  Sam had a simple solution for those suffering from Dyslexia and ADD– intensive phonics–and used his Alpha-Phonics  successfully to treat those suffering from these artificially created ailments.

School-Induced Dyslexia and How it Deforms a Child’s Mind  is available from our shop for $10. per copy which includes shipping in the U.S.   https://campconstitution.net/shop/?product-page=2   Help the children of America who are suffering from learning disorders and their parents who are encouraged by the Big Pharma and “Big Academia” to give their children harmful drugs.   A link to a PDF version from the archives:   http://blumenfeld.campconstitution.net/Manuscripts/School-Induced%20Dyslexia.pdf

 

 

 

Jesus is the Reason for the Season: Nativity Celebration at the Massachusetts State House

 

Massachusetts may be one of the most left-wing states in the country but that didn’t stop groups like the Massachusetts Family Institute https://www.mafamily.org/ and the Renew Massachusetts Coalition http://renewmacoalition.org/ to co-sponsor the 4th Annual Nativity at the State House.

Camp Constitution  was on hand to videotape  the event which was  hosted by State Representative Marc Lombardo.   Activities, which took place on Thursday December 19, included a spiritual tour of the State House conducted by historic reenactor Richard Hollond,  scripture reading and singing Christmas carols.

 

 

 

The Weekly Sam: The NEA and the Moral Decline of America

Sam Blumenfeld’s book The NEA:  Trojan Horse in American Education was one of the first to expose  the National Education Association as a far-left labor union promoting an anti-American agenda.   This is a presentation on the subject from the 1980s:

A link to a downloadable MP3 version from our Podomatic page:  https://www.podomatic.com/podcasts/shurtleffhal/episodes/2019-12-18T18_06_42-08_00  And a link to the Blumenfeld Archives:  https://campconstitution.net/sam-blumenfeld-archive/

Greta, COP 25: A Report by Debbie Bacigalupi

Debbie Bacigalupi, an expert on Agenda 21, and an instructor at Camp Constitution’s annual family camp, attended COP 25 Madrid with media credentials.  In this interview with Hal Shurtleff, Camp Constitution’s director and host of Camp Constitution Radio, Debbie gives a report on the event:

a link to our Podomatic version in MP3:   https://www.podomatic.com/podcasts/shurtleffhal/episodes/2019-12-16T12_41_13-08_00

Please subscribe to our YouTube Channel, and follow our Podomatic page

Founder of Wolf PAC Cenk Uygur Endorses the Unspeakable

 

Cenk Uygur, founder of Wolf PAC, an organization promting an Article V Convention to rewrite the U.S. Constitution, is running for a seat in the U.S. Congress.  Advocating something that today is still considered disgusting and reprehensible lost him Bernie Sanders endorsement.  Viewer discretion is advised.

In September 2011, we caught an interview that Uygur was conducting with Professor Larry Lessig outside of Harvard University’s School of Law where he and Lessig both hoped for a  runaway Article V Convention:

 

 

Readers who would like more information on the dangers of an Article V Convention are encouraged to follow this link:  https://campconstitution.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/COS-Facts-Flyer-112017.pdf

Celebrating the Bill of Rights with Camp Constitution

On December 15, 1791, Virginia became the 11th state to ratify 10 of the 12 proposed amendments which became knows as the Bill of Rights.  

Camp Constitution recently hosted a presentation on the Bill of Rights in Lexington, MA.  The speakers were Camp Constitution instructors  Tom Moor,  Mrs. Catherine White, and Joshua Moore.  Mrs. White is  the founder of the Constitution Decoded http://constitutiondecoded.com/index.html and Mr. Moore, who served two terms in the New Hampshire House of Representatives, is the founder of The Patriot Initiative https://thepatriotinitiativeusa.org/

 

The Dangerous Winds of Trying to Prevent Climate Change by Duggan Flanakin

  The dangerous winds of trying to prevent climate change
Inconvenient facts show why wind energy is not renewable, sustainable or climate-friendly.

Wind turbines continue to be the most controversial of so-called “renewable” energy sources worldwide. But, you say, wind is surely renewable. It blows intermittently, but it’s natural, free, renewable and climate-friendly.
That’s certainly what we hear, almost constantly. However, while the wind itself may be “renewable,” the turbines, the raw materials that go into making them, and the lands they impact certainly are not. And a new report says harnessing wind to generate electricity actually contributes to global warming!
Arcadia Power reports that the widely used GE 1.5-megawatt (MW) turbine is a 164-ton mini-monster with 116-foot blades on a 212-foot tower that weighs another 71 tons. The Vestas V90 2.0-MW has 148-foot blades on a 262-foot tower, and a total weight of about 267 tons. The concrete and steel rebar foundations that they sit on weigh up to 800 tons, or more. And the newer 3.0-MW and even more powerful turbines and foundations weigh a lot more than that.

Citing National Renewable Energy Laboratory data, the U.S. Geological Survey notes that wind turbines are predominantly made of steel (which comprises 71-79% of total turbine mass), fiberglass and resin composites in the blades (11-16%), iron or cast iron (5-17%), copper (1%), aluminum (0-2%), rare earth elements (1-3%) and other materials. Plus the concrete and rebar that anchor the turbines in the earth.
It takes enormous amounts of energy (virtually all of it fossil fuels) to remove the overlying rock to get to the ores and limestone, refine and process the materials into usable metals and concrete, fabricate them into all the turbine components, and ship everything to their ultimate locations. Petroleum for the resins and composites – and all that energy – must also be extracted from the earth, by drilling and fracking, followed by refining and manufacturing, again with fossil fuel energy.

