31 May 2012

The IPCC: Going Where No Scientist Should Go

I guess that global warming, climate change, global climate, climate warming - or whatever they call it these days - is just not scaring anyone anymore, so the UN has decided it needs to broaden its horizons and pen a chapter about Human Security in the next IPCC BS report. Wow, the climate sure is responsible for a lot of human security issues. What better way to secure humanity than to have some scary Professor dude - from the same university which gave the world the Climategate emails - whip up even more fear about how millions of people are being forced to move, or who are trapped because of environmental risks! Well dear Prof, pray tell us where we can find all these millions of poor at-risk people so we can help them become untrapped with our money. Goodness, try listening to this Prof in the clip below as he stumbles his way through his bullshitting double speak. Firstly he says people are being forced to move; then he says people are at risk because they can't move; and then of course, the obligatory 'poor migrants' who are forced to move to risky areas! These alarmists are just so full of it. Whatever would they do without their precious global warming to peddle to the masses? How about people stay where they are, adapt to whatever Mother Nature throws at us, and stop spending so much of OUR money on this crap? Prof, see, it's not THAT difficult! In the post below, see how the alarmist climate scientists are just an incestuous, in-bred little community, where they peddle this rubbish over and over, whilst the real scientists distance themselves from it. This is the new face of brainwashing UN style.


The next IPCC report will include a chapter that discusses gender inequality, marginalized populations, and traditional knowledge. So much for providing “rigorous…scientific information.”


The upcoming Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report will contain a chapter titled Human Security. According to an official outline, this will examine the following topics:
  • Social and economic activities, including employment
  • Education
  • Inequalities, gender, and marginalized populations
  • Culture, values, and society
  • Indigenous peoples
  • Local communities
  • Local and traditional knowledge
  • Migration and population displacement
  • Conflict
  • Community resilience
  • [see page 4 here]
We’re told that the IPCC is a scientific organization and that its job is to “provide rigorous and balanced scientific information to decision makers.” But what can science possibly tell us about Culture, values and society? Or about Local communities? Why is the IPCC going anywhere near subjects such as these?
The Human Security chapter is being led by Neil Adger, a professor of environmental economics at the University of East Anglia. In 2007 he co-authored a paper that declared:
climate change increasingly undermines human security in the present day, and will increasingly do so in the future… [backup link]

Gee, given that this is the person in charge, do we really suppose the IPCC report will come to a different conclusion?
Is Adger a precise thinker, a scrupulously dispassionate researcher, the sort of person who’s likely to examine all the literature, pro and con, in a fair-minded manner? You decide. In 2009 he authored a blog post in which he declared:
we urgently need to decarbonize the global economy… [backup link]
In his view, a “much more unstable climate” is a given rather than a mere possibility. He apparently understands every nuance of the big picture so thoroughly he feels no hesitation in declaring that human actions are “committing every part of the world to fundamental changes.”
His blog post insists we need to fix “our energy system.” Predictably, it criticizes fossil fuel subsidies but expresses no concern about the outrageous amount of money being wasted on not-yet-ready-for-prime-time alternative energy projects. It quotes a report that says “warming above 2°C would be very difficult forcontemporary societies and ecosystems to cope with” (italics mine) without acknowledging that it will be future societies that will deal with such warming should it, in fact, occur.
(The world has, after all, come a long way since the 1960s – when 8-track tapeswere the latest invention, rotary telephones were the norm, and personal computers weren’t yet part of everyday life. Let’s give future generations some credit. They’ll be equipped with far more than our current tools.)
Adger has also co-authored a journal commentary that begins with these words:
Human-induced climate change is real and is likely to drive increasingly dramatic changes in this century and beyond. [backup link]
It’s so good to know that IPCC-appointed experts approach these matters humbly, and with an open mind. That article, incidentally, relies on IPCC reports as well as a paper in which two of the authors are Greenpeace personnel. The full citation in the latter case is:
Meinshausen M, Meinshausen N, Hare W, Raper S C B, Frieler K, Knutti R, Frame D J, Allen M R, 2009, ‘‘Greenhouse-gas emission targets for limiting global warming to 2°C’’ Nature 458 1158-1162 [bold added]
As I explain in this blog post, Malte Meinshausen and William Hare have long been regarded as “key members of the Greenpeace International climate team.”
The public is often told it can have confidence in the conclusion that human-caused climate change is a problem. We’re told that this is because this conclusion rests on multiple lines of independent evidence.
But the more you learn about how the IPCC operates the less true such statements appear to be.
In fact, the same small group of people are often involved. These people quote the IPCC in their own work and then turn around and write the next IPCC report. The fact that some of them are employed by Greenpeace doesn’t disqualify them from participating in the IPCC. Nor does it prevent other IPCC authors from citing their work.
In sum, climate science is a small, incestuous, inbred little community. In no way does it represent the world’s finest scientific minds.
And when the IPCC starts writing about gender equality, marginalized populations, and traditional knowledge, it provides ordinary people with one more reason not to take it’s so-called science seriously.


Australia: Mass brawl erupts in front of Goldfish, Kings Cross

Australian males are seen taking on a group of dark complexion Blacks in Sydney. A few things to note. There appears to be a few White girls encouraging and assisting the Black males - there is no accounting for taste, especially these common females who think they need Black males to feel good - until they of course become another sad statistic. Secondly, see how the Black males divide the White males and a group of Blacks runs after a lone White man. As I've said repeatedly, Black males only know how to attack in packs. They are too scared to take on a White male one-on-one. They are cowards. The articles states that these may be USA and Australian defence force personnel, although to me some of the Blacks look Somalian or Sudanese. It's so classy when these Black men walk around with their pants hanging down their legs - gangsta mentality at its best. They seem to be able to lower standards no matter where they are in the world. The video is posted below.





















