Kudos to Finnish operatic star soprano Karita Mattila, who recently refused to appear together with dictator Vladimir Putin's puppet Valery Gergiev in New York. Because of Mattila's refusal the Munich Philharmonic Orchestra had to invite Italian conductor Fabio Luisi to lead the concert in the Carnegie Hall on April 12.
Shame on Munich Philharmonic Orchestra and the London Symphony Orchestra, both of which continue their co-operation with the much overrated Ossetian conductor!
Pages
▼
Friday, 16 May 2014
Richard Miniter: "The Obama Administration is too busy trying to appease the Russian bear to see an opportunity to tame it"
Richard Miniter is spot on in his Forbes column:
The only way to transform Russia from a would-be regional threat to a normal country would be to take away its extraordinary powers over Europe. European energy independence, missile shield and a robust NATO would trim Russia’s claws and change its behavior.
Unfortunately, the Obama Administration can’t see the tremendous historic opportunity that lies at its feet.
Putin’s slow-motion invasion of Ukraine is exactly the catalyst needed to wean Europe from energy dependence on Russia, forge opinion for missile defense and modernize NATO. Without Putin’s aggression, no American president could ever get the Europeans to act collectively and rapidly.
Yet the Obama Administration is too busy trying to appease the Russian bear to see an opportunity to tame it.
A proven missile defense for Poland is a vital first step. Let’s hope the Obama Administration comes to realize what the Poles already know.
The only way to transform Russia from a would-be regional threat to a normal country would be to take away its extraordinary powers over Europe. European energy independence, missile shield and a robust NATO would trim Russia’s claws and change its behavior.
Unfortunately, the Obama Administration can’t see the tremendous historic opportunity that lies at its feet.
Putin’s slow-motion invasion of Ukraine is exactly the catalyst needed to wean Europe from energy dependence on Russia, forge opinion for missile defense and modernize NATO. Without Putin’s aggression, no American president could ever get the Europeans to act collectively and rapidly.
A proven missile defense for Poland is a vital first step. Let’s hope the Obama Administration comes to realize what the Poles already know.
Thursday, 15 May 2014
Alarmists Oreskes and Oppenheimer maintain that climate scientists actually have underpredicted global warming!
Harvard historian Naomi Oreskes, Princeton geoscientist Michael Oppenheimer and some other "scholars" maintain that climate scientist actually have underpredicted evidence of human caused global warming:
In fact, it increasingly appears that, if there is any systemic bias in the climate models, it’s that they understate the gravity of the situation. In an interesting paper that appeared in the journal Global Environmental Change, a group of scholars, including Naomi Oreskes, a historian of science at Harvard, and Michael Oppenheimer, a geoscientist at Princeton, note that so-called climate skeptics frequently accuse climate scientists of “alarmism” and “overreacting to evidence of human impacts on the climate system.” But, when you actually measure the predictions that climate scientists have made against observations of how the climate has already changed, you find the exact opposite: a pattern “of under- rather than over-prediction” emerges. The scholars attribute this bias to the norms of scientific discourse: “The scientific values of rationality, dispassion, and self-restraint tend to lead scientists to demand greater levels of evidence in support of surprising, dramatic, or alarming conclusions.” They call this tendency “erring on the side of least drama,” or E.S.L.D. for short.
Alarmists Oreskes and Oppenheimer must be joking. Or do they think that climate scientists have underpredicted the fact that there has been no global warming during the last almost 18 years?
In fact, it increasingly appears that, if there is any systemic bias in the climate models, it’s that they understate the gravity of the situation. In an interesting paper that appeared in the journal Global Environmental Change, a group of scholars, including Naomi Oreskes, a historian of science at Harvard, and Michael Oppenheimer, a geoscientist at Princeton, note that so-called climate skeptics frequently accuse climate scientists of “alarmism” and “overreacting to evidence of human impacts on the climate system.” But, when you actually measure the predictions that climate scientists have made against observations of how the climate has already changed, you find the exact opposite: a pattern “of under- rather than over-prediction” emerges. The scholars attribute this bias to the norms of scientific discourse: “The scientific values of rationality, dispassion, and self-restraint tend to lead scientists to demand greater levels of evidence in support of surprising, dramatic, or alarming conclusions.” They call this tendency “erring on the side of least drama,” or E.S.L.D. for short.
Alarmists Oreskes and Oppenheimer must be joking. Or do they think that climate scientists have underpredicted the fact that there has been no global warming during the last almost 18 years?
Tuesday, 13 May 2014
Eurobarometer survey: Reducing waste and use of plastic bags are now the main European activities against dangerous global warming
"Europe is clearly leading the World" - That's what EU bigwigs have been boasting about for years now with regard to fighting "dangerous climate change".
However, the latest EU Eurobarometer climate change survey shows the gap between Brussels and the European man in the street. In spite of the massive (often EU financed and MSM supported) propaganda campaigns, only a small minority of Europeans say that they have taken e.g. any of these "environmentally friendly" measures:
11% report that low fuel consumption was an important factor in their choice
When the results did not fit the needs of the EU climate change alarmists, they decided to add a few activities to their list of climate change measures. Thus "reducing waste" and "regularly separating it for recycling" is now the number one activity in the fight against dangerous global warming for 69% of the Europeans! The next important activity is trying to cut down on the consumtion of plastic bags ...
The action Europeans are most likely to say they have taken is to try to reduce their
However, the latest EU Eurobarometer climate change survey shows the gap between Brussels and the European man in the street. In spite of the massive (often EU financed and MSM supported) propaganda campaigns, only a small minority of Europeans say that they have taken e.g. any of these "environmentally friendly" measures:
11% report that low fuel consumption was an important factor in their choice
of a new car; 9% say that they have avoided taking short-haul flights whenever possible;
7% have switched to an energy supplier providing a greater share of energy from
renewable sources; 5% have installed equipment to generate renewable electricity in
their home; and 4% say that they have purchased a low-energy home.When the results did not fit the needs of the EU climate change alarmists, they decided to add a few activities to their list of climate change measures. Thus "reducing waste" and "regularly separating it for recycling" is now the number one activity in the fight against dangerous global warming for 69% of the Europeans! The next important activity is trying to cut down on the consumtion of plastic bags ...
The action Europeans are most likely to say they have taken is to try to reduce their
waste and regularly separate it for recycling (69%). Half of all Europeans (51%) have
tried to cut down on their consumption of disposable items whenever possible, e.g.
supermarket plastic bags and excessive packaging
However, what most waste reducing and plastic bag avoiding Europeans do not know is that they are also footing the bill for the activities that make it possible for the EU to maintain its dubious "world leadership" with regard to "fighting dangerous climate change":
"the EU has agreed that at least 20% of its €960 billion budget for the 2014-2020 period should be spent on climate change-related action.
However, what most waste reducing and plastic bag avoiding Europeans do not know is that they are also footing the bill for the activities that make it possible for the EU to maintain its dubious "world leadership" with regard to "fighting dangerous climate change":
"the EU has agreed that at least 20% of its €960 billion budget for the 2014-2020 period should be spent on climate change-related action.
The EU to get tough on Putin's money machine Gazprom
Mafia state dictator Vladimir Putin's money machine Gazprom is in for a rough ride:
Europe has argued that Gazprom manipulates prices for political gain, and the European Commission is set to release the results of a two-year investigation this month that's expected to demonstrate substantial evidence that Gazprom is breaking European laws. After that report is released, the EC could take action relatively quickly.
"I think we are going to see, first of all, a spectacular lump of bad publicity for Gazprom, because the complaints will list all of the bad things that Gazprom has been doing," Edward Lucas, the editor of The Economist, told Radio Free Europe in an interview. "Then we will have fines, which may be very substantial, and there will also be the opportunity for the companies that have been overcharged for gas to launch lawsuits against Gazprom over the extortionary prices that they have been charging."
The European Commission could seek fines against Gazprom and/or a change in pricing structure. Gazprom has long linked its prices to the price of crude oil and has signed up countries to long-term contracts, which are often expensive.
But as the spot market in Europe has grown as a result of a flood of Qatari LNG -- which was once destined for the US until shale gas came about -- Russian gas is no longer the only game in town. Purchases of natural gas on the spot market have shot up from just 15% in 2008 to 44% in 2012. This has Gazprom's gas contracts looking more and more expensive and even extortionary, as Lucas points out. Eastern European countries often pay one-and-a-half times more for natural gas than does Western Europe.
Europe has argued that Gazprom manipulates prices for political gain, and the European Commission is set to release the results of a two-year investigation this month that's expected to demonstrate substantial evidence that Gazprom is breaking European laws. After that report is released, the EC could take action relatively quickly.
"I think we are going to see, first of all, a spectacular lump of bad publicity for Gazprom, because the complaints will list all of the bad things that Gazprom has been doing," Edward Lucas, the editor of The Economist, told Radio Free Europe in an interview. "Then we will have fines, which may be very substantial, and there will also be the opportunity for the companies that have been overcharged for gas to launch lawsuits against Gazprom over the extortionary prices that they have been charging."
The European Commission could seek fines against Gazprom and/or a change in pricing structure. Gazprom has long linked its prices to the price of crude oil and has signed up countries to long-term contracts, which are often expensive.
But as the spot market in Europe has grown as a result of a flood of Qatari LNG -- which was once destined for the US until shale gas came about -- Russian gas is no longer the only game in town. Purchases of natural gas on the spot market have shot up from just 15% in 2008 to 44% in 2012. This has Gazprom's gas contracts looking more and more expensive and even extortionary, as Lucas points out. Eastern European countries often pay one-and-a-half times more for natural gas than does Western Europe.
Sunday, 11 May 2014
The Guardian: "Eurosceptic parties could gain up to a third of the total vote and up to 200 of the 751 seats in the next European parliament"
Even Britain's leftist pro EU The Guardian newspaper has to admit that EU-critical parties are in for a good result in the forthcoming EU elections:
In Britain, Ukip's Nigel Farage, pint in hand, has already pulled British politics to a place close to the EU exit door. But euroscepticism is no longer a curiosity of these islands. Marine Le Pen, leader of France's Front National, has even grander designs than Farage. Le Pen plans to use the forthcoming elections to form an alliance dedicated to wrecking the "monster in Brussels" from within. Her party is on course to top the polls in France.
In Italy, an ex-comic, Beppe Grillo, whose anti-establishment shtick has its origins in the anarchic left, ridicules the recent succession of Italian prime ministers who have "become the slaves of financial interests and economic decisions taken elsewhere". The Five-Star movement which he founded in 2007 is second in Italy's polls, predicted to win 25% of the vote. The Greek socialists of Syriza are riding high from Athens to Alexandroupoli on the back of a promise to roll back crushing EU-imposed debt repayments.
Even in the land of Borgen, where consensus politics provided an unlikely template for cult television viewing, rebellion is in the air. The Danish People's party – anti-EU, anti-multiculturalism and anti-immigration – is pledging to "assert Denmark's independence and to guarantee the freedom of the Danish people in their own country". The DPP, which like Ukip has profited from popular resentment at the extension of welfare benefits to immigrant workers, sits in first place in the polls, also with a share of 25%. In the Netherlands, Austria, Finland, and across much of eastern Europe, it is a similar story.
Two weeks from the elections, it seems possible – probable even – that Eurosceptic parties could gain up to a third of the total vote and up to 200 of the 751 seats in the next European parliament. Given that less than half of the Union's electorate are likely to vote at all, those figures suggest an overwhelming majority of Europeans are either apathetic towards the ongoing project of a common borderless European home or actively hostile. --
In Britain, Ukip's Nigel Farage, pint in hand, has already pulled British politics to a place close to the EU exit door. But euroscepticism is no longer a curiosity of these islands. Marine Le Pen, leader of France's Front National, has even grander designs than Farage. Le Pen plans to use the forthcoming elections to form an alliance dedicated to wrecking the "monster in Brussels" from within. Her party is on course to top the polls in France.
In Italy, an ex-comic, Beppe Grillo, whose anti-establishment shtick has its origins in the anarchic left, ridicules the recent succession of Italian prime ministers who have "become the slaves of financial interests and economic decisions taken elsewhere". The Five-Star movement which he founded in 2007 is second in Italy's polls, predicted to win 25% of the vote. The Greek socialists of Syriza are riding high from Athens to Alexandroupoli on the back of a promise to roll back crushing EU-imposed debt repayments.
Even in the land of Borgen, where consensus politics provided an unlikely template for cult television viewing, rebellion is in the air. The Danish People's party – anti-EU, anti-multiculturalism and anti-immigration – is pledging to "assert Denmark's independence and to guarantee the freedom of the Danish people in their own country". The DPP, which like Ukip has profited from popular resentment at the extension of welfare benefits to immigrant workers, sits in first place in the polls, also with a share of 25%. In the Netherlands, Austria, Finland, and across much of eastern Europe, it is a similar story.
Two weeks from the elections, it seems possible – probable even – that Eurosceptic parties could gain up to a third of the total vote and up to 200 of the 751 seats in the next European parliament. Given that less than half of the Union's electorate are likely to vote at all, those figures suggest an overwhelming majority of Europeans are either apathetic towards the ongoing project of a common borderless European home or actively hostile. --