UN Weather Group Says La Nina Chances Increasing

GENEVA (Reuters) - Chances of floods and typhoons from the weather phenomenon La Nina are increasing, but the latest incarnation of its alter-ego, El Nino, is finished, weather experts said on Friday.

"The El Nino of 2002-2003 is now over," the United Nations (news - web sites) World Meteorological Organization (news - web sites) (WMO) said in a statement.

While wreaking less havoc than its 1997-98 predecessor, which caused $34 billion of damage, the latest El Nino brought droughts to Australia and southern Africa and higher temperatures to Asia.

During El Nino, which occurs every four to five years, there is abnormal warming of waters in the eastern Pacific, disrupting wind and rainfall patterns.

During La Nina, which brings unusually wet weather, the situation is reversed with warmer sea surface temperatures in the western Pacific and cooler temperatures in the east.

"Developments have increased the likelihood of La Nina conditions. Temperatures in the eastern tropical Pacific are already about one degree Celsius below normal in May," the WMO said.

It was not yet clear whether this was a random monthly fluctuation or whether it would develop into a generalized La Nina phenomenon, but scientists should know more in the next month or two, WMO scientists said.

Weather experts said earlier this month that La Nina could be developing after tropical storms battered the Philippines, killing 41 people.

NGOs - the New World Order

Exclusive commentary by Helen and Peters Evans

Jun 19, 2003

When the dictator, Josef Stalin, first appeared at the brand-new United Nations accompanied by representatives of Soviet "labor unions," other delegates cried foul, asking, "How can there be labor unions in a government-run society?" Stalin explained, "Ah, but these are Non-Governmental Organizations," and the term "NGO" first came into the world's vocabulary.

Nowadays, most of us are likely to think of NGOs as large-scale charitable organizations who work all over the world providing medical care in disaster situations, food to famine sufferers or advocacy for political prisoners. One of the main reasons we even recognize the names of the well-known groups is that they often canvass door to door for donations to support their good works.

However, there is a growing number of less well-known NGOs who don't want to help the hungry feed themselves, rather, their aim is to "eradicate hunger." They don't want to help the poor become wealthy, rather, their goal is to "eliminate poverty." Do these distinctions sound picky? Well, they're not. Helping people means getting down to cases with the real people who are asking for help, finding out what they really need and helping them in ways that enable them to actually provide it for themselves. The much more abstract aims of "eliminating" hunger or poverty typically involve utopian plans that are to be imposed upon people "for their own good."

Consider the "elimination of poverty." This abstract notion breeds anotherthe "re-distribution of wealth." We see this in the United States when our own Congress takes more and more wealth (in the form of taxes) from those who create it and "re-distributes" it, in the form of entitlements, to those who don't create, or earn, it. This is bad enough when a democratic nation, essentially, "does it to itself" through government policy. The citizens have the option of changing policies through democratic means. But what happens when non-governmental organizations try the same thing?

Consider a recent, international casethe "Kyoto Protocol To The United Nations Framework Convention On Climate Change." If you think it's about controlling climate change, read it again. If it were implemented, its real function would be the "re-distribution of wealth" from the industrialized, developed nations to the less-industrialized, less-developed nations who, under Kyoto, will basically be paid not to develop. The important thing to notice though, is the composition of the United Nations. Although seats in the U.N. General Assembly are ostensibly held by 185 "sovereign nations" from around the world, they are outnumbered more than two-to-one by about 500 seat-holding NGO's who can submit papers, call for votes, exercise influence by lobbying 'real' members, etc. The only thing they can't do is vote. An additional 3,000 NGOs hold, not seats, but "consultant" status at the U.N.

Who the heck are all those NGOs and what are they doing at the UN? Well, they are self-appointed groups vying for government-sized budgets and global power, claiming a pseudo-governmental legitimacy while side-stepping the accountability that is the essential requirement of legitimate government. In short, these burgeoning elements of the global New-Left are "hijacking democracy."

This is the title of an analytical synthesis of studies conducted over the last decade by Marguerite Peeters, subtitled "the power shift to the un-elected." Ms Peeters gave a brief overview of the trends indicated by her research at a recent conference at the American Enterprise Institute. She also told those assembled of a tentative meeting scheduled this fall for representatives of major NGO's, the European Union and the Democratic Party of the U.S. Do you know why Bill Clinton has hinted that he'd like to be Secretary-General of the UN? He would be the leader of the largest socialist organization in the world, while his wife... well, you know where her sights are aimed. We should "be afraid; be very afraid" of where this trend is taking us, but only if the fear mobilizes us to change its direction.

We should begin by learning more about the pervasive influence NGO's already have and would like to have on our lives. The American Enterprise Institute and the Federalist Society have collaborated on a new website, NGO Watch Check it out. It's time for us to use our own influence.

"Recent years have seen an unprecedented growth in the power and influence of non-governmental organizations (NGOs). While it is true that many NGOs remain true to grassroots authenticity conjured up in images of protest and sacrifice, it is also true that non-governmental organizations are now serious business. NGO officials and their activities are widely cited in the media and relied upon in congressional testimony; corporations regularly consult with NGOs prior to major investments. Many groups have strayed beyond their original mandates and assumed quasi-governmental roles. Increasingly, non-governmental organizations are not just accredited observers at international organizations, they are full-fledged decision-makers." ~ NGO Watch.org

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.