…
|
|
||||
|
Hands up who thinks Good Civilizations are driven by fear, censorship and by dividing their citizens by the color of their skin?
The background to this is that Bari Weiss, formerly of the New York Times, wrote last month about the crippling fear of Brearly School parents where children are taught to be ashamed of their race, and are afraid to speak up in class. Despite paying $54,000 a year in fees, the parents feel so powerless and in fear of the new orthodoxy that they have to meet in secret to strategize. They can’t zoom or email lest they lose their jobs, and their social circles. And since the school is a prep school for Harvard and so forth, even if they are willing to speak up, they are afraid of what would happen to their children if they did. Indeed, sometimes their children beg them not to say anything, even though the situation is intolerable. ‘If You Publish My Name It Would Ruin My Life’ “The school can ask you to leave for any reason,” said one mother at Brentwood, another Los Angeles prep school. “Then you’ll be blacklisted from all the private schools and you’ll be known as a racist, which is worse than being called a murderer.” One private school parent, born in a Communist nation, tells me: “I came to this country escaping the very same fear of retaliation that now my own child feels.” — Bari Weiss, The Miseducation of America’s Elites Finally, one parent has broken the spell, pulled their children out, and was brave and articulate enough to put his name to his reply and send it to all 600 or so families in the school. April 13, 2021 Dear Fellow Brearley Parents, Our family recently made the decision not to reenroll our daughter at Brearley … It cannot be stated strongly enough that Brearley’s obsession with race must stop. It should be abundantly clear to any thinking parent that Brearley has completely lost its way. The administration and the Board of Trustees have displayed a cowardly and appalling lack of leadership by appeasing an anti-intellectual, illiberal mob, and then allowing the school to be captured by that same mob. What follows are my own personal views on Brearley’s antiracism initiatives, but these are just a handful of the criticisms that I know other parents have expressed. I object to the view that I should be judged by the color of my skin. I cannot tolerate a school that not only judges my daughter by the color of her skin, but encourages and instructs her to prejudge others by theirs. By viewing every element of education, every aspect of history, and every facet of society through the lens of skin color and race, we are desecrating the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and utterly violating the movement for which such civil rights leaders believed, fought, and died. I object to the charge of systemic racism in this country, and at our school. Systemic racism, properly understood, is segregated schools and separate lunch counters. It is the interning of Japanese and the exterminating of Jews. Systemic racism is unequivocally not a small number of isolated incidences over a period of decades. Ask any girl, of any race, if they have ever experienced insults from friends, have ever felt slighted by teachers or have ever suffered the occasional injustice from a school at which they have spent up to 13 years of their life, and you are bound to hear grievances, some petty, some not. We have not had systemic racism against Blacks in this country since the civil rights reforms of the 1960s, a period of more than 50 years. To state otherwise is a flat-out misrepresentation of our country’s history and adds no understanding to any of today’s societal issues. If anything, longstanding and widespread policies such as affirmative action, point in precisely the opposite direction. I object to a definition of systemic racism, apparently supported by Brearley, that any educational, professional, or societal outcome where Blacks are underrepresented is prima facie evidence of the aforementioned systemic racism, or of white supremacy and oppression. Facile and unsupported beliefs such as these are the polar opposite to the intellectual and scientific truth for which Brearley claims to stand. Furthermore, I call bullshit on Brearley’s oft-stated assertion that the school welcomes and encourages the truly difficult and uncomfortable conversations regarding race and the roots of racial discrepancies. The soft racism of systematically low expectations: I object to the idea that Blacks are unable to succeed in this country without aid from government or from whites. Brearley, by adopting critical race theory, is advocating the abhorrent viewpoint that Blacks should forever be regarded as helpless victims, and are incapable of success regardless of their skills, talents, or hard work. What Brearley is teaching our children is precisely the true and correct definition of racism. Turn their own words against the cult: I object to Brearley’s vacuous, inappropriate, and fanatical use of words such as “equity,” “diversity” and “inclusiveness.” If Brearley’s administration was truly concerned about so-called “equity,” it would be discussing the cessation of admissions preferences for legacies, siblings, and those families with especially deep pockets. If the administration was genuinely serious about “diversity,” it would not insist on the indoctrination of its students, and their families, to a single mindset, most reminiscent of the Chinese Cultural Revolution. Instead, the school would foster an environment of intellectual openness and freedom of thought. And if Brearley really cared about “inclusiveness,” the school would return to the concepts encapsulated in the motto “One Brearley,” instead of teaching the extraordinarily divisive idea that there are only, and always, two groups in this country: victims and oppressors. Read it all, pass it around, share. h/t Charles April 19th, 2021 | Tags: Bullying, Racism | Category: Free Speech, Ideology, USA, Woke |  Print This Post | | It’s Woke Culture versus the WorkersThe Australian Labor party was formed by the workers unions in 1890. But now, when polled, more than half of the members of one trade union say they are losing support for the Labor Party because it is too focussed on inner city Woke Ideals like climate change and gender issues. For a quarter of members the betrayal was so bad they won’t even vote Labor. Working-class Aussies are abandoning the ALP in droves over the party’s obsession with “woke” issues like gender, race and climate change.Joe Hildebrand, News.com Working-class Australians — the very foundation of the Labor Party — are abandoning the ALP in droves because they think the party has been overrun by “woke ideals” and “white-collar university educated yuppies”. Private research commissioned by the NSW Electrical Trades Union – which was itself just taken over by the Left this week – has found a quarter of union members surveyed no longer vote Labor and a further 35 per cent reported decreasing support for the party. Incredibly, almost one in five said the Liberal party better represented working people. They surveyed 1500 people from the Electrical Trades Union in areas around Sydney “…the perception of Labor as captive to trendy inner-city issues is killing the party.” “Support for the Labor Party among ETU NSW members has markedly declined in recent years – around 60 per cent of survey respondents report a decrease in their support with 25 per cent indicating they no longer vote Labor,” the report said. “Nearly a fifth of respondents now see the Liberal Party as the major party that best represents working people like them.” The survey found 42 per cent of union members saw “gender issues” as the biggest distraction to what government should really be focusing on, followed by climate change at 34 per cent. One participant said, “I feel betrayed or cheated by the Labor Party. They’ve made a big push for carbon neutrality, catering to leftists in inner city Melbourne or Sydney. F**k you, we’ll vote Pauline Hanson or Clive Palmer.” …another said, “The Liberals might be coming for our rights, but Labor are coming for our jobs.” h/t Analytic ,,, Hard-nosed journalists have all agreed that “Climate Emergency” is this year’s hottest, not-so-new trend. All the coolest, uninvestigative reporters have signed a pledge to parrot the same term. They all want to join the same club, and this is the new “token for entry”. How sweet. It’s a pledge to use hyperbole, destroy English and bore the public by repeating the same approved propaganda measure. It won’t work for more than five minutes. The public learnt to ignore global warming and then climate change. Now they will get to ignore the emergency that isn’t an emergency. But it will make it harder for actual ecological emergencies to get any air time at all. “Congrats” o environmental ones. It’s a cheap trick. Journalists are milking the “shock” value out of the word “emergency” til it becomes an empty, nihilist cliche. Like borrowing money from the future, there are only so many rounds of “Exploiting-the-language” one team can play before they run out of Reader Capital, and then run out of readers. Fewer people are dying from climate than ever, it’s an emergency! Deaths due to Natural disasters,. All 400 media outlets are cheerleading in synch:
Making us all wonder how many different media corporations ultimately control them? “We Are Living in a Climate Emergency, and We’re Going to Say So,” declares the headline of a Scientific American commentary. [pompously] “The media’s response to Covid-19 provides a useful model,” the statement advises, noting how media were able to control the narrative and compel Americans to comply with safety mandates by referring to the pandemic as an “emergency.” The Gods are back! The media think they “controlled people” to get them to stay home. It’s almost like they think just using the word “emergency” is what did it. If only they thought of that before? Marc Morano warned us the climate dictators were going to try to recover after Covid stole all their news airspace away from them. 
Some bright spark in media marketing thinks that the only difference between Covid and Climate Change is that we just didn’t sell the climate problem the same way. Most journalists apparently only see the world as verbal word games. A must-read book that shows how the Green New Deal is dangerous, impractical, misguided, and guaranteed to fail with disastrous results for the American people.”—Sean Hannity
 Emden, Germany by Gritte On January 1st, Germany shut 11 coal fired plants with about 4.7GW of generating power — supposedly as a part of the Big Phaseout. But eight days later the wind wasn’t blowing and according to Pierre Goslin the system got so unstable that the managers had to turn back on some of the coal power.This on-off-cycle repeated so many times that one large plant — Heyden –was restarted six times in the next eight weeks. The Federal Network Agency have reclassified the four of the big plants as “system relevant” which means they have to hang around on standby ready to rescue the grid at any time. So the largest efficient and cheap generators on the grid will be paid to sit around waiting for the unreliable expensive energy to fail. 2021 German Coal Plant “Phaseout” Lasted Only 8 Days…Put Back Online To Stabilize Shaky GridThe Federal Network Agency has now confirmed that it has reclassified the Heyden, Datteln, Walsum 9 and Westfalen power plants, which had already been shut down, as system-relevant and that they now must remain on standby as reserve power plants. The owners will therefore be required to continue operation in the short term. Never mind that this sporadic operation of these coal plants is horribly inefficient and costly, as you will find out below. Coal plant shutdowns have increased grid frequency instability Who pays, … the consumer: See NoTricksZone, and also WattsUp. Thanks RicDre. APOLOGIES: Moderation is going to be very slow tonight. Sorry for the inconvenience. Hopefully we can fix that soon. April 16th, 2021 | Tags: Renewable Energy | Category: Electricity, Fossil Fuels, Global Warming, Grids, Renewable | Print This Post | | Project Veritas do great work, catching candid admissions in private of the real power games and corruption going on. “Look what we did. We [CNN] got Trump out” CNN Technical Director Charlie Chester, admits on tape, in a private discussion that what they do is propaganda, and he 100% believes if it weren’t for CNN, “I don’t know that Trump would have got voted out”. “I really don’t think so”. He was focused on getting Trump out of office, it wasn’t just a political leaning, it was his raison d’etre: “I came to CNN because I wanted to be a part of that. “ So CNN is the place political lobbyists go to get paid to push election outcomes towards the President they personally want. Climate change is coming next. “It’s going to be the next Covid. They’ll be able to milk that for quite a bit.” h/t ClimateDepot UPDATE: Twitter sees their competition exposed, and a way for Twitter to put itself at the center of the global news debate, … and ..O… immediately cancels and bans Project Veritas. Protecting CNN and or Biden is more important than growing its own audience? Clearly Twitter is a political machine with similar goals to CNN. They all benefit from Big-Government. None of them serve their audiences, and they don’t want the audience to know that. Evidently they have other masters… James O’Keefe, the founder of the investigative journalism organization Project Veritas, has been permanently blacklisted by Twitter, just as his organization releases bombshell undercover footage showing senior CNN employees admitting to using “propaganda.” @Project_Veritas, the organization’s official account, has also been suspended. In a comment to Breitbart News, a Twitter spokeswoman said the suspension was permanent. This comes directly after O’Keefe and Project Veritas publicly embarrassed the far-left news network CNN. In a statement, O’Keefe vowed to sue Twitter: “I am suing Twitter for defamation because they said I, James O’Keefe, ‘operated fake accounts. This is false, this is defamatory, and they will pay. Section 230 may have protected them before, but it will not protect them from me. The complaint will be filed Monday.” Power, Profit and Ideology all point in the same direction. Convenient, eh?
h/t Murray Shaw and RicDre
April 16th, 2021 | Tags: Media bias | Category: FakeNews, Global Warming, Media-matters, Politics | Print This Post | | … The Guardian is a study in delusional arrogance. Consider this weeks headline pronouncement from the anonymous “Guardian Staff”: “The climate emergency is here. The media needs to act like it” .. Wrapped in so few words — ponder the vainglorious conceit embodied in such a headline. One, that Guardian “staff” are the judge and jury of a complex science, that they can prophesy the future climate, choose which experts are right, and feel that they know more than the Nobel Prize winning physicists, atmospheric chemists and professors of climate who disagree. Two, that “the media” are supposed to save the world from their own decreed emergency by making policy pronouncements, silencing opponents, and overriding elected officials. Three, that they unfailingly know what’s best for the stupid voting masses. What the media needs is to eat humble pie and start doing their jobs. If they were only smart enough to recognize their own failings they might start investigating the issues of the day with an open mind, serious questions, and report the smartest arguments made by the most informed commentators on all sides of the issues that matter. These are our Upperclass wannabee rulersHow stupid must they think the rest of humanity. Oh, if only the unwashed had the vision of the self-annointed Genius Guardian rulers. Did any of these writers even pass double maths in high school? Not for the Guardian writers the tough road of appealing to voters, listening to other points of view, studying the numbers, the costs or the physics. Instead, they want the seductive easy road to being rulers. This is the cry from the 120-IQ’ers, smarter than average, but too stupid to know how little they know. Too arrogant to listen to maths nerds or engineers. And too bigoted and intolerant to listen to the workers and consider their point of view. The Guardian editors are the mediocre wordsmiths who were fooled by a fashion trend. Now, those who have forgotten what “the media” is even supposed to do, think they can tell the rest of their profession how to do their jobs. Glory be! Lordy — The Guardian speaks for Planet Earth itself:Ahead of Earth Day, the Guardian is partnering with newsrooms around the world in a joint initiative calling on journalists to treat the climate crisis like the emergency [we Arts grads think] it is. When the world shut down last year, there was one big beneficiary: the planet. If only The Guardian writers knew High school science — they’d know megafires can only occur where there is too much fuel, not where there is too much desert. We are in an emergency. California is on the brink of drought, prompting fears of a new wave of devastating megafires later this year. Rising temperatures could soon make the planet’s tropical regions unlivable for humans. And they might understand that temperatures in the tropics are limited by the giant evaporative air conditioner that keeps tropical oceans at 30 – 32C. The tropics won’t get hotter in a warming world, the warm humid conditions will just spread further into the temperate zones. More coral reef, more rainforest! The tragedy… The only thing they “investigate” is whether other people are following their own decrees on Planet-management: Yet a Guardian investigation recently found that only a small number of major countries have been pumping rescue funds into a low-carbon future. Maybe people aren’t buying the Guardian dictats because the “low-carbon” future The Guardian imagines is a barren impoverished wasteland of futile hopium which benefits no one but the self-serving corporates which offer these expensive solutions to problems that don’t exist? Could be… Yet they imagine they are “setting trends in language”. Spin doctors unite: Two years ago, the Guardian announced it was changing the language it uses to talk about the environment, eschewing terms like “climate change” for the more appropriately urgent “climate emergency”. Today, we are joined by others in the news industry, organizations that recognize that a global catastrophe is already here, and that without immediate action, it will get unimaginably worse. Thus verily and Lo! The Guardian hath forecast doom and the richest most bountiful time in human history “is a catastrophe”. An Emergency! With more food available to the human species than has ever been made and fewer people per capita dying of natural disasters than at any point in the last hundred thousand years, the only “emergency” is the destruction of English and history. The real question here is why even a slice of the population pay to read this arrogant voodoo. And it might be that it fills a spiritual void, giving the rich and listless “a purpose” and a cheap way to salve their guilt. Or it might just be that The Guardian is selling a fashionable social drink people use to pump themselves up the pecking order.
Image: The Northern Gods Descending 1890. April 14th, 2021 | Category: FakeNews, Fashion, Global Warming, Media-matters, Pseudoscience, Psychology | Print This Post | | It’s all a bit much for snowflakesThe ABC is just a Lifestyle Magazine for the Upperclass, paid for by everyone else. For twenty years the media EcoRulers told people they will destroy the Earth if they use disposable coffee cups and nappies. Their whole identity as a Good Person depended on doing the right thing. And “every little bit matters” — etcetera, and ad nauseum. Who would have guessed that asking people to save the Planet with every purchase would cause anxiety, a perpetual sense of failure, and long term stress? And it never mattered anyway — the point was not the environment, but the political power. So now that hapless fans are being struck down with “Climate Distress” — it’s time to forgive them. Here’s the ABC Agony Aunt column letting all of them off the hook: Climate distress is real and it’s rational. Here’s how to manage itEdwina Seselja While researching how to reduce her carbon footprint a few years back, Brisbane woman Zara Monteith quickly fell down an anxiety-inducing rabbit hole, with each search opening her eyes to a different environmental problem to try to solve. Despite doing everything she could, Zara felt like nothing she did to reduce her consumption or environmental impact made a difference. She saw a psychologist and said “I just can’t do anything”. And the psychologists said ‘I feel the same way.'” Now is not the time to mention that “every little bit helps”. The new approach is “nevermind“. No-one is perfectFirst up, recognise that you’re not always going to be able to make the environmental choice and be the perfect Instagrammable eco-warrior. For some families disposable nappies are necessary, for some products styrofoam containers are unavoidable and on some days the air conditioner is going to run for much longer than the climate (or your wallet) would like. Plan B is “cry”: Dr Burke says emotion-focused coping means addressing the uncomfortable feelings like guilt or hopelessness. She says this can be done by “moving” the stress hormones out of your body through actions. “That might be things like having a cry — So if you have to use disposable diapers, you can. Whole generations were raised on cloth nappies, but we can’t expect EcoWorriers to do that. Just like using your own mug rather than a styrofoam-dolphin-killing cup. It’s all too hard. What matters is just that Ecoworriers are saying the right thing, they’re in the right Team, even if they can’t adopt all the symbolic tokens. No one really cared about the plants, the poor or the dolphins, they just wanted to look like they cared. April 14th, 2021 | Tags: ABC, Mental Health, Psychology | Category: FakeNews, Fashion, Global Warming, Media-matters, Pseudoscience, Psychology | Print This Post | | … Red-pill timeBasic facts, details, accuracy, buried under the weight of propaganda. Here’s a lost fact: most of the world likes fossil fuels and wants even more of it.  The world is using more fossil fuels than ever. And this is not exactly a new trend — starting in 1765 or so. Yet despite that, nine out of ten Australians speak as though they have been trained by a renewable energy ad bureau. And in a sense they have. A few years ago, 88% of Australians would say that fossil fuels are in decline around the world and we must invest in “alternatives”. So nine out of ten people are just wrong. Despite all that connectivity (or possibly because of it) nine out of ten people know something that is not true and has never been true during their entire lives. Lowy institute polls show how strong the effect of propaganda is. Vale the ABC, undoing science education, and destroying the national debate every day of the week.  89% of Australians think fossil fuels are in decline. Graph. Lowy Poll On the plus side, the more wrong the reporting, the more the real story rattles the cage. When people get red-pilled they don’t just learn that fossil fuels are still popular and important, they also learn they can’t trust the media, that consensus means nothing, and that opinion polls are often junk. There is a lot of upside here for the truth-tellers. Would you like contradictions with that?In question two of the same survey, eighty percent of the population say that fossil fuels cause climate change and we should reduce them. This factoid has been used to scare politicians into signing up all to all kinds of bad deals and silly laws. Yet in questions 3 and 4 we find out that two thirds of the population also agrees that we should continue to export fossil fuels to developing nations. And half the population say we have an abundant supply and should not just export them, but use them too. Evidently most people think fossil fuels are good for the economy — both ours and the third worlds. Assuming the people who disagreed with the first two questions were the same people who agreed with using more fossil fuels (as would be consistent) that still means one third of Australians will simultaneously say they believe fossil fuels are declining and causing climate change but we should export them and use them anyway. Jobs trumps “climate change” every timeSo what do the contradictions mean? Mostly that the media is telling porkies, but also that people are telling pollsters what they think they want to hear. On top of all that, the bigger truth is that people value the economy and jobs more than the imaginary threat of climate change (which is consistent with nearly every other survey done anywhere). Let the Red-pilling begin. h/t Simon. REFERENCESGlobal Energy Use, OWID: https://ourworldindata.org/fossil-fuels EIA: US Government https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/ They couldn’t cancel Prince Philip, but the media have cancelled that he was a skeptic of climate change. Prince Philip not only read Ian Plimer’s books, and said good things about him, he wrote, thanked and endorsed him on official letterhead. He organised a speech for Plimer at the Royal Society of Artists (which then cancelled by other people). The Duke of Edinburgh was a fan of David Bellamy and Christopher Booker too. He invited Bellamy to give a lecture at Buckingham Palace and wrote a “long and thoughtful” letter to Christopher Booker. So while the BBC et al are lavishly and justifiably praising the Great Duke, they prefer not to mention that he thought wind farms were “useless” “monstrosities” that were ‘completely reliant on subsidies’ and ‘would never work’. The Australian ABC found time to say that he once made a joke asking whether Australian Aboriginals still threw spears at each other. The ABC called it a “faux pas” as if the Duke might have been asking it seriously, or aboriginals might not have a sense of humor? (There’s that soft racism again). So his opinion on national energy policy is not worth discussing, but a one liner from nineteen years ago that didn’t offend anyone, is? We all know that if the Duke of Edinburgh had donated funds to Al Gore we’d be hearing all about it (again). Prince Philip, climate sceptic, already spinning in his graveRowan Dean, The Spectator Here is the letter from Windsor castle, dated 29 April 2018: … What is extraordinary about that letter is that as well as confirming the Prince’s admiration for the Professor, it points out that the Royal Family should have nothing to do with the politics of climate change. Yet today, a decade on, both future monarchs Prince Charles and Prince William, the former in particular in advocating the Great Reset and embracing Greta Thunberg, and the latter in his fondness for Sir David Attenborough, are in climate politics up to their eyeballs.  Duke Edinburgh, Climate Change, Letter to Ian Plimer.
… From the GWPF It is with deep sadness that we learn of the death of HRH Prince Philip, who passed earlier today. The GWPF offers its condolences to Her Majesty the Queen and the Royal Family on the death of the Duke of Edinburgh. Prince Philip, an environmental campaigner and fellow climate realist, will be profoundly missed. …. All decaying civilizations have a decaying language Some call the changes an “evolving” thing or a “living language” but when all the changes produce ambiguous misunderstandings or emotional reactions rather than analytical ones, it’s obvious the abuse of words is just degradation for political gain, not progress. Civil behavior is what makes civilizations. Any barbarian can rant with indignation. When words are exploited we lose meaningful tools. It’s about free speech One word has become a favourite weapon to silence people and stop discussions. Hate. Pat Condell reminds us that “hate” is a powerful word, the darkest emotion, an extreme word — but it’s misused and abused now for any old reason, but only in a selective way. The word hate is thrown like a verbal frisbee — tossed like verbal acid — every unwelcome remark, and unpleasant truth is “hate”. If you vote for the wrong candidate, you are voting for “hate”. And now this extreme word has been crowbarred into the law. You can be arrested if you say something that may causing alarm and distress to people who are determined to be alarmed and distressed by your free speech. But if the suppression of your birthright causes you alarm and distress, you won’t see anyone arrested for that. Being offensive and mocking is not “hate”. It’s just a word but it is wielded like a baseball bat. He makes a great defense for free speech. h/t Bill in AZ … It’s hard to find a more daft example of Pravda-style Public Broadcasting
Like all good Pravda pieces, higher prices were “always expected” and the only graph he shows is not of Canberra and not about retail prices. Graphs are just eye candy anyhow. The ABC journalists are apparently being trained to write in the genre of top level teenage girlie-gossip magazines. This is how a precocious, fifteen year old girl would explain electricity pricing to her 12-year-old Youtube fan-club: Electricity prices are falling. So why are Canberrans’ household power bills about to rise?EvoEnergy says its charges need to go up because electricity prices are going down. If that sounds confusing to you, you’re not alone — the workings of Australia’s electricity markets are complicated. Let’s go through what has happened and explain why. Yes let’s! Canberra’s entire electricity use is bought from renewable suppliers, such as wind, solar and hydro-power stations. To ensure this, the ACT government has contracts with generators across the country, including the massive Hornsdale Wind Farm in South Australia. However, to lock in that supply and to help fund the construction of those generators, the government needed to offer them an attractive, fixed price for their electricity. Now you tell us? Weren’t renewables meant to be cheaper — not “always expected” to be more expensive. And isn’t $5.50 a week, just a way to hide that it’s “nearly $300 a year?” Energy Minister Shane Rattenbury says those contract prices were always expected to be slightly above the market price — a difference of about $5.50 a week per household. Can anyone else hear a used car salesman knocking? This is the expected, direct cost to Canberrans of living in a city with 100 per cent renewable electricity. Canberrans won some, now they’re losing someFor the past few years, however, ACT households have not been paying more — the ACT’s price regulator says Canberrans have actually been paying “among the lowest prices in Australia”. How did that happen? The ebbs and flows of the market moved in Canberrans’ favour. And the Ebbs will get you every time. (Are we learning yet kids?) The true convoluted story probably has to do with contracts that had contingency clauses triggered by falling wholesale prices, though it’s impossible to tell from this “news” report. In the scramble for excuses, there are some gems: did he just admit the ACT is powered by dirty black coal?Hidden among the vague details of interstate trading: Now, the market price is falling below the ACT’s negotiated prices, which means the ACT must pay extra to fulfil its contracts. And that’s the main reason Canberrans’ bills will increase — EvoEnergy says it expects its payments to renewable suppliers to more than triple from $42 million this financial year to $127 million in 2021-22. There are also differences between the market prices in South Australia (where a lot of the ACT’s contracted supply comes from) and New South Wales (where the ACT’s actual electricity comes from). Those differences are currently disadvantaging Canberra consumers. So the ACT’s “actual energy” comes from the black coal of NSW but they have to pay more so they can call it “renewable” and pretend it comes from South Australia? But it’s all OK, because Canberrans are already paying $2000 a year for electricity (what’s another $300?). And people can always switch providers, cook dinner at 11pm, or move to Queensland each winter.
Prince William wraps himself in the UpperClass Climate Club Fashion du jour
After all the hoo-ha with Megan and Harry, somehow the harangued Duke thought that standing with the bankers, multinational corporations and Tech Giants while pressing the Public Guilt Button would endear him with the people? Or perhaps he’s just hoping to buy a bit of protection from the thought police? Boy, is he in for a surprise. Every flight he gets on will be mocked by both sides. PRINCE WILLIAM has been blasted for his latest message about climate change, with people pointing out on social media that he and his family drive Range Rovers and frequently take private jet flights. Abbie Lewellyn, The Express In a video message broadcast at the Conservation International Gala in the UK, the Duke of Cambridge called for humanity to “reset our relationship with nature and our trajectory as a species” in order to avoid a climate disaster. He said the next decade will be “one of our greatest tests” and he warned that the most vulnerable people around the world would be most hit by the devastating effects of climate change. While many have applauded William’s efforts to tackle the climate crisis, which includes the £50million Earshot (sic) Prize, he has also been criticised for perceived double-standards. The Duke of Cambridge has said humanity needs to ‘fundamentally reset our relationship with nature and our trajectory as a species’ to avoid climate disaster. By definition Prince William is the most Upper of the Upperclass. He is Uber-class, but it’s still not enough. He seems to have held out against the Upper-mob-warriors longer than most. But there is no denying the cult. It’s like the Monarchy have a death wish — picking up the globalist aim against the interests of their own people. How’s all the pomp and pageantry going to look as the punters’ electricity bills rise? Long live the Queen. Fifty more years should do it.
In other non-news, Meghan, the woman that couldn’t bear the pressure of being a Royal in the UK wants to run the most powerful nation on Earth. Photo of Prince William et al by Carfax2  Malcolm Turnbull | | Veni Markovski Last week the NSW State government foolishly gave Malcolm Turnbull a pedestal to advertise his favourite ideology (and possible also help the investment profile of his son.*) Then they remembered why he was so unpopular he nearly lost the 2016 national election — even though he’d been handed the gift of a record 90 seat majority created by Tony Abbott. They also remembered what a bomb the climate debate is in any election — where 90% of everyone says they care about the climate but almost no one actually votes to try to change global weather. So one week later, Toxic Turnbull has been dropped like the radioactive-Labor-lite-rock that he is. What were they thinking? In the last ten years, the only time “climate change” has been a winner is when a politician campaigns against it — like the Axe The Tax plan of 2013. In 2019 Labor lost the unloseable election by being anti-coal. The recent historic crushing of the conservatives in WA who had an anti-coal agenda must have shaken the party controllers to the core.
One Nation and Mark Latham (a former Opposition Labor leader, for foreign readers) pressed the obvious DefCon1 button. The Turnbull appointment “anti-coal” and an “insult to the electorate”. “Malcolm Turnbull should never have been appointed as the NSW Government’s Climate Chief, because, in reality he is an anti-coal activist with clear property financial interest that have led him to lobby against job-creating coal projects in the Upper Hunter region,” Mr Latham said. Malcolm Turnbull sees a media conspiracy, not a voter backlashUp pops the Big Conspiracy Shield: Malcolm Turnbull dumped from role on NSW government clean energy board after ‘media backlash’Former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull says the NSW government has capitulated to a “ferocious campaign” from the media after his appointment to a clean energy board was overturned. Mr Turnbull, who has been a fierce critic of News Corp, said the government had caved to pressure from the Murdoch press by reversing his appointment. “There was a pretty ferocious campaign, a vendetta, really, in the characteristic way that News Corp operates,” Mr Turnbull said. “Its goal was to bully the state government into not appointing me chair of this net zero board.” –– ABC and or MSN (Microsoft News?) And thus the conversation wheel turns back to the media. Nobody mention the voters. If there is any bullying here, it’s by the electorate who are fed up with the regressive UpperClass, anti-coal, anti-jobs and anti-cheap energy plans. This is the power of the voters. (Isn’t that a great and marvellous sentence to read in 2021?) Appointing Turnbull was like getting my “pants pulled down” says NSW Deputy leader: That bad eh? NSW Deputy Premier John Barilaro said on Nine Radio this morning that he was embarrassed he had agreed to Mr Turnbull’s appointment. “I gave the benefit of the doubt to the Liberals and the benefit of the doubt to Malcolm Turnbull and he pulled my pants down within 48 hours,” Mr Barilaro said. –– ABC and or MSN (Microsoft News?) The Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) calls it “bad timing” and “bad luck” for Turnbull, who “probably had to go” given the situation — but would have been fine if he’d been appointed after the election (because who cares what the voters want?). But the SMH editors suddenly care about coal workers and argue that committing to the anti-coal agenda would help the coal industry, because since five minutes ago they are investment gurus and global coal supply experts: Since coal demand is likely to fall, if too many new mines are approved, it will likely cause an oversupply in coming decades. Such a coal glut could threaten the financial viability of the coal mining companies, which in turn raises serious concerns about whether they will have the cash to remediate the scars all over the upper hunter left by open-cut mines. How to lose elections — Flog the climate scare:Turnbull tried to push through an emission trading scheme in 2009, and lost to the climate vote as opposition leader, he nearly lost the National Election of 2016, he lost the party leadership again in 2018 trying to force through a National Energy Guarantee. The Climate Horse is so dead it’s a fossil. When will they learn? *Does Malcolm Turnbulls son Alex still benefit from a pro renewables policy in Australia? [2017] Malcolm Turnbull should come clean and explain to his party and the public that his son, Alex is heavily invested in wind power outfit, Infigen and did so at a time when it was on the brink of bankruptcy. In one of the luckiest bets of all time (see our post here), Alex Turnbull managed to buy in when Infigen shares were a measly $0.20, just before his Dad signed Australia up to the Paris Climate Change agreement, after which they rocketed to $1.20. If Turnbull’s family invests in renewable energy, why isn’t that mentioned each time he talks about it? Posts showing that voters don’t vote for “Climate Change”
h/t David B April 6th, 2021 | Tags: Australian Politics, NSW (New South Wales), Turnbull (Malcolm) | Category: Australia, Global Warming, Politics | Print This Post | | …. |
Jo appreciates your support to help her keep doing what she does. This blog is funded by donations. Thanks!
Follow Jo's Tweets
   
 
|
|||
|
Copyright © 2026 JoNova - All Rights Reserved |
||||
.svg){kind=link}
Recent Comments