COLLECTIVE MADNESS
“Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people."
Oops, got caught out on the wrong thread. Anyway, an insightful comment by Max. We could do a dozen Doctorals on it (and probably should.)
ReplyDeleteWe will….I will be bumping this one up right now!
ReplyDelete.
DeleteQuestion?
What does the wig job in the video have to do with the article posted by Max yesterday?
From the article:
Not that the folks most outraged by this document see the handling of Katrina relief as benign. FM 3-39.40 lands during a time of skyrocketing paranoia and grievance among domestic radicals of virtually every stripe, in many cases fueled by their interpretations of real government actions, from the use of informants and undercover operations against would-be terrorists to the Patriot Act to the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act and its provisions for the military detention of American citizens.
Some of their talking points have even spilled over into mainstream politics, as in the case of the Kansas state legislature's condemnation of the U.N.'s Agenda 21 sustainable energy initiative, which many radicals see as undermining U.S. sovereignty.
Because of its content and authenticity, FM 3-39.40 has a bit more tooth than some of its predecessors in conspiracyland. Within two weeks of its first appearance online, the document has produced more than 237,000 hits on Google.
Radicalization is driven in large part by victimization narratives, whether it's a fear of Big Brother watching, big banks looting, big government seizing one's guns, or a big, global war on Islam. A document like FM 3-39.40 is read as confirming the worst fears of an unusually wide spectrum of political dissenters, radicals, and would-be violent extremists from the right, left, and "other." Gasoline, meet match...
The perspective of the article is obvious from words like "skyrocketing paranoia", "domestic radical", and "conspiracy land". They could be part of one of Obama's set speeches defending intervention in Libya or Holder's testimony to Congress explaining why he can arbitraily do away with habeus corpus rights.
The author equates anyone who questions the government as being extremist or radical. It's an example of the logical fallacy of the 'undistributed middle term' (some extremists question government policies, Jim questions government policies, therefore, Jim is an extremist). Bullshit.
Radicalization is driven in large part by victimization narratives...
Victimization narratives? The author misses the irony.
Since 9/11, the government has been promoting the victimization narratives in its efforts to consolidate power centrally and chip away at individual rights. The average US citizen has less chance of being hit by a terrorist attack than being hit by lighting; yet, the government has used the fear they've generated to launch HS, give us the TSA, promote indefinate detention, rendition, non-wars (time-limited kinetic engagements), individual mandates, etc. etc.
And the reaction from the non-extremist, the non-radical sheep as the drones circle overhead and an unusual name puts them on some government list?
"Well gee, if you haven't done anything wrong, you have nothing to fear."
Lord love a duck. What pussies.
.
.
DeleteThere doesn't have to be a 'revolution' to reverse the current trend or the government power grab. At some point,the ACLU or some other group or organization will be granted standing in the numerous suits they have brought challenging these government assaults on individual rights. Eventually, they will see their day in court. We have seen the beginnings when that group of journalists who are challenging DAA provisions were granted their day in court.
Because of the deference the court usually shows the other two branches of government, the current trend may take a while to reverse; however, at some point, I am optimistic that basic rights like habeas corpus will be fully restored.
Despite the bleating of the sheep.
.
Deuce, Here's the
ReplyDeleteLINK
from the previous post.
(Yes Rufus - it *was* insightful - I did use italics! In fact I thought the entire article was very measured in tone. Scared shitless the country is. And damn if the BC crowd isn't adding to the drumbeat of despair leading to violence. (The guy with Delusions of Grandeur is back weaving his rhetorical spells of hypnotic harmony among the Cat Choir of the Disgruntled and dare I say Declawed. He is quite literally laying the intellectual groundwork for trading a FEMA camp for one with his name on it.) Looking for blood is not a policy. This is one of those times and subjects where I dislike that crowd intensely, erudition and experience be damned.)
Gasoline, meet match.
