At least (one of the) fridges got cleaned out. I'm pretty sure that if this hadn't happened, in 30 years time, my kids when dealing with the last of their parent's deceased estate would have have been throwing out egg whites in a plastic freezer bag from 2012.
Update: power's back. Yay. (And ancient frozen egg whites collected in the rubbish today.)
Graham Readfearn in The Guardian notes:
The Bureau of Meteorology has been checking the rainfall data from the floods in south-east Queensland, revealing a string of broken records and a stunning amount of rain.
In the six days from 23 to 28 February, at least 33 places recorded more than one metre of rain, including an astonishing 1.77 metres falling at Mount Glorious, just east of Wivenhoe Dam that helps reduce flooding in the city.
Parts of south-east Queensland and north-east New South Wales had at least 2.5 times their average rainfall for the month, with some areas getting five times the average.
In Brisbane, 792.8mm fell into the city rain gauge over the six days to 9am on 28 February, which is above the previous six-day record of 655.8mm set in January 1974.
For the first time ever, the city had three consecutive days when more than 200mm fell. Before last month, there had only been eight previous days when the city had seen more than 200mm in one day.
The BoM national manager of climate services, Dr Karl Braganza, said this meant the city had received almost 80% of its annual average rainfall in only six days.
In northern New South Wales, several places in the northern rivers region had daily totals above 500mm up to 9am on 28 February.
Braganza said preliminary analysis of rainfall in Lismore, which is currently inundated, suggested more rain had fallen in the town than the previous record in March 2017 when the remnants of Tropical Cyclone Debbie passed through.
As I've been noting for years - climate change and its effect on rain and floods was the massively disruptive and costly effect that was not discussed enough in early talk about climate change, and just imagine how much worse it may get with another .5 to 1 degree temperature rise.
It seems the estimate for the repair time for power to houses in my neighbourhood has stretched out to Friday! I know this happened to other houses in my area in the 2011 floods (5 to 7 days with no power), but my particular neighbour only lost it for one day. Hence we were not particularly worried when it first went off yesterday morning.
Now, a friend has lent us a generator. Noisy, smelly things they are. But I think the idea is to run them for a couple of hours to get the fridge cold, then turn it off for an hour and don't open the fridge. We have eskys and plenty of ice too. And a gas stove (yah).
Speaking of gas stoves, I know they are getting so much bad PR for their health effects now, but I'll put on my populist "it didn't affect me, so it can't be so bad" hat now and mention that I grew up in a house with town gas and therefore a gas stove top and oven, in a rather small three bedroom house in which I sometimes shared with older brothers who would smoke in bed. (!) I have now lived in a house for nearly 20 years with a gas stove top from bottle gas.
No one in my family (6 siblings, and parents) ever suffered asthma or any lung disease*. Neither of my kids (now adults) suffered asthma. Same with allergies to anything (which I mention because of asthma's connection to allergy.)
Is it because I live in a warm climate, where kitchen windows are nearly always open during cooking? But my life experience is not consistent with "gas is really bad for health".
Anyway, back to the floods. This report concentrated mostly on suburbs on my side of town, so I'll put it here.
The estimate of the number of houses affected seems to be about 15,000 to 20,000.
But the Lismore flood is more remarkable - highest known historical flood exceeded by 2m! I mean, that's really incredible.
* Whoops - I forgot that I had included both parents in that explanation, but my father did die of lung cancer. However, he was a life long smoker who gave up only a few years before the cancer was diagnosed. All of my brothers eventually gave up smoking - I think by their 40's at the latest.
By the way, Morrison did turn up in Brisbane yesterday afternoon, and did an underwhelming TV appearance. I think everyone seeing it probably thought "you're only here because of Hawaii." Amusingly, I didn't see his visit even covered on the evening news, which I'm sure must have irritated his minders a lot.
I'm sick of having to constantly delete Graeme Bird's anti-Semitic conspiracy comments, which are at full blown fever level due to the situation in Ukraine.
So all comments are going into moderation for now.
I thought Helen Dale, self confessed Ukraine expert, would have some bad take related to the war there.
She didn't disappoint:
 |
Yeah, a real crisis of masculinity (and damning evidence that the entire US military is just emasculated weaklings now) on display there.
Why are libertarian types so obsessed with masculinity? Even queer ones like Dale?
Beyond the pathetic culture war take, she seems to also be in on the "let's have my cake and eat it too" camp - juggling "don't get into wars you can't win" with "the West is just so weak now" in her vacuous head.
How depraved is this, from supposed Catholic Currency Lad:
A revanchist pseudo-Czar only gets one Joe Biden in a lifetime and Vladimir Putin has had his. The two men are equals, morally, but Putin has an edge – only measurable by micrometer, granted – for sincerity. I don’t believe the United States can survive as a recognisable iteration of itself if Biden remains in office till January, 2024. Compare this situation to, say, 1982. Had Ronald Reagan become incapacitated in that year, George H.W. Bush was ready to step in.
In the next paragraph, he says that there is no point in committing Western troops to the battle, as there is no "serious prospect of success".
I'm not sure how many on the wingnut Right actually agree with the extremes of the Tucker Carlson line, which is to effectively advocate the West doing nothing at all - not even sanctions - against Russia and Putin. (He declared weeks ago he was "on Russia's side", and is telling his fans to be very, very upset when sanctions lead to more expensive petrol. A real American patriot.)
I mean, we all know many of them admire Putin for culture war reasons, but I still think the majority know it's not a good look to actually shrug your shoulders (or make clear your support) for unprovoked military excursions of this kind.
So I think the more common line is to not offer an endorsement of the invasion per se (Morrow, Connolly, the execrable Brendan O'Neill) but to nonetheless run the line "ha, the West is so weak, decadent and absorbed in identity politics it was like an invitation to Putin", while simultaneously being a supporter of Trump and his America First isolationism.
They want the West (or Europe alone, who knows?) to be both "strong" and sabre rattling, while simultaneously always complaining about how bad the neo cons were for getting involved in unnecessary wars that ultimately failed. Here's the motormouth Brendan O'Neill today, for example:
Weak Western leaders like Joe Biden pose as the saviours of the Ukrainian people while making it clear that they won’t take any firm action to actually defend Ukraine. Putin is picking up on this incoherence, and exploiting it, says Brendan O’Neill
Here he is in 2008:
Military interventionists, both of the "neocon" and "humanitarian" variety, never learn. Over the past 10 to 15 years, not a single one of their interventions has delivered democracy to a tyrant-hit hotspot, or liberated a people from bondage. Instead they have inflamed and intensified conflict and led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. And yet, blinded by the narcissistic and deluded belief that they have the power to free people from tyranny, both left-leaning and rightwing interventionists continue to call for more "wars of liberation", for one more chance to prove that their bombs and bloodshed really can spread freedom around the globe.
This is what decades of culture warring does to the brain - it doesn't matter if your political "enemy" actually agrees with you on what to do to a present problem - you just shred consistency and strawman your way into "it's all your fault, always."
PS - another example that is irritating to watch - the praising of Trump for telling Merkel she shouldn't be dealing commercially with the Russians, while ignoring the fact that Trump spent years trying to get a hotel in Moscow, and lied about still actively trying to do so during his first Presidential campaign.
Fox News and the conservative set like Gray "there's always a way to blame liberals" Connolly (and gormless James Morrow) have excitedly been reminding people of the clip of Trump complaining at the NATO summit in 2018 that Germany shouldn't have gone with Nord Stream 2 because it would become too reliant on Russia, as if this shows some remarkable Trumpian prescience.
But, for once, Trump's concern wasn't some completely new (and crackpot) idea. (Although it may well have had more pure commercial self interest at heart than he predecessors had.) Here's the start of an opinion piece in Foreign Policy in 2018 defending the pipeline:
“A number of other EU states are getting pretty vocal about the fact that the implications are much bigger than just Russia-Germany,” John B. Emerson, the U.S. ambassador to Germany, told POLITICO in Berlin, stressing political divisions on the project both within Germany and the broader European Union. “We continue to push our concerns about Nord Stream both at the EU level and with Germany.”
