Do you have questions about the Passion Play in Oberammergau? We hope, you will find all the answers to your questions here.
When will the Passion Play take place?
The Passion Play takes place from 16th May to 4th October 2020 (A total of 103 performances in the indicated time period). Mondays and Wednesdays are free, i.e. there are no performances on those days.
Is the Passion Play available in other languages?
The shows will be exclusively in German.
You can buy text books in various languages with a translation of the text on the day of the performance.
When can I buy the text book and which languages are available?
You will be able to buy the text book in 2020. The text book will be available in German, English and potentially in other languages.
Will there be an introduction?
There will be a daily 45-minute introduction to the Passion Play in German and English. Learn interesting facts and background information about the current Passion Play and its almost 400-year history from local participants. The planned starting times and the exact prices are not fixed yet. The tickets can be purchased on site at the office, Dorfstr. 3.
Where can I find a theatre layout plan?
When and how can I get information on the ticket pre-sales?
I am registered online, will I receive tickets?
Your registration is non-binding; we use it as a means of orientation and to collect the data. Your data will be entered into our address book so that we can inform you in time on the start of the sales via newsletter or mailing circular.
When can I buy individual tickets?
starting from March 6th, 2019.
After we received the full amount of your payment the booked tickets will be sent by mail to the customer's specified billing address. Please note, these are the original tickets, so please keep them easily found until the date of the event.
For pupils, students (up to 26 years of age) and people with disabilities (from 70% disability) there is a quota of tickets on which they receive a reduction of 30%. Excluded from the reduction are tickets in price category 1. If the contingent is exhausted, unfortunately no reduction can be granted on tickets at the full price.
When and where can I buy arrangements?
What are the prices for the arrangements/package deals?
Where can I find a list of the qualified traveling agencies where I can book arrangements?
Can I choose my hotel/guest house/holiday home?
Yes, you can choose your preferred hotel or guest house/holiday home if it is included in the arrangement.
I wish to stay in a specific hotel/guest house/holiday home. Is my requested accommodation facility included in the arrangement?
What can I do if my preferred hotel is not included in the arrangement?
https://www.ammergauer-alpen.de/en or at: +49 8822 922740.
Individual tickets will be available starting from March 6th, 2019.
I wish to stay overnight in (the region around) Oberammergau, but I wish to stay longer than one or two nights.
Which options will there be for the 3-course-meal?
There will be the following options: Meat, Fish, Vegetarian.
When do I receive my tickets and travel documents?
Please note, If you can't find your documents it's always worth checking your Spam, Junk or Trash folders first.
The travel documents we will be sending you by email must be printed out completly and must be provided to the supplier of the services. This email includes your accommodation voucher, ticket voucher and all the other services booked in your arrangement.
Please note: Your original entry tickets will be given to you on your day of arrival at the check-in desk of your choosen hotel. Please give the corresponding voucher to the receptionist.
Shall I take out a ticket insurance?
We recommend that you take out a ticket insurance.
Is there a ticket redemption protection?
What services does the ticket redemption protection include?
In case of non-arrival of the travel/non-use of the rental object: Reimbursement of the contractually owed cancellation costs if an insured event has occurred. Non-deductible!
How do I get to Oberammergau?
You can find informationen about arrival and departure here.
How does the admittance to the Passion Play area work?
An event area with admission checks is set up in front of the Passion Play Theatre. Please allow sufficient time (at least 1 hour before the start of the performance).
Are there any admission checks?
Before you enter the Passion Play Theatre area there will be admission controls. Bag and body checks may be carried out as part of the admission checks. These are to be tolerated to an appropriate extent. Admission into the theatre is only permitted of a valid ticket. The ticket must be shown at the entrance of the theatre. Admission checks will take place.
Please inform yourself before your visit about possible changes to the admission times at www.passionsspiele-oberammergau.de/en.
Do I need an identity card to my personalized ticket?
Admission is only permitted upon presentation of a valid ticket for the performance day. The name of the visitor must be entered on the back of the ticket. At the request of the admission staff, the identity card must be presented in order to check whether the person entered on the ticket is the same as the ticket holder entering the theatre. For safety reasons, the Passionsspiele Oberammergau Vertriebs GmbH & Co. KG must have all the names of the visitors.
During the performance, the ticket must be carried at all times and presented on request.
Commercial sale of the ticket is not permitted.
Do I need to proof the entitlement of ticket reduction?
All reduced tickets must be accompanied by proof of entitlement to the reduction. The entitlement must exist on the day of the performance. Reductions in the case of reduced fees for pupils, students and persons with disabilities must be proven at the time of admission with a valid student card, student identity card or severely disabled person's identity card as well as the identity card at the time of admission. If the proof cannot be provided, the difference to the respective fee must be paid without reduction before admission.
When starts the admission to the Passion Play Theatre?
Admission to the Passion Play Theatre takes place approx. 30 minutes before the start of the performance. The seat must be taken 15 minutes before the beginning of the performance.
Please note: Admission is not possible after the start of the performance.
We recommend you to count in at least 1 hour for identity checks.
What do I do if I lost my ticket?
In case of ticket loss you will receive a duplicate of your ticket at the office (Dorfstraße 3) or via phone +49 (0)8822 835 93 30 for a fee with corresponding proof.
How shall I be dressed?
Please note that the Passion Play Theatre is an openair stage with roofed seats. Therefore, please wear seasonal comfortable and weather-depending clothing. Wardrobe can be left in a baggage drop-off point on site. Blankets will be provided for you on site.
Which objects are permitted in the theatre?
Only resealable beverage bottles up to 0,5 litre and mini umbrellas may be taken into the theatre. Prohibited objects can be deposited in a baggage drop-off point on site.
During performances any electronic devices (e.g. mobile phone, smartphone, tablet) must be set up in such a way that they do not interfere with the performance by sound, vibration or light signals (airplane mode).
As a disabled person, may I bring a support?
Please note that admission is only possible for persons with a valid ticket. Accompanying persons should contact the office in advance.
Are sound, film, photo and video recordings permitted?
Sound, film, photo and video recordings of any kind are prohibited at the venue for copyright reasons. Recording equipment and cameras of any kind brought along must be returned to the baggage drop-off points for storage for a fee.
Smoking is forbidden in the theatre but it is okay at the event area.
Animals are prohibited in the Passion Play Theatre. In particular, dogs must not be taken along.
Are drinks and snacks available during the break?
If you booked an arrangement, a 3-course-menu is included and a table is waiting for you. For ticket only guests: Please make an early reservation for a table. Please consider the waiting times at the entrances and exits of the theatre and the security area. You will be able to buy snacks and beverage on site.
Where do I find the house rules?
Further information can be found online in the house rules.
When do church services take place?
At the moment there are no fixed times for the services.
Where do I find the Tourist Information?
Here you can find our visitor information for Ticket Only as PDF download.


text:
Luisita landgrabbers cited as "labor-law compliant" by DOLE
By FLORIDA SIBAYAN
Alyansa ng mga Manggagawang-Bukid sa Asyenda Luisita (AMBALA)
What kind of message is the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) Secretary Rosalinda Baldoz sending to the public in conferring unprecedented distinction to the Luisita Industrial Park – a hub widely-known to be part of the still dispute-ridden and controversial Hacienda Luisita estate?
While it is up to the workers themselves in the Luisita Industrial Park (LIP) to contest the ostentatious designation made by the DOLE in naming the LIP as the very first "Labor Law Compliant Eco-zone" in the country, this does not belie the fact that aggressive land grabbing and brazen human rights violations are continuously being perpetrated by the LIP administration under the Luisita Realty Corporation (LRC).
The LRC is one among the many notorious corporate avatars of the Cojuangco-Aquino family in Hacienda Luisita, where presidential sister Ballsy Aquino-Cruz is director while Pinky Aquino-Abellada and Viel Aquino-Dee sit as top stockholders.
DOLE's conferment may be used to prop up the LRC's pending application before the Philippine Economic Zone Authority's (PEZA) Board to incorporate 260.4 hectares of agricultural land in Barangay Balete, Luisita to the existing Luisita Industrial Park complex. The PEZA granted the LRC a pre-qualification clearance on February 13, 2014, barely a week after the Cojuangco-Aquinos ordered the burning of farmers' homes and the bulldozing of crops within the contested property.
Another Cojuangco-Aquino firm, Tarlac Development Corporation (TADECO) ordered the aggressive attacks against Hacienda Luisita farmers in Balete. Violent eviction of farmers, bulldozing of ready-to-harvest palay crops and fencing off of the 260-hectare area from its tillers continued even after the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) affirmed the agricultural nature of the said property by issuing a Notice of land reform coverage (NOC) on December 17, 2013. The DAR did not lift a finger to stop TADECO's assaults against Luisita farmers.
The headquarters of the 31st company of the 3rd Mechanized Battalion of the Philippine Army was constructed within this 260-hectare area last year with the blessings of the LRC. Soldiers have, since then, been practically deployed to serve in the Cojuangco-Aquino private army, intermitently mobilized to harass and evict farmers from the area. Bulldozers of the Cojuangco-Aquino family which were used to destroy farmers' crops and homes are usually parked right beside the army headquarters.
In successive incidents from September 2013 to March 2014, TADECO was able to evict tillers even without a court order through the deployment of private security guards, local police and fully-armed SWAT teams. The attacks resulted in the death of one of our members, Dennis dela Cruz, several cases of mauling, attempted murder and unlawful arrest, and the filing of harassment suits against hundreds of farmers.
Personnel – thugs – hired by the Cojuangco-Aquino family from the Great Star Security Agency, one of the Luisita Industrial Park's subcontractors, are directly responsible for the violent attacks against farmers in Barangays Balete and Cutcut. Great Star Security Services, Inc. was also declared compliant with General Labor Standards and issued Certificates of Compliance (CoC) yesterday, October 1, in a high-profile ceremony at the LIP compound which was graced by Baldoz herself.
Security guards from the Great Star Security Services Inc. are also involved in the shooting of a group of farmers in disputed farmlands in Barangay Maimpis, San Fernando, Pampanga on July 28, 2014. It seems that violation of human rights is their forte.
The Cojuangco-Aquinos are hell-bent on maintaining control of the Luisita estate and in implementing their grand master plan to convert the sugar plantation into a giant commercial hub, in contempt and complete reversal of the 2012 Supreme Court decision for total land distribution.
Ten years after the Hacienda Luisita Massacre, Luisita farmers are still denied land and justice. President BS Aquino's alter-egos like Baldoz of DOLE and Gil delos Reyes of DAR, act like extensions of this insatiable landlord family in ruthlessly extracting every last drop of blood, sweat and tears from Luisita farmworkers.
FLORIDA SIBAYAN
c/o AMBALA – Unyon ng mga Manggagawa sa Agrikultura
56 K-9 Street, Kamias, Quezon City
Contact Number: +639293201477

