Saturday, June 25, 2016

The nitty gritty of why the Brits hate the EU. Not mentioned are the regulations that outlawed powerful hair dryers and tea kettles in the name of global warming. Serfdom by bureaucrat!


Bonfire of the EU laws: From crooked cucumbers to powerful vacuum cleaners, the barmy Brussels regulations we can now get rid of

  • Historic EU referendum saw Britain voting to leave the European Union
  • Leave voters across the country are celebrating the referendum result
  • Country will leave behind a network of laws and regulations set by the EU 
comments
As the country reflects in the wake of the EU referendum, Leave voters are celebrating changing the course of history and breaking free from the shackles of the European Union - and its laws and regulations.
Despite the fact Britain has voted in favour of leaving the EU, this is still the start of a long process before the country officially untangles from the network of institutions in Brussels.
And among that network there were a number of bizarre - and some argued trivial - rules the Brusselsbureaucracy passed.
Here are some of the more bizarre regulations the Brexiters can enjoy saying goodbye to. 
David Cameron said he could not be the 'captain of the ship' while the UK negotiated its exit from the EU as he announced he would be resigning as Prime Minister and Tory leader 
David Cameron said he could not be the 'captain of the ship' while the UK negotiated its exit from the EU as he announced he would be resigning as Prime Minister and Tory leader 
Boris Johnson stopped short of confirming that he would stand to succeed David Cameron today - but made a broad appeal to people stay calm and help forge a better future
Boris Johnson stopped short of confirming that he would stand to succeed David Cameron today - but made a broad appeal to people stay calm and help forge a better future
Boris Johnson compliments David Cameron's leadership
Progress: 0%
0:00
Play
Mute
Current Time0:00
/
Duration Time2:00
Fullscreen
Need Text
1. Ban on curvy bananas and crooked cucumbers  
The first - and one which reared its head as the Brexit and Remain camps drew up their battles lines - was the banana regulation.
An example often cited as 'legislative heavy-handedness' was the EU ban on 'bendy bananas' and crooked cucumbers.
A 1994 EU regulation specified that bananas must be 'free from abnormal curvature.' 
A 1994 EU regulation specified that bananas must be 'free from abnormal curvature' and cucumbers needed to be straight
Many of these specifications were abolished in 2008, though the banana guidelines remain on the books
A 1994 EU regulation specified that bananas must be 'free from abnormal curvature' and cucumbers needed to be straight 
EU rules also governed the shape of many other fruits and vegetables — cucumbers, for example, needed to be almost perfectly straight. 
Many of these specifications were abolished in 2008, though the banana guidelines remain on the books.
Just days ago, Boris Johnson became embroiled in a bizarre row over EU rules on how bananas should be sold. 
The strange row was triggered by comments Mr Johnson made as he took his referendum bus tour to the Midlands ahead of the vote.
Delivering a stump speech to a crowd in Stafford, Mr Johnson said: 'If we take back control on June 23, we can also get rid of so much of the pointless rules and regulations that are holding back this country. 
'It is absurd that we are told you cannot sell bananas of bunches of more than two or three bananas. You cannot sell bananas with abnormal curvature of the fingers. Why should they tell us?
'Why should they tell us how powerful our vacuum cleaners should be? Why should they tell us how powerful our hairdryers should be?
'This is not a matter for an international, supranational body to dictate to the British people.' 
Government banned the import of 100-watt bulbs
Government banned the import of 100-watt bulbs
2. Incandescent lightbulbs 
Something else that could now make a return is the incandescent lightbulb. 
Incandescent bulbs have been phased out in stages in the UK since 2009 following European regulations.
The Government banned the import of 100-watt bulbs from 2009, followed by a ban on 60w bulbs in 2011 and a full ban on all 'traditional' bulbs in 2012.
The bulbs were branded environmentally-unfriendly because some 95 per cent of the energy that goes into them gets turned into heat rather than light.
Following the EU's ban on incandescent light-bulbs, many people were reported to have suffered epileptic fits from the flickering, supposedly eco-friendly fluorescent bulbs. 
3. Vacuum cleaners
On his campaign trail in recent weeks, Boris Johnson also blasted Brussels red tape that he said placed burdensome extra costs on UK retailers selling products such as bananas, vacuum cleaners and hairdryers.
The European Commission triggered an outcry by banning powerful vacuum cleaners two years ago.
