Sunday, November 23, 2014

Aussie Government Finally gets Tough on Windbag Obama !


THE United States embassy in Canberra (right) advised President Barack Obama not to make the provocative, anti-Abbott speech on climate change which he made at the University of Queensland in Brisbane. That the President acted against the advice of his own embassy reveals a deeply divided and in part dysfunctional Obama administration…

The speech was not only damaging for Tony Abbott, as it will be used by all his deadshit opponents, like Tanya Plibersek, on climate change up until the next election, it was a disaster for US foreign policy, because the gratuitous climate change remarks completely overshadowed all the regional and security content which Obama’s foreign policy team wanted to be the main point of his major address on his Asian tour. A few days later, Foreign Minister Julie Bishop gave Obama a ''bitch-slap'' by correcting him about his incorrect statements about Australia's Great Barrier Reef.

Obama’s speech was deliberately designed to hurt Abbott… Historians of the relationship cannot cite a single similar example of a visiting president going out of his way to wound an Australian prime
minister…  Such a rude scumbag !

There was also an element of cowardice in the speech. Obama would never have given that speech at home before the congressional mid-term elections. There would have been some courage in such a speech delivered, say, in West Virginia, or Ohio, a week before the mid-terms.
What was Obama’s purpose? Can one more celebrity orgasm really be more important to the President than maintaining his relationship with his closest ally in Asia? Was Obama preparing for his post-presidential life, as a new and improved Al Gore?


Simon Benson of the Sydney Daily Telegraph adds:
''EARS are still ringing in the US embassy in Canberra after one unlucky State Department official received a terse phone call last weekend… The caller ... a senior staffer from ... Tony Abbott’s office and rang to express their displeasure at not being afforded the courtesy of a forewarning that the US President was planning to come to Australia to dump on the PM. ''   
The caller demanded to know why the Prime Minister’s office had not been given a “heads up” about Obama’s G20 climate change stunt. After all, that’s what friends do, right? Or in this case don’t do. They don’t blindside them.
I enjoy very much this kind of briefing from Abbott officials - painting the picture of Obama hitting back after losing the Senate and House of Reps and being shown up for the failure that so many US voters now see:
''One has to consider why [Obama] didn’t make his line-in-the-sand speech on climate change before the mid-term elections and, well, to a domestic audience in America…
There are those who also believe the US administration has also been waiting for a chance to give Abbott a serve....'' added Benson. 

The US was also annoyed at Australia’s free-trade agreement with Japan, believing it undermined its own domestic ambitions being pursued through the Trans Pacific Partnership. It is also still smarting over the PM’s use of veto to kill the Graincorp deal.
Abbott has also been perceived by some officials to have shown Obama up on several occasions — most notably his refusal to go to water over the Snowdon leaks like Obama did and, more recently, his hawkish and early calls on action against Islamic State terrorists, which Obama had been accused of having no clear plan to deal with.
 

Senior officials are now hoping the rupture caused by Obama’s speech doesn’t have implications for other more important aspects of the US-Australia relationship, which is
sure to be tested further as the West continues its global political realignment and shift to the centre right.  This political realignment is evident in the relationship between Abbott, his Canadian counterpart Stephen Harper and UK PM David Cameron. (photo left - Abbott, Cameron , Harper))
Combined with a conservative government in NZ, already there are four members of the Five Eyes intelligence network led by centre-right conservatives. And this at a time when the fifth and most powerful member, the US, is not only under the command of a president who abandoned the centre for the left, but whose power has been circumscribed...

Add the conservative leaders of Japan and India, and the strong personal relationships Abbott has with them, and a significant conservative power bloc emerges already in the Indo-Asia-Pacific with links to the northern hemisphere in the UK and Canada.


Obama, who has strayed perilously away from the centre, appears now to be the odd man out. The question is that, if the status quo remains in place for the foreseeable future — and should the Republicans win office in 2016 — an unprecedented conservative global grouping could be established that has the potential to have profound impact on the changing world order, just as the Tony Blair-Bill Clinton pact — as short-lived as it was — did in the ’90s with a power grouping of centre-left social democratic governments across the Atlantic.


The shift to centre-right government among the major partners of the US has implications for a range of issues — most notably on national and global security. “The Republicans will win presidency in 2016. I wonder if anyone has considered that all Five Eyes partners could be led by centre-right governments in 2017,” offers a senior intelligence source. “Throw in conservative governments in control in India and Japan, and it’s worth pondering.”


