Craving the City vote a poll driven Prime Minister cancels UK meat and dairy diet
Pastoral farmers have emerged as the easiest targets for the Glasgow climatists. British prime minister Boris Johnson has proclaimed that Britain will eat “alternative proteins,” instead of red meat.
There are strong indications that Australasian pastoralists are being softened up with the pre-Glasgow plugging of cattle and sheep as villains behind climate warming.
Worse still, Mr Johnson’s vendetta against pastoral farmers targets dairy products as well as meat. Cheese is included on his list of global warming endangered products scheduled to be replaced by protein “substitutes.”
Censored from media channels in ruminant raising countries has been the preliminary skirmishing surrounding the Glasgow menus with activists seeking to ensure that the delegates have plant food diets only at the meet.
Similarly censored in these agrarian supplying nations is the new vehement straight-to-camera determination of Mr Johnson to follow the polls which show him that climate ideology now controls the votes of urban non-productive knowledge workers.
In concert with the meat and cheese purge the City has now formally identified (non pastoral) green industries as the subsidised replacement for the now mature information technology boom of the last era.
A dedicated steak and chips and cheese dietary adherent until just a few weeks ago Mr Johnson’s whoopy-cushion private school buffoonery is being brought to bear on his now extremist climatism.
His new role as arbiter of public taste as enforcer of the national diet coincides with his restoration of the pre-EU Commonwealth trade preference on meat and dairy products.
Giving with one hand, taking with the other and with an even greater accompanying fanfare he simultaneously proclaimed these very same meat and dairy products banned from the approved menu for Britons.
Glasgow showcase attendee president Joe Biden’s polls have been telling him much the same thing as Mr Johnson’s, but for rather longer.
Namely that climate warming is the over-arching cause, the cause of causes, of the educated privileged, and that events such as the Glasgow one represent the key to sealing in this vote by raising the temperature of the “clock is ticking” moral panic alarm.
Unspoken in the Glasgow event is the way in which its promoter United Nations is using it to brush under the carpet the pandemic which its World Health Organisation division failed to identify and detect until it was too late. This is the reason that it insists that climate is always described as the “real” crisis.
Pastoralists accommodate and temporise with the climate doctrine in all its self-scourging forms. This productive sector cannot bring itself to realise that the movement is as much about capturing votes as it is about capturing carbon dioxide.
Prince Charles and his ducal sons both becoming more excitable by the day have bestowed the royal seal of approval on the Glasgow meet anointing it with a ruling class mantra as the “best and last chance” saloon in which to redeem the planet.
Her Majesty has kept her distance from the hysteria. The UK media deliberately and incorrectly interpreted her “irritation” comment as one centred on climate warming itself.
It in fact reflected the Queen’s impatience with heads of state declining to commit themselves one way or the other to attending the conference and in doing so creating for her a protocol and organisational problem of considerable magnitude.
New Zealand’s barely arithmetically calculable warming contribution is assessed as a coefficient of its immense number of gas emitting ruminants (grazing animals) in proportion to the now fabled and diminutive “team of five million” number of humans doing the same thing.
It is this supposed total gas-per-person assessment that empowers the cabinet-sized government delegation from New Zealand to the Glasgow summit with its now suddenly and unexpectedly accelerated anti-pastoral agenda.
Cancelled Subs believed bomb-proof in newly reinforced Green-Climate-Anti Nuclear shelter
France really did learn at the same time as everyone else that its flagship technology deal to build Australia’s submarines was cancelled. The reason was that France’s channels kept telling Paris that the Australian government would not dare to confront its electorate with anything nuclear in any shape or form.
The more Paris interrogated its own channels the stronger emerged this anti nuclear theme and with it the belief in the determination of Scott Morrison government to stick doggedly with the diesel submarines on order.
These channels included France’s own embassies and consulates and also its lobbyists which had the single purpose of monitoring the progress of the submarine construction contract.
Ex Australian federal prime ministers from opposing parties insisted that the deal would continue uninterrupted if only because of the electoral hazards of inviting anything nuclear into Australia.
The linkage between green-climatism-nuclear is stronger in Australia than anywhere else. One development especially convinced France and its informants that this linkage was now about to be massively and unexpectedly reinforced.
News Corporation had been on the sidelines of this three-sided contention if not actually openly sceptical. It was now about to plunge in on the side of the climatists and thus the anti-nuclears.
As indicators of this about-face began to seep out from places such as the chain’s advertising sales operations, so the belief became even more cemented in that France’s diesel submarines were safe simply because they were not nuclear.
After all News Corporation’s success everywhere was built upon the ability to position its media to take advantage of the public mood by accurately calibrating it.
Australia’s susceptibility to alarms about nuclear technology’s threat to existence is due in large part to it being viewed after World War 2 as a sanctuary from the Cold War with its threat of annihilation.
Its anti-nuclear protest movement kept pace with that of Britain which is where many of this era immigrant wave had come from.
This activism has been constantly fuelled and refreshed ever since by Australia’s presence as one of the world’s big three uranium suppliers.
Though the rest of the western world’s defence establishments found the equipping of France’s nuclear submarines with diesel engines rather odd, this was not a widespread impression within Australia itself.
Australia’s quirky tendency to bypass off the shelf standardised defence options in favour of acquiring a unique production run with its own specifications is not unfamiliar.
France’s channels both official and unofficial backed this by telling Paris that their subs were truly safe and that the green-climate-anti nuclear movement, a movement about to be so massively reinforced by the intervention of News Corporation, would keep them even safer.
This was because any nuclear alternative would be interpreted as the thin end of the wedge, a point of entry, for nuclear power stations.
This theory again rang true in Paris long ultra-sensitive to the eagerness of activists in Australasia to display outrage at the mere scent of anything nuclear.
All these informed hunches seemed to outweigh the gathering shifts affecting the zones and conditions in which the submarines would eventually one day operate.
Such as China’s rapid escalation from a perceived benign autocracy which had rescued “a quarter of the world’s population from poverty” into a most visible threat to global stability.
Then came the Kabul evacuation the images of which demanded a global-strength diversion which now took the form of AUKUS.
At first there was a belief that France all along had known the game was up and was recalling ambassadors and sounding its “fury” to extract from its Australian ex customer still greater contract termination penalties.
And yet. And yet. France paradoxically has emerged from the Cancellation as a good and trusting ally.
There were no tripartite intercepts along the Canberra-Washington-London communications triangle. Hotels suites in Cornwall were unbugged. No sources obviously existed at any level at all within the sprawling Australian side of the project …..
France was as surprised as the green-climatist-anti nuclears.
Maori vocabulary in broadcasts shrouded absence of special inoculation initiative and hoodwinked multiculturalists
Auckland is a merchant city and New Zealand’s largest metropolis. Many of its more prosperous and educated citizens were thrilled when Maori phrases and words were routinely inserted into official situation reports on the virus threat and even to the extent of a new name for their city, a Maori one.
They assumed that this display of diversity-in-difficulty was also a sign that politicians and public health officials had an operational plan for a by now obviously vulnerable segment of the public health community.
It turned out that they had no such plan. The liberal use of Maori in situation reports and press conferences was symbolic rather than applied.
As these same urban privileged with holiday homes and skiing trips already booked found themselves absolutely grounded during the extended Auckland region pandemic territorial lockdown there came a chilling realisation.
It was that the government, so outwardly vocally aware of this vulnerable population group, had not positioned its health services to cope with this same group’s obvious frailty in terms of infection.
The impression, a false one as it turned out, that the Labour government had the matter well in hand was only merely being implicitly reinforced by the health officials giving their televised situation reports and routinely injecting into press conferences Maori place names and location descriptions hitherto unknown to the public at large.
This in turn was reinforced by presenters on the government’s television channel announcing for example that this or that had occurred in “Paremata” which most assumed was in the town of the same name but which turned out to mean Parliament
In the middle of all this came the announcement of a re-structuring of the nation’s health apparatus in which the 20 district health boards were to be centralised.
This explained why the biggest boards, the ones in and around Auckland, had had their attentions deflected from reaching the sector likely to be most prone to the Wuhan virus.
Professional managers in the path of this upheaval now found that they had an additional and severe problem to deal with in addition to the existing one of the pandemic. .
Upon the announcement of the planned realignment the leader of the opposition National Party Judith Collins announced that once in power she would reverse it. Especially the proposed Maori Health Authority part of it.
While all this was going on the government announced a scheme to take away control of water from municipal authorities while establishing ownership rights for Maori tribes.
No wonder that an impression had built up among Labour’s devoted Auckland urban privileged constituency that whatever the government did or did not have a handle on, it was most utterly focused on Maori needs in anything at all and especially in applied public health.
In practical terms the Labour government has made little impact with what it terms as its “deliveries” notably in tackling the house shortage so remarkable in a sparsely populated nation.
Its doctrinal stock-in-trade gloss though was sufficient to hold in a state of thrall the politico-media class along with the rest of the urban privileged.
A disappointment in the government’s ability to reinforce its flagship diversity doctrine with a practical and applied underpinning in the form of a different and tailored approach to countering and containing the virus for the diverse now dents this unquestioning devotion.
Duke and Duchess of Suffolk new California Residence attracts global Media to High Court case in South Seas
Proceedings in the High Court of New Zealand between the representatives of a prominent Russian businessman resident in California and a Wellington legal publisher have caused what is being seen as a benchmark in the ability of journalists to protect the sources of their stories.
The burden of the case is that the Wellington publisher and journalist John Bowie has been ordered to pay substantial costs to the plaintiff’s representatives in New Zealand
There are several firms in New Zealand which have acted on behalf of the plaintiff in the case against Mr Bowie who runs an online legal topics news site.
The case has involved a number of issues from the complainant’s representatives. An outcome is that these amounted to the failure of Mr Bowie to disclose the identities of the sources of the information in the stories that he published in his online Lawfuel.
Mr Bowie has received instructions via the plaintiff’s representatives in New Zealand to make available to them his own personal computer and associated electronic storage devices.
These are the systems that may contain messages and other such correspondence between he and his sources involved in the stories cited in the High Court action.
The New York-based Overseas Press of America has notified its anxiety about the order and also its subsequent support for the National Press Club of New Zealand which took the matter to the country’s Law Commission.
In a development in the case it was emphasised that the costs against Mr Bowie were due to Mr Bowie’s own decision to withhold the sources of the information in the stories that he published in Lawfuel.
Also cited was Mr Bowie’s refusal to reveal to the plaintiff’s New Zealand representatives the identities of the individuals behind the assumed names in the by lines of articles that appeared in Lawfuel
This South Seas case might have remained largely unnoticed internationally had it not been for the unrelated sale of the plaintiff’s California residence to the re-locating royal couple the Duke and Duchess of Suffolk.
The property transaction coincidence involving the British royal couple known popularly as Harry and Meghan, pictured above in the film colony with their Montecito friend and neighbour, had the effect of drawing attention to proceedings in the High Court in Wellington.
This in turn now aroused a wider industry interest centred on the impact internationally of the security, the privacy, of the sources behind the stories of journalists everywhere.
In the last century New Zealand became renowned for the prominence internationally of its reporters and cartoonists. In this one it seems that the Oceania nation will be noted in the matter of access to story sources and authorship. See also-