Showing posts with label Trump. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Trump. Show all posts

Monday, 9 July 2018

Trumponomics Good For Ireland (So Far)

Irish Exports to US up € 1 billion in 2017 


Export figures published by the Central Statistics Office show that Irish exports to the USA since Trump was sworn in as President in January 2017 were up €1.1 billion (3%) from 2016 to €33 billion. And compared to 2015, Irish exports to US have shot up by 23%, a total increase of € 6.2 billion.

The biggest increases were in dairy, cereals and other food products, beverages, textiles, medical and pharmaceutical products, power generating machinery and manufactured articles. 

Trump's "America First" policies of tax cuts, reduced regulation and energy independence have led to increased investment and economic growth in America. This in turn means that America have imported more goods from Ireland. Some commentators warned that the opposite could happen - that USA would become more isolated and less dependent on imports - but the reality is that people living in strong performing economies purchase more goods, including imported goods.

USA remains Ireland's largest exporting market. The impact of Trump's tariffs is not known yet. He has also attempted to lure FDI back to America.




Sunday, 18 March 2018

Media Hypocrisy on Leo's Wind Farm Gaffe

By Owen Martin


Image result for leo varadkar failte ireland
The email Leo Varadkar sent to Failte Ireland

There was much consternation in the media over Leo Varadkar's wind farm "gaffe" at the White House where he boasted that he rang the local council and managed to stop a wind farm from being built beside Trump's golf resort in County Clare. There was talk of cronyism and political favors. The facts turned out to be different. Varadkar, then the tourism minister, emailed the tourist board Failte Ireland advising that they make a submission on the development. Failte Ireland make submissions on planning applications all the time, including on wind farms. If one thinks logically about it, how could a tourist board not oppose a wind farm in a tourist region ? The only issue is should they really need prompting from a minister to know that a wind farm might damage tourism in an area

Compare the outrage from the media about Varadkar's comments to the appeasement when the Government announced they would change the planning rules to facilitate large multinationals by taking rights away from objectors to data centres (see here). Here, the government is not as much interfering in the planning system, but radically changing it to favour developers. There was no outcry from the media. There was no rally call to defend the rights of citizens. Suddenly, the concept of equality took a backseat to expediency and the latest fad of the day. 

In January of this year, the Irish Courts determined that An Bord Pleanala (the main planning authority in Ireland) must, in relation to European Union Projects of Common Interest (PCIs) :

    act as a clearing-house or framework coordinator for the development consent process. It is not a role that requires any substantive decisions to be taken regarding the acceptability of a proposed development  [Martin Vs An Bord Pleanala].

In other words, once the European Commission decides something needs to be built, the planning authorities in Ireland must approve it. The High Court also ruled that "it is not the function of An Bord Pleanála to review government policy or to consider public submissions in relation to government policy. 

Once again, this ruling, which effectively limits the rights of citizens to challenge government and EU decisions, was ignored by the media. This is the kind of environment where cronyism thrives unchallenged and unhindered. Objections to developments based on logic and evidence can be easily dismissed. 

An independent and effective planning system is simply not possible with the current system, let alone with the system that is being planned to facilitate data centres. If the rights of citizens were protected in the planning system, then there wouldn't be any problem with cronyism or political favors as the system would have to take account of facts, evidence, transparency and due legal process.

Thursday, 18 May 2017

Trump's Intel Leak to Russians - Fake News ?

If President Trump leaked classified information to the Russians then that Intel must be something that was not already in the public domain. Otherwise, if it was, then it's a fake news story.

The intelligence related to an ISIS terror plot to hide bombs on laptops on board airplanes. This plot was reported by the media back in March :




According to another news outlet at the time, the source of the Intel was the US raid in Yemen :
CNN, citing an unnamed US official, said the ban on electronics on certain airlines is related to al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula and that some information came from a recent US special forces raid in Yemen. Reuters could not immediately confirm the CNN report, but Reuters has reported the group has planned several foiled bombing attempts on Western-bound airlines.

The raid in Yemen happened in February and was much publicized in the media at the time :
The US special forces members targeted the compound of a suspected senior AQAP leader in the mountainous Yakla region of Bayda province - the focal point of recent US drone strikes in Yemen.
So both the ISIS plot and the exact location in Yemen where the Intel originated was in the public domain by the end of March. Trump gave the Russians information that they could have found with a quick google search.

Wednesday, 17 May 2017

The Trump - Russian Narrative Fails Basic Logic Test

“It is very easy: If you can put Russia in the equation you win your argument,” - George Epurescu, Romanian Anti Fracking Group

In 2014, many media outlets such as the New York Times, The Guardian, and Financial Times were reporting that Russia may have been financing anti fracking protest groups around Europe. Their source was the then head of NATO, Anders Rasmussen. According to Wikileaks, even Hillary Clinton was privately worried about Russian influence in anti fracking movements in the US. Bloomberg recently reported that since US overtook Russia in gas production, the Russian TV Network, RT has :


"regularly published articles and aired segments that appear to oppose fracking, the fossil-fuel extraction technique that has made the U.S. an energy superpower again. One "exclusive" interview about the extraction technique features the opening question: "There are a lot of studies that say fracking is dangerous, so why do you think some countries and companies think it’s worth the risk?" 

This tends to support the initial claims made in 2014 by the head of NATO. There is of course a clear motive for Russia to get involved in anti fracking movements and to provide a platform for anti fracking propaganda on RT - to keep gas prices high and reduce competition. 

The logical next step then is for Russia to have backed an anti fracking party in America like the Greens or indeed a candidate like Bernie Sanders but certainly not someone like Donald Trump who is a strong advocate for US gas, coal and oil. Russia exports about $8 billion in petroleum products to the US each year. Even if the claims in 2014 about Russian influence in anti fracking movements are false, there is still no clear motive as to why Russia would back Trump. 

As George Epurescu says, "Russia" is now an argument and a counter argument to almost everything. You can dispense with the inconvenient need for basic logic and reason to support your arguments and just claim "Russia" which elicits the necessary emotional response required to make it look like you actually have an argument. 

Wednesday, 15 February 2017

Recent Protests in Dublin

Members of the Campaign Group United Against Racism during the rally





Image result for protests dublin trump


--Protests outside American Embassy against America's refugee policy. America has admitted about 40,000 refugees to date.



--Protests outside Japan Embassy against their refugee policy. Japan has admitted 28 refugees to date.










Saturday, 4 February 2017

More Fake News - Dystopian Novels and Trump

"The best books, he perceived, are those that [can be misinterpreted to] tell you what you know already." - 1984, George Orwell [slightly amended by the blog author]
by Owen Martin

Everyday now fake news arrives unashamedly onto our shop shelves. The latest fad is to misinterpret dystopian novels so that they can be applied to the Trump presidency. Irish Times recommends 1984, Animal Farm and Brave New World to their readers.  News organisations around the world are also pushing the same narrative - Vox, CNN, Independent, Guardian, New York Times and Washington Post.    

Fake News is something that appears true on the surface but upon closer examination is evidently false. 

Animal Farm was about the Russian Revolution in 1917 and the period of Communism that followed. All Communists oppose Trump

Both 1984 and Brave New World were about the dangers of the Big State. In 1984, it was called Big Brother, in Brave New World it was called World State. Trump's policies are to cut taxes, reduce government regulations and freeze Federal hiring. The exact polar opposite of what a Big State would do. 

All communist countries suffer from over-regulation and central planning.  

A World State is what climate hustlers have being demanding for years now. Trump is a climate skeptic and wants nothing to do with a World State.

This proves that there is a distinct lack of intellectual capacity at the mainstream news organisations. New readers of these books will inadvertently be reading about the dangers of the Big State, not Trump. The Big State that most of these news organisations and the Left support. 

But what about the Newspeak that comes from the Trump administration ? Orwell makes it clear that the purpose of Newspeak is to restrict thought and ideas. In 2017, Newspeak could only resemble the Left's constant use of Political Correctness as a tool to suppress speech and ideas. 

Scott Adams uses the idea of the Persuasion Filter to explain how people can see two different movies when presented with the same set of facts. If people are watching a movie where Trump is Hitler and therefore the end of the world is nigh, then all dystopian novels (and most definitely the famous ones) must apply to Trump. However, this means living in an inverted world where a book about Communism and the Big State can apply to a free market Capitalist who you happen to dislike.   

Persuasion by Inversion.

Friday, 11 November 2016

The End of the Traditional Media ?


                                            Humans are 90% irrational - Scott Adams


It's been an extraordinary year in politics as event after event proved the "experts" and the media wrong. The above article appeared in an Irish newspaper back in August. The article below about climate change appeared in the same newspaper a week later. Both pieces suffer from a distinct lack of critical analysis and instead focus mostly on emotion and even hysteria. This approach does sell newspapers as Scott Adams says humans are mostly irrational. Once the irrational idea that Trump could not win the election took hold, this then evolved into a mass hysteria where even the bookmakers became hoodwinked. Not alone did they lose big on the Trump victory, they paid out on a Trump defeat before the actual result came in ! Rational and clear analysis becomes almost impossible in such an environment and even intelligent people succumb.

In such environments (mostly created by the media), the media will seek to reinforce how we feel about the issue by saying "Relax" or in the case of the climate "Worry". At this stage, we have moved from being 90% irrational to 100% irrational. All doubt has been removed. Only the sudden shock of reality can make us see sense.





Back in 1968, an English man had the crazy idea about transferring news and information across wires and into TV screens and even on to computers. It turned out to be very prescient.   

.




The internet means you can get different opinions and analysis and make up your own mind. If you prefer the emotive stuff, you can still find that online. If you prefer critical analysis and debate then you can find that too which before was not as accessible. Articles can be instantly fact-checked and updated to give the most accurate assessment at that time.  

President Elect Trump had a significant online presence, much bigger than that of his opponent. Turns out that was not something to "Relax" about. The old print media is now looking increasingly irrelevant.  We may be seeing it going extinct in the near future. Something they will certainly be "worried" about.