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Hello! My name's Novice Sister Goldie Grrr (three R's) and I'm from Kansas City, born and raised! I've been a part of the City of Fountains Sisters since May of 2016, and a Novice Sister since November of 2016.
I hope to work with my sister's to create a community that's open, accepting, and fun for everyone, regardless of gender, sexuality, race, class, or ability.


text:
Carriera
Cresciuto nel settore giovanile dei Carbayones, ha esordito in prima squadra il 13 aprile 2014 in un match di campionato vinto 5-1 contro il .

Statistiche

Presenze e reti nei club
Statistiche aggiornate al 3 dicembre 2021.

Collegamenti esterni

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


Your "Perry for President?!?" cover sent me to the phone to schedule a stress test. The last Texas governor to ascend to the White House left a scar on our great state that will always be a painful reminder of big business's influence on our democratic process. To even suggest that our country might be subjected to the policies of another "man" without conscience is just reckless journalism ["Right Place, Right Time," February 2010].
The only time Rick Perry is a conservative is when he's running for office, and the last time he saw a copy of the Constitution was in high school! Paul Burka's a real talent for sure, but what a waste to see him build up this weasel.
Rick Perry for president? Hell, yes! As president, he could make every state—not just Texas—secede from the Union and create a new Confederacy. He could free us from Socialist Security, Medicare, and those other big-government programs. And he could repeal every amendment except the Second, which is the only one us teabaggers like anyway. Hit it, Rick!
There was a texas monthly cover in recent months that had Mike Leach dressed as a pirate. Within a year Leach was no longer the football coach at Texas Tech and apparently unemployed. May this trend continue and we see Mr. Perry unemployed within a year!
Rick Perry flippantly encourages the notion of secession among his supporters to gain a few political brownie points. This man has the gall to then turn around and entertain pretensions of becoming president of the very union he casually undermines. Perry isn't fit to wipe the behind of even a drummer boy who was in either army of the Civil War. He isn't fit to hold office of any kind. Who in the hell does this ignorant, irresponsible jackass think he is?
Jan Reid's piece about Doug Sahm brought back wonderful memories ["He's About a Mover," February 2010]. As a teenager in the tumultuous sixties, I distinctly remember that great hit "She's About a Mover." To read of Doug Sahm's talent and determination brought tears to my eyes. It's too bad he passed so soon.
I found Nate Blakeslee's article "The Convert" interesting on many levels [February 2010]. As an ob-gyn, I have done thousands of ultrasounds and understand how clearly you can view fetuses early in pregnancy. Whether you have ultrasound guidance or not, the fetus will be moving all around until it dies from the surgical abortion. That is why ultrasounds are avoided, because the patients would be greatly disturbed if they caught a glimpse of the procedure. I have talked to others who have left the "abortion industry," and it is usually because of more than just one inciting event. It is something in their conscience that tells them to leave.
I found far more problems in Christopher Kelly's review of The Blind Side than in the movie itself [Hollywood, TX; "Stop the Blitz"; February 2010]. Kelly pronounces the movie as "among the most naively racist American movies of the past ten years" and uses the rest of his review to support that point. The fact that The Blind Side portrays a heartwarming story about members of a white, do-gooder, Southern family helping a young black man doesn't automatically make it racist.
I, like Kelly, hope to hear more from directors Spike Lee, Sanaa Hamri, and others who portray "complex portraits of race." But there's plenty of room at the table and in the theater for them and for director John Lee Hancock and actress Sandra Bullock as well. We can never have too many authentic and compelling stories.
O ye of little faith, there are innately good people in the world whose agenda transcends color coding. Mr. Kelly's disdain and skepticism of the Tuohy family and their heartfelt quest to help a young man suggests to this reader elitism and, more importantly, racism.
And as for Sandra Bullock, I applaud her entrepreneurial aspirations and accomplishments. The Blind Side is something to be proud of.
Shame on me! Here I thought I was simply watching a movie about helping those less fortunate than ourselves when in actuality I was watching a movie about stereotypes. Doggone movie had me feeling so good that after the show, I immediately went out and put money in the Salvation Army's red bucket (it was Christmastime). Even worse was the fact that I had put in the kind of money that folds and not the kind that clanks. I was so deluded about the facts that at the time I totally forgot that I'm Hispanic and probably (or at least according to Christopher Kelly) more in need than whoever's pockets were being lined by my misguided effort. Regardless, Mr. Kelly, I still think that my effort should be rewarded. Do you have any idea how hard it is to trade food stamps for actual cash?


AWARD WINNER! Best Multi-family Residential Development in BC, Best Low-Rise Development in BC & more (2002). TROPEZ...Arbutus Walk's outstanding residence in upper Kitsilano. Beautiful 4 storey rainscreened CONCRETE building. Beautiful EXTRA LARGE one bedroom + den + flex suite. Big den could be perfect office or kids room. Flex could be fantastic pantry or office space. It's all here ....great floor plan, open gourmet kitchen w/breakfast bar, new hardwood floors,fireplace, balcony. Pretty garden outlook. Pet friendly building. Parking & locker included. Connaught Park, Kitsilano Community Centre, restaurants & cafes just steps away. Short stroll to 4th Ave shopping and Kits Beach plus quick access to downtown & UBC. Call Joseph today for private viewing.


The following information is an update of recent local, state, national, and international legal developments relevant to agriculture.
On September 18, 2018, Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf announced $5 million in grant funding under the Pennsylvania Dairy Investment Program. The grant money will be provided to applicants for technology, products, and best practices research. Funding will also be provided for research on domestic and international marketing and diversifying operation and revenue streams. Lastly, the funds will go to research on transitioning to organic production and value-added dairy production. The purpose of the new funding is to support the dairy industry in modernizing or expanding business to overcome existing challenges and strengthen dairy operations.
On September 18, 2018, the Pennsylvania Milk Marketing Board (Board) approved an order establishing an over-order premium of $0.75 per hundredweight for milk. The order applies to the Class 1 price for milk sold, produced, and processed in Pennsylvania. Milk dealers will be required to show the amount of the over-order premium being paid on their monthly statements to producers and cooperatives. The Board heard testimony from the Pennsylvania Association of Dairy Cooperatives, the Pennsylvania Farm Bureau, the Pennsylvania Grange, and the Progressive Agriculture Organization. The order will be effective October 1, 2018, through March 31, 2019.
On Tuesday, September 18, 2018, Under Secretary of Agriculture for Marketing and Regulatory Programs, Greg Ibach announced that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) will be investing $102.7 million in funding for projects "intended to expand markets for local food production and specialty crops." The funds will be administered by USDA's Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) and are allocated as follows: $72.15M to state departments of agriculture in all 50 states as well as D.C. and five U.S. territories through the Specialty Crop Block Grant Program for specialty crops, $13.35M to 49 producer-to-consumer marketed projects through the Farmer's Market Promotion Program, $13.45M to 44 projects supporting local and regional food businesses through the Local Food Promotion Program, $2.67M to six projects for the domestic maple syrup industry through the Acer Access and Development Program, and $1.1M to nine projects that explore new market opportunities for U.S. food and agriculture products through the Federal State Marketing Improvement Program. For more information on grant recipients, visit the Agricultural Marketing Service's website.
On Tuesday, September 18, 2018, Bayer AG unit Monsanto motioned for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict to strike a $289M jury award from San Francisco's Superior Court of California, as well as moved for a new trial. The jury verdict in question came on August 10, 2018, after plaintiff, Dewayne Johnson, argued that years of exposure to Monsanto's Roundup caused him to be diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma. (Dewayne Johnson v. Monstanto Co., case no. CGC-16-550128). For more information on this case, see the Ag Law Weekly Review from August 16, 2018. In its motion to the court, Monsanto alleges that the scientific evidence in the case "falls far short" of the "sufficient and substantial" evidence requirements in California. Shortly after the trial, Monsanto's Vice President, Scott Partridge, released a statement questioning opposing counsel's conduct, which he says "distorted the facts and used baseless and egregious emotional appeals to inflame the jury." A hearing on the motions has been set for October 10, 2018.
On September 18, 2018, California Governor Jerry Brown signed into law legislation which will permit home kitchen businesses to sell their food products. AB 626 redefines "food facility" to include microenterprise home kitchen operations with no more than $50,000 in gross annual sales. Microenterprise home kitchen operations must not include catering, and the operator must sell directly to consumers and not through any retailer or wholesaler. The law also limits the home business to no more than 30 individual meals per day and no more than 60 meals per week.
On September 20, 2018, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced the completion of an update to its Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program website. The purpose of the update is to improve implementation of the RFS program and to provide greater certainty and clarity to stakeholders. The new information will include data regarding the number of small refinery exemption petitions, the weekly average price of Renewable Identification Numbers (RINs) traded, and the weekly volume of RINs traded. The website updates also include system updates and new interactive features.
On September 18, 2018, the White House released the Presidential Memorandum on the Support for National Biodefense. The Memorandum establishes the Cabinet-level Biodefense Steering Committee which will be led by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. The committee will monitor and coordinate the implementation of the National Biodefense Strategy. The purpose of the new strategy is to improve understanding and response to biological threats, which can include disease and biological attacks. According to a statement by the White House, the strategy will address biological threats that are naturally occurring, deliberate, and accidental.
On September 20, 2018, the Children's Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative (CFBAI) announced a voluntary plan to improve child-directed food advertising. CFBAI's plan is intended to combat childhood obesity and will update food categories for added sugars, sodium, and whole grains. CFBAI intends for food categories to be more transparent and descriptive. Some of the organizations in CFBAI include Burger King Corporation, Campbell Soup Company, The Coca-Cola Company, The Hershey Company, McDonald's USA, and Kellogg Company. CFBAI intends to implement this plan by January 1, 2020, to coincide with new food labeling regulations from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Tiffany Dowell Lashmet, Texas Beef Checkoff Facing Legal Challenge, Texas A&M AgriLife Extension (September 24, 2018).
Dr. Steve Suppan, USDA Reorganization 2.0: Cut Researchers, Cut Research, Institute for Agriculture & Trade Policy (September 17, 2018).


