Quantcast
Channel: Cognate Socialist Dystopia
Viewing all 585 articles
Browse latest View live

Letters 20/12 Hopes for free speech...

$
0
0

Hopes for free speech have been restored

YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

Hi Geoff Discover news with your friends. Give it a try.
To get going, simply connect with your favourite social network:
Facebook
IT is such a breath of fresh air to see Tim Wilson appointed to the Human Rights Commission.
The lefties must be outraged and will be pouring out their vitriol in social media. But for the ordinary Australian it is a victory for real human rights.
I came to Australia 27 years ago, not only for better economic prospects for my children but also for their freedom of speech and basic human rights. It has been a paradise compared with countries such as Pakistan.
But in recent times, with the Labor government and the Greens, I had become disillusioned about where our beautiful country was heading. Now my hope and dream is restored and I pray that our country will have absolute freedom of speech as our banner to the rest of the world.
Nalini Gayer, Westmead, NSW
AS the only non-minority group recipient of a favourable racial discrimination tribunal decision in the history of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, in the case Bell versus ATSIC, I welcome the appointment of Tim Wilson.
In 1990-95, I experienced the operational philosophy of this organisation in a case that could have been resolved in a week with a handshake apology for racially vilifying remarks in the workplace.
I hope Wilson's appointment will help provide a balance in the commission that was reflected in my case.
John Bell, Heidelberg Heights, Vic
WHILE I agree with Merv Bendle when he extends his best wishes to Tim Wilson on his appointment to that renegade agency, the Human Rights Commission, a more fundamental issue arises (Letters, 19/12).
That is, does a nation with a strong and enviable common law tradition need such quasi-judicial bodies? If we can't trust independent courts with well-honed rules of procedure and evidence together with democratically elected parliaments to protect our freedoms, not least free speech, then no committee of "experts" will save us from catastrophe. Governments, since such bodies exist at state as well as federal level (with a particularly expensive and farcical ACT model), could do worse than to scrap these and any similar busybody bureaucracies. Cost cutting has to begin somewhere.
John Kidd, Auchenflower, Qld
THE appointment of Tim Wilson, star of the Institute of Public Affairs, to the Human Rights Commission, a body he wants abolished, has predictably displeased some and pleased others. It would be fair to describe these groups broadly as the Left and the Right, or more neutrally as Wilson's critics and backers respectively.
However, Christian Kerr ("Wilson's backers speak out against Left's human-rights hypocrisy", 19/12) hedges his bets, pitting Wilson's backers, who prefer some rights over others because they love freedom, against the Left, who prefer some rights over others because they are hypocritical.
This is expanded in your editorial ("The Left goes missing in defence of free speech", 19/12), even linking hypocrisy with the wearing of beards.
If you are on the opposite side of a debate from the Left, chances are you are of the Right. If you are uncomfortable with that label, it is advisable not to apply its opposite to your opponents. If not, wear it with the same pride with which your enemies supposedly wear their facial hair.
John O'Hagan, Preston, Vic
THE Human Rights Commission supposedly monitors compliance by Australia with its international obligations. Australia does not have to comply with so-called international obligations touted by the UN. Australia should reassert its commitment to free speech.
Anyone with an understanding of the historical struggle for democracy knows that free speech trumps everything. Tim Wilson knows this.
John Chambers, Brisbane, Qld

Last Post, December 20

YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

Hi Geoff Discover news with your friends. Give it a try.
To get going, simply connect with your favourite social network:
Facebook
The Tim Wilson appointment to the Human Rights Commission is the best entertainment as we watch the Left tie itself in knots while at the same time tripping over their own human rights and free speech contradictions.
Jim Ball, Narrabeen, NSW
Shock, horror -- Tim Wilson to join the Human Rights Commission. What is the Greens-Labor axis afraid of? Could it be some semblance of a balanced debate?
Sukhbir S. Patheja, Benowa Waters, Qld
I support the liberty of people to use their right to free speech to attack the appointment of a free speech libertarian to the Human Rights Commission and to attack the government's emphasis on free speech because that is exactly what must be expected when a country such as Australia has free speech.
Rod Cruice, Dayboro, Qld
Australia is a land of freedom. How can anyone believe we should not have free speech? The "progressive" class can be seen for what it is -- a regressive class that would rather see us erode a right that has shaped our country.
Cathy Greatrex, Claremont, WA
The time has come for Tony Abbott to make Peter Costello an offer he can't refuse. He is sorely needed to run the economy and get Australia out of the mess Labor has created.
Michael Stanbridge, Bonnet Bay, NSW
Stephen Conroy was one of the most belligerent and least likeable ministers in the former government ("Not right then . . . or now", 19/12). It appears he was not always truthful about the NBN and typified the incompetence of the Gillard-Rudd governments.


Rhiannon's motives great letter 20/12

$
0
0

Rhiannon's motives

YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

Hi Geoff Discover news with your friends. Give it a try.
To get going, simply connect with your favourite social network:
Facebook
GREENS senator Lee Rhiannon is correct when she states that one can criticise Israel without being anti-Semitic (Letters, 19/12).
It is, however, hardly surprising that when she regularly criticises Israel in an extreme and unbalanced fashion and never gives Israel the benefit of any doubt that some people might misunderstand her motives.
Rhiannon and other extremists in the Greens have frequently indulged in intemperate and ill-informed attacks on Israel. The NSW Greens conference in 2011 passed a proposal to "boycott Israeli goods, trading and military arrangements, and sporting, cultural and economic events as a contribution to the struggle to end Israel's occupation and colonisation of Palestinian territory, the siege of Gaza and the imprisonment of 1.5 million people and Israel's institution of a system of apartheid".
This radical anti-Israel policy is at odds with the policies of both main parties in Australia and the majority of the Australians. It is also at odds with the federal Greens, which voted against a similarly worded proposal.
The NSW Greens policy is so one-sided and extreme that it could have been written by Hamas. Given that Hamas is recognised and listed by most democratic governments as a terrorist organisation, one can hardly be surprised that this position of the NSW Greens would cause concern.
Bill Anderson, Surrey Hills, Vic 

Wilson laughs off his Twitter-zone critics

$
0
0

Wilson laughs off his Twitter-zone critics

YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

Hi Geoff Discover news with your friends. Give it a try.
To get going, simply connect with your favourite social network:
Facebook
Wilson laughs off his Twitter critics
Laughing off criticism: Tim Wilson Source: Supplied
TIM Wilson has laughed off the torrent of social media criticism directed at him following his appointment as Australia's new Human Rights Commissioner, saying he is ``ecstatic'' to have helped trigger a new debate about the subject.
Mr Wilson told The Australian his appointment would take effect in February and that he would prepare by re-reading John Stuart Mill's On Liberty, The Hedgehog and the Fox by Isaiah Berlin and The Soul of Man Under Socialism by Oscar Wilde.
Critics of Mr Wilson have flocked to social media to attack his appointment, including former Fairfax columnist Catherine Deveny who tweeted that Mr Wilson would restore balance because there were ``not enough c-nts''.
Current Fairfax columnist Mike Carlton sought to ridicule the appointment by questioning whether Mr Wilson would be promoted to a three star general. Mr Carlton followed the comment by writing ``LMFAO'' - commonly used as an abbreviation for ``laughing my f-cking arse off.''
When asked what his reaction was to some of the more vituperative tweets posted about his appointment, Mr Wilson replied by saying: ``All I do is laugh at them''.
``Honestly, I'm just laughing, amazed at the number of people who suddenly have a view about me. I consider myself to be a basic, normal person,'' Mr Wilson said.
``Some of them are hilarious. I'm just confused as to why they're their spending their time doing these things.''
Mr Wilson said he would take his new role seriously and believed that it was a time of ``opportunity and growth'' for the Australian Human Rights Commission. He suggested it would be able to ``refocus its work''.
``I'm obviously going to making a contribution to how I think it should be re-focussed,'' he said.
Former human rights commissioner Sev Ozdowski has lashed out at Mr Wilson's critics, accusing them of double standards.
Prominent Australian left wing academic, Robert Manne -who specifically requested that his quotes be run in full or not at all - expressed doubt yesterday about Mr Wilson's past comments.
``As Tim Wilson appears to believe that Edward Snowden ought to be imprisoned as a traitor for exposing to the world the extraordinary threat to our freedoms posed by the activities of the US National Security Agency, and as I believe he advocated turning water cannon onto Occupy Melbourne protesters as an instance of his support for the principle of freedom of assembly, and as he certainly believes that the tepid Labor Government media reform proposals form a greater threat to freedom and democracy than News Corp's ownership of two-thirds of the Australian metropolitan press, his choice as our Freedom Commissioner seems to me rather odd,'' he said.

How to win war with bikie gangs

$
0
0

How to win war with bikie gangs

YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

Hi Geoff Discover news with your friends. Give it a try.
To get going, simply connect with your favourite social network:
Facebook
GARY Johns's own lack of intelligence regarding the threat posed by criminal motorcycle gangs (The Australian, December 17) borders on the astonishing. Their propensity for violence, intimidation and illegality are well-documented around the world.
The Crime and Misconduct Commission, Queensland's top crime-fighting body, has described criminal motorcycle gangs as "high-threat criminal networks" that have increased their involvement in organised crime.
It also says: "Changes in their internal culture have resulted in them exhibiting an increased propensity to engage in, firstly, illegal drug activity in Queensland and interstate and in the use of violence, particularly firearms related violence."
The Australian Crime Commission says these gangs are heavily involved in illicit drug markets, vehicle rebirthing, firearms trafficking, serious frauds, money laundering, extortion, prostitution, property crime and bribing and corrupting officials.
The ACC also says: "They often form alliances with street gangs, possibly in part as a recruitment tool to undertake the higher-risk aspects of their criminal activities, while remaining insulated from prosecution."
Then there is the very human proof, the casualties of the gangs' actions, people such as Kathy Devitt. She was shot in the leg, in the middle of the day, while shopping on the Gold Coast. She was allegedly collateral damage, caught in the cross-fire of escalating conflict between rival bikie gangs. Try telling her gangs are not a problem.
When the Newman government came to office, after effectively 20 years of Johns's Labor Party, we inherited a state in which criminal motorcycle gangs were thriving. Legislation implemented by the former government simply failed. More than four years since its Criminal Organisations Act 2009 was passed, not a single group has been captured by it.
We implemented a range of new measures to tackle the bikies almost immediately, including increased penalties for firearms offences and the toughest unexplained wealth laws in the country. Despite this, the gangs continued to think they lived outside of the law and what was acceptable in society.
They passed the point of no return when scores of Bandidos rioted in front of diners on the Gold Coast, then surrounded a watch house when their fellow bikies were arrested.
The Newman government has taken the strong, necessary action that Queenslanders demanded and deserve. We have brought in, with Labor Party support, a range of reforms that are hitting criminal gangs head on and from within. We deliberately and unapologetically made the legislation and penalties severe to send a message to the bikie gangs that their time in Queensland was over.
In just 2 1/2 months, more than 430 criminal motorcycle gang members and associates have been arrested in Queensland on more than 900 charges, including extortion, drugs, affray (rioting) and firearms offences. There are also reports that members are handing in their colours and abandoning their club houses.
Initial crime statistics also suggest a possible ripple effect. Assaults, robberies and break and enters are down by as much as 60 per cent in parts of the state.
Gang-related intelligence is also growing. In the past, a twisted code of silence among members and even rival groups made it difficult to prosecute them. Many bikie gang crimes also went unreported because of intimidation and threats of retribution against complainants.
The Crime and Misconduct Commission and the police now have more resources and powers, including the ability to perform intelligence-gathering hearings, and they're using them.
The weight of fear is also lifting from the community with Crime Stoppers receiving about 600 gang-related reports since the beginning of October, a 700 per cent increase.
Even our political rivals have acknowledged our efforts. South Australia's Labor attorney-general turned Speaker Michael Atkinson has been quoted as saying Queensland has found the "magic formula" in the fight against criminal motorcycle gangs. Former prime minister Julia Gillard even called for a response to organised crime earlier this year.
Many gang members, unsurprisingly, are doing whatever they can to get around our new laws. They are reportedly launching a legal challenge and their PR machine is in top gear, doling out misinformation and fear to legitimate, law-abiding motorcycle riders and groups.
Make no mistake, there is a reason these groups are called criminal motorcycle gangs. They even proudly call themselves outlaws. Violence, fear and illegality are their currency and purpose.
Criminal motorcycle gangs are not the only illegal groups that will be captured by the new laws. Other organised crime gangs and pedophile rings also will be targeted.
The laws' framework consists of a range of safeguards, including the requirement of a jury to determine if an offender is a vicious lawless associate, which ensures law-abiding people have nothing to fear.
We made a commitment to the people of Queensland during the election that we would make our state the safest place to raise a family.
We are keeping that promise by giving the authorities and the judiciary the power to rid what is a real and serious criminal scourge from our state.
Jarrod Bleijie is the Queensland Attorney-General and Minister for Justice.

YESTERDAY'S CUT AND PASTE RE University boycott..19/12

$
0
0

University boycott drive sure looks 'anti-Semitic in effect, if not necessarily in intent'

YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

Hi Geoff Discover news with your friends. Give it a try.
To get going, simply connect with your favourite social network:
Facebook
The New York Times, December 15:A GROWING campaign among American professors to isolate Israel reached a milestone when a large group of scholars is expected to reveal whether its members endorsed an academic boycott of Israel to protest Israeli treatment of Palestinians.
The American Studies Association has never before called for an academic boycott of any nation's universities, said Curtis Marez, the group's president and an associate professor of ethnic studies at the University of California, San Diego. He did not dispute that many nations, including many of Israel's neighbours, are generally judged to have human rights records that are worse than Israel's, or comparable, but he said, "one has to start somewhere".
Former president of Harvard University, Larry Summers, on US public broadcaster PBS, December 15:
THIS particular academic boycott is much worse, it is much worse because the idea that of all the countries in the world that might be thought to have human rights abuses, that might be thought to have inappropriate foreign policies, that might be thought to be doing things wrong, the idea that there's only one that is worthy of boycott, and that is Israel, one of the very few countries whose neighbours regularly vow its annihilation, that that would be the one chosen, is I think beyond outrageous as a suggestion. I said some time ago with respect to a similar set of efforts that I regarded them as being anti-Semitic in their effect, if not necessarily in their intent. And I think that's the right thing to say about singling out Israel.
Doing wrong can never be acceptable. Summers:
IF there was an academic boycott against a whole set of countries that stunted their populations in some way, I would oppose that because I think academic boycotts are abhorrent, but the choice of only Israel at a moment when Israel faces this kind of existential threat I think takes how wrong this is to a different level.
Damned statistics, Ross Gittins, The Sydney Morning Herald, yesterday:
YOU have heard of painting by numbers, but these days the great fad is management by numbers. I call it the metrification of business -- although it's just as prevalent in the public service. If you know what the initials KPI stand for you'll know what I'm talking about. When the push for micro-economic reform was at its height, someone got the bright idea that if you calculated and made public the equivalent of key performance indicators for all the many responsibilities of the state governments, you'd encourage them to compete amongst themselves to improve their standing in the league tables . . . I've been around long enough to know measurement can be a trap.
Gittins, on the launch of The Sydney Morning Herald Wellbeing index, December 6, 2011.
OUR purpose is not to supplant GDP but to fill the vacuum left by the absence of a timely, more comprehensive, single indicator of social progress. The problem is we have fallen into the habit of regarding GDP as something much more: the nation's bottom line, a measure of the progress our society is making, the supreme indicator of our wellbeing . . . GDP was never intended to fill that role and, as every economist will concede, it is quite inadequate to the task . . . Among the many limitations of GDP is that it fails to take adequate account of the natural environment . . . GDP takes no account of the way the quality of our health contributes to Australians' wellbeing.
Twittering on. Bernard Keane, 29706 followers, December 16:
DEAR The Oz, thanks for republishing my tweets but I reach more people on Twitter than your freefalling readership cheers BK.
The Australian, November 16:
THE latest monthly EMMA (Enhanced Media Metrics Australia) data release, covering the 12 months to October, showed stable newspaper print and digital audiences for most titles compared with the September period. News's national title The Australian (totalled) 3.2 million.

PVO: Brandis and Dreyfus take hypocrisy to a new level 21/12

$
0
0

Brandis and Dreyfus take hypocrisy to a new level

YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

Hi Geoff Discover news with your friends. Give it a try.
To get going, simply connect with your favourite social network:
Facebook
Lobbecke
Illustration: Eric Lobbecke Source: TheAustralian
ALL you can do is laugh at the hypocritical actions of the first law officer, Attorney-General George Brandis QC, and his opposition counterpart, Mark Dreyfus QC, himself attorney-general in the previous Labor government, when it comes to appointments and the pair's commentary on those appointments.
The two men are no strangers to hypocrisy, having used inflated rhetoric to condemn others for entitlements abuses before themselves being caught out for not dissimilar failings. But the pair's commentary about two recent appointments to the Australian Human Rights Commission reads as if it were torn from the pages of a Yes Minister script.
Last July, Dreyfus appointed 31-year-old Tim Soutphommasane to the AHRC. Brandis slammed the appointment, describing Soutphommasane as an "overt partisan of the Labor Party", adding that "appointees must be people who can command the confidence of the entire community that they will discharge their responsibilities in the human rights field in a non-partisan manner".
Soutphommasane was a member of the Labor Party and an active voice for the Left, appearing regularly on the political talk-show circuit. He was also a fellow at the left-leaning think tank Per Capita. Dreyfus rejected the Brandis attack, arguing Soutphommasane was well qualified for the role. I'll come to that misnomer in a moment. It is worth noting that Soutphommasane was an entry-level academic (albeit a very good one) when he was appointed to a role previously held by judges and former federal ministers.
This week Brandis made his first AHRC appointment, selecting 33-year-old Tim Wilson, a director at the right-wing (it sees itself as "free market") think tank the Institute of Public Affairs.
All of a sudden Brandis no longer thought it important that appointees "discharge their responsibilities in the human rights field in a non-partisan manner", as he had previously said. Equally, having condemned Dreyfus for making the Soutphommasane appointment late in Labor's term without consulting the opposition before doing so, Brandis announced Wilson's appointment to the AHRC before the Governor-General had even formally signed off on it. Brandis's high bar for due process was suddenly forgotten.
What was Dreyfus's reaction to the Wilson appointment? He said it was "dubious to say the least", attacking Wilson's partisanship (until the appointment Wilson was a member of the Liberal Party). How can Brandis and Dreyfus expect people to take them seriously? By all means condemn a partisan appointment by your political opponents, but don't then make one yourself. By all means make partisan appointments, but for God's sake shut up when your opponents go on to do likewise.
The sad thing about Dreyfus and Brandis is that they are supposed to be the adults in any room: former senior members of the bar and now senior frontbenchers within their parliamentary parties. Prior to Brandis and Dreyfus demeaning themselves, I would have argued that the biggest complaint anyone should have with the Wilson and Soutphommasane appointments is that with a base salary of more than $320,000 a year, surely candidates should have CVs to match the likes of a Brandis or Dreyfus to even be considered for positions on the AHRC.
In truth, the reason appointees to the commission no longer live up to the pedigree of past commissioners is because the AHRC has been exposed as nothing more than a lobbying arm of the public service, and an expensive one at that. The Fraser government set up the AHRC as an almost quasi-judicial body that would have the power to enforce rulings on issues within its ambit. But a 1995 High Court judgment stripped the commission of the power to make and enforce decisions, turning it into a toothless tiger. Hence the AHRC no longer conducts hearings.
The limited role of the AHRC today is what brings into question the $25 million it costs each year to run. It isn't just the salaries of the commissioners that are expensive and no longer justifiable. The entire apparatus takes rent-seeking to a new level. You have to love the irony that in the same week that Treasurer Joe Hockey talked about the need to reduce the size of government when releasing his mid-year economic and fiscal outlook, the Attorney-General makes a new appointment to a body he had previously (privately) canvassed abolishing.
It is hard to justify the salaries of commissioners being tied to those of judges, now the role of the AHRC has been downgraded. The calibre of appointments isn't what it once was. There are exceptions: Sex Discrimination Commissioner Elizabeth Broderick, a former law partner, is one. Another is Gillian Triggs, a former dean of law at the University of Sydney. But for the most part finding senior practitioners to fill AHRC roles is increasingly hard to do now the functions of the commission centre around a glorified form of lobbying and public advocacy. And with this shift the likes of Soutphommasane and Wilson become ideally suited to becoming commissioners: able to hit the airwaves to mount arguments in the policy areas they have been assigned.
The question for taxpayers is: why are we now paying for them to do pretty much what they already had been doing, at a cheaper price, when they were paid by their ideologically driven organisations? A new conservative government was always likely to counterbalance years of left-wing appointments to the AHRC with right-wing appointments of its own. A strong conservative government, however, would simply have abolished the commission and saved the money.
There is nothing the AHRC does that can't be done by advocacy groups within academia, the non-government sector or even government departments. Equally, the toothless reports the AHRC produces could just as easily be done by the Ombudsman, only with much greater powers to investigate before publishing findings.
If the AHRC has to exist at all, Wilson's appointment at least starts the process of balancing up the organisation. Were it a truly quasi-judicial body such ideological thinking wouldn't much matter, but as a body for public advocacy it certainly does.
Peter van Onselen is a professor at the University of Western Australia.

letters 21/12 Human rights not a matter of competing philosophies

$
0
0

Human rights not a matter of competing philosophies

YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

Hi Geoff Discover news with your friends. Give it a try.
To get going, simply connect with your favourite social network:
Facebook
MY congratulations to Tim Wilson on his appointment as Human Rights Commissioner. All Australians have a stake in what he does or doesn't do in this position.
He's on the record saying that "in the second half of the 20th century the rise of international human rights law has perverted and distorted our understanding of where our rights come from".
The basis of all international human rights law is the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the human rights conventions developed in the past six decades to protect women, children, minorities and other vulnerable groups. These have been ratified by Australian governments after careful examination.
He refers to positive rights and negative rights and reasserting the necessity of traditional human rights. But human rights are universal.
Freedom of expression is important and when there has been a challenge to this right, the commission has taken a strong stand.
However, the commission also bears a responsibility to ensure that the rights of the most vulnerable and disadvantaged in our society are protected -- the homeless, mentally ill, asylum-seekers and refugees among others.
This is not a matter of competing philosophies. These groups deserve Wilson's continued advocacy.
I wish him every success in working with his colleagues to effectively discharge his responsibilities.
Brian Burdekin, human rights commissioner, 1986-94, Melbourne, Vic
THE Labor Party is a strange organisation in that it is always prepared to go for the populist point of view. Labor's protestations about Tim Wilson's appointment as Human Rights Commissioner is hypocrisy of the first
degree. It's as if individuals aligned to the Labor Party have never been appointed to this body.
Has it ever dawned on the opposition that if Nicola Roxon's legislation to clamp down on freedom of speech had been passed, much of Labor's attack on the Abbott government and its appointments might be in breach of that legislation?
Attorney-General George Brandis is on the right track to nail Labor and the Greens for their hypocrisy in an area of life they have always claimed as their own. Where are the true believers hiding?
Peter D. Surkitt, Hampton, Vic
IT is good to see Tim Wilson laughing ("Wilson laughs off his Twitter-zone critics", 20/12). The very piece of legislation that Wilson disagrees with -- an offence to offend someone -- is now seeing those critical of his appointment biting themselves on the bum. That is why he is laughing.
How dare they offend with their vitriol? For too long we've seen this country being turned into a society with diminishing resilience and with
a delusional belief that political correctness would make us better.
We now pin labels on those we disagree with, thereby seeing emotional blackmail as a conversational strength rather than using our ability to unpack the issues and debate the realities.
Of course, seeing people unfairly labelled as a way of silencing those who see things differently is too easy. Wilson will seek to have people debate the issues, rather than complain about being offended. That will build knowledge and resilience, two vital ingredients for a better Australia.
Tim Dwyer, Moffat Beach, Qld
IN Joe Kelly's story, he reports that left-wing academic Robert Manne insisted his statement about past comments by Tim Wilson, our new Human Rights Commissioner, be published in full. Manne's comment consisted of a single sentence of 107 words filling 20 lines.
It brought to mind Samuel Johnson's rejoinder to a critic: "Sir, it is the height of rudeness to quote a man against himself."
Bob Lawrence, Dover Gardens, SA

#######

Last Post, December 21


If Van Badham ceased her vacuous tweeting (Cut & Paste, 20/12) and did some reading, she would find out that the Nazis were the National Socialist German Workers Party -- more akin to her politics than Tim Wilson's.
Iain Rae, River Heads, Qld
After the workout Cut & Paste gave The Guardian's Van Badham, I expect she's already cancelled her subscription to The Australian.
John McHarg, Baldivis, WA
Is Robert Manne a gale-force windbag or do I need to let a reef out of my mainsail ("Wilson laughs off Twitter-zone critics", 20/12)?
Chris Topovsek, Noosaville, Qld
Most of those upset over repealing section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act also condemned Dutch MP Geert Wilders for visiting Australia and speaking his mind. These people have no interest in protecting free speech.
Fabio Scalia, Windsor, Vic
Without free speech, we wouldn't know how loopy some of us are.
Paul Haege, Darling Point, NSW
How on earth did a Collins-class submarine make it all the way to Singapore ("Female submariner sent home after 'groping' woman colleague", 20/12)?


Emmerson: After panning Labor excess, Coalition launches $14bn spree

$
0
0

After panning Labor excess, Coalition launches $14bn spree

YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

Hi Geoff Discover news with your friends. Give it a try.
To get going, simply connect with your favourite social network:
Facebook
MOST market analysts have concluded the Abbott government is deliberately pessimistic in its economic forecasts underlying the mid-year fiscal and economic outlook. Then, when the economy does better than forecast, the budget deficit will be better than expected and the government will claim the credit. But what if the economy does worse?
That's the distinct possibility considered by Ross Garnaut in his book Dog Days: After the Boom. Garnaut explained his thinking further in an Emmo Forum podcast with me, where he suggested that if the government did not make large savings through taxation and spending measures and the exchange rate remained overvalued, government debt would rise to about $700 million. The budget update forecasts gross debt of $667m, so Garnaut was on the money.
The budget is in trouble. The government and the opposition have a responsibility to repair it. Blaming the previous government for the budget deficits is a political strategy, not an economic one.
But here's the political problem blocking an economic solution: the Prime Minister must break promises if the budget is to be repaired. Only that way, Garnaut reasoned, might Australia be able to navigate a course through the end of the mining boom without recession.
When the Coalition declared a budget emergency in May, it pledged to set out its solution before the election. Its belated response just two days before the election left the budget bottom line virtually unchanged. Moreover, Tony Abbott repeatedly promised there would be no surprises and no excuses from his government. Yet the mid-year budget update is full of surprises and excuses.
It's all Labor's fault, Joe Hockey thundered at the National Press Club. Having argued that the Labor government didn't have a revenue problem, only a spending problem, the Treasurer announced further revenue downgrades that are responsible for more than 60 per cent of the deterioration in the budget position.
In response to this worsening outlook, the government will exacerbate the problem with $13.7 billion in new spending and revenue decisions made in just 100 days since the election. It also will proceed with repealing the mining tax, scrapping the reduced superannuation tax concessions for the wealthiest Australians and implementing an extravagant paid parental leave scheme. And the government will implement the promise that will do the most damage to the budget: scrapping the carbon price as a revenue source and substituting for it wasteful spending on its direct action policy. To achieve the promised 5 per cent reduction in carbon emissions by 2020, direct action will be horrendously expensive in the final three years to 2020.
The question is not if promises will be broken but which ones will be. This is where a government's ideology comes into play. By decisions such as the enhanced paid parental leave, rescinding the mining tax and restoring full superannuation tax concessions for the wealthy while reimposing a 15 per cent tax on the superannuation of the lowest income earners, the government is signalling it wants to support the high end while hitting those at the bottom.
When the Labor government pared back middle-class welfare the Coalition sought to block the savings. Hockey likened Labor's cuts to the Howard government's baby bonus for second and subsequent children to China's one-child policy. Abbott opposed reductions in family payments for high-income earners and the means testing of the private health insurance rebate, describing these payments as "tax justice".
Back in the mid-1980s, when commodity prices collapsed and Paul Keating warned of Australia becoming a banana republic, the Hawke government implemented the second largest spending cuts on record. But it knew the burden needed to be fairly shared, assuring the Australian people of "restraint with equity". The public reaction to the savings in the May 1987 economic statement was so favourable that Bob Hawke called an election for July and won with an increased majority.
Australia faces similar circumstances now, when the world is not paying us as much as it has been. Again we need to tighten our belts. But it must be done fairly. And the opposition needs to play its part instead of blocking the passage of its own 2013-14 budget measures.
At the same time the government cannot expect low-income earners to bear the brunt of the cuts while proceeding with an unaffordable paid parental leave scheme for high-income earners.
It would be to the shared credit of the Coalition and Labor to work together on budget repair.
If we are to avoid the dog days of recession that Garnaut fears, we must exercise restraint with equity.
If the Hawke government implemented the second largest spending cuts on record, which government made the biggest cuts? It was the Gillard government in the financial year just gone. So let's move beyond the blame game and show some rare but badly needed co-operation and fix the budget - fairly.

Craig Emerson is a former cabinet minister and was an economic adviser to prime minister Bob Hawke. He now runs his own economic consultancy,Craigemersoneconomics.com.

PVO IS A FOOL: Brandis and Dreyfus take hypocrisy to a new level

$
0
0

Brandis and Dreyfus take hypocrisy to a new level

YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

Hi Geoff Discover news with your friends. Give it a try.
To get going, simply connect with your favourite social network:
Facebook
Lobbecke
Illustration: Eric Lobbecke Source: TheAustralian
ALL you can do is laugh at the hypocritical actions of the first law officer, Attorney-General George Brandis QC, and his opposition counterpart, Mark Dreyfus QC, himself attorney-general in the previous Labor government, when it comes to appointments and the pair's commentary on those appointments.
The two men are no strangers to hypocrisy, having used inflated rhetoric to condemn others for entitlements abuses before themselves being caught out for not dissimilar failings. But the pair's commentary about two recent appointments to the Australian Human Rights Commission reads as if it were torn from the pages of a Yes Minister script.
Last July, Dreyfus appointed 31-year-old Tim Soutphommasane to the AHRC. Brandis slammed the appointment, describing Soutphommasane as an "overt partisan of the Labor Party", adding that "appointees must be people who can command the confidence of the entire community that they will discharge their responsibilities in the human rights field in a non-partisan manner".
Soutphommasane was a member of the Labor Party and an active voice for the Left, appearing regularly on the political talk-show circuit. He was also a fellow at the left-leaning think tank Per Capita. Dreyfus rejected the Brandis attack, arguing Soutphommasane was well qualified for the role. I'll come to that misnomer in a moment. It is worth noting that Soutphommasane was an entry-level academic (albeit a very good one) when he was appointed to a role previously held by judges and former federal ministers.
This week Brandis made his first AHRC appointment, selecting 33-year-old Tim Wilson, a director at the right-wing (it sees itself as "free market") think tank the Institute of Public Affairs.
All of a sudden Brandis no longer thought it important that appointees "discharge their responsibilities in the human rights field in a non-partisan manner", as he had previously said. Equally, having condemned Dreyfus for making the Soutphommasane appointment late in Labor's term without consulting the opposition before doing so, Brandis announced Wilson's appointment to the AHRC before the Governor-General had even formally signed off on it. Brandis's high bar for due process was suddenly forgotten.
What was Dreyfus's reaction to the Wilson appointment? He said it was "dubious to say the least", attacking Wilson's partisanship (until the appointment Wilson was a member of the Liberal Party). How can Brandis and Dreyfus expect people to take them seriously? By all means condemn a partisan appointment by your political opponents, but don't then make one yourself. By all means make partisan appointments, but for God's sake shut up when your opponents go on to do likewise.
The sad thing about Dreyfus and Brandis is that they are supposed to be the adults in any room: former senior members of the bar and now senior frontbenchers within their parliamentary parties. Prior to Brandis and Dreyfus demeaning themselves, I would have argued that the biggest complaint anyone should have with the Wilson and Soutphommasane appointments is that with a base salary of more than $320,000 a year, surely candidates should have CVs to match the likes of a Brandis or Dreyfus to even be considered for positions on the AHRC.
In truth, the reason appointees to the commission no longer live up to the pedigree of past commissioners is because the AHRC has been exposed as nothing more than a lobbying arm of the public service, and an expensive one at that. The Fraser government set up the AHRC as an almost quasi-judicial body that would have the power to enforce rulings on issues within its ambit. But a 1995 High Court judgment stripped the commission of the power to make and enforce decisions, turning it into a toothless tiger. Hence the AHRC no longer conducts hearings.
The limited role of the AHRC today is what brings into question the $25 million it costs each year to run. It isn't just the salaries of the commissioners that are expensive and no longer justifiable. The entire apparatus takes rent-seeking to a new level. You have to love the irony that in the same week that Treasurer Joe Hockey talked about the need to reduce the size of government when releasing his mid-year economic and fiscal outlook, the Attorney-General makes a new appointment to a body he had previously (privately) canvassed abolishing.
It is hard to justify the salaries of commissioners being tied to those of judges, now the role of the AHRC has been downgraded. The calibre of appointments isn't what it once was. There are exceptions: Sex Discrimination Commissioner Elizabeth Broderick, a former law partner, is one. Another is Gillian Triggs, a former dean of law at the University of Sydney. But for the most part finding senior practitioners to fill AHRC roles is increasingly hard to do now the functions of the commission centre around a glorified form of lobbying and public advocacy. And with this shift the likes of Soutphommasane and Wilson become ideally suited to becoming commissioners: able to hit the airwaves to mount arguments in the policy areas they have been assigned.
The question for taxpayers is: why are we now paying for them to do pretty much what they already had been doing, at a cheaper price, when they were paid by their ideologically driven organisations? A new conservative government was always likely to counterbalance years of left-wing appointments to the AHRC with right-wing appointments of its own. A strong conservative government, however, would simply have abolished the commission and saved the money.
There is nothing the AHRC does that can't be done by advocacy groups within academia, the non-government sector or even government departments. Equally, the toothless reports the AHRC produces could just as easily be done by the Ombudsman, only with much greater powers to investigate before publishing findings.
If the AHRC has to exist at all, Wilson's appointment at least starts the process of balancing up the organisation. Were it a truly quasi-judicial body such ideological thinking wouldn't much matter, but as a body for public advocacy it certainly does.
Peter van Onselen is a professor at the University of Western Australia.

Vested interest ex WIKI

$
0
0
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vested_interest


Vested interest

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Vested interest is a communication theory that seeks to explain how influences impact behaviors. As defined by William Cranovested interest refers to the amount that an attitude object is deemed hedonically relevant by the attitude holder (Crano, 1995). In Crano's idea of vested interest, if the attitude object is subjectively important and the perceived personal consequences are significant, there will be a greater chance the individual's attitude will be expressed behaviorally. For example, a 30 year old individual is told that the legal driving age is being raised from 16 to 17 in his state. While he may not agree with this law, he is not impacted like a 15 year old prospective vehicle operator and is unlikely to be involved in protesting the change. This example illustrates the point that highly vested attitudes concerning issues are related to an individual’s situational point of view.

Key factors[edit]

Involvement[edit]

A key factor to consider with vested interest is the level/type of involvement the individual has with a particular attitude object. This can be broken up into three main components. Value-relevant involvement concerns behaviors which support/reinforce values of the individual. Impression-relevant involvement relates to those behaviors which serve to create or maintain a specific image of the individual. This could, in some ways, be compared to a low-self monitorOutcome-relevant involvement concerns those behaviors which hold direct personal consequences at a premium for the individual and as a result, corresponds most closely to vested interest (Crano, 1995).

Ego involvement[edit]

Ego-involvement’s main foci are an individual’s attitudes psychologically experienced as being a part of “me”. The more highly emotional people are, minor differences in beliefs can be viewed as significantly large, whereas a person with low ego-involvement offers great latitude before acting. It is important to note that highly vested attitudes can be experienced as ego involving, the opposite isn't always true. An individual can be ego involved in a certain attitude that has no hedonic consequence.

Attitude importance[edit]

The factor to consider with vested interest and its application towards attitude-consistent actions is attitude importance. Attitude (or issue) importance concerns not only matters of personal consequence, but also those matters of national/international interest (Crano, 1995). While both of these can fall in line with each other, vested interest and attitude importance are not the same. For example, consider the plight of an African nation that has been ravaged by an influenza epidemic. While an individual may view this situation as objectively important, because of the possibly low level of personal consequence (vested interest), his resultant behaviors may not be indicative of his attitude concerning the situation. In other words, since the issue at hand is of little hedonic relevance to the perceiver, the amount of vested interest is low, and is therefore unlikely to produce attitude-consistent actions.

Components of vested interest[edit]

Vested interest is determined by, and must include, all five of these sub-components: stake, salience, certainty, immediacy, and self-efficacy. It can also be argued that distance (both mentally and physically) could potentially be another component of this theory. Oppositional behavior or NIMBY "Not In My Back Yard" (Thornton and Knox, 2002) will be used as an example of how all components are utilized. A new prison was built in Thompson, Illinois, and sparked various actions in and around the community.

Stake[edit]

Stake refers to the perceived personal consequence of an attitude that is directly related to the intensity of vested interest. In its basic form, the more that is at stake concerning a particular issue, the stronger the attitude will be. Consequently, as attitude strength increases, the consistency of attitude-based actions also increases (Crano, 1995). From the example above, it was well known the prison would create jobs and revenue for the community and a majority of the community supported the decision to house the inmates. Unfortunately, the minority (homeowners by the site) were not happy about the location and most decided they would move if the things pressed on.

Salience[edit]

Salience refers to the perceiver’s awareness of the effects of an attitude upon himself (Crano, 1995). In other words, the prominence of an issue, as perceived by an individual, shapes the strength of his resulting attitude. Again, the issue of salience was split between supporters and non-supporters. The media consistently pushed the new job message and how it would impact a large region of both Illinois and Iowa. Even though most people would not want a prison in their back yard, the positives outweighed the negatives of those living next to it.

Certainty[edit]

Certainty refers to perceived likelihood of personal consequences as a result of an attitude or action (Crano, 1995). Simply stated, if a certain course of action is taken, then the chances of a specific event occurring as a result of this action are evaluated by the perceiver to help shape his resultant attitudes and behaviors. Certainty can be easily applied to situations in which an individual knowingly takes a calculated risk. Although the chance of a prison escape is minimal, particularly in a maximum security prison, it could occur and crimes against those living close by would increase. The supporters were certain this would not happen and while those living close continually argued their case on the potential dangers.

Immediacy[edit]

Immediacy refers to an individual’s perceived amount of time between an action and its resulting consequences (Crano, 1995). Immediacy can be considered an extension of certainty; however, these two entities are completely separate. Opposition to the prison felt the amount of time for the prison to be built and eventual housing of prisoners was not long enough to make a decision and that it was only a matter of time before something negative happened to the local citizens.

Self-efficacy[edit]

Self-efficacy, in vested interest, is the amount that an individual believes that they are capable of performing an action associated with an attitude or advocated position (Crano, 1995). People with high vested interest that was covered by the other four components would need self-efficacy to stand up and protest the location of the new prison. If they believed there was nothing they could do then they would not act on their attitude held and vested interest will not have been attained.

Relevant research[edit]

Drinking age experiment[edit]

Various studies have been conducted to determine the effects of vested interest on attitude strengths. In one such study, Crano and Sivacek (1982) visited a university and gathered the results of a proposed drinking age referendum in the state of Michigan. The referendum sought to increase the legal drinking age from 18 to 21. The respondents were divided into three categories, which were high vested interest (those who would be significantly impacted immediately as a result of the referendum), low vested interest (those who would be unaffected by the law change at the time of its inception), and moderate vested interest (those who fell between these extremes). Although 80% of the subjects were opposed to the referendum, their respective levels of vested interest clearly indicated that the strength of their attitudes significantly impacted their resultant behaviors. Roughly half of the high vested interest group joined the anti-referendum campaign. However, roughly one-quarter of the moderate vested interest group and one-eighth of the low vested interest group joined the campaign. (Sivacek & Crano, 1982)

Comprehensive exam experiment[edit]

In a second study, Sivacek and Crano (1982) visited Michigan State University. In this experiment, subjects were informed that the university was considering the addition of a senior comprehensive examination to the graduate prerequisites. Respondents were given choices to
  1. do nothing,
  2. sign an opposing petition,
  3. join a group that opposed the referendum, and
  4. volunteer specific amounts of hours to the opposing group's activities.
The respondents were grouped into the same three categories (high, moderate, and low vested interest). The study found that those of the highest levels of vested interest were significantly more inclined to take actions based upon their attitudes concerning the issue; that is, their resultant behaviors (signing the petition, joining the group, pledging multiple hours with the group) occurred much more consistently (and prevalently) than that of the other two vested interest groups. (Sivacek & Crano, 1982)

Vested interest and assumed consensus[edit]

Another study conducted by Crano sought to prove that vested interest may impact people's belief that a majority of a population will support their attitude on an issue. This bias is known as false-consensus or assumed-consensus effect. Under the guise of a public opinion survey, Crano (1983) created high and low vested interest groups by identifying whether upper or lower classmen would pay a surcharge to subsidise lost funding from the government. The class who was selected to pay the surcharge had a high degree of vested interest while the student body not required to pay exhibited a lower degree of vested interest. The study then determined the participants estimate of what percentage of the student body would support their beliefs regardless of impact. Crano found that vested interest had an impact on assumed consensus and students believed that a majority of the university's population would support their plight even though only half would be affected. (Crano 1995)

Summary[edit]

Each of these five entities coexist within an individual’s realm of conscious judgment. Any of these entities, if it creates a strong enough attitude, can cause an individual to either adopt or reject an advocated position. All five are considered anytime an individual is presented with a message that attempts to influence or persuade him to adopt a certain position or perform an action. The process of evaluating these entities can range from near instantaneous to several years; at any rate, all five are considered (consciously or subconsciously) before making a decision.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  • Crano, W. D. (1995). Attitude strength and vested interest. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and Consequences. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 131–158.
  • Sivacek, J., & Crano, W. D. (1982). Vested interest as a moderator of attitude behavior consistency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 210-221.
  • Thornton, B., & Knox, D. (2002). "Not In My Back Yard": The Situational and Personality Determinants of Oppositional Behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 2554-2574.

Vested interest: business dictionary

$
0
0
http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/vested-interest.html


vested interest

  
1. Right of ownershippossession, and use of a tangible or intangible property that is immediate (or is certain to come about) and which (unlike a contingent interest) is not dependent on something that may or may not happen. Not to be confused with vested in interest. See also absolute interest.

2. Personal stake, or expectation of personal gain, that underlies a strong commitment to maintain or influence an action.


Use vested interest in a sentence

 or Register to see usage examples.


Read more: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/vested-interest.html#ixzz2oLdLzJpI

vested interest - cambridge bus. dictionary

$
0
0

English definition of “vested interest”

vested interest

    noun [C]
 


 a strong reason for supporting a particular action which will give you a personal or financial advantage:a vested interest in sth Leaks about a possible merger were traced back to the companies with a vested interest in the deal.The majority faction has a vested interest in taking part in the election.


vested interests [plural] disapproving
 people or organizations with a financial or personal advantage in a system, situation, etc., used especially when they refuse to allow changes to it that would cause them to lose this advantage:The bond market and other vested interests fought plans to tighten the tax loopholes.Strong vested interests can keep a counter-productive policy going almost indefinitely.
(Definition of vested interest noun from the Cambridge Business English Dictionary © Cambridge University Press)
Focus on the pronunciation of vested interest

VESTED INTERESTS - My Essay on Wayne Swan's best self - created Cliche.

$
0
0
VESTED INTERESTS

I seek no commentary on the former Australian Labor Party's Wayne Swan beyond pointing out what must be known to keen political students. Wayne abused, misused and in disparate ways abominated so many basic concepts that that he effectively made them cliches. Like his arguable favourite phrase 'Vested interests.' Swan wrecked the VI phrase.

Indeed the former Australian Treasurer was arguably the worst performer in  two governments that are plainly the worst in international / mainstream democratic history. Some kudos: I guess that is why Euro magazine named hin the world's best treaurer!

Herein I try to advise the reader why it is only in Wayne's World that it is credible for a Treasurer to bleat about 'VESTED INTERESTS' in the way he often did.


  • Swan was invariably talking about business - a la their 'Vested interests.
  • Business invariably has interessts - they are of the 'vested' kind: it is the indubitable, logical corollary that they indeed will promote their interests. That is the way of the business world!
  • The way W's mind works - it seems acceptable to denounce business for having business - interests.
  • Only a sociaslist twirp could think like that and not have the nous to realize that he thus discredits himself.
  • Only a socialist party of the above kind could be so inept as to have no one to tell Swan to cease using this moronic moniker.
  • Only a socialist party of the above kind could have Prime Ministers... ditto
  • Only a socialist party of the above kind could have elected Swan to the leading financial position in the first place.
  • Only a socialist party of the above kind could have failed to realize that Swan was daily discrediting them by merely, gainlessly being Wayne Swan.
  • He survived for years! I cannot get my mind around this alone. It possibly is a reasonable way of delienating how hopeless Labor was.
  • And yet they seamlessly continue the same way in opposition. What is so wrong with socialism: is it that they become so ensconsed with the proletariat that their collective and collective brains cease to function?
  • Indeed one has to worry about the electorate as well: around 50% of them are similasry constrained
Then again they were all clueless in all elements including use and abuse of words and concepts.
Eg.
Denier [Climate Change obscenity!]
Misogyny
There are so many examples resident in my blogs and elsewhere!
A didactic analysis will have to wait another day.

Geoff Seidner

Just one great example:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/leftist-jargon-is-village-idiocy/story-e6frg7bo-1226688359012

Leftist jargon is village idiocy

Mark Dreyfuss - Denier of Science

$
0
0
http://theclimatescepticsparty.blogspot.com.au/2011/03/mark-dreyfuss-denier-of-science.html


The Australian Climate Sceptics - Exposing the flaws in the greatest hoax inflicted on the human race

The Australian Climate Sceptics Blog




We are a shoe-string operation. Unfortunately no BigOil funding! Help expose the hoax.

Donations: Westpac BSB 035612, Account No. 239469


All Scientists are Sceptics ~Professor Bob Carter
Perhaps the most frustrating aspect of the science of climate change is the lack of any real substance in attempts to justify the hypothesis ~Professor Stewart Franks
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf

FRIDAY, MARCH 25, 2011


Mark Dreyfuss - Denier of Science

In an interview with 2UE's Jason Morrison (link in title), Climate Change Parliamentary SecretaryMark Dreyfuss made some extremist remarks. He said the rally was attended by extremist groups. His boss Greg Combet (see You're so wrong Greg Combet) had previous said that the rally was by extremists. Mr Combet was invited on to the program but declined and the Parliamentary Secretary attended in his place.

Mr Dreyfuss also made the extraordinary statement that Tony Abbott was standing in front of placards associated with these groups. Well, sir, the one placard that was prominently behind Mr Abbott was created by a child of around 14 years. Surely that child was not a member of an extremist group. If I had anything to do with the rally, I would not have approved that sign or one other, Having said that, there were more than 1000 signs. Two slightly offensive signs. Less than 0.2% and the media and Mr Dreyfuss have to single out those two. Mr Dreyfuss also singled out one other, but more of that in a minute. Also, Mr Abbott should not be held responsible for a sign that appeared out of his sight behind him after he began speaking. What rot!

For Mr Dreyfuss and Mr Combet especially to call this polite well-behaved rally extremist must mean that Mr Combet has forgotten another angry protest in which he was involved. Do you remember when Unionists smashed their way into parliament house and created much damage? That was the day I resigned from my unions. See footage here thanks to 2UE's Mike Smith.

So, I challenge Mr Dreyfuss to substantiate his statement that The Climate Sceptics party is an extremist organisation. Our policies are on-line for the world to see. Centralist - Mr Dreyfuss.  Mr Dreyfuss' ALP has signed a deal with a party that I would call extremist, a party that wants to renounce Australian sovereignty, a party that wants Australia governed by the United Nations. Now, Mr Dreyfuss, I would call an anti-Australian sovereignty party an extremist party, wouldn't you? The Greens anti-Australia stance can be found here.

Jason asked Mr Dreyfuss whether he had problems with the Socialist Alliance. Mr Dreyfuss answered that he did have problems with the Socialist Alliance. His own leader Julia Gillardwas an executive with the Social Alliance until a few short years ago. Mr Dreyfuss said Tony Abbott must disassociate himself from the extremist groups, will he call on the Prime Minister to disassociate herself from the extremist Socialist Alliance?

Mr Dreyfuss said that there were climate change deniers at that rally. Well, Mr Dreyfuss, I did not see anyone who denied that climate changes. As a member of The Climate Sceptics, we all know that climate changes, that climate has always changed.

Mr Dreyfuss said that some-one was holding a sign that said: Carbon dioxide is not pollution – I love CO2 . He added: "That person is clearly denying the "science" of Climate change.

Or, perhaps are you denying the science of Climate change, Mr Dreyfuss. Do you rely on the crumbling edifice of the political body, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Their brief was to blame man-made CO2 emissions for runaway global warming. So far the runaway warming has not happened and the IPCC has admitted to us in correspondence that they have not yet been able to establish the link. (That correspondence can be provided on request.)

Many IPCC scientific reviewers do not agree with the report issued by the IPCC. Even the IPCC's reports for policy makers differ from their own scientific reports. Feet of clay. 

Mr Dreyfuss, just refer to the data from the Vostok Ice Core samples. The temperature rises before the rise in atmospheric CO2. That was the primary reason why Dr David Evans left your department

Here is a video from CANdo. Do you really think that these are all extremists and dinosaurs?

Brandis fends off demands to fund Wilson salary

$
0
0

Brandis fends off demands to fund Wilson salary

YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

Hi Geoff Discover news with your friends. Give it a try.
To get going, simply connect with your favourite social network:
Facebook
A POLITICAL row has erupted over newly appointed Australian Human Rights commissioner Tim Wilson's $320,000-a-year salary.
Attorney-General George Brandis, who appointed Mr Wilson to the HRC to focus on safeguarding freedom of expression, has hit back at opposition calls for the government to find the money to pay his plump salary, declaring staffing costs at the HRC had ballooned by almost 50 per cent under the last three years of Labor.
The HRC's president Gillian Triggs has complained the commission's $25 million budget would be squeezed by Mr Wilson's appointment and the statutory agency would have to look at making cuts to some of its programs, such as an anti-bullying initiative and an education scheme for older Australians.
Labor's legal affairs spokesman Mark Dreyfus yesterday seized on the remarks as evidence of the "ham-fisted process" of Mr Wilson's appointment. "Mr Wilson is already on the record calling for the Human Rights Commission to be abolished -- it looks like he may already get his way, with the commission forced to cut programs to pay for his salary."
Mr Dreyfus challenged Senator Brandis to "come up with the funding to pay for his position" if the Abbott government believed the perspective Mr Wilson would bring to the commission was vital.
"Otherwise, Senator Brandis needs to come clean about the kind of cuts he expects the Human Rights Commission to make to pay for his appointment," Mr Dreyfus said.
But Senator Brandis returned fire, pointing out staffing costs at the human rights agency blew out under the previous government.
He said the HRC's latest annual report showed it employed 143 staff at a cost of $16.38m. "That is an increase in staffing costs of $1.32m over the previous year, and an increase of $5.37m, or almost 50 per cent, in the three years since June 2010," Senator Brandis said.
"If the commission decides to increase its staffing costs by 50 per cent in three years, it is difficult to understand how the salary of a single statutory officer cannot be met by economies within its staffing expenditure rather than elsewhere in its budget."
But Senator Brandis said the management of its finances was a matter for the commission and Mr Wilson's salary, like those of the other commissioners, was determined independently by the Remuneration Tribunal.
Senator Brandis said Mr Wilson would help restore balance at the Australian Human Rights Commission, but Labor claimed his appointment signalled the "blatant political agenda" of Senator Brandis.

