Terwijl moslims in christelijke landen een maximum aan godsdienstvrijheid bezitten, heerst er in de islamitische landen een ongeëvenaarde onderdrukking van alle niet-islamitische geloofsrichtingen. Het onderstaande essay is het antwoord van Michael Mannheimer op de ongehoorde beschuldigingen van Erdoğan tegen Europa i.v.m. het Zwitserse minaretreferendum.
Door: Michael Mannheimer
Duitsland, 23.12.2009
In acht van de tien landen met de scherpste christenvervolging, evenals in 40 van de 50 door de wereldwijd opererende mensenrechtenorganisatie ”OpenDoors” geregistreerde landen, heerst de islam. Ook Turkije behoort – nog voor Marokko, Palestina, Bangladesh en Bahrein – tot de landen die christenen massief onderdrukken en vervolgen. Van de meer dan 2 miljoen christenen aan het einde van het Ottomaanse Rijk – die altijd nog 30 % van de bevolking uitmaakten – zijn tegenwoordig nog maar ruim 100.000 christenen overgebleven, die daarmee nog slechts 0,2 % van het voor 99,8 % uit islamieten bestaande Turkije uitmaken.
De alledaagse terreur tegen de christenen in Turkije
Hoeiboei
dinsdag 29 december 2009
maandag 28 december 2009
Obama's image: What a difference a year makes
December 28, 2009
By Ed Lasky
Almost a year has passed since January 20, 2009 -- when the waters of the ocean no longer rose and America began to heal from the depredations of Republicans. Barack Obama has been our president for that long, and the people have started to wise up.
The light that has shined on Barack Obama as president has reflected back an image that bears very little similarity to the iconic visage that floated above us all during 2008. Why has Barack Obama betrayed so many allies, broken so many promises, thrown so many pledges and people under the bus?
One simple aphorism (paraphrasing Winston Churchill) can explain it all. Barack Obama is no longer a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma. Much about his past remains murky, but faced with the need to govern, he has given the American people plenty of evidence of his nature, if only they will look.
American Thinker
Obama is a cynic, wrapped in hypocrisy, inside a bully.
By Ed Lasky
Almost a year has passed since January 20, 2009 -- when the waters of the ocean no longer rose and America began to heal from the depredations of Republicans. Barack Obama has been our president for that long, and the people have started to wise up.
The light that has shined on Barack Obama as president has reflected back an image that bears very little similarity to the iconic visage that floated above us all during 2008. Why has Barack Obama betrayed so many allies, broken so many promises, thrown so many pledges and people under the bus?
One simple aphorism (paraphrasing Winston Churchill) can explain it all. Barack Obama is no longer a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma. Much about his past remains murky, but faced with the need to govern, he has given the American people plenty of evidence of his nature, if only they will look.
American Thinker
Obama is a cynic, wrapped in hypocrisy, inside a bully.
donderdag 24 december 2009
Climategate: How To Follow the Money
It appears that most of the Copenhagen participants saw the money they spent as an investment. Here's how they get paid.
December 23, 2009 - by Charlie Martin
There’s big money in climate.
That became strikingly obvious in Copenhagen. The conference itself cost in the neighborhood of $30 million, but that was only the visible tip of the melting iceberg. Add to that the celebrities, the demonstrators, the congressional delegations, and the corporate displays, and you can bet something closer to $60 million was really spent on the conference — along with, of course, a carbon footprint the size of Morocco’s. The one significant outcome of the Copenhagen conference was an agreement to continue the international market in carbon offset trading that would otherwise have expired in 2012 and to prevent a crash in the carbon credits market.
It appears that most of the participants saw the money spent as an investment.
To see why, we need to look at the way Kyoto has turned into cash for many of the biggest names in the climate change world, and to do that we need to understand how the whole carbon trading scheme works.
Read: Pajamas Media
Cash for carbon: the new Oil for Food...
December 23, 2009 - by Charlie Martin
There’s big money in climate.
That became strikingly obvious in Copenhagen. The conference itself cost in the neighborhood of $30 million, but that was only the visible tip of the melting iceberg. Add to that the celebrities, the demonstrators, the congressional delegations, and the corporate displays, and you can bet something closer to $60 million was really spent on the conference — along with, of course, a carbon footprint the size of Morocco’s. The one significant outcome of the Copenhagen conference was an agreement to continue the international market in carbon offset trading that would otherwise have expired in 2012 and to prevent a crash in the carbon credits market.
It appears that most of the participants saw the money spent as an investment.
To see why, we need to look at the way Kyoto has turned into cash for many of the biggest names in the climate change world, and to do that we need to understand how the whole carbon trading scheme works.
Read: Pajamas Media
Cash for carbon: the new Oil for Food...
woensdag 23 december 2009
How the Auschwitz Sign Claiming that `Work Makes Free’ Embodies Current Western Thinking and Policy
By Barry Rubin
The theft and then recovery of the famous sign at the entrance of Auschwitz—Arbeit macht frei, work will make you free—has brought that artifact of the Holocaust to international attention once again. Merely dismissing the sign as, “cynical,” few understand the meaning of the sign in context and its underlying implications for Jewish thought and Israel today.
At the time--and this was very clear in Eastern European towns like that of my grandparents in Poland-- Jews were used by the Germans for forced labor. While many were involved in road repair (an extremely important task during the war when highways were heavily used by the Nazis for military purposes), tree cutting, or other manual labor, others labored in their usual professions.
The Germans, of course, wanted to win the war, which they were waging, despite their victories, against difficult odds. Even after the French were defeated and the British retreated across the Channel, the combat was ferocious against the Soviets and the United Kingdom fought on. In pragmatic terms, the Germans needed Jewish labor. After all, too, they could hardly be receiving it under better circumstances. The Jews were not paid for the work, they were denied consumer goods, and their food rations were minimal.
Rubin Reports
Post Copenhagen: Is Man-Made Global Warming a Dead Issue?
Roger L. Simon
December 22nd, 2009 1:46 pm
I know this sounds premature, but the failure of UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen has in all likelihood made anthropogenic global warming a dead issue.
Another nail in its coffin appeared on the site of insciences organization yesterday:
Cosmic rays and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), both already implicated in depleting the Earth’s ozone layer, are also responsible for changes in the global climate, a University of Waterloo scientist reports in a new peer-reviewed paper.
Pajamas Media
December 22nd, 2009 1:46 pm
I know this sounds premature, but the failure of UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen has in all likelihood made anthropogenic global warming a dead issue.
Another nail in its coffin appeared on the site of insciences organization yesterday:
Cosmic rays and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), both already implicated in depleting the Earth’s ozone layer, are also responsible for changes in the global climate, a University of Waterloo scientist reports in a new peer-reviewed paper.
Pajamas Media
maandag 21 december 2009
Copenhagen Wrap-up: “I have seen the future and it stinks!”
December 20th, 2009 12:25 pm
I am only just back last night from the Copenhagen UN climate change conference, yet am convinced of the accuracy of my headline – an obvious parody of Lincoln Steffens’ famous 1921 declaration about the Soviet Union, “I have seen the future and it works. ” In this case, however, the future concerns (supposedly democratic) “global governance” and not the workers’ state. For make no mistake about it, Kenneth Andersen is correct. COP15 was only peripherally about “climate change” and almost entirely about UN hegemony.
Roger L. Simon
I am only just back last night from the Copenhagen UN climate change conference, yet am convinced of the accuracy of my headline – an obvious parody of Lincoln Steffens’ famous 1921 declaration about the Soviet Union, “I have seen the future and it works. ” In this case, however, the future concerns (supposedly democratic) “global governance” and not the workers’ state. For make no mistake about it, Kenneth Andersen is correct. COP15 was only peripherally about “climate change” and almost entirely about UN hegemony.
Roger L. Simon
zondag 20 december 2009
"Ik ben qua denken een vrije vogel’
vrijdag 18 december 2009
Hij is de meest besproken politicus van Nederland, evenzeer verketterd als vereerd. Maar - wie is Geert Wilders, de politieke leider van de PVV die zoveel losmaakt bij voor en tegenstanders eigenlijk? ‘Ik leid een leven dat ik mijn ergste vijand niet toewens.’
De plaats van handeling druipt van de symboliek. Socialistenvreter Geert Wilders betreedt de Den Uylzaal aan Het Binnenhof, vernoemd naar de progressieve partijleider en premier Joop den Uyl (1919-1987). In de kamer, waarin de aanpalende VVD-fractie regelmatig overlegt, slingert een stapeltje wervende aanmeldingskaarten van de partij van Mark Rutte. Die evenmin zijn besteed aan de afvallige liberaal. Hij oogt ontspannen in het statige vertrek - uiterlijk hecht Geert Wilders aan een vast patroon. Donker pak, altijd een smetteloos witte hemd, een felgekleurde zijden das, traditionele zwarte schoenen en - opvallend contrast - het onmiskenbare geblondeerde haar. Hoe meer mensen over zijn kapsel beginnen, hoe opstandiger hij wordt. ,,Toen ik kamerlid voor de VVD was, zeiden Hans Dijkstal en Gerrit Zalm dat er, als ik me meer zou aanpassen en ik mijn haar op orde zou brengen, wellicht een kabinetspost inzat. Ik heb het geen seconde overwogen."
Forum voor de Vrijheid
Hij is de meest besproken politicus van Nederland, evenzeer verketterd als vereerd. Maar - wie is Geert Wilders, de politieke leider van de PVV die zoveel losmaakt bij voor en tegenstanders eigenlijk? ‘Ik leid een leven dat ik mijn ergste vijand niet toewens.’
De plaats van handeling druipt van de symboliek. Socialistenvreter Geert Wilders betreedt de Den Uylzaal aan Het Binnenhof, vernoemd naar de progressieve partijleider en premier Joop den Uyl (1919-1987). In de kamer, waarin de aanpalende VVD-fractie regelmatig overlegt, slingert een stapeltje wervende aanmeldingskaarten van de partij van Mark Rutte. Die evenmin zijn besteed aan de afvallige liberaal. Hij oogt ontspannen in het statige vertrek - uiterlijk hecht Geert Wilders aan een vast patroon. Donker pak, altijd een smetteloos witte hemd, een felgekleurde zijden das, traditionele zwarte schoenen en - opvallend contrast - het onmiskenbare geblondeerde haar. Hoe meer mensen over zijn kapsel beginnen, hoe opstandiger hij wordt. ,,Toen ik kamerlid voor de VVD was, zeiden Hans Dijkstal en Gerrit Zalm dat er, als ik me meer zou aanpassen en ik mijn haar op orde zou brengen, wellicht een kabinetspost inzat. Ik heb het geen seconde overwogen."
Forum voor de Vrijheid
Mark Steyn: It's settled; climate circus was a fairy tale
By MARK STEYN
Syndicated columnist
The best summation of the UN climate circus in Denmark comes from Andrew Bolt of Australia's Herald Sun: "Nothing is real in Copenhagen – not the temperature record, not the predictions, not the agenda, not the 'solution'."
Just so. Reuters, for example, carried a moving account of the speech by Ian Fry, lead negotiator for Tuvalu, the beleaguered Pacific island nation soon to be under water because of a planet-devastating combination of your SUV and unsustainable bovine flatulence from Vermont farms. "The fate of my country rests in your hands," Fry told the meeting. "I make this as a strong and impassioned plea ... I woke this morning and I was crying and that was not easy for a grown man to admit," he continued, "his voice choking with emotion," in the Reuters reporter's words. Who could fail to be moved?
The Orange County Register
Syndicated columnist
The best summation of the UN climate circus in Denmark comes from Andrew Bolt of Australia's Herald Sun: "Nothing is real in Copenhagen – not the temperature record, not the predictions, not the agenda, not the 'solution'."
Just so. Reuters, for example, carried a moving account of the speech by Ian Fry, lead negotiator for Tuvalu, the beleaguered Pacific island nation soon to be under water because of a planet-devastating combination of your SUV and unsustainable bovine flatulence from Vermont farms. "The fate of my country rests in your hands," Fry told the meeting. "I make this as a strong and impassioned plea ... I woke this morning and I was crying and that was not easy for a grown man to admit," he continued, "his voice choking with emotion," in the Reuters reporter's words. Who could fail to be moved?
The Orange County Register
vrijdag 18 december 2009
Groene buitenkant, rode binnenkant
Wie stemmen er over onze toekomst in Kopenhagen?President Chavez:
Hugo Chavez kreeg een daverend applaus nadat hij zei dat het proces in Kopenhagen "niet democratisch, niet alomvattend is, maar is dat niet de realiteit van onze wereld, de wereld is in werkelijkheid een imperiale dictatuur...weg met de imperiale dictaturen".Massa-moordenaar en dictator Robert Mugabe:
Toen hij zei dat "er een stil en verschrikkelijk spook in de zaal" was, en dat dit spook het kapitalisme was, kreeg hij een oorverdovend applaus.
En toen hij afrondde met "onze revolutie streeft ernaar alle mensen te helpen... socialisme, dat andere spook dat waarschijnlijk door deze zaal waart, dat is de manier om de planeet te redden, kapitalisme is de weg naar de hel... laten we strijden tegen het kapitalisme en ervoor zorgen dat het ons gehoorzaamt", toen kreeg hij een staande ovatie.
"Wanneer deze kapitalistische goden van koolstof boeren en hun gevaarlijke emissies uitbraken dan zijn wij, de mindere stervelingen van de ontwikkelingswereld degenen die naar adem snakken en zinken en uiteindelijk sterven."Hoofdonderhandelaar van het kleine eilandstaatje Tuvalu, Ian Fry:
"Ik werd vanmorgen huilend wakker, het is voor een volwassen man niet eenvoudig dat toe te geven," zei Mr. Fry op zaterdag, terwijl de tranen in zijn ogen sprongen.Wat ontroerend.
"Het lot van mijn land rust in uw handen," besloot hij, terwijl de toehoorders in luid applaus uitbarstten.
Alleen jammer dat Mr. Fry niet echt bang hoeft te zijn voor de stijgende oceanen, omdat hij niet op de eiland-atol woont, maar in Queanbeyan, Australië, op 144 km afstand van het dichtsbijzijnde strand. Toen zijn vrouw werd gevraagd of hij ooit op Tuvalo had gewoond wilde ze "liever geen commentaar geven".
Volgens zijn buurvrouw woont hij al langer dan tien jaar in Queanbeyan waar hij zich opwerkte "naar een toppositie in de klimaatverandering".
heraldsun.com.au
Hot Air
De klimaatleugen is niets meer of minder dan een middel om een doel te bereiken. Het gaat in Kopenhagen in werkelijkheid maar om één ding: zoveel mogelijk geld lospeuteren van de "haves" en het verdelen onder de "have-nots". Oftewel "de rijkdom verdelen" zoals de verkapte marxist Obama zich tijdens zijn verkiezingscampagne liet ontglippen.
Groen aan de buitenkant, rood aan de binnenkant.
Climategate: Faster and Faster, the Dominos Fall
With the revelation about the cherrypicked Russian stations (plus six other freshly, independently discovered problems), the real story of how we got here just took a shape.
December 17, 2009 - by Charlie Martin
The Climategate files were made public just a month ago, and the email messages that were revealed have already had real impact. The emails show us scientists being petty and political, even corrupt. Suppressing dissenting science and perhaps even violating the law to prevent data from being shared with the rest of the world. They show us people with failings, egos against egos. But the emails themselves aren’t enough to call the overall science of CO2-driven, human-caused climate change into question.
The Climategate emails, however, make up only five percent of the Climategate files. The other 95 percent, the programs and data and documents, are where the real story is hiding. That story has begun to come out, in several independent analyses of the data we have, using hints from the emails and from other files and raw data that is available from other sources.
A story is beginning to take shape. This story broke into the world media Wednesday. An article in RIA Novosti, the Russian state-owned news service, states:
Pajamas Media
December 17, 2009 - by Charlie Martin
The Climategate files were made public just a month ago, and the email messages that were revealed have already had real impact. The emails show us scientists being petty and political, even corrupt. Suppressing dissenting science and perhaps even violating the law to prevent data from being shared with the rest of the world. They show us people with failings, egos against egos. But the emails themselves aren’t enough to call the overall science of CO2-driven, human-caused climate change into question.
The Climategate emails, however, make up only five percent of the Climategate files. The other 95 percent, the programs and data and documents, are where the real story is hiding. That story has begun to come out, in several independent analyses of the data we have, using hints from the emails and from other files and raw data that is available from other sources.
A story is beginning to take shape. This story broke into the world media Wednesday. An article in RIA Novosti, the Russian state-owned news service, states:
Pajamas Media
Climategate: … And Just Like That, the Warming’s Gone (PJM Exclusive)
The Russian paint-by-numbers data. The CRU data matching NOAA and NASA. What's left?
December 17, 2009 - by Joseph D'Aleo
As James Delingpole, in the Telegraph, noted Wednesday:
Climategate just got much, much bigger. And all thanks to the Russians who, with perfect timing, dropped this bombshell just as the world’s leaders are gathering in Copenhagen to discuss ways of carbon-taxing us all back to the dark ages.
On Tuesday, we heard via the Ria Novosti agency that the Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA) issued a report claiming that the Hadley Center for Climate Change had probably tampered with Russian-climate data:
The IEA believes that Russian meteorological-station data did not substantiate the anthropogenic global-warming theory. Analysts say Russian meteorological stations cover most of the country’s territory, and that the Hadley Center had used data submitted by only 25% of such stations in its reports. Over 40% of Russian territory was not included in global-temperature calculations for some other reasons, rather than the lack of meteorological stations and observations.
The data of stations located in areas not listed in the Hadley Climate Research Unit Temperature UK (HadCRUT) survey often does not show any substantial warming in the late 20th century and the early 21st century.
The HadCRUT database includes specific stations providing incomplete data and highlighting the global-warming process, rather than stations facilitating uninterrupted observations. They concluded climatologists use the incomplete findings of meteorological stations far more often than those providing complete observations and data from stations located in large populated centers that are influenced by the urban-warming effect more frequently than the correct data of remote stations.
Pajamas Media
December 17, 2009 - by Joseph D'Aleo
As James Delingpole, in the Telegraph, noted Wednesday:
Climategate just got much, much bigger. And all thanks to the Russians who, with perfect timing, dropped this bombshell just as the world’s leaders are gathering in Copenhagen to discuss ways of carbon-taxing us all back to the dark ages.
On Tuesday, we heard via the Ria Novosti agency that the Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA) issued a report claiming that the Hadley Center for Climate Change had probably tampered with Russian-climate data:
The IEA believes that Russian meteorological-station data did not substantiate the anthropogenic global-warming theory. Analysts say Russian meteorological stations cover most of the country’s territory, and that the Hadley Center had used data submitted by only 25% of such stations in its reports. Over 40% of Russian territory was not included in global-temperature calculations for some other reasons, rather than the lack of meteorological stations and observations.
The data of stations located in areas not listed in the Hadley Climate Research Unit Temperature UK (HadCRUT) survey often does not show any substantial warming in the late 20th century and the early 21st century.
The HadCRUT database includes specific stations providing incomplete data and highlighting the global-warming process, rather than stations facilitating uninterrupted observations. They concluded climatologists use the incomplete findings of meteorological stations far more often than those providing complete observations and data from stations located in large populated centers that are influenced by the urban-warming effect more frequently than the correct data of remote stations.
Pajamas Media
donderdag 17 december 2009
Obama the America denier
By Bruce Walker
Most people involved in public affairs fall into two grand schools: Some believe that America is a unique nation, a nation built upon extraordinary and good moral values, and a country which is a microcosm of what the world should be. These people need not be Americans. Churchill, for example, was an unabashed admirer of America.
Other people believe that America is simply a very arrogant country, a nation inhabited with bumpkins who believe too much in God, and because of its religious faith and confidence, the antithesis of what the world should be. This animus flourishes outside America, but it also has a strong camp following in America.
Barack Obama is decidedly in the second camp. He is an "America Denier."
American Thinker
woensdag 16 december 2009
Wie wordt er beter van 'Kopenhagen?'
De vechtende demonstranten op straat, de trein vol bekommerde landgenoten die Nederland naar Kopenhagen liet rijden, het politieke gezwatel over de toekomst van onze kinderen, het getetter van de media over nog sneller smeltend ijs.... de wereld lijkt in rep en roer.
Maar de 15.000 vergaderaars in het Bella Center in Kopenhagen laten zich niet meeslepen. Helder moeten ze blijven, hun koppie er bij houden, want deze bijeenkomst moeten er spijkers met koppen geslagen worden, of beter: zakken gevuld. Want het gaat in Kopenhagen om geld, heel veel geld. Geld dat uit de zakken van de burger moet worden gehaald en verplaatst naar de zakken van de ambtenaren, wetenschappers en bedrijven die van heinde en verre zijn gekomen om nu toch eindelijk te oogsten.
Ze weten dat het pandemonium buiten nergens over gaat - er is geen klimaatprobleem - maar ze weten ook: hoe meer angst onder de mensen, hoe meer lawaai op straat, des te groter hun perspectief op financieel gewin.
Valt er dan zoveel te halen? Jazeker, er staan hier honderden miljarden op het spel. Landen hopen op bedragen in de orde van miljarden en sommige individu's verwachten hier honderden miljoenen weg te slepen. De kleinere spelers hopen hier hun goede baan op de universiteit of bij de overheid te kunnen bestendigen. Dat klinkt bescheiden, maar als je een hypotheek en kinderen hebt is dat een prima motivatie om langdurig vol te houden dat ons een mega-klimaatprobleem te wachten staat.
Er zijn drie groepen van begunstigden te beneficiaries onderscheiden: de landen in de derde wereld, het groen-wetenschappelijk complex en de banken, 'Big Carbon'.
Follow the money hier: De Klimatosoof
Maar de 15.000 vergaderaars in het Bella Center in Kopenhagen laten zich niet meeslepen. Helder moeten ze blijven, hun koppie er bij houden, want deze bijeenkomst moeten er spijkers met koppen geslagen worden, of beter: zakken gevuld. Want het gaat in Kopenhagen om geld, heel veel geld. Geld dat uit de zakken van de burger moet worden gehaald en verplaatst naar de zakken van de ambtenaren, wetenschappers en bedrijven die van heinde en verre zijn gekomen om nu toch eindelijk te oogsten.
Ze weten dat het pandemonium buiten nergens over gaat - er is geen klimaatprobleem - maar ze weten ook: hoe meer angst onder de mensen, hoe meer lawaai op straat, des te groter hun perspectief op financieel gewin.
Valt er dan zoveel te halen? Jazeker, er staan hier honderden miljarden op het spel. Landen hopen op bedragen in de orde van miljarden en sommige individu's verwachten hier honderden miljoenen weg te slepen. De kleinere spelers hopen hier hun goede baan op de universiteit of bij de overheid te kunnen bestendigen. Dat klinkt bescheiden, maar als je een hypotheek en kinderen hebt is dat een prima motivatie om langdurig vol te houden dat ons een mega-klimaatprobleem te wachten staat.
Er zijn drie groepen van begunstigden te beneficiaries onderscheiden: de landen in de derde wereld, het groen-wetenschappelijk complex en de banken, 'Big Carbon'.
Follow the money hier: De Klimatosoof
dinsdag 15 december 2009
Climategate: McIntyre and the ‘Divergence Problem’
The "trick" used to "hide the decline," which alarmists have claimed was taken out of context, is actually worse when the context is included.
December 14, 2009 - by Charlie Martin
It’s been less than a month since the Climategate files were first disclosed, but they’ve already had a dramatic impact on the debate over climate change.
On the one hand is the dominant so-called consensus — that human emission of greenhouse gases has been the primary cause of an unprecedented warming of Earth’s climate. On the other hand, there has been an underground opposition trying to make itself heard. What the disclosure of the files did was demonstrate that these opposition voices had been suppressed unfairly and unscientifically.
As a result, the raw data that had been withheld is becoming available to outside researchers. This new openness is already having results.
Payamas Media
maandag 14 december 2009
Bill Maher: Burka fashion show
Ok, nice way to take the mickey out of that misogynistic portable prison.
However, what's up with the politically correct mantra about defending the right of a woman to wear a burka voluntarily as a religious expression? Hello? Voluntarily? Who cares? In the West we do not discriminate or treat women as second-class citizens, we should not allow the burka here even under the guise of "voluntary religious expression". Period.
What would have happened to that lovely Indian tradition of burning widows on their husband's funeral pyre if General Napier had not stood up for the superior and much more humane views of his own civilization and put an end to that barbaric custom?
He said:
"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."You can be sure that if he had defended the right of a woman to voluntarily immolate herself as a religious expression the practice would not have become outlawed and women would still be "voluntarily" climbing onto those funeral pyres today.
Backward, inhumane and discriminating customs have to be eradicated, whether they are based on religion or not, and whether the women concerned are "voluntarily" supporting it or not.
Oh, and by the way: the same goes for the niqaabs, hijabs, headscarves and other assorted islamic tools to oppress women. After all, the only difference is the amount of material used. The thought behind all that "religious clothing" is the same: If you don't cover the meat, the tomcat will come. And whatever happens afterward is never the fault of the tomcat.
You want to oppress your women? Go live somewhere else!
.jpg)
zondag 13 december 2009
Sociale kosten van migratie in Europa (7)
E.J. BRON - 12 DECEMBER 2009
”Wat de islamitische migratie Europa kost – Een afrekening met een mythe” heet een essay van Michael Mannheimer. Het gaat hierbij om het waarschijnlijk meest omvangrijke journalistieke onderzoek m.b.t. het onderwerp hoeveel de islamitische migratie Europa kost. Dit is het zevende deel van een serie artikelen, waarin de kosten van migratie in Europa onder de loep worden genomen. Het onderstaande artikel is het 3e deel van drie delen waarin Italië als voorbeeld wordt genomen.
(Zie voor de voorgaande delen de links onderaan het artikel)
Voorbeeld Italië
De rol van de moskeeën bij de terreur en de islamisering in Italië
Archief Het Vrije Volk
”Wat de islamitische migratie Europa kost – Een afrekening met een mythe” heet een essay van Michael Mannheimer. Het gaat hierbij om het waarschijnlijk meest omvangrijke journalistieke onderzoek m.b.t. het onderwerp hoeveel de islamitische migratie Europa kost. Dit is het zevende deel van een serie artikelen, waarin de kosten van migratie in Europa onder de loep worden genomen. Het onderstaande artikel is het 3e deel van drie delen waarin Italië als voorbeeld wordt genomen.
(Zie voor de voorgaande delen de links onderaan het artikel)
Voorbeeld Italië
De rol van de moskeeën bij de terreur en de islamisering in Italië
Archief Het Vrije Volk
donderdag 10 december 2009
Sarah Palin < > Al Gore: 1 - 0
The Washington Post Op-ed and Response to Climate Change and Gravity
Gisteren om 14:34
Copenhagen’s political science
The Washington Post
By Sarah Palin
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
With the publication of damaging e-mails from a climate research center in Britain, the radical environmental movement appears to face a tipping point. The revelation of appalling actions by so-called climate change experts allows the American public to finally understand the concerns so many of us have articulated on this issue.
“Climate-gate,” as the e-mails and other documents from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia have become known, exposes a highly politicized scientific circle -- the same circle whose work underlies efforts at the Copenhagen climate change conference. The agenda-driven policies being pushed in Copenhagen won’t change the weather, but they would change our economy for the worse.
The e-mails reveal that leading climate “experts” deliberately destroyed records, manipulated data to “hide the decline” in global temperatures, and tried to silence their critics by preventing them from publishing in peer-reviewed journals. What’s more, the documents show that there was no real consensus even within the CRU crowd. Some scientists had strong doubts about the accuracy of estimates of temperatures from centuries ago, estimates used to back claims that more recent temperatures are rising at an alarming rate.
This scandal obviously calls into question the proposals being pushed in Copenhagen. I’ve always believed that policy should be based on sound science, not politics. As governor of Alaska, I took a stand against politicized science when I sued the federal government over its decision to list the polar bear as an endangered species despite the fact that the polar bear population had more than doubled. I got clobbered for my actions by radical environmentalists nationwide, but I stood by my view that adding a healthy species to the endangered list under the guise of “climate change impacts” was an abuse of the Endangered Species Act. This would have irreversibly hurt both Alaska’s economy and the nation’s, while also reducing opportunities for responsible development.
Our representatives in Copenhagen should remember that good environmental policymaking is about weighing real-world costs and benefits -- not pursuing a political agenda. That’s not to say I deny the reality of some changes in climate -- far from it. I saw the impact of changing weather patterns firsthand while serving as governor of our only Arctic state. I was one of the first governors to create a subcabinet to deal specifically with the issue and to recommend common-sense policies to respond to the coastal erosion, thawing permafrost and retreating sea ice that affect Alaska’s communities and infrastructure.
But while we recognize the occurrence of these natural, cyclical environmental trends, we can’t say with assurance that man’s activities cause weather changes. We can say, however, that any potential benefits of proposed emissions reduction policies are far outweighed by their economic costs. And those costs are real. Unlike the proposals China and India offered prior to Copenhagen -- which actually allow them to increase their emissions -- President Obama’s proposal calls for serious cuts in our own long-term carbon emissions. Meeting such targets would require Congress to pass its cap-and-tax plans, which will result in job losses and higher energy costs (as Obama admitted during the campaign). That’s not exactly what most Americans are hoping for these days. And as public opposition continues to stall Congress’s cap-and-tax legislation, Environmental Protection Agency bureaucrats plan to regulate carbon emissions themselves, doing an end run around the American people.
In fact, we’re not the only nation whose people are questioning climate change schemes. In the European Union, energy prices skyrocketed after it began a cap-and-tax program. Meanwhile, Australia’s Parliament recently defeated a cap-and-tax bill. Surely other nations will follow suit, particularly as the climate e-mail scandal continues to unfold.
In his inaugural address, President Obama declared his intention to “restore science to its rightful place.” But instead of staying home from Copenhagen and sending a message that the United States will not be a party to fraudulent scientific practices, the president has upped the ante. He plans to fly in at the climax of the conference in hopes of sealing a “deal.” Whatever deal he gets, it will be no deal for the American people. What Obama really hopes to bring home from Copenhagen is more pressure to pass the Democrats’ cap-and-tax proposal. This is a political move. The last thing America needs is misguided legislation that will raise taxes and cost jobs -- particularly when the push for such legislation rests on agenda-driven science.
Without trustworthy science and with so much at stake, Americans should be wary about what comes out of this politicized conference. The president should boycott Copenhagen.
_______________________________________________________________________
Steven Hayward has a great article in The Weekly Standard on the Climategate scandal. Be sure to check it out.
The response to my op-ed by global warming alarmists has been interesting. Former Vice President Al Gore has called me a “denier” and informs us that climate change is “a principle in physics. It’s like gravity. It exists.”
Perhaps he’s right. Climate change is like gravity – a naturally occurring phenomenon that existed long before, and will exist long after, any governmental attempts to affect it.
However, he’s wrong in calling me a “denier.” As I noted in my op-ed above and in my original Facebook post on Climategate, I have never denied the existence of climate change. I just don’t think we can primarily blame man’s activities for the earth’s cyclical weather changes.
Former Vice President Gore also claimed today that the scientific community has worked on this issue for 20 years, and therefore it is settled science. Well, the Climategate scandal involves the leading experts in this field, and if Climategate is proof of the larger method used over the past 20 years, then Vice President Gore seriously needs to consider that their findings are flawed, falsified, or inconclusive.
Vice President Gore, the Climategate scandal exists. You might even say that it’s sort of like gravity: you simply can’t deny it.
- Sarah Palin
Copenhagen’s political science
Gisteren om 14:34
Copenhagen’s political science
The Washington Post
By Sarah Palin
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
With the publication of damaging e-mails from a climate research center in Britain, the radical environmental movement appears to face a tipping point. The revelation of appalling actions by so-called climate change experts allows the American public to finally understand the concerns so many of us have articulated on this issue.
“Climate-gate,” as the e-mails and other documents from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia have become known, exposes a highly politicized scientific circle -- the same circle whose work underlies efforts at the Copenhagen climate change conference. The agenda-driven policies being pushed in Copenhagen won’t change the weather, but they would change our economy for the worse.
The e-mails reveal that leading climate “experts” deliberately destroyed records, manipulated data to “hide the decline” in global temperatures, and tried to silence their critics by preventing them from publishing in peer-reviewed journals. What’s more, the documents show that there was no real consensus even within the CRU crowd. Some scientists had strong doubts about the accuracy of estimates of temperatures from centuries ago, estimates used to back claims that more recent temperatures are rising at an alarming rate.
This scandal obviously calls into question the proposals being pushed in Copenhagen. I’ve always believed that policy should be based on sound science, not politics. As governor of Alaska, I took a stand against politicized science when I sued the federal government over its decision to list the polar bear as an endangered species despite the fact that the polar bear population had more than doubled. I got clobbered for my actions by radical environmentalists nationwide, but I stood by my view that adding a healthy species to the endangered list under the guise of “climate change impacts” was an abuse of the Endangered Species Act. This would have irreversibly hurt both Alaska’s economy and the nation’s, while also reducing opportunities for responsible development.
Our representatives in Copenhagen should remember that good environmental policymaking is about weighing real-world costs and benefits -- not pursuing a political agenda. That’s not to say I deny the reality of some changes in climate -- far from it. I saw the impact of changing weather patterns firsthand while serving as governor of our only Arctic state. I was one of the first governors to create a subcabinet to deal specifically with the issue and to recommend common-sense policies to respond to the coastal erosion, thawing permafrost and retreating sea ice that affect Alaska’s communities and infrastructure.
But while we recognize the occurrence of these natural, cyclical environmental trends, we can’t say with assurance that man’s activities cause weather changes. We can say, however, that any potential benefits of proposed emissions reduction policies are far outweighed by their economic costs. And those costs are real. Unlike the proposals China and India offered prior to Copenhagen -- which actually allow them to increase their emissions -- President Obama’s proposal calls for serious cuts in our own long-term carbon emissions. Meeting such targets would require Congress to pass its cap-and-tax plans, which will result in job losses and higher energy costs (as Obama admitted during the campaign). That’s not exactly what most Americans are hoping for these days. And as public opposition continues to stall Congress’s cap-and-tax legislation, Environmental Protection Agency bureaucrats plan to regulate carbon emissions themselves, doing an end run around the American people.
In fact, we’re not the only nation whose people are questioning climate change schemes. In the European Union, energy prices skyrocketed after it began a cap-and-tax program. Meanwhile, Australia’s Parliament recently defeated a cap-and-tax bill. Surely other nations will follow suit, particularly as the climate e-mail scandal continues to unfold.
In his inaugural address, President Obama declared his intention to “restore science to its rightful place.” But instead of staying home from Copenhagen and sending a message that the United States will not be a party to fraudulent scientific practices, the president has upped the ante. He plans to fly in at the climax of the conference in hopes of sealing a “deal.” Whatever deal he gets, it will be no deal for the American people. What Obama really hopes to bring home from Copenhagen is more pressure to pass the Democrats’ cap-and-tax proposal. This is a political move. The last thing America needs is misguided legislation that will raise taxes and cost jobs -- particularly when the push for such legislation rests on agenda-driven science.
Without trustworthy science and with so much at stake, Americans should be wary about what comes out of this politicized conference. The president should boycott Copenhagen.
_______________________________________________________________________
Steven Hayward has a great article in The Weekly Standard on the Climategate scandal. Be sure to check it out.
The response to my op-ed by global warming alarmists has been interesting. Former Vice President Al Gore has called me a “denier” and informs us that climate change is “a principle in physics. It’s like gravity. It exists.”
Perhaps he’s right. Climate change is like gravity – a naturally occurring phenomenon that existed long before, and will exist long after, any governmental attempts to affect it.
However, he’s wrong in calling me a “denier.” As I noted in my op-ed above and in my original Facebook post on Climategate, I have never denied the existence of climate change. I just don’t think we can primarily blame man’s activities for the earth’s cyclical weather changes.
Former Vice President Gore also claimed today that the scientific community has worked on this issue for 20 years, and therefore it is settled science. Well, the Climategate scandal involves the leading experts in this field, and if Climategate is proof of the larger method used over the past 20 years, then Vice President Gore seriously needs to consider that their findings are flawed, falsified, or inconclusive.
Vice President Gore, the Climategate scandal exists. You might even say that it’s sort of like gravity: you simply can’t deny it.
- Sarah Palin
Copenhagen’s political science
Abonneren op:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