text:
The Dark Horse Years 1976-1992 es una caja recopilatoria del músico británico George Harrison, publicada por Dark Horse Records en febrero de 2004. La caja incluye los cinco álbumes de estudio que Harrison grabó tras fundar su propia compañía discográfica, Dark Horse Records, desde Thirty Three & 1/3 hasta Cloud Nine, además del álbum en directo Live in Japan remasterizado con sonido SACD.

Trasfondo
El material que Harrison grabó en Dark Horse Records había sido reeditado inicialmente en CD en 1991, pero pocos años después dejó de manufacturarse. En 2000, Harrison mostró interés por reeditar su catálogo musical por completo, pero solo llegó a remasterizar y reeditar All Things Must Pass antes de caer enfermo y fallecer a causa de un cáncer en noviembre de 2001.

Tras su fallecimiento, su viuda Olivia y su hijo Dhani pospusieron los planes de Harrison para finalizar Brainwashed, su último trabajo de estudio, y para organizar Concert for George, un concierto homenaje a su carrera. Tras ambos proyectos, la familia de Harrison programó la remasterización de su catálogo musical en Dark Horse Records, seguido dos años después por la reedición de Living in the Material World, la publicación de The Traveling Wilburys Collection en 2007 y el estreno de George Harrison: Living in the Material World, un documental de Martin Scorsese, en 2011.

Contenido
A pesar del título, la caja recopilatoria no incluyó todo el material que Harrison grabó con Dark Horse Records. El álbum Cloud Nine no incluyó como tema extra «Lay His Head», una canción publicada como cara B del sencillo «Got My Mind Set on You». Además, «Cockamamie Business» y «Poor Little Girl», dos temas publicados originalmente en el recopilatorio Best of Dark Horse 1976-1989, tampoco fueron incluidos. La caja también omite «Cheer Down», una canción que Harrison grabó para la banda sonora de Lethal Weapon 2, aunque una versión en directo aparece en Live in Japan. Además, tampoco se incluye la mayoría de las canciones que Harrison grabó para la versión original de Somewhere in England, rechazada por Warner Bros. Records, aunque el álbum sí incluye el diseño de portada original. El DVD tampoco incluye los videos de «Blow Away» y «All Those Years Ago».

Con motivo de su publicación, BBC Radio 2 nombró la caja recopilatoria como «álbum de la semana» y promocionó el lanzamiento con la canción «This Is Love», del álbum Cloud Nine.

Listado de canciones
Todas las canciones compuestas por George Harrison excepto donde se anota.

Referencias

Enlaces externos
 The Dark Horse Years Sitio oficial de la publicación The Dark Horse Years 1976-1992

Álbumes recopilatorios de George Harrison
Álbumes recopilatorios de 2004
Álbumes en inglés


text:
The Alt-Right Dictionary: 7 terms you need to know to understand Trump's most hateful supporters
Adele M. Stan AlterNet
Since Republican presidential nominee Donald J. Trump went public with his embrace of the so-called "alternative right"—which happened when he hired alt-right promoter Stephen K. Bannon as his campaign chief—the self-styled renegade offshoot of cultural conservatism is getting a whole lot of attention.
What's so renegade about the alt-right? It puts on bold display the racism and misogyny that has always fueled the so-called conservative movement, but which has typically been rationalized through themes involving the word "freedom," employed to justify a right to discriminate, whether against members of races or creeds other than your own, or by gender, sexual orientation or gender identity. The alt-right hordes on Twitter and other internet haunts dispense with the obfuscation, declaring the superiority of white people and demonstrating contempt for blacks and Jews, hating on women, and preposterously whining that they are the targets of a "white genocide."
The alt-right encompasses a range of right-wing hate groups and ideologies, from the Neo-Nazi Daily Stormer crowd to the more buttoned-down wanna-be-wonks at the National Policy Institute. As Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton prepared to deliver a speech Thursday devoted to Trump's exploitation of the alt-right, the movement's denizens erupted in a stream of vitriol and fevered attempts to define their own movement before Clinton's definition took hold.
Like all political movements, the alt-right has its own lexicon and memes, as well as its own interpretation of news events. Below you'll find a brief list of terms you may use as a guide if you care to visit the swamps in which adherents to this 21st-century version of white supremacist ideology reside.
1. Alt-right. As Julie Andrews once sang before her character fled the Nazis: "Let's start at the very beginning." The term "alt-right" is shorthand for "alternative right." Just as, say, alt folk musicians envisioned themselves as a more modern, hipper iteration of the Dylan-era folk music that preceded them (which really wasn't folk music at all, but I digress), alt-righties perceive their movement to be the tweaked-for-millennial-consumption adaptation of the ideologies professed by such uncool paleoconservatives as Cranky Uncle Pat Buchanan and Klanboy David Duke.
There are, however, disagreements among alt-righties on the scope of their hatred. The self-parodying Breitbart News editor Milo Yiannopoulos, for example, wears his gay identity as a badge, even as he spews vitriol against Muslims and blacks. Others who wear the alt-right label, such as the Daily Stormer's Andrew Anglin, spurn Yiannopoulos as a "degenerate." Yiannopoulos' latest badge of courage is being banned by Twitter for his racist dogging of actor/comedian Leslie Jones, a star of the all-female reboot of Ghostbusters. (Since then, Jones' personal accounts have been hacked in a brutal cyberattack.)
One form of hatred that appears to unite alt-righties? Misogyny. Man, do they hate feminists! Yiannopoulos even did a lecture tour titled, "Feminism is cancer."
Gearing up a Twitter offensive in advance of Hillary Clinton's speech in Reno about the alt-right, #altright members on Twitter set out to define their own movement.
"#AltRight means you don't think a room full of white males is a problem to be fixed," wrote @hateful_heritic.
"#AltRightMeans it's time to oppose HUD/Section8 housing moving blacks into the suburbs. Save our White neighborhoods", added@_AltRight_, with an accompanying photo of a lone white man in a swimming pool, surrounded by dark-skinned people.
Some posted Richard B. Spencer's white-identity video, "Who are we?" (Money quote: "I'm a Roman, a Briton, a Dane…")
For giggles, there's also this parody of Billy Joel's "We Didn't Start the Fire," by American Renaissance, another alt-right racist group.
2. Cuck. Short for "cuckservative," a derogatory term used to describe self-described conservatives whom alt-righties deem to have rolled over when establishment Republicans demanded they toe the party line, or who have succumbed to the alt-right view of "political correctness," which basically means the rejection of racist, misogynist or anti-gay epithets. The roots of "cuck" are in the patriarchal word cuckold, a man whose wife has sex with another man. Sometimes in modern usage, it means a man who likes to watch his female partner have sex with another man.
Cuck can be a noun or a verb, replete with schoolboy giggles over its rhyming with f**k. Alt-righties often describe themselves as "uncucked," which seems a perverse permutation of former presidential candidate Shirley Chisholm's description of herself as "unbought and unbossed." (Chisholm was the first black candidate to run for the presidential nomination of one of the two major political parties, and one of the first women to do so.*) In defense of the term, Milo Yiannopoulos (who is British) wrote a post on Breitbart News titled, "'Cuckservative' Is a Gloriously Effective Insult That Should Not Be Slurred, Demonised, or Ridiculed."
3. Glorious. To alt-righties, this appears to be the superlative of adjectives, applied to many things other than the term cuckservative, harkening back to the rhetoric of the Third Reich. (In the book Catastrophe and Meaning: The Holocaust and the Twentieth Century, authors Moishe Postone and Eric L. Santner trace the evolution of the term "glory" from the World War I appellation "fields of glory" to its use by Nazis in describing the mass murder of Jews in World War II.)
The Daily Stormer website routinely refers to Trump as "Our Glorious Leader," as in the post, "Our Glorious Leader Calls for a Ban on All Moslems," and "Glorious Leader Donald Trump Refuses to Denounce Daily Stormer Troll Army," a reference to the antisemitic trolling of GQ writer Julia Ioffe after she wrote an article on Trump's wife, Melania. In an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer, Trump declined to renounce the trolling, which included death threats.
Twitter user @_AltRight_ insists that Trump's #DeportationForce will be "glorious." In fact, there's a whole lotta "glorious" ugliness in her Twitter feed.
4. Pepe. Pepe the Frog was once the generic mascot of the anonymous message-board site 4chan, one of the internet hollows where the alt-right first congregated. The alt-right glommed on to it, creating all manner of memes depicting it, even in the uniform of an SS officer and most famously as the face of Donald Trump. Vice's Roisin Kiebard explains it all.
If you've seen this meme, you've met the alt-right.
As alt-righties geared up for Clinton's speech about Trump's alliance with the alt-right, a gif appeared in the #altright feed featuring the image of a white hand feeding Pepe-shaped bullets into the magazine clip of an assault rifle.
5. Rare Pepe. According to the Daily Beast's indispensable Olivia Nuzzi, the term "rare Pepe" means "an ironic categorization for certain versions of the meme: Pepe, his eyes red and irises swastika-shaped, against a trippy rainbow backdrop." The irony apparently stems from 4chan's attempts to purge Pepe once the frog became an alt-right racist.
6. Normie. In alt-right-speak, this means anybody who's not part of the alt-right. Alternatively, it means anyone who's not part of 4chan/Reddit culture.
7. White genocide. A common theme in alt-right tweets and rants, in which the admission of non-white immigrants to the U.S. or Europe is characterized as the destruction of the white race. Other forms of so-called "white genocide" include racial mixing and the adoption of non-white babies by white people. Such adoptive parents are deemed to be "race traitors."


text:
Category: Regulations
How to Keep the US Natural Gas Boon Going
America is becoming a major liquefied natural gas exporter. According to the latest statistics, the U.S. liquefied natural gas exports quadrupled from 0.5 billion cubic feet of gas per day in 2016 to 1.94 billion in 2017.
Of U.S. liquefied natural gas exports last year, 53 percent went to Mexico, South Korea, and China, with the largest share, 20 percent, going to Mexico.
A growing share of American liquefied natural gas exports is headed to Europe, too. Since the arrival of the first U.S. liquefied natural gas carrier in the Portuguese port of Sines in April 2016, the European Union has increased its imports of America's liquefied natural gas from 0 to 2.8 billion cubic meters. NATO members, particularly Poland and Lithuania, have built new liquefied natural gas import terminals.
Given that the global liquefied natural gas market has become increasingly fluid and competitive, the value of U.S. liquefied natural gas exports is expected to be almost $5 billion this year. With plentiful reserves and innovative technologies that have unleashed an energy renaissance, the United States is the world's leading natural gas producer and exporter and has a vital interest in protecting and expanding world energy trade.
In a welcome move at their July meeting in Washington, President Donald Trump and European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker agreed to strengthen U.S.-EU strategic cooperation on energy trade, through which the EU would import more U.S. liquefied natural gas to diversify its energy supply and make it more secure.
However, U.S. law still requires prior regulatory approval for liquefied natural gas exports and constrains the timely expansion of much-needed energy infrastructure. These restrictions need to be addressed sooner rather than later so that energy companies can capitalize even further on America's liquefied natural gas abundance and Europe's energy demands.
The U.S. needs to make sure it does not get in its own way by keeping outdated and onerous restrictions. Regrettably, more than a dozen export facilities are awaiting permit approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. In fact, it has been three years since the commission last approved a new liquefied natural gas export terminal.
Heritage Foundation energy policy expert Nick Loris made the case for reformsuccinctly in a recent paper:
[A] burdensome environmental review process and an unnecessary public interest determination made by the Department of Energy slows the process of shipping [liquefied natural gas] to the desired destination. Both administrative and legislative reform will stimulate investment in energy in the U.S. and increase supply diversity for America's allies, providing greater choices for consumers and creating a more mobile natural gas market. Further, empowering the states would create different and more efficient options for permitting, reducing the time frame in which [liquefied natural gas] reaches the market.
While strengthening relationships with trading partners around the world, America's liquefied natural gas exports, supported by the timely expansion of much-needed energy infrastructure, would provide an additional boon to the economy and create more jobs.
That means, as The Economist has opined, "a cleaner world and a richer America." The time to act on that is now.
Commentary by Anthony Kim. Originally published at The Daily Signal.
Posted on November 30, 2018 November 30, 2018 Categories Regulations, Trump AdministrationLeave a comment on How to Keep the US Natural Gas Boon Going
Companies blocked from using West Coast ports to export fossil fuels keep seeking workarounds
A year after Washington state denied key permits for a coal-export terminal in the port city of Longview, the Army Corps of Engineers announced it would proceed with its review – essentially ignoring the state's decision.
This dispute pits federal authorities against local and state governments. It's also part of a larger and long-running battle over fossil fuel shipments to foreign countries that stretches up the entire American West Coast.
We are sociologists who have studied how people respond to news about plans for big energy facilities in their communities. With President Donald Trump pushing hard for more fossil fuel production and exports, we believe it could get significantly harder for local communities to have a say in these important decisions.
Access to Asia
Oil and gas exports have dramatically increased nationwide over the past decade, ever since technological advances turned the U.S. from a top importer of these fuels to a growing exporter.
Energy companies have sought more access to West Coast ports for decades for routes to Asia and Australia. The region's deepwater ports, railroad and pipeline networks, and proximity to some of the nation's most productive oil, gas and coal fields make it particularly attractive for export terminals.
In some cases, exporting through the West Coast is the only economically viable option, as longer overland transportation routes would be too costly. Moreover, shorter trips by sea to reach China and other growing Asian markets cut costs.
Yet Western ports do not export as much crude oil as other American coastal areas.
https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/9pNWU/2/
In addition, there are no facilities yet in California, Oregon or Washington for exporting liquefied natural gas, a form of the fuel that has been cooled to very low temperatures for easier storage and shipping.
This is not for lack of trying. All the numerous export terminals energy companies have proposed for liquefied natural gas up and down the West Coast have faced significant public opposition that made securing permits hard if not impossible.
https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/S6ao6/3/
Likewise, relatively small volumes of coal are being shipped abroad from ports on the West Coast despite efforts to build new export terminals there.
https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/h1P45/2/
Energy dominance
With his "energy dominance" policy, Trump has emphasized expanding production and export of fossil fuels and weakening environmental regulations – including those that address climate change.
His administration is siding with energy companies and landlocked states like Wyoming and Colorado angling to ship coal, oil and natural gas mined and drilled within their borders to lucrative and growing Asian markets.
At the same time, many local and state governments on the West Coast are on board with demands made by environmental activists for renewable energy development and advocates for more local control over development.
Local supporters of fossil fuel exports point to the positive local effects these facilities can have. Labor unions, county governments, business councils and ports frequently argue that bolstering fossil fuel exports would create jobs, entice investment and increase the tax base.
Opponents argue that transporting, storing, handling and shipping fossil fuels – via railroads, pipelines and ships – endangers nearby communities and contributes to climate change.
They point to oil train derailments, the public health perils of increased diesel fumes and coal dust, and pipeline explosions and leaks. They also highlight the climate implications of shipping fossil fuels abroad that may affect the carbon footprints of other countries, where the fuel would be burned.
These people have maintained a virtual blockade against new export facilities so far. But in our study of this issue, we have found it remains unclear if the federal government will overturn or override local and state decisions to deny permits.
https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/2W42P/6/
Public opinion research indicates both support and opposition for fossil fuel export depending on fuel type. Our 2017 national survey showed that about a third of U.S. citizens sampled opposed exporting natural gas, while about half supported it and almost a fifth were undecided. Our forthcoming survey of Washington residents found similar levels of opposition to natural gas exports. We also detected higher rates of disapproval of oil and coal exports, with about half of residents opposing them.
Activists in the Pacific Northwest have established what they call a "thin green line" of resistance against any big new fossil fuel infrastructure. Their protests have contributed to state and local decisions to deny permits, as well as the passage of ordinances and resolutions limiting such development. Cities like Portland, Oregon, have banned these projects altogether.
Tribal governments have actively opposed many of these proposals, too. For example, the Lummi Nation played an essential role in stopping the Gateway Pacific coal terminal proposed for Bellingham, Washington.
Legal fights have ensued. After Washington denied the permit for the Millennium Bulk Terminals coal export proposal, six interior states and several industry groups joined the company in a lawsuit. They allege that the state's decision violated the Constitution's commerce clause, which grants Congress – not states – the power to regulate trade.
In some cases, the courts have determined that local bans are not allowed. In others, companies have simply withdrawn proposals, especially after sustained public protests.
Silencing local voices
The administration is pursuing multiple workarounds for expanding fossil fuel export, including a recent proposal to set up export facilities on retired military bases. Energy companies and energy-producing states are trying to capitalize on the fossil-friendly administration.
For example, senators from Texas, Colorado and Montana have encouraged Trump to use his authority under the North American Free Trade Agreement, or the deal that may replace it, to override Washington state's denial of the coal export permit.
These moves at the federal level appear to be restricting opportunities for public participation in siting decisions, a development we find troubling.
In the case of the Jordan Cove natural gas export project in Oregon, the federal agency with permitting authority over the proposal used a new process for soliciting public comments in 2017. Instead of taking part in a hearing where those attending could hear all comments, members of the public met one-on-one with agency staff and a stenographer.
In previous research, we have shown how public hearings on energy projects are critical to the formation of active community groups, who use these opportunities to connect with like-minded individuals.
While one-on-one meetings may seem more efficient and less prone to conflict, they may also stifle important local debates on these issues. And they could potentially push activists toward more confrontational tactics because they do not feel their voices are adequately heard through official channels.
In addition, some companies have used existing permits and zoning to start handling a different fuel or expand facilities without undergoing environmental review and associated public comment processes.
Despite years of successfully blocking fossil fuel exports from the West Coast, whether the thin green line will hold is far from clear. Its resilience will partly depend on what happens with global fossil fuel markets and the success of export proposals in Canada and Mexico. Its resilience will also depend on how hard the Trump administration is willing to push and how hard the West Coast is willing to push back.
Shawn Olson-Hazboun, Faculty, Graduate Program on the Environment, Evergreen State College and Hilary Boudet, Associate Professor of Sociology, School of Public Policy, Oregon State University
Posted on November 30, 2018 November 30, 2018 Categories RegulationsLeave a comment on Companies blocked from using West Coast ports to export fossil fuels keep seeking workarounds
3 Residents Challenge Climate Change Rules at Delaware's High Court
Delaware regulators have imposed costly and unlawful climate change regulations on industry in violation of legislative directives, according to three citizen activists who took their case to the state's highest court.
But before the Delaware Supreme Court can address the substantive questions raised in the residents' lawsuit, it first must resolve a lower court ruling that "failed to apply the correct legal test for standing," Richard Abbott, their lawyer, said in an interview with The Daily Signal.
The Superior Court of Delaware ruled in June that residents David T. Stevenson, R. Christian Hudson, and John A. Moore did not have legal standing to challenge the state's participation in a regional climate change agreement.
The trial court judge "applied the wrong legal standard," their lawyer told The Daily Signal.
The three men had argued that the agreement's regulatory restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions would raise their electricity bills. But Judge Richard Stokes decided that they failed to demonstrate this would be the case, and therefore did not have standing.
The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, or RGGI, is a multistate agreement that currently includes Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont.
State government officials who have joined the initiative argue that greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide are responsible for dangerous levels of climate change, also known as global warming.
The gases enter the atmosphere during the industrial burning of fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas, and oil. However, a growing number of scientists question theories that link human activity to significant climate change, and instead point to natural forces.
States that are parties to the agreement must impose a "cap and trade" arrangement in which government officials set an upper limit on carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel plants. Companies subject to the caps may trade "allowances," however.
Delaware became part of RGGI when it entered a memorandum of understanding with other states in December 2005. The memorandum of understanding provided the framework for cap-and-trade regulations in each participating state, built around a "model rule."
Since there will be fewer carbon dioxide permits available for electricity generators to purchase under the regulations, the three plaintiffs argue, the price of the permits will rise in response to the realities of supply and demand, and that these higher costs will be passed along to consumers.
'Probable Injury'
At the heart of the case is the authority of Delaware's Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control. Gov. John Carney, a Democrat who took office in 2017, supports the initiative.
When the lawsuit initially was filed in December 2013, the agency's regulations had not gone into effect. For Delaware residents to have standing to sue, they needed to show there was a "probable injury" and not an "actual injury," Abbott, the plaintiffs' attorney, said in the phone interview.
Abbott argued that the trial court judge, Stokes, should have considered only facts that were relevant when the suit was filed, instead of relying on "postfiling facts."
The precedent in Delaware, and in other states with cases involving energy consumers who dispute government policies, says that standing must be "broadly and liberally applied," he told The Daily Signal.
"When making this determination about standing, it's not supposed to be a stringent straitjacket like this judge wants to make it out to be," Abbott said, adding:
One reason for the confusion, I think, is that it took more than four years for the court to dispose of the case, and these cases are typically done in a 12- to 18-month time period.
But it's difficult because DNREC [Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control] filed all kind of frivolous motions at the beginning of the case, which they always do because the government gets away with filing frivolous motions without being held accountable.
The Superior Court judge identified three methods the plaintiffs could use to establish standing: produce electric bills showing rate increases that can be attributed directly to the regulations; show proof that energy companies pursued rate increases in response to the regulations; or get "expert witness testimony" establishing a connection between the regulations and increased energy costs.
"You can't show your electricity bills went up at the beginning of a case before the regulations even took effect, and the electricity providers can't apply for a rate increase before they've had an increase in costs," Abbott said. "This is impossible. Once again, the correct test for standing is what's happening at the time of filing."
Challenging Changes to the Cap
In November 2013, the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control altered the "size and structure" of the cap on carbon dioxide emissions. The cap became substantially lower and more restrictive than what the Delaware General Assembly approved through the memorandum of understanding with other states, the three plaintiffs say in their brief to the Delaware Supreme Court.
The three residents' brief says the memo of understanding doesn't permit "any changes" related to caps on carbon dioxide, requiring the agreement to be "formally amended by all signatory states" before adoption of any regulations reducing the caps from 2014 through 2018.
The caps on CO2 established in the agreement "are mandatory, static, and not expressly permitted to be changed by DNREC's unilateral regulatory action," their brief argues.
Delaware regulators routinely file "frivolous motions" and "play the game about standing," Abbott said, because they want to avoid answering substantive questions about their modifications to the caps on carbon emissions without the approval of elected officials.
Officials at the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control "know that if the case ever gets to the merits, they are dead," Abbott said, adding:
The state legislature said you can adopt regulations that are consistent with the MOU [memorandum of understanding], but they essentially cut the cap in half. There is no question that the regulations are illegal and inconsistent with what was authorized by statute.
I've litigated many cases against DNREC and have won every single case because they just ignore the law. This has gone on for decades. There is an institutional problem with this agency, where they have just gotten into the habit of doing whatever they feel like.
The Daily Signal sought comment from the agency's public affairs department, but officials had not responded by publication time.
Virginia Set to Join Climate Pact
As The Daily Signal previously reported, Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam, a Democrat, has advanced his own regulatory proposal to make his state part of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative.
The Virginia proposal, which could go into effect in December, has attracted criticism from lawmakers, policy analysts, and citizen activists who say the state should not enter the climate pact without the approval of the Virginia General Assembly.
Related: Virginia Governor Set to Bypass Legislature to Join State-Based Climate Agreement
"Gov. Northam is sadly encumbering the state of Virginia with a regulatory monster that will have no impact on the climate even if you believed every claim made by Al Gore or the United Nations," Marc Morano, a prominent climate change skeptic, told The Daily Signal in an email. "RGGI will do nothing but saddle Virginia with meaningless climate change inspired regulations on Virginia industry."
Morano, executive editor and chief correspondent of the Climate Depot website and author of the bestseller "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Climate Change," has been critical of state policymakers who implement climate change regulations without popular support.
"RGGI will make states like Delaware and Virginia less competitive with other states wise enough to avoid this virtue-signaling nonsense," Morano said. "If Gov. Northam bypasses the legislature to impose these economically strangling regulations, it will prove once again that the governor lacks the support of the people and the legislature to impose this monstrosity on the state of Virginia."
"The same is true in Delaware, where stringent regulations are imposed without legislative approval," he said.
New Jersey also is set to join the climate pact. Gov. Philip Murphy, a Democrat, issued an executive order in January reversing a decision by his Republican predecessor, Chris Christie, to keep New Jersey out of RGGI.
California has its own cap-and-trade program covering power plants, factories, and oil refineries.
In Washington state, voters were set to vote Tuesday on a ballot question,Initiative 1631, which would impose the nation's first tax on carbon dioxide emissions. Gov. Jay Inslee, a Democrat, long has been a proponent of the carbon tax and cap-and-trade proposals.
Report by Kevin Mooney. Originally published at The Daily Signal.
Posted on November 29, 2018 November 29, 2018 Categories Regulations, Solar ScamsLeave a comment on 3 Residents Challenge Climate Change Rules at Delaware's High Court
Green Energy Mandates Could Double Your Electric Bills
Business and homeowner utility costs could double in many states if environmental groups succeed in enacting draconian solar and wind power mandates in states across the country.
Yet these mandates will have almost no impact in cleaning the air or reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
In Arizona and Nevada, voters will decide on Nov. 6 whether to adopt renewable mandates requiring local utilities to buy at least 50 percent of their electric power from green energy—mostly, wind and solar power.
At least a dozen other states are set to ramp up their mandatory standards (also called "renewable portfolio standards") in 2019. California is set to move to 60 percent legally mandated renewable energy by 2030 and 100 percent by 2045.
These mandates come with a steep price to American families and businesses. Residents in states with existing high mandates must often pay between 50 percent and 100 percent more on their electric bills than residents of states where utilities are free to rely on the market and purchase electric power from the lowest-cost sources—often coal, natural gas, or nuclear power.
Because lower-income households spend five to 10 times more as a share of their incomes on energy than do high-income households, high renewable portfolio standards are a regressive—and unduly burdensome—tax on the poor.
Ironically, these green initiatives are usually sponsored by billionaire liberal funders, such as investor Tom Steyer of California.
While the natural growth of renewable energy sources is a positive development, mandates are an economically disastrous method that crowds out the market for affordable electricity.
Today, the United States produces more than 75 percent of its electricity from natural gas, coal, and nuclear power. Less than 10 percent comes from solar and wind power.
Given the massive federal subsidies of more than $150 billion between 2009 and 2014 to the wind and solar industries, that is an amazingly small percentage.
Comparing the states with the most stringent renewable portfolio standards (25 percent or more) with the states with low ones (10 percent or less), and then with states with none, reveals a pattern.
States with high renewable portfolio standards have electric power rates that are about 27 percent per kilowatt hour more expensive than states with low ones, and about 50 percent higher than states without them.
The Heartland Institute estimates costs could total an extra $1,000 per year per household, compared with current electricity costs, at the proposed rate increase in Arizona.
This could mean tens of thousands of dollars of higher costs for a business, depending on energy usage. For manufacturers, it could mean $100,000 or more of extra costs.
Lower-income families would be most adversely affected by stricter green energy requirements. This is because poorer households typically pay about seven times more as a share of their income in energy costs than do wealthier families.
Middle-class families pay at least twice as high a share of their income in energy bills than do the rich.
One of the critical flaws of renewable energy requirements is that they almost all squeeze out two of the most dominant and cleanest forms of energy used across the country—natural gas and nuclear power.
But from an environmental and clean air standpoint, and for the purposes of reducing greenhouse gases that may be linked to climate change, this distinction makes no sense.
It appears simply to be a multibillion-dollar corporate welfare giveaway to the solar and wind industries at the expense of ratepayers.
Even coal that is burned in Arizona, Nevada, and other states is much cleanertoday than it was 20 or 30 years ago. All of this is evidenced by the dramatic improvement in air quality nationally over the past 35 years.
Only a small percentage of this clean air progress is due to renewable energy, because over most of this period, wind and solar power have been fairly inconsequential sources of U.S. energy production.
Since 1980, total emissions of the six principal air pollutants have fallen by 67 percent.
To put that in perspective: That reduction occurred amid a dramatic expansion of the U.S. economy. Gross domestic product increased by 165 percent, vehicle miles traveled increased 110 percent, the U.S. population grew by 44 percent, and energy consumption increased by 25 percent.
For these reasons, the "clean energy" initiative is best thought of as a regressive tax imposed on those who can least afford it.
Again, this "tax" could cost middle-income and lower-income American families about $1,000 more per year in utility prices. These mandates could also negatively affect business productivity and move jobs to areas with more energy choices.
Americans deserve affordable, abundant, and reliable energy. Renewable energy mandates are a "green tax" on homeowners and small businesses that can least afford it.
Commentary by Stephen Moore and Andy Vanderplas. Originally published at The Daily Signal.
Posted on November 29, 2018 November 29, 2018 Categories Legislation, Regulations, Solar ScamsLeave a comment on Green Energy Mandates Could Double Your Electric Bills
Ratepayers Get Cold Shoulder as Green Energy Gets 'Preferential Treatment' in Delaware
Delaware residents are the victims of deceptive business practices associated with a green energy scheme resulting from elected officials' sweetheart deal with a fuel cell company, policy analysts and academics argue.
Bloom Energy had pledged to create 900 full-time jobs in Delaware by Sept. 30, 2016, and to continue employing these workers for at least seven years.
But a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission from Bloom Energy's initial public offering in June shows that as of March, it had only 277 full-time employees.
"Bloom has been able to milk Delaware taxpayers and ratepayers for massive subsidies, gain preferential treatment on multiple fronts, and avoid rules that are rigorously applied to other industries," energy researcher Paul Driessen said during an event Friday at The Heritage Foundation's headquarters on Capitol Hill.
The Delaware General Assembly extended financial inducements to Bloom Energy through legislation in 2012, a major topic during the panel discussion at Heritage, as was what Driessen and other speakers called preferential treatment from state regulators and other government officials.
The Sunnyvale, California-based company manufactures solid oxide fuel cells that use an electrochemical reaction to transform natural gas into electricity.
