Disgraced former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer to give lecture at Harvard Ethics Center — and while his talk does not appear to directly address the issue of ethics, there's no guarantee he won't be asked question on the topic.
13 Counts of Murder
URGENT: Army charges Major Nidal Hasan with 13 counts of premeditated murder in Fort Hood massacre, qualifying him for death penalty if convicted
Obama Jobless Response: Summit
As another half-million Americans file jobless insurance claims, Obama responds by calling summit
ACORN Sues Over Funding Cuts
Community organizing group sues U.S. — American taxpayers — to recoup funds lost in wake of scandal
'Hedge fund boss hired Russian to kill me'
A LAWSUIT involves sordid stories of bankers, escorts, lap dances and now even a hitman.
Life in jail for cold, brazen killer
NOTORIOUS criminal gunned down a security guard who had already handed over more than $160,000 in cash.
Breast milk now politically correct
GOVERNMENTS tell mums to ditch the baby bottle under plan to boost breast milk feeding rates.
Myer cash floats away, taxman gives chase
AUSTRALIAN Tax Office says Texan group that owned Myer owes it $452m from public float.
Schoolboy 'tormented for salami sanger'
PARENTS claim 11-year-old son was bullied by Muslim students for eating meat during Ramadan.
iCough therefore I am too sick for work
OVER the phone flu diagnoses could become a reality thanks to software that listens to coughs.
New laws target fight club kids
STUDENTS who stand by cheering as others are being bullied and those caught filming fights face tough new penalties being considered by the State Government. - Good one Rees (Bronx cheer), targeting children with legislation. - ed.
Staggering cost of the refugee crisis
BILL for sheltering 78 Tamil asylum seekers refusing to leave boat will top $1 million today.
=== Journalists Corner ===
Do women in politics face tougher treatment than men? Meghan McCain has her say!
Plus, Laura Ingraham's "Pelosi Problem"-
What's the speaker said now that has the radio host all fired up?
===
The Lone Republican
He was the only GOP vote in favor of the Dems' health care plan. Now, how are his political donors making him pay the price?
===
Life After the Presidency
Get expert insight and analysis of George W. Bush's latest speech!
===
Health Care - Dead On Arrival?
What is the GOP's strategy to shut down the health care bill in the Senate? Newt Gingrich breaks down D.C.'s bitter battle!
=== Comments ===
The Military and the Fort Hood Massacre
By Bill O'Reilly
A new Rasmussen poll says 81 percent of Americans have a favorable view of the military. Just 9 percent unfavorable. I'm guessing some of that 9 percent are in the media.
But now there is a military controversy over the assassin Hasan.
As you may know, the FBI picked up information that the major was e-mailing an Al Qaeda recruiter in Yemen. The feds say they passed the information along to the Army. The Army says that's not true.
Only a congressional investigation will get to the bottom of this, and there should be one, because there is no question that Hasan is a terrorist, a man who murdered 13 innocent people because of jihad, the Muslim holy war.
As “Talking Points” strongly stated Tuesday night, the massacre at Fort Hood is not a crime, not a tragedy, not the action of a man snapping. It is an act of war perpetrated by a Muslim terrorist who believes that infidels should die.
Now, we all know the Obama administration and many other Americans have trouble with that kind of definition. They don't want to be seen demonizing Islam. I understand that. But not all Germans in World War II were evil, and many good Americans fought for the South in the Civil War. The folks know not all Muslims are terrorists, so we should stop the nonsense. It is important for America to teach the world that terrorism must be confronted, not misdefined.
With all due respect to President Obama, you don't win hearts and minds by avoiding the problem. And the problem is fanatical Muslims trying to kill innocent Americans and other so-called infidels. So the president should wise up and try to rally the world against these killers.
Nidal Malik Hasan should have been flagged, neutralized and dealt with. But he wasn't because some people in America continue to run away from the problem.
