This entry was posted
on Saturday, March 28th, 2009 at 9:59 am and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
Helen Klark’s main role at the UN will be the reducing poverty, and she has sure achieved that objective in respect of her own situation.
Already the owner/ landlord of six or so houses in NZ, (all gained at the expense of the taxpayer), here’s what she gets at the UN, and once more at the expense of the taxpayer-. (don’t forget, this mind crippled left wing zealot has never had a real job)
* Package in the region of $500,000 a year, including base salary – which is tax-free – and allowances based on the cost of living in New York. It also comes with a superannuation scheme.
* Office in downtown New York.
* As a member of the now-closed original MPs superannuation scheme, she will take a lucrative entitlement after 28 years in Parliament.
* She will also get the former Prime Minister’s annuity of $40,250 a year. When back in New Zealand, she is entitled to free domestic airfares, a chauffeur-driven car for official purposes and a self-drive car
Klark’s type traditionally rise to the top in socialist situations- check out this web page for an explanation-
Check out the new blog: Anti Earth Hour; Earth Hour cynics are encouraged to submit their pictures of power-hungry activities for Earth Hour 09. Also, any articles or research you’ve done. Pop over for a visit and get your blog linked in!
Don’t forget, Like Lucy said, celebrate Edison and switch on tonight!
I wonder if hubby Peter Davis is a little worried about entering the US after his last visit. I suppose he will now be entitled to diplomatic immunity?
Tell me anyone, did he do a George Michael or a Lee Tamahori? And did Winston have to step in to get him out of the country?
this is so cool..http://whoar.co.nz/2009/worlds-fastest-electric-car-72-datsun-video/
Problem is phil, “It takes about 20 minutes to fully charge the car, and it can get up to 40 miles on a full charge.”
Who the hell is going to buy a car that stops every 40 miles for 20 minutes even if you can find recharge outlets every 40 miles?
Hydrogen fuel cells have always been the preferred option because they allow electric cars to behave like our cars today. Top Gear last week showed one production model currently available only in Californy.
It requires a network of hydrogen outlets setup in conventional gas stations.
This technology is the future, not battery-driven vehicles.
BTW, hydrogen fuel-cells need a platinum membrane, which is why I’ve been recommending platinum as an investment for a few years now. If people think it’s expensive now, wait till these vehicles hit the production lines.
IRL Lower Hutt have been doing good research on hydrogen fuel cell technology for some time – can but doesn’t have to be -linked to use of coal to produce the hydrogen. Very clean technology. Massive potential.
This technology is the future, not battery-driven vehicles.
I wouldn’t bet on that at all. Electric motors beat the internal combustion engine hands down, the problem has always been the power supply. But battery technology is increasing in leaps and bounds, not only in increasing storage capacity but also in reduction of weight, size and charging times.
I wouldn’t bet on that at all. Electric motors beat the internal combustion engine hands down,
andrei, hydrogen fuel cells produce electricity that powers an electric motor. It strips an electron from a hydrogen molecule as it passes through the membrane and that is used to generate electricity.
“Are you complaining that Ms Clark has a job in regards to the remuneration package ?”
Where do you illiterate leftist morons come from??
If you’re going to write a sentence with a question mark at the end, you half educated self described example of leftist vermin, try and make the question understandable.
“Reid-I know you read Janet Albrechston’s every column, but yesterday’s was exceptionally good-”
RB, I hope you don’t think that article is a counter to my views on the subject.
If you do, then you’re quite wrong in your assessment as to what my views actually are.
I simply think the “war on terror” is using the wrong tactics and it’s producing exactly the opposite result to that intended. I don’t think that because I have a concern about human rights etc. I think that because it’s quite obvious to anyone objective that it’s simply driving people into the arms of the terrorists. I think that anyone who doesn’t see that is thicker than a whale omelet.
Therefore we should change our tactics but whenever one suggests that, some people for some reason, think that you’re being ’soft on terrorists’ which is quite wrong.
Are you suggesting that HC used public funds to buy these houses – ie some kind of rort? Or that this is what she spent her salary on?
If the latter, I have to completely reject the notion that they were purchased at taxpayer expense. Once that salary went into HC’s bank account it was HER money to spend as she liked. And that is none of my business or yours, and taxpayers have no right to criticise. Or do you embrace the idea that the state has or should have the right to dictate how people spend their own money?
“(um..!..is your apparant lack of any imagination down to astrological tendencies/templates..?..perchance..? ..are you a taurus..?..or a virgo..?..”
Actually phil I’m a Scorpio-Tiger and I suggest you read Suzanne White’s book which combines Western-Chinese signs if you want to know more about my general traits.
Usually in personality assessments I come out very strong on having both creative and analytical aspects but I’m weaker on organisational skills because frankly, organising shit bores the crap out of me.
“Therefore we should change our tactics but whenever one suggests that, some people for some reason, think that you’re being ’soft on terrorists’ which is quite wrong.”
Yeah? Is that so? Try this for another dose of harsh reality-
Well, if we’re going to bash him for having shit grammar, we may as well bash his spelling too. Or would that be hypocritic of me?
Anyway, I think the point that RB was trying to make (for those of you not clever enough to read plain English) was that Clark has enjoyed an excellent salary package well beyond the means of most Kiwis, and she will now be getting a deal better than that of a CEO of a multinational corporation.
What’s wrong with this, you ask? Surely these right-wing types should be pleased with her for succeeding, since they always measure success in dollar terms!
Well, no, actually.
The problem is that none of Clark’s jobs have ever created a cent of wealth and every cent that she herself has received has been provided by the hardworking people of New Zealand. Now, we won’t get into the realms of how much wealth Clark destroyed through socialist policy, but suffice it to say that she has single-handedly destroyed at least $10b of wealth as a conservative estimate.
So, the point is that Clark is a parasite. We have paid her enormous amounts to fuck us over any way she can. That is the bottom line, and that, if I may speak for RB here, is the issue that RB has with Helen’s new job.
Now, for all you slow-witted “progressive” types out there, have I made myself clear?
hydrogen fuel cells produce electricity that powers an electric motor.
I am aware of that.
My point was (is) nobody should discount any technology as in the statement“This technology is the future, not battery-driven vehicles”.
Fuel cells have been around a long time, they have issues which may be overcome and they may perform a significant role in the future but at the end of the day if you are using hydrogen (say) for a fuel cell you have to extract and transport it to filling stations which adds to its inefficiencies and for which there is no infra structure. Whereas the national grid exists today and can and is used to charge batteries which gives them a head start.
Sad isn’t it the way such simple points always need to be explained to thick as pig shit commies?
Too damn stupid to see the utterly mind boggling incongruity in a wealth destroying parasite like Klark commanding what is virtually a $NZ million salary to work against global poverty. The ultimate in hypocrisy, cynicism and denial.
Klark won the job because like most of the UN, she is a zealot committed to the cause of global socialism, and such zealots will only ever exist as long as there is money to be stolen from the productive sector to support them.
They can never really produce, or support themselves. They can never in the end do anything but add to global poverty.
..and exist in disgusting profligacy (as Klark so well examples) by helping themselves to a share of the earnings of those poor they profess to want to help.
She has risen because she is part of a powerful global network of political manipulators and deceivers and legislative thieves. Not ever for any admirable reason.
Well the Top Gear piece showed the presenter pulling into a gas station and filling up with hydrogen so the hydrogen outlets are deployed in the same way that we have diesel pumps. That would seem to be a most sensible way to develop an outlet network, to pick-a-back on the existing infrastructure.
Trevor Mallard’s 10:46 indicates a LH firm is doing research on efficiently producing the hydrogen – no doubt there are many others in the same space.
The fact this is zero emission – produces only water from the exhaust, and is practical in that it allows vehicles to operate in exactly the same way they do today, really does indicate that this is the next step-change in our transport technology.
Electric batteries however they develop still have obvious disadvantages which need to be overcome and I don’t really agree that the fact we have a national grid gives them a head-start because until battery technology allows people to operate to at least the same performance level as exists today, there will be very little demand for them.
The point that I couldn’t give a fuck for liberal media left wing jerkoffs and their fake concerns and blighted perceptions, and least of all their whining bullshit about perceived damage to the US’s image and pre-emptive strikes and aggression being a creator of terrorism.
Worthless media driven treasonist crap. There’s only one sure answer. Kill every one of the mind fucked stone aged bastards.
Sure, let’s do away with Guantanamo, that sign of weakness and compromise. Close it down, straight after every one of those scum have been put up against the wall and dealt with the way they should have been when first captured.
They never understand anything other than strength and brutality.
Lefties promoting electric cars has to be another stand out example of what utter utter utter dipshits they really are.
On the one hand doing everything they can to defeat the generation of electricity and on the other hand, cheering for a technology that will see demand for electricity increase tenfold.
Only a totally mind fucked leftist/ socialist/ Marxist/ watermelon/ narcissist could be capable of such unbelievably rank self deceit.
“They never understand anything other than strength and brutality.”
Yeah but the “war on terror” has targetted far too many innocent people both in an actual sense and critically, in a “seen to” sense.
Unnecessarily so, it could have easily been executed without doing this. Instead, the US especially is now globally perceived as a ruthless bully. THIS IS A FACT AND THE CRITICAL POINT IS, IT DID NOT HAVE TO HAPPEN THIS WAY.
That’s been my point all along and it irritates me when people mistakenly confuse my motives by hallucinating that I have some sort of liberal human-rights agenda because although those people coincidentally advocate the same point I make, my reasoning has nothing whatsoever to do with their reasoning. My reasons are entirely fact-based. There is nothing speculative or unclear about THE FACT IT DIDN’T HAVE TO HAPPEN THIS WAY.
Happy to detail exactly what went wrong, exactly what should have been done, if you have any doubts about this, RB.
“Yeah but the “war on terror” has targetted far too many innocent people both in an actual sense and critically, in a “seen to” sense.”
Worthless liberal media crap. Look up how many French were killed during the D-Day invasion.
“Instead, the US especially is now globally perceived as a ruthless bully.”
Who cares how the US is “perceived” by a bunch of left wing stooges and useful idiots? Stop trying to push that feeble propaganda line down my throat Reid. I will never buy into it.
Newsflash RB. That’s actually what people really think. How they got that perception is quite irrelevant to the fact they have it.
Update: Correction, how they got that perception is critical, but the fact they got it from the media is not the point. The point is, they have it. And they didn’t have to get it, at all, if the war on terror had been played differently.
reid: Obviously you haven’t been following The One, Fox News. If you had been following The One, you’d realise that America was right in invading Iraq for their involvement in gassing Kurds, invading Kuwait, 9/11, sinking the Titanic, the Hindenburg explosion and the Holocaust. Shame on you for not following The One, The Dear Leader Robert Murdoch at The One is very displeased with your disloyalty to The One.
Lefties promoting electric cars has to be another stand out example of what utter utter utter dipshits they really are
I am hardly a lefty RB.
Its not an ideological issue its one of engineering.
For more than one hundred years it has been obvious the best way providing rotational energy to wheels is via electric motors. Which is why 99.9% of railway locomotives are powered this way today, either through an external system or through on board diesel powered generators.
The human race would be far better off if every question wasn’t reduced to one rabid ideology.
That being said you can’t beat the burble of a good v8.
“the fact they got it from the media is not the point”
It is the very point. The mainstream media are a global political force, not the bringers of truth and light you so foolishly perceive them to be. Those days of the media acting as watch dogs are regretfully long gone.
The mainstream media has been infiltrated by leftist agents who either knowingly or because they’re gullible fools, use their influence to advocate for political positions they see as benefiting the advance of global socialism. This naturally requires that truth be hidden.
“we would not be looking at what we are seeing today”
Stop using “we”. Your view may be shared by a bunch of gullible uneducated misinformed jerkoffs, but its not universal. By any means.
OK, so feel free to exclude yourself from the criticism.
“For more than one hundred years it has been obvious the best way providing rotational energy to wheels is via electric motors. Which is why 99.9% of railway locomotives are powered this way today, either through an external system or through on board diesel powered generators.”
The glaring logic gaps in the above paragraph though might give any rational person reason to question your first assertion. (not a lefty)
It is the very point. The mainstream media are a global political force, not the bringers of truth and light you so foolishly perceive them to be. Those days of the media acting as watch dogs are regretfully long gone.
So you’re saying RB that the biased media is solely responsible for the global perception of the war on terror and the politician’s actions have nothing whatsoever to do with it?
BTW, don’t presume to know what I think – “you so foolishly perceive them to be.” You clearly have no idea what I think about that issue.
“The Dear Leader Robert Murdoch at The One is very displeased with your disloyalty to The One.”
If Rupert Murdoch controls the editorial content of his global media business, how come so many of his newspapers and TV stations are such glaring examples of undisguised left wing propaganda? Answer that you smearing unintelligent fuckwit.
For more than one hundred years it has been obvious the best way providing rotational energy to wheels is via electric motors.
Don’t you think it would be more accurate to say that electric motors have the potential to be the best method of efficiently generating rotational velocity?
As it stands, electric motors are simply not viable for a lot of purposes.
I agree that the major problem with electric cars is that you need some sort of portable power source and not with the idea of using electric motors. Locomotives demonstrate, as you say, that electric motors have a lot of potential. The problem is that, at this stage, no electric configuration can match the internal combustion engine.
“Except for hydrogen fuel cells Christopher. Do catch up.”
You catch up. How much electricity is needed to produce hydrogen??
Its a bit like burning diesel to generate steam and then using that steam to drive an engine and then saying steam driven vehicles are going to solve world oil shortages.
“If Rupert Murdoch controls the editorial content of his global media business, how come so many of his newspapers and TV stations are such glaring examples of undisguised left wing propaganda? Answer that you smearing unintelligent fuckwit.”
Hahaha. Fuckwit? Really, if you need ad hominems to be an integral part of your argument perhaps you need to change your style.
Anywho, what newspapers are you talking about? News corp owns;
AU: The Australian, The Courier-Mail, The Daily Telegraph (AU), The Herald-Sun, Geelong Advertiser, The Advertiser, The Sunday Times (WA), The Mercury, Northern Territory News
FJ: Fiji Times
UK: The Sun, News of the World, The Sunday Times, The Times
US: New York Post, Wall Street Journal
All of which are somewhere between conservative and centrist. As for TV, everybody knows Fox News has a conservative bias. Prey tell, where are these phantom “liberal bias” newspapers/tv stations you speak of?
Let me guess your reply. It will be something along the lines of “your socialist world view and the vast socialist mass media conspiracy are based on lies and you’re a liberal fucktard”, without actually addressing the post in question.
The perception you promote and claim exists, yes. [the biased media is solely responsible for the global perception of the war on terror]
Fuck that’s funny RB. So the media bias is solely responsible for all the enraged Arabs, and all the skeptical Westerners, Africans and Asians who don’t think the war on terror is being played in the best possible way? You’re really saying that events have nothing to do with it?
I see.
Further, you say that those people who are skeptical are “a bunch of gullible uneducated misinformed jerkoffs, but its not universal”
I’d suggest RB that out of those in the global population who have any opinion at all on the war on terror, those who think it’s being played very badly indeed are actually in the majority. I’d say the gullible idiots are those who think it’s been executed in the optimal way.
So every word you have ever written here on the issue has been written by someone else??
I quote from and link to plenty of articles from all sorts of sources from across the left-right spectrum. As I’ve said before, I don’t care where it comes from, if it’s true, it’s true. Try not to draw any deeper conclusion than that for merely quoting a fact says nothing about what I think about the MSM.
I’ve never posted on that particular subject and I probably never will so you have no idea at all what I think about it. However when there is a fact that appears that supports my point I’ll link to it. If you think that means I’m sucked in by some propaganda then I suggest that’s a silly conclusion.
You catch up. How much electricity is needed to produce hydrogen??
Well duh, that’s why it’s uneconomic to crack hydrogen to burn it, which is why fuel cells are better than hydrogen-burning engines. Have a look at cha’s link, why don’t you.
“Hahaha. Fuckwit? Really, if you need ad hominems to be an integral part of your argument perhaps you need to change your style.”
Don’t instruct me on style school teacher. If you want to save yourself the embarrassment of being perceived and named as a fuckwit, maybe you should cease writing such fuckwitted unsubstantiated material.
“Let me guess your reply.”
You couldn’t, because you can’t even think straight enough to save your own arguments. The assertion “All of which are somewhere between conservative and centrist.” does not amount to anything other than the naked opinion of someone who has already proved themselves as a vacant leftist dogmatist…
“everybody knows Fox News has a conservative bias.”
who is so ignorant and ill mannered they presume to speak for everyone, even when he/ she is lying.
Independent objective university studies have proved that FOX news is the most balanced of media outlets. You wouldn’t know of that though, and you’ll therefore probably ask me to supply references. (which I’m happy to do as it once again exposes leftists as lazy ignorant bastards.The catch is you’ll have to agree to donate $100 to a charity I name.)
..and you refuse to answer my question. If Rupert Murdoch controls editorial content so tightly, why does he allow so much left wing propaganda to spew from the pages of the media he owns??
On second thoughts, don’t answer. I’ve got better things to do than argue reality with some deranged left wing knuckle dragger who doesn’t know his arse from grass.
BTW there is a comma missing in “you half educated self described example of leftist vermin”
A comma and two hyphens, actually. This is getting silly, but if you want to keep playing correct-sy, at least make an effort.
Well duh, that’s why it’s uneconomic to crack hydrogen to burn it, which is why fuel cells are better than hydrogen-burning engines.
Not that I entirely agree with Reid about fuel cells being the best thing ever, but I don’t think any proponents of fuel cells would actually advocate cracking hydrogen to burn it. It’s why the movie “chain reaction” is total crap.
Fuck that’s funny RB. So the media bias is solely responsible for all the enraged Arabs, and all the skeptical Westerners, Africans and Asians who don’t think the war on terror is being played in the best possible way? You’re really saying that events have nothing to do with it?
I don;t think the war on terror has been done in an optimal way at all, but I think people like RB would be less pissed off with people like you Reid if the vast majority of the MSM didn’t portray every part of the war on terror as an immoral, poorly-executed calamity.
The reality is that there is more than one way to skin a cat, and the way terrorism has been fought has not necessarily been the best way to skin it.
That doesn’t mean that it won’t work in the end, and it doesn’t mean it’s been a catastrophic failure the way the MSM would have us believe.
I can’t speak for RB, but that’s what pisses me off the most. The media’s portrayal of muslim extremists as “really nice guys who probably just need to be hugged more” is quite disgusting.
Reid: The problem with advocating against the way the war on terror has been conducted is that you lump yourself in with all the socialist / jihadist nutjobs unless you are very, very careful about how you word your criticisms.
I don’t agree with everything you say, but you’re clearly not in the reactionary, pro-jihadist camp. My issue is more with the fact that so many people (sometimes unknowingly) are.
“who think it’s being played very badly indeed are actually in the majority.”
When the fuck has majority viewpoint ever been any proof of truth? Especially today with the media such a worthless pack of lying left wing bastards.
Look at the “perceptions” on global warming. Perceptions manufactured by the same group you claim to be telling the truth on the Bush government and the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, but perceptions that you say are wrong. You want it both ways?
So far as I can see, as a mathematician, fuel cells cannot match the internal combustion engine.
Christopher, my apologies for my 12:27, I misunderstood your point. Are you talking about power output in individual engines or conservation of energy equations?
which is why I’ve been recommending platinum as an investment for a few years now. If people think it’s expensive now, wait till these vehicles hit the production lines.
reid, I’ve been watching Anglo Plantnum for a few years. Wish I’d ridden it up over the last 3 years… but VERY happy not to have been holding over last 6 months! Carnage! Entry point looks ok’ish now – back to mid-2005 levels… except perhaps a mass of burnt investors who will sell into any rises. Another consideration is that it’s ~75% owned by Anglo American and I’m nervous about small shareholders being treated as a doormat in the volatile world of mining & minerals. Do you hold this or any other platinum stocks?
I don’t agree with everything you say, but you’re clearly not in the reactionary, pro-jihadist camp. My issue is more with the fact that so many people (sometimes unknowingly) are.
Christopher, I take your point, however I say what I say in the way I say it, because I don’t care what people like RB think about my motives.
I believe the points I make in my comments should speak for themselves and if people like RB chose to think I’m whatever-it-is-he-thinks-I-am because of the points that I make, then I truly don’t give a flying fuck because it’s quite irrelevant to the point.
I don’t disagree that the media play up the negative angle however it’s also true that even politically unaware people aren’t total idiots and they can usually read the correct writing on the wall, when it’s large enough. The problems inside the conduct of the war on terror are writ large to anyone with eyes, pretending they wouldn’t be there if only the MSM weren’t so biased is not only crazy but it’s factually incorrect.
Why the fuck would I bother arguing with you when the usual response is “you half educated self described example of leftist vermin”
Pretty feeble given there’s plenty of other people reading,
…and the guy posts tired old left wing propaganda and smears under the handle “Dirty Rat”, which to my mind, makes my description of him as a “half educated self described example of leftist vermin” as fair comment and reasonably accurate. At the least arguable.
BTW Cha, every time you people focus on those things rather than the real argument, I know you’ve got no real defence. I give you the bait, and every time, you stupidly take it.
“Don’t instruct me on style school teacher. If you want to save yourself the embarrassment of being perceived and named as a fuckwit, maybe you should cease writing such fuckwitted unsubstantiated material.”
Embarrassment? Why would I be embarrassed at what you think?
“Independent objective university studies have proved that FOX news is the most balanced of media outlets. You wouldn’t know of that though, and you’ll therefore probably ask me to supply references. (which I’m happy to do as it once again exposes leftists as lazy ignorant bastards.The catch is you’ll have to agree to donate $100 to a charity I name.)
..and you refuse to answer my question. If Rupert Murdoch controls editorial content so tightly, why does he allow so much left wing propaganda to spew from the pages of the media he owns??”
Why should I have to do your homework? Back up your own points you lazy fuck. You’re the one who has to validate your argument, not me.
And you STILL haven’t pointed me towards any of the “leftist” mass media outlets you claim exist. Are you going to, or do you concede that you’re pulling things out of your ass (perhaps pulling a brain out might be a good idea)?
“On second thoughts, don’t answer. I’ve got better things to do than argue reality with some deranged left wing knuckle dragger who doesn’t know his arse from grass.”
Hahaha. Go back to your sister, but please remember to use protection.
Christopher, my apologies for my 12:27, I misunderstood your point. Are you talking about power output in individual engines or conservation of energy equations?
Actually, after re-reading my post I didn’t understand me either.
There are several problems with PEMFCs (I’m assuming you’re talking about PEMFCs here). I’m supposed to be working on an assignment, so I’ll just list them:
1. Cost
2. Durability issues. Fuel cells need to endure subzero temperatures and up to about 105 deg C (because of impurities)
3. The need for high-pressure hydration systems to compensate for loss of hydration in subzero temperatures and low humidity
4. Vehicle range in terms of the volume required to store hydrogen. Containers have to be pretty robust for safety reasons.
Anyways, that’s me out for the day.
I like the idea of fuel cells, they just aren’t a great solution at present.
Because they already had enough diplomatic influence in Saudi to manage things sufficently well.
Apparently RB you’re not very well acquainted with the evidence that indicates Saudi remains an important source of terrorist funds, even after 8.5 years of “diplomatic influence.”
I suggest you do some research into the links between the Wahhabi movement, the Saudi Royal Family and terrorist financing. Don’t forget also to investigate the Saudi support given to disseminate the Wahhabi viewpoint worldwide in thousands of Islamic schools, which teaches pupils in those schools attitudes that would instantly place them onto the no-fly lists if they were ever foolish enough to enter the home of what they term “the Great Satan.”
Try not to become distracted by the Saudi and US diplomatic officials who say critics of Wahhabism exhibit an anti-Islamic bias and merely want to disrupt the U.S.-Saudi alliance. After all, you want the truth, don’t you. You don’t want propaganda from officials who have a vested interest in lies, do you?
So do that research RB and then come back and tell us whether you still think that the “diplomatic efforts” have actually achieved what they should have.
Before you do that however, what are you basing your contention on? I’d like to look further into that myself.
Okay, I’ll bite RB, the war on terror is no more than a war by proxy between the west and those funding the terrorists, Saudi Arabia, Iran and probably Syria.
For a long time I’ve wondered how a rag tag crew of third world mountain dwellers can be so well armed, enough to hold off NATO and the combined forces of the United States for most of this decade. And even though the soviets left enough munitions behind, IEDs etc, to blow us all to kingdom come three times over these people seem to have a never ending supply of twenty first century communications, weaponry and whatever else is required to wage a decade long war.
It just strikes me that there is much more going on than meets the eye. Someone’s getting rich and various states interests are being advanced at the expense of the people losing their lives, be they US or NATO personnel, shepherds from the”stans” or mad Arab ‘jihadis’ and us, the taxpayers. So follow the money RB, a huge transfer of wealth from us, the tax payers, to who?. Boeing, General Electric, Haliburton, Saab, Dassault, our very own Raykon, the arms industries of the US, China, Israel, South Africa, Britain, Russia and christ knows who else.
I’m not going to do it. I have already enough research on this situation to know where I stand, and I will never truck with the treasonist left wing mainstream media, under the guise of being rational or any other guise.
“what are you basing your contention on? I’d like to look further into that myself.”
It common sense for chrissakes. The US had diplomatic influence in Saudi which for better or worse gave them an avenue to deal with enemies there that was preferable to an invasion. They had no such diplomatic avenues with Iraq, and there were plenty of other good reasons to invade Iraq anyway.
Furthermore, I reject in anticipation every one of the premises you use to undermine the decision to invade.
Yes, there were contacts between Saddam and Al Qaida principles. Yes there were attempts to manufacture genocidal weapons to use against the US. No Bush did not lie, because if he did, so did the governments of every other western nation and the Democrats. No he did not say “major operations are over” in the context the media portrayed, even deceitfully inserting a non existent full stop after “over”. The war was not illegal. If it was, so many other countries (around 30 IIRC) would not have participated. No the war did not result in large numbers of civilian deaths as reported in the now discredited Lancet.
All so much bullshit.
Left wing bullshit designed to de-stabilise the Bush administration.
Generated by a global network of anti-capitalist scum.
There needed to be a beachhead for democracy in the Middle East, Saddam needed a bloodied nose, his people needed freedom from tyranny and fear, the US needed to assert itself as capable of real pre-emptive action against terrorism, and invasion of Iraq was the best option.
The war has been won. The terrorists have been defeated. Democracy reigns in Iraq where once there was totalitarian tyranny.
(well, the terrorists were defeated until they succeeded in getting Obama elected, who now wants to free their leaders in return for their support)
What a surprise RB. You demand evidence from everyone else but when asked to provide it yourself, you refuse to.
I’m glad you think the war on terror is over.
I therefore look forward confidently to the dismantling of all the legislative apparatus western govts have enacted to “protect us from the terrorists.”
When do you think that will start to happen RB? Next month? Maybe by end of May perhaps? Surely not longer than that.
A wideish ball it may have been Cha, but as Crowe has just this second said, “it’s a danger when you don’t treat him as a proper bowler” – an absolute masterstroke from Dan the Man!
” therefore look forward confidently to the dismantling of all the legislative apparatus western govts have enacted to “protect us from the terrorists.”
Oh gawd, just like they did immediately Hitler was defeated? What a joke your arguments are. You really need to stop drinking that left wing Kool Ade Reid, its often the cause of irreparable brain damage.
..and you need to read. I said the terrorists were defeated, and the war was won, but not that the war was over. See what I mean about leftist brain rot? Perhaps you need to see someone about restoring your state of consciousness to the real world.
These scum are like the left. Like rust, both terrorists and their bosom buddy leftists never sleep. One must always be on guard.
..and you’re worried about acts to protect us from terrorists when so many of our liberties are threatened by the left anyway? Look at what they have done in the UK, once one of the nations with more respect for liberty than any.
By means of political correctness, they’ve turned it into a poisonous and dying totalitarian leftist hellhole, as bad as anything from 1984. …and they’ve done it while you’ve been whining incessantly about the Bush government and Iraq. Get real man, you’re so completely manipulated by leftmedia you don’t have clue.
Submitted by Whaleoil on Sat, 28/03/2009 – 12:44pm
in
* Helen Clark
* Ian Wishart
PDF version
That is the question that Ian Wishart is asking in TGIF.
He has looked at the accounts for the UNDP and seen something a little awry;
Figures obtained by TGIF also reveal sharp spikes in the levels of NZ Government donations in the periods leading up to the 2005 and 2008 elections, both of which were tight-fought political races.
According to United Nations Development Programme’s published accounts, New Zealand contributed:
US$2 million in 2000,
US$4 million in 2001,
US$3.9 million in 2002
US$5 million in 2003
US$11 million in 2004
US$16 million in 2005
US$10.8 million in 2006
US$12.5 million in 2007
US$12.5 million in 2008
It isn’t just the UNDP that sees similar spikes of our cash flowing into UN coffers, The UNFPA got about US$770k in 2001 but a whopping US$3.7 million in 2004 and then US$5.2 million in 2005, the figure drpped back to $2.7 million in 2006 and 2007.
Same goes for UNICEF. US$1.6 million in 2001 and US$5 million.
Is Helen buying insurance for herself before each election?
This is even more alarming when you look at our contribuitions beside Australia’s. Wishart says that on a pro-rata basis our contributions should be about a fifth of Australia’s, in fact in each case listed we have contributed more.
It looks on the surface that Helen Clark has used her position as Prime Minister to effectively buy herself a job and to buy it with our money. It seems that Helen Clark has an unhealthy appetite for stealing our money to buy things like elections and high paying jobs for herself.
About Electric Cars.
Whatever the original fuel source, the energy has to be stored, battery, accumulator, call it what you like.
This storage device will have a finite life.
Who disposes of the dead battery? where does it go? is this more polution?
The greenies never think of this, they just think of now.
Turn lights off, then we can’t see what’s really going on.
Habharjan out now – India 305-9 and in deep shit! And Ryder takes a ripper of a catch – India all out for 305 – NZ leads by 314 on the first innings. India will follow on.
So did anything happen with earthour?
Couldn’t see much from the glare at my place.
anyway the Highlanders and the Crusaders won, and the NZ cricket team are in a happy place. All is good.
The money put into promoting Earth Hour would be better spent on…
1. Promoting New Zealand as a holiday destination – cut down on unnecessary international flights, which do far more damage to the environment than our – partly hydro – power generation.
2. Promoting vegetarianism, providing incentives for switching land use from livestock to crops.
3. That’s about it, really.
But switching off lights can probably make people feel like they’re doing something, and it’s nice and non-offensive in a culture that bristles at the thought of sacrificing their holidays to Europe and steaks.
For more than one hundred years it has been obvious the best way providing rotational energy to wheels is via electric motors. Which is why 99.9% of railway locomotives are powered this way today, either through an external system or through on board diesel powered generators.”
It is something I have looked into, basically a prius like set up, rather than having to charge up your car at a wall, you have an engine running at optimum efficiency keeping the batteries charged. Problem is making everything strong enough, electric motors have a flat torque “curve”, that is the same right from the very first rotation. easily snap the axles if your tires are too sticky.
March 28th, 2009 at 10:16 am
Regarding the New National govrenment.
Every get the feeling you’ve been had?
March 28th, 2009 at 10:18 am
this is so cool..
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/worlds-fastest-electric-car-72-datsun-video/
phil(whoar.co.nz)
March 28th, 2009 at 10:22 am
Dont forget celebrate Edison 8.30pm tonight. Turn on every light and electrical appliance for 1 hour.
March 28th, 2009 at 10:22 am
The hypocrisy of socialists-
Helen Klark’s main role at the UN will be the reducing poverty, and she has sure achieved that objective in respect of her own situation.
Already the owner/ landlord of six or so houses in NZ, (all gained at the expense of the taxpayer), here’s what she gets at the UN, and once more at the expense of the taxpayer-. (don’t forget, this mind crippled left wing zealot has never had a real job)
* Package in the region of $500,000 a year, including base salary – which is tax-free – and allowances based on the cost of living in New York. It also comes with a superannuation scheme.
* Office in downtown New York.
* As a member of the now-closed original MPs superannuation scheme, she will take a lucrative entitlement after 28 years in Parliament.
* She will also get the former Prime Minister’s annuity of $40,250 a year. When back in New Zealand, she is entitled to free domestic airfares, a chauffeur-driven car for official purposes and a self-drive car
Klark’s type traditionally rise to the top in socialist situations- check out this web page for an explanation-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nomenklatura
March 28th, 2009 at 10:29 am
Check out the new blog: Anti Earth Hour; Earth Hour cynics are encouraged to submit their pictures of power-hungry activities for Earth Hour 09. Also, any articles or research you’ve done. Pop over for a visit and get your blog linked in!
Don’t forget, Like Lucy said, celebrate Edison and switch on tonight!
March 28th, 2009 at 10:33 am
I wonder if hubby Peter Davis is a little worried about entering the US after his last visit. I suppose he will now be entitled to diplomatic immunity?
Tell me anyone, did he do a George Michael or a Lee Tamahori? And did Winston have to step in to get him out of the country?
[DPF: And that is 20 demerits]
March 28th, 2009 at 10:36 am
Problem is phil, “It takes about 20 minutes to fully charge the car, and it can get up to 40 miles on a full charge.”
Who the hell is going to buy a car that stops every 40 miles for 20 minutes even if you can find recharge outlets every 40 miles?
Hydrogen fuel cells have always been the preferred option because they allow electric cars to behave like our cars today. Top Gear last week showed one production model currently available only in Californy.
It requires a network of hydrogen outlets setup in conventional gas stations.
This technology is the future, not battery-driven vehicles.
BTW, hydrogen fuel-cells need a platinum membrane, which is why I’ve been recommending platinum as an investment for a few years now. If people think it’s expensive now, wait till these vehicles hit the production lines.
March 28th, 2009 at 10:42 am
Apparently “the person,” whoever it might have been, was travelling on a diplomatic passport at the time of the incident.
March 28th, 2009 at 10:43 am
“And did Winston have to step in to get him out of the country?”
What’s this all about?
Nothing to do with Klark’s unwavering defence of Winston throughout the Glen saga is it??
March 28th, 2009 at 10:43 am
Care to expand OECD?
Heaven forfend, RB.
March 28th, 2009 at 10:46 am
IRL Lower Hutt have been doing good research on hydrogen fuel cell technology for some time – can but doesn’t have to be -linked to use of coal to produce the hydrogen. Very clean technology. Massive potential.
March 28th, 2009 at 10:47 am
Well what about this then?
This technology is the future, not battery-driven vehicles.
I wouldn’t bet on that at all. Electric motors beat the internal combustion engine hands down, the problem has always been the power supply. But battery technology is increasing in leaps and bounds, not only in increasing storage capacity but also in reduction of weight, size and charging times.
March 28th, 2009 at 10:48 am
Reid-
I know you read Janet Albrechston’s every column, but yesterday’s was exceptionally good-
http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/janetalbrechtsen/index.php/theaustralian/comments/detox_cant_cure_jihadist_urge_to_kill/
March 28th, 2009 at 10:50 am
“battery technology is increasing in leaps and bounds,”
Its not actually. Electric cars are a dying fad. An expensive wank. One good dose of economic reality will see the end to them.
March 28th, 2009 at 10:52 am
andrei, hydrogen fuel cells produce electricity that powers an electric motor. It strips an electron from a hydrogen molecule as it passes through the membrane and that is used to generate electricity.
It doesn’t burn hydrogen in the engine.
March 28th, 2009 at 10:52 am
reid..what is ‘cool’..
is the fact he blows away all the petrol-head drag-racers..and sets three new world records..
..in a 72′ datsun..
..and what is exciting..
..is the potential this shows for electric cars..
(um..!..is your apparant lack of any imagination down to astrological tendencies/templates..?..perchance..?
..are you a taurus..?..or a virgo..?..
if so..my commisertations to you..
eh..?..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
March 28th, 2009 at 10:54 am
Redbaiter
Are you complaining that Ms Clark has a job in regards to the remuneration package ?
A bit of a hypocritic view of hypocrisy
March 28th, 2009 at 10:58 am
“Are you complaining that Ms Clark has a job in regards to the remuneration package ?”
Where do you illiterate leftist morons come from??
If you’re going to write a sentence with a question mark at the end, you half educated self described example of leftist vermin, try and make the question understandable.
March 28th, 2009 at 11:02 am
“Reid-I know you read Janet Albrechston’s every column, but yesterday’s was exceptionally good-”
RB, I hope you don’t think that article is a counter to my views on the subject.
If you do, then you’re quite wrong in your assessment as to what my views actually are.
I simply think the “war on terror” is using the wrong tactics and it’s producing exactly the opposite result to that intended. I don’t think that because I have a concern about human rights etc. I think that because it’s quite obvious to anyone objective that it’s simply driving people into the arms of the terrorists. I think that anyone who doesn’t see that is thicker than a whale omelet.
Therefore we should change our tactics but whenever one suggests that, some people for some reason, think that you’re being ’soft on terrorists’ which is quite wrong.
March 28th, 2009 at 11:04 am
Trevor do you have any general links that would shed some light on those lines of research?
March 28th, 2009 at 11:05 am
“all gained at the expense of the taxpayer”
What are you suggesting Redbaiter?
Are you suggesting that HC used public funds to buy these houses – ie some kind of rort? Or that this is what she spent her salary on?
If the latter, I have to completely reject the notion that they were purchased at taxpayer expense. Once that salary went into HC’s bank account it was HER money to spend as she liked. And that is none of my business or yours, and taxpayers have no right to criticise. Or do you embrace the idea that the state has or should have the right to dictate how people spend their own money?
March 28th, 2009 at 11:09 am
“(um..!..is your apparant lack of any imagination down to astrological tendencies/templates..?..perchance..? ..are you a taurus..?..or a virgo..?..”
Actually phil I’m a Scorpio-Tiger and I suggest you read Suzanne White’s book which combines Western-Chinese signs if you want to know more about my general traits.
Usually in personality assessments I come out very strong on having both creative and analytical aspects but I’m weaker on organisational skills because frankly, organising shit bores the crap out of me.
Puzzled as to why you asked but there you are.
March 28th, 2009 at 11:09 am
“Therefore we should change our tactics but whenever one suggests that, some people for some reason, think that you’re being ’soft on terrorists’ which is quite wrong.”
Yeah? Is that so? Try this for another dose of harsh reality-
http://www.lasorsa.com/blog1/?p=87
March 28th, 2009 at 11:10 am
Well, if we’re going to bash him for having shit grammar, we may as well bash his spelling too. Or would that be hypocritic of me?
Anyway, I think the point that RB was trying to make (for those of you not clever enough to read plain English) was that Clark has enjoyed an excellent salary package well beyond the means of most Kiwis, and she will now be getting a deal better than that of a CEO of a multinational corporation.
What’s wrong with this, you ask? Surely these right-wing types should be pleased with her for succeeding, since they always measure success in dollar terms!
Well, no, actually.
The problem is that none of Clark’s jobs have ever created a cent of wealth and every cent that she herself has received has been provided by the hardworking people of New Zealand. Now, we won’t get into the realms of how much wealth Clark destroyed through socialist policy, but suffice it to say that she has single-handedly destroyed at least $10b of wealth as a conservative estimate.
So, the point is that Clark is a parasite. We have paid her enormous amounts to fuck us over any way she can. That is the bottom line, and that, if I may speak for RB here, is the issue that RB has with Helen’s new job.
Now, for all you slow-witted “progressive” types out there, have I made myself clear?
March 28th, 2009 at 11:18 am
“Yeah? Is that so? Try this for another dose of harsh reality-”
Again RB, not sure how what this is saying rebuts any of my views in any way whatsoever.
What’s the point you’re making here?
March 28th, 2009 at 11:19 am
hydrogen fuel cells produce electricity that powers an electric motor.
I am aware of that.
My point was (is) nobody should discount any technology as in the statement“This technology is the future, not battery-driven vehicles”.
Fuel cells have been around a long time, they have issues which may be overcome and they may perform a significant role in the future but at the end of the day if you are using hydrogen (say) for a fuel cell you have to extract and transport it to filling stations which adds to its inefficiencies and for which there is no infra structure. Whereas the national grid exists today and can and is used to charge batteries which gives them a head start.
Who knows how it will eventually play out
March 28th, 2009 at 11:22 am
Thanks Christopher.
Sad isn’t it the way such simple points always need to be explained to thick as pig shit commies?
Too damn stupid to see the utterly mind boggling incongruity in a wealth destroying parasite like Klark commanding what is virtually a $NZ million salary to work against global poverty. The ultimate in hypocrisy, cynicism and denial.
Klark won the job because like most of the UN, she is a zealot committed to the cause of global socialism, and such zealots will only ever exist as long as there is money to be stolen from the productive sector to support them.
They can never really produce, or support themselves. They can never in the end do anything but add to global poverty.
..and exist in disgusting profligacy (as Klark so well examples) by helping themselves to a share of the earnings of those poor they profess to want to help.
She has risen because she is part of a powerful global network of political manipulators and deceivers and legislative thieves. Not ever for any admirable reason.
March 28th, 2009 at 11:31 am
“Who knows how it will eventually play out”
Well the Top Gear piece showed the presenter pulling into a gas station and filling up with hydrogen so the hydrogen outlets are deployed in the same way that we have diesel pumps. That would seem to be a most sensible way to develop an outlet network, to pick-a-back on the existing infrastructure.
Trevor Mallard’s 10:46 indicates a LH firm is doing research on efficiently producing the hydrogen – no doubt there are many others in the same space.
The fact this is zero emission – produces only water from the exhaust, and is practical in that it allows vehicles to operate in exactly the same way they do today, really does indicate that this is the next step-change in our transport technology.
Electric batteries however they develop still have obvious disadvantages which need to be overcome and I don’t really agree that the fact we have a national grid gives them a head-start because until battery technology allows people to operate to at least the same performance level as exists today, there will be very little demand for them.
March 28th, 2009 at 11:33 am
“What’s the point you’re making here?”
The point that I couldn’t give a fuck for liberal media left wing jerkoffs and their fake concerns and blighted perceptions, and least of all their whining bullshit about perceived damage to the US’s image and pre-emptive strikes and aggression being a creator of terrorism.
Worthless media driven treasonist crap. There’s only one sure answer. Kill every one of the mind fucked stone aged bastards.
Sure, let’s do away with Guantanamo, that sign of weakness and compromise. Close it down, straight after every one of those scum have been put up against the wall and dealt with the way they should have been when first captured.
They never understand anything other than strength and brutality.
March 28th, 2009 at 11:43 am
Lefties promoting electric cars has to be another stand out example of what utter utter utter dipshits they really are.
On the one hand doing everything they can to defeat the generation of electricity and on the other hand, cheering for a technology that will see demand for electricity increase tenfold.
Only a totally mind fucked leftist/ socialist/ Marxist/ watermelon/ narcissist could be capable of such unbelievably rank self deceit.
March 28th, 2009 at 11:45 am
“They never understand anything other than strength and brutality.”
Yeah but the “war on terror” has targetted far too many innocent people both in an actual sense and critically, in a “seen to” sense.
Unnecessarily so, it could have easily been executed without doing this. Instead, the US especially is now globally perceived as a ruthless bully. THIS IS A FACT AND THE CRITICAL POINT IS, IT DID NOT HAVE TO HAPPEN THIS WAY.
That’s been my point all along and it irritates me when people mistakenly confuse my motives by hallucinating that I have some sort of liberal human-rights agenda because although those people coincidentally advocate the same point I make, my reasoning has nothing whatsoever to do with their reasoning. My reasons are entirely fact-based. There is nothing speculative or unclear about THE FACT IT DIDN’T HAVE TO HAPPEN THIS WAY.
Happy to detail exactly what went wrong, exactly what should have been done, if you have any doubts about this, RB.
March 28th, 2009 at 11:48 am
“Trevor do you have any general links that would shed some light on those lines of research?”
Trev only pops in now and again and then vanishes very quickly back into his gilded cage.
Its standard leftist reaction to real life.
March 28th, 2009 at 11:49 am
“Yeah but the “war on terror” has targetted far too many innocent people both in an actual sense and critically, in a “seen to” sense.”
Worthless liberal media crap. Look up how many French were killed during the D-Day invasion.
“Instead, the US especially is now globally perceived as a ruthless bully.”
Who cares how the US is “perceived” by a bunch of left wing stooges and useful idiots? Stop trying to push that feeble propaganda line down my throat Reid. I will never buy into it.
March 28th, 2009 at 11:50 am
Osama bin Elvis
March 28th, 2009 at 11:51 am
“Worthless liberal media crap.”
Newsflash RB. That’s actually what people really think. How they got that perception is quite irrelevant to the fact they have it.
Update: Correction, how they got that perception is critical, but the fact they got it from the media is not the point. The point is, they have it. And they didn’t have to get it, at all, if the war on terror had been played differently.
March 28th, 2009 at 11:56 am
“The point is, they have it.”
So you want to be complicit in a deception rather than advocate for truth?
March 28th, 2009 at 11:58 am
“So you want to be complicit in a deception rather than advocate for truth?”
It’s not a deception, RB.
The politicians have played the war on terror badly, clumsily, and they didn’t have to.
If the politicians weren’t so incompetent, we would not be looking at what we are seeing today.
Regardless of what the media produces.
March 28th, 2009 at 12:07 pm
reid: Obviously you haven’t been following The One, Fox News. If you had been following The One, you’d realise that America was right in invading Iraq for their involvement in gassing Kurds, invading Kuwait, 9/11, sinking the Titanic, the Hindenburg explosion and the Holocaust. Shame on you for not following The One, The Dear Leader Robert Murdoch at The One is very displeased with your disloyalty to The One.
March 28th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
Lefties promoting electric cars has to be another stand out example of what utter utter utter dipshits they really are
I am hardly a lefty RB.
Its not an ideological issue its one of engineering.
For more than one hundred years it has been obvious the best way providing rotational energy to wheels is via electric motors. Which is why 99.9% of railway locomotives are powered this way today, either through an external system or through on board diesel powered generators.
The human race would be far better off if every question wasn’t reduced to one rabid ideology.
That being said you can’t beat the burble of a good v8.
March 28th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
“the fact they got it from the media is not the point”
It is the very point. The mainstream media are a global political force, not the bringers of truth and light you so foolishly perceive them to be. Those days of the media acting as watch dogs are regretfully long gone.
The mainstream media has been infiltrated by leftist agents who either knowingly or because they’re gullible fools, use their influence to advocate for political positions they see as benefiting the advance of global socialism. This naturally requires that truth be hidden.
“we would not be looking at what we are seeing today”
Stop using “we”. Your view may be shared by a bunch of gullible uneducated misinformed jerkoffs, but its not universal. By any means.
March 28th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
“I am hardly a lefty RB.”
OK, so feel free to exclude yourself from the criticism.
“For more than one hundred years it has been obvious the best way providing rotational energy to wheels is via electric motors. Which is why 99.9% of railway locomotives are powered this way today, either through an external system or through on board diesel powered generators.”
The glaring logic gaps in the above paragraph though might give any rational person reason to question your first assertion. (not a lefty)
March 28th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
So you’re saying RB that the biased media is solely responsible for the global perception of the war on terror and the politician’s actions have nothing whatsoever to do with it?
BTW, don’t presume to know what I think – “you so foolishly perceive them to be.” You clearly have no idea what I think about that issue.
March 28th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
Islamic nations succeed in passing repressive resolution at UN Human Rights Council meeting
http://adamsmith.wordpress.com/2009/03/28/un-abuses-human-rights/
March 28th, 2009 at 12:23 pm
“The Dear Leader Robert Murdoch at The One is very displeased with your disloyalty to The One.”
If Rupert Murdoch controls the editorial content of his global media business, how come so many of his newspapers and TV stations are such glaring examples of undisguised left wing propaganda? Answer that you smearing unintelligent fuckwit.
March 28th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
Don’t you think it would be more accurate to say that electric motors have the potential to be the best method of efficiently generating rotational velocity?
As it stands, electric motors are simply not viable for a lot of purposes.
I agree that the major problem with electric cars is that you need some sort of portable power source and not with the idea of using electric motors. Locomotives demonstrate, as you say, that electric motors have a lot of potential. The problem is that, at this stage, no electric configuration can match the internal combustion engine.
March 28th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
“So you’re saying RB that the biased media is solely responsible for the global perception of the war on terror”
The perception you promote and claim exists, yes.
“BTW, don’t presume to know what I think – “you so foolishly perceive them to be.” You clearly have no idea what I think about that issue.”
So every word you have ever written here on the issue has been written by someone else??
March 28th, 2009 at 12:27 pm
“The problem is that, at this stage, no electric configuration can match the internal combustion engine.”
Except for hydrogen fuel cells Christopher. Do catch up.
March 28th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
“Except for hydrogen fuel cells Christopher. Do catch up.”
You catch up. How much electricity is needed to produce hydrogen??
Its a bit like burning diesel to generate steam and then using that steam to drive an engine and then saying steam driven vehicles are going to solve world oil shortages.
March 28th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
YOU FUCKING BEAUTY!!!!!
Tendulkar out for 49
March 28th, 2009 at 12:43 pm
My father and I have long been interested in the development of hydrogen fuel cells.
So far as I can see, as a mathematician, fuel cells cannot match the internal combustion engine.
I’m not saying they won’t in the future, just that they don’t now.
March 28th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
“If Rupert Murdoch controls the editorial content of his global media business, how come so many of his newspapers and TV stations are such glaring examples of undisguised left wing propaganda? Answer that you smearing unintelligent fuckwit.”
Hahaha. Fuckwit? Really, if you need ad hominems to be an integral part of your argument perhaps you need to change your style.
Anywho, what newspapers are you talking about? News corp owns;
AU: The Australian, The Courier-Mail, The Daily Telegraph (AU), The Herald-Sun, Geelong Advertiser, The Advertiser, The Sunday Times (WA), The Mercury, Northern Territory News
FJ: Fiji Times
UK: The Sun, News of the World, The Sunday Times, The Times
US: New York Post, Wall Street Journal
All of which are somewhere between conservative and centrist. As for TV, everybody knows Fox News has a conservative bias. Prey tell, where are these phantom “liberal bias” newspapers/tv stations you speak of?
Let me guess your reply. It will be something along the lines of “your socialist world view and the vast socialist mass media conspiracy are based on lies and you’re a liberal fucktard”, without actually addressing the post in question.
March 28th, 2009 at 12:49 pm
Hydrogen Energy for the Future of New Zealand
March 28th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
Fuck that’s funny RB. So the media bias is solely responsible for all the enraged Arabs, and all the skeptical Westerners, Africans and Asians who don’t think the war on terror is being played in the best possible way? You’re really saying that events have nothing to do with it?
I see.
Further, you say that those people who are skeptical are “a bunch of gullible uneducated misinformed jerkoffs, but its not universal”
I’d suggest RB that out of those in the global population who have any opinion at all on the war on terror, those who think it’s being played very badly indeed are actually in the majority. I’d say the gullible idiots are those who think it’s been executed in the optimal way.
I quote from and link to plenty of articles from all sorts of sources from across the left-right spectrum. As I’ve said before, I don’t care where it comes from, if it’s true, it’s true. Try not to draw any deeper conclusion than that for merely quoting a fact says nothing about what I think about the MSM.
I’ve never posted on that particular subject and I probably never will so you have no idea at all what I think about it. However when there is a fact that appears that supports my point I’ll link to it. If you think that means I’m sucked in by some propaganda then I suggest that’s a silly conclusion.
Thanks for the link cha.
March 28th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
Well duh, that’s why it’s uneconomic to crack hydrogen to burn it, which is why fuel cells are better than hydrogen-burning engines. Have a look at cha’s link, why don’t you.
March 28th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
Red baiter
A “yes” or “no” answer would have sufficed, however you took the Social Credit ettiquette in regards to question answering.
BTW there is a comma missing in “you half educated self described example of leftist vermin”
March 28th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
“Hahaha. Fuckwit? Really, if you need ad hominems to be an integral part of your argument perhaps you need to change your style.”
Don’t instruct me on style school teacher. If you want to save yourself the embarrassment of being perceived and named as a fuckwit, maybe you should cease writing such fuckwitted unsubstantiated material.
“Let me guess your reply.”
You couldn’t, because you can’t even think straight enough to save your own arguments. The assertion “All of which are somewhere between conservative and centrist.” does not amount to anything other than the naked opinion of someone who has already proved themselves as a vacant leftist dogmatist…
“everybody knows Fox News has a conservative bias.”
who is so ignorant and ill mannered they presume to speak for everyone, even when he/ she is lying.
Independent objective university studies have proved that FOX news is the most balanced of media outlets. You wouldn’t know of that though, and you’ll therefore probably ask me to supply references. (which I’m happy to do as it once again exposes leftists as lazy ignorant bastards.The catch is you’ll have to agree to donate $100 to a charity I name.)
..and you refuse to answer my question. If Rupert Murdoch controls editorial content so tightly, why does he allow so much left wing propaganda to spew from the pages of the media he owns??
On second thoughts, don’t answer. I’ve got better things to do than argue reality with some deranged left wing knuckle dragger who doesn’t know his arse from grass.
March 28th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
“Have a look at cha’s link, why don’t you.”
I don’t usually look at links if that’s all the post is. If Cha can’t make an argument then fuck him.
March 28th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
A comma and two hyphens, actually. This is getting silly, but if you want to keep playing correct-sy, at least make an effort.
Not that I entirely agree with Reid about fuel cells being the best thing ever, but I don’t think any proponents of fuel cells would actually advocate cracking hydrogen to burn it. It’s why the movie “chain reaction” is total crap.
I don;t think the war on terror has been done in an optimal way at all, but I think people like RB would be less pissed off with people like you Reid if the vast majority of the MSM didn’t portray every part of the war on terror as an immoral, poorly-executed calamity.
The reality is that there is more than one way to skin a cat, and the way terrorism has been fought has not necessarily been the best way to skin it.
That doesn’t mean that it won’t work in the end, and it doesn’t mean it’s been a catastrophic failure the way the MSM would have us believe.
I can’t speak for RB, but that’s what pisses me off the most. The media’s portrayal of muslim extremists as “really nice guys who probably just need to be hugged more” is quite disgusting.
Reid: The problem with advocating against the way the war on terror has been conducted is that you lump yourself in with all the socialist / jihadist nutjobs unless you are very, very careful about how you word your criticisms.
I don’t agree with everything you say, but you’re clearly not in the reactionary, pro-jihadist camp. My issue is more with the fact that so many people (sometimes unknowingly) are.
March 28th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
“who think it’s being played very badly indeed are actually in the majority.”
When the fuck has majority viewpoint ever been any proof of truth? Especially today with the media such a worthless pack of lying left wing bastards.
Look at the “perceptions” on global warming. Perceptions manufactured by the same group you claim to be telling the truth on the Bush government and the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, but perceptions that you say are wrong. You want it both ways?
March 28th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
Christopher, my apologies for my 12:27, I misunderstood your point. Are you talking about power output in individual engines or conservation of energy equations?
Would be interested in further detail on either.
March 28th, 2009 at 1:20 pm
Whoever said I was saying the war on terror is a cluster-fuck simply because the majority of people believe it is?
I told you RB, I’m happy to detail the specific issues that went wrong and what should have been done. Would you like me to do that?
In fact why don’t I start now.
Why didn’t the US invade Saudi Arabia instead of Iraq, after 911?
March 28th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
reid, I’ve been watching Anglo Plantnum for a few years. Wish I’d ridden it up over the last 3 years… but VERY happy not to have been holding over last 6 months! Carnage! Entry point looks ok’ish now – back to mid-2005 levels… except perhaps a mass of burnt investors who will sell into any rises. Another consideration is that it’s ~75% owned by Anglo American and I’m nervous about small shareholders being treated as a doormat in the volatile world of mining & minerals. Do you hold this or any other platinum stocks?
March 28th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
“Why didn’t the US invade Saudi Arabia instead of Iraq, after 911?”
Because they already had enough diplomatic influence in Saudi to manage things sufficently well.
Next question.
(What’s the bet its just another based on faulty premises underpinned by left wing propaganda?)
March 28th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
I don’t usually look at links if that’s all the post is. If Cha can’t make an argument then fuck him.
Why the fuck would I bother arguing with you when the usual response is “you half educated self described example of leftist vermin”
March 28th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
Hydrogen fuel cells are just part of the equation, you can have catalytic converters for some things and cracked hydrogen for others.
March 28th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
Christopher, I take your point, however I say what I say in the way I say it, because I don’t care what people like RB think about my motives.
I believe the points I make in my comments should speak for themselves and if people like RB chose to think I’m whatever-it-is-he-thinks-I-am because of the points that I make, then I truly don’t give a flying fuck because it’s quite irrelevant to the point.
I don’t disagree that the media play up the negative angle however it’s also true that even politically unaware people aren’t total idiots and they can usually read the correct writing on the wall, when it’s large enough. The problems inside the conduct of the war on terror are writ large to anyone with eyes, pretending they wouldn’t be there if only the MSM weren’t so biased is not only crazy but it’s factually incorrect.
March 28th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
Why the fuck would I bother arguing with you when the usual response is “you half educated self described example of leftist vermin”
Pretty feeble given there’s plenty of other people reading,
…and the guy posts tired old left wing propaganda and smears under the handle “Dirty Rat”, which to my mind, makes my description of him as a “half educated self described example of leftist vermin” as fair comment and reasonably accurate. At the least arguable.
BTW Cha, every time you people focus on those things rather than the real argument, I know you’ve got no real defence. I give you the bait, and every time, you stupidly take it.
March 28th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
“Don’t instruct me on style school teacher. If you want to save yourself the embarrassment of being perceived and named as a fuckwit, maybe you should cease writing such fuckwitted unsubstantiated material.”
Embarrassment? Why would I be embarrassed at what you think?
“Independent objective university studies have proved that FOX news is the most balanced of media outlets. You wouldn’t know of that though, and you’ll therefore probably ask me to supply references. (which I’m happy to do as it once again exposes leftists as lazy ignorant bastards.The catch is you’ll have to agree to donate $100 to a charity I name.)
..and you refuse to answer my question. If Rupert Murdoch controls editorial content so tightly, why does he allow so much left wing propaganda to spew from the pages of the media he owns??”
Why should I have to do your homework? Back up your own points you lazy fuck. You’re the one who has to validate your argument, not me.
And you STILL haven’t pointed me towards any of the “leftist” mass media outlets you claim exist. Are you going to, or do you concede that you’re pulling things out of your ass (perhaps pulling a brain out might be a good idea)?
“On second thoughts, don’t answer. I’ve got better things to do than argue reality with some deranged left wing knuckle dragger who doesn’t know his arse from grass.”
Hahaha. Go back to your sister, but please remember to use protection.
March 28th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
Actually, after re-reading my post I didn’t understand me either.
There are several problems with PEMFCs (I’m assuming you’re talking about PEMFCs here). I’m supposed to be working on an assignment, so I’ll just list them:
1. Cost
2. Durability issues. Fuel cells need to endure subzero temperatures and up to about 105 deg C (because of impurities)
3. The need for high-pressure hydration systems to compensate for loss of hydration in subzero temperatures and low humidity
4. Vehicle range in terms of the volume required to store hydrogen. Containers have to be pretty robust for safety reasons.
Anyways, that’s me out for the day.
I like the idea of fuel cells, they just aren’t a great solution at present.
March 28th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
Apparently RB you’re not very well acquainted with the evidence that indicates Saudi remains an important source of terrorist funds, even after 8.5 years of “diplomatic influence.”
I suggest you do some research into the links between the Wahhabi movement, the Saudi Royal Family and terrorist financing. Don’t forget also to investigate the Saudi support given to disseminate the Wahhabi viewpoint worldwide in thousands of Islamic schools, which teaches pupils in those schools attitudes that would instantly place them onto the no-fly lists if they were ever foolish enough to enter the home of what they term “the Great Satan.”
Try not to become distracted by the Saudi and US diplomatic officials who say critics of Wahhabism exhibit an anti-Islamic bias and merely want to disrupt the U.S.-Saudi alliance. After all, you want the truth, don’t you. You don’t want propaganda from officials who have a vested interest in lies, do you?
So do that research RB and then come back and tell us whether you still think that the “diplomatic efforts” have actually achieved what they should have.
Before you do that however, what are you basing your contention on? I’d like to look further into that myself.
March 28th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
Okay, I’ll bite RB, the war on terror is no more than a war by proxy between the west and those funding the terrorists, Saudi Arabia, Iran and probably Syria.
For a long time I’ve wondered how a rag tag crew of third world mountain dwellers can be so well armed, enough to hold off NATO and the combined forces of the United States for most of this decade. And even though the soviets left enough munitions behind, IEDs etc, to blow us all to kingdom come three times over these people seem to have a never ending supply of twenty first century communications, weaponry and whatever else is required to wage a decade long war.
It just strikes me that there is much more going on than meets the eye. Someone’s getting rich and various states interests are being advanced at the expense of the people losing their lives, be they US or NATO personnel, shepherds from the”stans” or mad Arab ‘jihadis’ and us, the taxpayers. So follow the money RB, a huge transfer of wealth from us, the tax payers, to who?. Boeing, General Electric, Haliburton, Saab, Dassault, our very own Raykon, the arms industries of the US, China, Israel, South Africa, Britain, Russia and christ knows who else.
So who profits and who gains RB?.
March 28th, 2009 at 2:49 pm
“Before you do that however,”
I’m not going to do it. I have already enough research on this situation to know where I stand, and I will never truck with the treasonist left wing mainstream media, under the guise of being rational or any other guise.
“what are you basing your contention on? I’d like to look further into that myself.”
It common sense for chrissakes. The US had diplomatic influence in Saudi which for better or worse gave them an avenue to deal with enemies there that was preferable to an invasion. They had no such diplomatic avenues with Iraq, and there were plenty of other good reasons to invade Iraq anyway.
Furthermore, I reject in anticipation every one of the premises you use to undermine the decision to invade.
Yes, there were contacts between Saddam and Al Qaida principles. Yes there were attempts to manufacture genocidal weapons to use against the US. No Bush did not lie, because if he did, so did the governments of every other western nation and the Democrats. No he did not say “major operations are over” in the context the media portrayed, even deceitfully inserting a non existent full stop after “over”. The war was not illegal. If it was, so many other countries (around 30 IIRC) would not have participated. No the war did not result in large numbers of civilian deaths as reported in the now discredited Lancet.
All so much bullshit.
Left wing bullshit designed to de-stabilise the Bush administration.
Generated by a global network of anti-capitalist scum.
There needed to be a beachhead for democracy in the Middle East, Saddam needed a bloodied nose, his people needed freedom from tyranny and fear, the US needed to assert itself as capable of real pre-emptive action against terrorism, and invasion of Iraq was the best option.
The war has been won. The terrorists have been defeated. Democracy reigns in Iraq where once there was totalitarian tyranny.
(well, the terrorists were defeated until they succeeded in getting Obama elected, who now wants to free their leaders in return for their support)
March 28th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
Judging by the karma votes, approximately 25% of poll participants do.
March 28th, 2009 at 3:16 pm
What a surprise RB. You demand evidence from everyone else but when asked to provide it yourself, you refuse to.
I’m glad you think the war on terror is over.
I therefore look forward confidently to the dismantling of all the legislative apparatus western govts have enacted to “protect us from the terrorists.”
When do you think that will start to happen RB? Next month? Maybe by end of May perhaps? Surely not longer than that.
March 28th, 2009 at 3:22 pm
Jesse Ryder can do no wrong – he’s just knocked over Rahul “The Wall” Dravid for 83 – India 246-5, still 174 short of avoiding the follow-on.
March 28th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
Jesse Ryder can do no wrong – he’s just knocked over Rahul “The Wall” Dravid for 83 – India 246-5, still 174 short of avoiding the follow-on.
And from a wide which would probably have been called had “Bazza” not showed why he’s in the running to the best keeper/batsman since Smith.
March 28th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
A wideish ball it may have been Cha, but as Crowe has just this second said, “it’s a danger when you don’t treat him as a proper bowler” – an absolute masterstroke from Dan the Man!
March 28th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
You bewdy! Yuvraj Singh gone, and the door is open just a bit at one end! 253-6!
March 28th, 2009 at 4:19 pm
” therefore look forward confidently to the dismantling of all the legislative apparatus western govts have enacted to “protect us from the terrorists.”
Oh gawd, just like they did immediately Hitler was defeated? What a joke your arguments are. You really need to stop drinking that left wing Kool Ade Reid, its often the cause of irreparable brain damage.
..and you need to read. I said the terrorists were defeated, and the war was won, but not that the war was over. See what I mean about leftist brain rot? Perhaps you need to see someone about restoring your state of consciousness to the real world.
These scum are like the left. Like rust, both terrorists and their bosom buddy leftists never sleep. One must always be on guard.
..and you’re worried about acts to protect us from terrorists when so many of our liberties are threatened by the left anyway? Look at what they have done in the UK, once one of the nations with more respect for liberty than any.
By means of political correctness, they’ve turned it into a poisonous and dying totalitarian leftist hellhole, as bad as anything from 1984. …and they’ve done it while you’ve been whining incessantly about the Bush government and Iraq. Get real man, you’re so completely manipulated by leftmedia you don’t have clue.
March 28th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
Its all about TRUST.
Did Helen buy her job with our Money?
Submitted by Whaleoil on Sat, 28/03/2009 – 12:44pm
in
* Helen Clark
* Ian Wishart
PDF version
That is the question that Ian Wishart is asking in TGIF.
He has looked at the accounts for the UNDP and seen something a little awry;
Figures obtained by TGIF also reveal sharp spikes in the levels of NZ Government donations in the periods leading up to the 2005 and 2008 elections, both of which were tight-fought political races.
According to United Nations Development Programme’s published accounts, New Zealand contributed:
US$2 million in 2000,
US$4 million in 2001,
US$3.9 million in 2002
US$5 million in 2003
US$11 million in 2004
US$16 million in 2005
US$10.8 million in 2006
US$12.5 million in 2007
US$12.5 million in 2008
It isn’t just the UNDP that sees similar spikes of our cash flowing into UN coffers, The UNFPA got about US$770k in 2001 but a whopping US$3.7 million in 2004 and then US$5.2 million in 2005, the figure drpped back to $2.7 million in 2006 and 2007.
Same goes for UNICEF. US$1.6 million in 2001 and US$5 million.
Is Helen buying insurance for herself before each election?
This is even more alarming when you look at our contribuitions beside Australia’s. Wishart says that on a pro-rata basis our contributions should be about a fifth of Australia’s, in fact in each case listed we have contributed more.
It looks on the surface that Helen Clark has used her position as Prime Minister to effectively buy herself a job and to buy it with our money. It seems that Helen Clark has an unhealthy appetite for stealing our money to buy things like elections and high paying jobs for herself.
March 28th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
Did Helen buy her job with our Money?
http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/
March 28th, 2009 at 4:27 pm
About Electric Cars.
Whatever the original fuel source, the energy has to be stored, battery, accumulator, call it what you like.
This storage device will have a finite life.
Who disposes of the dead battery? where does it go? is this more polution?
The greenies never think of this, they just think of now.
Turn lights off, then we can’t see what’s really going on.
March 28th, 2009 at 4:51 pm
Woohoo – VVS Laxman out – India 291-8, and both ends are open – a further 129 needed just to avoid the follow-on!
March 28th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
Habharjan out now – India 305-9 and in deep shit! And Ryder takes a ripper of a catch – India all out for 305 – NZ leads by 314 on the first innings. India will follow on.
March 28th, 2009 at 5:58 pm
Patel strikes; Sehwag out LBW – India 30-1 (or put another way; minus 284 for 1)
March 28th, 2009 at 8:15 pm
I just remembered to turn all my lights on as a protest against all this global warming garbage. I hope others who feel the same do likewise.
March 28th, 2009 at 9:16 pm
did you chucky..
(yawn..!..)
always been a bit cut/nose/spite face..?
have you..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
March 28th, 2009 at 9:36 pm
Earth Hour be damned – tonight has been a celebration of the life and works of Thomas Edison
March 28th, 2009 at 9:58 pm
So did anything happen with earthour?
Couldn’t see much from the glare at my place.
anyway the Highlanders and the Crusaders won, and the NZ cricket team are in a happy place. All is good.
March 28th, 2009 at 10:21 pm
Did I strike a nerve? Were you with him, DPF?
March 28th, 2009 at 10:33 pm
and the Chiefs are playing a 16 man Reds team
March 28th, 2009 at 10:39 pm
The money put into promoting Earth Hour would be better spent on…
1. Promoting New Zealand as a holiday destination – cut down on unnecessary international flights, which do far more damage to the environment than our – partly hydro – power generation.
2. Promoting vegetarianism, providing incentives for switching land use from livestock to crops.
3. That’s about it, really.
But switching off lights can probably make people feel like they’re doing something, and it’s nice and non-offensive in a culture that bristles at the thought of sacrificing their holidays to Europe and steaks.
March 29th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
“andrei
For more than one hundred years it has been obvious the best way providing rotational energy to wheels is via electric motors. Which is why 99.9% of railway locomotives are powered this way today, either through an external system or through on board diesel powered generators.”
It is something I have looked into, basically a prius like set up, rather than having to charge up your car at a wall, you have an engine running at optimum efficiency keeping the batteries charged. Problem is making everything strong enough, electric motors have a flat torque “curve”, that is the same right from the very first rotation. easily snap the axles if your tires are too sticky.