Bloom Energy traces its roots to 2002, when a Silicon Valley venture firm, Kleiner Perkins Caufield and Byers, invested in the green energy company. (That firm is now known as Kleiner Perkins.)
In April 2012, Bloom Energy opened a manufacturing facility in Newark, Delaware, on a site owned by the University of Delaware that previously was occupied by a Chrysler assembly plant.
David Legates, a professor of climatology at the University of Delaware, told the Heritage audience that Bloom Energy isn't a genuine green energy company because its fuel cells use fossil fuels and release more carbon dioxide than traditional natural gas plants.
Bloom Energy's fuel cells also run on methane gas, which produces hazardous waste, he said.
Even so, the company qualifies for renewable energy credits under Delaware'sRenewable Energy Portfolio Standards Act, which calls on utilities to draw 25 percent of their energy from renewable sources by 2025. The company also is exempt from the state's hazardous waste rules.
"Bloom Energy asserts that nothing on either side of the chemical equation is hazardous material, which technically is true," Legates said. "However, no clean commercial source of methane exists. Thus, it contains many hazardous products that must be removed from the methane before it can be added to the fuel cell to avoid contamination … These compounds must be removed in sulfur canisters."
A Sweetheart Deal
Legates' slide presentation quoted Bloom Energy's permit application as saying its manufacturing process "neither uses nor produces hazardous waste."
The statement is misleading because it "ignores the presence of hazardous waste in the methane source," he said.
But because Delaware officials accepted the company's description of its manufacturing process, state rules governing hazardous waste aren't applicable, he said.
In 2012 legislation amending Delaware's Renewable Energy Portfolio Standards Act to allow fuel cells to be used as a renewable energy source, several provisions worked to the disadvantage of state residents, Legates said.
The law calls for a mandated surcharge, described as a tariff, on the bills of every Delmarva Power ratepayer that state lawmakers guaranteed to Bloom Energy for 21 years. The law also includes a clause that says Bloom Energy is entitled to all of the 21-year tariff if the law ever is repealed.
Legates described the arrangement between the state government and Bloom Energy as a sweetheart deal.
Delaware government officials charge Bloom Energy annual rent of $1 for its Newark manufacturing plant, and pledged to spend more than $16 million to upgrade the facility, he said.
"To date, Delmarva Power ratepayers have paid Bloom Energy approximately $200 million, and the total take by Bloom Energy from the state has been $300 million," Legates said. "Moreover, the energy produced by Bloom Energy was more than three times as expensive [as traditional natural gas sources] in 2012, and now estimates place [it] as much as six times more expensive than traditional natural gas sources."
Newark-based Delmarva Power, a subsidiary of Exelon Corp., provides electricity and natural gas to customers on portions of the Delmarva Peninsula in Delaware and Maryland.
The Daily Signal sought comment from Bloom Energy, but had not received a response by publication time.
Citizen Activist Denied Standing
John Nichols, a retired financial planner from Middletown, Delaware, who filed two lawsuits challenging Bloom Energy's business practices and government policies that facilitate those practices, also spoke during the Heritage event.
In June 2012, Nichols sued then-Gov. Jack Markell, a Democrat, and members of the state Public Service Commission. Nichols argued that the state's deal with Bloom Energy is unconstitutional.
In January 2013, Nichols appealed a decision by the state Coastal Zone Industrial Control Board that he didn't have standing to challenge the permit issued to Bloom Energy by the state Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control.
Nichols argued that the permit violated Delaware's Coastal Zone Act, which regulates industrial activity in specific areas.
The courts ruled that he did not have standing in either his state or federal lawsuit.
"To violate both the spirit and intent of the Delaware Coastal Act took failure on a massive scale," Nichols said during the Heritage event. "Ironically, these failures may serve a valuable public purpose."
That's because government agencies are responsible for consequences to ratepayers and taxpayers that are beginning to gain attention, he said.
"The notion that all these failures are a coincidence strains credulity to the breaking point," Nichols said. "These failures demand accountability for Delawareans, Delmarva ratepayers, taxpayers, Bloom investors, and everyone who values the beauty of the Delaware coastline."
'Duped Investors'
Although the state's favoritism to Bloom Energy deserves further exposure and investigation, the company also benefits from "deep state" relationships at the national level with government and corporate figures, chemical engineer Lindsay Leveen told the Heritage audience by telephone.
Leveen, who is a consultant to corporations on energy deregulation and writes for the website Green Explored, reviewed the history of Bloom Energy and what he called its "collusion" with the internet company Google.
John Doerr, chairman of Kleiner Perkins in 1999, invested in Google and sits on the tech giant's board. Doerr helped to organize financial support for Bloom Energy on behalf of Kleiner Perkins in 2002, Leveen said.
In July 2008, Google became Bloom Energy's first commercial customer. Three months earlier, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers had released a report funded by the Department of Energy concluding that Bloom Energy "had by far the worst fuel cell on market," Leveen said in his own slide presentation.
Bloom Energy installed four "Bloom Boxes"—devices used to convert natural gas to electricity—at Google headquarters, but only one of them had to operate at limited capacity for 30 days to be deemed a commercial success, Leveen said.
"The performance test at Google simply duped investors," he said. "We also know from the S-1 [the Securities and Exchange Commission filing] that many of the Bloom Boxes failed and were decommissioned, and that Bloom took a major financial loss on the decommissioning of those boxes."
Leveen called for executive branch agencies to investigate Bloom Energy, including the Federal Trade Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Environmental Protection Agency.
Say the Magic Words, Answer No Questions
Despite financial setbacks, Bloom Energy remains afloat because it received government subsidies, tax breaks, and other favors from high-ranking government officials, Driessen, a senior fellow with the Washington-based Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, said during his presentation. CFACT advocates free market solutions in energy policy.
"Bloom has been able to milk Delaware taxpayers and ratepayers for massive subsidies, gain preferential treatment on multiple fronts, and avoid rules that are rigorously applied to other industries," Driessen said, adding:
The Delaware state legislature has allowed Bloom to operate under a unique definition of renewable energy that lets it qualify for special treatment and subsidies by claiming that its equipment could run on biofuels like methane from cows or landfills even if they never have done so, and even if they've always run solely on natural gas and even if they generate hazardous waste in the process.
Bloom Energy's federal investment tax credit was eliminated in 2016, but Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., worked to restore the tax credit and make it retroactive to the date it ended, Driessen said. Sens. Tom Carper, D-Del., and Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., helped Schumer revive the tax credit, he said.
Driessen cited figures showing state and federal officials have given fuel cell makers $3 billion in subsidies over the past decade, with $1.5 billion going to Bloom Energy. Even with this assistance, fuel cell companies lost $6 billion and Bloom lost $2.4 billion, he said.
"Bloom clearly appears to have made questionable statements and outright misrepresentations of material fact to legislatures, regulators, investors, and journalists," he said, adding:
You might ask how do they get away with this? Actually, the formula for success is pretty simple. Invoke the magical, infinitely malleable terms climate change, renewable energy, sustainability, and environmental protection, and you can pretty much deceive, exaggerate, fabricate, and manipulate all you want. Few difficult questions will be raised, little transparency will be required, and no accountability demanded.
Posted on November 27, 2018 Categories Regulations, Solar Scams, UncategorizedLeave a comment on Ratepayers Get Cold Shoulder as Green Energy Gets 'Preferential Treatment' in Delaware
Time to Pull the Plug on Electric Vehicle Handouts for the Rich
Earlier this year, Congress passed an irresponsible budget bill that included handouts for electric vehicle owners and alternative fuels.
Eager to frivolously waste more taxpayer dollars, some legislators are now pushing to extend the electric vehicle tax credit and lift the cap on the number of vehicles that qualify for the credit by each manufacturer.
Doing so would reward special interests and only benefit the wealthiest Americans. Congress should instead eliminate the subsidies for electric vehicles.
Promoted as a way to wean Americans off their alleged addiction to oil, both federal and state governments have generous handouts for electric vehicles. Consumers can use up to $7,500 of other peoples' money to buy an electric vehicle.
Add in-state and local incentives and that number can easily top $10,000. In Colorado, for instance, a buyer can use up to $12,500 in federal and state tax credits to buy an electric vehicle, not to mention enjoy other perks like subsidized charging stations, preferred parking, HOV lane access, and exemption from emissions testing.
The federal tax credit applies to the first 200,000 electric vehicles per manufacturer, and then a phaseout of the credit begins. Tesla is in the phaseout period now and General Motors Co. is close to hitting the 200,000 mark.
Both the House and Senate introduced legislation to lift the per manufacturer cap and extend the subsidy another decade. In a press release, sponsors of the Senate bill urged that "federal action is needed to ensure a competitive electric vehicle market that continues to provide the choice and ability for consumers to purchase electric vehicles."
Competition is not built on the foundation of government dependence. If federal action is necessary to ensure competition, it is more indicative of how uncompetitive the technology is. Subsidies may increase electric vehicle purchases in the short-term, but they counterproductively stifle innovation by encouraging reliance on preferential treatment from Washington.
When subject to the marketplace, manufacturers will understand the true price point at which consumers value an electric vehicle. Without the government picking winners and losers, the companies would have properly aligned incentives to provide a better product at a competitive price.
This holds true for not only electric vehicle subsidies, but subsidies for all energy sources and technologies.
Importantly, the fuel for electric vehicles is not free. As demand for electric vehicles increases as a result of the lower up-front subsidized price, so does the demand for electricity.
New research from the National Economic Research Associates shows that American households would, in fact, be worse off both as taxpayers and electricity consumers. The study projects that between 2020 and 2035, the average U.S. household would lose about $610 in personal income if the subsidy cap is removed. Cumulatively, total personal income of all American households would decrease by more than $7 billion over the 2020-2035 time frame.
If market-driven forces drove electricity prices higher as demand for electric vehicles increased, that would be one thing. But this is a cost borne as a result of the government pulling policy levers.
The indirect costs are particularly burdensome on lower- and fixed-income families who can't afford electric vehicles and take advantage of the subsidies. Instead, the benefits of these subsidies accrue to America's wealthiest households, which can also afford an electric vehicle without the subsidy.
This is borne out by data. The Pacific Research Institute found that in 2014, 79 percent of electric vehicle tax credits went to households making over $100,000, while 99 percent of them went to households making at least $50,000.
For these reasons, Congress should reject all attempts to extend the federal electric vehicle tax credit, and seek to lift the per manufacturer cap. A coalition of free-market organizations, including Heritage Action for America, has already sent a letter to House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas, asking his committee to refrain from expanding the electric vehicle tax credit in any form.
Rather than picking favorites, policymakers should eliminate targeted tax credits for all transportation fuels and technologies. By eliminating the tax credit, the onus is on automotive companies to make electric vehicles competitive with gasoline-fueled cars.
By encouraging free and open competition in the electric vehicle industry, we will see companies bring innovations in their products and marketing that will make the electric vehicle market viable on its own—without the expensive, prohibitive, and stifling federal subsidies and mandates that exist today.
Commentary by Nicolas Loris. Originally published at The Daily Signal.
