New Hot Take: It Wasn’t Russian Collusion, It Was Israeli Collusion

By William Teach June 6, 2018 – 5:25 pm

Any time that Leftists start yammering on about Israel, it’s hard not to think that this has something to do with the Progressive (Marxist, Socialist, whatever) hatred of Israel and Jews. Because we’ve witnessed their hatred time and time again. Does this have something to do with that? Who knows. What we do know is that Leftists love them some conspiracy theories, and if they involve slamming Israel, all the better (Via Twitchy)

Schindler writes

Indeed, some counterintelligence pros in Washington have a rather different take on the Mueller inquiry than most Americans do. While Moscow’s secret role in subverting our election in 2016 is plain to see and is now denied only by the willfully obtuse or congenitally dishonest, detecting a direct Kremlin hand on the Trump campaign is trickier. Trump’s links to Moscow are visible but remain somewhat obscure.

His ties to Israel, however, are much plainer to see. Based on the available evidence to date, Team Trump’s 2016 links to shadowy Israelis appear just as troubling as those to dodgy Russians—indeed, in some cases they are the very same people. As a veteran counterspy in our Intelligence Community whom I’ve known for years recently asked me with a wry smile, “What if the real secret of the Trump campaign isn’t that it’s a Kremlin operation, rather an Israeli operation masquerading as a Russian one?”

And what if some people are just batshit crazy? Because he’s put himself in the realm of Excitable Louise Mensch

https://twitter.com/SethAMandel/status/894319260541104128

Even if true, let’s not forget A) nations interfere with other nations, including elections, all the time, and B) Obama and his people interfered with Israeli elections (and Russia’s) multiple times. And the left leaning media said nothing bad.

Read: New Hot Take: It Wasn’t Russian Collusion, It Was Israeli Collusion »

Posted in Israel, Unhinged Tools | 13 Comments | Trackback URL

Note On Privacy Policy And Logging In

By William Teach June 6, 2018 – 2:01 pm

With the new 4.6.9 WordPress, it was made to be compliant with European Union privacy rules. You’ll notice that there is a new privacy policy in the top bar with all the other Pages. Though it’s kinda bare bones. My privacy policy is basically “I don’t give your stuff to anyone else.”

You’ll also notice that a bar pops up at the bottom about the cookies policy. It will go away when you click it or it times out after 30 seconds. Supposed to be saved in your device for like 30 days or something. I’m hoping that it will allow better saving of your user name and stuff when you go in to comment.

As far as logging in goes, would y’all like to be able to login using Social media such as Google, Twitter, facebook? I have to do a big change to the comments PHP to allow that. Could be easy, could be a pain. If you think it would be helpful, I’ll do it sooner rather than later. (the comments PHP really needs to be update, anyhow, a lot of really old scripts. Though most work).

You can also create a WordPress.com account, and login under Meta on the far right sidebar.

Thanks for coming around, folks. Wouldn’t work without y’all.

Read: Note On Privacy Policy And Logging In »

Posted in Pirates Cove | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach June 6, 2018 – 1:00 pm

…is an evil charcoal grill causing the seas to rise hundreds of feet, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Living Freedom, with a post wondering what Deerfield will do on their gun grabbing.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

Surprise: Greenland Was Much Warmer Than Today During Holocene

By William Teach June 6, 2018 – 10:30 am

Must have been all the darned flies driving lots of tiny fossil fueled vehicles

Bugs in Greenland Mud Yield Clues to Future Warming

Flying bugs trapped deep in the frozen mud covering Greenland have pointed researchers to new clues about the country’s climate, suggesting the now-icebound island was once warmer than previously believed.

In the centuries that followed the last ice age and in the millenia between the last two, Greenland could have seen summer highs between 10 and 15 degrees warmer than today, according to a new study led by researchers at Northwestern University in Illinois.

Core samples taken from the mud of a lake bed in northwestern Greenland, just beyond the edge of the ice sheet and largely undisturbed by its historical ebb and flow, revealed large numbers of preserved insects known as phantom midges and a fly species known as chironomids. Those species today usually live well south of Greenland, but the numbers found in the sediment cores taken by the Northwestern team were comparable to populations seen in the Canadian Atlantic provinces.

So, wait, what could have possibly caused it to be so warm during these two different time periods, one of which was during our current Holocene? And why can’t it possibly be the same causation (for the most part) during the current warm period we’re now in?

Figuring out what Greenland’s climate was like in the past can help scientists figure out what may happen to it in the future as planet-warming carbon dioxide and other gases build up in Earth’s atmosphere. That data collected by studies like the Northwestern study can be fed into computer models to help fine-tune those estimates.