The Way I See It......it was obvious this week when the conservative global intelligence think-tank Stratfor published a critique of Obama’s next two years and what it will mean for the world.
“We don’t normally comment on US domestic political affairs unless they affect international affairs,’’ wrote Stratfor’s CEO George Friedman (photo right). “However, it is necessary to consider American political affairs because they are likely to have a particular effect on international relations,”

“We have now entered the final phase of Barack Obama’s presidency, and like those of several other presidents since World War II, it is ending in what we call a state of failure. “When the president’s support has fragmented to the point that he is fighting to recover his base, I consider that a failed presidency — particularly when Congress is in the hands of the opposition.

“His energy cannot be directed toward new initiatives. It is directed toward recovering his base. “Looking at the timing of his decline, the only intruding event that might have had that impact was the rise of the Islamic State and a sense, even in his own party, that he did not have an effective response to it.

“The president is actively trying to save his legacy in the face of enormous domestic weakness. The last two years of a failed presidency are mostly about foreign policy and are not very pleasant to watch.” A call for more effective US leadership in Iraq and more US support for Israel might not go astray, either.

Why I Burned My ''Proof of Aboriginality'' Papers -- Kerryn Pholi


If you are an Aboriginal person with the literacy and media access to be reading this, you are not 'disadvantaged'.  After a career spent in jobs reserved for Indigenous Australians, Kerryn Pholi has had enough of being a "professional Aborigine". Far from closing the gap, she now believes these
strategies are racist.

I am a person of Aboriginal descent. This is nothing special; all it means is that I could trace my ancestry back to a stone-age way of life more easily, with far fewer steps, than most readers. When I think about my Aboriginal ancestry, I feel gratitude. I feel gratitude because modernity has given me a life of ease, pleasure and privilege beyond anything an Aboriginal woman in pre-invasion Australia could possibly imagine. As a person of Aboriginal descent, and a female at that, I am grateful that I had the good fortune to be born here in Australia in 1975, and not here in say, 1775.

 Perhaps life for my Aboriginal ancestors (the Bundjalung people of what is now northern NSW) had its good points prior to invasion, just as European life around 5,000 BC couldn't have been all bad ... though nobody seems to miss that particular lifestyle much or yearn to have it back.

 Perhaps some readers are disgusted that a person with Aboriginal ancestry would be grateful to the 'white invaders', given the historical horrors they brought upon 'my people'. Nonsense; I can feel
gratitude for my personal good fortune without needing to be grateful to anyone in particular.

 I don't feel particularly proud to be Aboriginal. No-one likes to see a skinhead thumping his chest and saying he is proud to be white; how is pride in an Aboriginal racial identity any different? And yet in a way I am proud of my Aboriginal ancestors. Some Aboriginal people say they are proud to be members of a (somewhat nebulous) racial/cultural group that has survived (sort of) for sixty thousands of years.

 I don't share that perspective, but I have my own version of 'survivor pride'. The fact that I am here,
with a bit of Aboriginal in my genetic mix, means that at some point my Aboriginal ancestors had the wit to take advantage of what was on offer, and so they survived where others did not. I feel pride that my forbears had the sense to discard unhelpful traditions and cultural attitudes, and make the best of their lot for themselves and their offspring. Unfortunately for me, I did not inherit the smarts of my Aboriginal ancestors. While they were obviously willing to do what they could to make the best of their situation, I simply can't do it anymore.

 I used to identify as Aboriginal, and I have worked in 'identified' government positions only open to Aboriginal people. As a professional Aborigine, I could harangue a room full of people with real qualifications and decades of experience with whatever self-serving, uninformed drivel that happened to pop into my head. For this nonsense I would be rapturously applauded, never questioned, and paid well above my qualifications and experience.

 I worked in excellent organisations that devoted resources to recruiting, elevating and generally indulging people like me, simply because other people like me told these organisations that's what they needed to do to 'overcome Indigenous disadvantage'. In these organisations I worked alongside dedicated, talented and highly skilled people - and there may have been room for one more dedicated, talented and highly skilled person if I hadn't been there occupying a position designated for someone of my 'race'.

