Paul Matthews

Face of the day

Ian Fletcher -Faifax NZ

Ian Fletcher
-Faifax NZ

While in general our MSM seem determined to only focus on the negative possibilities of our Government having these kind of capabilities I for one am glad that they are trying to protect us as the threat is very real. Given the fact that the Labour Party could not even make their website secure from the average Joe on the web clicking on the links they provided aren’t you glad they are not currently in power? They called looking at all the private data and credit card details that they left totally unsecured and in public view on their website ‘hacking’ for goodness sake. Fit to run this country? I don’t think so. What they did was no different to someone not putting privacy settings on their facebook page and then being all outraged when everyone was able to look at their photos and download them.

Spy boss Ian Fletcher has both hands tied behind his back justifying cyber-security defence system Project Cortex

The director of the Government Communications Security Bureau says he can’t say how Cortex will work or exactly which organisations will come under its protection. To do so would risk exposing vulnerabilities, he says. Nor will he say how much Cortex is costing.

Nevertheless, he wants to talk about why the GCSB is making the investment in the system, the existence of which was brought to light by Prime Minister John Key in the lead up to Kim Dotcom’s “moment of truth” event in September.

The Government is due to review the country’s spy agencies and their legislative underpinning next year. Fletcher says the GCSB’s biggest challenge is recruiting the right people in a tight labour market.

The internet has made it easier for “both good things and bad things to happen”, he says.

Read more »

Guest Post – Kevin Hearle – NZ?s Kyoto commitment (a farce) and here is why.

iraqi

The New Zealand Kyoto commitment as measured by the Government fell to Zero in April of 2013 the actual commitment in Millions of Units was 29.1M Units but because the value of these Units is linked to the price in Euros of a CER on the European Exchange and that fell to ?0.01 effectively zero our units are deemed to be worth less than a CER (though why a unit of carbon is worth less in NZ than it is in Europe is beyond me) this made our 29.1 million credit worth nothing.

Let?s consider that we can actually measure our commitment with any certainty for the moment.

The price of carbon has fallen from around ? 12.00 in 2008 to effectively zero ?0.01 in April 2013. This fall is due to the manipulation of the market by the EU in allowing the market to be flooded with CER?s? and now by the complete loss of credibility of the UN IPCC and the Catastrophic Anthropogenic? Global Warming ?scenario painted by that organisation. ?The IPCC?s 5th Assessment report has been bagged by scientists and the press alike.? James Delingpole?s article in the Telegraph? headlined ?The climate alarmists have lost the debate: it’s time we stopped indulging their poisonous fantasy? sums it up.

Delingpole quotes? IPCC lead author Dr Richard Lindzen as saying ?the IPCC has ?“sunk to a level of hilarious incoherence.” Nigel Lawson has called it “not science but mumbo jumbo”. The Global Warming Policy Foundation’s Dr David Whitehouse has described the IPCC’s panel as “evasive and inaccurate” in the way it tried dodge the key issue of the 15-year (at least) pause in global warming; Donna Laframboise notes that it is either riddled with errors or horribly politically manipulated ? or both; Paul Matthews has found a very silly graph; Steve McIntyre has exposed how the IPCC appears deliberately to have tried to obfuscate the unhelpful discrepancy between its models and the real world data; and at Bishop Hill the excellent Katabasis has unearthed another gem: that, in jarring contrast to the alarmist message being put out at IPCC press conferences and in the Summary For Policymakers, the body of the report tells a different story ? that almost all the scary scenarios we’ve been warned about these last two decades (from permafrost melt to ice sheet collapse) are now ?graded by scientists to somewhere between “low confidence” to “exceptionally unlikely;” . ? Read more »