[Kanuk Journal] Europeans need to eat less beef and consume less dairy products in order to reach the EU's climate goals, according to a new study by Swedish researchers.
"Reductions, by 50 percent or more, in ruminant meat (beef and mutton) consumption are, most likely, unavoidable if the EU targets are to be met," according to the findings published in the Food Policy journal.
But Stefan Wirsenius, one of the authors of the study written by researchers from Chalmers University of Technology and the SP Technical Research Institute, said there was no need to give up meat completely.
"Poultry and pork cause quite low emissions," he said. Dairy products are also problematic, according to the study. Producing 1 kilogram of protein from dairy results in emissions four times greater than for an equivalent amount of poultry.
"EU and US consumption of cheese and other dairy products is among the highest in the world. If we were to replace some of the dairy with vegetable products, such as oat milk, we would have a better chance of meeting our climate targets," Wirsenius said.
The European Union wants to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 20 percent by 2020, when compared with levels from 1990.
#7
OK, I'm just taking those dangerous cows off the fields by eating steaks.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
02/25/2016 12:03 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Eating more eurines would get the desired result quickest...
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
02/25/2016 13:49 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Thank gawd the cowboys slaughtered the bison that covered America's Great Plains. Otherwise global warming would have started a century earlier.
Now if we can just take care of all those vast herds of African ruminants. And don't forget the termites! Cluster bomb love, that's what I'm thinking. Do it for the planet!
Why, yes. Yes he does
It didn't take long for the two Cuban-American presidential contenders to smell a Havana rat.
"You wake up this morning to the news that the president is planning to close GuantĂĄnamo ‐ maybe even giving it back to the Cuban government," Marco Rubio said Tuesday while campaigning in Las Vegas.
Dropping the "maybe," Ted Cruz said at a Reno rally, "I believe that President Obama intends to try to give the GuantĂĄnamo naval facility to RaĂşl and Fidel Castro as a parting gift."
Indeed, a diplomat familiar with the administration's Cuba maneuvering tells me the White House has seriously considered giving in to RaĂşl Castro's demand to hand over GuantĂĄnamo. America has controlled the naval base since 1903. Since the 1959 revolution, the Cuban government has said GuantĂĄnamo is an occupied territory that must be returned.
Most recently, RaĂşl Castro demanded turning Gitmo over as a condition for renewing relations.
White House officials say that, yes, Obama believes the detention facility should be closed down ‐ but no, not the naval base. RaĂşl opened a US embassy last year anyway. So unless there's some secret deal to change all that during Obama's March 21 visit, let's assume that, for now, we still have the base. Legacyâ˘
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/25/2016 08:51 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11130 views]
Top|| File under: Commies
As predicted here on the Burg quite a while back. Stay tuned for the 2017 ribbon cutting ceremony and ground breaking of the Obama People's Library and Re-Education Center.
#3
I just don't think so. Gitmo is of vital strategic importance. You wouldn't want a Russian or Chinese leased naval base at the doorsteps of Florida.
Sorry, but not even Obama will do such an idiotic thing unless he wants to retire in Havana and miss out on all that money he will make with "speeches" in the next years.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
02/25/2016 11:50 Comments ||
Top||
#4
EC,given Obama's hatred for America and especially its military, I don't think it is beyond him to turn Gitmo over to the Cubans. Having a Russian or Chinese base there would just be icing on the cake.
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia ||
02/25/2016 12:05 Comments ||
Top||
#5
We need to put whatever replaces Gitmo in four different places: Honolulu, San Francisco, Manhattan, and Martha's Vineyard, so that when the lawfare hits the fan and they get released, they're walking the streets in the areas that voted for that c***.
#7
Actually he could do it without Congress. The Guantanamo treaty says that the base would revert to Cuba if the U.S. "abandons" it.
The Commander in Chief could recall all troops and abandon the base.
But please, let's be realistic. This is NOT going to happen. The military and the American public would fry him alive.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
02/25/2016 17:21 Comments ||
Top||
#8
The military and the American public would fry him alive.
Even though Obama has the standard Leftist hatred of the military, he *is* the Command and Chief of the armed forces, and half of America voted for him twice.
This is a man in search of a legacy. At this point, I would be surprised if Gitmo did NOT end up in Cuban hands.
[Atlas Shrugs] Sweden is already borrowing 10,000,000 kroner per hour to finance Muslim immigration. Muslim migrants will cost Sweden 14 Times their National Defense Budget. Who is going to defend the Swedes from the invaders?
Willis Ă berg, head of housing issues at the Swedish Migration Board, boasted that the organisation was 'thinking outside the box'.
'... having a theatre sounds really nice. Those who are going to stay at the ship will probably have to do that for quite a bit of time while their applications are being processed. So they need every encouragement they can get.'
Does anyone think that putting Muslim migrants on a luxury liner to live will give them unrealistic idea of what to expect from their host country?
Desperate Sweden is forced to hire luxury cruise liner with theatre, gym and swimming pool to house 2,000 refugees at a cost of ÂŁ65,000 A DAY
The Swedish Migration Board rented the Ocean Gala for £65,000 a day Cruise liner boasts a swimming pool, theatre and numerous restaurants Officials admitted they needed to 'think outside the box' to deal with crisis But locals living in town of HärnÜsand object to it mooring in their harbour
By Ulf Andersson and Flora Drury For Mailonline, February 17, 2016: Thousands of migrants are being given rooms aboard a luxury ocean liner which comes complete with a theatre and swimming pool because Sweden can no longer cope with the numbers arriving at its borders every week, it has been revealed.
Sweden's Migration Board is renting the Ocean Gala -- once the world's largest cruise liner where holidaymakers pay ÂŁ2,500 for a two-week break -- for at least the next year at the eye-watering cost of of ÂŁ65,000 a day.
When the giant cruise ship is full it will provide bed and board for 1,790 migrants -- about the number arriving in the country every single day at the height of the crisis.
A spokesman said: 'Having a theatre sounds really nice. Those who are going to stay at the ship will probably have to do that for quite a bit of time while their applications are being processed. So they need every encouragement they can get.'
A policy paper distributed by the U.S. military is under fire for perpetuating a number of bizarre theories about extremism, such as claiming that wearing an Islamic hijab amounts to "passive terrorism."
According to Murtaza Hussain of the Intercept, a recently re-published book from the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory includes a chapter entitled "A Strategic Plan to Defeat Radical Islam" written by Dr. Tawfik Hamid, a fellow at the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies who identifies as a former extremist. The chapter, also called a white paper, is framed as a plan to combat terrorism, but includes a number of odd, largely unsubstantiated ideas as to how extremism is created -- namely, that hardline extremist ideology (specifically Salafi Islam) takes root when women begin wearing hijab, a traditional Islamic head covering. I think he's got the cause and effect thing backward: the hijab is a sign of Salafism, not vice versa.
"[Extremism occurs when] increasing numbers of women begin to wear the hijab, which is both a symptom of Salafi proliferation and a catalyst for Islamism," Hamid writes. "In turn, the proliferation of militant Salafism and the hijab contribute to the idea of passive terrorism, which occurs when moderate segments of the population decline to speak against or actively resist terrorism." By choice, or by force?
As The Intercept points out, Hamid's theory -- which includes a diagram showing hijab as one of the three core methods of radicalization -- does not appear to be "supported by empirical evidence." Hijabs are commonly worn by millions of Muslim women, the overwhelming majority of whom neither sympathize nor participate in terrorist attacks carried out in the name of Islam. Wearers of hijab include U.S. Olympic fencing team star Ibtihaj Muhammad, women's rights activist and Nobel Peace Prize winner Malala Yousafzai, and Islamic journalist, feminist, and peace prize winner Tawakkol Karman -- none of whom, like countless other Muslim women, are in any way affiliated with extremism, "passively" or otherwise.
The author offers other bizarre theories for radicalization as well. He postulates that extremists -- especially suicide bombers -- are created as a result of "sexual deprivation," arguing that "suicide bombing is prevalent among young males when the testosterone level is highest."
"Speaking from my own experience with the radical groups, I believe young Muslims are motivated to join radical groups because of sexual deprivation," Hamid writes, going on to imply that suicide bombers only kill themselves because they are promised sex with beautiful women in heaven. "Addressing the factors causing deprivation in this life can interrupt the radicalization process and reduce the number of suicide attacks by jihadists."
Muslims in America and elsewhere were quick to blast the report on Twitter using the hashtag #PassiveTerrorism.
MIT professor and intellectual Noam Chomsky attributes Donald Trump's success in the Republican presidential primary to "fear" and a "breakdown of society."
In an interview published Tuesday, AlterNet's Aaron Williams asked Chomsky for his thoughts on Trump's "surprising progress." After a second-place finish in Iowa, the billionaire has stormed to consecutive double-digit wins in New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada.
"Fear, along with the breakdown of society during the neoliberal period," Chomsky responded. "People feel isolated, helpless, victim of powerful forces that they do not understand and cannot influence."
Chomsky compared the political environment that's allowed Trump to flourish to the 1930s, when the U.S. was in the Great Depression. "Objectively, poverty and suffering were far greater," Chomsky said. "But even among poor working people and the unemployed, there was a sense of hope that is lacking now, in large part because of the growth of a militant labor movement and also the existence of political organizations outside the mainstream."
Trump and Hillary Clinton are leading in their respective primaries, but Chomsky demurred when asked who he thought would win the White House.
"I can express hopes and fears, but not predictions," he said.
Chomsky has contributed to Bernie Sanders' campaigns in the past but said he would "absolutely" vote for Clinton over the Republican nominee if he lived in a swing state. So he'd prefer to go further past the breaking point before inviting Socialism ==> Communism. Got it.
In an interview last month, Chomsky praised Sanders but said the Vermont senator didn't have "much of a chance" due to "our system of mainly bought elections."
#1
"Fear, along with the breakdown of society during the neoliberal period," Chomsky responded. "People feel isolated, helpless, victim of powerful forces that they do not understand and cannot influence."
So would that include a President who can't be influenced, Noam? The President who will not be influenced by the majority of the House and Senate because they are all "obstructionists"?
Or is it all Bush's fault?
Intellectual? I do not think that word means what he thinks it means.
Posted by: Bobby ||
02/25/2016 12:59 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Of course Noam has been working diligently for a total breakdown of our society for more than 50 years.
h/t Instapundit
Donald Trump is the most famous narcissist in the world. That fact probably seems obvious to you, given Trump's continuous self-promotion. Mental health experts agree with your assessment. Trump hits most of the checkboxes for the diagnosis.
The biggest tell for narcissism is a belief that you are better than other people. For example, if Trump believed he could run for President -- with almost no political experience -- and dominate the Republican party in only a few short months, that would be an example of...
Okay, wait. That one doesn't work. Apparently his self-image was spot-on in that one specific case. It was the rest of us who got that one wrong.
But still, Trump obviously has an inflated self-image. For example, there was the time he thought he could transition from being a real estate developer to being a best-selling author of a book about negotiating, but then...shit. Okay, that example doesn't work.
Okay, how about this example: Remember when Trump thought he could transition from developing real estate and being a best selling author to becoming a reality TV star and then...okay, forget that one. That sort of worked out for Trump.
Um...okay, I have one. Remember all of the Trump real estate and casino businesses that failed? I think there were a handful of big failures. That's a terrible track record when you consider Trump's hundreds of successful projects that...shit. Okay, that example doesn't work when you put it in context.
But the ego on that guy. For example, Trump thinks models are attracted to him. Models! Ha ha! And they are, but my point is that I forget what my point is. Something about his ego? Yes, that's it.
Anyway, Trump thinks he is smarter than most people just because he has a high IQ and went to great schools. Usually that does mean you are smarter than 98% of the public, but in this case it was probably just luck, because obviously all of us are smarter than Trump. I mean, look at his haircut!
[NYPOST] President B.O.'s policy -- well, his lack of one -- when it comes to confronting America's enemies was on full and embarrassing display Tuesday.
First, the president unveiled his long-delayed plan to close the terrorist detention center at Guantanamo Bay, saying that keeping it open is "contrary to our values."
It was dead before arrival. Even Democrats weren't rushing to endorse it.
After all, just three months ago, Congress overwhelmingly passed a bill that bans moving the detainees to the United States. (The Senate vote was 91-3.) And moving them here is the only way to close Gitmo.
Second, Secretary of State John F. I was in Vietnam, you know Kerry Former Senator-for-Life from Massachussetts, self-defined war hero, speaker of French, owner of a lucky hat, conqueror of Cambodia, and current Secretary of State... conceded that his much-touted ceasefire in Syria, set to take effect Saturday, "may be" little more than what a Democratic senator called a "rope-a-dope deal."
With Washington as the dope.
"I'm not going to vouch for this," said Kerry. With good reason: It doesn't cover ISIS, the al Qaeda-affiliated Nusra Front and other terrorist groups -- nor anyone who cares to fire at them. For months, Russia's been bombing anyone it wants to while claiming to be targeting ISIS.
Plus, no one knows how (or even if) violations will be handled. The whole thing depends on the good will of Iran, Bashir al-Assad and Vladimir Putin ...Second and fourth President and sixth of the Russian Federation and the first to remain sober. Putin is credited with bringing political stability and re-establishing something like the rule of law, which occasionally results in somebody dropping dead from polonium poisoning. Under Putin, a new group of business magnates controlling significant swathes of Russia's economy has emerged, all of whom have close personal ties to Putin. The old bunch, without close personal ties to Putin, are in jail or in exile or dead... -- who's sure to continue Arclight airstrikes against anti-Assad forces.
The Gitmo plan is just as hollow -- and with even less justification, despite the president's repeated and dubious claims.
The remaining detainees aren't "low risk" -- those were mostly freed before Obama took office. They're very much high-risk -- like the five top Taliban capos Obama sprang in exchange for Bowe Berghdal, who now faces court-martial for desertion.
On Tuesday, in fact, a Gitmo "alum" was tossed in the clink You have the right to remain silent... by Spanish officials, who said he was part of an ISIS recruiting cell.
Just more proof that when it comes to threats to the nation, this president lives in the land of make-believe.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/25/2016 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11129 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Well, at least "let's pretend" is a plan . . . .
#4
The whole Left world view is based on fantasy which is why their programs fail so often. Even with repetitive failure they refuse to reexamine the fallacious foundations of that world view.
[ALMANAR.LB] A long and convoluted opinion piece translated from Arabic, which may be why it makes so little sense. The main thrust seems to be that the insidious Saudi plotters against the decency and honor of Leb, Syria, and the Islamic Republic should keep sending money and not withdraw funding just because the lines have been drawn and the real rulers of Leb are on the other side.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/25/2016 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11133 views]
Top|| File under: Hezbollah
h/t Instapundit
Ace ruminates on leftist piety as a kind of status signalling:
I've heard it called "Luxurious Concerns." That is, your concerns mark your social status. If your concerns are about keeping your job, paying your rent, or whether your kids' school is any damn good, you're worried about Big Things, and therefore you are marked as a Struggling Person. Only those who have really made it -- who are at the top of the economic and social order -- have the luxury of worrying about the Small Things. And if you worry about the Very Small Things, or indeed the Microscopic Things, then, well and truly, you have arrived... If you can't afford a Luxury Car, or a Luxury Apartment, you can at least adorn yourself with Luxury Worries. It's very cheap. Easy, too... Our modern class of intellectually-insecure social climbers are posing as connoisseurs of offensiveness.
In America, Donald Trump -- whom many of the experts thought had no chance -- is dominating the polls. In Britain, meanwhile, much of the public seems to be mobilizing in favor of exiting the troubled European Union -- a British Exit, or Brexit.
Writing in The Spectator, Brendan O'Neill puts this down to a class revolt on both sides of the Atlantic. And he's right as far as he goes, but I think there's more than just a class revolt. I think there's also a developing preference cascade. O'Neill writes: "In both Middle America and Middle England, among both rednecks and chavs, voters who have had more than they can stomach of being patronised, nudged, nagged and basically treated as diseased bodies to be corrected rather than lively minds to be engaged are now putting their hope into a different kind of politics. And the entitled Third Way brigade, schooled to rule, believing themselves possessed of a technocratic expertise that trumps the little people's vulgar political convictions, are not happy. Not one bit."
Well, that's certainly true. Both America and Britain have developed a ruling class that is increasingly insular and removed from -- and contemptuous of -- the people it deigns to rule. The ruled are now returning the contempt.
But while there's a class component here, it's not as strong as some might suggest. Trump does well among college and post-college educated voters, too, and the Brexit is suddenly developing support from the sort of political class leaders who used to be pro-Europe. The difference is that the upper-class types have been less willing to show it.
In both cases, it may be that the lower classes are expressing their views more openly because they have less to lose. Express the "wrong" opinions in British or American politics or academia and it's the (figurative) gulag for you; if you work at a fast-food place, the consequences are generally less steep. But when enough ordinary voters express an opinion, the elites may feel safer, too.
In his terrific book, Private Truths, Public Lies:The Social Consequences of Preference Falsification, Timur Kuran writes about the phenomenon he calls "preference falsification": People tend to hide unpopular views to avoid ostracism or punishment; they stop hiding them when they feel safe.
This can produce rapid change: In totalitarian societies like the old Soviet Union, the police and propaganda organizations do their best to enforce preference falsification. Such regimes have little legitimacy, but they spend a lot of effort making sure that citizens don't realize the extent to which their fellow-citizens dislike the regime. If the secret police and the censors are doing their job, 99% of the populace can hate the regime and be ready to revolt against it -- but no revolt will occur because no one realizes that everyone else feels the same way.
This works until something breaks the spell and the discontented realize that their feelings are widely shared, at which point the collapse of the regime may seem very sudden to outside observers -- or even to the citizens themselves. Kuran calls this sudden change a "preference cascade," and I wonder if that's not what's happening here.
#2
I have talked with college kids who differently are afraid to express their views for fear of what the PC crowd will do to them. Interestinghy hypothesis.
Posted by: Sven the pelter ||
02/25/2016 12:29 Comments ||
Top||
[Washington Examiner] Attorney General Loretta Lynch confirmed Wednesday that President Obama cannot legally move detainees from Guantanamo Bay to any United States territory.
"That is the state of the law," Lynch told a House Appropriations Committee panel, citing defense legislation signed into law by Obama last year.
"It's certain that we would be prohibited from doing so. I'm not aware of any efforts to do so at this time, in any event," she said in response to a question about the Pentagon's plan to close the 15-year old detention facility in Cuba.
#2
No sense bringing them here and disrupting the fledgling ISIS domestic terrorist network.
Bribe a foreign gov't to take them and you've hit the trifecta. You're rid of a fat, aging terrorist, emptied GITMO, and you've recruited a paid foreign asset.
#3
Saw a comment at PJMedia pointing out that Ms. Lynch may try to behave nicely to create a case for her being Obama's nominee for Scalia's position. the GOPe needs a really good excuse to give up and roll over, and so this might provide it.
#4
Ref #3. Yes quite interesting her recent news breakout. Her credibility might be bolstered a tad if just fok'n ONE of the Beest's inner circle were to be brought up on charges. Failing that, what she sez is meaningless drivel.
My guess is the FBI has discovered Obama regime fingerprints all over the email scandal.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[Kanuk Journal] Europeans need to eat less beef and consume less dairy products in order to reach the EU's climate goals, according to a new study by Swedish researchers.
A policy paper distributed by the U.S. military is under fire for perpetuating a number of bizarre theories about extremism, such as claiming that wearing an Islamic hijab amounts to "passive terrorism."
MIT professor and intellectual Noam Chomsky attributes Donald Trump's success in the Republican presidential primary to "fear" and a "breakdown of society."
...Second and fourth President and sixth of the Russian Federation and the first to remain sober. Putin is credited with bringing political stability and re-establishing something like the rule of law, which occasionally results in somebody dropping dead from polonium poisoning. Under Putin, a new group of business magnates controlling significant swathes of Russia's economy has emerged, all of whom have close personal ties to Putin. The old bunch, without close personal ties to Putin, are in jail or in exile or dead...
