The Factuals versus the OABS (Old Age BullShit)

Milo gets it right on November 8th, 2016 and Trump in Oz on November 9th and 10th, 2016​

November 8th

November 9th

November 10th

​

 

UNESCO passes resolution declaring Temple Mount Muslim, not Jewish

OCTOBER 14, 2016 8:31 PM BY CHRISTINE WILLIAMS134 COMMENTS
The UN has long been against Israel and proved it in a virulent way in Durban I, right before 9/11; since then, it has continued working toward the ultimate goal of delegitimizing Israel and ultimately destroying it, which is, of course, also the dream of jihadists.
UNESCO has now passed an expected anti-Israel resolution which denies “Jewish connections to the Temple Mount and Western Wall in Jerusalem,” despite abundant archeological evidence proving Israel’s connection to Jerusalem.

24 UNESCO member states voted in favor of the resolution, 26 abstained, and only six countries voted against.​

​

​

Donald Trump weighed in, declaring that the resolution is a:

“one-sided attempt to ignore Israel’s 3,000-year bond to its capital city” and “further evidence of the enormous anti-Israel bias” at the United Nations.​

​

Trump further stated that:

under his potential administration, “the United States will recognize Jerusalem as the one true capital of Israel” and that “Israel will have a true, loyal, and lasting friend in the United States of America.”​

​

​

Christianity is also a priority on the hit list of jihadists, with a similar impulse to erase all the traces of the conquered religion. Back in 2012, Saudi Arabia’s highest Islamic authority said: “No Christian churches should be allowed in the Arabian Peninsula.”

“Sheikh Abdul Aziz bin Abdullah, the Saudi grand mufti, said it is “necessary to destroy all the churches in the region.”​

​

Abdullah further “cited an Islamic hadith quoting the prophet Mohammed on his deathbed, who said, ‘there are not to be two religions in the [Arabian] Peninsula,’ meaning only Islam can exist there.”


“Only six countries vote against contentious resolution claiming Temple Mount is sacred only to Muslims”, i24 News, October 13, 2016:

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) on Thursday passed a contentious anti-Israel resolution denying Jewish connections to the Temple Mount and Western Wall in Jerusalem.​

24 UNESCO member states voted in favor of the resolution, 26 abstained, and only six countries voted against.​

The proposal, put forth by the Palestinians, along with Egypt, Algeria, Morocco, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar and Sudan, condemns Israel on several issues related to Jerusalem and its holy sites.​

The draft resolution, a copy of which was obtained by Ha’aretz, acknowledges that the city of Jerusalem is holy to Judaism, Islam, and Christianity but says the Temple Mount holy site is sacred only to Muslims and fails to mention its significance to Jews.​

An entire section of the proposal dedicated specifically to the Temple Mount complex refers only to the site’s Muslim names (Al-Aqsa Mosque and Haram al-Sharif) and fails to mention its Hebrew or English names (Har HaBayit or Temple Mount).​

​

The resolution refers also to the Western Wall plaza by its Muslim name (al-Buraq plaza) and only mentions its Hebrew-Jewish name (Hakotel Hama’aravi) later in quotation marks.​

The flashpoint complex is considered Judaism’s holiest site, once the site of the first and second Temples, and is the third holiest to the Muslim faith.​

Israeli politicians, led by President Reuven Rivlin, were quick to condemn the vote on Thursday, slamming the resolution even before the vote had taken place in Paris.​

“No forum or body in the world can come and deny the connection between the Jewish people, the Land of Israel and Jerusalem – and any such body that does so simply embarrasses itself,” he said at an event in his Jerusalem residence. “We can understand criticism, but you cannot change history.”​

Agricultrure Minister Uri Ariel sent a letter to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu calling on him to act by encouraging nations to end funding for the UN.​

“We in the government in general, and you as the foreign minister, should demand that the nations of the world condemn these anti-Semitic decisions, and immediately stop funding the UN,” he wrote.​

He also called for the government to “strengthen the Temple Mount, and to to increase the control and Jewish presence in the holiest place for Jews — the Temple Mount.”​

Opposition leader Isaac Herzog said UNESCO is giving a “bad name to diplomacy.”​

“Whoever wants to rewrite history, to distort fact, and to completely invent the fantasy that the Western Wall and Temple Mount have no connection to the Jewish people, is telling a terrible lie that only serves to increase hatred,” he said. “On this matter there is no disagreement among the people of Israel, and I urge UNESCO to withdraw this bizarre resolution and to engage in protecting, not distorting, human history.”……​

France was among the 33 countries that backed the resolution in the 58-member body causing a diplomatic spat which resulted in French President Francois Hollande pledging that France would not support such measures in the future.​

​

Israeli diplomats have over recent weeks attempted to convince UNESCO member states to oppose or at least abstain during the vote.​

Israel’s foreign ministry published a brochure featuring archaeological findings providing evidence of Jewish connections to Jerusalem generally and specifically to the Temple Mount complex.​

In a letter submitted to UNESCO’s executive board, Israel’s ambassador to the world cultural organization wrote that, without undermining other religions’ ties to Jerusalem’s holy sites, the archaeological findings “leave no doubt…of the deepest and longest Jewish presence in Jerusalem since ancient times,” according to Ha’aretz.​

He wrote that the initiative challenging the Jewish people’s ties to Jerusalem “is an attempt to rewrite history in a dangerous, unfair and one-sided manner.”​

Hugh Fitzgerald: May God Save “God Save The Queen”
Monroe, NY: Muslim known to FBI arrested for bomb threat against LaGuardia airport




Donald J. Trump
October 14 at 1:25pm ·

I have said on numerous occasions that in a Trump Administration, the United States will recognize Jerusalem as the one true capital of Israel. The United Natio...ns' attempt to disconnect the State of Israel from Jerusalem is a one-sided attempt to ignore Israel's 3,000-year bond to its capital city, and is further evidence of the enormous anti-Israel bias of the UN.
Jerusalem is the enduring capital of the Jewish People and the overwhelming majority of Congress has voted to recognize Jerusalem as just that.

Further, the decision by the Obama Administration to strike the word 'Israel' after the word 'Jerusalem' in the President's prepared text was a capitulation to Israel's enemies, and a posthumous embarrassment to Shimon Peres, whose memory the President was attempting to honor.

In a Trump Administration, Israel will have a true, loyal and lasting friend in the United States of America.

Donald J. Trump





Tony Bermanseder
Jock L Schrbk IV
and will China, Russia, Korea, and of course Mexico, will they be our friends too? Dont hate.

Tony Bermanseder

Jerusalem's 3rd temple is globally starhuman-ET associated. Jerusalem's 2nd temple of Herod from 20BC-70AD WAS/IS physically located at Jerusalem/Israel. Jerusalem's 1st temple of Solomon did not exist as elaborate physical construct, but served like the Gizean pyramids as symbolic past representation for a future global realisation for a similarly metaphorical 'Holy Land' Israel renamed from a personal-individual archetypology called Jacob, son of Isaac son of Abraham.

Trumpf, perhaps inadvertently intuits this factuality.

Not far off the markers.
Rabbi Predicts Trump Will Win and Usher in the Second Coming
YOUTUBE.COM

Are the true evangelists Ets in the codes of Isaiah?

Isaiah 60:8
Who are these that fly as a cloud, and as the doves to their windows?





Hopefully the Republican congress will behave as positively as Laura says. Ps.: I like her necklace!​

 

What does Baba Vanga know? Blind Bulgarian clairvoyant who predicted 9/11 and Islamic State's rise to power warned Barack Obama will be the 'last US president'

• Baba Vanga made the predictions before she died in 1996 at the age of 85
• Pensioner warned that Barack Obama would be the 'last US president'
• Donald Trump will not be sworn in as US president until January 20
• Also credited with predicting 2004 tsunami and attacks on Twin Towers

By JOHN CARNEY FOR DAILY MAIL AUSTRALIA and JULIAN ROBINSON FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 13:04 +11:00, 10 November 2016 | UPDATED: 21:40 +11:00, 10 November 2016


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ays-Barack-Obama-president.html#ixzz4PhPYDZ4Y
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

The blind psychic who predicted 9/11 and the rise of Islamic State has also forecast that Barack Obama would be the 'last US president'.
Baba Vanga, who was known as the 'Nostradamus from the Balkans', predicted correctly that the 44th President would be African-American.
But it's unclear what the Bulgarian-born Prophet - who died in 1996 aged 85, and who had an alleged prediction success rate of 85 per cent – meant when she said Obama would also be the last, Prophecies reports.
Obama technically remains president until Donald Trump is sworn in on January 20, 2017.
Baba Vanga prophesied that the 44th US president would be black and he would be 'the last one'. She went on, saying that at the time of his stepping into office, there would be a spectacular economic crisis.
'Everyone will put their hopes in him to end it, but the opposite will happen; he will bring the country down and conflicts between north and south states will escalate,' she said.
However, she also spoke of a Messianic personality, but left few clues to help recognise this 'peacemaker' who in her words 'will sign the lasting peace'.

​

Baba Vanga (pictured) predicted before she died that the 44th President would be African-American, but that he would be the 'last US president'



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ays-Barack-Obama-president.html#ixzz4PhQ0Pv49
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


​

Vanga is said to have made hundreds of predictions in her lifetime, including that there would be a 'great Muslim war' which would start with the Arab Spring in 2010.
She predicted it would take place in Syria and would come to a conclusion in 2043 with the establishment of a caliphate with Rome at its centre.

​

Democrat Barack Obama technically remains president until January 20, 2017


President elect Donald Trump will not take office until he is sworn in on January 20

US Election: President-elect Donald Trump in numbers


Vanga reportedly said Europe will 'cease to exist' by the end of next year, leaving the continent 'almost empty' and a 'wasteland almost entirely devoid of any form of life'.
The chilling prophecy has alerted conspiracy theorists who highlight ISIS activity close to Europe in Libya.
Vanga's followers say she predicted the 2004 Boxing Day tsunami by foreseeing a 'huge wave' which would 'cover a big coast covered with people and towns, and everything will disappear beneath the water.'
In 1989 the mystic is said to have made reference to the 9/11 terror attacks on New York by claiming 'American brethren' would be attacked by 'two steel birds'.
Some suggest this was a reference to the two hijacked passenger jets t

​

Vanga is said to have made hundreds of predictions in her lifetime, including that there would be a 'great Muslim war' which would start with the Arab Spring in 2010



The blind pensioner, who has previously been credited with predicting the 9/11 terror attacks and the Boxing Day tsunami of 2004, warned of an invasion of Europe by Muslim extremists

​

She is also alleged to have predicted the effects of climate change 60 years ago by warning that polar ice caps would melt and cause sea levels to rise.
Vanga was born in the village of Strumica at the foot of a mountain range in what was the Ottoman Empire.
She is believed to have lost her eyesight during storm when she was picked up in a fierce gust of wind and dumped back down on the ground.
Vanga later claimed she had the ability to look into the future and quickly developed a 'cult' following.
In later years, she became trusted by the rich and famous with even heads of state and powerful politicians from around the world seeking her opinions.

​

HOW A BULGARIAN VILLAGER PREDICTED MAJOR GLOBAL EVENTS

GLOBAL WARMING AND THE BOXING DAY TSUNAMI
In the 1950s Vanga reportedly predicted how 'a huge wave will cover a big coast covered with people and towns, and everything will disappear beneath the water'.
She also warned of the effects of climate change by suggesting 'cold regions will become warm... and volcanoes will awaken.'
'Everything will melt, just like ice,' she added.
THE 9/11 TERROR ATTACKS ON NEW YORK
In 1989, she is said to have made reference to the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center.
News.com.au reports how she once said: 'Horror, horror! The American brethren will fall after being attacked by the steel birds. '
She added that 'innocent blood will gush.'


Warnings: In 1989, Vanga is said to have made reference to the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center



The pensioner once predicted that the 44th US president would be African American - but she also warned that he would be the 'last US president'

BARACK OBAMA BECOMING PRESIDENT
The pensioner once predicted that the 44th US president would be African American - but she also warned that he would be the 'last US president'.

LOOKING IN TO THE FUTURE
Vanga made predictions for the next few centuries before she died. Highlights include her warnings that aliens will help civilisations live underwater by 2130 and that there will be a war on Mars in 3005.
In another apocalyptic message, she said everything on earth will die by 3797 - but that by this stage humans should be capable of moving to a new star system.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ays-Barack-Obama-president.html#ixzz4PhQeohhw
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

​

​

​

 

Who is better for Britain and Europe?
This or that?




Two down, 4 to go, including Geert Wilders of the Netherlands and then ...



Some cultures are better than others in cultural relativism!
​

 

Schadenfreude!
​

 

The science!
Don J. Easterbrook is Professor Emeritus of Geology at Western Washington University.
... Easterbrook has studied global climate change for five decades.




The political-globalist weather secret!
What if geoengeneering is the true manmade global warming?​

 

The Big Bluff that Paris deal is solid: truth is Trump can axe it easily

The UNFCCC were trying a weak bluff last week that Trump “would not derail Paris”. Turnbull rushed to sell Australia out to the Paris deal on Nov 10th for no purpose at all even after the US election guarantees two of the largest economies in the world will not be committed to carbon reduction, all of which was obvious from November 9th, 2016. (China — the other “largest” economy has promised to do nothing.)
In a letter to John Kerry on November 3rd, fourteen US senators explained that Obama’s commitment to the Paris deal is the legal equivalent of him giving a speech — the “lowest forms of commitment the United States can make…”. It’s worthless. The Senators explained that everyone knows the Paris deal was done to avoid going through Congress (it’s printed in The Guardian) because Congress would never approve it.
Obama said he had ratified the Paris agreement, but it was a bluff.
What one President can proclaim, the next can just as easily wipe out.


Source: US Senate Letter in full.pdf November 3, 2016

The US senators are warning Turnbull, Trudeau, May, Merkel, Hollande and everyone else, that the US is going to fall far short of its carbon commitment, and that the Paris deal is of “no consequence”:
Paris Agreement Parties relying on fulfillment of promised US climate actions should be fully aware that the administrations “commitment” is opposed by the majority of congress, it’s legal soundness is questioned by the US Supreme Court, and under the best of circumstances, the country will fall short of meeting the 26 – 28 percent reduction by a range of forty-five to sixty percent. Most importantly, any future administration will have numerous options to forego President Obama’s political commitments under the Paris Agreement and the fact that it will soon be in force is of no consequence.“
The US Congress, and Donald Trump, have made their position clear all along. Turnbull and Bishop didn’t have to do this. Who were they negotiating for? The Australian population voted twice against carbon schemes.
h/t Amanda B, David B.


Rating: 10.0/10 (27 votes cast)
The Big Bluff that Paris deal is solid: truth is Trump can axe it easily, 10.0 out of 10 based on 27 ratings

Finally, some coverage of the massive amount of money pumping the Big-Green agenda. What is really so remarkable about this is that skeptics are winning, despite the fact that the greens have almost all the institutional, academic, government, and big-media support, and far, far more money. All we have is truth and wits.
The Washington Examiner


Mainstream media don’t know Big Green has deeper pockets than Big Oil

Ron Arnold
Mainstream reporters appear not to be aware of the component parts that comprise Big Green: environmentalist membership groups, nonprofit law firms, nonprofit real estate trusts (The Nature Conservancy alone holds $6 billion in assets), wealthy foundations giving prescriptive grants, and agenda-making cartels such as the 200-plus member Environmental Grantmakers Association. They each play a major socio-political role.
Seeing Big-Green funding means taking a broader view of the money trail:
Invisible fact: the environmental movement is a mature, highly developed network with top leadership stewarding a vast institutional memory, a fiercely loyal cadre of competent social and political operatives, and millions of high-demographic members ready to be mobilized as needed.
That membership base is a built-in free public relations machine responsive to the push of a social media button sending politically powerful “educational” alerts that don’t show up on election reports.
Big Oil doesn’t have that, but has to pay for lobbyists, public relations firms and support groups that do show up on reports.
US environmental activists have access to $13 billion?

I’d like to see a detailed breakdown of that. But if we include government funding to activist-scientists, as well as government grants for all forms of emissions reduction and education campaigns, it’s believeable. Compare $13 billion to funding for skeptical scientists. The Heartland Institute are the largest single group usually named as supporting skeptical scientists. Their total budget (for all their projects, which involve a lot more than just the climate) is about $6 – $7m.
“… you do need detailed knowledge to parse Big Green into its constituent parts. I spoke with Washington-based environmental policy analyst Paul Driessen, who said, “U.S. environmental activist groups are a $13-billion-a-year industry — and they’re all about PR and mobilizing the troops.
“Their climate change campaign alone has well over a billion dollars annually, and high-profile battles against drilling, fracking, oil sands and Keystone get a big chunk of that, as demonstrated by the Rockefeller assault.”
Mind-boggling. One hundred billion at their disposal?

Driessen then identified the most-neglected of all money sources in Big Green: “The liberal foundations that give targeted grants to Big Green operations have well over $100 billion at their disposal.”
That figure is confirmed in the Foundation Center database of the Top 100 Foundations. But how much actually gets to environmental groups? The Giving USA Institute’s annual reports show $80,427,810,000 (more than $80 billion) in giving to environmental recipients from 2000 to 2012.
I checked the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and found $147.3 million in assets while environmental donor Gordon E. and Betty I. Moore Foundation posted $5.2 billion.
Driessen pointed out another unperceived sector of Big Green: government donors. “Under President Obama, government agencies have poured tens of millions into nonprofit groups for anti-hydrocarbon campaigns.”
RON ARNOLD, a Washington Examiner columnist, is executive vice president of the Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise.
h/t to Waxing Gibberish


Rating: 9.1/10 (96 votes cast)
Big-Green have more money than Big-Oil but the media are blind to it., 9.1 out of 10 based on 96 ratings

 

The anti-trumpers globalist agenda linked to the AGW scandal, faking as science from a reputable university?!.
​

John Cook’s consensus data is so good his Uni will sue you if you discuss it

UPDATE: After I wrote this Brandon published the letter in full and raised some provocative questions. (See below)
——————————
What bad news for The University of Queensland. Their entire legal staff were on holiday at the same time and this eminent university was protected only by a Law & Society 101 student who staffed the overnight service of FreeLegalAidOnline. A mockfest is ensuing across the Internet. It is so unfair.
A year ago John Cook published another 97% study (the magic number that all consensuses must find). It was published under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license (see Anthony Watts view). Cook’s work is obviously impeccable (except for the part about 97% being really 0.3%), but evidently it uses a special new kind of “open data”. The exact date and time each anonymized reviewer reviewed a sacred scientific abstract is commercial and must be kept secret. These volunteer reviewers allegedly stand to, er … lose a lot of money if that data is revealed (they won’t be employed again for no money?). Such is the importance of this that the University of Queensland left the data on secret-secret forum protected by no passwords and then put urls to it on secret forums that were publicly accessible. Brandon Shollenberger had the genius idea of changing the numbers in the url +1, +1, and +1, and voila! For the crime of finding unhidden non-secret data Brandon received a threatening legal letter, and expects the Feds to arrive any minute. You can’t just type any old numbers into a url.



http://www.skepticalscience.com/about.shtml
…
Doing the right thing, Brandon contacted John Cook and UQ to give them a chance to tell him any good reason why he should not draw people’s attention to this unhidden, non-secret data (which may possibly save the world by convincing everyone that 97% of honest scientists are believers in a climate catastrophe). Unfortunately the lawyer writing the letter to Brandon was obviously a skeptic plant, cleverly seeded with big-oil funds. It’s the only way anyone can explain why a letter so abjectly clumsy, improbable and ridiculous could come from a university which prides itself on its reputation. Not only could Brandon not reveal the details of how the abstracts were reviewed because they would sue him, but he could not even reveal the letter threatening to sue him, or they would sue him for that too — he would be double-sued.
Apparently the threatening letter was copyright. On that point, Steve McIntyre, May 15, 2014 at 5:12 pm wonders about a strange contradiction: “the premise of copyright is the protection of commercial interests. Obviously, the letter from the University of Queensland has no commercial value. ”
I would counter that letter from The University of Queensland does have commercial value (just not the way you might think). They could sell threatening letters to other universities who are trying to hide data and can’t afford real lawyers. Perhaps it has value in comedic theatre? What this is not though (because I’d never suggest such a defamatory thing) is abject panic about potential losses from the grand cash cow that is the climate grants gravy train. UQ are honest, upstanding researchers, who always supply all the data necessary to replicate and analyze work, especially when the health of Planet Earth depends upon the results. Right?
Steve McIntyre points out that The UQ letter raises a variety of interesting issues:

• The original Consensus rating project was carried out by SKS volunteers. How did title migrate from SKS to the University of Queensland?
• If the ratings data has been owned by UQ all along and the UQ had confidentiality obligations, why did they leave it lying around the internet (apparently) without password protection?
• Are there any documents that actually demonstrate the existence of “contractual obligations to third parties”? This is eerily reminiscent of the U of East Anglia.
• On what conceivable basis can the University justify its refusal to provide anonymized rater information and datestamps?

John Robertson, May 15, 2014 at 5:03 pm, adds that The University of Queesnland appears to be partaking in OPEN DATA STRATEGY 2013 that states:
OPEN DATA STRATEGY
2014-2017
In response to the Queensland Government’s request, Queensland’s universities have developed an Open Data Strategy to guide the availability of data for other individuals and organisations.
At this point the only rational hypothesis for the UQ threatening letter is that malicious skeptics have gained control of the legal department, probably through force or subterfuge.
For UQ the only sensible action is to immediately release all the data on Monday morning (before Brandon does, and before any more blogs get in on the Mockfest). UQ could tell everyone that the letter was a spoof…
There is already a downfall spoof

H/t Steve McIntyre. Be aware though, the point of this satirical approach might not be to make you laugh:



More posts on the “0.3%” consensus paper:

• Dear John, you want “deniers” to help you do a fallacious survey eh?
• Cook’s fallacy “97% consensus” study is a marketing ploy some journalists will fall for
• Lewandowsky, Cook and the Barack Obama tweet that wasn’t
• That’s a 0.3% consensus, not 97%
• Richard Tol: half Cook’s data still hidden. Rest shows result is incorrect, invalid, unrepresentative.
• Cook’s 97% consensus is a case study of Agnotology – ignorance and misinformation

——————————————————————–
UPDATE:
There is so much to puzzle over. Stepping outside any satirical genre, Brandon Shollenberger says:

No indication was given the project was tied in any way to the University of Queensland. The data was stored on a third-party website. If the University of Queensland owns this data, there’s nothing to indicate it.​

Naturally, if the data doesn’t belong to the University of Queensland, it cannot have the supposed contractual obligations regarding it. Let’s assume, however, it does own the data. Let’s also assume the University of Queensland had the obligations it claims to have had. If those things are true, why was the data stored on a publicly accessible, third-party website? Wouldn’t that failure to protect the data amount to a violation of the supposed contractual obligations?​

Finally Brandon asks about the study data he holds related to a paper on key-words used in scientific abstracts and published as “creative commons”:

“Tell me what material I possess could cause harm if disseminated. Tell me what agreements or contractual obligations would be impinged upon if that material were released to the public.“​

Rating: 9.5/10 (213 votes cast)
John Cook's consensus data is so good his Uni will sue you if you discuss it, 9.5 out of 10 based on 213 ratings

 

Defamation, Deception and Criminality of the leftoloonies!

​

 

or....



Three excellent choices on many criteria, including (true) feminism; LGBT and racism. A logical and thoughtful decision.

​