Computing Forever takes on the EU(starting with Richard Dawkins)2/2

2:50 “It is not difficult to do some basic research[]”(Computing Forever)
Sometimes it works to look at the sources someone uses for his arguments.
https://youtu.be/omlGfwLC2Lw

These are Computing Forever’s named sources.
1 The sun.
2 An article by a pro-Brexit writer, written for a news website called Heat Street, a libertarian source. The article is otherwise unsupported.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_Street
look up : Lukas Mikelionis to get to know the writer.
3 Above article(point 2) is in itself is based on a article by a former UKIP politician writing for the daily mail who cites no sources and is otherwise unsupported.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janice_Atkinson
4 Infowars, a website run Alex Jones, a man who is a libertarian and a  conspiracy theorist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Jones_(radio_host)

None of his named sources are supported by credible sources like:
http://www.onlinecollegecourses.com/2012/12/17/the-best-english-newspapers/
I don’t mean that they do not support him. I mean even if they support his claims he doesn’t mention them.
Above link is just an example. Go look for yourself.Check this man’s sources and claims.

Note that Computing Forever hardly uses any credible source even if these supports his claims.
He uses the Guardian once, only to cite a biased interview of a former Greek finance minister who can hardly be viewed as being objective.

Here is a detailed breakdown:

00:00
CF opens  with an article on Theresa May and Scotland that comes from the sun.
The sun is a tabloid paper with a pro-Brexit stance.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_(United_Kingdom)
It is also not considered a reliable source.
http://www.djsresearch.co.uk/MediaAdvertisingAndPRMarketResearchInsightsAndFindings/article/The-Sun-Crowned-Most-Read-and-Least-Trusted-Newspaper-by-UK-Poll-00886
No other sources support this article.

00:45
She wants to slowly forget about it.”
An unsubstantiated statement by CF.

1:10
The Eu “[] is an anti-democratic superstate.
Anti-democratic:Unsupported claim.
Superstate: Unsupported claim.
It is not a state:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union.

2:05
So many scientists seem to be against leaving out of self-interest.
Unsupported claim.

Note:there are however sources that support this claim, but CF does not use them. He simply fails to back up his claims even if he can.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/jul/07/brexit-is-also-a-vote-against-the-elitism-in-science
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-the-science-community-says-no-to-brexit/
http://www.nature.com/polopoly_fs/7.35380!/file/Brexit%20survey_full%20results.pdf

2:10
Now I am not saying that is the reason Dawkins is against Brexit, but it wouldn’t surprise me if it was.

It can be easily found that he is. Did Computing Forever even look?

Twitter:
The #Brexit vote makes me seriously doubt the existence of any sort of human evolution
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/richard-dawkins-eu-referendum-brexit-david-cameron-a7059201.html
http://www.wired.co.uk/article/richard-dawkins-brexit-catastrophe
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/29/eu-referendum-parliament-leaders-david-cameron-david-mitchell
https://richarddawkins.net/?s=brexit

2:40
Basic research how the EU operates

a) First mentioned article: 6 Time EU bosses who sneered at the electorate.
This is written by Heat Street, a libertarian news agency by a pro-Brexit writer. He ends the article with: “Vote Leave to wipe the smirk off their faces”

Point by point:

1) Euro parliament president: Referendums for “mentally weak”, “like Nazis”


The underlying source is an article by Janet Atkinson in the daily mail. She mentions no sources and no other sources support what she says. She was a UKIP politician and therefore can be assumed to be a Brexit supporter. More about her here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janice_Atkinson
As it comes to nazis it was Schulz who was being accused of being one.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Schulz
See the incident with Godfrey Bloom.
And
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/tory-mep-provokes-uproar-with-attack-on-nazi-eu-776748.html

2)“Decisions taken by the most democratic institutions in the world are very often wrong.
Jose Manuel Barroso 2010
This is an often quoted statement and seems valid enough. Context hard to establish.

3) Rompuy: “But we do it anyway.”
http://www.standaard.be/cnt/dmf20140429_01087318
Not accessible, so hard to establish context or validity. I am Dutch so I can read the Standard. Can’t access the page without becomming a member.

4) “Britain belongs to us.”
http://www.itv.com/news/2015-06-17/martin-schultz-britain-belongs-to-the-eu/
Quoted out of context if you look at it as Schulz says the UK belongs to the EU(not us) as it is part of it.
But the writer conveniently overlooks Schulz saying that Britain is free to suggest changes as any other member state can at 1:10 into the interview.

5)Juncker: “PM’s listen to voters too much.”
Quote:
“Elected leaders are making life “difficult” because they spend too much time thinking about what they can get out of EU and kowtowing to public opinion, rather than working on “historic” projects such as the Euro, he said.

6)Trade Commissioner: “I don’t take my mandate from the European People.”
This is quoted by John Hillary in his article. He is an opponent of TTIP for which the Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström is responsible. She has denied saying this.  See controversy:
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/i-didn-t-think-ttip-could-get-any-scarier-but-then-i-spoke-to-the-eu-official-in-charge-of-it-a6690591.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cecilia_Malmstr%C3%B6m

b)”Greece Is A Scapegoat For The Disintegration Of The EU”
http://www.theguardian.com/business/ng-interactive/2015/apr/29/the-austerity-delusion
Based on an interview with the Former Greek minister of Finance.

c)Hate speech code.
Unsourced, so here are the sources Computing Forever fails to mention. Read for yourself.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/31/facebook-youtube-twitter-microsoft-eu-hate-speech-code
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-1937_en.htm

d)ELITE WILL USE MIGRANTS TO DESTROY EUROPEAN LABOR
http://www.infowars.com/elite-will-use-migrants-to-destroy-european-labor/
This is an article in infowars.
It is run by Alex Jones.
He is a conspiracy theorist.  
I can confidently say he is a crackpot. The aritcle is written by Kurt Nimmo, but based on what Alex Jones thinks(see associated movie on website).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Jones_(radio_host)
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Alex_Jones

3:50
“(sarcastic) We should just listen to our politicians? They can never be corrupted, biased or plain wrong on any issue?
What he seems to claim is that he doesn’t trust in the democratic process with which the country is organized.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_the_United_Kingdom

4:44
I can’t believe that I bought two of his books.”(about Dawkins)
Apparently, books get only credible when the writer agrees with you in everything even if the books discuss unrelated subjects.

5:25: “Where have I heard this before?“(on a second referendum)
From Nigel Farage.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-wants-second-referendum-7985017

6:15 : False dichotomy: it is referenda or dictatorship and nothing in between.
Yet, he refuses to vote a second time in the Irish 2009 one.  https://youtu.be/pZ9fxpmM1lA?t=66

6:20 “you are anti-democratic to the core.”(to Dawkins)
Dawkins is undemocratic because he says that the decision should have been left to an elected parliament and he proposes a second referendum.
Computing Forever doesn’t like this.

6:25 “Ireland and France were asked again for the Nice and Lisbon treaties because the EU doesn’t care for[].”

Referenda are not enforced from the EU. In fact the democratic elected parliaments and governments have to initiate and approve them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amendments_to_the_Constitution_of_Ireland
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referendums_in_France

7:50
I will always respect you.”(about Dawkins)
Look back at 4:44 where CF wonders why he bought two books from Dawkins.

And that is the end.

What it all boils down to is that you are watching a video that uses as sources articles from the sun, heat street and infowars, twitter and the like. And biased interviews.  The only credible source he mentions is the guardian. Otherwise his statements go unsourced or unexplained.

Ceci n’est pas un prohète

https://flic.kr/p/pMo2zQ

Ceci n’est pas un prohète
It is hard not to say something…

One cannot stay silent in a world where silence is demanded by thugs with delude minds and possibly a well founded grudge against the world they lived in.

Islam plays undeniably a part in the Charlie Hebdo atrocities, but at the same time the marginalization, the disenfranchising of youth of alien descent seems to be something we all should be aware of.

Veleda Lorakeet.

Twelve angry men

Message from Noam Chomsky hearing “Japanese Court Rejected Demand to Evacuate Children”

On 2013/04/29, at 11:50, Noam Chomsky wrote:The world-renowned political dissident, linguist and author Noam Chomsky commented on the ruling of Sendai High Court which rejected a demand that a city affected by the fallout of the country’s 2011 nuclear disaster evacuate its children.

Chomsky said:

It is deeply disturbing to learn that the courts have blocked efforts to evacuate children from the Fukushima site, though acknowledging the health risks. Nothing tells us more about the moral level of a society than how it treats the most vulnerable, in this case its most precious possession, its children. I hope and trust that this grim decision will be reversed.

Noam Chomsky”

I was about to like this message, but I decided to look around the internet first before auto reflexing. I especially get suspicious when people start to tell that that courts of law in democratic countries are misbehaving. While I am not so naive as to belief that democratic courts are flawless, I think you need to come with a lot of proof when you say that they are abusive of children. Some of the judges are parents!
In a nutshell: a group of parents and activists filed a lawsuit on behalf of a group of children who live in the city Koriyama, which is about 55(40 miles) kilometers west from the nuclear power plant that broke down during the tsunami of 2011. The lawsuit basically asked the court to rule that the government should pay the costs for the evacuation of those children from that city.
The court ruled that the government is not obliged to pay the costs for the evacuation because there was no reason to evacuate as the levels of radiation in the city of Koriyama are well below the threshold that is established as dangerous, even though there hotspots in the area. 
What the court did not say is: you are not allowed to leave yourself. It said that the government is not obliged to evacuate and thus not obliged to pay for moving.
What is dubious is trying to pressure a court into changing a ruling. It is dubious because courts should operate independently from power groups and popular opinion. It is why they are called impartial. 
If you don’t like the ruling there is the option to appeal to a higher court if you can proof there has been a legal omission.Or you can have a ruling or decision changed via proper democratic means. Another option is to ask you local representative or government to help finance the move. I suspect they got a negative on that request before, which is why they tried to get the courts to force them to paying. Another option is to file a lawsuit against the company running the powerplant, the Tokyo Electric Power Company. Since that would have been the most obvious route I suspect they got a negative on that one as well.
In general it turns out that the complaining party is angry because the court did not rule in favor of that party. It is downright selfish and disgraceful that the lawyer accuses a court of child abuse because it did not favor his lawsuit. Perhap he ought to have a look in the mirror and wonder if he is not crossing a line himself?

I am sad to see that Noam Chomsky auto reflexed his message. His message basically says that the courts forbad evacuation of children, which is not true at all.  And since he is some kind of authority with some groups, all other people instantly auto reflexed. And then calling for the court to change their ruling is dubious method of dealing with this. 
Perhaps people should watch twelve angry men? It deals with the subject of people with fixed opinions and the judicial process.

http://fukushima-evacuation-e.blogspot.nl/