ReplyDeleteFire! Our world needs to burn down! Fire is cleansing. The old be done away, the new given room to grow. Burn it down so it can be built up. Burn, baby, burn. A conflagration, a combustion, incendiary. Fire is magic. Fire is fascinating. Fire lives! The flickering rhetoric in radical leftism is only possibly matched by the trope of the cleansing revolutionary move to the mountains, where things can begin again in the purifying mountain air, away from the plains, and the soot filled cities.
Taken from a fading memory from some book whose name I can't recall concerning revolutionary rhetoric.
The names and faces and countries may change, the rhetoric remains the same.
...
The guy with Delusions of Grandeur is back...
hmmmm, scratches head....
b
There will be no revolution in America. If nothing else, the people are too lazy, and fat. And, we have too many elections.
Deleteb
.
DeleteI too was a little puzzled, bobbo.
.
Most of us, on the other hand, suffer from Delusions of Competency. :)
ReplyDeleteTaken from a fading memory from some book whose name I can't recall concerning revolutionary rhetoric.
DeleteDon't speak for me
Rufee....
:)
b
It's Reset Time again - in some quarters. I normally laugh at the rhetoric, but in combination with the government planning, just leaves me cold and unamused. (And if anyone here can read some of ---'s crap and not see the religious underpinnings, from a crowd that regularly condemns the Left for presuming to elevate Man to the divine level of a God, then the rhetoric of rapture has captured thy soul. Bow in humble observance of Man as God.)
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Deletemeanwhile in the EU and Quebec it is the 'left' manning the barricades, rioting in the street...
ReplyDeletemeanwhile in the EU and Quebec it is the 'left' manning the barricades, rioting in the street...
ReplyDeleteI don't know how far I want to go with this, but . . . . .
ReplyDeleteFirst, Wall St gets nuts with Dot.Com Mania, and turns everyone's 401k into a 201k, then a military operation to remove a "threat to cheap oil" turns into a decade-long quagmire of unheard-of Expense and nation-building idiocy, Then the Politicos of both parties get together with Wall St (again) and the Big Banksters, and come within an eyelash of completely crashing the Global Economy, as Gasoline Prices go from $1.00/gal to $4.00/gal.
Then, their heroes sporting feet of the finest clay, the right-wing awakens to a left-leaning, Black President, of the name "Barak Hussein Obama."
It's simply a case of "Cosmic-level Overload."
Now, I know that that outfit out in San Francisco has proven that the TSA could be a lot better, BUT
ReplyDeletedo you people Really want to do away with having security checkpoints prior to boarding airplanes?
.
DeleteTo reduce the issue of TSA abuse to the words 'security checkpoints' is simplistic.
.
Then, why not rail against "TSA Abuse?"
DeleteTo use TSA, proper, as an epithet seems a little over the top, doesn't it?
Just to put it into perspective, how would you like to have been given the assignment on Sept 12, 2001, of "making airline travel Safe?"
.
DeleteA legitimate point.
I could go into the issue of the TSA itself as part of the massive growth and redundancy in government bureaucracy precipitated by 9/11 and the WOT but obviously that was not what I was referring to above.
As far as the job, I am not sure I am qualified for it with respect to expertise or philosophy. However, if the question was could I have done better than was done, perhaps I am fooling myself, but I am inclined to answer yes.
.
And, btw, Q, when you went to work for the big auto company you weren't asked if you wanted to "opt out" of health insurance coverage. You were covered. It was "Mandated."
ReplyDelete.
DeleteDon't be silly Rufus.
Healthcare was negotiated as part of a union contract.
.
And, why YOU were hired they Gave You a Card, and said, "This is your Health Insurance Card. This booklet describes the coverage."
Delete"When" you were hired . . .
Deletealthough they might have asked, "why," a few times. :)
Of course, since your Health Insurance was paid with Pre-Tax Dollars, I was given the pleasure of picking up some of the cost (which, in light of the fact that, being self-employed, mine was paid in After-Tax dollars, I wasn't too awful crazy about.)
DeleteIt all really does have to do with the "ownership" of said "gored ox" doesn't it? :)
Delete.
DeleteWhen you were hired, you became part of the union and fell under terms of the union contract. Every few years, that contract was renegotiated, including the healthcare. That was the only reason you got healthcare (ignoring of course competitive factors within the industry).
Outside of the terms of the union contract, the auto companies were free to do what they wanted with healthcare. I could go into a number of the recent changes they have made in order to 'remain competitive'.
.
.
DeleteIt all really does have to do with the "ownership" of said "gored ox" doesn't it? :)
Not in this case.
My comment above was on the constitutionality of the individual mandate. It had nothing to do with the pros (many) or cons (also many) of Obamacare.
Whether it is healthcare or ethanol, you take any criticism of them or articles supporting them as an outright indictment against them and your views on them. That is not the case.
.
Q, in this comment,
Delete"yet, the government has used the fear they've generated to launch HS, give us the TSA, promote indefinate detention, rendition, non-wars (time-limited kinetic engagements), individual mandates, etc. etc."
you equated the "individual mandate" with "indefinite detention, rendition, and Lord knows what-all.
I just thought I would point out that you have, in your life, suffered other "individual mandates," and, apparently, escaped somewhat free, and w/o serious scathement. :)
BTW, one of the first "mandates" was that citizens would have in their household certain things - eg. a rifle, a certain amount of ammo, powder, etc.
.
DeletePoint taken.
I obviously need to be more careful in how I word things.
The intent of my list you posted above was to point to examples of where, IMO, the government has stretched or broken constitutional, statutory, or treaty rights or obligations. In that sense, although most are tied to the WOT and only one to Obamacare, I think they all are related as examples of government overreach.
Is one more egregious than another? That depends on your perspective.
.
ReplyDeleteSen. Lieberman: White House inching closer to military response in Syria
By Carlo Munoz and Jeremy Herb - 05/20/12 06:00 AM ET
With the evident failure of an international peace plan designed to end the violence in Syria, recent actions by the Obama administration indicate the White House could be inching toward a military response, a Senate Armed Services Committee member said.
"I think they're moving toward some more real action," Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Ct.) told The Hill regarding the White House's evolving position on Syria.
Lieberman, along with Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), has been at the forefront of the congressional effort to provide military support to Syria.
"Every day that passes more people get killed," Lieberman said. "It's our moral obligation to help them."
from DefCon
The only thing I think I may have figured out about ousting Assad is that it might be bad for the Christians and they would take a beating again. Lieberman must feel it would be somehow good for Israel but I'm not sure that I understand in what manner. Perhaps he feels getting rid of Assad would weaken the ties between Syria and Iran. But what comes next?
Rufus is right, Mccain, - er, McNutz - never seems to find a conflict with which he doesn't seem to want to become involved.
b
Okay, asshole, who are you, and what have you done with Bob?
Delete"Bob" died of an overdose of cholesterol reducing pills. That, and heavy doses of UroXathal done him in.
DeleteWarning: No woman should try this medication combination!
b
Reality in Afghanistan -
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/20/us/obamas-journey-to-reshape-afghanistan-war.html?_r=1&hp&pagewanted=all
NYTimes
Revolution doesn't come to America file -
ReplyDeleteMay 20, 2012
An unexpected encounter with Chicago NATO protestors
Richard Baehr
We went to see a play last night at Timeline Theatre, a great local company. The company rents space from a church on Broadway and Wellington, which we learned was housing out of towners in to protest NATO.
The people on the street and in the church itself were the greatest collection of losers I have ever seen in my life. But it was diverse. The sidewalk was marked off in sections for blacks, Latinos, native Americans (though Prof. Warren was nowhere to be seen), gays and lesbians, and some others.
A fair number were clearly mentally disturbed, screaming, accosting people who were walking into the theatre.
Today should be pleasant with the mob in 90 degree weather.
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/05/an_unexpected_encounter_with_chicago_nato_protestors.html#ixzz1vRGGtI4y
The commentators don't seem well taken with this gaggle of lumpenproletariat, a word I have always liked. They lack, as Marx said, 'class consciousness'. They do not seem to realize what turds they are, allowing themselves to be herded into marked off sidewalk ghettos like that.
b
Really good article by Alan Dershowitz about the Zimmerman case. Zimmerman is really a political prisoner. Notice Dershowitz's comments about the prosecutor's attitude towards the case. Also his quoting from a really old English case. I wish Dershawitz would take the case, or be added to it. He would have a client who should be found not guilty, unlike when he helped in the OJ case.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/drop-george-zimmerman-murder-charge-article-1.1080161
b
.
ReplyDeletePolitical prisoner? Get real. He is not even a prisoner. He's out on bail somewhere.
I agree with Dershowitz' contention that Zimmerman should not be charged with 2nd degree murder and perhaps not even with manslaughter; but that is only because of the wording of Florida's dumn ass "Stand Your Ground" law. If he is found guilty of murder in spite of the wording of the law, IMO, it would be a political decision not one justified under the law.
That being said, Zimmerman appears to be a dick and he is guilty as sin in initiating the confrontation that resulted in him getting his ass kicked and the kid getting shot.
I don't know what the full charges are against Zimmerman, but IMO additional lesser charges should have been brought that could be proved in spite of the SYG laws, perhaps, inciting a confrontation that resulted in injury or death, or criminal stupidity.
.
Rhetoric, ok, overstated.
Deletehe is guilty as sin in initiating the confrontation that resulted in him getting his ass kicked and the kid getting shot
I am not certain of that. I have read the kid jumped him from behind, and also, other accounts, so I don't jump to conclusions like the logicial.
only because of the wording of Florida's dumn ass "Stand Your Ground" law
DeleteAgain, what in logic or natural reasoning makes this law a "dumn" ass law?
b
like the logician Quirk, should read.
Deleteb
.
DeleteI am not certain of that. I have read the kid jumped him from behind, and also, other accounts, so I don't jump to conclusions like the logicial.
Yeh, where did you read that, Zimmerman's sworn affidavit?
As for not jumping to conclusions, please, stop it, you're killing me. At the time of this incident, you were telling us all that Martin was a drug king pin in the making, had to be since he was wearing a hoodie (in the rain). Naw, you wouldn't jump to any conclusion.
Again, what in logic or natural reasoning makes this law a "dumn" ass law?
Don't need logic or natural reasoning. Merely, read the words and apply a little common sense.
One, in the absence of witnesses, you have to assume the defendant is innocent when he claims self-defence. I can't argue so much with this part of the law since you have to have some sort of proof; however, it's interesting to note with the introduction of SYG laws, 'justifiable homocides' have doubled. Just an interesting note regarding all SYG laws.
However, specific to the Florida law, the reason this case got so much publicity was the delay in the police bringing charges. Many got all over the police for those delays. However, under Florida law if probable cause isn't proven, the controlling authority can be sued for arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant. In other locations, it's standard practice after a shooting to take the shooter into custody and hold him until the facts are sorted out.
Also in the same jurisdiction as the Martin case, it was reported that a relative of a police lieutenant remained free for over a year before pressure was brought to bear by the family of the victim and the media and the shooter was finally arrested and eventually convicted. So there is added flexibility for abuse under the Florida law.
Lastly, unlike most jurisdiction, if the person charged is found innocent of 'criminal charges' then interested parties are prevented from bringing 'civil charges' against that person even if it was obvious he was responsible for the initial confrontation. OJ would have loved that option.
Like I said, it's a dumb ass law which will likely set dumb ass Zimmerman free despite his dumb ass actions and the damage that resulted.
.
1st degree dickness.
ReplyDeleteFelony Fucktard
DeleteSome sort of a Manslaughter charge seemed more sensible to me.
ReplyDelete.
ReplyDeleteDershowitz contends the charges brought by Corey were unethical and misguided. He suggests they were politically motivated. He implies the prosecution is out to railroad Zimmerman.
A lot of that may be true but she may have actually been doing Zimmerman a favor by overcharging him under Florida law almost guaranteeing (in the absence of an OJ jury) that he will be found 'not-guilty'.
.
Found not guilty, don't they have the option of trying him again on lesser charges?
Deleteb
.
DeleteI'm not a lawyer and could be wrong but I would think that option would fall under double endemnity rulings since it involved the same incident.
.
.
DeleteDouble endemnity?
:)
Rufus has me rattled.
What I meant was 'double jeopardy'.
.
RE: FP article
ReplyDeleteCompletely disagree about the alleged 'bias.' The writer opens by setting a stage with conspiracy theory. The rhetorical bias is intentional - he is in descriptive mode.
He then goes on to describe the origins of the policy in dispute, which is a "containment" policy that originated in response to foreign occupation of foreign people, which is followed by a crisp and succinct segue into the difficulties of translating such a policy into a domestic context:
FM 3-39.40 is, essentially, a how-to guide for taking control of thousands or tens of thousands of people in a specific area, sorting them out afterward, and controlling them while in detention or in the midst of a resettlement.
For domestic extremists and radicals in search of evidence to support their forgone conclusion that the government is on the verge of declaring a police state, the field manual is a rhetorical gold mine -- even if it didn't specifically discuss how to apply these techniques to American citizens on U.S. soil.
Unfortunately, FM 3-39.40 discusses exactly that. Here are a few choice excerpts:
He then discusses specific passages that contain sufficient "content and authenticity" to further elevate conspiracy concerns. It is a logical assertion, as opposed to a 'call the paddy wagon - lunatics loose' assertion.
The writer ends with the paragraph cited top of thread, which clearly suggests a moderate stance - one that acknowledges the historical difficulty of a free people balancing national security concerns with civil rights.
The article was temperate in tone and concluded with the observation that the radical fringes are more alike than different. I agree - up to a point. (There is no one quite like Crazy Guy - maybe I should say Crazy G-y.)
.
DeleteWe'll have to agree to disagree.
My initial comment was prompted by what I perceived as the lack of relevance of the clown video Deuce put up attached to Berger's comments. Perhaps Deuce can clarify the connection for me. The only way I can see it had relevance was if Deuce viewed Berger's argument in the same light I thought Berger presented it.
You view the context of Berger's essay different than me. I view his choice of words as an indictment of those who disagree with what he views as reasonable approaches to security issues by the government. However, he gives us this statement,
Radicalization is driven in large part by victimization narratives, whether it's a fear of Big Brother watching, big banks looting, big government seizing one's guns, or a big, global war on Islam.
Based on that comment the EB could be viewed as a radical blogsight since everyone of those 'fears' has been expressed by more than one person here.
.
RE the "wig job"
DeleteI will suggest that Deuce posted the video to emphasize the *contrast(s)* implicit in that final graph of the Berger piece.
Radicalization can be viewed as a spectrum of thought ranging from the full conformist to the anti-social, from the conscientious objector to the coward, as well as several other dimensions. The video guy is an example of the caricature vs character-driven dimension. The Berger dimension is ideological - from Big Institutional to fully dispersed, whatever that might be called, or to use the BC terminology, centralized vs decentralized.
Radicalization is driven in large part by victimization narratives, whether it's a fear of Big Brother watching, big banks looting, big government seizing one's guns, or a big, global war on Islam.
I will grant an intellectual aloofness to the analysis that may suggest something about the writer's attitude but it's sufficiently ambiguous for me to reserve judgment since he leaves a teensy bit of room for the idea that radicalization is justified under specific circumstances in which case the spectrum shifts as the radical moves center - and the kaleidoscope "resets" itself - and it is that process he is describing, if only implicitly.
(Something, I will note, is that Fernandez himself seems to view this as not likely to impossible - the non-violent course-correction without some form of systemic collapse. He could be right but I don't think so. I actually think that the energy tech is going to explode shortly and change the landscape.)
Well, if Fernandez thinks that he's just silly. We'll muddle through, just like we did in the thirties. Except with more tools (most especially, a fiat currency.)
DeleteThere will be, at most, a lot of bitching, moaning, griping, wailing, rending of garments, gnashing of teeth, cussing, and "throwing out of the bums" (a different crew every two years, or so.)
And, a lot of nonsense from the preachers of doom, such as your BC buddies.
Can you imagine trying to get Bob to "riot?"
DeleteOr, Deuce? Or Quirk? Or Melody?
It's really not "in our genes."
"my" BC buddies?
DeleteBurr in your saddle?
I have been uncharacteristically discrete in saying what I think about BC and "my" buddies there. I can fully unload if there is any interest.
From "The son of paleface" thread:
Delete84. wretchard
It isn’t that I don’t care about the Constitutional legitimacy of the Presidency, simply that I’ve come to believe that it cannot be enforced within the system of mutuality that exists in the political system. Only when that system is broken will the imperative to gain power in the “next cycle” with the consent of the other lose its force.
But conservatives are like mythical Old West gunfighters in that they may not draw first or shoot an opponent in the back. The Left is under no such obligation, and they have been gradually slouching towards breaking the system themselves and becoming bushwackers.
There is no escape from the asymmetry — unless you want to be like them. But even dire necessity may be inadequate as a justification to stoop so low. My guess is that most of society will wait for the “vanguard” to make the first move.
Once they draw or fire from the back — in other words once they trash the system — then the whole system of mutual restraint falls apart because there is no longer any incentive to observe it and some kind of resolution will be found within the new context.
That’s a roundabout way of saying that I am no longer sure the system can recover within itself. So it will recover outside itself; or in a breakdown state that it may enter. Perhaps the only way forward is to wait for the Left to tear up the contract for good and all, because one is morally prevented from doing this oneself while any hope remains. But if they do it, then the conversation changes completely.
It is not something one should look forward to, but the Left itself seems to be hurrying toward that kind of scenario. How will it play out? Who can say? But that is how it always is. You bear the ring, though you do not know the way.
May 19, 2012 - 10:34 pm
Someone tell me what that means.
I don't know for sure what it means, but what if Romney wins the electoral college, and Obama wins the popular vote? What then? What if Obama wins the popular vote by a large margin, as might happen according to this article -
Deletehttp://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/05/20/how-another-electoral-split-decision-could-divide-america.html
That’s a roundabout way of saying that I am no longer sure the system can recover within itself. So it will recover outside itself; or in a breakdown state that it may enter. Perhaps the only way forward is to wait for the Left to tear up the contract for good and all, because one is morally prevented from doing this oneself while any hope remains. But if they do it, then the conversation changes completely.
It would be a bad scenario, I must say. Hadn't thought about it much. The more one thinks about it, the more likely it seems that it might happen.
Then maybe the matches met the gasoline, and not only rhetorically.
b
That's already happened:
DeleteFour candidates won the popular vote but lost the presidency: Andrew Jackson won the popular vote but lost the election to John Quincy Adams (1824); Samuel J. Tilden won the popular vote but lost the election to Rutherford B. Hayes (1876); Grover Cleveland won the popular vote but lost the election to Benjamin Harrison (1888); Al Gore won the popular vote but lost the election to George W. Bush (2000).
LINK
Two things I think you're missing: whatever the trigger event, the "failure" is more profound than an electoral loss, and, secondly, it will be caused by the Left, according to BC.
The Right (Tea Party and RINO) is in denial about its role in and responsibility for making government work. Policy being a four-letter word.
More evidence of the socialist plot to destroy capitalism.
It's almost as if the two GWB terms never happened.
DeleteA wrinkle in the space-time fabric that got ironed out.
The Israeli prime minister has stoked a volatile debate about refugees and migrant workers from Africa, warning that "illegal infiltrators flooding the country" were threatening the security and identity of the Jewish state.
ReplyDelete"If we don't stop their entry, the problem that currently stands at 60,000 could grow to 600,000, and that threatens our existence as a Jewish and democratic state," Binyamin Netanyahu said at Sunday's cabinet meeting. "This phenomenon is very grave and threatens the social fabric of society, our national security and our national identity." Israel's population is 7.8 million.
His comments follow media reports of rising crime, including two gang rapes, in southern Tel Aviv, where many African migrants are concentrated. However, Micky Rosenfeld, spokesman for the Israeli police, said the overall crime rate in Israel had fallen. There had been one alleged rape of a teenage girl connected to the migrant community, for which three suspects were in custody, he added.
Too many blacks in Israel
Yohanan Danino, the Israeli police chief, said migrants should be permitted to work to discourage petty crime. Nearly all are unable to work legally, and live in overcrowded and impoverished conditions. "The community needs to be supported in order to prevent economic and social problems," said Rosenfeld.
But the interior minister, Eli Yishai, rejected such a move, saying: "Why should we provide them with jobs? I'm sick of the bleeding hearts, including politicians. Jobs would settle them here, they'll make babies, and that offer will only result in hundreds of thousands more coming over here.”
Along that line of thought of Eli Yshai -
ReplyDeletehttp://www.americanthinker.com/2012/05/demographic_tipping_point_whites_now_less_than_half_of_us_births.html
b
Woodside Petroleum WPL.AU -2.36% Chief Executive Peter Coleman is at the heart of a seismic shift in global energy markets.
ReplyDelete...
The following interview has been edited:
WSJ: How challenging was it to build the Pluto project just seven years after gas was first discovered?
Mr. Coleman: It was really a tremendous challenge in many respects. At the time, Woodside was a company about half the size that it currently is today, so the investment decision to move Pluto forward was a very, very big one for us.
...
WSJ: How will the Pluto LNG project contribute to Woodside this year?
Mr. Coleman: It will increase our production quite significantly—in fact, we'll go through a step change of almost 40% in our production on an equity basis.
...
WSJ: Pluto will ship LNG to Japanese customers. Have you seen a noticeable change in Japan's interest in securing LNG supply and equity in projects after last year's earthquake?
Mr. Coleman: We've seen a transition in the view from Japan. Early on, of course, there was uncertainty from customers on what the long-term LNG demand outlook will be in Japan.
Energy Role
Sunday's New York Times features a strong piece by Campbell Brown, "Obama: Stop Condescending to Women." Brown isn't a big fan of President Obama's Barnard commencement speech last Monday. Here's the heart of her op-ed:
ReplyDeleteWHEN I listen to President Obama speak to and about women, he sometimes sounds too paternalistic for my taste....It’s all so tired, the kind of fake praise showered upon those one views as easy to impress.
...
And speaking of dumping Biden, here's an excerpt from an e-mail I received in response to my editorial from one of the savviest political pros I know:
Makes sense to dump him. Not one vote will be lost if they switch VP's.
...
Alternative move: Ken Salazar or Mark Udall. With Colorado in the bag Obama's path to victory much easier.
- Bill Kristol
I've gone through these files and I long ago concluded that they were devastating. There was a Lebanese connection – probably a Palestinian one, too.
ReplyDelete...
Eventually, of course, all sides did well when the Scots decided that poor old Megrahi was going to kick the bucket within six months and might as well go home. To the mystification of his lawyers, Megrahi had forgone a judicial inquiry into his case in order to go back to Tripoli – and, as we now know, our Government was all too happy to see him off.
Wikileaks disclosed that British oil companies were more than keen to see the dying man shipped back to Tripoli to save their newly-acquired interests in Libya. The Americans were enraged – but not as enraged as they might have been if Megrahi's lawyers had been given the chance to tear the whole Lockerbie trial to bits.
Never Know
Future avalanche victims had better hope for a faster rescue team. Mars Inc., the manufacturer of Snickers, is phasing out chocolate products that exceed 250 calories per portion as part of an agreement with Partnership for a Healthier America (PHA).
ReplyDelete...
Call it “yes, we can’t!” progressivism.
Under the mantle of “choice,” Mars and the PHA are eliminating consumer options. While this tactic may help avid Snickers eaters shed a few pounds and improve corporate profits (don’t expect Mars to reduce its prices when it cuts its standard 280-calorie bar to 250 calories), the Orwellian doublespeak is sure to leave a bad taste in one’s mouth.
Can't live with her. Can't live without her:
ReplyDeleteThe statement of support for Greece remaining in the euro underlines the unpredictable damage to the global financial system that could come from a Greece departure. It follows a week of increasing speculation that Greece might not be able to stay the course, and in which a top European Union official said officials were working on emergency plans in case of a Greek exit. That country is facing the most acute financial crisis of the eurozone and is set to hold elections June 17 to end political deadlock.
LINK
There seems to be some truth to the face-off between home-grown money guys (Pierre LaGrange et al) who support some form of repair versus the internationalists (Roubini et al) ... who don't.
The dreaded WayBack feature rides with Jockey Truth in the saddle --
ReplyDeleteMay 20, 2012
Wayback Feature Unravels the Obama Bio Lie
Clarice Feldman
Doug Ross of Director Blue used the wayback feature to investigate Obama's literary agency's website and it shows that there were a number of revisions to the literary agent-distributed Obama biography that said he was born in Kenya; these revisions reflected changes in Obama's life. But it wasn't until 2007 when he threw his hat in the ring for the presidency that the bio was changed to state he was born in Hawaii..... (Read Full Article)
fantail1952
A DNA test may be in order. To find out if he was born on this planet.
Like
Reply
Today 08:25 PM
10 Likes
grich
The Director Blue link shows that Obama did not change his autobiography (April 2007) until a couple of months after announcing he was running for president (February 2007). We'll never know, but I would bet that this "Constitutional law scholar" didn't know you had to be a natural born citizen to be president.
Like
Reply
Today 08:36 PM
9 Likes
clarice
That is precisely my take on it.
Like
Reply
Today 09:06 PM
in reply to grich
2 Likes
donnieboy62
you know this is getting velly imtellesting. does anyone have the stones to follow thrue? stay tuned 'cause something is getting stinky and it sure smells like a lying, 2faced liberal anti-american marxist to me.
Like
Reply
Today 08:08 PM
7 Likes
mediazorba
Only constitutionalists care that our candidates be natural born citizens. Republicans feel they should be "native" born, and democrats don't care where they were born. In order to please Republicans and fool those few voters that care on the democrat side, Ozero had to change his place of birth to Hawaii.
Like
Reply
Today 08:11 PM
4 Likes
FRS
This is going to get harder for the MSM to ignore, my guess is that when one picks up the story, in order for the others to compete there will be a rush to one-up the other.
Like
Reply
Today 08:39 PM
2 Likes
jmc
Cache those pages Now -- before The Regime gets its hooks into Wayback Machine and makes them scrub 'em!
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/05/wayback_feature_unravels_the_obama_bio_lie_comments.html#disqus_thread#ixzz1vSz16Can
b
Apple in 2010 privately took issue with Samsung over the designs of its smartphones, saying they looked and functioned too much like the iPhone. The two companies negotiated for months over royalties, executives at both firms have said.
ReplyDeleteAfter Apple in April of last year filed its initial suit accusing Samsung of copying some of the U.S. company's patented designs, Samsung countered with accusations that Apple violated some of Samsung's patents on phone technology.
But Samsung had contributed many of those patents to technical committees in charge of setting phone standards, a move that provides Samsung with a steady stream of royalties but that commits the company to offering the technology at fair and reasonable terms to anyone who seeks them. Its effort to use those so-called standards-essential patents against Apple backfired in Europe, triggering an investigation by European Commission antitrust authorities.
John Prine has wonderful wide set expressive understanding eyes, a perfect moustache, a gainful and winning smile, and a beautiful voice.
ReplyDeleteb
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZACwVOJXpn0
Delete