The lamestream media told you:

Hybrid gasoline/electric-battery cars promise a clean future and protection of the environment, according to leading scientists and environmentalists who have studied the issue. The government is getting pressure to enact laws requiring development of the vehicles, which can be simply plugged in and recharged daily.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Experts have failed to note, according to other experts, that the electrical power grid in America is running near maximum, and tops out on hot days when people run air conditioners.

“Where is the extra power supposed to come from if we have to run every car in the country on electricity?!” asks one electric company spokesperson.

According to research, environmentalists pushing for the electric cars are the same people pushing to ban any new form of electrical generating capacity in the country. The inconsistency has not been noticed by the lamestream media.

“If we run all our cars on electric,” one expert notes, “we’re going to have to burn an awful lot more oil and coal in plants we don’t even have. Where is that supposed to come from?” he asks, on condition of anonymity.

Hydrogen-powered cars, believed by some to be the answer because they run on water, overlook the fact that water, which humans must drink to survive, is often in shorter supply than electricity. Some scientists have also noted that, because of the laws of physics, it takes more power in electricity to split water and get the hydrogen than the hydrogen itself provides. Efforts to repeal the laws of physics have met with stiff resistance.

Undrinkable sea water, sometimes mentioned as an alternative, unfortunately requires more electric power to desalinate than is currently available, and it would then still have to be split to get the hydrogen. No one has recommended where you might stockpile all the highly corrosive salt left behind. The effect of desalinating significant portions of the world’s oceans is unknown.

The lamestream media told you:

Two years ago Hurricane Katrina pounded New Orleans, causing massive destruction and 1,600 deaths. Federal and state agencies have failed miserably in reconstructing the city, especially the hardest-hit Ninth Ward. Some 12,000 people are now living on the streets.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Reporters nationally have failed to inform the public that it is not government’s job or within its legitimate authority to take money from the public and give it to people who built their homes nine feet below sea level in a storm alley, when those homes are predictably flooded out or washed away.

Experts note than only clodpoles would rebuild homes in a hurricane zone below sea level after they were destroyed. “Even the federal government isn’t that dense,” said one high ranking official on condition of anonymity. “We are so lucky that area remains deserted,” the anonymous source said, “because it’s an accident waiting to happen. I don’t understand why the news media keeps pounding us for not building there.” Shocking but visually appealing images of aging wrecks accompanied the report.

According to social-welfare advocates, flood survivors have the same civil right to pick themselves up by their bootstraps and start over as any illegal alien who walked through 40 miles of snake-infested blazing desert to get here.

An apparently drunken homeless person colorfully surrounded by trash on a city street, when interviewed live by CNN asked, “Why isn’t somebody doing something for us?”

The lamestream media told you:

The United Nations, the world body dedicated to peace and an end to human suffering, is working diligently for global justice and deserves your support and massive tax dollars.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

David B. Kopel, Paul Gallant & Joanne D. Eisen, writing for the BYU Journal of Public Law (forthcoming, 2007), ask:

Does a woman have a human right to resist rape or murder? Do people have a human right to resist tyranny? The United Nations Human Rights Council has said “no” – that international law recognizes no human right of self-defense.

In an article, “The Human Right to Self-Defense,” they note that the Human Rights Council declares that very severe gun control – more restrictive than even the laws of New York City – is a human right.

Surveying international law from its earliest days to the present, this article demonstrates that self-defense is a widely recognized human right that no government and no international body has legitimate authority to abrogate.

The issue is especially important today, as many international advocates of international gun prohibition are using the United Nations to deny and then eliminate the right of self-defense.

For example, the General Assembly is creating an Arms Trade Treaty that would define arms sales to citizens in the United States as a human-rights violation, because American law guarantees the right to use lethal force, when no lesser force will suffice, against a non-homicidal violent felony attack.

The article analyzes in detail the founders – the great scholars of the 14th through 18th centuries – of the current system of international law. The article then looks at the major legal systems that have contributed to international law, such as Greek, Roman, Spanish, Jewish, Islamic, canon, and Anglo-American law.

In addition, the article covers the full scope of contemporary international law sources, including treaties, the United Nations, constitutions from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe and much more. The article shows that international law – particularly its restraints on the conduct of warfare – is founded on the personal right of self-defense. [Copied from the article abstract.] http://www.davekopel.com/DavePage.htm

The lamestream media told you:

“Migrants fleeing as hiring law nears,” according to the headline in Mexico-border-state Arizona, referring to a new law that will revoke the business license of any employer found hiring undocumented migrants, also known as illegal aliens.

“A growing number are pulling up stakes out of fear they will be jobless come Jan. 1 when the law takes effect. It’s impossible to count how many undocumented immigrants have fled,” because they’re undocumented. “At least several hundred have left,” since the bill was signed, based on anecdotal interviews by immigration reporter Daniel Gonzalez.

“Immigration hard liners,” a derogatory term for people who respect the nation’s borders, are cheering, according to the page one Sunday report. More than 70 percent of the public voted to take such actions when given the chance in a recent election.

People supporting illegal immigration have loudly declared that laws to stop the invasion will not work. Now, with a single common-sense law finally on the books, they will need to adopt new arguments.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

I told you so.

Comments (0)

Write comment

Full Name

Title

Comment

Write the displayed characters

Add Comment