Wind turbine transportation logistics can be a deciding factor in scheduling, costing and locating a project, Wind Power Monthly admits. The challenge of moving equipment from factories to ports to ultimate industrial wind power generation sites has become more formidable almost by the year, as the industry has shifted to larger and larger turbines. Offshore turbine sizes (up to 10 megawatts and 650 feet in height) present even more daunting logistical, maintenance and removal challenges.
Back in 2010, transportation costs totaled an average 10% of the upfront capital cost of a wind project. Transporting the nacelles (housings for the energy-generating components, including the shaft, generator and gearing, to which the rotor and blades are attached) typically required a 19-axle truck and trailer that cannot operate using renewable energy and which a decade ago cost about $1.5 million apiece. Those costs have continued to escalate.
Highways and city streets must often be closed down during transport to wind farm sites hundreds, even thousands, of miles away – to allow nacelles, 100-foot tower sections and 150-foot blades to pass through.
Transmission lines and transformers add still more to the costs, and the need for non-renewable materials – including more steel, copper, aluminum and concrete. To get wind-generated energy from largely remote locations to cities that need electricity and are eager to cash in on the 2.3 cent per kilowatt-hour production tax credit, the U.S. is spending $47.9 billion to construct transmission lines through 2025.
Of that, $22.1 billion will be spent on transmission projects aimed at integrating renewable energy into the existing power grid, without making it so unstable that we get repeated blackouts.
On top of all that, wind turbines only last maybe 20 years – about half the life spans of coal, gas and nuclear power plants. Offshore turbines last maybe 12-15 years, due to constant corrosion from constant salt spray. Then they have to be decommissioned and removed. According to Isaac Orr, policy fellow at the Center of the American Experiment, the cost of decommissioning a single turbine can reach half a million dollars. Then the old ones have to be replaced – with more raw materials, mining and smelting.

Recycling these materials also consumes considerable energy, when they can be recycled. Turbine blades are extremely hard, if not impossible to recycle, because they are complex composites that are extremely strong and hard to break apart. A lot of times, the blades just get cut up in large segments and dumped in landfills – if they can find landfills that want them. The massive concrete bases often just get left behind.
All these activities require incredible amounts of fossil fuel energy, raw materials, mining lands and waste products (overburden, mined-out rock and processed ores). How much, exactly? The wind energy industry certainly isn’t telling, wind energy promoters and environmentalist groups certainly don’t want to discuss it, and even government agencies haven’t bothered to calculate the amounts.
But shouldn’t those kinds of data be presented front and center during any discussion of what is – or is not – clean, green, free, renewable, sustainable, eco-friendly energy?

We constantly see and hear reports that the cost of wind energy per kilowatt-hour delivered to homes and businesses are becoming competitive with coal, gas, nuclear and hydroelectric alternatives. But if that is the case, why do we still need all the mandates, feed-in tariffs and other subsidies? And do those reports factor in the huge costs and environmental impacts presented here? Amid all these terribly inconvenient facts about wind energy, it shouldn’t be too surprising that a new study destroys the industry’s fundamental claim: that wind energy helps prevent global warming. Harvard professor of applied physics and public policy David Keith and his postdoctoral researcher, Lee Miller, recently found that heavy reliance on wind energy actually increases climate warming! If this is so, it raises serious questions about just how much the U.S. or other nations should rely on wind power.

As the authors explain, the warming is produced because wind turbines generate electricity by extracting energy out of the air, slowing down wind and otherwise altering “the exchange of heat, moisture, and momentum between the surface and the atmosphere.” The impact of wind on warming in the studied scenario was 10 times greater than the climate effect from solar farms, which can also have a warming impact, the two scientists said. The study, published in the journal Joule, found that if wind power supplied all U.S. electricity demands, it would warm the surface of the continental United States by 0.24 degree C (0.43 Fahrenheit). That is far more than any reduction in warming achieved by totally decarbonizing the nation’s electricity sector (around 0.1 C or 0.2 F)) during the 21st century – assuming climate models are correct about the amount of warming that carbon dioxide emissions are allegedly causing.

“If your perspective is the next ten years, wind power actually has – in some respects – more climate impact than coal or gas,” says Keith, a huge wind power supporter. But, he added, “If your perspective is the next thousand years, then wind power is enormously cleaner than coal or gas.” Of course, his analysis assumes significant warming that has yet to occur, despite increasing use of fossil fuels by China, India, Indonesia and other countries. It also assumes the world will still be using increasing amounts of coal and natural gas 100 to 1,000 years from now – a highly dubious proposition. And it ignores every point made in this article, which clearly explains why wind energy is not really cleaner than coal or gas.
Maybe, my friends, the answer is not blowing in the wind.

Duggan Flanakin is Director of Policy Research at the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow http://www.CFACT.org

 

The Weekly Sam: Christian Education vs. Government Education

“The plain, unvarnished truth is that public education is a shoddy, fraudulent piece of goods sold to the public at an astronomical price.  It’s time the American consumer knew the extent of the fraud which is victimizing millions of children each year.”  Sam Blumenfeld, author, educator, and homeschool pioneer

In this presentation to a group of Christian high school students, Sam backs up his statement:

 

Please subscribe to our YouTube channel and sing up for Camp Constitution’s Sam Blumenfeld Archives:  https://campconstitution.net/sam-blumenfeld-archive/