SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Heywood40 who wrote (991905)1/5/2017 2:40:28 AM
From: Sdgla1 Recommendation

Recommended By
Mick Mørmøny

  Respond to of 1570598
 
Bob Baer: If Russian Hacking Story is Political “there should be a criminal investigation”…
Posted on January 5, 2017 by sundance
For the past several days we have been discussing the Deep State shadow war within the various intelligence agencies. The larger issues have been building for a long time.

CIA Director John Brennan and DNI head James Clapper, both took politicization of intelligence to new levels to accommodate the White House. It is not accidental that both of these names are the primary voices behind the “ Russian Hacking Conspiracy“.



Those who have followed the intelligence storyline might find the comments last night (video below) by CNN contributor and former CIA official, Bob Baer, very interesting. Ideologically and politically Baer is not a Trump supporter:

…”Donald Trump is right, it [CIA] needs to be completely reorganized and get it away from politics. And if it turns out that this whole Russian hacking thing is based on politics there should be a serious criminal investigation of some sort”…… “And Trump is absolutely right in 2003/2002 with the national intelligence estimate the CIA let everybody down by putting a lot of trash in it, uh, under political pressure, and it’s time to correct that”… ~Bob Baer, CNN Continue reading ?



To: Heywood40 who wrote (991905)1/5/2017 6:53:19 AM
From: longnshort1 Recommendation

Recommended By
Mick Mørmøny

  Respond to of 1570598
 
Black Chicago teens torture special-needs boy, yell “F*** Donald Trump! F*** white people!” 8 legalins



To: Heywood40 who wrote (991905)1/5/2017 6:54:02 AM
From: longnshort2 Recommendations

Recommended By
FJB
Mick Mørmøny

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1570598
 
what an egomaniac President Obama Awards Himself Distinguished Public Service Medal - Breitbart 8 breitbart



To: Heywood40 who wrote (991905)1/5/2017 9:59:47 AM
From: Brumar89  Respond to of 1570598
 
Friends of the Earth admits false fracking claims
JANUARY 4, 2017
By Paul Homewood
h/t Joe Public



From the Times:

A green campaign group has agreed not to repeat misleading claims about the health and environmental impacts of fracking after complaints to the advertising watchdog.

Friends of the Earth spent more than a year trying to defend its claims, which were made in a fundraising leaflet, but has been forced to withdraw them.

The group’s capitulation is a victory for a retired vicar and a retired physics teacher who have been working for years to expose what they believe is scaremongering about a safe technique for extracting shale gas.

The Rev Michael Roberts and Ken Wilkinson complained about Friends of the Earth’s claims to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), which also received a complaint from the fracking company Cuadrilla.

The authority found that Friends of the Earth (FoE) failed to substantiate claims that fracking could cause cancer, contaminate water supplies, increase asthma rates and send house prices plummeting.

The ASA produced its draft ruling in July but was forced to delay sending it to its council for approval because FoE repeatedly requested more time to challenge the findings. The group finally agreed not to repeat the claims in a deal with the ASA under which it has avoided having a formal ruling against it.

The ASA said: “We have told Friends of the Earth Trust Ltd and Friends of the Earth Ltd not to make claims about the likely effects of fracking on the health of local populations, drinking water or property prices in the absence of adequate evidence.”

Mr Wilkinson, who said that he had no connection with the fracking industry and was acting purely to ensure the public received accurate information, welcomed the ruling. “It is outrageous that FoE used false information to raise money,” he said. “We need a frank debate about fracking and its potential impacts but it should be based on facts, not scaremongering.”

Francis Egan, chief executive of Cuadrilla, said: “FoE’s repeated falsehoods have been exposed as nothing more than scaremongering designed to frighten the public into giving it money. It is the unacceptable face of the charity sector.”

He called on the Charity Commission to take action against FoE, which he said had breached a previous commitment to the charity regulator to stop campaigning against fracking.

Cuadrilla is planning to start constructing a shale gas exploration site near Blackpool this month, with fracking due to start there in the autumn. In October the government overruled Lancashire county council, which had rejected Cuadrilla’s plans to drill and frack four wells at Preston New Road.

Ken Cronin, chief executive of UK Onshore Oil and Gas, which represents fracking companies, said that the ASA had consulted with “numerous independent scientific, health and regulatory experts before concluding that the anti-fracking myths perpetrated by Friends of the Earth were fundamentally false”.

He added: “The opponents of onshore oil and gas development must withdraw their scaremongering rhetoric and argue on the basis of the facts, which quite clearly show that the risks associated with fracking can be mitigated by the strong regulation and world-renowned best practice that we benefit from in the UK.”

FoE declined to respond directly to questions about its agreement with the ASA. A spokeswoman said: “We continue to campaign against fracking, alongside local people, because the process of exploring for and extracting shale gas is inherently risky for the environment.”

thetimes.co.uk

I don’t think that the fact FOE have been caught lying will come as any great surprise to any of us.

But there are two deeper questions:

1) Can they be trusted on any other issues?

2) What is their real motive for opposing fracking, which they now admit does not pose the dangers they claimed?

notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com



To: Heywood40 who wrote (991905)1/5/2017 10:05:25 AM
From: Brumar89  Respond to of 1570598
 
UK Taxpayers Face £1 Billion Bill over Green Energy Scandal

Massive green energy ripoff. Green businesses got paid a 60% premium over the cost of renewable fuels so they began heating empty buildings just to get taxpayer money.

JANUARY 4, 2017
By Paul Homewood



breitbart.com

Breitbart report on the latest green energy scandal in Northern Ireland:

A green energy scandal that is saw people heating empty buildings just to collect government grants could cost British taxpayers more than £1 billion.The UK Treasury faces a huge bill after spending on Northern Ireland’s Renewable Heat Incentive (RHI) went out of control, with businesses installing otherwise useless biomass heaters just to profit from the scheme.

The RHI was championed by Northern Ireland’s First Minister Arlene Foster back in 2012 when she was minister in charge of business and enterprise. There are now calls for her to resign over the fiasco.

The scheme was supposed to cost £25 million in its first five years, but will now likely be closer to £1.15 billion over 20 years. Around £660 million will have to be funded by taxpayers in the rest of the UK after ministers failed to cap costs, The Times reports.

Under the scheme, businesses could receive £160 for every £100 they spent on biomass fuels such as wood pellets. As businesses realised the profits they could make, there was a huge uptake and costs soon went out of control.

Finally, a whistle-blower exposed how businesses were purchasing biomass boilers just to collect the grant. One farmer in particular expected to make £1 million heating an empty shed, while another person hoped to make £1.5 million heating empty factories.

A similar scheme exists in the rest of the UK, but with much stricter spending controls. Northern Ireland’s Auditor-General, Kieran Donnelly, calculates that under that scheme a business could receive £192,000 over 20 years if it runs a boiler all year round. A similar business in Northern Ireland, however, could get £860,000.

Such is the outrage over the scandal that Mrs Foster’s political future is now in doubt. She survived a no-confidence motion last month, but new letters have come to light showing how she encouraged banks to “look favourably” on loan applications.

Martin McGuiness, the Deputy First Minister and leader of Sinn Fein, may now resign, causing the Northern Ireland government to collapse and triggering new elections.

A study in 2014 found that biomass may in fact be worse for the environment than fossil fuels, as the wood pellets used are often imported from North America, creating a bigger carbon footprint and contributing to deforestation in the United States.

breitbart.com

Unfortunately, this is just the sort of thing that happens when you throw money at a problem for political ends.

notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com



To: Heywood40 who wrote (991905)1/5/2017 10:26:52 AM
From: Brumar89  Respond to of 1570598
 
“Heating Empty Buildings”: Billion Pound British Biomass Subsidy Scandal

Another story on that billion pound green energy ripoff of UK taxpayers.

Eric Worrall / 20 hours ago January 3, 2017

Inside a Wood Pellet Heater. By H. Raab (User:Vesta) (Own work) [ GFDL, CC-BY-SA-3.0 or CC BY-SA 2.0 at], via Wikimedia Commons

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

h/t Breitbart – The Times reports that a badly designed British biomass subsidy has led to a gold rush of people cashing in, by heating empty buildings.

Taxpayers face £1bn bill over green energy subsidy scandal

A botched green energy scheme that has ignited a political crisis is on course to cost taxpayers more than £1 billion.

The Treasury faces the bill after a massive overspend on subsidies encouraging farmers and businesses in Northern Ireland to run eco-friendly power schemes. The Renewable Heat Incentive (RHI) was supposed to cost £25 million in its first five years but the bill is likely to reach £1.15 billion over 20 years.

The Treasury can claw back £490 million from the block grant to Northern Ireland, leaving £660 million to be financed by taxpayers in England, Scotland and Wales. The scandal threatens the future of Northern Ireland’s first minister Arlene Foster, leader of the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP). She was the minister responsible when the scheme was set up in 2012. It was intended to boost renewable energy, but critics say Mrs Foster and her officials did not cap costs.

Businesses that signed up could receive £160 from the government for every £100 they spent on fuels, such as wood pellets, burnt in biomass boilers. As people spotted the gains to be made, there was a surge in applications and costs spiralled.

Flaws in the scheme were exposed by a whistleblower who said businesses were buying biomass boilers solely to collect the subsidy. The whistleblower alleged that one farmer expected to make £1 million over 20 years for using a biomass boiler to heat an empty shed, while heating a number of empty factories would net their owner £1.5 million.



Read more (Requires Free Registration): thetimes.co.uk

To me this farce illustrates the utter chaos of British green energy politics.

Clean air laws passed in the 1950s discouraged use of biomass and coal for heating. The laws were widely ignored when I lived in Britain, pretty much everyone on my street had a coal burner, to try to escape skyrocketing gas and electricity costs. But the laws are nevertheless still on the statute books, and I have heard they are rigorously enforced in really high density urban areas.

Now thanks to this botched subsidy, businesses in Northern Ireland are being paid so much to burn smoky biomass fuel, mostly imported from the USA (Britain doesn’t have enough forests to keep up supply), that it is worth their while to heat empty buildings, just to collect the subsidy.

You couldn’t make it up.

wattsupwiththat.com

Resourceguy

January 3, 2017 at 1:53 pm

Clear cutting and shipping pellets long distances to heat empty buildings can be explained with the ultimate Green excuse line coined by Edward Markey as “who could have known.” With that strategy you can destroy worlds and civilizations.

Smart Rock

January 3, 2017 at 1:59 pm

It says the government would pay them £160 for every £100 they spent on biomass fuel. If there ever was a grant scheme specifically designed to promote waste and cheating, this was it.

When politicians cook up “green” schemes, common sense is obviously not part of the planning process. I suppose the virtue of “saving the planet” makes these twits blind to human nature.