“These findings may portend large future warming in this high-latitude region,” the authors conclude.

They just can’t help themselves in going Cult of Climastrology.

Read: Surprise: Greenland Was Much Warmer Than Today During Holocene »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

NY Bill Would Give School Employees Right To Ask Court To Take Guns From Parents

By William Teach June 6, 2018 – 7:33 am

When we talk about slippery slopes, and a concern that if you give the gun grabbers some of their “common sense gun control reforms”, they’ll push the envelope even more, this is what we mean

Teachers in New York could gain right to ask courts to strip guns from troubled students

New York may allow teachers to report troubled students to a judge to ensure they do not have access to guns.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo on Tuesday proposed a law — the “red flag bill” — that would give teachers and administrators the ability to file a petition with the courts to keep guns away from students who appear to pose a safety risk.

“This bill, if it passes, would be the first bill in the United States of America to give a teacher this recourse and this solution,” Cuomo said at a news conference in Manhattan.

Students, huh? There’s a good chance it will never be passed, since Republicans control the NY Senate. But, consider, citizens under the age of 18 aren’t allowed to own firearms in the first place in People’s Republik Of New York, and the majority of students in k-12 will be under 18, so, what’s the point?

New York prohibits the purchase of firearms by anyone younger than 18, but for students who are younger, the measure could allow a judge to order a family to take additional steps to keep the guns away from their children, Cuomo said.

“If you have a young person in a home with guns in it, a judge could limit the access to those guns in the house,” Cuomo explained.

And Bamm!, there it is. A way to make accusations and have people’s gun rights stripped quickly. Current red flag law in NY doesn’t allow for guns to be seized except from those directly accused. And, it’s pretty much about family, friends, or law enforcement making the claim. Cuomo’s gun grabbing would go the extra mile

The proposal would allow police, family members and teachers — as well as school administrators, guidance counselors and other licensed school professionals — to petition the court if they believe a person is a threat.

The judge would then decide whether to issue an “extreme risk protection order.”

The potential for abuse is amazing. Consider, also, that Cuomo wants the age of purchase to go from 18-21, so, there would be no kids in K-12 who would be able to legally purchase a firearm in NY, so, this is about going after the parent’s 2nd Amendment Right. Oh, and

Cuomo said that if the gun-control measures weren’t approved before session ended June 20, the bills would become a campaign issue.

He knows there is no way this gets passed during the current legislative session, and little chance before the elections, so he’s trying to create an election issue. But, don’t think he doesn’t want to find a way to take away more guns, all while he runs around with his own armed protection.

Read: NY Bill Would Give School Employees Right To Ask Court To Take Guns From Parents »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats, Liberal World | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

AG Sessions: If Illegals Do Not Want To Be Separated From Kids, Don’t Come Here Illegally

By William Teach June 6, 2018 – 7:16 am

If you get the message out, they will hopefully not come

Sessions defends separating immigrant parents and children: ‘We’ve got to get this message out’

Attorney General Jeff Sessions delivered a vigorous defense of the hard-line Trump administration policy that has resulted in immigrant children being separated from their parents after crossing the border illegally during a lengthy interview on Tuesday.

Conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt, who admitted he was “disturbed” by the separations, pressed Sessions repeatedly about the morality and necessity of the familial separations. But the attorney general stood his ground.

“If people don’t want to be separated from their children, they should not bring them with them,” Sessions said, echoing some of the remarks he made in May when the Justice Department announced that it would begin to prosecuting every person who crossed the border unlawfully, including many seeking asylum. “We’ve got to get this message out. You’re not given immunity.”

And this is also a great example of a biased media spinning like they’re doing dizzy bats, because we can go to the actual transcript the Washington Post’s Eli Rosenberg helpfully provided and see something very pertinent that’s left out of Rosenberg’s article

HH: But General, what I’m pressing on, because I’m disturbed by this. I don’t think children should be separated from biological parents at any age, but especially if they’re infants and toddlers. I think it’s traumatic and terribly difficult on the child. Is it absolutely necessary to do so? Can’t we have facilities where parents remain united with kids?

JS: Well, we can, we’d be glad to work at that, and actually, to keep them as close as possible, and then they’re deported. But the law requires us to keep children in a different facility than we do for adults. And every time somebody, Hugh, gets prosecuted in America for a crime, American citizens, and they go to jail, they’re separated from their children. We don’t want to do this at all. If people don’t want to be separated from their children, they should not bring them with them. We’ve got to get this message out. You’re not given immunity. You have to, you will be prosecuted if you bring, if you come illegally. And if you bring children, you’ll still be prosecuted.

Nor do we, as Sessions points out later, have the capacity/facilities to keep the kids together with the parents. And the kids are transferred to Health and Human services. It’s a simple proposition: don’t come to the U.S. illegally and none of this is a concern. Unaccompanied minors are released “within 72 hours to the “least restrictive” setting possible — usually parents, relatives or ORR-licensed shelters.”

HH: There’s an organization called Kids in Need of Defense, www.supportKIND.org, and they are, they’re liberal activists, but they have a point that these children deserve representation, because many of them are eligible for asylum or refugee status. You’re the chief law enforcement officer. Are you guaranteeing that these 10,000 children have adequate access to legal counsel?

JS: I’m guaranteeing that they’re treated properly and lawfully. But so much of this is not valid, these claims. You just can’t decide you want to come to America regardless, and when you’re not, don’t meet the standards for asylum demand entry to the United States, demand that you appoint lawyers, and demand that you go through prolonged trials. About 20% of the unaccompanied children, come by themselves, that are stopped, are denied immediately. And 80, then the rest go through an asylum process, which is fair and just and takes time. And they get a hearing. And the judges are well aware that they’re young, and they treat them with the proper care and concern. And of the 80% who actually go through asylum processes, only 20% are successful. Most are denied, and many of them have no legitimate claim at all. They were just coming here because they’d like to make more money or for some economic reason.

Most of the asylum and similar claims are complete mule fritters for both the kids and adults. They’re just coming to the U.S.. And we might be more sympathetic if they seemed like they actually wanted to be a part of America, rather than demanding that we give them food, shelter, healthcare, money, education, clothes, change America to the way the illegals want it, not too mention being abusive and rude to America and her citizens.

Read: AG Sessions: If Illegals Do Not Want To Be Separated From Kids, Don’t Come Here Illegally »

Posted in Illegal Immigration | Comments Off on AG Sessions: If Illegals Do Not Want To Be Separated From Kids, Don’t Come Here Illegally | Trackback URL

Who’s Up For A Climate Positive Burger?

By William Teach June 5, 2018 – 3:05 pm

Lunch with a side of cultism

The World’s First Climate-Positive Burgers: Max Burgers Now Help Fight Climate Change

This morning, from the main stage at SB’18 Vancouver, Max Burgers’ Chief Sustainability Officer, Kaj Török, announced that the Swedish burger chain is set to offer the world’s first climate-positive burgers. Török said that customers will soon be able to “take a bite that’s good for the planet as well as their taste-buds” when eating at the quick-serve burger chain, and urged other companies to join Max in going climate positive.

The climate-positive menu will be launched on the company’s 50th anniversary on the 14th June, across all 130 stores in Northern Europe and the Middle East. According to the company, customers will then be eating burgers that have 110 percent of their climate emissions offset — meaning every Max Burger sold will help fight climate change.

So, wait, Kaj took a long fossil fueled flight from Sweden to Canada? Huh.

“First, we measure all our emissions — from the farmers’ land to our guests’ hand, as well as lots of other things like waste, and consumer travel to and from the restaurant,” Török explained in a recent interview. “The second step is to make every effort to reduce emissions. We add new approaches and solutions all the time to find ways to make reductions, like the Green Family range. Thirdly, and only after making all the reductions we can, we plant trees to offset all remaining emissions. We then go a step further to capture the carbon dioxide equivalent of another 10 percent of emissions. That’s to ensure that we can contribute to reducing the overall levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. And all of this independently reviewed and done according to international standards.”

They’re also planting lots of trees. But, closing down because of all the energy and fossil fuels used isn’t in their plans.

In response to any criticisms about the climate-positive burger being just a ‘feel-good’ gimmick, Török replied: “Carbon offsetting doesn’t buy us a clear conscience. Instead, it is a self-imposed carbon tax that provides us with an incentive to continue reducing our emissions. Through our carbon offsetting, we take direct responsibility for our emissions while working hard to reduce our impact. It is both, rather than one or the other. Everyone must do as much as they can to contribute to meeting global climate goals.”

You can bet that the customers are paying for it.

Read: Who’s Up For A Climate Positive Burger? »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Climahypocrites, Global Warming | Comments Off on Who’s Up For A Climate Positive Burger? | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach June 5, 2018 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrible can of either soda or beer containing evil carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Flopping Aces, with a post Democrats hating America.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

‘Carbon bubble’ Could Spark Financial Doom Or Something

By William Teach June 5, 2018 – 10:30 am

It’s always something with these people

‘Carbon bubble’ could spark global financial crisis, study warns

Plunging prices for renewable energy and rapidly increasing investment in low-carbon technologies could leave fossil fuel companies with trillions in stranded assets and spark a global financial crisis, a new study has found.

A sudden drop in demand for fossil fuels before 2035 is likely, according to the study, given the current global investments and economic advantages in a low-carbon transition.

The existence of a “carbon bubble” – assets in fossil fuels that are currently overvalued because, in the medium and long-term, the world will have to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions – has long been proposed by academics, activists and investors. The new study, published on Monday in the journal Nature Climate Change, shows that a sharp slump in the value of fossil fuels would cause this bubble to burst, and posits that such a slump is likely before 2035 based on current patterns of energy use.

Daffy Screwball photo DaffyScrewball.gif

It’s all based on reading tea leaves, er, computer models.

Read: ‘Carbon bubble’ Could Spark Financial Doom Or Something »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

NC Democrats Look To Ban Lots Of Handguns

By William Teach June 5, 2018 – 7:20 am

Remember, they aren’t trying to take anyone’s guns, and they just want common sense reform. They’re not going to infringe on the rights of law abiding citizens. They’re angels!!!!

Can NC ensure ‘safe’ guns? Democrats want to ban handguns with dangerous design flaws

A trio of Democrats want North Carolina to follow California’s footsteps in governing gun safety.

The “Ensure Safe Handguns” bill instructs the NC Department of Public Safety to prohibit the use of handguns that have design flaws endangering users. The bill instructs the department to use California’s Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale as a model.

California has prohibited the sale of hundreds of handguns, affecting popular brands like Beretta, Colt and Smith & Wesson.

The department would conduct firing and other tests to determine which firearms are unsafe. Antiques, theater props and guns designed for use in the Olympic Games would be exempt from testing.

The bill itself would require that anyone who owns one of the non-certified handguns turn it in or face a misdemeanor.

Paul Valone, president of the gun-rights advocacy group Grassroots North Carolina, said the bill shows that Democrats “are trying to incrementally ban the ownership of firearms, one step at a time.” He thinks it would drive up the cost of handguns.

He’s not worried about the bill now, because he doesn’t think Republicans will even consider it.

“But people who value the 2nd Amendment should take note,” Valone said. “If Democrats win (control of the NC General Assembly this November), we would eat this bill and others just like it.”

True, it will die in committee now, because the GOP holds a supermajority. But, this is what the gun grabbers do: pass something, then expand on it.

Steve Oetzell noted in the Daily Breeze back in 2015

In 2000, California passed SB 15, creating the so-called Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale. This bill mandated that, in order to be sold in the state of California, all “pistols” (semi-automatic or not) shall be subject to a series of “drop tests” to determine the gun’s resistance to discharging when accidentally dropped. Additionally, it stipulated firing requirements to test the structural integrity of the gun.

This, presumably, was a good safety law, as the intent was to protect the public from poorly made guns. But rather than creating a much shorter list of unsafe handguns that are not approved for sale, the law created an all-encompassing list of “approved” handguns which, effectively, made all guns unsafe until the manufacturer paid a fee and submitted their handgun for testing. Once approved, a yearly fee was required to keep a handgun on the list. If the fee was not paid or the gun not resubmitted, it fell off of the list, once again, becoming an “unsafe” handgun.

Worse yet, one might argue that a citizen’s rights should not have an expiration date based on the expiration of a government fee. It also did not matter that nearly all firearms manufacturers already subject their product to testing and quality control far more rigorous than anything the state of California could ever dream up.

Guns have to be retested. But,

But that wasn’t enough. In 2003, California passed SB 489 requiring two very questionable “safety features” to be installed on any new handgun submitted for testing, approval, and addition to the list. These two features were the loaded chamber indicator (a device indicating that there is a bullet chambered in the gun) and a magazine disconnect (a device that will not allow the gun to fire if there is a bullet in the chamber when the magazine has been removed from the gun).

Suddenly, the list of laboratory drop tested firearms had been distorted into a vehicle used to enforce mandated “safety features.” This was not the intent of the original SB 15.

And then California required microstamping. And fewer and fewer handguns were available to the residents of California, who already had to deal with a huge amount of regulations and rules and laws that restricted law abiding citizens from using their 2nd Amendment Right.

Read: NC Democrats Look To Ban Lots Of Handguns »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, NC News | 2 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove