« The German Media: Barely a Distinction between Democracy and Dictatorship | Main | Is that Annan up there? Or Fischer? »

Comments

UN? Whats that? Isn't that this out-of-time organisation (still) residing in New York, which is controlled by Socialists and Dictators?

Did'nt Fox&Corcum had a nice Cartoon recently about this organisation?

Oh, sorry, it is Cox & Forkum.....

http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/000417.html

I was struck by the difference of Annan's and Bush's speeches. And I was struck by the reaction to both in the European media.

Mr. Annan talked about "international law". Mr. Bush talked about freedom for all human beings, about liberty's century and democracy instead of oppression.

Mr. Annan announced that he had appointed a commission to find out whether the systematic killing of people in Sudan can be called a genocide. Mr. Bush said this is genocide.

Mr. Annan indirectly compared Abu Ghraib and the Iraqi terrorists and head-choppers. Mr. Bush made clear that terrorism is the greatest danger to world peace.

Mr. Annan compared Palestinian terrorists to the policies of Israel (but keeping Israel for the end of his enumeration, so that it gets special attention). Mr. Bush said the Palestinians would deserve responsible and democratic leadership instead of corrupt terror mongers.

And how do we Europeans react? We credit Mr. Annan as a 'visionary' with 'moral resolution' and condemn Mr. Bush as stubborn, arrogant and immoral. I'm sorry, but where are we living???

I'm sorry, but where are we living???

Thomas, my friend, we know where you're living.

Where the hell did the rest of these people come from? During the Clinton years, I learned how the German people could've been mislead by the propaganda during the 20's and 30's. That people could go along with the liars and frauds and political screamers.

I never would've believed that education, civilized people would let their hatred so blind them to the truth and reality. That they would prefer the upside-down world, where religious fanatics who ritually slaughter completely innocent people, will be held up as good, while the man, land and people, who are scarificing to bring reasonable government and freedom to 50 million human beings are the height of evil.

These blind resent-filled people are everywhere, about 40% of Americans.

My German is very rusty, but doesn't Kampagnenjournalismus simply mean "campaign journalism"? Or does the normal usage of that term imply bias?

Note from David: The was it is used in this blog, "Kampagnenjournalismus" always means "biased journalism".

Well, on second thought there may be one good thing about the EU. When your women cannot walk outside with uncovered hair without being assaulted, the French and Germans won't try to leverage their Muslim populations against each other but rise together against the Americans and leverage the entire Muslim population of Europe to attack America and free the Palestinians from the Zionist oppressors.

So, no more European contintenal wars for you.

But war you will have.

BTW, did you know Kofi is married to the niece of Rauol Wallenberg? How the hell she lives with herself, I don't know.

I'm sooooo glad Kofi thinks no man is above the law.

OPEN THE BOOKS, KOFI and walk your talk.

just closing the bold tags

"Open the books Kofi and walk your talk"
I am curious which books are on the shelves in Kofi's home.
Probably a lot about the Plight of the Palestinian People.

Where do we live???

We live in a world where the Left has lost the war of ideas, but will try to keep their political power - by any means necessary.

Lies about alledged environmental desasters ("Global Warming"), fraudulent ideas ("multicultural society"), cultural warfare, lies, divisiveness, voter fraud, changing the electorate (Illegals in the USA, Turkey in Europe), siding and colaborating with murderous Islamofascists.

Collectivism leads to disaster. Let's fight it.

@hartmut: Lies about alledged environmental desasters ("Global Warming")

pardon? it is a working hypothesis which you shouldn't wipe away so easy. the theories about global warming are based on measurements, statistic analysis and computer simulations. this hypothesis could turn out to be true, and then we're in trouble. what makes you believe, people doing research on this topic are lying?

@no comment:

You might read this:

http://www.techcentralstation.com/081204D.html

All of the IPCC computer simulations say global warming, if caused by CO2, should affect the lower atmosphere (the region between roughly 5,000 and 30,000 feet), which is what we should expect, if carbondioxyde molecules transform light into heat. Problem is, the upper atmosphere doesn't heat up - or at least, only insignificant. Both weather balloon and satellite data (which match very good), show no global warming.

Given this facts, all climate predictions of the UN are nothing but junk science, and there's no need to worry at all.

@ hartmut

upper and lower atmosphere react differently. as a result of the rising temperatures in the troposphere the stratosphere cools down.

http://www.atmosphere.mpg.de/enid/1nh.html

@ JustinSane

Well, TCS does'nt say the troposphere is warming. It says it nearly did'nt change at all.... and the troposphere (where You appearently expect warming) is the lower atmosphere, ranging up to roughly 36,000 feet. Again, and according to satellite and weather balloon data, there is nearly no warming (or cooling).

Only on Ground level, there is some warming, and (according to the TCS-article) it's very likely only "hot spots", because of more industry, growing cities, etc.

From the TCS article:

"Four years ago, a distinguished panel of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences concluded that a real disparity exists between the reported surface warming and the temperature trends measured in the atmosphere above. Since then, many investigators have tried to explain the cause of the disparity while others have denied its existence.

So, which record is right, the U.N. surface record showing the larger warming or the other two? There's another record, from seven feet above the ground, derived from balloon data that has recently been released by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. In two research papers in the July 9 issue of Geophysical Research Letters, two of us (Douglass and Singer) compared it for correspondence with the surface record and the lower atmosphere histories. The odd-record-out turns out to be the U.N.'s hot surface history.

This is a double kill, both on the U.N.'s temperature records and its vaunted climate models. That's because the models generally predict an increased warming rate with height (outside of local polar regions). Neither the satellite nor the balloon records can find it. When this was noted in the first satellite paper published in 1990, some scientists objected that the record, which began in 1979, was too short. Now we have a quarter-century of concurrent balloon and satellite data, both screaming that the UN's climate models have failed, as well as indicating that its surface record is simply too hot."

@ JustinSane

Well, TCS does'nt say the troposphere is warming. It says it nearly did'nt change at all.... and the troposphere (where You appearently expect warming) is the lower atmosphere, ranging up to roughly 36,000 feet. Again, and according to satellite and weather balloon data, there is nearly no warming (or cooling).

Only on Ground level, there is some warming, and (according to the TCS-article) it's very likely only "hot spots", because of more industry, growing cities, etc.

From the TCS article:

"Four years ago, a distinguished panel of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences concluded that a real disparity exists between the reported surface warming and the temperature trends measured in the atmosphere above. Since then, many investigators have tried to explain the cause of the disparity while others have denied its existence.

So, which record is right, the U.N. surface record showing the larger warming or the other two? There's another record, from seven feet above the ground, derived from balloon data that has recently been released by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. In two research papers in the July 9 issue of Geophysical Research Letters, two of us (Douglass and Singer) compared it for correspondence with the surface record and the lower atmosphere histories. The odd-record-out turns out to be the U.N.'s hot surface history.

This is a double kill, both on the U.N.'s temperature records and its vaunted climate models. That's because the models generally predict an increased warming rate with height (outside of local polar regions). Neither the satellite nor the balloon records can find it. When this was noted in the first satellite paper published in 1990, some scientists objected that the record, which began in 1979, was too short. Now we have a quarter-century of concurrent balloon and satellite data, both screaming that the UN's climate models have failed, as well as indicating that its surface record is simply too hot."

I´m wondering whom did the Wise Council of Dinosaurs blame for the climate change that eventually led to their disappearance ? (Unfortunately, the US wasn´t around yet at that time to be blamed, or was it ...?).

Were the dinosaurs driving too many SUVs ? Did their industry polute the atmosphere until they poisoned it completely ? Did their old generation cell phones radiate the environment until it was all burned up ? Questions we all ask... Is someone trying to cover up the truth ?

Scientists couldn´t yet answer those questions, but they all agree on one thing. Apparently the origin of the disastrous climate change that wiped out entire dinosaur civilizations could be tracked down to a Dark Power, situated somewhere in what is today known as Texas, US. This theory is still being studied, but the coincidence is quite startling, isn´t it ?