From September 1, 2014, companies were prohibited from manufacturing or importing any vacuum cleaners above the 1,600-watt limit as part of a drive to reduce domestic electricity use. 
The European Commission triggered an outcry by banning powerful vacuum cleaners two years ago (file photo)
The European Commission triggered an outcry by banning powerful vacuum cleaners two years ago (file photo)
A furore broke out when shoppers panic-bought high-powered vacuum cleaners ahead of the deadline in 2014.
This directive was expected to be extended to kettles, toasters, hair-dryers and other domestic appliances but it was shelved earlier this year amid fears it would drive the British public towards the EU exit door.
In 2011, a ruling claimed drinking water did not ease dehydration
In 2011, a ruling claimed drinking water did not ease dehydration
4. Drinking water does not prevent dehydration
In 2011, a ruling by the European Commission claimed that drinking water 'does not ease dehydration'.
EU authorities passed a law which claimed scientists had found no evidence to suggest drinking water stopped dehydration. 
Manufacturers of bottled water were prohibited from labelling products with claims that would suggest consumption would fight dehydration.
5. 'Diabetics' banned from driving
European laws introduced in 2011 meant that drivers who treat their diabetes with insulin who have had one or more episodes of severe hypoglycaemia, known as 'hypos', could face losing their licences. 
If sufferers had one or more episodes of severe hypoglycaemia - when a patient's blood sugars drop to dangerously low levels - and required assistance from another person, they would have to inform the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA).
Diabetes UK said that the DVLA did not differentiate between daytime and night-time episodes of hypoglycaemia, meaning that some people with diabetes are losing their driving licence unnecessarily.
European laws introduced in 2011 meant that drivers who treat their diabetes with insulin who have had one or more episodes of severe hypoglycaemia, known as 'hypos', could face losing their licences
European laws introduced in 2011 meant that drivers who treat their diabetes with insulin who have had one or more episodes of severe hypoglycaemia, known as 'hypos', could face losing their licences
After a review of evidence, the European Commission said in March this year the driving ban for people experiencing recurrent severe hypoglycaemia when asleep should be lifted. 
Diabetes UK said the DVLA will be asked to make the changes by 2018.
6. It is illegal to eat your pet horse
In 2009 a law set out it was illegal to eat 'pet' horses after figures revealed that around two million pet horses were eaten across the EU each year.
According to the guidelines, all horses, ponies, donkeys and related animals (including zoo species like zebras) must have a horse passport.
The passport is a small booklet that identifies an owner's animal by its height and species.
It also states whether the animal can be used for food at the end of its life.
Owners can declare that the animal isn't intended for human consumption by filling in the appropriate section of the passport. This cannot be changed later.
7. Jams, jellies and marmalade guidelines 
In 2010, a directive was made relating to fruit jams, jellies and marmalades and sweetened chestnut puree intended for human consumption. 
EU rules stated that a preserve must contain at least 60 per cent sugar to be called a jam.  
Anything containing less had to be called a 'fruit spread', while a low sugar jam with less than 50 per cent of sugar was named a 'conserve'.
However these laws were relaxed in 2013. 
In 2010, a directive was made relating to fruit jams, jellies and marmalades and sweetened chestnut puree intended for human consumption
In 2010, a directive was made relating to fruit jams, jellies and marmalades and sweetened chestnut puree intended for human consumption
8. Olive oil in restaurants
Three years ago, the European Union planned to ban the glass jar which is filled, and refilled, with olive oil and served on restaurant tables across the EU, stating that only non-refillable bottles with proper labeling on the contents would be accepted.
Bureaucrats had originally argued that diners were at risk of being served 'inferior' or diluted oil, which could also harbour germs if served in an open dish or bottle.
Officials had wanted to force restaurateurs to only serve oil in its original bottles, with tamper-proof lids.
The 2013 olive oil plan, intended to ensure hygiene and curtail fraud, set off a barrage of complaints - including from David Cameron - and never actually took effect. 
A waiter refills an empty bottle of olive oil at an Italian restaurant in Brussels
A waiter refills an empty bottle of olive oil at an Italian restaurant in Brussels

SENIOR TORY MINISTERS' BLUEPRINT FOR AN INDEPENDENT BRITAIN

Hundreds of media were packed into Downing Street to watch Mr Cameron deliver his resignation statement in the wake of the referendum
Hundreds of media were packed into Downing Street to watch Mr Cameron deliver his resignation statement in the wake of the referendum
Earlier this month, senior Tory Cabinet ministers published six pieces of legislation they hoped to pass to restore Britain's border controls and end the supremacy of EU law following a Brexit.
Michael Gove, Chris Grayling and Boris Johnson set out what is effectively a manifesto for a 'government in waiting'.
They pledged that the new laws would be in place by the next General Election in 2020. 
Finance Bill: This would abolish the 5 per cent rate of VAT on household energy bills. Paid for by savings from the UK’s contributions to the EU budget.
National Health Service (Funding Target) Bill: Requirement that by the next general election, the NHS receives a £100million per week real-terms cash transfusion on top of current plans. Paid for by savings from the UK’s contributions to EU budget.
Asylum and Immigration Control Bill: Ends the automatic right of all EU citizens to enter the UK by the next election. Criminals refused entry and a ‘non-discriminatory’ Australian points-based system, based on skills, introduced for those wishing to enter from inside and outside the EU.
European Union Law (Emergency Provisions) Bill: This would end the European Court of Justice’s control over national security, allow ministers to remove EU citizens whose presence is not conducive to the public good – including terrorists and serious criminals – and end the growing use of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights to overrule UK law.
Free Trade Bill: The UK would leave the EU’s ‘common commercial policy’. That would restore the UK Government’s power to set its own trade policy. UK would take back seat on the World Trade Organization.
European Communities Act 1972 (Repeal) Bill: Ensures the European Communities Act 1972 – the legal basis for supremacy of EU law – is repealed. EU Treaties will cease to form part of UK law and European Court’s jurisdiction will end. UK would cease to contribute to the EU budget. EU law to be transferred into domestic law with Parliament choosing what to keep, remove or amend.

Orlando Jihadi’s Wife’s Location Still Unknown After Conflicting Statements to Police. Is Obama hiding her? Is she in a CAIR safe house?

Orlando Jihadi’s Wife’s Location Still Unknown After Conflicting Statements to Police

The Obama administration seems to have lost track of Noor Zahi Salman, wife of Orlando jihadi Omar Mateen and a possible co-conspirator in the worst terrorist attack on American soil since 9/11.

Loretta Lynch said at her press conference on Tuesday, in response to a question about Salman’s whereabouts, “Right now I do not know exactly the answer to that. I believe she was going to travel, but I do not know exactly her location now.”
The last word the public was given about her activities came a week ago, when Omar Mateen’s Taliban-supporting father, Seddique Mateen, told reporters she was no longer at his house and in fact had departed the Ft. Pierce, Florida, area. After he said that, St. Lucie County sheriff’s deputies popped in and out of his house, without offering a comment to the press. Try to imagine your daughter-in-law vanishing after your son commits a horrifying act of mass murder, leaving her young son in your care, without demanding to know where she was going.
One possible clue to her whereabouts is the revelation that Mateen bought three plane tickets to San Francisco, just two days before the attack. The flights were scheduled for July 14, which suggests either he had not made up his mind to strike or he somehow expected to survive the assault.
A federal official told NBC News that Mateen and Salman were planning to visit her sick mother, who has been struggling to recover from an operation. However, the Mercury News has reported that Salman’s mother complained about Mateen refusing to allow his wife to visit her family.
Wednesday brought some uncomfortable mumbling from the administration about how the FBI is keeping tabs on Salman, but the Attorney General has not been personally informed of her location. Frankly, losing her completely would be hard to believe, even coming from the Obama ineptocracy, where the soaring cost of government is matched only by its absolute incompetence. It still would not speak well of Lynch if she was not keeping updated on Salman, a person of great interest in the most important case on the Attorney General’s desk at the moment.
If Mateen’s wife really has disappeared, while the Obama circus was busy with its gun control juggling act, it would be bad news for everyone, possibly including Noor Salman. As CounterJihad points out, the administration has been peddling a ridiculous story about how Mateeen was a “self-radicalized lone wolf” to cover its bureaucratic posterior, but in truth, he had some ugly Islamist connections, and they might very well decide Salman is a loose end that needs to be snipped. The United Global Brotherhood of Lone Wolves does not want Salman sharing whatever she knows with U.S. intelligence.
Salman, variously described as either 29 or 30 years old, is the daughter of Palestinian immigrants, born in the Bay Area and raised in Northern California, according to the L.A. Times. Neighbors interviewed by the Times described her family as “friendly” and “happy.”
Salman was married once before, “in an arranged marriage that was organized in the Palestinian territories,” before meeting Mateen online.
She is reportedly being considered by a grand jury as either a passive or active participant in Mateen’s terror plot. She has given conflicting statements to law enforcement, beginning with her shifting account of what she knew about his plans to carry out a jihad attack.
“She initially denied that when Mateen left the house Saturday that she had any idea he was going to do something violent,” CNN reported last week. “But in subsequent statements, Salman conceded she had a suspicion he might be planning an attack, perhaps on Pulse, the officials said. According to one official, she knew ‘for a while’ Mateen had thoughts of wanting to do something violent. He had been talking about it for months, if not years.”
During her later statements to these officials, Salman claimed she tried to talk Mateen out of committing a violent act but did not call the police with her suspicions.
A source close to the investigation told ABC News that Salman said she watched Mateen leave the house with a “bag of guns” on the night of the shooting, and she tried to stop him because she was “concerned” about what he might do.
Salman was in Mateen’s company when he made visits to the Pulse nightclub and Disney Springs that have been characterized as scouting missions for future attacks, and she also accompanied him on at least one trip in early June to buy ammunition. CNN relayed her claim that she “didn’t know he was buying ammunition to kill people” and the assessment of investigators that she might not have fully understood he was scouting for a terrorist attack.
According to St. Lucie County property records, Salman was a witness when Omar Mateen sold his house to his sister and brother-in-law for only $10, which would seem like an alarming sign that he had something cataclysmic planned. Selling one’s house for ten bucks would be a topic of much conversation in most marriages, especially since Salman also told investigators he was spending a huge amount of money in the weeks before the Pulse shooting.
The most unsettling sign of Salman’s possible complicity in the attack was the series of text messages she exchanged with Mateen while he was busy murdering 49 people at the Pulse nightclub. Two hours into the attack, he texted her to ask if she was watching the news, and one of her responses said she loved him. She also tried to call him several times during the attack, but CNN notes there is no evidence that she attempted to contact the police.
It has been suggested that Mateen’s abusive nature, as reported by his first wife, could explain why Salman did not take more decisive action to stop him. Another explanation was proffered by one of Salman’s childhood teachers from California, who told ABC NewsSalman “had difficulty with retention” and that “conceptualizing and understanding” were “challenges to her.”
Salman’s family confirmed that she was enrolled in a special education program, and the woman who spoke with ABC was one of her teachers. In fact, Salman’s family went so far as to claim she “doesn’t understand cause and effect.”

The gay revenge narrative of the Orlando shooter is another Benghazi video coverup.

Posted By Elena Weissmann On 3:17 PM 06/24/2016 
The gay revenge narrative of Omar Mateen’s terrorist attack in Orlando has effectively obscured his several explicit pledges to ISIS laced throughout the rampage in several calls to 911.
The only trouble is the narrative is likely a complete fiction, according to the FBI’s official investigation.
[dcquiz] Following the slaughter of 49 innocent people at a gay nightclub in Orlando, news broke that Omar Mateen allegedly had multiple gay lovers, used gay dating apps, and frequented the same club he shot up. Clearly the news trumped Mateen’s sworn allegiances to ISIS, because the wider media opted primarily to cast Mateen as a conflicted, complicated and highly nuanced psychopath.
Perhaps inconveniently, the LA Times ran a story Thursday that revealed the FBI could find “no evidence” or reliable witness testimony to support that Mateen was gay or had gay lovers. In fact, his only affairs appear to have been with women.
From the LA Times:
So far, they have found no photographs, no text messages, no smartphone apps, no gay pornography and no cell-tower location data to suggest that Mateen — who was twice married to women and had a young son — conducted a secret gay life, the [FBI] officials said.
Federal agents reportedly combed through Mateen’s laptop computer and cellphone, along with the electronic communications of those who have made the claims to have consorted with Mateen. Agents came up with nada.
“Miguel,” the man who said he was Mateen’s lover for two months in an exclusive Univision interview, claimed that he had met with Mateen 15 to 20 times, the last occasion in late December. He said that Mateen had also slept with a Puerto Rican man who allegedly told him he was HIV positive.
“He adored Latinos, gay latinos with brown skin—but he felt rejected. He felt used by them. I believe this crazy horrible thing he did—that was revenge,” he told Univision.
Just 12 hours before the FBI’s findings became public, TMZ published an article claiming that the Ambassador Hotel had security footage of Omar Mateen meeting “Miguel” at the hotel for a hookup on December 14, 2015. The recording was mysteriously unavailable, as the “FBI went to the Ambassador Tuesday night and took a copy of the surveillance footage,” according to TMZ.
Federal investigators do not find “Miguel” credible, and law enforcement officials make no mention of security footage from the Ambassador, according to the LA Times. The investigation debunks speculations that Mateen shot up the nightclub as some kind of twisted revenge plot.
Other reporters have affirmed the FBI’s findings. Josh Rogin, a columnist for the Washington Post, tweeted Friday, “According to my source, the FBI discovered Omar Mateen had affairs with women but nothing about affairs with men. #Orlando.” Eric Tucker of the Associated Press wrote Friday of all those gay leads evaporating, “officials say the FBI, which has conducted about 500 interviews and is reviewing evidence collected from Mateen’s phone, has not found concrete evidence to corroborate such accounts nearly two weeks into the investigation.”
Those who have made claims are not backing down in the face of zero evidence. “The FBI obviously is trying to cover up their information,” Cord Cedeno, a Pulse regular, told the LA Times. “I can go take a lie detector test. I know for a fact Omar messaged me.”

CNN Anchor Condemns Brexit Result as the Product of ‘Xenophobia’ and ‘White Identity Politics.’ The left is always annoyed when you refuse to commit suicide for their utopian dream

CNN Anchor Condemns Brexit Result as the Product of ‘Xenophobia’ and ‘White Identity Politics’

Earlier Thursday evening, before the official results were in, Amanpour voiced her concerns about the U.K.’s push for national sovereignty.
Image source: CNN/MRCTV
Image source: CNN/MRCTV
“A lot of the Leave movements are led by the hard-right, very, very xenophobic, anti-immigrant, very populist, nationalist, white identity politics — they are the leaders who are pushing this momentum,” she told Anderson Cooper.
As the votes poured it that evening, and it became clear that the British exit, or Brexit, campaign was likely to succeed, Amanpour referenced a scathing “Economist” to support her previous claims.
“This marks a victory for the kind of economic nationalism, to quote this article here, for the kind of xenophobia, that will imperil the liberal world order that has guaranteed Western prosperity and stability since World War II,” she said.
U.K. Independence Party leader, Nigel Farage, who also headed the Leave movement, said last year that immigration and tightening borders would be the “defining issue” of the Brexit referendum.
After the results were announced, Amanpour called Farage out by name, dubbing him the “anti-immigrant, xenophobic” spokesman for the Brexit victory.
Watch: