TDS using Obama-era pictures

Hollywood is home of the champagne socialist hypocrites. Nancy Lee Grahn went on a rampage disparaging the Trump administration’s treatment of children on the border. She claimed that it was torture to make them sleep on the cement floor under emergency blankets with the lights left on.

Her tweet was as follows:

Sadly she used pictures from 2015. Merely cropped out the date hoping no one would notice. Sadly Twitter is a veritable minefield.

Best get facts right before emotional pleas based on a wish that it occurred under the administration she hates so much.

ACL raised $660,000 for Izzy

As it stands, the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL) has helped raise $660,000 for Israel Folau in only a day since GoFundMe (GFM) pulled his $715,000 crowd funding site down.

What did people honestly expect? That they would stop Folau dead in his tracks by ganging up on GFM to back down? All These activists managed to do was to ram a hot poker into a previously sleeping giant.

It is highly doubtful that the majority of those that stumped up cash are homophobes in any way. It is way beyond that. It is much more about a protest against the constant political correctness that is thrust in our faces on a daily basis. There is a pecking order in identity politics and the majority are usually the least considered.

The people that donated want to protect freedoms – speech, religious or otherwise – and they’re sick and tired of being lectured by hypocrites. The double standards of these corporations are sickening. CSR is a buzzword but it has two distinct features – to bash companies who don’t conform to activist ideals or the creation of crony capitalism. We’ve already seen the backlash against corporates who get “woke” e.g. Gillette.

It doesn’t matter whether Folau’s crowd funding is viewed as a stunt or how inane his religious beliefs might seem to mainstream Aussies. What matters to them is they can voice dissenting opinions without recrimination. Folau’s dismissal is now but a minor issue in the crowd funding saga. The natives are restless as they’ve grown tired of apologists finding new ways to “shame” their difference in opinions.

CM is hopeful that Folau sends Rugby Australia (RA) into receivership to remove the cabal that runs it. Australian rugby is in tatters because it is not run for the fans but for identity and gender based politics, a role no one has asked it to enforce. The woeful attendance and dismal record of the Wallabies attests to this gross mismanagement. Like Cricket Australia at the time of the ball tampering scandal, RA needs a clean out. Folau will be the catalyst.

The woke never get it. Another self inflicted wound.

NY Times tells the truth for a change

The Extinction Rebellion protested outside the New York Times HQ complaining that the paper and other mainstream media outlets are not doing enough to alert people of the climate emergency we face. The demands included compelling journalists to use more hysterical language so they can push for more “radical responses.”

70 were arrested. No care for wasting other people’s time.

The NYT was a little upset and released the following,

There is no national news organization that devotes more time, staff or resources to producing deeply reported coverage to help readers understand climate change than The New York Times.” The paper also claimed in a statement that it published almost 800 articles on climate change last year.

One of the first factual things it has written in a while.

Go Fund Me’s double standards

RAICES.png

Well, well, well. How come it took so many days for GoFundMe to come to this conclusion? What ridiculous double standards the site has. It was bullied pure and simple and folded to activist pressure to appear as if it was a clerical oversight. Why not sack the gatekeepers at GoFundMe who should have flagged this up the chain but didn’t until they felt backed into a corner by apparatchiks?

So easy to fob it off using “GoFundMe’s terms of service say it can take down funds that are “for the legal defence of alleged crimes associated with hate, violence, harassment, bullying, discrimination, terrorism or intolerance of any kind relating to race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, sex, gender or gender identity or serious disabilities or diseases. It was something it should have immediately caught but didn’t.

GoFundMe’s Country Manager Nicola Britton said the site doesn’t support Folau’s anti-gay views but presumably she supports funds that say hell awaits adulterers, fornicators, liars, drunks, thieves, atheists and idolators.

Regardless of whether one agrees with Folau’s religious beliefs or not, thousands of people still volunteered $750,000 to defend his rights to free speech. Will GoFundMe doxx all of those people who felt his cause was worthy enough to donate to? If he provides his bank account details for deposits, will his bank suspend his personal account?

Many people think it is outrageous that Folau doesn’t sell his properties and self-fund. Yet who are they to determine the voluntary nature of people who helped him raise $750k? They were not forced to. Do those who donated tell the faux outrage mob how to spend their money? No.

The irony is that GoFundMe is more than happy to run campaigns of $3m (GBP1.6m) to attack Folau for his supposed intolerance. Is that the sort of double standard the company operates under? CM is sure that GoFundMe will say it was an accident.

It wasn’t that long ago that GoFundMe happily allowed people to raise funds to pay for ladders assisting illegal immigrants to thwart national border protection laws. So when it comes to breaking federal US laws, then raising funds is OK under GoFundMe guidelines? One presumes that GoFundMe enforces its own arbitrary set of rules against its own pet causes.

Don’t forget that GoFundMe happily allowed $80,000 to be raised for Egg Boi who attacked Fraser Anning. Once again, regardless of Anning’s views, funds were raised for the legal defence of a teenager who committed violence, harassed, expressed hate and showed intolerance of another’s view, no matter how abhorrent the former Senator’s words might have been. Doesn’t that violate the same terms and conditions? Or is that OK because GoFundMe dislikes our politicians?

One hopes Folau moves to another fundraising site and doubles his target. GoFundMe has only shown exactly why free speech is at stake. CM doesn’t think much of his tweet but the reality is that 99.8% of people rolled their eyes and moved on. Rugby Australia (RA) also flicked the chicken switch and appears to have acted in haste and ran the risk of constructive dismissal. RA practices the very discrimination it claims it does not.

In any event, GoFundMe’s hypocrisy is there for all to see. If we want to express outrage that people didn’t fund better causes, look no further than the Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services (RAICES). The viral photo-shopped Time magazine picture of a little girl crying at a defiant Trump was used with great effect by RAICES to raise $20mn via Facebook crowdfunding!

Even after it was revealed that the child – stolen from her father – was never separated from the mother (who left her other 3 kids behind) and paid a smuggler to get to the border, RAICES still shamelessly uses the picture to boost its funding target to $25mn. Sanctimony at its finest.

How efficiently does your NSW council operate?

Garbage.png

Who has ever bothered to read the annual reports published by the local councils? Have we ever brought our local councillors to task on costs? For instance, why does household waste removal cost 2x as much in Woollahra as it does in Penrith? Of course, income disparity is one factor but is there a luxury element to garbage disposal in the wealthy suburbs? Garbage collection is just garbage collection, no? Of course, the distances travelled by garbage trucks might be a factor. Yet Waverley costs $17,500/hectare for annual rubbish disposal whereas Hornsby (arguably national parks don’t make it apples for apples comparisons) is $511/ha. Lane Cove has a similar area to Waverley but costs only $4,709/ha. Someone is making some serious coin on the collections in some council areas based off annual escalations one would think.

Staff Resident.png

Why does the City of Sydney council have a $924/resident cost per council staff versus $277 in Liverpool? Or on an area basis, why does it cost $83,000/ha in Sydney vs a similarly populated Parramatta at $12,300/ha?

Staff ha.png30% of Clover Moore’s budget is allocated to council staff. Councils in Hornsby, The Hills and Camden are less than 20%. Cumberland and Liverpool councils have around 50% of the budget allocated to staff.

Staff.png

The City of Sydney rakes in $757mn pa or $3,154 per 240,000 odd residents. Mosman pulls in just under $50mn or $1,600 per 31,000 residents. Blacktown pulls in $640mn revenue per annum across 366,534 residents.

Residents.png

Did we realise the collective equity base of our Sydney metro councils exceeds $66bn? $21bn of that in Sydney. How well are those assets being managed? There are some lazy balance sheets and even lazier investment strategies for all the collective billions sitting in those accounts.

AssetsCouncil.png

So next time you attend your council meeting, perhaps you can ask what the investment strategies are among the millions of your monies raised has been allocated?

 

We should be thinking of merging more councils. Plenty of inefficiencies to be squeezed out and plenty of opportunities to lower rates to the residents. Get off the high horse on declaring climate emergencies and look at streamlining services that really benefit those they serve.

Greta Thunberg’s Brilliant Minds speech

What troubles CM is that the soon to be Dr Thunberg (she will be given an honorary doctorate from the University of Mons in Belgium) will be abused even more by those pushing the climate change narrative. She is the perfect human shield to the divisive machine that lurks begins her. It is hard to criticize a movement when the face is a child.

She faces either nothing happening with the climate and being exposed as brainwashed. Or the policies she espouses will lead to such a miserable existence that life will be even more terrible than it is now.

This is not to criticize Thunberg per se. She is undoubtedly a very brave girl to face world leaders and celebrities with such scripted messages.

Here is the transcript of Greta Thunberg’s Brilliant Minds speech. The socialist imprints are all over the language. Especially when the 16-yo tells the audience they are simply “uninformed.” Watch out for the coming “carbon budget” which will mean you have to turn vegan, stop flying and take on your moral duty to stop spending other’s carbon credits!!

——

Around the year 2030, we will be in a position where we probably set off an irreversible chain reaction beyond human control, that will most likely lead to the end of our civilization as we know it.


That is unless, in that time, permanent and unprecedented changes in all aspects of industrialized society have taken place. Including a reduction of our CO2 emissions by at least 50%.

And please note that these calculations are depending on inventions that have not yet been invented at scale.

Furthermore, these scientific calculations do not include most unforeseen tipping points and feedback loops.

Nor do these calculations include already locked in warming hidden by toxic air pollution. Nor the aspect of equity, which is absolutely necessary to make the Paris Agreement work on a global scale.

And these calculations are not opinions or wild guesses.
These projections are backed up by scientific facts, concluded by all nations through the IPCC.

So if we are to stay below the 1,5 degrees of warming limit, which is still possible within the laws of physics, we need to change almost everything. We need to start living within the planetary boundaries. This will be a drastic change for many, but not for most.

Because most of the world’s population is already living within the planetary boundaries. It is a minority who are not. 

The richest 10% of the world’s population emits about half of our emissions of greenhouse gases. The richest 1% emits more than the poorest 50%.

And this is not about glorifying poverty, this is about the laws of physics and the remaining amount of greenhouse gases that we can still emit into the atmosphere to be in line with the Paris agreement.

It is not people in countries like Mozambique, Bangladesh or Colombia who are most responsible for this crisis. It is mostly down to people like you here in the audience.

Entrepreneurs, celebrities, politicians, business leaders. People who have a lot of power.
People who consume enormous amounts of stuff. Who often fly around the world, sometimes in private jets.

Your individual carbon footprints are in some cases the equivalent of whole villages.

But the worst part I think is that you are normalizing this extreme lifestyle. Because people look up to you. You are the role models, you are setting the standards. People aspire to be like you.

About 100 companies emit approximately 71% of our total emissions of CO2. And yes I know, we need a system change rather than individual change. But you can not have one without the other.

If you look through history all the big changes in society have been started by people at the grassroots level. No system change can come without pressure from large groups of individuals.

And no, I don’t blame you. I know you are not acting like this because you are stupid. You are not ruining the biosphere and future living conditions for all species because you are evil. At least I hope not. I know that almost everyone of you are simply uninformed. Just like the rest of the world’s population.

I know that you here in the audience didn’t travel here to see a sixteen-year-old girl who says strange and uncomfortable things.

But you know what? We need to dare to be uncomfortable. We need to be brave enough to say and do things that may not increase our profit or our popularity. Because otherwise, we won’t stand a chance.

We need to start thinking outside the box. To acknowledge that we don’t have all the solutions to the climate and ecological crises yet unless those solutions mean that we simply stop doing certain things.

We need to accept that the market and new technologies will not solve everything for us. We need to admit our common failure. And then we need to act, while there’s still time

At meetings like these, you love to listen to entrepreneurs, new ideas and new inventions. But when it comes to the climate crisis the time for those magic new inventions has just about come and gone.

And even though we most certainly need to embrace every bit of new clean technology – we can no longer look away from the obvious fact that we also need to change our behaviour. Some more than others.

The theme of this year’s Brilliant Minds conference is “Fluxability Quotient”. It’s what the organizers call “a symphony of big-picture thinking”.
Well, here is some big-picture thinking for you.

If you regularly fly around the world, eat meat and dairy and are living a high carbon lifestyle then that means you have used up countless of people’s remaining carbon budgets. Carbon budgets that they will need in their everyday life, for generations to come.

And if that wasn’t enough, those whose carbon budgets we are stealing are the ones least responsible and the ones who are going to be affected the most by this crisis.

According to climate scientist Kevin Anderson, if the richest 10% of the world’s population would lower their emissions to that of the average citizen of the European Union, then the world’s emissions of CO2 would be cut by about one third.

I think we can safely say that everyone in this room belongs to that 10%. Including me.

Everyone and everything needs to change. But the bigger your platform, the bigger your responsibility. The bigger your carbon footprint, the bigger your moral duty.

To make the changes required we need role models and leaders. People like you. I am certain that most of you sitting here will have the wisdom, the courage and the common sense to take a few steps back. To see the full picture. To make the sacrifices that are necessary. And to become the leaders we need you to be.

The question is, will you do it in time?

Future generations are counting on you. Don’t let us down.

Gender and climate change

Are we really supposed to take the UNFCCC seriously when it hosts a 3 day seminar on gender and the impacts of climate change?

In one presentation the main areas of focus were:

Trainings and workshops on design and implementation of gender‐responsive climate change policies. Tools and guidelines on gender‐responsive energy policy

Impact/Beneficiaries: Bangladesh, Cambodia and Vietnam

Why just three three countries?

The Serbians have been invited to a,

Study visit to Finland: mainstreaming gender into climate change policies and programmes;

Study visit to Austria: Gender‐Responsive Budgeting

Presumably fossil fuels will get them there. Based on the Finns own climate delegations gender imbalance is the order of the day.

It begs the question as to what on earth could gender possibly have to do with climate change? If the planet is warming will women’s calming influence cause us to adopt these resolutions.

CM wrote about studies that suggested toxic masculinity was a factor in climate change. The idea that men felt threatened if they had to become

Dr. Aaron Brough of Utah State University conducted the study to see if there is correlation between toxic masculinity and climate change. His assumptions run the line that men see environmentalism as more feminine and get triggered to make ecological choices if threatened.

If we needed anymore evidence of what a joke the climate change debate has become, the UNFCCC only confirms the stance with seminars dedicated to creating hot air. Scarier is that these cultural Marxists actually believe what they are espousing is rational!

One presumes the peak insanity will occur when the UN runs out of climate change impacts by virtue of one’s identity workshops.

The UNFCCC doesn’t wish to solve global warming because it would end the countless junkets around the globe. The more hysteria, the longer it stays in business. It is the gravy train that never stops.