The "Strikingly Handsome" Tanya Plibersek is Dribbling and RORTING AGAIN !!!

Tanya Plibersek slams government over Syrian refugee crisis

Andrew Carswell
The Daily Telegraph
October 1, 2015 12:00am

ACTING Labor leader Tanya Plibersek has criticised the Turnbull government on the refugee crisis, despite the Coalition trumping her own party’s suggestions on the number of displaced Syrians Australia should accept.

After returning home from a grandstanding tour of Washington and New York, the Opposition foreign affairs spokeswoman also laughed off Australia’s chances of securing a seat on the UN Human Rights Council, claiming she was bombarded by people who were concerned about Australia’s treatment of asylum seekers.

Yet while Ms Plibersek said Australia had some explaining to do for its treatment of asylum seekers, she backed the Turnbull government’s policy of offshore detention and preventing asylum seekers who arrive in Australia on boats from being included in the nation’s refugee intake.

“The effort to secure a spot on the UN Human Rights Council will be a very difficult one for Australia,’’ she said yesterday.

“I’ve just returned from Washington and New York where … people raised with me their concerns about the world going in one direction on these big issues of global concern, and Australia going in ­exactly the opposite direction.

“That’s true of climate change, it’s true of our commitment to our aid budget and it’s been true of our treatment of asylum seekers also.”

Labor’s renewed demands that Australia hike its refugee intact to 27,000 in light of the ongoing Syrian crisis comes as the European Union confirmed that out of the 213,000 ­arrivals in Europe in April, May and June, only 44,000 of them were fleeing the Syrian civil war.

Despite not having an official role at the 70th session of the UN General Assembly, Ms Plibersek filled her junket schedule with a gamut of meetings with US senators, the US State ­Department, the US Treasury, the IMF and “leading think tanks”.

Her itinerary was punctuated with selfies with climate change gurus, tasting a peanut butter and blackberry jelly doughnut, convivial chit chats with Kevin Rudd and a speech to the Asia Society Policy Institute, rivalled by a 13-minute, policy-loaded introduction from Mr Rudd himself.

Her Twitter feed was a gushing tribute to her humanitarian idols, ­including a blurred handshake with “friend” and director of the Earth ­Institute Jeffrey Sachs, a close-up of feminist Gloria Steinem and a snap with Nobel laureate Malala Yousafzai.

"Plibersek is strikingly handsome, with angular features that reflect her Slovenian heritage"

Big Apple’s seeding rotten far-off ideas
Editorial The Daily TelegraphOctober 1, 2015 
LABOR’S deputy leader Tanya Plibersek keeps some ­unusual company. Yesterday she reported the views of people she’s been hanging around with in the US.
“I’ve just returned from Washington and New York where any number of people raised with me their concerns about the world going in one direction on these big issues of global concern and Australia going in exactly the opposite direction,” Plibersek said.
Of particular concern, the Labor deputy leader claimed, were Australia’s attitudes towards climate change and asylum seekers.
On the latter, Australia is actually leading the world. Europe, now beset with one of the largest ­asylum-seeker crises in history, looks to Australia for guidance.
On the former, Australia sets a world-leading example on climate change by only producing around 1.3 per cent of the planet’s man-made global warming gases. Match that, China!

Labor's Next Leader ? 

The "Strikingly Handsome " Tanya Plibersek

The woman most likely


If Labor is to make its way out of the political wilderness, deputy opposition leader Tanya Plibersek will be a key player.
Erin O'Dwyer
SMH
October 20, 2013

Tanya Plibersek has a gift for doing many things at once. "My personal favourite was writing a speech, talking on the telephone and breastfeeding," says Labor's 43-year-old MP for the federal seat of Sydney, whisking egg yolks, lemon juice and olive oil into a home-made mayonnaise.

It's lunchtime at Plibersek's inner-city home and the mother of three is rallying the troops. "Yes, you can have a baguette, Joe," she says to her hovering eight-year-old. She calls upstairs – "Mum, would you like a sandwich?" – and then says to the photographer, "Are you sure I can't offer you anything?" He declines politely, then tosses over his shoulder, "Don't ask her why she's not running as leader of the opposition."

Why not indeed? Within hours of the ALP losing government in September, Plibersek emerged as a potential new leader. A few weeks later, BRW magazine described her as a "powerful candidate" due to her "warmth, intelligence ... and, let's not be shy, her undoubted charisma". Then former PM Julia Gillard all but endorsed Plibersek, calling her one of the most gifted communicators in politics.

So when Plibersek offered herself as deputy – leaving two men, Bill Shorten and Anthony Albanese, to contest the Labor leadership – political observers were left asking why she didn't step up for the top job. "Are there many working mothers asking that? I don't think so," says Plibersek, who was elected deputy leader last week. "I'm away a lot already, at least one or two nights every week, and if it was the leadership as well I'd be away every weekend."

Juggling work and family has been the mainstay in Plibersek's life since she entered Federal Parliament in 1998, aged 29. In that time she has had three children – Anna, 12, Joe, 8, and Louis, 3 – and breastfed each of them for the first year. Her family loyalty has only strengthened her public image as a capable and compassionate politician. "If you were to draw up a shortlist for the next PM, it would have Tanya Plibersek's name on it," says political commentator Lachlan Harris, a former press secretary to Kevin Rudd.

If the ALP has taken hits on its credibility and standing up for its ideals, then Plibersek is crucial to rebuilding. "What Tanya has in spades is a real decency and dignity," Harris says. "It shines through whether you see her on TV, meet her in an airport lounge or watch her on the floor of Parliament."

On election night, former PM Bob Hawke came under fire for suggesting that Plibersek could not lead the party because she had a three-year-old child. When it emerged that Bill Shorten also had a three-year-old, the backlash was swift, with feminist action group Destroy the Joint launching a Twitter tirade and an internet meme. "I felt a bit sorry for Bob Hawke," says Plibersek. "He asked me, in this incredibly supportive and encouraging way, 'Why don't you run?' And at that stage Louis wasn't quite three and I said I couldn't imagine it."

Hawke remains a firm believer in Plibersek's ability to lead the party. "She's got everything it takes," he says. "She's intelligent, articulate and committed to the values of Labor."

Amid the conflict and chaos of the Rudd-Gillard era, Plibersek emerged unscathed. She's one of a number of unassuming female Labor MPs – Michelle Rowland in NSW, Kate Ellis in South Australia, Kate Lundy in the ACT – determined to trample over gender politics and make a fresh start with rolled-up sleeves.

Plibersek, especially, manages to sidestep internal party politics and the machinations of the "faceless men", yet retains the respect of the party's king-makers. In her own electorate of Sydney she is much loved. "It's a very demographically diverse seat and she manages to cover a wide spectrum of people, from working-class families to the first- and second-generation migrants to the über-trendy latte drinkers,'' says Harris, who lived for many years in the electorate.

Long-time Canberra press gallery journalist Kerry-Anne Walsh describes Plibersek as a "straight shooter. She stands out in the Labor male ruck. She's a genuinely compassionate person, a good policy driver, and she doesn't play nasty political games."

Adds Harris, "What makes Tanya interesting goes beyond the fact she's a woman. It's her political skills and her character ... that make her a strong force in politics."

Plibersek sets out a light lunch for our interview. There's organic olive bread, hard-boiled quail eggs, poached salmon and lettuce from the garden. On the bench is home-made banana bread next to a folder marked "school notes". The fridge is plastered with wedding invites, photos and a timetable of before- and after-school activities."I love cooking and I find it really relaxing," Plibersek says. "It's different from what I do the rest of the time."

In the office, too, Plibersek's hospitality is legendary. On sitting days in Parliament she'll often cook – grilled chicken on the sandwich press or soup in the rice cooker. "It's quicker and healthier than a trip to the Parliament House cafeteria," she says.

Even at home, Plibersek never stands still. She darts around her kitchen, barefoot and relaxed, in white linen pants and a yellow striped T-shirt. She seldom has time to shop, and asks if she can buy the canary yellow top she is photographed in. "It's either buy it here or buy at the airport," she laughs. "The last time I did any clothes shopping was because I was on my way to Brisbane and had to stay overnight. I had to buy undies and a fresh shirt for the next day."

Plibersek is one of the most invited guests on ABC TV's Q&A program (along with Malcolm Turnbull and Christopher Pyne) – known for her calm, thoughtful answers and occasionally sharp tongue. In person, she is warmer, more personable. Still, she relishes the opportunity to spar on television, despite getting the jitters each time she steps in front of the cameras.

------------------

The "Strikingly Handsome " Tanya Plibersek 

-----------------------------------------------

Plibersek is strikingly handsome, with angular features that reflect her Slovenian heritage. Her father Joseph was one of hundreds of migrants who worked on the Snowy Mountains hydro-electric scheme, then returned home on weekends. It was a close and happy upbringing.

But life has not been without tragedy and turmoil. She watched Joseph succumb to cancer at age 80 last year and she lives with the painful memory of the murder of her brother Phillip 16 years ago in Papua New Guinea. Her husband Michael Coutts-Trotter was in the news for all the wrong reasons when, after he was promoted to the post of Director-General of the NSW Education Department in 2007, the press revealed that he had served three years of a nine-year jail sentence for conspiracy to traffic heroin when he was 21 – before he and Plibersek met. Her husband was an addict at the time, and she says, "I think it's clear that it was a pretty miserable life for Michael and he paid a very high price for it. I hope [the children] will see his experience as instructive."

Always, family comes first for Plibersek. When Louis asks her for help to get onto the trampoline, she scoops him up in her arms and disappears outside. She returns a few minutes later and picks up our conversation exactly where she left off. "One of the most sustaining parts of my life is my family life," she says. "For all of the disadvantages of my work, the upside is my children see a much broader cross-section of life and think more deeply about it than many kids their age do."

On weekends, the children go with her to work. A nanny cares for them through the week and she and her husband's extended families fill in the gaps. Any downtime is spent at home – bike riding, bushwalking, swimming laps with the kids. "Between us all, we work it out," she says. "We're a very close family and it makes a huge difference to have grandparents around. I don't feel guilty asking my brother [Ray] to look after the kids because he's forever saying, 'Why don't you go out on Saturday night?' "

The marginalised and disadvantaged are the focus of Plibersek's work. As housing minister, she drove a reform agenda that saw $31 billion invested in new public housing and spearheaded a white paper which aimed to halve homelessness by 2020. As health minister, she introduced free dental care for children. Real, tangible wins are what inspire and motivate her.

Plibersek does not shy away from the controversy of Kevin Rudd, acknowledging that the party was "destabilised from within". Equally, she describes the sexist campaign against Julia Gillard as "beyond the pale". "Australians shocked themselves by how vicious some of the treatment of the PM was," she says. "She certainly ran up against some people who never imagined a woman in that leadership role."

Asked how future female leaders might learn from Gillard's experience, Plibersek replies, "It's not a question of how a woman would do it or a man would do it, it's a question of how a person should do it in a way that reflects their personality. Ego can be a problem. False modesty can be a problem. You need to be true to yourself. Looking back, there were so many things I disagreed with John Howard on, but what you see is what you get with John Howard. And that's a good way to be."

Plibersek is appreciating the extra time she has with her children now she's no longer in cabinet, and doesn't miss having to get up and dress in the dark. But she is brutally honest that she hates being back in opposition. "It's devastating to see the things you've worked for destroyed. I spent 10 years in opposition, I know what it feels like. You feel impotent and frustrated. You see the things you have worked for being unwound."

Unlike those who believe the Labor Party has run its course, Plibersek is passionate about its future. She has never thought about running as an independent, and despite her outspoken support for same-sex marriage, she believes in working for change from within, rather than "throwing rocks from the outside". "It will depend on us behaving ourselves and working closely together,'' she says. "How competitive Labor is in three years is completely up to us."

If a week is a long time in politics, then 15 years as an MP is an eternity. Plibersek is a survivor, a stayer, a new hope for Labor. Bob Hawke says it's because she's interested in people. "It's who she is," he says simply. "Politicians are about representing people and that's what she does very well."

Styling by Sarah Bonnett. Hair and make-up by Erin Shaw. Lead-in and top image: Tanya wears Esprit shirt, Bianca Spender pants; Anna wears Witchery 8fourteen dress; Joe wears Country Road shirt, T-shirt and chinos. Above right image: Tanya wears Country Road shirt, Bianca Spender pants; Anna wears Witchery 8fourteen dress.

Julie Bishop WTF are you doing?

We should reject UN’s sick circus

Andrew Bolt 
Herald Sun
October 1, 2015 

WELL, that didn’t take long. Just two weeks as Prime Minister and Malcolm Turnbull is already promising to lick the boots of the tyrants who infest the United Nations.

Yes, the Turnbull Government is asking for the tremendous honour of joining the UN’s Human Rights Commission.

And if we’re really good, Australia may join some of the moral paragons on that body supervising our human rights — China, Congo, Cuba, Kazakhstan, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Vietnam.

No, that’s not a joke. These countries really are judges on a UN body meant to save us from exactly such thugs, thieves, theocrats and dictators. We will legitimise a pack of hypocrites we should shun and, in joining, will put ourselves at their level.

Sure, the Left is cheering, but check the company we’ll keep. Across the table will be Russia, which has stolen Crimea, invaded Ukraine and supplied to rebels the missile and the men that shot down the MH17 jet carrying Australian citizens.

Also rubbing shoulders with us will be the Saudi autocrats, about to behead and crucify Ali Mohammed al-Nimr, who protested for democracy in 2012, when he was only 17. And we’ll nod thoughtfully as the communist autocrats ruling China, Cuba and Vietnam define for us what should be meant by “human rights”.

I hope the UN’s showers are industrial strength.

Don’t believe the sanctimonious drivel about how joining such bodies does not compromise our beliefs. Horse manure. To win our temporary seat on the Security Council the Rudd government diverted hundreds of millions of dollars of aid money to African countries whose votes we needed.

Worse, to further curry favour with an important bloc of Muslim votes we saw Rudd as foreign affairs minister sucking up to Arab autocracies while attacking democratic Israel’s nuclear weapons program.

Then there’s the humiliating self-abasement in crawling for the votes of inferior countries. Labor foreign affairs spokeswoman Tanya Plibersek gave a perfect example yesterday, wondering whether “the massive cuts to our aid budget make it impossible for Australia to be a good global citizen”.

“The Australian Government will certainly have some explaining to do during the course of its bid for the human rights council spot.”

Pardon? We have to defend our human rights record to countries that have voted already for a gaggle of dictators?

Only a fool coached in our universities of Western self-loathing could think the UN is a better arbiter of our goodness than we are ourselves.

But I should cut Malcolm Turnbull some slack. Joining this sick circus might not be his fault.

Perhaps he simply couldn’t say no to Foreign Affairs Minister Julie Bishop, given her secret help to snatch the top job from Tony Abbott.

I mean, have you seen how Bishop is partying at the UN? There she was again this week, addressing the UN General Assembly like a world leader, with her boyfriend rubbernecking beside her in a seat normally meant for officials doing business for Australia.

The day before, some anonymous leaker boasted to a friendly Fairfax journalist that the UN’s “doors ... have mysteriously swung open” to Bishop now that her boss was Turnbull and not Abbott, so rude to thugs.

Gosh, she’d even “received a last-minute invitation to attend a Sunday lunch being hosted by United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon for the leaders of about 20 nations to discuss climate change”.

Now, which serial leaker would have leaked that, Julie? And note how eagerly Bishop pays homage to the UN’s multi-billion-dollar green faith, like it’s the entry price to a feed.

Ooh, but how exciting it all is for Bishop. Between gigs at the UN, she even had a star-studded dinner party in Manhattan, which the dutiful reporter noted was “a more raucous affair”, “full of big names” including actor Hugh Jackman and wife Deborra-lee Furness, Mariah Carey, Robert De Niro and glamorous more.

Marvellous. Imagine how many more hot invitations come Bishop’s way once we join the Human Rights Council.

So I was not surprised that someone — you again, Julie? — briefed journalists how Bishop had tricked that silly Abbott when he tried to stop this bid, first launched by Labor, to join a council Abbott considered “discredited”.

According to a Fairfax reporter in New York, Bishop had “been ordered by Mr Abbott to abandon the bid, an about face that might have caused Australia diplomatic embarrassment”, but “Bishop was yet to carry out the instruction when Mr Turnbull deposed Mr Abbott”.

Smart work, Bishop! A cunning delay.

How the UN will reward you. How dictators will laugh. And how Australians will pay.

----------------------------

Salim Mehajer threatens to sue Sydney gym for $10m over Kidnap allegations

Salim Mehajer threatens to sue Sydney gym for $10m in damages over harassment allegations

Renae Henry  
9news

Salim Mehajer is now accused of threatening the family of a Sydney siege survivor. His colleagues, once again, say he has brought shame on their council.

The controversial and newly re-elected Auburn deputy mayor has denied allegations he threatened a personal trainer at a Sydney gym, saying he plans to sue the company for damages of up to $10 million.

Salim Mehajer is accused of threatening Burwood Anytime Fitness trainer, Bruce Herat, after he was asked to stop dropping weights on the gym floor.

Mr Herat said he had been verbally abused by Mr Mehajer, who allegedly followed him to his car and threatened to kidnap his children after repeatedly asking, “don’t you know who I am?”.

Mr Herat is the father of Sydney siege survivor, Joel.

Mr Mehajer has issued a statement to 9NEWS denying the allegations and said he would urge the government to introduce legislation protecting high-profile public figures from allegations that can harm their reputations.

“I was working out peacefully on my own, using a leg stretching press, whereby I was targeted by Mr Herat,” Mr Mehajer said.

“I will urge the Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull to change laws to protect high profile politicians and businessmen from such allegations which can turn their career upside down in a split second.”

NSW Police Commissioner Andrew Scipione previously asked for any witnesses to the alleged incident to come forward.

Climate Hoax:You Don’t Know the Half of It

You Don’t Know the Half of It: Temperature Adjustments and the Australian Bureau of Meteorology


by Jennifer Marohasy
September 28, 2015

For the true believer, it is too awful to even consider that the Australian Bureau of Meteorology could be exaggerating global warming by adjusting figures. This doesn’t mean though, that it’s not true.

 Environment Minister Greg Hunt

In fact, under Prime Minister Tony Abbott, a panel of eminent statisticians was formed to investigate these claims detailed in The Australian newspaper in August and September 2014. The panel did acknowledge in its first report that the Bureau homogenized the

temperature data: that it adjusted figures. The same report also concluded that it was unclear whether these adjustments resulted in an overall increase or decrease in the warming trend. No conclusions could be drawn because the panel did not work through a single example of homogenization, not even for Rutherglen. Rutherglen is of course in north eastern Victoria, an agricultural research station with a continuous minimum temperature record unaffected by equipment changes or documented site-moves, but where the Bureau nevertheless adjusted the temperatures. This had the effect of turning a temperature time series without a statistically significant trend, into global warming of almost 2 degrees per Century.

According to media reports last week, a thorough investigation of the Bureau’s methodology was prevented because of intervention by Environment Minister Greg Hunt. He apparently argued in Cabinet that the credibility of the institution was paramount. That it is important the public have trust in the Bureau’s data and forecasts, so the public know to heed warning of bushfires and cyclones.

This is the type of plea repeatedly made by the Catholic Church hierarchy to prevent the truth about paedophilia, lest the congregation lose faith in the church.

Contrast this approach with that by poet and playwright Henrik Ibsen who went so far as to suggest ‘the minority is always right’ in an attempt to have his audience examine the realities of 18th Century morality. Specifically, Ibsen wanted us to consider that sometimes the individual who stands alone is making a valid point which is difficult to accept because every culture has its received wisdoms: those beliefs that cannot be questioned, until they are proven in time to have been wrong. British biologist, and contemporary of Charles Darwin, Thomas Huxley was trying to make a similar point when he wrote, “I am too much of a skeptic to deny the possibility of anything.”

Mr Hunt defends the Bureau because they have a critical role to play in providing the Australian community with reliable weather forecasts. This is indeed one of their core responsibilities. They would, however, be better able to perform this function, if they used proper techniques for quality control of temperature data, and the best available techniques for forecasting rainfall [1]. Of concern, there has been no improvement in their seasonal rainfall forecasts for two decades because they use general circulation models [2]. These are primarily tools for demonstrating global warming, with dubious, if any skill, at actually forecasting weather or climate.

Consider for example, the Millennium drought and the flooding rains that followed in 2010. Back in 2007, and 2008, David Jones, then and still the Manager of Climate Monitoring and Prediction at the Bureau of Meteorology, wrote that climate change was so rampant in Australia, “We don’t need meteorological data to see it” [3], and that the drought, caused by climate change, was a sign of the “hot and dry future” that we all collectively faced [4]. Then the drought broke, as usual in Australia, with flooding rains. But the Bureau was incapable of forecasting an exceptionally wet summer, because such an event was contrary to how senior management at the Bureau perceived our climate future. So, despite warning signs evident in sea surface temperature patterns across the Pacific through 2010, Brisbane’s Wivenhoe dam, a dam originally built for flood mitigation, was allowed to fill through the spring of 2010, and kept full in advance of the torrential rains in January 2011. The resulting catastrophic flooding of Brisbane is now recognized as a “dam release flood”, and the subject of a class action lawsuit by Brisbane residents against the Queensland government.

Indeed despite an increasing investment in super computers, there is ample evidence that ideology is trumping rational decision making at the Bureau on key issues that really matter, like the prediction of drought and flood cycles. Because a majority of journalists and politicians desperately want to believe that the Bureau knows best, they turn away from the truth, and ignore the facts.

News Ltd journalist Anthony Sharwood got it completely wrong in his weekend article defending the Bureau’s homogenization of the temperature record [5]. I tried to explain to him on the phone last Thursday, how the Bureau don’t actually do what they say when they homogenize temperature time series for places like Rutherglen. Mr Sharwood kept coming back to the issue of ‘motivations’. He kept asking me why on earth the Bureau would want to mislead the Australian public. I should have kept with the methodology, but I suggested he read what David Jones had to say in the Climategate emails. Instead of considering the content of the emails that I mentioned, however, Sharwood wrote in his article that, “Climategate was blown out of proportion”, and “independent investigations cleared the researchers of any form of wrongdoing”.

Nevertheless, the content of the Climategate emails includes quite a lot about homogenization, and the scientists’ motivations. For example, there is an email thread in which Phil Jones (University of East Anglia) and Tom Wigley (University of Adelaide) discuss the need to get rid of a blip in global temperatures around 1940-1944. Specifically Wigley suggested they reduce ocean temperatures by an arbitrary 0.15 degree Celsius. These are exactly the types of arbitrary adjustments made throughout the historical temperature record for Australia: adjustments made independently of any of the purported acceptable reasons for making adjustments, including site moves, and equipment changes.

Sharwood incorrectly wrote in his article that: “Most weather stations have moved to cooler areas (i.e. areas away from the urban hear island effect). So if scientists are trying to make the data reflect warmer temperatures, they’re even dumber than the sceptics think.” In fact, many (not most) weather stations have moved from post offices to airports, which have hotter, not cooler, day time temperatures. Furthermore, the urban heat island creeps into the official temperature record for Australia, not because of site moves, but because the temperature record at places like Cape Otway lighthouse is adjusted to make it similar to the record in built-up areas like Melbourne, which are clearly affected by the urban heat island [6].

I know this sounds absurd. It is absurd, and it is also true. Indeed, a core problem with the methodology that the Bureau uses is its reliance on “comparative sites” to make adjustments to data at other places. I detail the Cape Otway lighthouse example in a recent paper published in the journal Atmospheric Research, volume 166, page 145 [6].

It is so obvious that there is an urgent need for a proper, thorough and independent review of operations at the Bureau. But it would appear our politicians and many mainstream media are set against the idea. Evidently they are too conventional in their thinking to consider that such an important Australian institution could now be ruled by ideology.



This article was first published at On Line Opinion.  A shorter versions was subsequently published at The Australian, with the wonderful cartoon of Greg Hunt by Eric Lobbecke.

References/Links

1. Marohasy, J. 2014. Letter to Simon Birmingham, Re: Corruption of the official temperature record, and increasing unreliability of official seasonal rainfall forecasts.
http://jennifermarohasy.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Birmingham_2014_08_12.pdf

2. Abbot, J. and Marohasy J. 2014. Input selection and optimisation for monthly rainfall forecasting in Queensland, Australia, using artificial neural networks. Atmospheric Research, 138, 166-178. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169809513003141

3. Jones, D. 2007. Email to Phil Jones, Re: African stations used in HadCRU global data set. http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php

4. Jones, D. 2008. Our hot, dry future, The Sydney Morning Herald. http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/our-hot-dry-future-20081005-4udg.html

5. Sharwood, A. 2015. Why are they messing with the data? http://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/the-cyclone-tracy-of-ideological-battles-does-the-weather-bureau-tweak-data-or-is-our-government-paranoid/story-fnjwvztl-1227545670243?sv=a58a1574c4a196289acf208f11fc2d2b

6. Marohasy, J. and Abbot, J. 2015. Assessing the quality of eight different maximum temperature time series as inputs when using artificial neural networks to forecast monthly rainfall at Cape Otway, Australia. Atmospheric Research, 166, 141-149. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169809515002124

Middle Eastern Crime Gangs: Smuggling operation with links to Middle Eastern organised crime and involving corrupt Sydney waterfront workers has been shut down

Illegal tobacco and drug syndicate run by corrupt waterfront officials smashed by police in Sydney

The Daily Telegraph
September 30, 2015 3:48pm

A TOBACCO smuggling operation with links to Middle Eastern organised crime and involving corrupt Sydney waterfront workers has been shut down after the seizure of millions of cigarettes bound for black markets.

The syndicate, which allegedly shipped large quantities of cigarettes from the United Arab Emirates, is accused of paying kickbacks worth tens of thousands of dollars to employees from customs brokerage and freight-forwarding companies.

Authorities expect to make further arrests after 12 people, including one woman, were charged after raids at 17 Sydney properties on Tuesday.

Two men faced Sutherland Local Court today on various charges related to the illegal tobacco importation as well as the alleged importation of 270g of cocaine.

A third man, who is a member of the Lone Wolf outlaw motorcycle gang, was also due to face the same court today over the cigarette syndicate and drugs charges.

The remainder of the syndicate will face court next month.

Cash seized during a raid in Sydney over an illegal tobacco importation syndicate that allegedly smuggled millions of dollars worth of cigarettes and drugs into the country.
The arrests come after a joint operation involving the Australian Federal Police, NSW Police and Australian Border Force, which began just over a year ago.

Australian Border Force Deputy Commissioner Michael Outram said the “sheer size of the profits” available in the illegal tobacco trade made it attractive to organised crime.

“Elicit tobacco is a real priority for the Australian Border Force simply because of the involvement of serious and organised crime groups and transnational crime groups,” he told reporters in Sydney.

“They’ll trade in tobacco, they’ll trade in drugs, they’ll trade in human beings.”

He said the same tactics could be used to smuggle guns and drugs.

“If they can turn a quick buck with relatively low risk then they’ll do it, whether that’s drugs, whether that’s tobacco or in some cases whether that’s people smuggling.”

Police also seized $400,000 in cash during the raids on Tuesday. About $2 million worth of assets including bank accounts and properties had been frozen.

It’s alleged the syndicate imported more than 10 million cigarettes, including one shipment of nine million “Manchester” branded cigarettes, which was seized after arriving at Sydney’s Port Botany last week, and had a black market value of about $5.4 million.

More than $700,000 had been seized during the course of the investigation.

AFP acting deputy commissioner Ian McCartney said further arrests were expected.

“This is a sophisticated syndicate, obviously with tentacles here plus overseas,” he told reporters.

Cultural Diversity Gone Wild in Harmony Day Expression Session in Sydney's Occupied Territories.

Westfield Parramatta murder: Victim Nabil Naser warned police, family of death threats

The Daily Telegraph
September 30 2015

In the months before Nabil Naser was murdered in front of horrified Sydney shoppers, he complained to police and family that his killer had made death threats, a court has heard.

Mr Naser, 41, died on the floor of Parramatta’s Westfield on July 7, 2014, after he was stabbed multiple times by his former wife’s new husband Kazem Mohamadi Payam.

Crown prosecutor Terry Thorpe told Payam’s Supreme Court sentence hearing on Wednesday that significant animosity had built up between the pair following the breakdown of Mr Naser’s relationship with his former wife, who cannot be named for legal reasons.

In March 2014, the court heard that Payam and Mr Naser made counter claims against one another.

Payam and his wife took an AVO against Mr Naser, while Mr Naser complained to police that Payam had warned, “Nabil, you know me, I kill”.

On Tuesday, Mr Naser’s cousin Khalid Mohammad told Payam’s sentence hearing he had also raised concerns with him over death threats.

In the year before his death, Mr Mohammad said his cousin claimed Payam stated: “I’m going to cut your head off”.

However this was ruled as hearsay by Acting Justice Jane Mathews and will not be taken into account when Payam is sentenced.

Whatever the circumstances leading up to the killing, what happened on that day was captured by CCTV.

Footage from within the centre shows Payam enter the complex at around 9.30am before going to Woolworths where he buys a knife. He conceals this in the left sleeve of his jacket before meeting Mr Naser around an hour later.

Shoppers later described how their conversation appeared friendly at first but soon after yelling and screaming broke out. Payam is captured grabbing Mr Naser around his back, throwing him to the ground and stabbing him at least four times.

He then sits down, before beginning the attack again, this time stabbing Mr Naser twice.

In the next 10 minutes before his arrest, Payam continues to intermittently attack Mr Naser’s body.

At one point - after lighting a cigarette - he appears to kick Mr Naser in the upper body.

Horrified bystanders could hear Payem tell his wife over the phone: “I’m sorry, I’m sorry. I love you”.

He later told police he didn’t intend to kill Mr Naser, saying he had only bought the knife on the spur of the moment.

“I swear to God that I didn’t want to kill him, I don’t know what happened. He provoked me, said very rude things,” Payam claimed.

His matter will return to court for further sentencing submissions at a later date.

Liberal Government and Socialist Opposition join forces to protect Australians from Free Speech by Troy Newman

Peter Dutton cancels visa of controversial anti-abortion campaigner

Lanai Scarr National Political Reporter
The Daily Telegraph
September 30, 2015 

A CONTROVERSIAL anti-abortion campaigner who has called for medical professionals involved in terminations to be executed has been banned from entering Australia for a planned speaking tour commencing next week.

Immigration Minister Peter Dutton has confirmed to News Corp Australia that he has cancelled Troy Newman’s visa after concerns were raised that his presence in the country could incite hate and violence against those women who have an abortion and the medical professionals who perform them.

Mr Newman, who hails from the United States, has written several books decrying abortion and labels women who have them “murderers”.

“I can confirm that my Department has cancelled the visa for Mr Troy Newman under Section 128 of the Migration Act,” Mr Dutton told News Corp Australia.

“Mr Newman can appeal for a revocation of this decision and no further comment will be made during this appeal period.”

Labor’s Terri Butler wrote to Mr Dutton this week calling for Mr Newman to be banned from the country.

Mr Newman was due to conduct a speaking tour as a guest of anti-abortion group Right to Life Australia.

He planned to hold a series of public events to campaign against Australian women’s reproductive rights and proposed laws to create a “buffer zone” around medical clinics.

“I am concerned that Mr Newman’s presence in Australia will cause significant harm to our community,” Ms Butler said in her letter to Mr Dutton.

“There is a risk that this will involve the harassment and intimidation of women accessing reproductive services and professionals offering those services at medical clinics, and result in their vilification within the community; especially vulnerable women.

“Mr Newman’s conduct may incite discord within the community and disrupt the ability of women to access lawful reproductive medicine.”

Mr Newman posted on his Facebook page a video of him being prevented from boarding a flight from Denver to Los Angeles and then onto Australia.

“RED ALERT!!! The Australian government has revoked my visa in midflight,” Mr Newman posted.

“I was pulled off a plane in Denver and told I could not travel to Los Angeles. And then on to Melbourne Australia. I am scheduled to speak on Friday at Right to Life of Australia’s main convention in Melbourne.

“It is clear that the pro-abortion crowd does not want anyone to hear the truth about Planned Parenthood’s illegal actions. Please pray for me I’m stuck in Denver airport like a man without a country.”

----------------------

So what is it Terri Butler and her cheer squad want to stop Australian's from finding out about ?

No wonder Terri did not want this guy telling Australian's what she and her fellow progressives would rather stay secret

Anti Muslim invasion of Europe commentary to be banned,removed from Facebook

Mark Zuckerberg caught on HOT Mic saying Facebook will censor ANTI Migrant Posts

Facebook CEO tells German chancellor "we need to do some work"

by MIKAEL THALEN | INFOWARS.COM | SEPTEMBER 28, 2015

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg was caught discussing the censorship of anti-migrant posts at the United Nations development summit Saturday while speaking with German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

According to CNBC, the pair were picked up by a hot mic after Merkel confronted Zuckerberg on social media posts critical of “the wave of Syrian refugees entering Germany.”

After being asked about Facebook’s efforts to curtail speech, Zuckerberg stated, “We need to do some work,” confirming he’d already started looking at ways to hinder comments in opposition to Merkel’s immigration stance.

“Are you working on this?” Merkel asked. “Yeah,” Zuckerberg responded before their microphone was cut.

In response to the shocking revelation, media outlets such as Bloomberg immediately leapt to the defense of the tech giant, insinuating that any critique of the German government’s response to the migrant crisis would be “racist” and “xenophobic.”

Only just last week, an article by Infowars’ Kit Daniels examining the pope’s controversial comments on mass immigration was pulled and barred from Facebook without explanation.

Since the migrant crisis began, news outlets across the globe have both covered up crucial facts, specifically NATO’s responsibility in destabilizing Syria, and gone out of their way to outright ignore any stories that highlight the criminal acts of migrants.

Zuckerberg’s penchant for censoring speech deemed politically incorrect is unsurprising given his meeting late last year with Lu Wei, the czar of China’s authoritarian Internet censorship system.

http://www.infowars.com/mark-zuckerberg-caught-on-hot-mic-saying-facebook-will-censor-anti-migrant-posts/

It’s 1992 All Over Again

It’s 1992 All Over Again
A New Agenda 21 Threatens Our Way of Life

Tom DeWeese

If you had a time machine and could travel back to 1992 as the UN’s Earth Summit was underway, your efforts to abort this subversive policy would be aided by all you had experienced in the Orwellian world of “Sustainable Living”. You wouldn’t have to wonder what the NGOs who created it had in mind. You wouldn’t have to trust the news media to provide the details. You would know because you would have lived it. You would know that Nancy Pelosi’s open claim that Agenda 21 is a “comprehensive blue print” for the reorganization of human society was true.   And what’s more; you don’t like it!

We were told, without hesitation, that Agenda 21 was aimed at destroying free enterprise. That it is was a clarion call for humans to live on less and that Earth could no longer sustain the consumptive appetite of United States of America. They told us, but so many weren’t listening. It took over 15 years for many to finally understand the agenda of Agenda 21. By then it was firmly entrenched in every government agency, every community plan, and every school curriculum. So much so that many now say it is impossible to combat. That it’s a done deal.

Well, guess what, Agenda 21 is not a done deal and one of the main force to recognize that fact is the UN itself, along with a mob of enabling Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs). And because it is not a done deal, they are all planning a new massive gathering to reboot Agenda 21 and force it across the finish line.

Over the weekend of September 25 – 27, 2015, at the United Nations Headquarters in New York City thousands of delegates, UN diplomats, representatives of Non-governmental Organizations, heads of state and the Pope, will converge to present a new fifteen-year plan entitled “Transforming Our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.”

Just as in 1992, they are openly telling us what the plan includes and how they intend to put it in force. The preamble to the plan says, “All countries and all stakeholders, acting in collaborative partnership, WILL implement this plan.” It goes on to say, “We are determined to take the bold and transformative steps which are urgently needed to shift the world onto a sustainable and resilient path. As we embark on this collective journey, we pledge that no one will be left behind.” When I read these words I don’t glow with anticipation, I bristle with dread.

That, my friends, is a direct challenge and a threat to anyone who dares to disagree with the plan or stand in their way. They promise us that they “WILL” do it and it will be forced on everyone. Our experience with Agenda 21 over the past 23 years tells us what to expect.

Here are the seventeen goals to be presented and what they really mean:

Goal 1. End poverty in all its forms everywhere. The only answer the plan offers for eliminating poverty is redistribution of wealth. The document calls for “equal rights to economic resources.” That means government is claiming an absolute power to take away anything that belongs to you to give to whomever it deems more deserving. That is government-sanctioned theft. These are only Band-Aids that solve nothing. Tomorrow those on the bread lines will still need more. There is not a single idea in these plans to give the poor a way to earn their own wealth so they no longer need government handouts. The final result; a never ending cycle of poverty that will consume the middle class.

Goal 2. End hunger, achieve food security and improve nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture. UN documents go into great detail on controlling food supplies. They detail enforcing “sustainable farming tactics” which have been proven to force up the cost of food production while decreasing yield. It is basically the old Soviet practice of farm control that turned the bread basket of the world into non productive wasteland. The document details the use of government controlled seed and plant banks… “to ensure access to and fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge as internationally agreed.” In other words, our future food sources will be put into the hands of politically connected bureaucrats who have never been on a farm. . Starvation on a massive scale will trim the population to more sustainable levels.

Goal 3. Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being of all at all ages. This means cradle to grave control over how and where we live and what we are permitted to eat. The healthy lives they promote means basically forcing us out of our cars and into walking and riding bikes as we are relocated into controlled high rise apartment buildings sanctioned by government. Meat will be out of the question as raising herds is not considered to be “sustainable. But don’t worry. Obamacare for all will deal with the predictable decline in health that is sure to follow.

Goal 4. Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all. We have long known that lifelong learning is the means to continually apply behavior modification practices to assure we maintain the desired attitudes, values and beliefs to live in a global village

Goal 5. Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls. The rainbow flag flies as we ignore Shariah law and its war on women.

Goal 6. Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation. Ask California how sustainable water control is working for them as these policies have torn down water systems and dams to “free the rivers.” The original pioneers found the land to be a desert. They built a sophisticated water control system that resulted in an emerald green paradise. Now, as Sustainable policies are being enforced, they are witnessing the return of the desert, destroying productive land. Meanwhile, across the nation, the EPA is moving to take control of all the water in the United States. Control the water, control the population.

Goal 7. Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all. Seriously? Their solution is to ban oil and enforce wind and solar power. Every study across the nation and around the world has proven that these “modern” energy sources are unreliable and force up the cost of energy. Some report health problems related to life under the turbines. Moreover, the carnage of the birds and bats that are being chopped up and fried by these “sustainable” energy practices goes against everything environmentalists told us about protecting species.

Goal 8. Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all. One thing our 23 years of Agenda 21 have proven, there is no economic growth. European nations that implemented sustainable energy and water controls guidelines are now dumping those programs as fast as they can to save their economies. And who decides what is “productive” or “decent” work? Do we leave it to the bureaucrats to decide?

Goal 9. Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation. Oh come now. Sustainable industrialization means destroyed industry. No real industry can remain in business under a government managed economy with its shifting rules and constant increase in taxes. Government doesn’t create industry or prosperity. Our government’s real job is to provide protection of the market place so real innovators are free to create new ideas, industries and opportunities. Government itself is a job killer when it gets in the way.

Goal 10. Reduce inequality within and among countries. This is another form of redistribution of wealth that forces industries from first world to third world nations. By using oppressive sustainable policies to drive up production costs, companies are forced to take their factories to the poorer nations. The second trick is to exempt those poorer nations from the very environmental rules and regulations that caused the factories to move in the first place. Can anyone explain how this helps the environment? It doesn’t. It simply makes everyone equally poor. This is also an assault on national sovereignty.

Goal 11. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable. This is Smart Growth which promises a utopia of families and neighbors playing and working together, riding bikes, walking to work in stress free communities. It really means the end of private property rights, single family homes, and stack and pack high rises where residents are over taxed, over regulated, rents are high and individual thoughts and actions are viewed as a threat to the “well-ordered society.” And by the way, the American Planning Association did a study to see if their smart growth plans worked and their own report concluded that Smart Growth doesn’t work.

Goal 12. Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns. What more is there to say? Control from the top down.

Goal 13. Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts. Here it is! The root of the entire plan. Climate Change. How many scientific reports do real scientists have to present to show this is the greatest scam ever devised to create a reason for government to control every aspect of our lives? Well, here, let the Global Warming scare mongers tell you their true purpose in their own words:

“No matter if the science of global warming is all phony – climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.” Christine Stewart (former Canadian Minister of the Environment). Justice built on a lie? And here is another quote to make it clear. “We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.” Timothy Wirth (President, UN Foundation). The end justifies the means! Notice that Mr. Wirth is as concerned with the economy as he is with the environment.

Goal 14. Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development. Control the water, control society. This one is really aimed at destroying the oil industry in order to enforce wind and solar power. This is the UN pounding its chest to become the central global government it has always sought to be. It has no more right to the seas than it does to the air we breath or the surface of the moon.

Goal 15. Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss. Have you been watching the news as the greatest fires in history are destroying millions of acres of forests? Why is this happening? Because of sustainable forest management that refuses to allow the removal of dead trees from the forest floor. This creates a density of combustable material to fuel massively hot and unmanageable fires. If you want to save a forest, send an environmentalist back to his high rise in New York City where he belongs.

Goal 16. Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels. This is Social Justice which really means social engineering. Have you ever once witnessed an “effective” or “accountable” institution coming out of the United Nations? By its very nature, the UN is unaccountable. Who would be the entity to oversee that accountability? Every one of these programs outlined in the 2030 Agenda creates money, power and unaccountability at every level of government. That is why government is now running out of control and people are feeling so hopeless in trying to deal with their governments. Goal 16 should be named the “Foxes Running the Hen House” goal.

Goal 17. Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development. This means the re-boot of Agenda 21, because that was the original “global partnership.” This goal is a call for all of the treaties, plans and schemes devised in the massive UN meetings to be made the law of the globe. It is total global government and it is a sure highway to misery, destruction of human society, individual thought, motivation and dreams.

In 1992 they told us that Agenda 21 was just a suggestion. Today, after experiencing the “wrenching transformation” of our society that Al Gore called for, we know it was much more than that. And we have suffered the consequences as our economy has plummeted, as the middle class is disappearing, jobs are non-existent and the world is in turmoil.

Now the power elite which prey on the poor and helpless are determined to finish the job. They are fast moving toward the goal of eliminating individual nation states; controlling individual actions and wiping private property ownership from the face of the Earth. Their goal is to make us all “equal” in the same chains to assure none of us can disrupt their well ordered utopian nightmare.

Well, now our time machine has brought us back from 1992 to the present. As we disembark, one voice should be ringing in our ears. In clear and concise words we were warned of what Agenda 21 was designed to do. “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized nations collapse? Isn’t it out responsibility to bring that about?” The voice belonged to Maurice Strong, Secretary General of the UN Chairman of the Earth Summit as he delivered an official statement.

But here in 2015, the same forces are about to introduce the 2030 Agenda. We have the advantage of knowing what is intended. The 2030 Agenda to “Transform the World” is to be built on the ruins and desolation of a thousand such schemes for control over human life. Each time they have failed to achieve their lofty goals but have brought about a slow decline in liberty and self sufficiency. And each time they have come back with a new “plan.” The 2030 Agenda is Agenda 21 re-booted. But this time you and I don’t have an excuse to ignore it. We know what it is from the start. Now we have a new opportunity and the obligation to stop it dead in its tracks.   We’ve been given a second chance. Let’s not waste it.

https://www.youtube.com/user/TomDeWeese