Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
January 26, 2020

The MoA Week In Review - Open Thread 2020-07

Last week's posts at Moon of Alabama:

Related:

Interview with Iran's Foreign Minister Javed Zarif:
"It’s a Disaster for Europe To Be So Subservient to the U.S" -Spiegel

Related:

The OPCW Scandal and the Silence Cartel (pdf) English translation by Michael Kobs of the German report below
Der OPCW-Skandal und das Scheigekartell - Multipolar Magazine

Other issues:

Hong Kong:

"Protesters"? Or U.S. funded terrorist ...
Hong Kong protesters torch planned virus quarantine building - Reuters

>A group of protesters set alight the lobby of a newly built residential building in Hong Kong on Sunday that authorities planned to use as a quarantine facility for the coronavirus outbreak.

A Reuters witness saw several masked protesters, clad in black, rush into the public housing block in the Fanling district near to the border with China, and set alight a Molotov cocktail before running out. Black smoke could be seen pouring out of the building to the sound of fire alarms. Windows were smashed.<

Palestine:

Only Zionists and Nazis believe that Jews are a race.
Israeli High Court Allows DNA Testing to Prove Judaism - Haaretz

>Petition filed by Avigdor Lieberman, Yisrael Beitenu and several individuals asking for the DNA testing to prove Judaism to be disallowed is struck down<

Law:

The U.S. no longer cares for international law. Others continue to do.
The US’s Inalienable Right to Violence - Fair
The Troubling Decline of International Law - Craig Murray
EU, China, 15 Others Form Alliance to Settle Trade Disputes - Bloomberg

Use as open thread ...

Posted by b on January 26, 2020 at 15:34 UTC | Permalink

Comments
« previous page

@C1ue #138
Greenies and lawfare aren’t to blame for the current fires in Australia. As someone who was closely involved with Australian forest management during the major forest use debates of the 1990s, I’d suggest you save yourself some time and angst trying to prove otherwise. And stay away from Murdoch-owned media. They lie and misrepresent this issue at every turn, as does the present Commonwealth Government.

Try this instead https://www.ladbible.com/news/news-fire-brigade-dispels-the-rumour-that-greens-are-to-blame-for-bushfires-2020

Community expectations regarding fire management have changed. Bush fire brigades are no longer a few of the blokes from the local pub with a donated war-surplus blitz truck. They are better equipped, better trained, and better coordinated. Their activities are more standardised, but they still know their local areas and its risks intimately.

If you can’t manage the fuel load because of other constraints, then there’s not much else you can do about it. In any case, the more intense fires we see now tend to get into the crown of the forest more readily, so the amount of fuel load at ground level ceases to be a crucial determinant of potential fire intensity. For example https://www.armidaleexpress.com.au/story/6494023/opinion-we-did-burnoffs-badja-sparks-hits-back/?cs=471

Some years back Australian forest managers found that the standard fire risk measurement tool had to be revised because it was increasingly giving readings that were off the scale. It wasn’t any shift in the amount of fuel load that was responsible for this, it was the condition of the load (i.e. drier) and the hotter, drier conditions. That’s why we have a ‘catastrophic’ rating today.

Posted by: Extra | Jan 28 2020 13:24 utc | 201

im sorry walter, you have misunderstood the science. to say that the climate sometimes changes, due to some kind of forcing, is not to say that it is always changing. the effects of the sun are well understood, and so are the effects of c02 and other fossil fuel emissions. if renewables are a fairy tale, because people simply don't want to attempt to change, then our civilization is at risk, even our existence.

Posted by: pretzelattack | Jan 28 2020 14:17 utc | 202

Syrian Troops Liberate Strategic City of Maarat al-Numan in Idlib Province cited by Reuters and Sputniknews.

The Syrian military began a new military operation in Idlib - the last stronghold of terrorist militants in Syria, late last year. Damascus has declared that freeing the area is essential to putting an end to the country's foreign-backed civil war.

Syrian troops have regained control over Maarat al-Numan, Idlib province, a Syrian military source has said.
"The Army units began to strengthen their positions in Maarat al-Numan. At the same time, the Syrian Army's engineering troops began to de-mine the area," the source said.

[.]

Posted by: Likklemore | Jan 28 2020 14:34 utc | 203

pretzelattack | Jan 28 2020 14:17 utc | 202

If you say so, then it must be so. Dream on. Please.

Nevertheless Earth spins and moves an a climate that is part of the near terrestrial space and inter-stellar space. Nobody can say what an open system will be in the future except that it will change. It's an chaotic open system all the way to the stars. That's the science, the wisdom.

Stuff happens and we bet, not knowing. Life, environment...it's always not knowable in advance, not changeable later.

Actually, near term, I don't think there's a problem. This is because nobody can do anything about Change. It happens. It's the nature of end-stage zuswang...which is our location.

Quite probably most people will die as the climate change dictates this. Consider that a natural feedback mechanism. Then the petro chem plants and nuke P stations and spent pools will oxidize and spew. That is the "solution". Then some other stuff will probably happen...

But it will be messy, if Merkwurdigliebe and his cohort survive to see it.

Conan Doyle wrote stuff other than Sherlock..."Professor Challenger" series of quasi SiFi... "The Poison Belt" is poor literature, but interesting - and deals with "space weather", sorta. I recommend it.

Posted by: Walter | Jan 28 2020 15:31 utc | 204

walter it's not what i say, it's what every major science organization, from countries of all different economies and cultures, say. it's an open system, which doesn't change at random. the philosophizing isn't relevant. meanwhile
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2020/01/coronavirus-not-looking-good.html#comment-3280236

Posted by: pretzelattack | Jan 28 2020 15:37 utc | 205

Gee whiz, is the "not looking good corona virus" not part of the environment and that not part of the climate? Stuff happens. We, and Earth, are clearly tempest tossed by randomness. You yourself have shown this. But ideology requires belief, faith. Men believe what they will. Or did your beliefs say that the new virus is part of imaginary equilibrium?

If everyone, or many, believe a lie, does it become true? Or shall we believe our lying eyes?

Posted by: Walter | Jan 28 2020 16:35 utc | 206

@S #162
And how much of the 1999-2015 usage is due to climate change and "ocean acidification" panicmongering? Given that it has been pushed by Caldeira and co for 2 decades now?

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 28 2020 19:13 utc | 207

@Lennard Brunswick #176
You're trying to be nice, but the reality is that the message intended is very much that of "acid" - dissolving shells.
It is easy to see because there is no mention of the fact that pH levels vary significantly even kilometers apart in the ocean.
If "ocean acidification" is really a thing, then the first requirement would be to disclose just how much natural variance there is in pH levels.
Then, the actual potential change in "average" or "specific" pH over time.
Only then would thinner clamshells or whatever matter.
The playbook is to lead with the sensational and relegate relevant and important details to nowhere.
So I don't agree with your assertion that the use of "acidification" is scientific - any more than "global warming" is intended to be purely informational.

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 28 2020 19:16 utc | 208

@Bemildred #177
There are many problems with your assertion that there is a "natural system" and "we're disturbing it".
1) The CO2 levels vary dramatically every year: 8-10 ppm. If clams or whatever are really that sensitive to very slow, gradual changes in CO2 levels - they would be affected by the annual CO2 cycle far more than the 3 ppm they increase on a global average.
2) As I've already noted - the historical record shows that the original development of these animals was during periods of much, much higher CO2 levels. The entire Mollusca phylum - which includes all clams, oysters, etc - was created in the Cambrian era when CO2 levels were a tad under 3000 ppm CO2. To say they are vulnerable to 400 ppm CO2 levels, that's a high bar (literally) to overcome.
3) Calcium carbonate is an interesting phenomenon. There are actually areas in the Caribbean where Calcium carbonate precipitates directly. More importantly, there is no shortage of calcium or carbon in the ocean. Period.
There are parts of the oceans where different animals (diatoms) use silicon instead of calcium - there, silicon availability is an issue.

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 28 2020 19:29 utc | 209

@john brewster #185
The alarm at 350 was being run by a political organization - the one you point to. And one whose founder is a journalist, not even any type of engineer or scientist.
More importantly: what horrible things have happened? We've gone from 350 to 400+.
We're going to exceed 450 for sure. We won't get much past 600 ppm because there just aren't enough fossil fuels around.
I've watched the doom pronunciations for literally 20+ years now - they have uniformly been wrong (100%).
Even the IPCC clearly states that there is no detectable increase in weather/climate disasters to date.

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 28 2020 19:34 utc | 210

@cemi #191
Wow, you are just too easy.
BAC levels are set by the law. The law is an arbitrary definition - one I don't personally agree with but it is duly passed legislation.
CO2 levels are intended to convey a scientific argument.
And yet almost all of the rejoinders I see here are emotional, ideological or ad hominem.
Fail.

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 28 2020 19:38 utc | 211

c1ue @209: I didn't address you, and I wasn't proposing an argument, I was more trying to clarify what the argument was about, as there seemed to be a lot of confusion. In that sense, I think I did fine. Please carry on.

Posted by: Bemildred | Jan 28 2020 19:57 utc | 212

@Jon_in_AU #195
Thanks for the links - they did provide useful data but not directly.
The Fact Check is worthless because it doesn't really inform as to how much burning there should be.
It notes that 135,000 hectares is prescribed to be burned annually in NSW since 2011, and the burn levels up to 2019 are 2.3 times what they were in the previous decade. In particular, 668,191 hectares was burned in the 10 years to 2019 vs. 279,039 in the previous decade.

However, the real question is: how much undeveloped land is there in NSW?
The total area of the territory is 312,528 square miles = 80.9 million hectares. This is enormously more than the 66,918 acres burned per year, much less 27,900 hectares per year.

6,641,256 hectares alone are national parks/protected areas according to wiki.
So the amount burned, per year, is 10% of the national park land alone - if all the burns (and the at risk areas) are just the national parks.
Is a fuel load control burn, once every 10 years, enough?

However, the national park land certainly isn't the only source for fuel load.
According to agriculture.gov.au - 647,900 square kilometers is agricultural land, but 355,400 is grazing land. (1 square km = 100 hectares)
If we include the grazing land with the national parks - the burn coverage is 1.6%. That certainly doesn't sound like a lot, although of course it is certain not all of the grazing land would need burn.
It wouldn't take a lot of it, though, to make the burn coverage seem really low.
Note that the above doesn't cover land officially "residential" but which is forested. From the numbers of homes burned and people killed, clearly some significant amount of residential land also falls under the "control burn" eligible area.

Net net - while I still want to see more data, it does not look like the proactive burns are obviously sufficient.

I leave it to experts to talk more - ones that aren't defending themselves and their policies, and which provide a complete data picture.

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 28 2020 19:58 utc | 213

@pretzelattack #197
You make more assumptions.
A meteor could throw up enough dust to kill off photosynthesis for a year or 3. Enough dead plants = mass die-off, even if the weather remains roughly the same (i.e. goes back to where it was in 5 years).
Major volcanic eruptions alone show a pretty strong correlation with major crop failures.
So no, can't say your personal prejudice is convincing in this case, either.

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 28 2020 20:00 utc | 214

@Extra #201
Ah, great - perhaps you can provide me the data on the historical burn #s and acreage covered from the 1970s to today, for whichever province you worked in.
Because your statements are not themselves of any value.
I just went through the exercise of breaking down the ass-covering by another "fire management specialist" in post 213 - it is likely that the person in question is obfuscating rather than providing data, because the data that is provided does not clearly show fuel load management as being responsible.
To assist your data search, please provide:
1) Annual # burns per province per year or decade from 1970s to today
2) Acreage of said burns
3) What is the fuel load management principle being used? i.e. what are/were the estimates for accumulation of fuel load, per year, which said burns are based on?
4) What are the official estimates of "at risk" land in the area in question?

This type of information would clarify the situation greatly - as opposed to "trust me, I'm an expert even though an anonymous commenter on a web site".

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 28 2020 20:05 utc | 215

Apropos of the idea that Glorious Imperial Forces design to have more "diplomacy" one might wish to read

@ FAS Secrecy News
"NNSA Moves to Expand Plutonium Pit Production"

It's fascinating in itself, partly because they're simply saying that even though making the pretty bangers is illegal under one law, there's another law...so it's ok...phuckoff. More or less. Quite risible.

But what's more important is that intentions are revealed by actions, and this action reveals an intent. No that I mind, but one does imagine that Comrade P and his office might think the worse of their American "partners"...and then? What?

And our Iranian Brothers? What will they imagine this implies?

People should go get drunk and sleep this off. Terminal dumbazz.

Posted by: Walter | Jan 28 2020 20:37 utc | 216

For a city under quarantine (wuhan) 200 flights departed yesterday, a couple dozen international including a few to the US. Maybe thats part of the trade deal, exporting virus probono. I guess only the peasants are stuck in the city.

Posted by: Pft | Jan 28 2020 21:20 utc | 217

Climate change is real. Over 2 million years ago Planet Earth became a snow ball as it entered the ice age. Over the last 800,000 years we have had 7 glacial periods of around 100k years and as many shorter but warmer interglacials of 10-15K. We are 15 k years into the current interglacial. The optimum was reached 6000 years ago with higher temperatures and sea levels than today. The previous interglacial was warmer than this one with higher sea levels. Another glacial period is in our future, and this will destroy food production and results in a global famine. This seems more likely than runaway global warming, but predictions are difficult.

Section 14.2.2. of the Scientific Section of Third IPCC Assessment Report, (2001) titled “Predictability in a Chaotic System” says:

“The climate system is particularly challenging since it is known that components in the system are inherently chaotic; there are feedbacks that could potentially switch sign, and there are central processes that affect the system in a complicated, non-linear manner. These complex, chaotic, non-linear dynamics are an inherent aspect of the climate system.”
“In sum, a strategy must recognise what is possible. In climate research and modelling, we should recognise that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible”

Human produced CO2 is a tiny 4 % of total CO2 emissions. The oceans contain 37,400 billion tons (GT) of suspended carbon, land biomass has 2000-3000 GT. The atmosphere contains 720 billion GT of CO2 and humans contribute only 7 GT/yr of C The oceans, land and atmosphere exchange CO2 continuously.

IPCC has grossly underestimated the future oceanic CO2 uptake.  They assume only 50% of mans emissions are absorbed despite these 2 facts:

1. Much more carbon flows through the ocean than the amount produced by burning fossil fuels;
2. An amount of carbon equal to to the total amount stored in the atmosphere cycles through the ocean in about eight years [(750 GT) / (92 GT per year) = 8.3 years]

In essence they are stating that the approximately 3.5 GT C/yr accumulated by the atmosphere is all of mans C from CO2 emissions and none of natures 89 GT C/yr emissions.

As to CO2 levels past and present comparisons, ice core evidence suggest CO2 levels change with changing temperature with temperatures driving CO2 levels and not vice versa

Geological and ice core samples don't translate directly to atmospheric C02 levels except as a very rough estimate of a several hundred years or millennia average, so the effect is to smooth out the CO2 levels and erase spikes due to short term warming spells such as we have see recently since 1850

As for the GHG analogy. By far the most important greenhouse gas is water vapor. However, water in the form of clouds can reflect back solar radiation, causing temperature reduction. Clouds are nature’s screen reflecting some portion of incoming SW and outgoing LW. We have little idea how clouds work to modify temperatures.

We can see what the absence of clouds does . In the cloudless desert the day – night temperature range is the highest anywhere due to lack of water vapor. The lack of the greatest atmospheric GHG (H2O) results in the loss of LW heat into space (aka LW radiational cooling). Cold clear winter day/nights with low humidity show similar effects with plunging temperatures due to little obstacle to LW radiation to space. CO2 levels are the same in cloudless and cloudy days and nights. Its interesting but much of the increase in average temperature is due to an increase in night time temperatures. Maybe this is due to more CO2, especially in urban areas where CO2 levels at the surface are much higher than the 412 ppm measured on the top of Mauna Loa

Clouds are the wild card of climate change. In the 2001 IPCC Report it says:

“In response to any climate perturbation the response of cloudiness thereby introduces feedbacks whose sign and amplitude are largely unknown.”

So we have a model of the atmosphere that doesn’t know how clouds work but is the basis for climate predictions of global warming.

As for ocean PH. Henry’s Law requires that the partial pressures of atmospheric and dissolved ocean CO2 equilibrate. Rising atmospheric CO2 must increase dissolved seawater CO2. That is long established simple physical chemistry. This lowers pH by increasing carbonic acid, all else being equal. Furthermore anthropogenic carbon comprises less that 3% of the combined CO2 entering and leaving the ocean surface each year.

However, Ocean pH is not a linear chemical system driven only by Henry’s law; it is a system highly buffered by dissolved minerals and seafloor carbonates. Taking seawater chemical buffering into account, IPCC AR5 3.8.2 suggested that doubled atmospheric CO2 might cause surface pH to decline by Δ0.15-0.2. This is well within the normal diurnal and seasonal biological seawater pH variation for almost all ocean waters.

Ocean surface pH is not uniform. It varies diurnally, seasonally, by ecosystem, and by underlying ocean depth. The Moderately fertile Southern Ocean surface seasonality is Δ0.5 pH. Seasonal surface variation can be as high as Δ1.43 pH in biologically fertile waters

Near the surface, we expect to find the highest pH values, with progressively lower values downwards. At the surface of the Pacific, values run from pH 8.05 in the tropics to pH 7.6 in the Gulf of Alaska while, at 1000m in high latitudes and 250m at the equator, water of around pH 7.5 occurs at mid-‐depths; a similar pattern occurs in the Atlantic.

Near-‐surface, the pCO2 difference between gas and water phases controls gas CO2 exchange across the surface, while in the interior of the ocean pCO2 values are controlled by respiration and carbonate dissolution.

Some of the alarming reports concerning ‘corrosive sea water have been based on observations of commercial shellfish cultures in which the oysters have failed to produce normal shells; this syndrome has popularly been ascribed to changing pH of ocean water due to increasing CO2 levels in atmosphere due to Man, especially on the Oregon and California coasts.


The failure to produce normal shell material is due to very low levels of calcite saturation that results in abnormal calcification of larvae and adult shells that appear to be eroded.

In the pacific northwest, the corrosive waters are due to colder more acidic waters welling up from the depths of the Pacific Ocean in the summer and fall and streaming ashore in the fjords, bays, and estuaries of Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia. The extent varies depending on the strength of the PDO and other currents responsible for this upwelling. Besides having a low pH these cold deep waters are depleted in carbonate and saturated with CO2, causing calcite undersaturation and outgassing of CO2 to the atmosphere in accordance with Henrys Law.
So its hard to justify mans CO2 being to blame here.

The entire subject of the response of the marine ecosystem to increasing levels of atmospheric CO2 is in such an early stage of investigation is that it is not yet possible to achieve any level of certainty about what the future holds for the marine ecosystem.


Posted by: pft | Jan 28 2020 21:40 utc | 218

@c1ue | Jan 28 2020 19:38 utc | 211

So you don't "agree" that 0.4 or, say, 0.8 o/oo blood alcohol has no effect on your cognition? Nothing whatsoever? Negligible?
Simple question. That was your argument. Nothing "personal, emotional or ad hominem".

Posted by: Cemi | Jan 28 2020 21:46 utc | 219

jen - got it.. thanks..

@188 jackrabbit.. i am not sure it is that ominous.. pretty well everything the usa releases in a pr on iran, syria and etc is ominous..

@ 194 bemildred quote - "What I notice about Pompeo's screed is he didn't make any threats." true enough!

Posted by: james | Jan 28 2020 22:44 utc | 220

That ZH story that told me about the wuhan flights has been updated. It is locked down. They updated the article at least but at the bottom of the story. Just another land mine in the field of disinformation. Lol

Posted by: Pft | Jan 28 2020 23:18 utc | 221

Caitlin Johnstone destroys the "Democracy Works!" propaganda that pops up in every political discussion at moa and elsewhere with this simple observation:

It doesn't matter which establishment team carries the ball down the court for the establishment.

Whether it's minorities that get fondled under the table by a Democratic President or White Nationalists that get flattered by a Republican President, the result is the same: Zionist-inspired EMPIRE FIRST polices that advance establishment interests.

Participating in the rigged electoral process does nothing but give legitimacy to that process. That's why "Democracy Works!" propagandists try so hard to get you emotionally engaged in the farce. It's a shell game and YOU and your friends and neighbors are the stoopid mark that just can't bring him/herself to walk away from the table.

Until it all ends in tears.

The Answer: Form and join Movements. DEMAND democracy; Constitutional Rights; Civil Rights; Human Rights; accountability; transparency; economic fairness; peace-oriented foreign policy; environmental safeguards; etc.

There's no pill or app or easy out. Anyone that tells you that an establishment-approved candidate will defend your interests via a simple vote is lying. The fix is in. Every. Damn. Time.

<> <> <> <> <> <>

The Establishment Doesn’t Fear Trump, And It Doesn’t Fear Bernie. It Fears You.

The disturbing fact of the matter is that if you ignore election dates and just look at the numbers and raw data of US government behavior over the years, you can’t really tell who is president or which political party is in power at any given point in time.

. . .

It is inevitable that such a permanent second government would exist in the current iteration of the United States, if you think about it. It’s impossible to have a globe-spanning empire of the sort America now has without long-term plans spanning years or decades for securing control of world resources, undermining rivals, securing more compliant allies, and ensuring military and economic hegemony.

. . .

You wouldn’t know it from reading the billionaire media, but the Yellow Vests protests in France are still going on and have remained widespread for more than a year now. This lack of coverage is partially due to the fact that establishment narrative managers are responsible for conveying the idea that the only governments whose citizens dislike them are those which haven’t been absorbed into the imperial blob like China and Iran. But it’s also because the propagandists don’t want us getting any ideas.

... If enough people decide that the status quo isn’t working for them and begin rising up to force it to change, there’s not really anything the establishment can do to stop them. Right now the only thing keeping people from rising up in this way is the fact that they’ve been successfully propagandized not to, and the propagandists intend to keep it that way.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jan 29 2020 5:03 utc | 222

Your damn Ziocon Trump just unveiled the Grand Aprtheid Scam of the Century and he's going to try to shove it down Palestinians' throats using carrots and sticks and pressure from tyrant Saudi monarchs and corrupt Arab despots all eager to lick Zionist ass!

If there's reincarnation, I hope he's reborn a freak in a cage with a muzzle!

Apartheid deal

And who the hell is snot-nosed, silver spoon mealy-mouth Jared to dictate such garbage and call it a peace plan. Peace my ass!

He can take his plan and use it for toilet paper. Half-wit product of nepotism pretending to be a statesman! How dare he dictate to Palestinians who suffered oppression at the hands of Ziofascists like him for close to 8 DECADES!

Posted by: Circe | Jan 29 2020 5:40 utc | 223

The "plan" is deeply offensive to anyone with any sense of justice.

The clarity of US and Israeli actions under Trump does not benefit the US nor Israel. It removes any need for political, religious, or ideological portrayals and narratives because it makes it clearer than ever that the US and Israel governments are simply enemies of humanity.

The US and Israel have thoroughly made the case that any kind of attack by anyone on them is a case of self defense and self-preservation.

Why would they do that? They do it to set the stage for a false flag against themselves to start more war.

A path to a possible future becomes clearer; they get their war and are defeated and dissolved/removed as political entities or nations before the coming election.

Russia and China most likely see this possibility and want to avoid the enormous amounts of useless hardship and misery across the world as well as in the US and Israel for all those who are nothing much but hostages to "their own" governments.

All other governments should join any such Chinese and Russian efforts and provide as much assistance to them as possible under the leadership of those two nations.

People in the US and Israel who are able to sabotage their own governments abilities for warfare should try to do so to the extent that they can get away with it or are willing to accept negative consequences for themselves. It is most of all up to insiders to stop or cripple false flags and wars, everyone else can't be expected to be particularly effective (although with enough creativity and lateral thinking who knows what is achievable).

Posted by: Sunny Runny Burger | Jan 29 2020 6:56 utc | 224

The insanity of nuclear deterrence | Robert Green | TEDxChristchurch is a lecture by RN (ret) whose aunt died in a strange coincidence. It's on YT.

The talk touches on climate change.

And relates to the logic of Iran either deciding to make n-bangers or deciding not to make them. If Green's right (and he used to be in the jolly club of men who would drop 'em on the commies) ...if he's right, then his argument that these infernal gadgets are not a deterrent would seem to be explanatory in re the Iranian Strategy of Deterrence, eg the Iranian are being smart by not making gadgets. And zionistan is stupid to have done it...if they are for deterrence.

He touches on the Belgrano murders too, and how close we all came to death as a consequence of Falklands war that Maggie conjured.

In the zionistan affair they, the n-bangers, are not for deterrence, but for blackmail, so it would seem. Nobody has stopped sending rockets their way, so what are they for? Right, terror, fear, blackmail seems about right.

Withal, Green's lecture is pretty neat. Enjoy.

Posted by: Walter | Jan 29 2020 10:43 utc | 225

Breath-taking historical revisionism and propaganda wrapped in a Trojan Horse> Iranian PressTV says>

"Saudi Arabia publishes ‘Judaized’ translation of Holy Qur’an"

"The [numerous and deliberate]errors could create “the impression that the Islamic holy text itself endorses a fundamentalist Jewish reading of history,” MEMO wrote."

I am ever so pleased to see the Saud create against itself the inevitable trouble that this will cause and that when the priests discover this - which they will see as apostate blasphemy - will create dissension and rebellious ideas. Gee whiz!

(Oh I so hope that I've been brief enough, for some)

(me? It's just stories...unless one enjoys delusions, then it's real)

Posted by: Walter | Jan 29 2020 13:45 utc | 226

Want to know the real reason Dersho was part of the Trump defense team?

He loves everything Trump is doing for Israel on Iran and the Palestinians.

Fascist SCUM sticks together. Adelson & co were there right next to the podium of course.

dershowitz pompeo back pat

When Dersho talks peace, it translates as CRUSHING all resistance to Ziofascism, and Trump is the Chosen Deliverer he would make a humiliating spectacle of himself and mockery of the law for. It's all beyond REPUGNANT. Arrrgh!

A ROOM FULL OF DEVIOUS VERMIN CONGRATULATING EACH OTHER ON INFESTING EVEN THE MEANING OF PEACE.

Posted by: Circe | Jan 29 2020 13:56 utc | 227

Here's another link:

pat on the back

Oh and here's an article with a picture showing Trump and his financier next to him at the ceremony.

trump netanyahu dictate terms

The latter for anyone who's still not convinced of who Trump is and what he stands for.

Posted by: Circe | Jan 29 2020 14:11 utc | 228

Circe | Jan 29 2020 13:56 utc | 229

Der is a lousy lawyer in terms of character and ability, but he's connected...zionish persons (like D) in US are also linked to the old "Jewish Mafia" - Mossad and the mob are pals. Ask Myer Lansky. I note that as "lawyer" for Clown A D cannot be forced to testify against his client...which seem to suggest yet another reason. I can name others that are or were Catholic... Look up Sirhan's little adventure.

I don't know who did JFK, but the Mob knew it was going, so Mossad knew in advance..and that may explain how Johnson was (presumably) under zionish control when "Liberty" was done (poorly).

To-day runs along similar corrupt pathways. It's embarrassing, eh?

Posted by: Walter | Jan 29 2020 14:21 utc | 229

Something else VERY IMPORTANT I gleaned from the Intercept article I posted above. AIPAC is running a pressure campaign on Facebook targetting Sanders and a pro-Israel super-Pac disguised with a generic Democratic name (so no one ties it to Zionism, of course) will run a dirty attack ad against Sanders just days before the Iowa caucuses.

Also, the DNC is preparing to go to war against Sanders appointing Clinton militants, supporters and centrist anti-progressive apparatchiks to the 2020 Convention Committee.

dnc preparing for battle against bernie

And JOHN PODESTA IS ALSO ON THE COMMITTEE! (See last name on list, right corner.) This time they're trying to sabotage Bernie's campaign right out in the open!!!

DON'T LET THEM WIN! SUPPORT SANDERS ALL THE WAY! FIGHT THIS CORRUPTION!

Posted by: Circe | Jan 29 2020 15:09 utc | 230

@cemi #218
BAC 0.08% has some effect - the actual question is if it has a measurable effect on traffic safety.
That is far less clear.
If we are truly concerned about traffic safety, we would pass laws banning all cell phone use - texting as well as talk - when driving. Period.
The original point made is that BAC 0.08% DUI laws superceded laws where a policeman could pull someone over for any reason, if they're driving erratically.
Yes, it is true that rich defendants would have a greater chance of "getting off" without the BAC number, but that is true even with the BAC number. I've been a jury member as well as sat in court proceedings and have seen this in action.
But again, it is the law. Agree or disagree - either follow the law, get the law changed or accept the consequences.
A law is very different than a highly complex, highly uncertain situation such as human derived CO2 emissions causing climate catastrophe.

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 29 2020 17:59 utc | 231

@pft #218
Well said.
I've never said that the cannot be a negative impact on mollusks, corals, lobsters or whatever from CO2 - whether via acidification or something else.
However, a first order examination shows that the purported cause is neither obviously unusual nor is the mechanism clear. The natural variation is so large as to make the CO2 impact insignificant; the historical record shows clear survival (and even thriving) in much higher CO2 environments.
Anecdotal talk is a data point, but doesn't remove the need to show provable cause or eliminate weak theories, politically driven or otherwise.

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 29 2020 18:02 utc | 232

@ c1ue #215

You'd like all that information, would you? Do your own research,then. You seem to be like a number of 'sceptics'- demanding ever-higher standards of 'proof' when presented with factual evidence.

The basic situation is that Australia's climate has become hotter and drier. This has reduced the window of opportunity for safe hazard reduction via burning of fuel load. It also means that when fires do occur, they are more likely to be severe.

By the way, we don't call internal government regions 'provinces'; they're called States, or Territories. Given your interest in land management in Australia, I thought you would have known that already.

Posted by: Extra | Jan 31 2020 0:05 utc | 233

@Extra #233
I didn't ask you to do any work - I asked you for data which you, as a supposed direct contributor to fire hazard management, should have at your fingertips.

But it seems that you - like your climate panic-monger compatriots - fear that access to data would endanger your opinions, as opposed to inform the debate.

Therefore all that you've accomplished here is to minimize your own credibility by expressing extreme views without actually providing data or even engaging in discussion over what data others provide.

Carry on...

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 31 2020 17:52 utc | 234

« previous page

The comments to this entry are closed.