The Obama administration’s attempt to influence the debate seems to annoy Berlin.
“Some things the Europeans need to decide for themselves,” Peter Wittig, the German ambassador to the U.S., told reporters last month in Washington, noting that the Americans have “taken up some of the fears of other European countries.”
So congratulations, Conservatives, your orange oaf had one legitimate concern that wasn't entirely a fantasy of his own - but it was still irresponsible to threaten to walk away from NATO over it. (Which, if I recall correctly, he did in private, if not in public.) That threat in fact clearly shows why Putin wanted him as President. The Trump election and American culture war is still paying dividends for Putin, if national unity and resolve matter in foreign relations.
I mean, honest to God, we have never seen anything like this in my lifetime - the poisonous stream of continuous propaganda of a major American "news" operation so determined to blame and vilify at every opportunity a sitting US President and his party that it will blame and undermine him for the patently unwarranted military aggression of a nasty dictator like Putin.
While you can never expect complete political unity in terms of American use of military power, this isn't even a case of it being used, or threatened!
I'm just flabbergasted that it seems to be of no concern to those who own Fox News that their top rated "star" is literally repeated on Russian TV as a propagandist on Putin's side.
Now, you might say that it doesn't matter what Russian citizens think, it's not as if they have influence on Putin anyway. But it surely encourages Putin himself - he knows there is an American company so willing to make money by pandering to his side of the culture war that it will propagandise for him and for the return of the President who literally wanted to walk out of NATO completely.
In short, Fox News works against the security interests of America and Europe and deserves to be shut down. An internment camp is the minimum they should endure. Either that or permanent residence in Russia.
Update: add this Christofascist to the permanent holiday in Russia list as well.
The Canadian government began lifting a freeze on more than 200 bank accounts linked to recent protests in the country, officials said on Tuesday.
As many as 210 accounts holding nearly $8 million collectively were frozen under authorization from the nation's Emergencies Act, which was invoked in an effort to quell protests against COVID-19 restrictions, Canadian Assistant Deputy Minister of Finance Isabelle Jacques told a parliamentary committee, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) reported...
Some conservative members of Parliament have said constituents reported that holds were placed on their accounts after they donated to the protests, according to the CBC.
But the RCMP said it only provided banks with the names of convoy organizers and the owners of trucks who had remained in the protest zone in Canada's capital city of Ottawa, the CBC reported.
According to the CBC, Jacques told the parliamentary committee that the financial measures in the Emergency Act were designed to put financial pressure on protesters to go home. She said it was unlikely people who donated small amounts to the protests would be captured in the freezing of bank accounts, but not impossible.
"It's not impossible in view of the order, but in view of the exchange of information and the focused approach that was taken to stop the illegal funding of these activities, it would appear to be unlikely that this occurred, but not impossible," she told the committee, the CBC reported
As far as I know, there was one claim by a conservative politician that a "single mom" had her account frozen over a $50 donation - but no actual proof that this was true. The politician refused to supply her name, and (as far as I can tell) offered no proof.
It would not be at all surprising if it was a lie from a wingnut.
Update:
All use of the Emergency Law is over:
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is revoking the use of the Emergencies Act, the powerful legislative tool that was deployed in response to protests and blockades that erupted in Ottawa and at border crossings over recent weeks.
"The situation is no longer an emergency," Trudeau told a news conference.
"We are confident that existing laws and bylaws are now sufficient to keep people safe."
The Governor General signed off on the revocation on Wednesday afternoon, which formally ended the state of emergency.
Wingnuts will have to find something else to hyperventilate about.
I'm talking about the Ben Roberts-Smith defamation trial, and imagining the sort of discussions that might be being had between his barristers and him during breaks.
Because, really, it's impossible to believe they would not be wanting to say to any other normal client "this is a disaster, you need to cut your losses now". Instead, what are they saying?
