The TV Show

Breakdancers, masked bandits, Godzilla, wars, baseball games, and a TV master control room. And that's only in the first 10 seconds....

Burka Barbie

From the Daily Mail:

"One of the world's most famous children's toys, Barbie, has been given a makeover - wearing a burkha.

Wearing the traditional Islamic dress, the iconic doll is going undercover for a charity auction in connection with Sotheby's for Save The Children."

So to follow the thinking of the designers of Barbie's 50th Anniversary collection, let's dress up Barbie in clothes that represent the most misogynistic and oppressive political ideas, and then sell it at a charity to help the children.

'I know Barbie was something seen as bad before as an image for girls, but in actual fact the message with Barbie for women is you can be whatever you want to be.'

progress...

Why the burka is so objectionable is explained by Mark Steyn

"The burka, the niqab and the hijab are not fashion statements but explicitly political ones, and what they symbolize in a Western context is self-segregation."

On a supposedly unrelated note, Obama's "Safe School Czar" has a recommended reading list of books for children of all grades. Some of the books

weren’t merely X-rated and pornographic, but which featured explicit descriptions of sex acts between pre-schoolers; stories that seemed to promote and recommend child-adult sexual relationships; stories of public masturbation, anal sex in restrooms, affairs between students and teachers...

The point being that whilst the existence of both the toy and the books aren't necessarily too disturbing in and of themselves, but the values they are promoting to children are perhaps not the ones we as society should be.

I wonder what little girls in Afghanistan think of the Barbie...

Lethal Weapon - Lego edition

From this:

"I was surrounded by about 6 SWAT guys armed with shotguns and assault rifles. At this point it seemed like a good idea to inquire why I might be in custody. Apparently I had been reported with a gun."

Do not underestimate the power of Lego....

Who throws a shoe??!?

Remember that "hero" Iraqi journalist that deployed an I.S.P (Improvised Shoe Projectile) at George W. Bush last year? Well, what goes around, comes around.

He who lives by the shoe…may get hit by the shoe


Ask not for whom the shoe throws, it is being thrown at thee….

He who has the last shoe throw…will walk home in socks

From Storyballoon (via Newsbusters)

Judgement

From this story:

"I'm angry. I'm hurt," Bellamy said. "You shouldn't judge someone based on who they are."

Say what?

Disconnect

Last week, the Swiss people voted to change the national constitution to ban the constructions of minarets, the distinctive spires on the top of many (but not all) mosques. Switzerland has a type of 'direct democracy' where referendums can be be held for the people to vote on ANY legislation. The majority party, Swiss People Party (SVP) were driving the campaign, and 57.5% of voters voted in favor of the ban, contrary to the results of opinion polls on the vote.

Of course, the Swiss were roundly condemned by their own politicians, and of course the UN condemn it, the EU are critical, the Vatican criticize it (?!?!), the Egyptians believe it is a "grave mistake", the Maltese believe it "is a violation of human rights and religious freedom" and that bastion of human rights and religious tolerance, Iran believe it is an Islamaphobic act, which of course was backed up with a threat, and the Norwegians likened the swiss to Nazis (which given Switzerland's history *cough*WWII*cough* ... well enough said about that)

Norwegian newspaper "Dagsavien" front page, Monday 30th November, 2009
(picture source)

Automatic accusations of "Islamophobia" and racism flew thick and fast with Europe's elites were shocked (shocked!!!) that the Swiss people would resent what they see as the creeping Islamization of their society. And what becomes clear is the disconnect between the policies advocated by politicians, and what the "common people" think. The refusal of mainstream European political parties to talk about issues that are considered to sensitive to mention, is opening the door to extreme right-wing parties to garner public support. Much in the same way the refusal of Australian political parties to talk frankly and openly about immigration allowed a racist fishmonger to get elected to parliament 13 years ago. The Swiss People's Party cannot be compared to the UK's BNP, or France's Le Pen, as they are the majority mainstream party, so the reactions around Europe (and the World) demonstrates how disconnected the agenda of the European elites is vs their own citizens.

SVP Minaret ban poster (picture source)

Some delusions from columnists in The Guardian:

"Populist demagogues blame political, cultural, and commercial elites for the anxieties of the modern world. They are accused, not entirely without reason, of imposing mass immigration, economic crisis, and loss of national identity on ordinary citizens. But if the elites are hated for causing our modern malaise, the Muslims are envied for still having faith, for knowing who they are, for having something that is worth dying for."

(yeah it's the fact that Muslims "have faith" that the masses are jealous of, nothing to do with the specifics of their religious practice.... I think we have here is the first occurrence of Jihad-envy)

And some insightful introspectiveness, from of all places, Indonesia (in an article entitled "Thanking the Swiss Vote"):

"Frankly speaking, we expected more from the Swiss in their vote whether to endorse a government ban on minarets.
...
If a nation as peaceful as Switzerland sees the minaret as a symbol of Islamic fundamentalism and radicalism, how do other nations who are less tolerant see this symbol of Islam?"

And thanks to this vote, these issues are now being discussed. Taj Hargey in The Times (UK):

"Muslims who have settled in Switzerland (and elsewhere in Europe) should not confuse culture with creed. To become integrated into their surroundings, they must relinquish the cultural baggage of their ancestral homelands. They should practice a Swiss Islam that is rooted in the society in which they live.
Although the Swiss have been convinced by right-wing zealots that minarets are a problem, local Muslims should not embrace a victim mentality. They must confront the toxic radicalisation of their faith that is imported from overseas."

It's no wonder the Swiss want to ban minarets...they're starting to grow on people's heads.
(picture source)

How a conspiracy unfolds

One of the major questions I get asked about my Warming denialist beliefs is how could there be a global conspiracy of scientists and politicians pushing an agenda if the "facts" aren't in? Well the leak of the CRU emails, or "Climategate" as it is now known, shows precisely how and why this came about.

The answer is, as in any detective story, follow the money.

Brett Stephens from the Wall Street Journal:

“Why did the money pour in so quickly? Because the climate alarm kept ringing so loudly: The louder the alarm, the greater the sums.
...
None of these outfits is per se corrupt, in the sense that the monies they get are spent on something other than their intended purposes. But they depend on an inherently corrupting premise, namely that the hypothesis on which their livelihood depends has in fact been proved. Absent that proof, everything they represent—including the thousands of jobs they provide—vanishes. This is what's known as a vested interest, and vested interests are an enemy of sound science.”

Why this is such an incredible scandal is precisely because these scientists/politicians (or as I like to call them "activists") want to re-order the world economy and political structures based on the premise that man-made CO2 output is affecting the world's climate. Nothing short of "re-structuring" (read: handicapping) the developed worlds economies and establishing one global government to manage the world's industries will do. You think I'm tin-foil-hat-conspiracy mongering?

Let me quote from the UN's own IPCC "Ad hoc working group on long-term copperative action under the convention" document, or what is known as the proposed Copenhagen treaty (page 18):

"38. The scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention will be based on three basic pillars: government; facilitative mechanism; and financial mechanism, and the basic organization of which will include the following:

(a) The government will be ruled by the COP with the support of a new subsidiary body on adaptation, and of an Executive Board responsible for the management of the new funds and the related facilitative processes and bodies. The current Convention secretariat will operate as such, as appropriate"

Did you know that the Copenhagen conference was attempting to establish a "government"?

Lord Monckton (an adviser of Margaret Thatcher) said in an address in October:

"I read that treaty. And what it says is this, that a world government is going to be created. The word “government” actually appears as the first of three purposes of the new entity. The second purpose is the transfer of wealth from the countries of the West to third world countries, in satisfication of what is called, coyly, “climate debt” – because we’ve been burning CO2 and they haven’t. We’ve been screwing up the climate and they haven’t. And the third purpose of this new entity, this government, is enforcement."

Video of the presentation:


You would think that if changes of this nature to the world economy and political structures are that important you would want to make sure you get your facts right. Thus the importance of the CRU leaked documents cannot be underestimated, even to to the point where total left-wing greenies are now demanding explanation. Clive Crook from The Atlantic (definitely not a right-wing rag - emphasis mine):

“I'm also surprised by the IPCC's response. Amid the self-justification, I had hoped for a word of apology, or even of censure. (George Monbiot called for Phil Jones to resign, for crying out loud.) At any rate I had expected no more than ordinary evasion. The declaration from Rajendra Pachauri that the emails confirm all is as it should be is stunning. Science at its best. Science as it should be. Good lord. This is pure George Orwell. And these guys call the other side "deniers".

“These people are willing to subvert the very methods--notably, peer review--that underwrite the integrity of their discipline. Is this really business as usual in science these days? If it is, we should demand higher standards--at least whenever "the science" calls for a wholesale transformation of the world economy. And maybe some independent oversight to go along with the higher standards. “

So what has happened this week thanks to Climategate?

• Phil Jones, the head of the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit has stepped down.
• Al Gore has canceled his Copenhagen USD $1,200 per handshake event
• In The Guardian, one of the loudest Warm-mongers and fellow comrade-in-arms to Al Gore, Dr James Hansen of NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies (also implicated in Climategate) has said that the Copenhagen Climate talks must fail
• And Arnold Schwarzenegger has unveiled a scary new climate change map.

The Terminator talks about the end of the world...for Californians