Mark Dreyfus ex google

$
0
0




  • Mark Dreyfus
    Member of the Australian House of Representatives

  • Mark Alfred Dreyfus QC MP, an Australian lawyer and politician, is a former Attorney-General, Minister for the Public Service and Integrity, Minister for Emergency Management, and Special Minister of State in the Second Rudd Ministry. Wikipedia


  • BornOctober 3, 1956 (age 57), Perth

  • OfficeMember of the Australian Parliament since 2007

  • PartyAustralian Labor Party


    1. The Hon Mark Dreyfus QC, MP – Parliament of Australia

      www.aph.gov.au/M_Dreyfus_MP

      The Hon Mark Dreyfus QC, MP. Mark Dreyfus. Track (What's this?) ... Connect withMark Dreyfus. Connect: Facebook Contact form; Websites: Personal website ...


  • Muslim community leader Keysar Trad loses defamation case against 2GB's Jason Morrison

    $
    0
    0

    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/muslim-community-leader-keysar-trad-loses-defamation-case-against-2gbs-jason-morrison/story-fni0cx12-1226789106633

    Muslim community leader Keysar Trad loses defamation case against 2GB's Jason Morrison


    Muslim community leader Keysar Trad.


    Muslim community leader Keysar Trad. Source: News Limited



    MUSLIM community spokesman Keysar Trad has lost an eight-year defamation case over comments made by broadcaster Jason Morrison after the Cronulla riots.
    The NSW Court of Appeal yesterday ruled the former 2GB Radio announcer did not defame Mr Trad when he described him as a "disgraceful" and "dangerous individual".
    Morrison made the comments on December 19, 2005 after Mr Trad told a peace rally that Muslims in Australia were "suffering as a result of the racist actions of predominantly one radio station".
    Morrison said Mr Trad was "responsible about more misinformation about the Islamic community of the attitudes of Christian Australians than any other person".
    Mr Trad was initially successful in the NSW Supreme Court but the decision was reversed in part by the Court of Appeal. A five-judge panel of the High Court delivered a majority verdict which directed the Court of Appeal to re-examine the case.
    The court ordered Mr Trad to pay legal costs for Harbour Radio, which operates 2GB.





    Preliminary item to: LONGEVITY AND THE LOTTERY OF LIFE

    $
    0
    0
    From:g87
    Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2013 9:16 AM
    To: 
    Subject: Ethereal NONSENSE AND ''LONGEVITY AND THE LOTTERY OF LIFE''

    Hi ....
    Just a note to tell you that the below is simplistic: essentially WRONG re white bread.
    1. One’s diet in the context of the MARGINAL benefits of extra fibre is just that – MARGINAL. And ethereal.
    2. The thing is that one would get the benefits of ADEQUATE FIBRE from a serving of oats or bran ... whatever.... in this class – than the ETHEREAL differential between white bread and  wholegrain.
    3. Make no mistake – wholegrain is fine: BUT it is plain silly to suggest that whgite bread should be avoided.
    4. CERTAINLY IT IS HYSTERICAL TO SUGGEST a classification as ‘’...foods you should never eat again | Herald Sun’’
    5. Eat a good diet – and think about the simplistic rubbish like this: why does the writer not state the ‘killers’ – like TOO MUCH FATS and too many calories and inadequate exercise?
    I guess I may cut and paste this in part for future use as a thesis on a more important thesis of sorts: LONGEVITY AND THE LOTTERY OF LIFE
    Which is going to take time, methinks.
    Regards
    Geoff Seidner

    From: 
    Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2013 4:12 AM
    To: Undisclosed-Recipient:;
    Subject: Fw: Eight foods you should never eat again | Herald Sun
    Sun
    http://www.heraldsun.com.au/lifestyle/health/eight-foods-you-should-never-eat-again/story-fni0diei-1226696031906?sv=8a1c811cdbe16f29b43e97da9d0da8bc#.UrsPW6BhqqE.email

    --- This message was sent by leontug@mail2me.com.au via http://addthis.com. Please note that AddThis does not verify email addresses.
    Make sharing easier with the AddThis Toolbar: http://www.addthis.com/go/toolbar-em
    To stop receiving any emails from AddThis, please visit: http://www.addthis.com/privacy/email-opt-out?e=fpXlxebO_dXu4OTB4My7zeyO6s_kjujV

    White bread

    While it may claim to have extra fibre and 

    nutrients added, white bread is still not as 

    goodnutritionally as wholegrain bread. If you 

    must go white, at least choose sourdough.

    Eight foods you should never eat again

    YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

    Hi Geoff Discover news with your friends. Give it a try.
    To get going, simply connect with your favourite social network:
    Facebook

    ARE MONO-MEALS THE KEY TO A FRUIT FULL LIFE?2:02

    Eating lots of fruit and vegetables is the key to the '80-10-10' diet, in what many are claiming as the best path to a healthy lifestyle.
    AUTOPLAY
    Rice snacks like these are not good for you. Picture: Thinkstock
    Rice snacks like these are not good for you. Picture: Thinkstock Source: Supplied
    <>
    Stay away from the cordial. Picture: Thinkstock
    Stay away from the cordial. Picture: ThinkstockSource: Supplied
    AS HUMAN beings, when we are told not to do something, our instinct can be to do exactly that.
    Indeed this can also be the case with food restriction, but as a nutritionist there are some foods that offer so little nutritionally that they are best avoided - especially when they are parading as 'healthy' choices. Here are the worst offenders:
    Rice snacks
    It doesn't matter if rice has been made into a snack bar, cake, puff or crisp, rice is a dense source of high glycaemic index carbohydrate, which means that it makes our blood glucose levels rapidly increase, along with the hormone insulin, which also promotes fat storage in the body.
    White bread
    While it may claim to have extra fibre and nutrients added, white bread is still not as good nutritionally as wholegrain bread. If you must go white, at least choose sourdough.
    Flavoured water
    Given that a single serve of flavoured water can contain as much as five teaspoons of sugar, you are best to get your vitamins from grains, fruits and vegetables, and leave your water as nature intended it.
    Muffins and banana bread
    If you consider that the average muffin or slice of banana bread contains more than 60g of total carbohydrate, or the equivalent of four slices of bread, 20-30g of fat and at least four teaspoons of sugar, it is safe to say that there is nothing healthy about these café options.
    Extruded cheese snacks
    Puffs, rings or balls made using refined carbs, added MSG and lots of oil will never be a good choice, especially for children who need snacks that are as plain and minimally processed as possible.
    Frozen yoghurt
    It may sound healthy but sweet yoghurts can have as much sugar as ice-cream and just as many calories, especially when extra syrups, nuts and treats are added.
    Frozen Yogurt has a high sugar content. Picture: Thinkstock
    Frozen Yogurt has a high sugar content. Picture: Thinkstock Source: Supplied
    Chocolate nut spread
    With the first few ingredients listed as sugar and vegetable oil, chocolate spread contains a lot more bad fat than it does good fat from nuts.
    Muesli Bars
    There is a big difference between natural unprocessed muesli and the processed mix of honey, sugar, dried fruit, fillers, gums and coatings that are found in most commercially available muesli bars - which also combine to give 3-4 teaspoons of sugar per bar.



    JBIG - 1/10/13 BOYCOTT GROUP!!

    $
    0
    0

    TAG ARCHIVES: ISRAEL

    Jewish activists back call to Boycott Sodastream

    Saturday September 28 marked a national day of action to highlight the scandal of high street stores marketing Sodastream – fizzy drink-making products for the home produced by an Israeli company operating out of an illegal settlement on Palestinian land. There were protests in many cities around the UK.
    Ecostream 28.9.13 (17)
    The Jews for Boycotting Israeli Goods banner was prominent on the demonstration in Brighton where Sodastream is promoted by the Israeli-owned Ecostream shop.
    The green and gold Jews for Boycotting Israeli Goods banner was prominent on the demonstration in Brighton where Sodastream is promoted by the Israeli-owned Ecostream shop.
    J-BIG made a point of supporting the campaigners in Brighton and Hove who have steadfastedly maintained weekly protests since the Ecostream store opened just over a year ago. They have faced vicious attacks from Zionists, supported by the Brighton Argus newspaper in attacking them as anti-semites. One of those they have vilified is Jewish PSC member Terry Yason who addressed the protest on Saturday to put the record straight.
    Here’s what he said.
    Over 2000 years ago Hillel,  the  most famous of all Jewish  Rabbis,  said  when asked What is Judaism? –  ”That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. That is the whole Torah; the rest is commentary.”
    Since  Hillel Jews have consistently supported  the  underdog – at The  Battle of  Cable  Street against the Fascists  in Brick Lane,  London in 1936 ,  in the  International Brigades in Spain fighting Franco  for the democratically elected Republican Government,  in the Civil Rights Movement riding  and dying with the  Freedom Riders  in Mississippi in the 60s and  fighting in the ANC against Apartheid  South Africa. We have an honourable history.
    But today the Government of  the “Jewish State” of Israel defy Hillel in their  inhumane treatment of  the  Palestinians. For the first  time  in Jewish history, to their shame, they have  created  their  own Underdog.
    SodaStream, the  parent  of the Brighton shop Eco Stream, manufacture  their products  in a factory situated in  the  illegal settlement  of MISHOR ADUMIN.   In the Sodastream corporate video   their CEO… claims   they are one big happy family. Here is  what  one Palestinian worker says about working for Sodastream.
    “I feel humiliated and I am also disgraced as a Palestinian, as the claims in the corporate video are all lies. We Palestinian workers in this factory always feel like we are enslaved . . . “
    Brighton and  Hove  Palestine  Solidarity Campaign is  a  universal  movement,  made  up of  ordinary  people  of all  colours,  religions , politics, nationalities and  back grounds. Together we oppose  the savage   treatment  meted  out to the  Palestinians  by the  Israeli government.
    As a cornerstone  of  their  propaganda , the Israeli Government  continually label  those who oppose her as anti Semitic.
    Today I am  here  as a Jew, with my Jewish  and  non Jewish comrades,  to  destroy once and for all that  insidious claim , and to proclaim that Anti  Zionism is a call  not for  the destruction  of   the  State  of  Israel  but for  its  emancipation . When we  opposed Apartheid  in  South Africa the result  was  the  Rainbow  Nation.
    Like South Africa, Israel can become the  democracy it so  mistakenly calls  itself,  if  it also abandons Apartheid.
    To make even  more of  a  nonsense  of  their  lies;  today we are  joined   by members of  the two national Jewish organisations, Jews  for  Justice for  Palestinians   and Jews for Boycotting Israeli Goods  .
     We also have support from two Jewish artists who have sent  these emails. 
    From actress Miriam Margolyes:
    ‘ A great wrong is being done in Israel & decent Palestinian people are having their lives destroyed.  Brighton should emphatically NOT patronise the ECO shop. It is a fraud & a disgrace. ‘ 
    From comedian and author Alexei Sayle:
    ‘I wish all the best to the demonstrators, Sodastream drinks taste like creosote anyway and the fact that they’re produced in an illegal settlement makes them doubly repulsive’
    Israel was created  in my  name, exclusively for Jews  by Jews, and as  a Jew I feel a special responsibility to protest at the racist actions  of  the  Israeli government towards  the  Palestinians – their colonial land  grab , the relentless building  of settlements  on Palestinian land, their diversion  of priceless water to the settlements,  the constant confiscation of  Palestinian land , the thousands  of Palestinians  in Israeli jails and  to the shooting by the  IDF of  Palestinian children. In  their  their relentless  and  murderous  pursuit of a  land  devoid  of Palestinians they  destroy  the dream  of  Hillel.
     Today I ask  the Jews  of  the Diaspora to remember your  history  in supporting the  underdog, and  support  us in withdrawing your support  for Israeli Government policies  towards  the  Palestinians.
    To all the  people  of Brighton and  Hove   I ask you to boycott the EcoStream shop , refuse to  buy SodaStream products and send  them  packing out  of our  beautiful city .
    See also Tony Greenstein’s blog for a detailed report and more pictures.

    28 Sept: National Day of Action on SodaStream

    J-BIG is supporting the call from Brighton & Hove PSC to mark a year of protests to expose the Israeli-owned Ecostream shop. It poses as an eco-friendly enterprise but markets Sodastream products manufactured in Male Adumim. This is one among many illegal settlements which pollute Palestinian land and deprive Palestinians of access to water. See full details of the nationwide Day of Action on Saturday here.
    We will be taking the J-BIG banner to Brighton for a special demonstration starting at The Clocktower on Saturday at 12 noon. Please join us if you can.
    The regular demonstrations have become quite dramatic at times because of particularly nasty Zionist counter-protests. Our Jewish friend Terry Yason, who will be reading out messages of support on the 28th, has been forced to take legal action against a Christian Zionist who attacked him, calling him a Kapo and a fake Jew!  The Brighton Argus newspaper has been backing a Zionist campaign to brand  the pro-Palestinian activists as antisemites.
    We are particularly grateful to Miriam Margolyes and Alexei Sayle for providing the following statements of support.
    ‘A great wrong is being done in Israel & decent Palestinian people are having their lives destroyed.  Brighton should emphatically NOT patronise the ECO shop. It is a fraud & a disgrace.‘ — Miriam Margolyes
    “I wish all the best to the demonstrators.  Sodastream drinks taste like creosote anyway and the fact that they’re produced in an illegal settlement makes them doubly repulsive.”  - Alexei Sayle

    Support for Australian academics

    J-BIG has signed the following petition supporting two Australian academics targeted by an Israeli Law Centre.    We invite you to sign the petition,http://www.change.org/petitions/supporters-of-free-speech-and-human-rights-defend-free-speech-and-human-rights-and-support-the-bds
    —————————————————————–
    Prof. Stuart Rees, Chair of the Sydney Peace Foundation and Associate Prof. Jake Lynch, Director of Sydney University’s Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies (CPACS), have been threatened with legal action by Shurat HaDin, an Israeli Law Centre, through agents acting on their behalf in Australia.
    The claim is that Rees and Lynch are backing racist and discriminatory policies through their support for the international Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement.
    These accusations are unfounded and intimidatory. They are intended to stifle free speech.
    The BDS movement is a call for justice by all sectors of Palestinian civil society and supported around the world by unions, churches, civil society and human rights groups. It is a form of non violent popular resistance and international solidarity in protest against Israel’s persistent violation of Palestinian human rights and international law.
    BDS policies make it clear that it is a human rights based movement and opposed to racism in all forms, including anti-Semitism.
    Inspired by the effective movement against apartheid South Africa, BDS is directed against the illegal military occupation and settlements of the West Bank, the collective punishment of Gaza and Israeli discrimination of its own Palestinian citizens.
    BDS opposes corporations, institutions and organizations which support Israel’s violation of human rights and international law including businesses such as Caterpillar, Motorola, G4S and Veolia.
    In 2009, Assoc. Professor Lynch wrote to the Sydney Vice Chancellor asking him to revoke fellowships schemes between the University of Sydney and two Israeli universities: Technion University, Haifa and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
    In 2012, Professor Don Avnon of Hebrew University contacted Assoc. Prof. Lynch, seeking permission to use his name on an application under the Sir Zelman Cowan fellowship program. Prof Lynch refused, citing his and CPACS’ support for a boycott of institutional links with universities in Israel.
    By supporting BDS and in resisting derision and threats for doing so, Rees and Lynch have rejected the attempt by a foreign agency – in this case the Israeli law firm Shurat HaDin – to stifle dissent in Australia. This letter invites you to do the same, and in the following terms:
    I hereby support the global BDS movement.
    I wish to be named a co defendant.

    Sound and fury at the Proms over “apartheid” remark

    This article first appeared in the September 2013 issue of the BRICUP Newsletter, http://www.bricup.org.uk
    Proms collaboration between Kennedy and the young musicians from Palestine Strings.  Credit: BBC/Chris Christodoulou
    Proms collaboration between Kennedy and the young musicians from Palestine Strings.
    Credit: BBC/Chris Christodoulou
    Violinist Nigel Kennedy sent Israel’s apologists into a mighty spin during a Promenade concert in London on August 8 when he used the word “apartheid” to refer to the life circumstances of the young Palestinian musicians with whom he was sharing the stage.
    “Ladies and gentlemen,” said Kennedy, addressing an overwhelmingly supportive audience for his innovative performance of Vivaldi’s Four Seasons at the Royal Albert Hall, “ it’s a bit facile to say it, but we all know from experiencing this night of music tonight, that given equality and getting rid of apartheid gives a beautiful chance for amazing things to happen.”
    Kennedy, an enfant terrible of the classical music world , had not played at the Proms for years but took advantage of a radical mix of programmes this time to revisit the Four Seasons with a number of jazz musicians, his own largely Polish Orchestra of Life and 17 players from the Palestine Strings wearing trademark keffiyehs. Aged between 12 and 23, these protégées of the Edward Said National Conservatory of Music demonstrated considerable artistry in one of the world’s greatest performance spaces. No wonder the Zionist reaction to their mentor’s solidarity comment was so swift and strong.
    Within days the Jewish Chronicle announced with satisfaction  that the BBC intended deleting Kennedy’s remark from its edited TV broadcast of the concert. Baroness Ruth Deech, a prominent Zionist and former BBC governor, had pronounced his words “offensive and untrue” and unfit to be heard during a Prom concert. The BBC, saying they did not“fall within the editorial remit of the proms as a classical music festival,” duly obliged. The critically-acclaimed concert went out on BBC4 on August 23 without the offending comments.  
    In the interim BRICUP chairman Jonathan Rosenhead had joined supporters of Jews for Boycotting Israeli Goods, among them actress Miriam Margolyes and writer/comedian Alexei Sayle, in signing a letter contesting the BBC censorship decision. It was published on August 22 in the Daily Telegraph (scroll down through the other letters to find it here) along with a fair-minded article by the paper’s Religious Affairs editor John Bingham.
    The Jewish Chronicle named BRICUP and Rosenhead in its coverage.
    The issue was taken up by wider activist circles with writers’ organisation PEN and Index on Censorship weighing in in Kennedy’s defence. Rock legend Roger Waters of Pink Floyd was moved to issue a long-awaited statement calling on fellow musicians to back the boycott.
    petition calling on the BBC to revoke its censorship decision  quickly garnered more than 1,200 signatures.
    Music commentator Norman Lebrecht, himself deeply pro-Israel, picked up the story, calling into question the provenance of a statement in which Kennedy described his comments as “purely descriptive and not political whatsoever” anddenounced the BBC’s “imperial lack of impartiality”. The flighty genius does not own a computer or use any new-fangled digital media so the statement was issued via a musician friend’s Facebook page. As a matter of interest, Lebrecht later posted YouTube footage of the concert, generating serious and largely favourable discussion on his blog.
    Matters were complicated by Kennedy’s own manager Terri Robson – presumably with an eye to her charge’s potentially lucrative future bookings – publicly suggesting that the BBC was within its rights to censor him.
    Thanks to links with pro-Palestinian classical musicians who are in contact with Kennedy – he does at least own a mobile phone – we were primed and ready when he once again re-iterated his pro-Palestinian stance in an open letter to the Palestine Strings.
    He observed that his comment would surely not “have been censored if it had been referring to the benefits of the demise of the apartheid in South Africa when playing with an African ensemble”.
     
    Kennedy’s letter suggested that the Palestine Strings had been detained for 12 hours on their return to Palestine. This turned out to be a misunderstanding. The players were not detained but Edward Said National Conservatory of Music’s Orchestras Manager, Tim Pottier, was held for 12 hours at the Allenby Bridge. An official at the conservatory explained in a private email, “Tim is now sadly used to long interrogations and waiting at the Bridge, although the return from the Prom established a record. The occupying authorities who control all entries to Palestine know him far too well and, I suspect, do not like what he does.”
    This incident, naturally enough, was not deemed newsworthy by mainstream media. Indeed, although the Telegraph’s Bingham refers to “a bitter row over alleged censorship”, others showed zero interest in the BBC censorship story.
    One late entry into the fray was pundit Dominic Lawson who chose to use his valedictory column in the Independent on September 2 to slag off Kennedy and Waters as part of a sinister army of antisemites holding Israel responsible for all the evils of the world.
    His attack highlights the care supporters of BDS need to take in the terminology they use. Waters has defended himself expertly when challenged, but drawing attention to Baroness Deech’s Jewish-sounding maiden name (“nee Fraenkel”) rather than referencing her vociferous Zionism, and shooting down a pig-shaped zeppelin emblazoned with a Star of David (albeit alongside other symbols of oppression), has handed ammunition to the enemies of BDS. A call from a small group of German Jews to boycott a forthcoming concert by Waters has won mainstream coverage denied to the injustice done to Kennedy.
    It remains to be seen, at the time of writing, if any further controversy will follow Kennedy’s planned appearance at the Last Night of the Proms on September 7.
    As he himself noted when news of the BBC’s censorship plan became known:
    “ . . . the BBC has created . . . a huge platform for the discussion of its own impartiality, its respect (or lack of it) for free speech and for the discussion of the miserable apartheid forced on the Palestinian people by the Israeli government supported by so many governments from the outside world.”

    NIGEL KENNEDY LOOKS FORWARD TO END OF “ZIONIST APARTHEID”

    Violinist Nigel Kennedy, whose remark about the “apartheid” conditions faced by Palestinians was censored from a BBC Prom concert broadcast, has vigorously defended his comment, adding more fuel to the row about the BBC’s decision. See the Jewish Chronicle’s coverage here and here.
    In an open letter to young  musicians of the Palestine Strings with whom he shared the stage to spectacular effect on August 8, Kennedy, who is billed to play at the Last Night of the Proms on September 7, wrote:
    Your performance at the Royal Albert Hall was something to be proud of and demonstrated the benefits of people being treated equally as opposed to being decimated and robbed by an apartheid system.
    As you have seen, there is huge support for stopping the abuse of your human rights. My short comment [about apartheid] was purely observational and humanist. It surely wouldn’t have been censored if it had been referring to the benefits of the demise of the apartheid in South Africa when playing with an African ensemble. Many thanks however to [everyone] for giving a world platform to the important discussion concerning Zionist apartheid.
    I hope life is treating you ok. We all miss you over here. I’m sorry to hear that the “normal” treatment of Palestinian people by the Israeli authorities led to you being detained for twelve hours. I am looking forward to playing with you again soon and to the days when we can play on a level playing field in Palestine and throughout the world.
    No further information is available at the time of writing about the detention of the young musicians Kennedy refers to.
    The BBC has insisted that Kennedy’s “apartheid” remark was cut for purely editorial reasons. But an article in the Jewish Chronicle before the TV broadcast on August 23 referred approvingly to lobbying efforts by Zionists, among them Baroness Deech, a well-known pro-Israel advocate and former BBC governor.
    The decision to censor has provoked serious online discussion in musical andactivist circles, with writers’ organisation PEN and Index on Censorship weighing in in Kennedy’s defence. The Daily Telegraph published a letter signed by 32 Jews opposed to the BBC’s decision, among them actress Miriam Margolyes and writer/comedian Alexei Sayle.
    An online petition - Don’t Censor the Palestine Prom – has gathered more than 1,100 signatures and remains open.

    NIGEL KENNEDY CONDEMNS BBC’S “CENSORSHIP AND IMPERIAL LACK OF IMPARTIALITY”

    The following statement has been issued on behalf of violin maestro Nigel Kennedy in response to the BBC’s decision to censor a remark he made  during a Prom concert with young Palestinian musicians on August 8 (see previous post for details).
    Will the BBC now have the courage to restore Kennedy’s comment to its rightful place in the TV broadcast of the concert on August 23?  Will they continue with his scheduled appearance as one of the stars in the gala Last Night of the Proms on September 7?
    As Kennedy says,  the BBC may have done us a favour by inadvertently generating “discussion of the miserable apartheid forced on the Palestinian people by the Israeli government supported by so many governments from the outside world.”
    A spokesperson for Nigel Kennedy said:
    “Nigel Kennedy finds it incredible and quite frightening that in the 21st century it is still such an insurmountable problem to call things the way they are. He thinks that once we can all face issues for what they really are we can finally have a chance of finding solutions to problems such as human rights, equal rights and even, perhaps, free speech. His first reaction to the BBC’s censorship & imperial lack of impartiality was to refuse to play for an employer who is influenced by such dubious outside forces.
    Mr Kennedy has, however, reminded himself that his main purpose is to provide the audience with the best music he can deliver. To withdraw his services would be akin to a taxi driver refusing to drive their customer due to their political incorrectness. He, therefore, is not withdrawing his services that he owes to his audience, but is half expecting to be replaced by someone deemed more suitable than him due to their surplus of opportunism and career aspirations.
    Mr Kennedy is glad, however, that by censoring him the BBC has created such a huge platform for the discussion of its own impartiality, its respect (or lack of it) for free speech and for the discussion of the miserable apartheid forced on the Palestinian people by the Israeli government supported by so many governments from the outside world.
    Mr Kennedy believes his very small statement during his concert was purely descriptive and not political whatsoever.”

    FOOTBALL STARS RALLY IN SUPPORT OF PALESTINE

    As Israel prepares to announce the draw for UEFA’s under-21 football finals in June next year, the Red Card Israeli Racism campaign has put out the following news release.
    FOOTBALL STARS RALLY IN SUPPORT OF PALESTINE
    + FREDERIC KANOUTE, MOUSSA SOW, DEMBA BA, JACQUES FATY SAY UEFA IS REWARDING ISRAEL FOR “ACTIONS CONTRARY TO SPORTING VALUES”
    + MPS AND OTHER EMINENT BRITS SAY ISRAEL MUST NOT HOST UEFA UNDER 21 FINALS
    Nov 27 – On the eve of the announcement in Tel Aviv of the draw for the Euro 2013 under-21 finals next June, some of the biggest names in European football have condemned Israel ’s military attack on Gaza which killed 170 people, including Palestinian boys playing football, and destroyed vital sports infrastructure.
    Former Tottenham and Sevilla striker Frederic Kanoute is among those signing a statement referring to Israel’s hosting of the U-21 championship as rewarding it “for actions that are contrary to sporting values”.   (See full statement below)
    On November 8, 13-year-old Ahmed Younis Khader Abu Daqqa was shot in the abdomen by the Israeli military while playing football with his friends in ‘Abassan village, east of the southern Gaza Strip town of Khan Yunis . He died in hospital shortly afterwards. Four other boys were also killed.
    The Palestinian Paralympic Committee offices, along with a stadium and sports complex where the Palestine team prepared for London 2012, were among facilities wiped out by Israeli bomb attacks in the days that followed.
    A number of football fixtures and gatherings have been moved because of the violence.
    Pressure on UEFA to change the venue for the 2013 u-21 finals is mounting as 20 British Members of Parliament have signed a motion (EDM 640) in the House of Commons  stating:
    ” That this House congratulates the Football Association for its Kick It Out campaign against racism in football; registers with profound disapproval, however, that the FA is prepared to participate in the European Under-21 football tournament to be played in Israel in June 2013, even though Israel is geographically not in Europe and is a country which has policies of racial apartheid against Palestinians.”
    Campaigners in a number of European centres are marking the draw in Israel on Wednesday.
    Red Card Israeli Racism in Britain has handed in a petition of several thousand signatures.  along with a statement from public figures including filmmaker Ken Loach, calling on the Football Association to support a change of venue for the 2013 tournament. (Text and signatures attached).
    UK campaign coordinator Geoff Lee said, “ In addition to the increasing racist violence against Arabs in Israel which is well known to UEFA , the latest attacks by Israel on the besieged people of Gaza must make the UEFA delegates rethink this issue.”
    In Italy, a letter has been delivered to the Italian Football Federation calling for withdrawal of the Italian national team from the competition unless there is a change of venue. On themorning of Wednesday, November 28 a protest will be held outside the nationalheadquarters in Rome during which activists have requested a meeting with management.
    NOTES FOR EDITORS:
    1. ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF FRENCH LANGUAGE STATEMENT SIGNED BY :
    Frederic Kanoute, Moussa Sow, Demba Ba, Jacques Faty and others
    The horrific situation faced by Palestinian civilians in recent days is deeply concerning. We have learnt that on November 10 the Israeli army bombarded a sports stadium on Gaza . Four young people who were playing football were killed. Mohamed Harara and Ahmed Harara (16 and 17 years old), Matar Rahman and Ahmed Al Dirdissawi (18 years old).
    We are also aware that since February 2012 two footballers with the Al Amari team, Omar Rowis (23) and Mohammed Nemer (22) are still imprisoned in Israel without trial or charge.
    In the run-up to Israel hosting the UEFA Under-21 European Championship, which will reward Israel for actions that are contrary to sporting values, we as European sportspeople wish to express our regret the turmoil of recent days, the primary victim of which has been the Palestinian people.
    We express our solidarity and our support for the civilian causalities. All people have the right to a life of dignity, freedom and security. The Palestinians must be protected by the rule of international law. We hope that a just peace will finally emerge – it is simply unacceptable that children are killed while they are peacefully playing football.
      2. THE STATEMENT IN FRENCH
    Palestine , le sport au pied du mur
    La situation subie par les civils palestiniens ces derniers jours est plus que préoccupante. Nous avons appris que le 10 novembre, l’armée israélienne a bombardé un terrain de sport à Gaza . Quatre jeunes qui jouaient au football ont été tués : Mohamed Harara et Ahmed Harara (16 et 17 ans), Matar Rahman et Ahmed Al Dirdissawi (18 ans).
    Nous savons en outre que depuis février 2012, les deux joueurs de football de l’équipe d’Al Amari, Omar Rowis (23 ans) Mohammed Nemer (22 ans) sont toujours emprisonnés en Israël sans procès et sans jugement.
    À la veille où Israël doit accueillir l’Euro des moins de 21 ans, se voyant ainsi récompensé alors qu’il commet des actes qui restent contraires aux valeurs du Sport, nous, sportifs européens, regrettons la situation d’embrasement de ces derniers jours qui a pour première victime le peuple palestinien. Nous exprimons notre solidarité et notre soutien aux victimes civiles. Tout peuple a le droit de vivre dignement, dans la liberté et la sécurité. Les Palestiniens ne peuvent en ce sens être exclus du droit international. Nous espérons que le droit et la justice règneront enfin, parce qu’il est inadmissible que des enfants meurent alors qu’ils jouent paisiblement au football.
    Premiers signataires: Kanoute, Moussa Sow, Demba Ba, Jacques Faty
    4. Events in Israel cancelled because of the violence:

    5. England could host u-21 in 2013 instead of Israel

    5. Statement from Ken Loach and other eminent figures calling for UEFA to move under-21 finals from Israel .
     
    STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF PALESTINIAN FOOTBALL
    As football supporters we hear with concern an appeal from Mahmoud Sarsak,http://www.bdsmovement.net/2012/mahmoud-sarsak-uefa-appeal-9826 a young Palestinian national team player whose career was cut short by three years’ detention without trial in an Israeli jail.
    We are aware that he regained his freedom last July 10, only after a three month hunger strike won him sympathy and support from influential voices in the football world.
    Sarsak is asking us now to show our support for all Palestinians who love the beautiful game but who suffer the impact of discriminatory Israeli policies on Palestinian football and the life of the community in general.
    We are disturbed by the myriad ways in which the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian West Bank and the siege of  Gaza  prevent both the development of Palestinian sport at grass roots level and its representation in international competitions. These include:
    • regulations and checkpoints that block the movement of players between Palestinian towns and villages and between  Gaza  and the  West Bank ;
    • official interference preventing the Palestinian national team from travelling abroad to train or compete and making it virtually impossible for foreign teams to attend fixtures in Palestine ;
    • restrictions on the importation of equipment, even when donated by international footballing organisations;
    • prevention of the construction of facilities.
    In addition to these impediments, life under occupation entails the constant threat of detention or even death. Two  West Bank footballers, Mohammed Saedy Ibrahim Nemer and goalkeeper Omar Khaled Omar Abu Rowis, were detained in February and have been incarcerated ever since.
    Four footballers were among the 1,400 Palestinians killed during the Israeli assault on  Gaza  in December 2008 – January 2009.   Even children are not exempt. On June 20 this year, twelve-year-old Mamoun Zuhdi al-Dam was killed by an Israeli warplane as he played football on land near his family home in  Gaza .
    Against this background, Sarsak has drawn our attention to Palestinian dismay at UEFA’s insistence on having  Israel  host next year’s under-21 finals.
    He says that staging this, or any other UEFA competition, in  Israel “is legitimising  Israel ’s continued occupation, oppression and apartheid policies. There can be no place in football for segregation and oppression so prestigious tournaments cannot be allowed to take place in  Israel .”
    Taking into account the high profile given in European football to combating racism wherever it appears, we agree with Sarsak that it is inappropriate for European football’s governing body to be staging international competitions in a country responsible for systematic discrimination against Palestinians.
    We therefore call upon UEFA to move the 2013 U21 finals away from  Israel  and to assure Palestinians that  Israel  will not be granted such an honour as long as its discriminatory practices continue.
    Signed:
    John Austin
    Dr. Salman Abu Sitta
    Stephen Cavalier
    Jeremy Corbyn MP
    Bob Crow
    Rev. Garth Hewitt
    Ghada Karmi
    Bruce Kent,
    Ken Loach
    Paul Laverty
    Kika Markham
    Karma Nabulsi
    Prof. Steven Rose
    Keith Sonnet
    David Thompson
    Jenny Tonge

    BRAND ISRAEL EXPOSED AS PLYMOUTH PROTESTS ROUND OFF BATSHEVA UK TOUR

    One of many posters used around the country contrasting Israeli freedom of cultural expression with the injustices inflicted upon Palestinians.
    The last of two nights of peaceful but noisy protest at the Theatre Royal in Plymouth, southwest England, on Saturday, rounded offalmost a month of action  directed at Israel’s Batsheva Ensemble – the junior arm of world renowned Batsheva Dance Company which is hailed by Israel’s right-wing leaders as its best “cultural ambassador”.
    Rain-soaked but exuberant in Plymouth.
     
    Like previous protests in Edinburgh, Salford, Bradford, Brighton, Birmingham, Leicester and London, the Plymouth actions were coordinated by the Don’t Dance with Israeli Apartheid campaign, part of the cultural boycott movement which aims to expose Israel’s deliberate deployment of art as a political weapon. Israel’s slaughter of more than 160 Palestinians in Gaza as Batsheva’s tour drew to a close gave the campaign added momentum.Plymouth’s small band of Palestine solidarity activists was reinforced by others from nearby Exeter and further afield, mounting demonstrations of at least 40 outside the theatre on both nights, despite vile weather on the Saturday. There were also protests inside the venue. The demonstrations were covered by the localEvening Herald .
     
    At least one prospective audience member tore up his tickets after reading a campaign leaflet
     
    One local activist said Christians, Jews, Muslims and Atheists, drenched by pouring rain, all stood and shouted together for a common purpose.  ”It was
    joyful and spirited,” the activist said.  ”The beaming face of a friend from Gaza, who was with us, was reward enough. I asked how his family were. ‘Strong’, he said. They will know in Gaza that we support them.”
     
    Earlier in November organisers of protests at the Salford Lowry received amessage of support and encouragement “from youth in Gaza.”
     ”We in Gaza salute your tremendous efforts confronting any group supported by the Israeli apartheid regime,” the message said.  ”You are our voice and you give us real hope. Please do everything to grow the movement. No longer can we entertain anyone in the name of brand Israel while the ethnic cleansing, racism and sheer brutality against our people persists everyday of our lives.”
     
    During three days of protest at Batsheva’s Sadler’s Wells performances in London Nov 19-21, the company’s artistic director Ohad Naharin  was quoted in Israeli newspaper Haaretz saying he sympathised with protestors but Batsheva did not deserve to be targeted.
     
    Zionists in Manchester showed that they see Batsheva as an icon for their Israeli nationalist views.
     However, indications of involvement by some pro-Israel members of the fascist English Defence league, vociferous counter demonstrations by flag-waving Israel supporters and the presence of a high proportion of Zionists in Batsheva’s audiences at every venue testify to the truth of the cultural boycott analysis – whatever the views of individuals associated with an Israeli cultural institution, as long as it does not formally renounce state funding and the cultural ambassador role, it will continue to be treated as an icon by  the state which is repressing Palestinians and will consequently encounter protests.
     
    The Don’t Dance with Israeli Apartheid campaign began in Edinburgh in August when the Batsheva Dance Company appeared at the Edinburgh International Festival. The no2brandisrael website was set up and creative banners, leaflets and artwork were developed to get the Palestinian boycott message out all around the country. There was high-level support from Scottish cultural figures and excellent news coverage.
     
    With the appearance of the Batsheva Ensemble, also in Edinburgh, at the end of October, the Don’t Dance coalition moved into action mobilising Boycott Israel Network and Palestine Solidarity Campaign supporters, and members of  a range of local and national faith-based, community and human rights organisations, to protest the entire tour.  
    Photos: Rada Daniell
    Protesterssinging, handing out leaflets and engaging in conversation  with ticket holders generated considerable debate among audiences in every centre. Most were hostile but a significant number asked questions which were respectfully answered and went away better informed than before about Israel’s denial of equality, justice and freedom to Palestinians.
    Interventions inside the venues have given theatre managements huge headaches and are bound to make them review any future plans to book cultural groups linked to the Israeli state.
    Sadler’s Wells saw five interventions each on Monday and Tuesday, and another two on Wednesday. Security staff were often heavy-handed, dragging, grabbing, carrying and pushing people. This behaviour was reproduced in some other venues but not all.
    Organisers in several centres reported positive experiences working with police, although this was not entirely true in Bradford where the Batsheva protests became  the focus for a remarkable expression of community solidarity with the people of Palestine.
     The Sadler’s Wells protests – although no bigger or more effective then elsewhere -attracted the most media interest.
    This was probably partly because Sadler’s Wells is London’s prime contemporary dance venue, and partly due to the connection with protests over the Gaza onslaught.
    Remarkably, BBC Radio 4 devoted 12 or more minutes of its iPM slot on Saturday afternoon to discussing cultural boycott, initially with a listener who claimed to be baffled and upset by protests targeting Batsheva, and then with Liz Lochhead, Scotland’s national poet (Makar), who has publicly backed the boycott since before the Israeli company’s appearance at the Edinburgh International Festival.
    Campaign news releases sent out in advance of the Sadler’s Wells dates were quoted by the Guardian and by the London Evening Standard, which said: “The spectacle begins even before you get inside the theatre — a vocal anti-Israeli picket line against this contemporary dance company because it takes financial support from the Israeli state. “
    The Evening Standard headlined its editorial comment on Nov 20 ”Israel’s Gaza war and a protest too far,” echoing its own report on the same day referring to Zionist actress Maureen Lipman’s “anger after protestors disrupt show”.
    This Guardian review referred to demonstrations outside and inside the performance spaces.
    BBC arts report was reasonably fair and other dance reviewers also covered the protests. 

    Many pictures and YouTube clips appears on activist blogs, websites and Facebook pages.  
     
     

    ANGER AT GAZA SLAUGHTER TARGETS SADLER’S WELLS

    NOVEMBER 18 – FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
    ANGER AT GAZA SLAUGHTER TARGETS SADLER’S WELLS
    • PROTEST OVER GAZA DEATHS MOVES TO THEATRE HOSTING ISRAEL’S BATSHEVA DANCE ENSEMBLE
     
    • BATSHEVA ACCUSED OF ACTING AS CULTURAL FIGLEAF FOR ATROCITIES
     
    • SADLER’S WELLS BEEFS UP SECURITY IN PREPARATION FOR PRO-PALESTINE PROTESTS
    • ACADEMICS CONDEMN THEATRE MANAGEMENT REFUSAL TO ENTER DIALOGUE
    November 18 - Protests at the growing Palestinian death toll caused by Israel’s bombardment of Gaza will move from outside London’s Israeli Embassy to the city’s premier contemporary dance venue at Sadler’s Wells, Islington on Monday.
    nationwide campaign,  Don’t Dance with Israeli Apartheid, has already interrupted 11 dance performances by Israel’s Batsheva Ensemble in six cities up and down the country and is now targeting the Israeli troupe’s three planned performances at Sadler’s Wells on Nov 19, 20 & 21.
    Campaigners say their protest is not directed at individual Israeli artists, but at the government which deliberately uses culture as cover for its human rights abuses and violations of international law.
     
    “We target artistic institutions which are intrinsically linked to the Israeli state through funding and the ‘Brand Israel ’ initiative,” the campaign leaflets say. They quote an Israeli Foreign Affairs ministry spokesman outlining, in the wake of the previous onslaught on Gaza which killed more than 1300 Palestinians, its explicit intention to send abroad cultural icons to “show Israel ’s prettier face, so we are not thought of purely in the context of war.”
    Although Batsheva’s artistic director Ohad Naharin has publicly opposed Israeli policies towards the Palestinians, his company isembraced by Israel ’s far-right government as their finest cultural ambassador.
    It receives funding from the Israeli state, Israeli arms companies and the racist Jewish National Fund which works openly to dispossess Palestinians and replace them with Jewish immigrants.
    “With Israel escalating its attacks on Gaza, killing dozens including civilians, with children among them, we intend our protests to reclaim for the Palestinians a tiny piece of the cultural and physical space which Israel has stolen from them,” said Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi, cultural working group coordinator for the Boycott Israel Network, part of the UK Don’t Dance coalition. “We do not accept that art may be used as a figleaf for killings and collective punishment of a civilian population.”
    Sadler’s Wells management has emailed ticket-holders telling them to expect “groups of peaceful demonstrators” at the Batsheva Ensemble performances, with the possibility of “some form of disruption inside the venue”. Bags will be searched on arrival and people should be ready for delays, the email said.
    The theatre’s chief executive and artistic director Alistair Spalding refused to meet academics from the British Committee for the Universities of Palestine  (BRICUP) who had asked to discuss the invitation to Batsheva with him.
    Spalding insisted the Israeli company was no different from other international institutions: “the vehicle for the creative expression of their artistic directors and not .. representatives of the governments of their countries.
    “I have a firm belief in cultural engagement rather than exclusion and … will present the work of choreographic artists whatever theirnationality,” Spalding said.
    Prof Jonathan Rosenhead, chair of BRICUP, said that Sadler’s Wells commitment to cultural engagement seemed not to extend to dialogue with principled critics. Spalding had failed to address any of the arguments BRICUP had made, said Rosenhead.
    He referred in particular to the conditions under which Palestinian culture has to operate, described by a Palestinian dancer as “ Israel ‘s three-tiered system of occupation, colonisation and apartheid [which] ruthlessly suffocates the livelihoods of Palestinian communities, including our right to artistic and cultural expression.”
    BRICUP has issued an open letter to Batsheva’s Naharin,  even more relevant now that Gaza is under Israeli attack, asking “What does the artistic freedom of yourself and your dancers mean, when it’s used as international cover by a state that’s essentially trying to force out the indigenous Palestinian population?”
    Don’t Dance with Israeli Apartheid began its campaign with protests at performances by the main Batsheva Dance company in the Edinburgh International Festival at the end of August , winning support from considerable Scottish cultural figures including the national poet (Makar) Liz Lochhead.
    Hundreds of campaign supporters have made their presence felt at every stop on the current tour by Batsheva’s junior Ensemble, beginning in Scotland  before moving on to Manchester and Bradford .
    In Brighton Green Party MP Caroline Lucas wrote to the Dome Theatre management reminding them that: “Israel’s sponsorship of arts and cultural events is one deliberate way in which it is actively seeking to repair the reputational damage inflicted by its treatment of Palestinians, so Palestinian civil society has called for a full cultural boycott of all cultural performers and exhibitors that are institutionally linked to the Israeli state.”
    There were more protests on November 13 & 14 in Birmingham where five  protestors disrupted the performance on each of the two nights, and on the second night they managed to drop a banner from the Circle.
    Demonstrators massed outside the Leicester Curve on Friday Nov 16
    A performance in Leicester on Friday night attracted a hundred or more local people angered by the assault on Gaza. As in every other venue, the show was interrupted on a number of occasions by protesters calling out pro-Palestinian slogans.
    After Sadler’s Wells there are two more Batsheva Ensemble tour dates, in Plymouth on Nov 23 & 24.
    ENDS
     
     

    HUMANISING THOSE ISRAEL SEEKS TO DEMONISE

    Click the caption to read the names and ages of the victims of Israel’scurrent assault on Gaza.
    The letter below has appeared in the Guardian newspaper, along with several others commenting on the attacks. Initiated by Jews for Boycotting Israeli Goods, it has been signed by the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network and more than 30 individuals including actress Miriam Margolyes, comedian, author and actor Alexei Sayle, writer/musician Leon Rosselson and author Mike Marqusee. (Not all the names appear in the Guardian).
    Letter to the editor
    As Jewish supporters of Palestinian rights, we have once again watched in horror as Israel escalates its lethal bombardment on the civilian population of Gaza.  Numerous people including children are being killed or wounded.  Israeli casualties came only after Israel, having started the slaughter by killing a 13-year-old boy in Gaza on November 8, shattered a truce by assassinating the Gazan military leader who had negotiated it. So who is the terrorist and who wants peace?
    Israel’s political-military leaders cynically escalate the conflict, trying to justify their blockade on Gaza and acting tough in the run-up to government elections. Having turned Gaza into an open-air prison, they again punish the Palestinians for electing leaders who attempt to resist the illegal Occupation.
    Too much of our media, the BBC in particular, collude with the official Israeli version: that the attacks are ‘targeted’ retaliation for rockets launched from Gaza. Despite hand-wringing by some Western governments, they encourage Israeli belligerence by labelling Hamas as a terrorist organisation, supporting the Gaza siege and denying Palestinian rights, both within and outside Israel. We support the peaceful campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) designed to help achieve those rights.

    Mid / Late 2013: What is the Meaning of a “Multi-Decadal Climate Projection”?

    $
    0
    0
    https://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2006/01/04/what-is-the-meaning-of-a-%E2%80%9Cmulti-decadal-climate-projection%E2%80%9



    Climate Science: Roger Pielke Sr.






    What is the Meaning of a “Multi-Decadal Climate Projection”?

    There are numerous papers and news releases that present regional and global model forecasts for decades into the future (see, as just two examples, the NSF press release and a Canadian study).
    Is this science? The short answer is NO.
    While as process studies, there is merit in this research, but to transfer the results as skillful projections to policymakers is inappropriate and misleading. Now only is there no value added in regional downscaling of mult-decadal projections beyond what can be achieved by just interpolating downscale a global model to finer scale surface terrain information, the global models themselves have not demonstrated skill at accurately predicting historic changes in the global climate.
    Policy Statement on Climate Variability and Change by the American Association of State Climatologists (AASC)*
    This statement provides the perspective of the AASC on issues of climate variability and change. Since the AASC members work directly with users of climate information at the local, state and regional levels, it is uniquely able to put global climate issues into the local perspective needed by the users of climate information. Our conclusions are as follows:
    1. Past climate is a useful guide to the future – Assessing past climate conditions provides a very effective analysis tool to assess societal and environmental vulnerability to future climate, regardless of the extent the future climate is altered by human activity. Our current and future vulnerability, however, will be different than in the past, even if climate were not to change, because society and the environment change as well. Decision makers need assessments of how climate vulnerability has changed.
    2. Climate prediction is complex with many uncertainties – The AASC recognizes climate prediction is an extremely difficult undertaking. For time scales of a decade or more, understanding the empirical accuracy of such predictions – called “verification” – is simply impossible, since we have to wait a decade or longer to assess the accuracy of the forecasts.
    Climate prediction is difficult because it involves complex, nonlinear interactions among all components of the earth’s environmental system. These components include the oceans, land, lakes, and continental ice sheets, and involve physical, biological, and chemical processes. The complicated feedbacks and forcings within the climate system are the reasons for the difficulty in accurately predicting the future climate. The AASC recognizes that human activities have an influence on the climate system. Such activities, however, are not limited to greenhouse gas forcing and include changing land use and sulfate emissions, which further complicates the issue of climate prediction. Furthermore, climate predictions have not demonstrated skill in projecting future variability and changes in such important climate conditions as growing season, drought, flood-producing rainfall, heat waves, tropical cyclones and winter storms. These are the type of events that have a more significant impact on society than annual average global temperature trends.
    3. Policy responses to climate variability and change should be flexible and sensible – The difficulty of prediction and the impossibility of verification of predictions decades into the future are important factors that allow for competing views of the long-term climate future. Therefore, the AASC recommends that policies related to long-term climate not be based on particular predictions, but instead should focus on policy alternatives that make sense for a wide range of plausible climatic conditions regardless of future climate. Climate is always changing on a variety of time scales and being prepared for the consequences of this variability is a wise policy.
    4. In their interactions with users of climate information, AASC members recognize that the nation’s climate policies must involve much more than discussions of alternative energy policies – Climate has a profound effect on sectors such as energy supply and demand, agriculture, insurance, water supply and quality, ecosystem management and the impacts of natural disasters. Whatever policies are promulgated with respect to energy, it is imperative that policy makers recognize that climate – its variability and change – has a broad impact on society. The policy responses should also be broad.
    Thus, to address the issues of climate variability and change, modernizing and maintaining high quality long-term climate data must be a high priority in order to permit careful monitoring. With the rapid dissemination of these data, State Climate Offices, as well as the Regional Climate Centers, and the National Climatic Data Center can better monitor emerging climate threats to critical national resources, such as our water supply, agriculture, and energy needs. The climate data must include all-important components of the climate system (e.g., temperature, precipitation, humidity, vegetation health and soil moisture). We also recommend that the nation strengthen its local, state, and regional climate services infrastructure in order to develop greater support capabilities for those decision makers who have to respond to climate variability and change.
    Finally, ongoing political debate about global energy policy should not stand in the way of common sense action to reduce societal and environmental vulnerabilities to climate variability and change. Considerable potential exists to improve policies related to climate; the AASC is working to turn that potential into reality.
    Approved by the AASC, November 2001.
    Papers that appear in the literature purporting to provide “projectionsâ€? of climate decades into the future in response to both the human- and natural- climate forcings and feedbacks need to be viewed as just sensitivity studies (See “Overlooked Issues in the U.S. National Climate and IPCC Assessments” ). They should never include years (such as 2050-2059 or 2100) in their figures and conclusions.
    Science papers should not be just the presentation of a hypothesis (i.e. the projections) without the testing the hypothesis. That truncated science, unfortunately is where we are with the presentation of multi-decadal climate projections to policymakers.
    Comments Off
    Filed under Climate Models
    Comments are closed.
    D/




    Viewing all 585 articles
    Browse latest View live