===
Far too belatedly - but the ETS will be opposed
Andrew Bolt
Good, but the explanation now will be all-important - and if only I could be confident that Malcolm Turnbull will give the kind most needed:
The coalition is expected to present a united front and vote down emissions trading legislation when it is brought before parliament next week. - Andrew, I feel that you are too hard on the libs and soft on ALP when important things like this arise. Mr Turnbull's stance is both pragmatic and suitable for a AGW skeptic like myself. He uses the (weasel) words 'sustainable,' 'affordable' and 'useful' in reference to AGW matters, and so his words and his deeds match what you espouse. Why should the libs always be tethered to idiots like those in Mr Turnbull's constituency who are AGW supporters when the ALP get a free pass for their stupidity on the issue? - ed.
===
Join our global conspiracy
Andrew Bolt
FORGIVE me for having been so selfish when I wrote how angry I was at Kevin Rudd’s wild attack on me.
Your 1300 emails of protest yesterday sure put me right. Now I realise this was not just about me. The Prime Minister had mortally insulted you too.
What’s more, the venom of his attack was a warning you could not ignore.
To recap: Rudd last Friday devoted an entire speech in Sydney to singling out me and three or four others as “reckless”, “arrogant” and “dangerous” conspirators who were “cowards” and “invariably ... driven by vested interests” operating “across the world” to stop your Prime Minister from saving you from global warming.
We “deniers” were so vile that we “simply do not care” that “the clock is ticking for the planet” and were “prepared to destroy our children’s future” to stop Rudd.
I admit I saw red. If Rudd is indeed saying I am bribed to tell lies about global warming, he is himself the liar. I challenge him: name the “vested interests” in whose pay I am.
I urge him to argue not with abuse, but be giving evidence that the world is indeed still warming, rather than cooling; that man is to blame; and that his colossal tax on our emissions will lower the world’s temperature by a jot.
Oh, and how much will he pay of the $7 billion a year the United Nations tells us to hand over as our “climate debt” under its draft Copenhagen treaty, to pass on to countries such as China?
But so wrapped in myself was I that it took readers to remind me that Rudd’s abuse was actually aimed at all those who doubt as I do - including many of the world’s greatest climate scientists, as well as all those Australians still interested in evidence and debate.
And they raised a still more serious worry. With Rudd ranting that sceptics were invariably corrupt liars and child-endangerers, which government scientist, bureaucrat, academic or MP would dare contradict him on the issue of global warming?
No one can now trust that Rudd will even get - let alone heed - fearless and impartial advice on a policy that could in fact devastate our economy.
So why did I get all these readers reminding me this was really about them, too, and not just me?
Because on my blog yesterday I wrote this letter:
Dear Mr Rudd,As of 6pm yesterday12.30pm today, more than 1300 2000 blog readers posted comments saying they wanted to join, too, some saying Rudd’s threats alone meant they must.
I am an Australian who respects reason and evidence, and who wants this nation to prosper - and not squander its wealth.
On Friday I heard you say there is now a group of “opponents of climate change action ... active in every country” that is “powerful enough to threaten a deal on global climate change both in Copenhagen and beyond”.
I would like to join this group. Can you please tell me where I can enrol?
Here’s your chance. If you, too, want to be part of a global conspiracy against Rudd’s mad plans, sign our letter demanding Rudd hand over its address. Just go here and tell him you cannot be bullied into silence.
===
How many clues does anyone now need?
Andrew Bolt
JF Beck reports:
Per Johansson, Stockholm’s head of the department for clubs and associations, is obviously upset:Beck has the answer. Some of the 20 or so recruits are now dead.It’s horrible. There was no suggestion of this when we had contact with the association when it was created.What is Johansson upset about? What did his inspections miss? Here are your choices:
Their paperwork was in order when they submitted it. And during the visits we made to the facility during the first year we didn’t see anything to indicate something like this.a) A city funded recreation centre attached to a fundamentalist Christian church recruited young men willing to attack abortion clinics.
b) A city funded recreation centre attached to a synagogue recruited young Jews willing to wage war on Gaza.
c) A city funded recreation centre attached to a mosque recruited young Muslim jihadis.
===
Reclaiming the Age
Andrew Bolt
One Age writer accuses another Age writer of making things up. Lying, in other words. And adds that she’s a colossal snob, misanthrope and mindless, to boot.
True, but surely the real question is why the Age editor continues to exploit someone so clearly screaming for help, and allows the paper to be identified with its most extreme and damaged part.
===
Dear Baroness: these natives aren’t for scaring
Andrew Bolt
Britain’s new High Comissioner, a former Labor politician and cultural studies graduate, decides to meddle in Australian politics - and in a field she knows nothing about:
BRITAIN’S new high commissioner, Baroness Valerie Amos, has expressed surprise that Australians are still debating whether humans cause climate change and says other nations have long since ‘’moved on’’.Not only is Amos a Labour hack meddling in Australian politics by pushing uninformed views, but she is wrong and arrogant to claim Britain has “moved on”. True, her Government has bombarded voters with increasingly hysterical scare-ads like this one:
In her first public comments since arriving in Canberra three weeks ago, Baroness Amos, a former leader of the House of Lords, said Australia was well-positioned to lead the international community on climate change but the public debate should move beyond scepticism and negativity to finding solutions.
Her comments come days after a senior Liberal, Nick Minchin, said he and most of his party colleagues believed man-made climate change was a myth.
Yet the British seem to be realising slowly that they are being conned:
Less than half of Britons believe climate change will affect them during their lifetime and fewer than a fifth think it will disturb their children, a government survey showed Friday.But still the sceptics are dismissed as somehow deranged or evil people who must be dealt with, rather than simply argued with, Melbourne ABC host Jon Faine tells the Baroness that the sceptics are indeed causing “great problems” here, and asks:
In the YouGov poll for the Department of Energy and Climate Change, 69 percent of respondents said flooding would be the most likely consequence in Britain, but only 26 percent believed the country was already feeling the impact of climate change.
“Recent research shows the public are unclear on what causes climate change and what the effects are,” the department said.
What do we do about it?We?
Hmm, I feel your pain, Jon.
Perhaps you should inform the Baroness of your own.
UPDATE
How bracing, to receive moral lectures from this Baroness:
Baroness Amos, the former International Development Secretary, became a non-executive director of Travant Capital Partners - a Nigerian private equity firm - in 2007.
Her appointment came shortly after Travant Capital received £15million from the Government-run company CDC, which is owned by the department she used to run.
===
That’s about enough of us
Andrew Bolt
OUR lives - especially in the cities - will get a lot rougher unless one of two things changes. Either we cut immigration, or we drop this green craziness and start building.
Actually, the real answer is that we’d better do both.
Let me illustrate this crash that’s coming - by contrasting two lots of quotes from the past couple of weeks.
First, there’s this, from Treasury secretary Ken Henry, warning that today’s 22 million Australians will be swelled by 13 million more by 2050.
“Will they live in our current major cities and regional centres, or will they live in cities we haven’t even yet started to build?” Henry asked.
Did we really want Melbourne, for instance, to blow out into one of the world’s megacities, with a population that could reach seven million?
Yes, we do, apparently, because Prime Minister Kevin Rudd - now overseeing the biggest immigration program in our lifetime - days later replied: “I believe in a big Australia.” And with Australia now adding another 440,000 people a year, two-thirds of them immigrants, we’ll sure get it.
Let’s forget for the moment whether you actually want twice as many people in your town, on your roads, on your trains, in your face.
Let’s check first a rather more basic problem exposed in three other news items from just this week - items that each warn we’re not even ready for all these newcomers, whether we want them or not.
===
Missing the M in the massacre
Andrew Bolt
How reluctant were the US media to notice the most salient fact about the Fort Hood jihadist? The Culture and Media Institute reports the conclusions of its survey:
Networks Decide Attack Wasn’t Terror: 85 percent of the broadcast stories didn’t mention the word “terror.” ABC, CBS, and NBC evening news referenced terrorism connections to the Fort Hood attack just seven times in 48 reports.No doubt these outfits will also be the first to howl about the failure - or refusal - of the US military and intelligence service to pick up the warning signs that Hasan was like to kill for his faith.
ABC, CBS, NBC Follow White House Line: Before Obama’s Nov. 10 speech, 93 percent of the stories had ignored any terror connection. But after Obama hinted at what ABC called “Islamic extremist views,” all three networks mentioned terrorism.
Alleged Attacker’s Muslim Faith Not Important Either: Slightly more than one-fourth (29 percent) of evening news reports mentioned that Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan was a Muslim. Of those, half (7 out of 14) defended the religion or included experts to do so.
===
Bright hopes
Andrew Bolt
Jane Campion directs and Abbie Cornish star in Bright Star.
For several good reasons, I’m hoping this Australian film is as good as some say, and that it does great business. Those reasons include a natural wish to have creativity rewarded, even if then writing about a good film is harder than giving trash a rich pounding. Less fun to read, too.
I also rather like some of Keats’ poetry, and would like it better known, even if he says in some lines false things just because they sound so deceptively pretty:
Beauty is truth, truth beauty,—that is all. Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.But that’s youth for you. The marvel is that Keats wrote so much that was fine, although dying so terribly young:
MUCH have I travell’d in the realms of gold,Mind you, it’s only from two months ago visiting the house in which he died that I’ve come to read a word of the man’s work - such was my education. But that is actually the most pressing reason I’d give for hoping Campion’s film does well. There must be plenty of kids who are like I once was - marooned in a bad school, somewhere out bush, from a migrant family and desperate for some ladder up to a world of learning. Here may be a film that tells such children where a part of that world might be found, and why it’s worth climbing up to reach.
And many goodly states and kingdoms seen;
Round many western islands have I been
Which bards in fealty to Apollo hold.
Oft of one wide expanse had I been told 5
That deep-brow’d Homer ruled as his demesne:
Yet did I never breathe its pure serene
Till I heard Chapman speak out loud and bold:
Then felt I like some watcher of the skies
When a new planet swims into his ken; 10
Or like stout Cortez, when with eagle eyes
He stared at the Pacific—and all his men
Look’d at each other with a wild surmise—
Silent, upon a peak in Darien.
===
Tide turns against the carpetbagger
Andrew Bolt
The Wall Street Journal’s Holman Jenkins on the true vested interests in this debate:
When so much of his position and prestige are invested in a predicted climate crisis, is (Al). Gore likely to be open to contrary evidence? Is he likely to be particularly fastidious about whether proposed steps will actually have an effect on global warming if they also happen to benefit his investments?…Jenkins suggests a turning point in the debate was the debunking of two key bits of “evidence” cited by Gore and many other warmists - the “hockey stick” that purported to show we’d never been so hot, and the ice cores which were presented as proof that increases in carbon dioxide concentrations had caused the world to warm after past ice ages, when the evidence actually show that in every case the warming had preceded the CO2 rises.
Mr. Gore long ago jumped over to the side where salesmanship, by whatever means, was the trumping priority. As far back as 1989, he insisted there was “no dispute worthy of recognition” about the danger of manmade climate change. By now, he titularly heads a vast establishment with a stake in one side of the argument.
Notice, for instance, after a decade in which the earth appears to have stopped warming and even cooled, that global warming advocates have rushed to embrace a computer simulation that predicts this cooling (in retrospect, of course) and allows for indefinite future cooling, even while assuring that the world is destined to face disastrous warming anyway. Isn’t this what forecasters of doom have done since time immemorial when their deadlines for doom haven’t been met?
Mr. Gore’s own predictions of a climate catastrophe have not lessened, but every time he opens his mouth, the costs of meeting the emergency become easier and easier to swallow. They aren’t even costs anymore; as he says in his new book, they are “profits.”
All policy salesmanship naturally defaults toward the proposition of huge benefits and negligible costs (i.e., free lunchism). Isn’t that where Al Gore is today?
Note that the hockey stick actually passed peer review and was debunked first of all by a retired engineer and a professor of economic outside the warming club, which fought for years to cover up the flaws in the stick’s methodology. And I’m pleased to say the second point was the one I tried to put to Al Gore at a conference several years ago, prompting a rather spectacular meltdown - and, when I repeated the point here, it earned me a shameless smearing by the ABC’s Robyn Williams.
No comments:
Post a Comment