John Kerry: ISIS Gravest Threat, Embodiment Of Evil

By William Teach November 13, 2015 – 6:53 am

Has he checked with himself and his boss regarding the threat level?

(Washington Post) Secretary of State John F. Kerry on Thursday called the Islamic State “the gravest extremist threat faced by our generation and the embodiment of evil in our time,” describing the group as combining “medieval and modern fascism” and comparing it to the enemies the United States faced in the last century’s world wars.

Well, it’s nice to have the threat recognized. Now, if only they’d acknowledge the true threat from all Islamists, especially those working quietly and without the violence to change Western society using our own laws, Constitutions, and mores against us.

Even as the diplomatic track continues, he said, the fight against the Islamic State has expanded. President Obama “over the last month . . . has directed every member of his national security team to pick up the pace and move forward with ideas for degrading and defeating Daesh more rapidly, more completely, and permanently.” (snip)

“The stakes could not be higher,” Kerry said. “We are on the right track, and we are making gains, and we are clear about the road ahead.”

Imagine what we could have done if someone had treated ISIS as the Varsity, rather than the JV.

Of course, there’s this

There’s plenty more like that from SoS Kerry. He’s also compared ‘climate change’ as being as big a threat as ISIS, Ebola, and other things.

Perhaps Mr. Kerry should have checked with Mr. Obama, who doesn’t seem to make any equivocation regarding ‘climate change’ being his #1 threat.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: John Kerry: ISIS Gravest Threat, Embodiment Of Evil »

Posted in Global Warming, Kerry, War On Terrorism | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

What’s The Deal With Hockey Fights?

By William Teach November 12, 2015 – 4:24 pm

As you may or may not know, I am not a hockey fan: I am a Fanatic. The NHL has always been my #1 favorite sport, especially once the NJ Devils came into being. So, I found an interesting explanation regarding fights via Caveman Circus.

Why are fights between players allowed in the NHL when it is very strongly prohibited in just about every other sport?

It helps to remember that fights in hockey are 99% consensual. If you don’t want to fight you turn your back and that’s it. There are players that fight and players that don’t, and it’s not really a machismo/honor thing that you MUST fight. No one thinks less of you for not being a fighter.

If you jump someone who is NOT looking for a fight you are usually going to get tossed from the game and probably suspended for a few games to boot. It’s not OK to blind-side someone who is not likewise spoiling for a fight and generally speaking that is frowned upon.

So the minor penalties and general lack of punishment is only in the case of two people who have collaboratively decided to go at it, which is true for almost every fight you see. They are pre-arranged (often at the face-off) and mutually agreed. At that point, two consenting adults doing what they want, basically, and the refs leave it alone until someone is at risk of getting seriously hurt — usually once someone goes down and it’s no longer a standing fight, or if other people are getting involved, or if one person is effectively incapacitated, etc.

To some degree hockey is a self-regulated game. Refs are there for line calls, not necessarily behavior control. 10 people flying around a small ice surface at 40km/h with wooden sticks can REALLY hurt each other while the ref is looking the other way if they want to.

To avoid this, fighting is used as a pressure relief… all the pent up aggression you feel for the wrongs and slights done to your team goes into cheering for your guy in the fight. Afterward everyone chills out. This is generally true even if the two guys fighting aren’t the actual guys you were mad at. But the thing is, everyone on your team is going to be mad at someone different for some random thing that happened, so it’s not practical to expect everyone will “pay” individually.

This mostly works because most players aren’t assholes. If they do something to earn your ire it was probably by accident or a “one time” thing. It’s unlikely you’ll remember it for more than 5 minutes and unlikely that guy is going to specifically tick you off again. So the fight serves to release the cumulative pressure of all those little things, not necessarily any specific incident.

Where this fails is if there is just that one total dick on a team that is constantly cheap-shotting people or otherwise behaving in a douchey way not consistent with the overall tone of the game. Especially if that person keeps doing it even after a fight or two. At some point the other team is going to remember his number and a “generic fight” won’t fix the issue. That guy now has a target painted on his back and at some point — maybe not even that game but in a future game — someone is going to risk getting tossed from the game/suspended to teach that specific player a lesson.

Though usually half of that guy’s own team are just as happy to watch him get creamed because, honestly, he IS a dick. We’d never say it out loud of course, team solidarity, rah rah rah… but at some point people get what they deserve and everyone on both sides knows it.

Now, there are a couple other things to add. Sometimes guys fight simply to try and pump up their team when they’re down. Sometimes the other guy doesn’t “want to go”, because he doesn’t want to pump the other team up. Sometimes they go because both teams are flat. Sometimes guys just feel like fighting. Mostly, though, it is a pressure valve. In the other hockey leagues, there is no fighting, and, especially in European leagues, guys get a lot of injuries from slashes and other liberties, things that often do not get called. If someone is being wild with a stick in the NHL, it often starts with the other team’s enforcer warning the enforcer of the team with the guy slashing that something is going to go down if it doesn’t stop. The enforcer then tells the guy to chill. If he doesn’t a fight will happen. Sometimes, the enforcer for the slasher’s team may wash his hands of it all, and the slasher has to either fight or “turn turtle”. If you’re going to dish it out, you better be prepared to take it.

Read: What’s The Deal With Hockey Fights? »

Posted in NHL | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach November 12, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…is a wonderful carbon friendly bike, which Everyone Else should be forced to use rather than fossil fueled vehicles, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is 90Ninety Miles From Tyranny, with a post on IT workers forced to train their foreign worker replacements.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | Comments Off on If All You See… | Trackback URL

Next Phase For Cult Of Climastrology: Suing Companies For Causing “Extreme Weather”

By William Teach November 12, 2015 – 10:10 am

Funny how this all sounds like a Leftist political movement rather than a science, eh?

(ECO Watch) A few weeks ago the first ever human rights legal action seeking the accountability of the 50 big polluters was launched. Filed by Filipino typhoon survivors and several environmental organizations, it demands that the Philippines Human Rights Commission (CHR) investigate and acknowledge the complicity of 50 investor-owned fossil fuel companies in causing extreme weather events.

This comes from a consensus that the typhoons and catastrophic storms that annually batter the Philippines and many other small island nations, are exacerbated by climate change caused by the burning of fossil fuels by distant and faceless energy companies. People in the Philippines know that they are at the end of a terrible chain reaction that destroys homes, ruins health and takes lives and livelihoods. It violates their basic human rights, so they, like many others, are starting to seek climate justice.

Consensus, huh? How about science? Eh, that’s immaterial. They want Climate Justice.

They are part of a growing number of people that will no longer stand for companies—despite knowledge of the harms associated with their products—continuing to engorge themselves on profit at the expense of the climate and human lives. These companies are morally bound to help communities at the frontline of climate change while financing a just transition to a 100 percent renewable energy future.

Morally bound! It would be hilarious if all these companies said “oh, you want a 100% renewable energy future? How about starting today, because we are pulling out. Have fun fueling your automobiles and having energy for your homes.” This isn’t to say that they do not have a responsibility to do all they can to protect real environmental concerns, but, ‘climate change’ is mostly not real, and mostly has nothing to do with the environment.

The top 50 investor-owned polluters under public scrutiny are taken from a list of 90 entities who, according to a report by Rick Heede, are responsible for 63 percent of the carbon dioxide and methane emitted between 1751 and 2010.

Pull out. Watch the meltdown by Warmists. Skipping to the end

We encourage the Commission for Human Rights to commit to investigating the big polluters for their human rights violations as a matter of urgency.

Bad Weather, which has always happened, you can’t stop, and will always happen, is now a human rights violation

Read: Next Phase For Cult Of Climastrology: Suing Companies For Causing “Extreme Weather” »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 11 Comments | Trackback URL

The Apocalypse Is In China Ahead Of Climate Talks Or Something

By William Teach November 12, 2015 – 8:04 am

Once again, we see a real environmental problem placed under the banner of ‘climate change’, reducing the actual environmental problem to a lower status

Apocalyptic China scenes ahead of climate talks

China probably doesn’t want you looking at these photos right now, especially since the world is less than three weeks away from the much-anticipated UN climate change conference in Paris.

Thick, toxic smog blanketed the country’s northeast over the weekend, reaching levels more than 50 times what the World Health Organization considers safe.

In Shenyang, a city of more than 8 million people, pollution readings were “the highest ever,” according to Greenpeace.

There are multiple tweets which show the air quality, something we’ve seen many, many times

Apocalyptic scenes such as these are common in northern China during the winter, when the country cranks up its coal-fired public heating systems to keep people warm.

And that’s how this whole thing ties into Hotcoldwetdry. The use of so many poor quality coal plants for energy is certainly an environmental issue for Chinese citizens: on one hand, they avoid freezing to death. On the other, spectacular, sorry, apocalyptic air pollution. Rather than dealing with the actual environmental problem as it stands, these fools must make it all about climate change. It’s idiotic.

And apocalyptic. In the runup to Paris, the words of the season are apocalypse and Armageddon.

  • The earth is slowly slipping into an environmental apocalypse.
  • The horsemen of the climate change apocalypse are almost upon us and their advance guard is here.
  • Waterlogged cities might seem like stuff of the post-apocalypse, but that post-apocalypse might come as soon as a single generation.

Those are just a smattering of gloom and doom stories out there from the Cult of Climastrology. These people are depressing. And constantly conflate real environmental issues, such as air pollution, with their pet cause, ‘climate change’, which turns the real issue into a minor one.

Read: The Apocalypse Is In China Ahead Of Climate Talks Or Something »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Environment, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Entitled Snowflakes Protest Free Speech Panel, Spit On Attendees

By William Teach November 12, 2015 – 7:41 am

This bit of Typical Liberal College Student Insanity comes to us via Alex Griswold at Mediaite, but, let’s start with commentor Greyhound

Appeasement only makes the aggressor more aggressive. And the students will be emboldened to push universities around the country even harder. Now they have to restore order one way or another. Now it seems to me the options are either some combination of parental and university action on their part, until they give in – or – the police hit them. A mass arrest.

The cops at Mizzoula have joined in. The universities originally started the PC movement, and is run by far left liberals, and a goodly chunk of the teachers and staffers are the same. They’ve reap what they have sown. Parents? It’s possible, mostly in terms of saying “you’re on your own for the cost of education”.

A group of Yale students interrupted and later protested a panel extolling the virtues of free speech.

The conservative William F. Buckley, Jr. Program held a free speech panel Friday featuring the Freedom for Individual Rights in Education’s Greg Luikianoff and National Review‘s Kevin Williamson. The purpose of the panel was thebacklash and screaming protests on Yale’s campus after an associate master sent an email contesting the University’s stance on offensive Halloween costumes.

During the panel, a student began posting signs around the room reading “Stand with your sisters of color. Now, here. Always, everywhere.” When a security guard asked him to leave, the student refused. The incident was caught on camera.

Earlier in his remarks, Lukianoff mocked those who were hysterical about Associate Master Erika Christakis‘ email about Halloween costumes.  “Looking at the reaction to Erika Christakis’s email, you would have thought someone wiped out an entire Indian village,” he joked.

Griswold then points to a Yale Daily News article and the “comical overreaction” by the students (2015-2016 tuition $46,500, total fees $66,893). As Rick Moran notes, regarding the resignation of a beloved teacher at Mizzou who refused to cancel a test and told students to stand up to bullies “Beloved or not, he did not obey the fascists who have now taken over the school because the adults have abdicated. Infants are running the nursery and it’s a school holiday with ice cream for all whenever they want it.” Where are the adults? Who’s running these schools? Why are schools that cost large sums of money, including to the taxpayer, essentially acting as babysitting services for adult age delinquents?

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Entitled Snowflakes Protest Free Speech Panel, Spit On Attendees »

Posted in Liberal World, Unhinged Tools | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Surprise: Bolivia Wants To Abolish Capitalism To Save Us From ‘Climate Change’

By William Teach November 11, 2015 – 4:56 pm

Members of the Cult of Climastrology are mostly far left leaning people, who profess a hatred of capitalism…though, of course, so many of them like practicing it in their own lives in terms of the products they purchase and the services/goods they themselves offer. While they used to be more circumspect about their motives (these are people James Delingpole calls “Watermelons”: green on the outside, red on the inside), they are becoming more brazen and outspoken about what they are looking to do. Witness this from the Weekly Green Left

The Bolivian government’s national contribution to the COP 21 climate talks scheduled to start in Paris on November 30 contains a series of radical proposals for safeguarding the future health of the planet,Euractiv.com said on October 14.

Bolivia’s contribution insists that capitalism is responsible for “consumerism, warmongering and […] the destruction of Mother Earth”. (snip)

Bolivia, whose constitution (WT note: that constitution is 177 pages long in Spanish. Go figure) guarantees the respect of Mother Earth, holds “the failed capitalist system” responsible for climate change. Euractiv.com said its contribution says: “For a lasting solution to the climate crisis we must destroy capitalism.”

Huh. How about that? This is an official document from the government of Bolivia

A key Bolivian proposal is to establish an “International Court of Justice for the Climate and Mother Earth”, which would ensure that all countries fulfill their climate obligations.

Wait, I thought we were told that no one was pushing that?

(I thought I had posted this the other day, apparently, not)

Read: Surprise: Bolivia Wants To Abolish Capitalism To Save Us From ‘Climate Change’ »

Posted in Global Warming, Progressive Goals | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach November 11, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…is a beach soon to be flooded by carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Raised On Hoecakes, with a post on Veterans Day.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | Comments Off on If All You See… | Trackback URL

Congress Punks Obama On Moving Gitmo Detainees To US

By William Teach November 11, 2015 – 12:14 pm

Obama has long wanted to close Gitmo, which house many stone cold Islamic jihadis. Why? Based on his directly post 9/11 writing, he seems to blame the US, and he apparently wants to give the little darlings civilian trials

(WRAL)  Congress sent President Barack Obama a $607 billion defense policy bill Tuesday that bans moving Guantanamo Bay detainees to the United States — something Obama has been trying to do since he was sworn in as president.

The Senate’s 91-3 vote gave final legislative approval to the measure. The House overwhelmingly passed it last week, 370-58.

Obama does not like the Guantanamo provisions, but White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Obama will sign the bill.

Of course he will sign it, because there’s no way he wants to look the fool in vetoing a defense bill with massive Congressional support over Gitmo, nor fight what would easily be overridden by Congress. It’s a fight he would lose, and Democrats are surely thinking of their next election in 2016.

However, I think Republicans missed a prime chance in recommending that a facility be built to house the jihadis in Chicago’s Hyde Park area.

Read: Congress Punks Obama On Moving Gitmo Detainees To US »

Posted in Barry Obama, Current Affairs | Comments Off on Congress Punks Obama On Moving Gitmo Detainees To US | Trackback URL

Warmist Wants Obama To Stop All Oil Production On Public Lands

By William Teach November 11, 2015 – 7:24 am

What is one of the best ways to help the lower and middle class? Cheap, reliable, affordable energy. Why is the Cult of Climastrology against this? Here’s Lydia Millet in the NY Times

Obama Should Let Fossil Fuels Lie

PRESIDENT OBAMA’S rejection of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline last week had the ring of a great victory for the environment. But even as he declared the United States a “global leader” in the transition to cleaner energy, he revealed a challenge that neither he nor his administration has confronted: “If we’re going to prevent large parts of this earth from becoming not only inhospitable but uninhabitable in our lifetimes,” the president said, “we’re going to have to keep some fossil fuels in the ground, rather than burn them and release more dangerous pollution into the sky.”

The logic is clear. If we don’t extract them, we can’t burn them. Even better, this is a change the president can actually make, without the approval of Congress. With the climate summit meeting in Paris near, and the Keystone decision fresh, the United States can truly take the lead on these fuels by stemming their production, not just their consumption.

Most climate debates have focused on cutting the use of fossil fuels. But besides a few high-profile scuffles over fuel extraction in vulnerable wild places like the offshore Arctic, political leaders have ignored fossil fuel production as a necessary piece of climate strategy.

Globally, we will have to use far less of our already proven reserves of oil, gas and coal in the next 35 years if we are to even have a shot at avoiding the most disastrous warming effects. Some say we need to keep a third of the earth’s oil reserves, half its gas and 80 percent of its coal unused. We need to lock up those fuels that would push us past the tipping point. And the most logical place for the United States to start is on our public lands.

This is the extremist view of the CoC. What happens when energy costs skyrocket? Who gets hurt? Not the very rich. What happens when people can no longer afford to drive to work? Who gets hurt? Not the rich.

Secretary Jewell’s circular argument won’t get us anywhere we need to go. No one in the “Keep It in the Ground” movement was suggesting the immediate cessation of fossil fuel extraction — merely an end to new leases on federal public lands. Existing leases, stretching decades into the future in some cases, already cover some 67 million acres of public land and ocean — 55 times bigger than Grand Canyon National Park — whose fuels contain the potential for up to the equivalent of 43 billion tons of carbon dioxide pollution.

Actually, some are. And those who aren’t now, will be if they get Obama to deny any new leases. That’s what they do. Ask for an inch, take a mile, then come back for another inch. This is being pushed by 350.org, the extremist ‘climate change’ group, which does indeed want to stop all fossil fuels extraction on federal lands and offshore.

Who gets hurt? Not that Warmists seem to care in the least. Progressive revolutionaries aren’t worried about that.

Read: Warmist Wants Obama To Stop All Oil Production On Public Lands »

Posted in Energy, Global Warming | Comments Off on Warmist Wants Obama To Stop All Oil Production On Public Lands | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove