Slashdot Mirror
British Court Rejects Donald Trump's Attempt To Block Wind Farm (nytimes.com)
HughPickens.com writes: Sewell Chan reports at the NYT that Britain's highest court has unanimously rejected an attempt by Donald J. Trump to block the construction of a wind farm near his luxury golf resort in northeast Scotland. Trump has vowed to stop further development on the project if the offshore wind farm — 11 turbines, which would be visible from the golf resort 2.2 miles away — goes forward. Trump spokesman George A. Sorial denounced the ruling as "extremely unfortunate for the residents of Aberdeen and anyone who cares about Scotland's economic future" adding that the wind farm will "completely destroy the bucolic Aberdeen Bay and cast a terrible shadow upon the future of tourism for the area. History will judge those involved unfavorably, and the outcome demonstrates the foolish, small-minded and parochial mentality which dominates the current Scottish government's dangerous experiment with wind energy."
Nicola Sturgeon, first minister of Scotland, withdrew Trump's status as a business ambassador to Scotland last week after Trump called for Muslims to be barred from entering the United States. Robert Gordon University in Aberdeen has stripped Mr. Trump of an honorary degree it awarded him in 2010. Trump's mother was born in Scotland and moved to the United States in the 1930s. " I think I do feel Scottish," said Trump at one time.
Nicola Sturgeon, first minister of Scotland, withdrew Trump's status as a business ambassador to Scotland last week after Trump called for Muslims to be barred from entering the United States. Robert Gordon University in Aberdeen has stripped Mr. Trump of an honorary degree it awarded him in 2010. Trump's mother was born in Scotland and moved to the United States in the 1930s. " I think I do feel Scottish," said Trump at one time.
I think if history judges the presence of this wind farm unfavorably, they can, you know, just tear it down. It seems much easier to undo the damage of a wind farm than it does, say, a coal plant.
It doesn't hurt to be nice.
Robert Gordon University in Aberdeen has stripped Mr. Trump of an honorary degree it awarded him in 2010
You kind of have to question why they awarded it in the first place.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Wind Farm? Not Off My Back Porch
But another obstacle is a political heavyweight with a famous name, a local Cape Cod address and hardline opposition to the project.
U.S. Sen. Edward Kennedy's primary residence is in Hyannisport, Mass., on the Kennedy family compound. It's one of the closest landfalls -- about 6 miles -- from the proposed site of the 440-feet turbines, which would be visible from his house as well as other surrounding coastlines.
In all fairness, Kennedy's aides were probably afraid he'd try to drive over to the windmills out at sea.
Giant windmills constantly turning just makes scenery more awesome.
N4st0r, trixx0r h0bb1tz0rz! Th3y st0l3 0ur pr3c10uzz!
It seems like you are under the illusion that Trump is something other than a catchphrase spouting blowhard racist 1%er who doesn't give a shit about anyone or anything but Trump. Renewable energy is important, Trumps view from his golf course isn't.
Look I'll grant you that every media outlet has a narrative whether they are trying to or not (hint though: the left's isn't the only one).
But seriously, with Trump, what is there to filter? Where is the missing narrative of the time he proposed a policy that made any goddamn sense whatsoever (another hint: yelling at somebody you don't like is not a policy)? I mean, there are people with whom I strongly disagree on how implement solutions (i.e. Cheney: I hate you but you are a clever sumbitch), and then there are complete lunatics brimming with extreme personality disorders proposing things that make a bridge to the moon sound sane.
Please tell me, what did I miss? I would honestly like to know what actual action Trump has proposed that you (or anybody) thought was appropriate, feasible and constitutional?
"free" stuff
You say it like it's cigarettes and beer. It's fucking health care and financial assistance programs for people (you know, humans like you and I), and the transition of some of our tax burden to the mega corporations that currently pay jack shit. Disagree with the programs if you want, but don't be the disingenuous prick who reduces the whole thing to your idiot fiction of a black Friday mob of welfare mothers.
Why not temporarily ban white loners in their 20's from owning guns because most of the time it's one of them that are shooting up churches, schools, and theaters?
Banning all Muslims is not a common sense solution because your chances of getting killed by a Muslim in the US is virtually nil. It's not like people aren't getting killed on a daily basis, but the causes are much more mundane than terrorism.
The idea of banning all Muslims is a reaction to an irrational fear.
The news in my country did a segment on wind farms and revealed they were extremely loud, which can't be healthy.
You're right, watching non-credible news stories is extremely unhealthy.
If you ever see a wind farm, go in for a closer look and listen, they are less noisy than your average car and we seem to accept those every-fucking-where on earth...
One thing I *haven't* seen is a rational explanation of why a temporary ban on Muslim immigration isn't a common-sense response to an immediate problem. It's not unconstitutional, it's no less against "American Principles" than going to war on false premises, ordering the death of a citizen, or secret lists and laws. It's also fairly easy to implement - think it through a few minutes and you'll see that detection is relatively straightforward(**).
Because it is
A) impossible to implement
B) Alienates good Muslims
C) drives moderate to borderline Muslims to the other side.
D) And most importantly UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
YES it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. It violates both the 1st and the 14th amendment, you know discriminating against someone based on their religion and making laws favoring one religion over the other...
But you are not really looking for a rational aurgiment against it so much as just trying to attack perople.
When you cant win, ad hominem.