A MASS brawl erupted on the streets of Sydney's red light district last night with punches and kicks thrown between two groups, reported to be US and Australian defence force personnel.

One group are wearing red and black baseball caps and were of dark complexion while the other was made up of predominately Caucasian males.

The Caucasian group were Australian servicemen out of Richmond and there are reports the other group are members of the US air force.

The fight exploded out the front of exclusive nightspot, Goldfish, on Darlinghurst Rd, Kings Cross before 5am.

It's alleged the two groups had a disagreement inside Kings Cross McDonalds earlier in the night.

It started with a verbal altercation until a man of dark complexion allegedly throws a stray punch at one of the Caucasian men.

An attacker was allegedly seen using a belt as a whip.

At the height of the exchange one Caucasian man in a blue shirt begins sprinting away from his attacker.

He is chased over the roadway and down an adjacent street.

The fight quickly escalates into a running battle.

A police van arrived at the scene just as the groups dispersed, but 15mins later two of the brawlers wearing baseball caps returned to Darlinghurst St.

Two men, aged 20 and 21, were handcuffed, searched and taken into custody by patrolling officers.

Police took statements from a number of people and are continuing with their investigations today.


Source

Christians Should "Convert, Pay Tribute, or Leave," Says Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood Candidate?

All one can say is good luck to the Egyptian Coptic Christians. No one will suffer more from the Arab Spring than the Christians. And the world stands by and says nothing. Another one bites the dust. From the great heights of the industrious Pharaohs to the lowly Muslim Brotherhood.  Egypt is crying.




"They need to know that conquest is coming, that Egypt will be Islamic, and that they must pay jizya or emigrate," Morsi reportedly said.
According to the popular Egyptian website, El Bashayer, Muhammad Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood presidential candidate, just declared that he will "achieve the Islamic conquest (fath) of Egypt for the second time, and make all Christians convert to Islam, or else pay the jizya," the additional Islamic tax, or financial tribute, required of non-Muslims, or financial tribute.

In a brief report written by Samuel al-Ashay and published by El Bashayer on May 27, Morsi allegedly made these comments while speaking with a journalist at the headquarters of the Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party, adding "We will not allow Ahmed Shafiq [his contending presidential candidate] or anyone else to impede our second Islamic conquest of Egypt."

After his interviewer pointed out that the first Muslim conquest of Egypt was "carried out at the hands of Amr bin al-As [in 641]," he asked Morsi, "Who will the second Islamic conqueror be?" Morsi, replied, "The second Muslim conqueror will be Muhammad Morsi," referring to himself, "and history will record it."

When asked what he thought about many Christian Copts coming out to vote for his secular opponent, Ahmed Shafiq, Morsi reportedly said, "They need to know that conquest is coming, and Egypt will be Islamic, and that they must pay jizya or emigrate."

If this interview is accurate, certainly Morsi would not be the first political Islamist in Egypt to say he wants to see the nation's Christians subjugated and made to pay jizya (see here for more examples).

However, considering that the English language media are currently reporting that Morsi is trying to woo Egypt's Christians and women to win more votes, it is difficult to imagine that he actually made those comments: one does not doubt that he favors the idea of a "second Islamic conquest" and the subjugation of Christians; one doubts that he would be so foolish as to reveal his mind now, publicly, and thereby jeopardize his chances of winning the presidency.

Then again, his remarks are reported in the context of a private meeting at the headquarters of the Brotherhood's political party. Perhaps Morsi thought he was speaking to a fellow Islamist who would not expose him? Perhaps he was frustrated at having to win Copts over and was "venting"? Stay tuned.

Christine Lagarde attack on Greece backfires as she pays no tax

Here's a wonderful quote by Ms Lagarde, the IMF managing director, about Greece:
"As far as Athens is concerned, I also think about all those people who are trying to escape tax all the time. All these people in Greece who are trying to escape tax. 
"I think of them equally. And I think they should also help themselves collectively [by] paying their tax," she said.

It has since emerged that preacher Lagarde is paying, well, no taxes on her more than half-a-million salary - and perks. It must be great to get to preach to others about the right thing to do, all the while not paying any taxes yourself! Tough life these people have; ruining countries and giving away our tax money to those who they think deserves it. And then not contributing anything to the potty. 




Christine Lagarde, the International Monetary Fund managing director who provoked an angry reaction from the Greek people after telling them to pay their taxes, does not pay tax on her own salary, it has emerged.


Ms Lagarde was forced to publish an embarrassing climbdown on her Facebook page over the weekend after being bombarded by hundreds of Greek people who felt insulted by her suggestion that the country’s crisis was partly due to “all these people in Greece who are trying to escape tax”.
However, on Tuesday she had to admit that her $467,940 (£300,000) annual salary and $83,760 of additional allowances are entirely tax-free as the IMF is an international organisation.
An IMF spokesman said: “Salaries, like those in most international organizations, are paid on a lower, net of tax basis to ensure equal pay for equal work regardless of nationality.”
He added that Ms Lagarde, 56, does pay all other “taxes levied on her, including local and property taxes in the US and France”.
Ms Lagarde earns more than President Barack Obama and David Cameron, both of whom pay taxes.

ROMNEY SURROGATE HAMMERS CNN

Soledad O'Brien and CNN beclowning themselves to shill for Obama is hardly news. What is news, though, is Romney surrogate John Sununu aggressively pushing back against CNN and O'Brien for carrying and enabling the Obama campaign's talking points regarding Donald Trump. It's a thing of beauty to watch...




30 May 2012

Massive West Africa hunger in 2012

If you can't feed them, don't breed them. Breed like flies, die like flies. Crude sayings, but at the end of the day all true. Once again we have African countries not being able to feed their people. Something must be broken, because despite the food and monetary aid which is pumped into the continent, Africa continues to have famine outbreaks as regular as clockwork. Why is it always Africa? Why doesn't this happen in Europe, or Asia? Why not in South America? Why always Africa? Even countries under ice 99% of the year can feed its people. But not in Africa - a continent rich in minerals, agricultural soil and abundant land. Africa should be way ahead of every other continent but sadly isn't. And once again the West will come to the rescue because the West would rather throw money at the problem instead of demanding workable, practical solutions. It's so much easier and less time consuming. The UN will tell us how many children will be at-risk to pull at our heartstrings. My heartstrings are all worn out - in fact, I don't have anymore to pull. Year after year we hear this same sorry song, over and over - the words may change but the tune stays the same. And the more we help, the less independent these countries become. At the end of the day, it's all our fault - we are the problem - we haven't allowed Africa to grow up. Let West Africa find their own regional solutions to their own problems. Let them figure out how to fish instead of being given the fish. Let them control their population the natural way and not the artificial aid way, because come next famine there'll be even more at-risk children for the UN to use to pull the heartstrings with. It's about time we treat Africa like an adult and not like a helpless child. 


SOS Social Centre Sanankoroba Mali


Geneva - UN officials say they expect 18 million people in West Africa will go hungry this year, including three million young children whose lives or health will be at risk.



W David Gressly, the UN's regional humanitarian co-ordinator for nine countries in the arid Sahel region of Africa, says during 2012 the lives of at least 1 million children under 5 will be threatened and another 2 million under 5 will suffer health problems due to malnutrition.
Gressly told reporters on Tuesday in Geneva the third such hunger crisis in the Sahel since 2005 is made worse because people have not had time to recover from the two "previous shocks" caused by drought and failed harvests.
He and other UN officials said political instability in some areas adds to the problem.

Robert Mugabe asked to be UN 'leader for tourism'

In case there was any doubt in your mind regarding the complete waste of time, money and energy that is the UN, then doubt no longer. In their latest error of judgement faux pas, they have appointed Robert Mugabe as their new international envoy for tourism. Nevermind that he's under a travel ban because of his.....ummm....let's just say, human rights transgressions, they have gone ahead anyway and given him the position.  His task? To boost global holiday making.Well, not sure about you, but I'm convinced! Who better to listen to and take direction from than Robert Mugabe! Just what were the UN thinking? Well, do they ever think? They are now infested by third-world dictators who get to wave their middle finger at the funding first world countries - as per this latest brilliant coup! It's time to stop funding this gigantic disaster that is the UN and condemn it to go the way of the dinosaur. And to think that my tax money is being used to prop up this piece of crap. Thanks but no thanks.



Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe at National Heroes Acre in Harare

The Zimbabwe president, accused of ethnic cleansing and bankrupting his country, asked to champion tourism



With a line-up that includes Drew Barrymore, David Beckham, Orlando Bloom, and Ricky Martin, the UN's choice of ambassadors has been known to cause raised eyebrows or the odd smirk.

Seldom, however, has there been such anger, or questioning of the organisation's credibility, as that greeting the appointment of a new international envoy for tourism: Robert Mugabe.

Improbable as it seems, the Zimbabwean president, who is widely accused of ethnic cleansing, rigging elections, terrorising opposition, controlling media and presiding over a collapsed economy, has been endorsed as a champion of efforts to boost global holidaymaking.

Despite that fact Mugabe, 88, is under a travel ban, he has been honoured as a "leader for tourism" by the UN's World Tourism Organisation, along with his political ally, Zambian president Michael Sata, 75. The pair signed an agreement with UNWTO secretary general Taleb Rifai at their shared border at Victoria Falls on Tuesday.

Zimbabwe's state-owned Herald newspaper quoted Rifai urging tourists from around the world to visit : "I was told about the wonderful experience and the warm hospitality of this country … By coming here, it is recognition, an endorsement on the country that it is a safe destination."

The agreement will also see the two southern African countries co-host the UNWTO general assembly in August next year.

UNWTO said it had not appointed Mugabe to any formal position but acknowledged he would receive an open letter like other heads of state who have joined its leaders for tourism campaign.

The development has stunned human rights campaigners and political opponents, who regard Mugabe as a tyrant.

Kumbi Muchemwa, a spokesman for the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), said: "I can't see any justification for the man being an 'ambassador'. An ambassador for what? The man has blood on his hands. Do they want tourists to see those bloody hands?"

Meanwhile, British MP Kate Hoey, chair of the all-party parliamentary group on Zimbabwe, said: "It is an absolute scandal – and an affront to the people of Zimbabwe, who didn't vote for Mugabe as their president but had him imposed because he used violence and the armed forces to hang onto power in defiance of the democratic will of the people of Zimbabwe.

"For a man who has destroyed his country's infrastructure and cynically engineered hunger to be an 'ambassador' for tourism is disgraceful – particularly as he has been personally responsible for the downward spiral of the economy and destroyed the hotel, travel and tourism industry in the process."

Mugabe and his allies are subject to EU and US sanctions preventing them from travelling to EU countries including Britain, although he does attend the UN general assembly in New York.

Muchemwa added: "Robert Mugabe is under international sanctions, so how do you have an international tourism ambassador who can't travel to other countries?

"The UN is losing credibility in this process. Does it think people should go to a country where the law is not obeyed? An MDC activist was murdered last Saturday. Zimbabwe is doing things which don't encourage the arrival of tourists."

There was also criticism from the Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition, an umbrella organisation of civil society groups. Dewa Mavhinga, its regional information and advocacy officer, said: "It boggles the mind how the UN could appoint Mugabe as an ambassador of any sort. I don't think he's an appropriate person.

"It sends the wrong message to Mugabe that he is now acceptable to the international community. This is the same guy who last week was bashing gays and lesbians, who he says are worse than dogs."

Zimbabwe is rich in tourism potential, boasting attractions such as Victoria Falls, the ruins of Great Zimbabwe and the Hwange wildlife game reserve, and one of the best climates in the world. Its official tourism branding entices with "a world of wonders".

The past decade has hit the industry hard, with the national airline going bust, but there have been recent signs of a gradual recovery.

John Makumbe, a politics professor at the University of Zimbabwe, said of Mugabe's accolade: "I think it's ridiculous because Zimbabwe is one of the countries least used by tourists.

"Tourism is at its lowest level because of the political and economic crises it's gone through. Tourists really wish Victoria Falls was in another country, like South Africa.

"Robert Mugabe will do more damage to international tourism than good. His image is in tatters, his country is an international pariah.

"It undermines the reputation of the UNWTO as being detached from the reality on the ground in terms of human rights violations and political instability."

But after visiting the country last week, the UN high commissioner for human rights, Navi Pillay, urged western countries to lift their targeted sanctions, arguing that they are hurting the poor. She also called on Zimbabwe to pass reforms to avoid violence in the next election.

Mugabe's Zanu-PF party seized on his UN honour as evidence that opponents and media have exaggerated the country's problems. Spokesman Rugare Gumbo said: "There's no alternative but to accept the reality on the ground. We can theorise about sanctions but the reality is that the UN is in control of the situation. If you can't defeat them, join them: that is what we are witnessing."

He continued: "The situation on the ground in Zimbabwe is not as bad as portrayed. If we say this ourselves, you say it's propaganda.

"What do you expect from the MDC? They are paid by the US and Europeans and they have nothing else to offer. They keep making noise but the reality on the ground is different."

UNWTO, which has headquarters in Madrid, insisted that it had not awarded Mugabe an official title. Sandra Carvao, its co-ordinator of communications, said: "Correct would be to say UNWTO has presented both presidents with an open letter which calls for them to support tourism as a means to foster sustainable development in their countries to the benefit of their people and consequently ask them to support the sector in this respect."

She added: "UNWTO does not have an ambassadors programme and the receiving of the UNWTO/WTTC [World Travel and Tourism Council] open letter implies no legal commitment or title attribution to the country or the head of state or government in question."

Source

Holder to brief black pastors on campaign 2012

Obama was meant to bring the different races in America together. He was also meant to heal the planet and walk on water. Instead he has caused more racial tension and class warfare than ever before. That's how he rolls. And now that the election is just around the corner and there is a chance he may have to give up his wonderful Affirmative Action job, he's pulling out all the stops to stay in Office. So to do this, the Obama campaign has decided that they need to get the word out to the African American community on how to vote, and what better way than to target the Black religious leaders in these communities. Now, I don't know much about politics - in fact, you may even say I'm dumb - but I just know this can't be right, or legal. Since when is it acceptable for a Black president to target the Black community and hold special Black-only meetings? Since when is it acceptable to say to the Black community that they have a 'theological responsibility' to vote (for Obama of course). How racist is this man? Would it have been acceptable for George Bush to call on only White priests and pastors to meet and 'discuss' how best to campaign? Of course not. However, it seems that Blacks in America are a special breed of people, allowed to shout 'racist' at anyone saying anything they don't like or agree with; but at the same time they're able to have 'Black-only' membership groups without censor. We all know that Whites get born with White privilege so they get nothing!


Attorney General Eric Holder, the IRS, and the liberal lawyers at the ACLU will brief several hundred pastors in the African American community on how to participate in the presidential election -- which the Congressional Black Caucus chair expects will help President Obama's campaign.

"We will have representatives from nine denominations who actually pastor somewhere in the neighborhood of about 10 million people, and we're going to first of all equip them with the information they need to know about what they can say and what they cannot say in the church that would violate their 501c3 status with the IRS," Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Mo., told MSNBC today.
"In fact, we're going to have the IRS administrator there, we're going to have the Attorney General Eric Holder there, we're going to have the lawyers' organization from around the country, the ACLU -- all giving ministers guidance about what they can and cannot do," he noted.
Cleaver said they would not tell pastors which candidate to support. They will let them know who to regard as the bad guys, though (hint: not Democrats). "We're going to talk about some of the draconian laws that have cropped up around the country as a result of the 17 percent increase in African American votes," Cleaver said, describing voter ID laws as a form of Jim Crow-style "poll tax" on seniors and black voters.
The CBC chairman is confident that "President Obama is going to get 95 percent of the [African American] vote," and wants to keep that turnout high. "We want to let them know that there is a theological responsibility to participate in the political process, at least in the Judeo-Christian tradition," he said.

UK: Spot the difference

This is a classic example of why Western countries are going to hell in a hand basket. Below are two examples of 'justice' as evidenced in the UK. The first article is about Muslim extremist who burnt replica poppies on Remembrance Day last year and where the group was heard to chant "British soldiers burn in hell". There are also the same people who labeled British soldiers baby killers. Their punishment? ONE Muslim man was found guilty of public order offence and fined £50. The second article is about a drunk White women who went on a racist rant on the Tube train. She was found guilty of bringing shame to Britain! I kid you not. Her punishment? A whopping 5 months in jail and banned from travelling on the Underground for FIVE years for anti-social behavior. See, it's okay to wish publicly British people dead - as per the new UK invaders - but, not okay if to publicly voice racist remarks. For that you get jail time. This is what is going on in our countries - justice skewed to accommodate those easily offended.  

Hat tip: Mark L




Muslim extremist fined £50 for burning poppies on Remembrance Day

Emdadur Choudhury arrives at Belmarsh Ma

A Muslim extremist who burned replica poppies on Remembrance Day last year has been fined £50 after being found guilty of a public order offence.

Emdadur Choudhury, a member of Muslims Against Crusades (MAC), was guilty of a "calculated and deliberate" insult to the dead and those who mourn them when he burned two large plastic poppies during a two-minute silence on 11 November, district judge Howard Riddle said.
Members of MAC were heard chanting "British soldiers burn in hell" before the burning incident near the Royal Albert Hall in London. "The two-minute chanting, when others were observing a silence, followed by a burning of the symbol of remembrance was a calculated and deliberate insult to the dead and those who mourn or remember them," Riddle said at Woolwich crown court.
Mohammad Haque, 30, of Bethnal Green, east London - a fellow MAC member - was found not guilty of the same public order offence.
Choudhury, 26, of Spitalfields, east London, had denied a charge under section 5 of the Public Order Act of burning the poppies in a way that was likely to cause "harassment, harm or distress" to those who witnessed it.
Read more here

Versus

Tube racist whose champagne-fuelled tirade was viewed by thousands on YouTube is sentenced to five months in prison 

Vile: A child in the Central Line carriage looks on as the woman continues her tirade of abuse

A secretary who hurled racist abuse at fellow passengers on a Tube train while drunk had brought shame to Britain, a judge said yesterday.

Jacqueline Woodhouse, 42, was jailed for 21 weeks for her foul-mouthed tirade. She snarled at shocked commuters seated beside her: ‘I used to live in England and now I live in the United Nations.’

Woodhouse’s champagne-fuelled rant was recorded by a passenger, who posted the seven-minute clip on YouTube where it caused a sensation.

At Westminster Magistrates’ Court, the judge also gave Woodhouse an anti-social behaviour order banning her from travelling on the Underground or the Docklands Light Railway while drunk for five years after it emerged that she had been fined for a similar rant on the DLR in 2008.

District Judge Michael Snow said of the video clip capturing her latest outburst: ‘Anyone viewing that would feel a deep sense of shame that our fellow citizens could be subject to such behaviour.’

The seven-minute clip was captured by fellow passenger Galbant Singh Juttla who was making his way home from a funeral at the time.

He became distressed by Woodhouse racially abusing a black woman who had bumped into her accidentally.

Today at Westminster Magistrates’ Court in central London, district judge Michael Snow sentenced her to 21 weeks behind bars - but she will be eligible for release in just over 10 weeks.

Previously the court was told that Woodhouse had drunk an 'unknown' quantity of champagne at a retirement party before getting on the Tube at 11pm.

Woodhouse, of Romford in Essex, admitted causing harassment alarm and distress to Mr Juttla earlier this month.

In the video which was played in court earlier this month, the clip begins with Woodhouse shouting in a thick Essex accent about 'foreign s*** heads'.

She turns to her passengers and asks: 'Where do you come from? Where do you come from? Where do you come from?

'I would like to know if any of you are illegal? I am sure like 30 per cent of you are.'
She then turns on the Pakistani man sitting next to her, who is singing his national anthem, and threatens to 'punch him in the face.'

'I wouldn’t mind if you loved our country,' she adds.

She then turns to Mr Juttla's camera, as he assures her he would rather be listening to his music than to her.


Woodhouse ignores the anger of other passengers as she continues her aggressive seven-minute tirade.

'Oh look he’s filming, hello,' she says. 'Hello government.'

She goes on: 'Why don’t you tell me where you’re from?'

He replies: 'I am British.'

She gets her phone out of her black handbag and looks as if she is filming him too.
Mr Juttla warns her: 'Watch what you are saying.'

She replies: 'I used to live in England and now I live in the United Nations.'

As he tells her to keep her mouth shut, informing her that she has had too much to drink, she becomes extremely agitated and starts screaming.

'It’s not your country anyway so what’s your problem?' she yells. 'It’s been overtaken by people like you.'

Read more here



29 May 2012

"Sudanese Go Home!" Hundreds of Israelis Protest Growing Crimes Commited by Illegals

At least Israeli's have open eyes!


Green energy jobs far short of Obama goal

Obama estimated that over 200 000 new green jobs would be created by him investing in the green industry. He pumped $90 billion into green energy projects via his stimulus package so it would stand to reason that he must have created a significant number of new green jobs. Surely close to his target of 200 000! Yet, by the end of last year, only 16 100 people had landed new jobs in this sector. That means that every new green job has cost the tax payer $5.6 million. What a brilliant economist this man is. It's almost as if he used his green slush fund only to re-pay his friends who helped him win election, but that couldn't be - surely not! Let this be a lesson to everyone out there. Do not fall for a few well rehearsed lines by a politician, spoken with eloquence. Do not fall for a smooth operator with a forked tongue. Do not buy oil from the snake-oil salesman. Listen with skepticism and vote with the head, not emotions, otherwise you land up with a president like Barack Obama. And the America people aren't the only ones guilty of this.


Funny Obama Pictures

President Obama has made much of his commitment to green energy as he launches his re-election bid, but the nascent industry has produced far fewer jobs than the president promised, despite massive, repeated infusions of taxpayer dollars.


Since taking office more than three years ago, Obama has routinely promoted wind, solar and other green energy efforts, touring factories -- often the beneficiaries of federal grants -- and touting the manufacturers as cutting-edge job producers who are leading America's transition to energy independence. He had promised in 2008 to help those companies create millions of jobs.

"We can invest $15 billion a year in renewable sources of energy ... to create 5 million new jobs, new energy jobs, all across [the] country, jobs that pay well, jobs that can't be outsourced," Obama, the candidate, told an Ohio crowd.

But the president has fallen far short of his own mark.

The wind industry has actually lost about 10,000 jobs since 2009, even though it doubled its domestic production, the American Wind Energy Association reports. And Republicans were quick to point out that as Obama blocks the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada to Texas, the oil and gas industry has added 75,000 jobs since the start of his term.

Obama spent $90 billion of his stimulus package on green energy projects, including weatherization of buildings and development of electric vehicles. Yet, by the end of last year, just 16,100 people landed new jobs in the so-called green industry, Labor Department statistics show, far short of the 200,000 jobs the White House projected it would help create each year.

The lack of progress has some Democrats bemoaning the current state of green energy, particularly when compared with the vision laid out by Obama.

"To me, the most glaring failure of the Obama administration has been a total inability to deliver on green jobs," said one top Democratic strategist not associated with the president's re-election campaign. "Even worse, it's not even part of the national dialogue -- you'd think it would be a bigger part of his platform with all the focus on gas prices, but sadly, it just the occasional stump speech."

Administration officials counter that laying the foundation for green energy boosts the U.S. in the long term, even if jobs aren't being created at the pace Obama had promised in the campaign. Wind power and other green initiatives, Obama said last week in Iowa, remain part of his "all-of-the-above energy strategy."

"This is an industry on the rise," Obama said at a wind turbine factory, calling on Congress to extend his tax credit for wind producers. "And as you know, it's an industry that's putting people to work."

Still, with job creation lagging behind his own predictions, Obama's green energy initiatives have provided Republicans with political ammo they have not hesitated to use against him, including the bankruptcy of Solyndra, a solar panel manufacturer that failed despite a $535 million federal loan.

Such failures, Republicans said, prove the government can't pick winners and losers in the private sector.

"He handed out tens of billions of dollars to green energy companies, including his friends and campaign contributors at companies like Solyndra that are now bankrupt," said presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney. "He's crony capitalist."

Source


South Africa: 2010 stadiums worry Mbalula

Who would have guessed that the 2010 Soccer World Cup stadiums built in South Africa would go to waste? No, you don't say! Well I did, so I'm very tempted to say I told you so. Billions was spent to host this tournament and to build the stadiums, all for a measly 2-week period. Today they mostly lie in waste and the government has finally admitted to this 2 years after the tournament. FIFA don't care. They can now say that they've hosted a world cup on African soil - and they have paid off the bribes to the African politicians with the spoils generated by the tournament, and stuffed the rest of the profit in their back pockets. In the meantime, South African tax payers will feel the pain for many decades to come as they are left to pay off the massive debt and upkeep of these white elephant stadiums. Hey, but at least Africa can now brag that they held the tournament! That's all that matters and bugger the suckers who are left paying for these bragging rights.




Many of the stadiums built or upgraded for the 2010 FIFA World Cup are in danger of becoming white elephants, Sports Minister Fikile Mbalula said on Monday.


"Some of those stadiums are not only underutilised but also face the long term danger of becoming white elephants," he said in Pretoria.

"Communities are saying they don’t have facilities and then we go and find facilities that are not being used or have been vandalised."

Mbalula was addressing reporters after speaking at a municipal conference on sport and recreation.

He said in some instances facilities did exist but were too costly for communities to access.
"Stadiums in Dobsonville were upgraded as training facilities in 2010, but communities and clubs cannot afford to use them," said the minister.

"We’ve been paying lip service to these things but instead of complaining, we can sit down and resolve these issues with local government and have an integrated approach."

Mbalula said he wanted schools to have access to facilities but the costs were prohibitive.
"Once in a while, they must be accessible to schools and communities so we need to work with local government," he said.

"I’m quite aware that nothing is free of charge, but the fees that are being charged to utilise these facilities are quite exorbitant.

"Do not misunderstand me, Premier Soccer League teams must rent facilities. They have money and they have sponsors but even they pay exorbitant fees.

"They must pay but those prices must be negotiated with the municipalities and there must be reasonable rates."

Pakistan death decree over singing and dancing at a wedding

I don't pretend to understand the Muslim culture or religion - I'm way too stupid for that. But, what I do find fascinating is that people of this religion allow sad people to decide who lives and dies. Take the example below. Four women and two men have been sentenced to death by clerics in Pakistan because they saw video footage of the women and men dancing and singing at a wedding. The horror! Mind you, the men and women aren't shown together on the video, but it's inferred that they were inter-mingling, and boof, they're condemned to die, just like that. No trial necessary; no witnesses interviewed; no nothing - just sentenced to death. I wonder what it's like to be part of this fun-police, sitting in judgement of their fellow man, just waiting for them to put a foot wrong, and then deciding their fate. They must truly be a bundle of joy to live with. Over 943 women and girls were murdered last year in Pakistan, for allegedly defaming their family's honor. What more can one say?




ISLAMABAD: Four women and two men have been sentenced to death in northern Pakistan for singing and dancing at a wedding, police said yesterday. Clerics issued a decree after a mobile phone video emerged of the six enjoying themselves in a remote village in the mountainous district of Kohistan, 176 kilometres (109 miles) north of the capital Islamabad.
Pakistani authorities in the area said local clerics had ordered the punishment over allegations that the men and women danced and sang together in Gada village, in defiance of strict tribal customs that separate men and women at weddings.
“The local clerics issued a decree to kill all four women and two men shown in the video,” district police officer Abdul Majeed Afridi told AFP. “It was decided that the men will be killed first, but they ran away so the women are safe for the moment. I have sent a team to rescue them and am waiting to hear some news,” he said, adding that the women had been confined to their homes.

Afridi said the events stemmed from a dispute between two tribes and that there was no evidence the men and women had been inter-mingling.
“All of them were shown separately in the video. I’ve seen the video taken on a cell phone myself, it shows four women singing and a man dancing in separate scenes and then another man sitting in a separate shot,” he said. “This is tribal enmity. The video has been engineered to defame the tribe,” he added.
The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan said at least 943 women and girls were murdered last year for allegedly defaming their family’s honour. The statistics highlight the scale of violence suffered by many women in conservative Muslim Pakistan, where they are frequently treated as second-class citizens. – AFP

28 May 2012

And so it continues

South Africans will understand this title.

Hat tip: Denise R


https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/579275_444613528899271_276467885_n.jpg
















UK: NHS removes word 'Dad' from pregnancy handbook in case it offends same sex couples

The NHS has decided they will remove the word 'Dad' from their pregnancy handbooks lest they offend same-sex couples - they would rather offend heterosexual couples instead. Yes, what an excellent idea - let's pander to the minority instead of the majority. But why stop there? We surely don't want to offend the eternally offended by using the word 'Mom". Let's just get this over and done with and label Moms 'Incubator' and Dads 'Sperm Donor' - those terms surely can't offend these people, errr, humans, errr, homo sapiens, errr, homo erectus, oh bugger it, people? In fact the word baby may offend, um, babies, so let's also change that so as not to offend them. Going forward we could call them the 'Product" - thereby also not offending those who hate gender labels. And on and on we go, too scared to speak out in case we offend someone or anything. The newly created Thought Police are armed, able and willing to hunt you down lest you transgress - whether wittingly or unwittingly. There are so many different groups of people to offend these days that it's best we just keep quiet. Gone are the days where a spade was a spade - that era was way too easy. Pretty soon kids at school will be hiding rather than shamefully admitting that they come from a former 'normal' family unit of a Mum, Dad and maybe some siblings. Gosh, we couldn't have that! It's far easier these days not to offend the Gays than to offend the rest of us. After all, empty vessels make the most noise.


It is feared that the term 'dad' may offend same sex couples and it has therefore been replaced with 'partner'. Picture is posed by models
Anyone else find this photo creepy? Or is that offensive? I'm so confused.



The Health Service has removed the word ‘dad’ from a pregnancy handbook for fear of offending gay and lesbian parents.

Officials decided to use the term ‘partner’ throughout the 200-page guide, titled Ready Steady Baby, after receiving a complaint that ‘dad’ was discriminating against same-sex couples.

But the omission of the word has angered some campaigners who claim that traditional family values are being undermined.

Norman Wells, of the Family Education Trust, said: ‘This is all part of an agenda to present as natural a type of family that cannot be created by natural means.

‘The NHS should not be squandering taxpayers’ money to advance the cause of a minority interest group.



Ready Steady Baby: The 220 page guide has now been reprinted

No matter how much effort is made to present positive images of families headed by same-sex couples, the fact remains it takes a man and a woman to create a child.’

Robert Oxley, from the TaxPayers’ Alliance, said: ‘It’s barmy that the NHS is wasting money reprinting guides because of a single complaint. Becoming a dad isn’t synonymous with one type of couple so it seems ridiculous to worry about changing it.

'The NHS has bigger priorities than prescribing how to define who wants to be called dad.’

Although the guide is published by the NHS, it is given only to pregnant women in Scotland when they go to ante-natal classes. Expectant mothers in England are given a similar pamphlet, The Pregnancy Book. 

A spokesman for the Department of Health, which produces it, said there were no plans to remove the word ‘dad’ from this guide.

A spokesman for NHS Health Scotland said it had been reviewing the wording anyway and had made several other changes. They confirmed it cost £100,000 to print 90,000 copies of the new version.

The spokesman added: ‘It is standard practice to review publications on a yearly basis, if not more often. At the time this complaint was received the Ready Steady Baby text had just been through its annual review, changes made and the new edition was printed in December 2011.

‘The review process identified the need to use language that was more inclusive, particularly in relation to same-sex partnerships.’

Only last week a decision by the NHS to consider offering same-sex couples free fertility treatment angered some campaigners. NICE, the NHS watchdog, issued draft guidelines stating that gay and lesbian couples should be offered one cycle of IVF – as long as they had already tried to have a baby six times previously through a private clinic.
For the first time the guidelines also stated that women aged 40 to 42 should be offered IVF treatment on the NHS.

But Josephine Quintavalle, founder of the group Comment on Reproductive Ethics, described the same-sex move as ‘absurd’. ‘We are not prepared to accept what constitutes fertility from a biological perspective,’ she said. 

‘Fertility treatment is very important but in this case what we are trying to do is rewrite biology.’

27 May 2012

Mark Steyn: Facebook also a loser in Egypt

Another great article by Mark Steyn. He just gets better and better.

Article Tab: Egyptian demonstrators gather to denounce the electoral success of Ahmed Shafiq, a presidential candidate, in Tahrir Square in Cairo, Egypt on Friday, May 25, 2012. Of 13 candidates running for the presidency, Shafiq, along with Mohammed Morsi, gained the largest number of votes during  two days of presidential voting in Egypt.
Arab spring!


So how's that old Arab Spring going? You remember – the "Facebook Revolution." As I write, they're counting the votes in Egypt's presidential election, so by the time you read this the pecking order may have changed somewhat. But currently in first place is the Muslim Brotherhood candidate Mohammed Morsi, who in an inspiring stump speech before the students of Cairo University the other night told them, "Death in the name of Allah is our goal."
Like!
In second place is the military's man, Ahmed Shafiq, Hosni Mubarak's last Prime Minister and a man who in a recent television interview said that "unfortunately the revolution succeeded."
Like!
In third place is moderate Islamist Abdel-Moneim Abolfotoh, a 9/11 Truther endorsed by the terrorist organization al-Gama'a al-Islamiya. He's a "moderate" because he thinks Egyptian Christians should be allowed to run for the presidency, although they shouldn't be allowed to win.
Like!
As I said, this thrilling race is by no means over, and one would not rule out an eventual third-place finish by a rival beacon of progress such as Amr Moussa, the longtime Arab League flack and former Mubarak Foreign Minister. So what happened to all those candidates embodying the spirit of Egypt's modern progressive democratic youth movement that all those Western media rubes were cooing over in Tahrir Square a year ago? How are they doing in Egypt's first free presidential election?
You have 0 friends!
I don't know about you, but I have the feeling that Messrs Morsi, Shafiq and Abolfotoh are not spending much time on Facebook, or even on Twitter. Indeed, for a "social media revolution," the principal beneficiaries seem to be remarkably antisocial: liberated from the grip of Mubarak, the new Egypt is a land where the Israeli Embassy gets attacked and ransacked, Christians get killed and their churches burned to the ground, female reporters for the Western media are sexually assaulted in broad daylight, and for the rest of the gals a woman's place is in the clitoridectomy clinic. In the course of the election campaign, the Muslim Brotherhood has cast off the veil of modernity and moderation that so beguiled the U.S. State Department and the New York Times: Khairat el-Shater, the deputy leader, now says that "the Quran is our Constitution" and that Mubarak-era laws permitting, for example, women to seek divorce should be revised. As the TV cleric Safwat Hegazy told thousands of supporters at a Brotherhood rally in the Nile Delta, "We are seeing the dream of the Islamic Caliphate coming true."
Thus, the Facebook Revolution one year on. Status: It's not that complicated. Since the founding of the Kingdom of Egypt in 1922, the country has spent the last nine decades getting worse. Mubarak's kleptocracy was worse than Farouk's ramshackle kingdom, and the new Egypt will be worse still.
At a certain level, there's nothing very new about this. In the early stages of revolution, students are often on the front line, mainly because they've got nothing else to do all day. But by the time the strongman is being sworn in at the presidential palace they're usually long gone from the scene, supplanted by harder and better organized forces. Was it ever likely that Western "social media" would change this familiar trajectory? National Review's editor Rich Lowry, from whose byline picture the pixie twinkle of boyish charm has yet to fade, was nevertheless sounding as cranky an old coot as I usually do when he declared that "Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg is to uselessness what Henry Ford was to the automobile" and deplored a world in which millions of people spend their time "passing around photos of pets in party costumes, telling us whether they are having a good or bad hair day, and playing the farming-simulation game FarmVille." It is not necessary to agree with the full majestic sweep of Lowry's dismissal to note that neither Lenin nor Mao is known to have taken a photograph of his pet in a party costume, or even a Party ] costume, and that both men played their farming-simulation games for real, and on an industrial scale. Putting aside its deficiencies in revolution-mobilizing, Facebook, until its shares headed south this week, had a valuation of over $100 billion – or about two-thirds of the GDP of New Zealand. Which seems a little high to me.
Whatever one feels about the Shariah-enforcing, Jew-hating, genital-mutilating enthusiasts of the Muslim Brotherhood, they do accurately reflect a significant slice – and perhaps a majority – of the Egyptian people. The problem with the old-school dictators was that, in the end, Mubarak, Ben Ali and Gadhafi didn't represent anything other than their Swiss bank accounts. The question for the wider world is what do "social media" represent? If they supposedly embody the forces of progress and modernity, then they've just taken an electoral pounding from guys who haven't had a new idea since the seventh century.
No one should begrudge Mark Zuckerberg his billions, and decent people should revile in the strongest terms thug-senator Chuck Schumer's attempts to punish Zuckerberg's partner Eduardo Saverin for wishing to enjoy his profits under the less-confiscatory tax arrangements of Singapore: It is a sign of terminal desperation when regimes that can't compete for talent focus their energies on ever more elaborate procedures to prevent freeborn individuals voting with their feet.
But it is also a sign of desperation to talk up amiable diversions for pampered solipsistic Westerners as an irresistible force of modernity. One of the basic defects of the Bush administration's designation of a "war on terror" was that it emphasized symptoms (bombs and bombers) over causes (the underlying ideology). In the war of ideas, the West has chosen not to compete, under the erroneous assumption that the ever more refined delivery systems for its sensual distractions are a Big Idea in and of themselves. They're not. If you know your Tocqueville, they sound awfully like his prediction of a world in which "an innumerable crowd of like and equal men ...revolve on themselves without repose," a phrase which nicely distills the unending busyness of our gaudy novelties.
Don't get me wrong; I like goofy pet photos. But can these gizmos do anything else? Yes, in theory. But, in practice, is a culture that "revolves on itself without repose" likely to be that effective at communicating real ideas to the wider world? Ideas on liberty, free speech, property rights, women's rights and all the other things conspicuous by their absence in the philosophies of Egypt's new political class. In the end, a revolution cannot be Tweeted. Whatever their defects, the unlovely forces running the new Egypt understand the difference between actually mutilating a young girl's genitals to deny her the possibility of sexual pleasure, and merely "following" your local clitoridectomist on his Twitter feed.
A century ago, the West exported its values. So, in Farouk's Egypt, at the start of a new legislative session, the King was driven to his toytown parliament to deliver the speech from the throne in an explicit if ramshackle simulacrum of Westminster's rituals of constitutional monarchy. Today, we decline to export values, and complacently assume, as the very term "Facebook Revolution" suggests, that technology marches in support of modernity. It doesn't. Facebook's flat IPO and Egypt's presidential election are in that sense part of the same story, of a developed world whose definitions of innovation and achievement have become too shrunken and undernourished. The vote in Egypt tells us a lot about them, but it also tells us something about us.