LOL ! Thanks

Amir Taheri: "Kofi's Contempt."
http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/28815.htm
Interesting article in the New York Post. Kofi's suggestion that the coalition's intervention in Iraq somehow violated international law implies that the UN should take steps to restore Saddam in power. See also Melaniephillips.com, diary 20 september.

@ hartmut
wow, the tcs seems to be a real institution if it comes to climate research. lol
it's just pseudo-science. all those hobby-climate researchers like to spin actual scientific results without even understanding anything about their meaning.
they are too afraid to publish their 'cognitions' in scientific periodicals because they know all too well that they'd be immediately ripped to pieces.

@niko
"As for the 'people doing research on this topic are lying?' question, jeez. Climate 'research' has become a billion bucks industry. So you want to tell me Big Tobacco is lying to secure their profits, but hundreds of thousands of Academics won't do the same?"
that's another popular twist. guess what, those scientists would receive way more money if they tried to prove that all this fuss about global warming was bs.

"Take a look at drawings and paintings of Great Britain ca. 1700. What will you see? Lots of palm trees. Why? Because 300 years ago the average temperature in Great Britain, moreover in whole Europe, was 2 to 3 degrees Celsius higher than it is today. What does it tell us? Nothing. It's the same nothing as your statistics about so-called global warming tell us. Insignificant. It's a two-way road."
and? that tells us exactly what? there have been times when the earth wasn't just 2 or 3 degrees warmer. nobody denied that there are natural climate variations, name me one serious climate resercher who did that. the question is, are we influenceing our climate and the simple and undisputed answer is yes. the only thing uncertain and disputed is: how big is this influence and what will be the effects?

on a side note (and yes, i noticed your attempt at being humerous): there are some possible scenarios about the distinction of the dinosaurs. just do some reading.
nuff said

CNN's got an article if the election were held today, W's got 300 electoral votes, he only needs 270.

---

JS, you are a lemming - or if you prefer, sheeple.

Oh, Yeah, Justin, You want sound science?

Well, appearently, the NOAA, with it's alarmist global warming "studies", does'nt want it anymore.

go figure:

"Washington, D.C., September 22, 2004—In a behind-the-scenes move with far reaching implications, the Senate Appropriations Committee last week approved a bill including language that would shield one of the federal government’s most important scientific agencies from legal requirements mandating integrity in government science. A clause in the annual appropriations bill for the Department of Commerce and other agencies (S. 2809) would exempt research produced by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration from complying with the Federal Data Quality Act, which requires that data circulated by federal agencies conform to standards of scientific integrity."

“This quiet ploy is clearly aimed at avoiding the inevitable lawsuits exposing the junk science, much of it traceable to NOAA, which has been employed in government publications in recent years, including two alarmist global warming reports,” said Christopher C. Horner, Senior Fellow and Counsel at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. “The apparent strategy here – that any agency or department report using NOAA science will now be above the law – guts existing data quality rules in the very context which forced Congress to enact them in the first place.”

http://cei.org/gencon/003,04221.cfm


Has FOCUS or FOCUS ON LINE run any stories on the UNITED NATIONS Food for oil scandal and the Annan Familie's deep financial interest in, as well as Kofi's efforts towards stifle a legitimate investigation into it? But I am suppose to accept his word that the UN is about the "rule of law?"
Oddly, I have not seen a story about the largest financial scandal in history in any German media yet.

Choosing a storyline based on a preferred politic and a preconceived notion . . . and allowing nothing to be printed that deviates from the party line??
The leftist German medias are smug and self-righteous in their certainty of the complexity and sophistication of their personal opinions! (Just ask 'em!)
The fanatical Muslim extremists are smug and self-righteous in the certainty of their simply fulfilling the will of Allah!

So, what is the difference between the "mainstream" German (European?) media and "extreme" Al-Jazeera?

Tyranno

For those who actually want to follow Oil-for-Food-Palaces-Terrorists,

Friends of Saddam is a good resource. And google Claudi Rossett (sp).

At least you can be informed, even if the German "press" wants to keep your countrymen ignorant.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Mission

The Debate

Blog powered by Typepad

August 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31