 In my years of working as a professional Aborigine, I don't think I did anything that really helped anybody much at all, and I know that I was a party to unfairness, abuses of power, wastefulness and the plain silliness in the name of 'reconciliation' and 'cultural sensitivity'. I had a nagging sense of feeling like a complete fraud, things were reasonably OK until I made the mistake of reading Thomas Sowell's ''Affirmative action around the World: an empirical study''.

After that, I could no longer ignore the fact that my career was built on racism. Not 'reverse racism' or 'positive discrimination' - just plain racism, of benefit to nobody except a select gang of privileged people with the right genes and a piece of paper to prove it. In other words, of benefit only to people like me.

About 18 months ago I burned my 'Proof of Aboriginality' documentation (a letter from the NSW Department of Education acknowledging that I was Aboriginal, on the basis that my local Aboriginal Lands Council at that time, circa 1990, had said so). I walked away from the Aboriginal Industry for good.  It hasn't been easy, and I am still working out what to do with myself from here, but it has been rewarding. I feel Andrew Bolt was unfairly pilloried in court by a Jew lawyer and a Jew judge
(who should know better), but was right in pointing out that government subsidies to part-aboriginals was taking help away from those full-blooded aboriginals living in the bush who really need it. (photo left of Andrew Bolt coming out of the court house)


It feels great to simply identify as a human being, and to work alongside colleagues that only know me as another ordinary wage-slave, and not as a pampered mascot with the power to ruin a career with an accusation of 'insensitivity'. It also feels good to do proper work; sitting around a government office essentially being paid to be Aboriginal is both undignified and boring. I miss the money of course, but I don't miss the racism.

 If you are an Aboriginal person with the literacy and media access to be reading this, you are not 'disadvantaged'; you are one of the most fortunate people on the planet. You don't need special assistance because you are Aboriginal, you are not owed recompense because you are Aboriginal, nor do you possess special powers to perform tasks that others could not.

To accept preferential treatment on the basis of one's race - in employment, academe, the arts, the media - is to participate in racism. It does not 'close the gap', promote role-models or let you 'challenge the system from within'. To genuinely challenge racism we need to stop rationalising our individual self-interest, reject preferential treatment, compete in the open market for jobs, grants and audiences, and accept the financial and career consequences of refusing to be bought.

I realize when an Aboriginal person speaks out in criticism of the Aboriginal Industry, or speaks in favour of policies that are unpopular with the industry, it is almost inevitable that at some point a venerable Aboriginal spokesperson will declare—more in sorrow than in anger—that the dissident has “lost her culture” or “turned her back on her culture” or is “ignorant of her culture”. The superficial attractions of  “whitefella” culture has led the Aboriginal dissident to stray from the guiding wisdom of Aboriginal culture, which would have prevented her from forming such foolish ideas and voicing such dangerously naive opinions. In this particularly effective form of silencing and shaming, Aboriginal dissenters are simply ignorant, pitiable, uninitiated children—which means there is no need to engage critically with anything they say about Aboriginal policy but they'll go back to getting drunk.

This form of silencing suggests that if I had more “cultural” authenticity I would be disinclined to question or critically reflect on policies that provide preferential treatment to Aboriginal people. Or perhaps I might still reflect on the issue, but I would not be very concerned by the problems I see—or my special cultural knowledge would allow me to see justifications for this approach that I simply do not see from my present, culturally bereft standpoint. Or perhaps I would simply refrain from voicing any concerns out of loyalty to my “culture”.

NOTE:  Kerryn Pholi is a light-skinned Aborigine and has worked in Indigenous research and policy in various government agencies and NGOs.

The Way I See It.......I love Aborigines and their culture, I agree with Kerryn, I’m over this racist nonsense that is acceptable from one side only. But the historic reality is that Australia was always going to be colonised, if not by the Brits then by the Dutch or Portuguese, and I doubt either would have been less brutal. Aboriginal leaders took offence when Prime Minister Tony Abbott said last month that when the British First Fleet landed they found nothing but bushland...which was true!

Okay, so this is where I get into trouble for telling the truth: For 60,000 years Aborigines did not attempt to improve this land and it was begging to be colonised by someone. They planted no seeds, although there were plenty. They did not invent the wheel, neither did the Incas but look what they accomplished! They both walked huge distances but one made roads and organised an empire under one language while the other didn't make any effort to consolidate 510 separate languages. They did not discover numbers, although trade is a tribal imperative. Metallurgy alluded them. They remained nomadic, although a protein-rich 10,000-mile coastline was begging for permanent settlement.

And we wonder why voluminous amounts of money have not succeeded in “closing the gap”.
The “gap” will remain for generations to come because Aboriginal tribes were the least developed of any indigenes on earth. The “gap” was actually a grand canyon and we have never understood it.
We were as ruthlessly cruel to Aborigines as the Plymouth pilgrims were to the more developed American Indians and the Chinese are to the developed Tibetans, but it’s a price that is always paid by those with less sophisticated weapons, so get over it! Burning the Australian flag last week isn't going to win you any friends either. Like Kerryn says, ''Stop whinging and become something!''

Taking the ''Oh My'' Out of Vagina Anxiety !


I have been fortunate in over forty years of my spinal corrective practice to treat many women prior to and during their pregnancy to help them achieve pelvic alignment and nerve balance, so necessary for having a good outcome with less stress on mother and baby. From the easing of  ''morning sickness'' to maintaining the spinal column over nine months as the foetus is growing, and on to reducing labour time at delivery, chiropractic ticks all the boxes.

My Most Frequently Asked Question 


One of the biggest fears for pregnant women, particularly first-time mums, is ‘’how of earth can something as big as a baby come out of my vagina?’’  With episiotomy there are two options. (cutting the skin between the vagina and anus [Mid-Line] or diagonally [ Medio-Lateral] not to the anus) (see diagram right) during Labour is the most commonly performed operation in the West, childbirth can certainly have an effect on your delicate bits. Here’s all you need to know about Vagina Anxiety.

What’s Vagina Anxiety?

The fear of the effect of childbirth on a woman’s birth canal, and the delicate skin and tissue around the vagina and anus, can lead to some pregnant women to suffer real anxiety. Many women suffer small tears during birth, and doctors will cut the skin if necessary to prevent a ragged tear occurring, which takes longer to heal than a cut.

How Many Women Tear during Birth?

While health experts don’t know exactly how many women tear during the birthing process, as small tears often aren’t recorded, a study found seven out of ten needed stitches for a cut or tear. Bad tears, (known as third or forth-degree tears), going all the way from the vagina to the anal opening, are much less common, with a ratio of 7 in 100 women suffering a bad tear during birth.

Why You might Need an Episiotomy.

There are various reasons why you might need an episiotomy, such as if your baby is in distress, if your baby is in a breech position, and there’s a complication, or the birth is progressing quickly and your perineum is at risk of tearing, as it hasn’t had time to stretch slowly. ‘’The use of forceps does mean that an episiotomy is likely, but not inevitable,’’ confirms Dr Mariam Stoppard, author of Pregnancy, Conception and Birth (Penguin), adding that a vacuum suction delivery means less chance of an episiotomy.

Don’t Push Too Hard!

When your baby’s head is about to be born, otherwise known as ‘’crowning’’, (diagram left) you’ll feel a stinging sensation as your vaginal opening stretches. Try not to push to hard at this point, as it can cause tears to occur. ‘’As soon as you feel this, try to stop bearing down, pant, and allow the contractions of your uterus to do the work,’’ says Dr Stoppard. ‘’This may be difficult as you’ll probably still feel like pushing, but if you continue to push you run the greater risk of tearing or needing that episiotomy.’’

Other Ways to Reduce Tearing.

Studies show that massaging your perineum, or rubbing and stretching the skin between your vagina and anus using natural oil, can help prevent tearing when you give birth. Water births can also help, along with mid-wives pressing hot flannels or towel on the perineum.

Add ‘’No Episiotomy’ to Your Birth Plan.

If you want to avoid or reduce your chance of having an episiotomy, it’s a good idea to make it clear in your notes and birth plan that you don’t want it to be done unless entirely necessary.  Dr Stoppard says, ‘’If you do have to have an episiotomy, you have the right to have a local anaesthetic in the perineum before it’s done, so insist on that.’’
 
How Long will my Episiotomy Take to Heal?
Your stitches should not take more than a month to heal. If you're in any doubt  as to whether your stitches have healed properly, go and see your GP, or wait for your six week check-up then. Using a herbal infused warm SITZ BATH is very helpful for healing and can be fitted in a typical toilet bowl. Some models come with a small aerator to supply a gentle stream  of bubbles to the surgical cut.
 
The Way I See It......(My Second Most Asked Question)
 
''When can I have Sex again?''   Once your stitches have healed it's fine to make love as long as both you and your partner feel like it. When you first make love, you may feel some initial tenderness and tightness. Relaxing as much as possible and using a lubricant will help make you more comfortable. Try taking a warm bath before you go to bed, and leave plenty of time for foreplay. You may prefer to be on top so that you can control the degree of penetration, or you may find that the side-lying position is the most comfortable initially.  Hopefully your new baby won't make you too tired for the enjoyment of love making. I hope my advice helped reduce that Anxiety.
 
 

Saturday, November 22, 2014

Oh....What a Terrible Web We Weave.......


Let's get real here....ground troops will eventually be needed to wipe out the Islamic State but what then? As long as the West fails to understand Islam's evil it will continue to fail to combat the worst of its atrocities; more beheadings, rapings and women and girls sold into slavery. Shias and
Sunnis are Islamic just as Catholics and Protestants are Christian and regime change in Iraq from Sunni to Shia presents exactly the same problem but from a different direction.

Barack Obama hasn’t figured it out yet. The last war between Iran and Iraq was a Sunni/Shia war. Their systemic hatred of each other led to Iraq using ballistic missiles to shower chemical poisons on Tehran and Iran to use children to clear mine fields by forcing them to run ahead of their tanks.

Iraq held weapons superiority over Iran due to Western loans of $80 billion but Iran’s tactical superiority levelled the playing field to a stalemate after eight years and millions dead.

With this conflict as a background the US defeated the Sunni Ba’athist Party power structure of Saddam Hussein and left a Shia, al-Maliki, in charge with the help of a southern Shia majority. A foreseeable disaster to everyone, except the US.

Undeterred, the US has now endorsed yet another Shia, Prime Minister Hadir al-Abidi, (photo left) to replace the non-inclusive al-Maliki. And guess what! The Iranians have also endorsed the new Shia PM and have been crossing their borders to help fight their old enemy the Sunnis, who in retaliation to the regime change have now become the Islamic State.

Of course the disenfranchised Sunnis in the north have joined ISIS and the Shia military are being summarily executed or have dropped their guns and are running for their lives while trying to change uniforms.[How does ISIS identify Sunni from Shia? Easy, they are told to pray. Sunnis and Shia pray to Allah differently and those exposed as Shia are immediately confined to mass graves.]

But hang on, Iran is the enemy of the US, it plans to wipe Israel off the map, so WTF is it doing helping the US defeat ISIS when Iran itself is the subject of vicious US sanctions over its nuclear capacity, likely to be knocked out again by the Israelis backed by the US?

Obama, scratching his self-imposed grey hair, has now written a series of appreciative letters to Tehran welcoming their involvement. (Although the exact content of the letters remains classified.)
And now the other arch enemy of the US, Syria’s Assad, might also be checking his letter box, because he too is helping to kill Islamic State fighters, while US ally, Turkey, refuses to take sides.
It’s really tough having an ally like the US. It insists on Middle East intervention when it has no concept of the consequences. Intelligence is lacking both on the ground and in the heads of the CIA and military brass.

“Al-Qaeda has been all but destroyed”, said Barack, (who was actually training and supplying arms to the ISIS, via the CIA, to defeat Assad) but Al-Qaeda is alive and well, fragmented and more dangerous, under a dozen different names in north Africa, including the Khorosan who now operates in Raqqa, northern Syria, with the ISIS. Excuse the language but what a fucking mess.

But nowhere near the debacle yet to be confronted in Afghanistan once the US departs that little incendiary cesspit. Despicable Shariah Law will certainly be reimposed by the patient Taliban who will make the ISIS onslaught look like a Sunday school picnic, with the support of northern Pakistan.


The Way I See It.....the one consistent thread weaving its way through Middle East conflicts is Islam and the quickest way to get it here is to get involved there.  But it is already here and the quickest way to embolden it is to appease it!  And that’s exactly what Western countries are doing.

And that's the rub. One can't help but look at the current ad hoc, half-hearted effort against ISIS without thinking that the goal isn't really beating ISIS, but beating back bad press. It's a policy built around keeping the lid on public criticism -- at least until the President has cleaned out his desk in the Oval Office.

Thursday, November 20, 2014

Would You By a Used Car from this Man? So why Buy Climate Change ?


The University of Queensland, along with a bevy of the ALP Left, was the perfect venue for guaranteed applause when bombastic President Obama promised to achieve something that he will never need to deliver. He bragged how he and Xi Jinping toasted their ''deal'' with a Chinese wine.


Actually he said he would use his “best efforts” to achieve a 26 per cent decrease in greenhouse gasses buy 2025. But Barry O. won’t be here, he’ll be on the well-worn guest speaker circuit for ex-aspirational Presidents.


And, at the same time, in a magnificent feat of negotiating skill he was able to convince Chinese President Xi Jinping to promise to dramatically increase his CO2 emissions each and every year until 2030. Wow, that’s some sort of achievement and the ALP and the brainwashed uni students went wild with excitement.  Suckers!!


Well, the wrong people were applauding, it should have been the climate realists, because Obama and Xi Jinping had just admitted that global warming is a nonsense created by the UN’s corrupt IPCC and by the time the Paris Conference on Climate Change comes around next year even the far Left should have twigged to the fraud.


The IPCC reports that 97 per cent of scientists agree with anthropogenic “warming”. However they do not report that over 30,000 climate scientists have disagreed with them. You see, the IPCC deals in percentages while climate realists deal in numbers. Ninety-seven per cent sounds a lot, but it’s not. It may well be 9.7 “scientists” out of 10 agree with the IPCC... with the 0.3 having lost their government grants for speaking out.


Here’s an interesting background to the massive climate fraud led by ex railway diesel mechanic,
IPCC chief  Rajendra Pachauri (pictured left):


1 The UN is insolvent: Half of Africa and South America and much of Europe don’t pay their dues and don’t intend to (this problem was exacerbated by the GFC). In 1988 the UN set out to remedy the financing shortfall with a massive climate scare.


2 The vehicle: With an average of seven climate catastrophes per year since Adam, the UN realised that these natural occurrences have never been blamed on anything!


3  Revenue source: World governments must pay 10% of the scam to the UN.


4  Incentives: World governments will each reap unprecedented receipts from what will effectively become a tax on carbon. Environmentalists and coal-hating Green minorities will naturally become allies in the scam and (small ''l'') liberal governments will acquire funding for socialist programs and their dream of a meaningful redistribution of income. Promoters of the scam, like Al Gore, will be rewarded by becoming billionaires overnight and the whole process will be one step closer to a UN dominated world government.

 [Witness Gillard’s and Milne’s plans for ridiculously ambitious social programs before they were thwarted by the abolition of massive carbon and mining taxes. “Socialism masquerading as Environmentalism”, said Tony Abbott. He was right!]


5  What exactly is this IPCC: It’s a group of disgruntled misfits that calls itself a scientific body. It is no such thing. Very few members are “scientists”. They are economists, bureaucrats, industry representatives, radical environmentalists, and far Left professional activists.


6  How does the IPCC operate: It collates papers from environmental socialists all over the world and writes up regular reports that reflect the common view. It will NOT accept papers from so called sceptics. Many “sceptical” scientists who express doubts about the IPCC’s alarmist views have found their government funding curiously cut.


7  What is a scientist?: There is no degree called “a scientist”. You can be a “scientist” in any field you want from climate to child behaviour and tree frogs. If you want be known as an official “scientist” simply write a paper on any subject your peer reviewers will agree with and have it officially peer reviewed, and... Voila! You’re a scientist and bumping shoulders with uni graduates who have agreed to nominate each other for professorships.


8 The IPCC’s record: Every single climate model of the IPCC has so far been proved wrong and is it any wonder? For example, a Dr Daniel Scott, a contributing author to chapter 14 of the IPCC’s Working Group 2 travelled, all expenses paid, to Tunisia, Germany, Greece, France, England, Puerto Rico, Switzerland, Australia, New Zealand, Sweden, Scotland, Italy, South Africa, Las Vegas, and numerous other destinations to deliver papers on the effect climate change “might” have on golf tournaments, ice-fishing, alpine skiing and tourism events in Canada’s capital city. (Nice work if you can get it, and they all take turns in “getting” it.)


The Way I See It......the word is out that the IPCC is actually a fraudulent body of gooks who are now frantically pressing (small l) liberal leaders to up the ante and make meaningful commitments to the global warming scam all to the future determent to their trusting citizens..  Their Socialist breatheran in the environmental organizations are ramping up the hype with traditional scaremongering phrases to add impetus to the so-called coming Armageddon.


Thus the determination of Obama to get global warming on the table prior to the final watershed scarefest in Paris, hoping that it might add credibility to his tattered reputation as a slack douse bag and pull up his legacy a notch higher than Jimmy Carters'. But it’s all coming apart at the seams. Paris is the last hurrah for the desperate UN’s IPCC... and don’t they know it! Now all they need is a huge blizzard like what happened at Copenhagen Climate Conference to put the real lid on the ''The Biggest Hoax of the Century''.  I just hope Dear Readers that your eyes are fully open now.

IRON ERNA Grabs a Problem by the Balls !


The new Norwegian Prime Minister, Erna Solberg, known more affectionately as “Iron Erna” began a program which targets and deports immigrants who have ties to radical groups or have committed violent crimes while in Norway.

While many in the West suggest this is a racist move, it's worked in a dramatic fashion and with national, not racial, identification and violent crime figures have dropped dramatically. the “Oslo Local News” reports violent crime has decreased by 31 per cent after a record number of immigrants were deported by Norwegian authorities.


The National Police Immigration Service of Norway, Politiets Utlendingsenhet (PU), deported a record 824 people in October. The previous record was set in the previous month when 763 people were deported.


PU believes the reason for the decrease in crime is more resources and more staff. It has also become easier for Norwegian authorities to deport people back to Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq and Nigeria.
Kristin Kvigne, head of PU, said, “This month helps us reach our anticipated figure for this
year.”  She added, We are not going to let it get as bad as Sweden. They were too generous in accepting unsuitable, un-assimilating people which showed their appreciation by increasing the level of rape cases to second highest in the world just behind Nigeria!''


The centre-right government of Iron Erna has predicted that 7,100 people will be deported in 2014. At the end of October, PU had so far deported 5,876 immigrants.A percentage of those deported in 2014 were asylum seekers who had their applications for continued asylum rejected. They were then deported along with their families.


The majority of deportees, however, had committed crimes or had returned illegally to Norway after already having been deported. Kvigne said it was important to view the high number of deportations made by PU in the context of dramatically falling crime rates across the country.


But not everyone in Norway is happy with the fall in violent crime. One academic socialist politically correct twit, Dr Unni Wikan, (see photo right) Professor of Social Anthropology at the University of Oslo slammed the new policy saying:
“Norwegian women must take responsibility for the fact that Muslim men find their manner of dress provocative. And since these men believe women are responsible for rape, the women must adapt to the multicultural society around them.” 
Wow, that sounds like a typically muddle-headed response from academia. Using Dr Wikan’s logic, it is the victim's fault that she has been raped and she should dress more appropriately so as to quell the immigrants’ desire to rape her!  Bloody unbelievable !  Must Westerners make another accommodation to these unwelcome ethnics?  Oh well, with a face like that I would guess she's safe to walk the streets of Oslo!


The Way I See It.....the difficulty for the Australian Government is that most of the crime is committed not by immigrants but by children of immigrants..... people who were born here. How you deport people who were born here is a complete mystery. Deport to where? Are they to be rendered Stateless? Who will accept them if they are guilty of violent crimes? Just do what is done in their
parent's home country....FLOG THEM !


The only alternative is to place them in off-shore processing centres where suddenly there is plenty of room is available. There ya go, The political correct Appeasers would be proud of me. I didn’t mention the word “Islam” once.

Monday, November 17, 2014

Today's Global Warming is Well Within Historic Range !


''Today's global warming is well within historic range''         
  • US President Barak Obama vows action on climate change with the declaration "none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires and crippling drought and more powerful storms".  
       
It was an appeal using rhetoric and not science because the most severe impacts of these natural disasters come from the challenge of managing increased population or changed population demands, not changes in the events per se.

Great fires are a regular feature of North American and Australian landscapes, and their human impact is worst when they reach housing or infrastructure built among trees, on the edge of bushland that has not been cleared by "cool" burn-offs.

Civilisations have been hit by droughts since the Nile delta drought of 4200 years ago destroyed Egypt's old kingdom, leaving the pyramids as witness. As global citizens, we still have much to learn about the management of water, it seems, whether in our Murray-Darling backyard or in the Sahel of Africa.

The term "powerful storms" summons up graphic images of Hurricane Sandy, which devastated New York - except it was no longer hurricane-strength when it, like a dozen others in written history, it struck.  But the Manhattan area it flooded contained huge areas of high-density development on reclaimed swamps, ponds and what was riverbed before civilisation drained, dozed and filled it to provide for the population of one of the world's greatest cities. When New York has absorbed the lessons from this, it will be able to pass on advice and technology to places such as Bangladesh.

In an antipodean antithesis of current political comment in Australia, London Mayor Boris Johnson mused in Britain's The Telegraph last week on the run of five cold snowy winters in London, and contemplated the theories of solar cycles as drivers of climate advanced by maverick astrophysicist Piers Corbyn, (photo left) and said he "wonders whether it might be time for government to start taking seriously the possibility, however remote, that Corbyn is right".

It is worth looking at some recent peer-reviewed science that points in such a direction.
A growing number of mainstream scientists agrees there is evidence for such cycles as drivers of climate change, although debate on causes and mechanisms is strong. By way of example, I note three recent papers that find evidence for long-term cycles influencing the Earth's climate.
Weichao Wu of the Peking University and colleagues studied sea-surface temperature records preserved in deep-sea sediments near Okinawa in the Pacific Ocean, and found evidence for multiple cyclic temperature variations over the past 2700 years.

The most interesting temperature peaks correspond to medieval, Roman and possibly Minoan warming periods of about 900, 1800 and 2500 years ago. The paper is significant in that it concludes that the current rate of global temperature change lies in the same range as that of those historical warming periods.

This suggests we have evidence that challenges current climate orthodoxy on two grounds, first by suggesting that such warming events were global not local European phenomena, and second that current warming is not unprecedented in the historical record.

While we read many claims by oceanographers of an increasing rate of rise in sea-levels associated with increased atmospheric carbon dioxide, an alternative interpretation of observed data is made in a recent analysis by Don Chambers (photo right) of the University of South Florida and colleagues. Chambers "Is there a 60-year oscillation in sea-level?" and shows evidence that the answer is probably yes.
poses the question:

I read his data and find it is arguable that the upswing of that oscillation is responsible for about half of the current 3mm/year rate of rise, leaving the background rate of rise at about 1.7mm, where it has been for 110 years.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change lead author Stefan Rahmstorf, writing in the climate scientists' blogsite Real Climate this month, commented on whether the data supports an interpretation of cycles, or non-cyclic shifts associated with changes in aerosols and current increases in greenhouse gases. Rahmstorf concludes in favour of the latter but ends with the objective and open-minded comment "if the system (is cyclic), we'd expect the opposite. In 30 years' time we will know for sure."

Offering considered alternative interpretations on the significance of a carefully constructed set of observational data is the essence of scientific debate; either may be right and I would add that if Chambers is right, the accelerating rate of increase in sea-levels has topped out about now, and the 10mm a year rises needed to reach the feared "1 metre rise by 2100" are not going to happen.

A third work that may eventually prove immensely important in understanding cycles in climate change is a study by J.A. Abreu of the prestigious Swiss university ETH, with co-authors including Ken McCracken, Australia's 1995 Australia Science Prize winner  . Abreu reconstructs a history of solar sunspot cycles over the past 10,000 years from elemental isotopes created by cosmic rays impinging on the atmosphere, subsequently preserved in Greenland ice-core records.
Australia's 1995 Australia Science Prize winner

These records show a series of cycles ranging from 88 years to 504 years with longer cycles of 974 and 2300 years evident in later work now accepted for publication (subject to minor changes). Thus
we see that sun-spot cycles, which have been understood for centuries to influence our climate on an 11-year cycle, also have predictable longer-period cycles in the hundreds and thousands of years, and present a mechanism to explain observational data of the type given by Wu and colleagues.
The mechanisms of sun-spot, solar magnetic field and cosmic ray interactions are complex and will be intensely studied, but the associations illustrated here demand consideration when we seek to model our future climate.

The devastating impacts of extreme climate events of which Obama speaks have always been with us, and we have to expect that the human tragedies they bring will be exacerbated by growth in global population.

The Way I See It.....cycles in climate change imply our efforts should be targeted at mitigation of effects, not changing the climate. Spending billions of taxpayers money to reduce temperature by one or two degrees is a fools errand and starves an nation's economy for decades. The eradication of Green ideology and money spent on mitigation will be more fruitful.

It is my hope that scientists advising our politicians will include the rich literature represented here in their briefings to politicians - or alternatively, that politicians will demand it. And may there be a quorum of politicians who will say as does Boris Johnson (photo right) while contemplating the exceptional snow and icicles in Trafalgar Square: "I have an open mind."