Posted on November 27, 2018 Categories RegulationsLeave a comment on Time to Pull the Plug on Electric Vehicle Handouts for the Rich
Virginia Governor Bypassing Legislature to Join State-Based Climate Scheme
Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam is poised to implement a new regulation without legislative approval to join 10 other states in a climate change agreement based on restricting carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants.
But lawmakers, policy analysts, and tea party activists in Virginia who oppose what they consider costly regulations of industry are raising questions about the economic and scientific arguments underpinning the proposed rule.
They say the Virginia General Assembly should have a straight up-or-down vote on Northam's plan, in part to ensure that any revenue the Democratic governor raises from "carbon trading" is collected and dispersed in a manner consistent with the state Constitution.
The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, or RGGI, is a multistate agreement that currently includes Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont. In addition to Virginia, New Jersey may rejoin the pact.
The public comment period for a draft version of Northam's proposed regulation ended in April. The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality is expected to introduce a final version in November.
The seven-member Air Pollution Control Board then will be responsible for making a decision. Board members, appointed by the governor, operate independently from the Department of Environmental Quality.
Northam, a physician from the state's Eastern Shore who previously was a state senator and lieutenant governor, took office in January after being elected governor last November.
Michael Dowd, director of the environmental agency's Air and Renewable Energy Division, told The Daily Signal in a phone interview that the Air Pollution Control Board "has a lot of authority with respect to promulgating regulations."
A board majority may "reject, accept, or modify" the proposed rule as it sees fit, Dowd said.
If the board decides in favor of the regulation, he said, it could go into effect by December.
The Virginia General Assembly does not go back into session until January, however. With Democrat gains in the state's November 2017 elections, Republicans have a 51-49 edge in the House of Delegates and a 21-19 margin in the state Senate.
Officials of states that entered the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative argue that greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide are responsible for dangerous levels of climate change, also known as global warming. These gases enter the atmosphere during the industrial burning of fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas, and oil.
However, a growing number of scientists question theories that link human activity to significant climate change, and instead point to natural forces.
New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy, a Democrat, signed an executive order earlier this year directing his agencies to re-enter RGGI. Murphy's Republican predecessor, Chris Christie, had withdrawn from the climate change agreement.
Participating states are required to impose a "cap and trade" arrangement. Government officials set an upper limit on carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel plants. But "allowances" may be traded back and forth among the companies subjected to the caps.
"Joining RGGI now is like joining a football team that's trailing 40-3 in the 4th quarter," Nick Loris, an energy policy analyst with The Heritage Foundation, said in an email to The Daily Signal. 'There's no real upside. No impact on climate. Higher electricity bills for families. Lost business opportunities."
Questioning the Governor's Plan
The problem with the development in Virginia is that "unelected regulators" have been granted too much authority over major policy decisions that will have significant statewide impact, Craig Rucker, executive director and co-founder of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, told The Daily Signal.
"The RGGI system has been very damaging to those states that are participating," Rucker said in a phone interview. "You see much higher electricity rates on average in those areas where RGGI is in effect, and you also see those states losing ground economically in comparison to other states that are not part of this agreement. And it should be noted that the RGGI states are not achieving anything in terms of lower global temperatures."
The Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, known as CFACT, is a Washington-based group that supports free market solutions in energy policy.
Virginia lawmakers should have the opportunity to weigh in on a regulatory change that could have "long-term ramifications," Rucker said, adding:
Because the effects of these regulations are not always immediately evident and often materialize over time, I don't think it's healthy for our democracy to have this change implemented administratively by individuals who do not have to stand before the voters. We are talking about rising energy costs that will impact future generations and impact Virginia's ability to compete economically with other states.
But Dowd, the state Department of Environmental Quality official, said the Northam administration disagrees with critics who say the governor is making an end-run around the General Assembly to join the multistate climate change pact.
"We've heard that argument and we disagree with it," Dowd said in the interview with The Daily Signal. "Our position is, and it always has been, that the state air pollution law vests the state air board with broad authority to control air pollution, and that linking to RGGI in a carbon trade or carbon cap-and-trade program is well within the statutory, regulatory authority of the air board."
While there will be "some expense" to energy consumers, the proposal has been carefully crafted to limit the impact, Dowd told The Daily Signal:
We have heard the concerns about [rising energy] costs and our response is that we have taken this into consideration in the economic modeling we have done, and the modeling indicates that the impact to ratepayers is relatively minimal. In fact, the impact to ratepayers should be a little over 1 percent between now and 2030. We think we have constructed a rule with the right approach and that this is the most cost-effective way to control carbon in Virginia.
In April, Northam vetoed a bill from Delegate Charles Poindexter, a Republican, that would have prohibited the governor or any state agency, including the Air Pollution Control Board, from entering into RGGI or creating any other cap-and-trade program without legislative approval.
In a press statement, Northam explained why he vetoed Poindexter's bill.
"Climate change affects all citizens and business entities in the Commonwealth, especially those located in coastal regions," the governor said, adding:
The Commonwealth must have all the tools available to combat climate change and protect its residents. These tools include the ability to adopt regulations, and rules and guidance that mitigate the impacts of climate change by reducing carbon pollution in the Commonwealth. The governor and state agencies should not be limited in their ability to protect the environment and in turn, the citizens of the Commonwealth.
Tea Party Activists Challenge Green Regulations
Virginia residents who oppose Northam's plan to enter the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative were expected to show up in force Saturday for theVirginia Tea Party's Fall Summit Meeting in Richmond.
Randy Randol, who analyzes energy and environmental issues for the Virginia Tea Party, said in a phone interview that the governor already has tacitly acknowledged limits to his authority over finances, and that these limits could affect implementation of RGGI.
"As predicted, Northam has requested that he be allowed to spend permit fee collections, confirming that he lacks authority to fully implement the program," Randol said.
Virginia Natural Resources Secretary Matthew Strickler informed a legislative commission earlier this month that Northam would ask the General Assembly "to keep and spend the proceeds of a new electricity carbon tax, rather than find a way to return it to ratepayers," according to news reports.
Strickler estimates that under the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, Virginia utilities would have to purchase carbon credits that would generate $200 million in revenue.
Under the cap-and-trade plan, companies buy carbon credits from state governments, typically during "carbon auctions" consistent with RGGI regulations. State governments collect revenue as a result.
How this money is collected, distributed, and appropriated remains an open question and a major sticking point.
The carbon credits that energy companies would be required to purchase under such a plan would generate between $175 million and $208 million for Virginia government, according to a fiscal note attached to legislation from Democratic lawmakers to authorize a cap-and-trade plan. Lawmakers defeated that plan in a party-line vote.
"The Department of Environmental Quality originally sold RGGI as a recycling program to get the money back to the consumer," Randol said. "The RGGI fee will be a direct pass-through to every class of electricity consumer—residential, business, and industry."
The tea party activist added:
Utilities are immune because they will pass the tax along to the consumers. What the governor is calling a fee is really tax, and there are reasons why he doesn't want to call it tax.
The Virginia Tea Party has opposed every ration and tax and cap-and-tax scheme that has been proposed. There was, for example, a proposal to tax power plant emissions to fund flood mitigation that we strongly opposed.
This proposal to move us into RGGI would impact the poorest residents of Virginia the most.
'Where the Money Goes'
Poindexter, the state delegate who pushed the bill requiring the General Assembly to approve any move into RGGI, told The Daily Signal in a phone interview that he opposes the governor's plan both legally and substantively.
Although the Virginia Constitution may give the governor latitude to join RGGI, it doesn't provide him with the authority to control the appropriation and spending of funds derived from the multistate agreement, Poindexter said.
"Where the money goes and who controls how it's spent is still up in the air, and therein lies the problem with the governor doing this on his own," Poindexter said. "Under the Virginia Constitution and state law, money cannot be spent without appropriation from the General Assembly. What's happening now is an attempt to work around constitutional requirements and the requirements of state law, to allow the governor to have control of the estimated $200 million in revenue from the sale of these carbon credits."
Poindexter, who represents Patrick County and parts of Franklin and Henry counties, also is a member of the state Commission on Energy and Environment.
As a matter of policy, Poindexter said, he views the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative as detrimental to Virginia's best interests. He anticipates that it will discourage energy production from inside the state and undermine future job opportunities.
"Virginia would not be putting itself in good company by joining RGGI," the lawmaker said. "When you look at where the electricity rates are in those states that are now in RGGI versus what we have now in Virginia, my concern is that entering into this agreement would lead to electricity rates rising to some level that is equivalent or even higher than they are in those other RGGI states."
"Also," Poindexter said, "my understanding is that in RGGI states, electricity generation typically moves out of those states and the power is then imported. That would not be a healthy development for our state, should we start to lose those jobs related to energy generation."
Rucker and others at the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow also challenged the scientific premise underpinning RGGI and similar state-level agreements. They point to updated research that shows natural forces, as opposed to human activity, are primarily responsible for climate change.
EPA's Proposed Rule
In the run-up to Saturday's Virginia Tea Party Summit, another question was on the mind of participants.
Since the Environmental Protection Agency under the Trump administration has proposed a rule replacing the Obama administration's Clean Power Plan with guidelines giving states more flexibility to determine how to address greenhouse gas emissions, isn't RGGI now superfluous?
Why not just embrace the EPA's proposed Affordable Clean Energy Rule?
Related: EPA Moves to Scrap Obama Mandates for Power Plant Emissions
"Our concern with what the EPA has proposed is that it is not very stringent and that it's really not going to move the ball forward in terms of regulating carbon emissions," Dowd of the state Department of Environmental Quality said. "RGGI represents a far more stringent and more realistic approach, and I don't think the ACE rule as proposed is strong enough to control carbon."
But Heritage's Loris said he views the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative as a losing proposition for Virginia.
"Interestingly, the United States isn't leading the developed world in greenhouse gas reduction because of a regional cap-and-trade program," Loris said. "The private sector's investment in cheap, abundant, and affordable natural gas is the reason."
Posted on November 27, 2018 Categories Climate, RegulationsTags Ralph Northam, Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, RGGI, Virginia climate agreementLeave a comment on Virginia Governor Bypassing Legislature to Join State-Based Climate Scheme


Saree Ke Fall Sa ( Remix) : Antara Mitra. Rajkumar) mp3song, download Gandi Baat ( Film Version) ( R. Tags3 : Gandi Baat ( film Version) Mp3 Download Gandi Baat ( film Version) Hindi Movie full 64kbps, 720p HD Movie Video, Gandi Baat ( film Version) 1080p, Gandi Baat ( film Version) Mp3 Download Original High Quality iTunes Rip music songs 190Kbps & 320Kbps Original Mp3 Song Gandi Baat Film Version R Rajkumar MP3 Song - R Rajkumar Movie mp3 songs - Gandi Baat Film Version R Rajkumar mp3 video lyrics - Baat ( Film Version) Mp3 Song Download movie R Rajkumar by Singer/ artist Nakash Aziz & Ritu Pathak Gandi Baat ( Film Version) Music of Pritam. Download Gandi Baat ( Film Version) ( R.
Gandi Baat ( Film Version) : Nakash Aziz. Gandi Baat Season 2 Episode 4 - Youtube MP4 Music MP3, Free Music, Download MP4 Download Free Music. Saree Ke Fall Sa ( Remix) mp3 download R Rajkumar singer Antara Mitra indiamp3. Gandi Baat mp3 song belongs new Hindi songs Gandi Baat by Mika Singh, Kalpana Patowary Gandi Baat available To free download on DjBaap. Rajkumar) mp3 song in 128 kbps 320 kbps itune rip also. Gandi Baat From Shahid Kapoor Sonakshi Sinha and Sonu Sood s R Rajkumar Enjoy the Latest Song Gandi baat. Gandi baat film version mp3 download.
Gandi baat film version mp3 download. Play and Listen Gandi Baat Film Version Mp3. Rajkumar songs Gandi Baat released on 04 Nov,.
0 plays 4: 25 10. Play Download Ringtone. You can download Gandi Film Songs Mp3 in first result we does not host save Gandi Film Songs Mp3 file in our server.
Gandi Baat ( Film Version) mp3 download R Rajkumar singer Nakash Aziz indiamp3. Play and Listen Gandi Baat Film Version Punjabimob Com Mp3. Gandi Baat Film Version.
Tags3 : Gandi Baat ( film Version) Mp3 Download, Gandi Baat ( film Version) 1080p, 720p HD Movie Video, Gandi Baat ( film Version) Mp3 Download Original High Quality iTunes Rip music songs, Gandi Baat ( film Version) Hindi Movie full 64kbps, 190Kbps & 320Kbps Original Mp3 Song Gandi Baat Film Version R Rajkumar MP3 Song - R Rajkumar Movie mp3 songs - Gandi Baat Film Version R Rajkumar mp3 video lyrics - Baat ( Film Version) Mp3 Song Download movie R Rajkumar by Singer/ artist Nakash Aziz & Ritu Pathak Gandi Baat ( Film Version) Music of Pritam. Gandi Baat ( Film Version) mp3 song download in 320kbps, 128kbps, 192kbps and 160 kbps mp3 format.
ee download R Rajkumar Gandi Baat Full Song In Mp3. To start this download lagu you need to click on [ Download] Button. Remember that by downloading this song you accept our terms and conditions.
Enjoy downloading R Rajkumar Gandi Baat Full Song In.
mp3 for scription: Gandi Baat ( Film Version) ( R. rajkumar) is sung by Ritu Pathak, Nakash Aziz and music is directed by Pritam Chakraborty.


Publication information: Article title: Wrestling with Augie March. Contributors: Kriegel, Leonard - Author. Magazine title: The Nation. Volume: 276. Issue: 24 Publication date: June 23, 2003. Page number: 27. © The Nation Institute. COPYRIGHT 2003 Gale Group.