if one Holocaust = 6mio dead Js (climate catastrophe)

.. what of two * 6mio dead Js[1] ...

  .. or about 24.16 times 6mio dead non-Js =

    .. 145 million normal people - would that be an Holocaust too?

Subtitle: What's a normal person's life worth - to the US/Zs?

-=*=-

Trigger article:

Climate accord clears hurdle in Copenhagen
Posted December 19, 2009 22:22:00
  «The document "is a solution based on the same very values, in our opinion, that channelled six million people in Europe into furnaces", said Sudan's Lumumba Stanislaus Di-aping.
However, Sweden's chief negotiator, Anders Turesson, said "the reference to the Holocaust is, in this context, absolutely despicable".» 
[AusBC/justin]

(Note: The headline is totally misleading; more below.)

Comment: Notice the Swede's (confected?/affected?) outrage.

Q: Exactly why despicable? Dead = dead, murder = murder; see next:

December 17, 2009 by Canada.com
Two-Degree Temperature Rise Could Flood Wide Areas of Planet, Study Says
by Margaret Munro
  «"The time to avoid disastrous outcomes may run out sooner than expected," says Princeton's Michael Oppenheimer.
He is co-author of a ominous new report on what happened the last time global temperatures rose a couple of degrees - the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets melted away so extensively that sea level rose between 6.6 and 9.4 metres.
If emissions of greenhouse gases are not reduced soon, they scientists say the planet could be committed to comparable melting, which might be unstoppable.
They say low-lying regions around the world could be inundated by more than a metre of sea level rise this century, followed by many more metres in coming centuries. Low-lying areas like Bangladesh and Florida would be hard hit, and Canadian communities from Tuktoyaktuk to Vancouver to Charlottetown could all expect to see waters rise. A one-metre rise in sea level would immediately affect 145 million people around the world.» 
[commondreams/Margaret Munro]

Now; Q: what's the difference between 6mio and 145mio; all prematurely dead, aka killed?

A1: The Nazis did it! (Based on the Holocaust, the Zs leveraged sympathy to inflict the abominable Nakba, aka the brutal genocide and ethnic cleansing against the hapless Palestinians.)

A2: The industrialised nations did it! (Who will leverage what from that?)

Consider this:

malnutrition and disease in Iraq
ron chapman
Thursday, 3 April 2003
  «On CBS Television on 12 May 1996 Leslie Stahl of the television show 60 Minutes asked Madeleine Albright, then US representative at the United Nations: "We have heard that half a million children have died ... is the price worth it? Albright replied, "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price - we think the price is worth it."» 
[one may google such]

Comment: Albright has claimed that she was taken 'out of context,' and that she should never have said it (which means that she doesn't deny having said it.) Whatever; the sanctions - now similar being applied to the US' putative 'next target,' Iran - certainly killed humongously many innocent people. Then the US (illegally!) invaded Iraq; 100s of 1000s if not 1.3mio+ dead, 2mio internally displaced & 2mio outright fled. There should be no splitting of hairs; Ramb-O-Bama has now fully approved torture - and worse. All the same, that bunch.

Then this:

Climate accord clears hurdle in Copenhagen
Posted December 19, 2009 22:22:00
  «UN climate talks in Copenhagen have avoided a total collapse by skirting bitter opposition from several nations to acknowledge a deal championed by US President Barack Obama and five emerging economies, including China.
After toxic exchanges through the night, the summit chair forced through a deal using a procedural tool that effectively dropped all obstacles to the Copenhagen Accord.
A decision at the marathon 193-nation talks merely took note of the accord, a non-binding deal for combating global warming led by the United States, China, India, Brazil and South Africa.
The delegates stopped far from a full endorsement of the plan, which sets a target of limiting global warming to a maximum 2 degree Celsius rise over pre-industrial times and holds out the prospect of $US100 billion in annual aid from 2020 for developing nations.» 
[AusBC/justin, ibid.]

Comment: The headline is totally misleading; more 'responsible' commentators have branded Copenhagen as both farce and disaster. Also, the biggest 'blockers' were the US and China, according again, to other commentators. The 2°C target was *not* set, nor was any other, neither in °C nor ppm. One person brandishing the $US100bio 'bribe' was Mme Clinton, holder of the same office Mme Albright once did. Hmmm.

So to the Q: What's a normal person's life worth - to the US/Zs?

Possible A: $US100bio / 145mio = $US689.66; perhaps a 1m rise in ocean levels may not kill the whole 145mio low-living (vis-à-vis sea level), but their lives made a living hell when not killed outright.

-=*=-

One more article:

December 17, 2009
Bolivian President Evo Morales joins us in Copenhagen to talk about the UN climate talks
  «AMY GOODMAN: You spoke yesterday here at the Bella Center and said we cannot end global warming without ending capitalism. What did you mean?
PRESIDENT EVO MORALES: [translated] Capitalism is the worst enemy of humanity. Capitalism - and I’m speaking about irrational development - policies of unlimited industrialization are what destroys the environment. And that irrational industrialization is capitalism. So as long as we don’t review or revise those policies, it’s impossible to attend to humanity and life.» 
[democracynow/Goodman,Morales]

Comment 1: Morales, as Di-aping, has a 100% right to free speech (one supposes), and both may well be 100% correct, to boot; then see my PS below.

Comment 2: One should read the whole lot; extracts can only ever be indicative. Complaints about 'the rich US' or 'fat-cat capitalists' attract lying trolls who yell "wealth envy!" - which never helps, and as with their standard m.o., derails discussion without ever adding anything worthwhile.

-=*=-

It should be noted, that as a generality, people do *not* voluntarily surrender their possessions or resources.

That is a necessary and sufficient explanation of why the US a) spends as much if not more than all other nations combined on so-called 'defence' (= offence, exactly à la Israel), has approaching 1000 military bases around the world, and b) at 5% of the world's population, manages to consume 25% of the world's resources. In three words: murder for spoil.

Some say that the US' illegitimate sprog Israel is the tail that wags the (rabid) US dog; I don't know which regime a) is actually in control and/or b) is criminally worse. In any case, I decry and rage against both.

-=*end*=-

Ref(s):

[1] Two * 6mio = approximate current population(±1mio, say), of Israel & Diaspora.

-=*=-

PS Truly free speech means no restrictions on subject or substance. If one sees lies, criminality and/or injustice, one *must* say so, and loudest - since to stay mute would be failing to oppose with one's full energies. Failing to oppose crime is failing one's responsibilities; let the criticism fall where *required*, on those who offend against humanity.

PPS I tire of this (also part of the vicious plans targeted *against* us, we the sheople). Democracy, as implemented in the Anglo/Judaic sphere is 'inoperative;' we the sheople are purely passengers, since the rulers (via their puppet politicians) will do what ever they want to - without asking, but propagandise us for our 'acquiescence,' where our silence is sufficient. I will not stay silent, and reject the rulers' criminal actions completely:

  -- not in my name!