Monday, December 7, 2009
Copenhagen Climate Summit: 1,200 limos, 140 private planes and caviar wedges
Copenhagen is preparing for the climate change summit that will produce as much carbon dioxide as a town the size of Middlesbrough, population 142,691.
Here are the highlights:
On a normal day, Majken Friss Jorgensen, managing director of Copenhagen's biggest limousine company, says her firm has twelve vehicles on the road. During the "summit to save the world", which opens here tomorrow, she will have 200.
Ms Jorgensen reckons that between her and her rivals the total number of limos in Copenhagen next week has already broken the 1,200 barrier.
And the total number of electric cars or hybrids among that number? "Five," says Ms Jorgensen. "The government has some alternative fuel cars but the rest will be petrol or diesel.
The airport says it is expecting up to 140 extra private jets during the peak period alone, so far over its capacity that the planes will have to fly off to regional airports – or to Sweden – to park, returning to Copenhagen to pick up their VIP passengers.
And this being Scandinavia, even the prostitutes are doing their bit for the planet. Outraged by a council postcard urging delegates to "be sustainable, don't buy sex," the local sex workers' union – they have unions here – has announced that all its 1,400 members will give free intercourse to anyone with a climate conference delegate's pass. The term "carbon dating" just took on an entirely new meaning.
At least the sex will be C02-neutral. According to the organisers, the eleven-day conference, including the participants' travel, will create a total of 41,000 tonnes of "carbon dioxide equivalent"... That is the amount of carbon dioxide produced by more than 60 of the world's smaller countries in an entire year -- combined.
The hot air this week will be massive, the whole proceedings eminently mockable.
Friday, December 4, 2009
Mormons Back Gay Rights!
The LDS church has recently endorsed a Salt Lake City ordinance which would ban discrimination against gays in housing and employment. This means that if you own a business you can't not hire someone who is LGBT or not allow them to rent your property because of their orientation. The LDS church has taken a step further to the left than Obama has on the issue.
Keeping a job from someone or a place of residence from someone because of their orientation is wrong. But what if it is good business sense.
Say you ran a conservative religious bookstore. Suppose a flamboyantly gay person, or a cross-dressing person came in to apply for a job. Such a person would make your customers – given their conservative religious views – uncomfortable and less apt to shop in your store. Hiring that person with those characteristics would hurt your business.
Would you still be forbidden by penalty of law from considering those things as you made your hiring decision? I hope not.
Say you had a day care, and a flamboyantly gay person or a cross-dressing person came to you wanting a job. Clearly, such a person would alienate many parents and, consequently, hurt your business. You should be able to refuse them work since it might bankrupt you. Basing the decision on business might be away around this silly law...I would hope.
Probably not though.
Now say you had a gay bar and a heterosexual person came to you seeking employment. If you wanted gay people working in your bar, to make your customers feel more comfortable, you would be completely within your rights to deny that straight person a job.
Common sense and principle still say that creating special rights for specific classes of people is unwise and un-American. Further, this specific set of protections threatens to spread mischief and inequality.
In a country whose founding document claims that “all men are created equal,” the idea of creating special classes of people with special legal protections is simply wrong. Further, the 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection under law, a promise broken by the creation of protected classes of people.
Thanks to Bob L.
Keeping a job from someone or a place of residence from someone because of their orientation is wrong. But what if it is good business sense.
Say you ran a conservative religious bookstore. Suppose a flamboyantly gay person, or a cross-dressing person came in to apply for a job. Such a person would make your customers – given their conservative religious views – uncomfortable and less apt to shop in your store. Hiring that person with those characteristics would hurt your business.
Would you still be forbidden by penalty of law from considering those things as you made your hiring decision? I hope not.
Say you had a day care, and a flamboyantly gay person or a cross-dressing person came to you wanting a job. Clearly, such a person would alienate many parents and, consequently, hurt your business. You should be able to refuse them work since it might bankrupt you. Basing the decision on business might be away around this silly law...I would hope.
Probably not though.
Now say you had a gay bar and a heterosexual person came to you seeking employment. If you wanted gay people working in your bar, to make your customers feel more comfortable, you would be completely within your rights to deny that straight person a job.
Common sense and principle still say that creating special rights for specific classes of people is unwise and un-American. Further, this specific set of protections threatens to spread mischief and inequality.
In a country whose founding document claims that “all men are created equal,” the idea of creating special classes of people with special legal protections is simply wrong. Further, the 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection under law, a promise broken by the creation of protected classes of people.
Thanks to Bob L.
Iran To Enrich Uranium To 20% For...FUEL?! Wwwaaaaaaahhhhhaaaaahhhhaaaa!
Press TV has reported that Iran will enrich uranium to 20% to meet their fuel needs. They just built ten new industrial scale enrichment plants so this is the obvious next move right?
This from a counrty that sits on the 3rd largest oil reserve in the world and has the larest natural gas reserve 2nd only to Russia.
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Obama's Speech
The speech Obama gave on 1 December was the same speech he gave 27 March.
Here are some excerpts:
OBAMA MARCH 27TH: Al-Qaeda and its allies, the terrorists who planned and supported the 9/11 attacks, are in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Multiple intelligence estimates have warned that Al-Qaeda is actively planning attacks on the United States homeland from a safe haven in Pakistan. And if the Afghan government falls to the Taliban or allows Al-Qaeda to go unchallenged, that country will again be a base for terrorists who want to kill some of our people as they possibly can.
OBAMA DECEMBER 1ST: ...I am convinced that our security is at stake in Afghanistan and Pakistan. This is the epicenter of violent extremism practiced by Al-Qaeda. It is from here that we were attacked on 9/11, and it is from here that new attacks are being plotted as I speak. This is no idle danger; no hypothetical threat. In the last few months alone, we have apprehended extremists within our borders who were sent here from the border region of Afghanistan and Pakistan to commit new acts of terror. And this danger will only grow if the region slides backwards, and Al-Qaeda can operate with impunity.
OBAMA MARCH 27TH: For six years Afghanistan has been denied the resources that it demands because of the war in Iraq. Now we must make a commitment that can accomplish our goals.
OBAMA DECEMBER 1ST: The Iraq war drew the dominant share of our troops, our resources, our diplomacy, and our national attention -- and that the decision to go into Iraq caused substantial rifts between America and much of the world.
OBAMA MARCH 27TH: We have a clear and focused goal: To interrupt, dismantle, and defeat Al-Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future. That's the goal that must be achieved. That is a cause that could not be more just.
OBAMA DECEMBER 1ST: Our overarching goal remains the same: To disrupt, dismantle, and defeat Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan and to prevent its capacity to threaten America and our allies in the future.
If he knew what he was gonna say on 1 December months ago, why all the dithering? 116 US Troops died in Afghanistan while Obama "decided" what to do.
The only difference between the two speeches was the in the 1 December speech he gave us a withdrawl date.
Here are some excerpts:
OBAMA MARCH 27TH: Al-Qaeda and its allies, the terrorists who planned and supported the 9/11 attacks, are in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Multiple intelligence estimates have warned that Al-Qaeda is actively planning attacks on the United States homeland from a safe haven in Pakistan. And if the Afghan government falls to the Taliban or allows Al-Qaeda to go unchallenged, that country will again be a base for terrorists who want to kill some of our people as they possibly can.
OBAMA DECEMBER 1ST: ...I am convinced that our security is at stake in Afghanistan and Pakistan. This is the epicenter of violent extremism practiced by Al-Qaeda. It is from here that we were attacked on 9/11, and it is from here that new attacks are being plotted as I speak. This is no idle danger; no hypothetical threat. In the last few months alone, we have apprehended extremists within our borders who were sent here from the border region of Afghanistan and Pakistan to commit new acts of terror. And this danger will only grow if the region slides backwards, and Al-Qaeda can operate with impunity.
OBAMA MARCH 27TH: For six years Afghanistan has been denied the resources that it demands because of the war in Iraq. Now we must make a commitment that can accomplish our goals.
OBAMA DECEMBER 1ST: The Iraq war drew the dominant share of our troops, our resources, our diplomacy, and our national attention -- and that the decision to go into Iraq caused substantial rifts between America and much of the world.
OBAMA MARCH 27TH: We have a clear and focused goal: To interrupt, dismantle, and defeat Al-Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future. That's the goal that must be achieved. That is a cause that could not be more just.
OBAMA DECEMBER 1ST: Our overarching goal remains the same: To disrupt, dismantle, and defeat Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan and to prevent its capacity to threaten America and our allies in the future.
If he knew what he was gonna say on 1 December months ago, why all the dithering? 116 US Troops died in Afghanistan while Obama "decided" what to do.
The only difference between the two speeches was the in the 1 December speech he gave us a withdrawl date.
Obama and Cloward-Piven
The following chart is from a JP Morgan research report. It shows private sector experience for presidents cabinet officials back to 1990. It includes secretaries of State, Commerce, Treasury, Agriculture, Interior, Labor, Transportation, Energy, and Housing & Urban Development, and excludes Postmaster General, Navy, War, Health, Education & Welfare, Veterans Affairs, and Homeland Security—432 cabinet members in all.
Why not pick those best suited for the positions in the cabinet? Well according to The President, they are. They are the ones with the ideas that will help him achieve his goals.
Another peak into Obama's mindset is that in his book "Dreams From My Father," he wrote about his short time in the pricate sector as time spent "behind enemy lines."
He went to Harvard Law school so we know he's no dummy, he knows what the Laffer Curve is. The only logical conslusion is that he is trying to strategically dismantle the US economy so that he can fundamentaly change the United States.
Another peak into Obama's mindset is that in his book "Dreams From My Father," he wrote about his short time in the pricate sector as time spent "behind enemy lines."
He went to Harvard Law school so we know he's no dummy, he knows what the Laffer Curve is. The only logical conslusion is that he is trying to strategically dismantle the US economy so that he can fundamentaly change the United States.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
The Definition Of Karma
Remember this?
Well the guy that threw the shoes was at a press press conference bragging about what he'd done or something when this happened:
Well the guy that threw the shoes was at a press press conference bragging about what he'd done or something when this happened:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



