Wren's week: Economy tanks, protest rights threatened, Morrison keen on Trump
A Tale Of Two ‘Heroes’: General Jim Molan and Journalist Julian Assange - New Matilda
Trump Wants to Shrink the National Security Council
If you're not with him, you're against him and have to go whether FBI, CIA or NSC your an enemy of the State if not wholly for this President. It why AOC said merely being a disgruntled WH aide doesn't mean zip anymore action is the only thing history will remember you by (ODT)
White House has been using a classified computer system designed for the most sensitive NSC information to stash politically-embarrassing or sensitive material the Trump administration doesn’t want others to see. Add to this, the speculation that the whistleblower, identified by the New York Times as a CIA analyst, may have been detailed to the White House as part of an NSC assignment.
The NSC is a national security planing and coordinating group within the White House that has been staffed, in part, by officials detailed from other agencies such as the FBI or CIA. Once a prestigious career booster, under Trump
One of the most important roles our leaders play is to decide which problems are urgent and which can wait. Scott Morrison’s Coalition wants to prevent the use of the term “almond milk” and inquire into discrimination against men in the family courts. Greta Thunberg thinks we should stop building new coalmines and urgently increase investment in renewable energy. But who is she to say what’s important and what’s not? Doesn’t she know? We have parliaments, boards and a media full of older men to tell us what’s important.
That’s why diversity really matters.
A warning. Liberal politicians who are obviously trying to curry favor with the ABC are used against those who call it out. From the ABC: "Andrew Bolt, has previously written that [Jon] Faine is 'one of the most biased' against the Liberals. But that's not how Mr Frydenberg sees it... 'I don't find him partisan.'."Bitch'n Bolt
First, O'Brien, long-time presenter of Insiders:
Andrew Bolt criticised as lack of education Millenials receive about the real state of the world's climate because they demonstrated against global warming. His proof was their inept to spelling on the banners they displayed. Well, using Bolt's yardstick look at the grammar the self-proclaimed wordsmith Andrew Bolt.
" What science, Barrie? Do you meant the science that clearly states" Bolt
Bolt is typical of denialists who argue against Climate Science; they call it a religion but they turn to non-scientists for support. Bolt's High Priest here being Bjorn Lomborg who offers attempted proof that the world isn't warming but is cooling. Lomborg isn't a scientist but simply denies the accuracy of records that the planet is warming.
Remember when Bolt insisted fewer people died from heat than they do cold that warming was good. Well, Lomborg pushes that old cherry as well. However, a very substantial new study of over 2million deaths has shown the opposite to be the fact, and Andrew Bolt is fully aware of it. The bigger question then is why does he ignore it? Why does he intentionally fail to report it?
Now that's more the behaviour of a religious zealot a denialist not at all interested in the science. So Bolt is flipped back where he was 15 years ago saying the earth's cooling. Roy Spencer was his high priest back then now it's Bjorn Lomborg at least Spencer was a scientist of sorts whose figures were wrong. Lomborg was dropped by Koch Industries couldn't get a placement for a job in any Australian University despite Tony Abbott's efforts offering a bribe. Lomborg has disappeared off the mediascape. Only resurrected by the likes of Andrew Bolt here in Australia. Bolt never has him on his shows anymore. I wonder why that would be? No quid pro quo value I guess.
Idiots like Bolt never really turn to the science or scientist they just attack their media opponents and turn to others like themselves paid deniers that doe the same. They have an exaggerated and undeserved media presence. Scientists meanwhile offer their work up to be peer- reviewed by a far more respected body of people.
https://www.theguardian.com/…/attack-of-the-clones-australi…
But the world – and Australia – is gradually changing, even if the loudest voices are not. It took 119 years to overturn the New South Wales law against abortion and, when it finally happened, conservative Coalition MPs complained that the process was “rushed”. Similarly, it was conservative Coalition MPs who thought we “rushed” the equal marriage decision too. And, unsurprisingly, it’s the same group of people who believe we shouldn’t “rush” into reducing greenhouse gas emissions either.
One of the most important roles our leaders play is to decide which problems are urgent and which can wait. Scott Morrison’s Coalition wants to prevent the use of the term “almond milk” and inquire into discrimination against men in the family courts. Greta Thunberg thinks we should stop building new coalmines and urgently increase investment in renewable energy. But who is she to say what’s important and what’s not? Doesn’t she know? We have parliaments, boards and a media full of older men to tell us what’s important.
That’s why diversity really matters.
If our most important institutions were more reflective of the population, it’s hard to believe climate denial, racism and sexism would be so readily accepted
A warning. Liberal politicians who are obviously trying to curry favor with the ABC are used against those who call it out. From the ABC: "Andrew Bolt, has previously written that [Jon] Faine is 'one of the most biased' against the Liberals. But that's not how Mr Frydenberg sees it... 'I don't find him partisan.'."Bitch'n Bolt
First, O'Brien, long-time presenter of Insiders:
Speaking for the first time in his role as RMIT adjunct professor, Cassidy took the opportunity to deliver a firm assessment of the current media ecosystem. (Cassidy)Proof Andrew Bolt's on the ball, hey! He can't distinguish who is who here between these two highly respected journalists. "First O'Brien" Bolt's offering turns out to be Cassidy. The second Cassidy as well. Mordecai Bromberg was spot on when he called him "sloppy".
Andrew Bolt criticised as lack of education Millenials receive about the real state of the world's climate because they demonstrated against global warming. His proof was their inept to spelling on the banners they displayed. Well, using Bolt's yardstick look at the grammar the self-proclaimed wordsmith Andrew Bolt.
" What science, Barrie? Do you meant the science that clearly states" Bolt
Bolt is typical of denialists who argue against Climate Science; they call it a religion but they turn to non-scientists for support. Bolt's High Priest here being Bjorn Lomborg who offers attempted proof that the world isn't warming but is cooling. Lomborg isn't a scientist but simply denies the accuracy of records that the planet is warming.
Remember when Bolt insisted fewer people died from heat than they do cold that warming was good. Well, Lomborg pushes that old cherry as well. However, a very substantial new study of over 2million deaths has shown the opposite to be the fact, and Andrew Bolt is fully aware of it. The bigger question then is why does he ignore it? Why does he intentionally fail to report it?
Now that's more the behaviour of a religious zealot a denialist not at all interested in the science. So Bolt is flipped back where he was 15 years ago saying the earth's cooling. Roy Spencer was his high priest back then now it's Bjorn Lomborg at least Spencer was a scientist of sorts whose figures were wrong. Lomborg was dropped by Koch Industries couldn't get a placement for a job in any Australian University despite Tony Abbott's efforts offering a bribe. Lomborg has disappeared off the mediascape. Only resurrected by the likes of Andrew Bolt here in Australia. Bolt never has him on his shows anymore. I wonder why that would be? No quid pro quo value I guess.
Idiots like Bolt never really turn to the science or scientist they just attack their media opponents and turn to others like themselves paid deniers that doe the same. They have an exaggerated and undeserved media presence. Scientists meanwhile offer their work up to be peer- reviewed by a far more respected body of people.
No comments:
Post a Comment