Jew hating journalist quits rather than apologize

Few articles on the Gaza conflict could be as deliberately misleading as the one, by veteran leftist shill and apologist, Mike Carlton who launched into a quixotic diatribe under the cartoon (below, and since removed), which can only be distinguished from Nazi propaganda from the 30s and 40s by virtue of the remote control, which was not available back then.

The Sydney morning Herald has apologized for the cartoon after a week of criticism and complaints, however Carlton has engaged in a vulgar diatribe against readers who have complained.  Some have been told to f**k off, been called pathetic f***wits, likudnicks, and a variety of other abusive terms by him.

The ABC has referred to this as “strident debate with his readers.” 

After numerous complaints about this SMH apologized on his behalf, then decided to demand that he do so and accept a suspension.  Being too arrogant and self-righteous to accept this he has quit his position.  Good bye and good riddance.

Australian media coverage of the Gaza conflict has largely followed the type seen internationally with most of the journalists embedded with Hamas and reporting on the war from the terrorist side of the border.  Reportage therefore is one sided and gives a false impression of aggression by the Israelis against relatively helpless Palestinians.

Most Palestinians are helpless, but are ruled by the terrorist group Hamas which sees advantage in launching rockets into Israel from among the civilian population, who cop the consequences.

Among Carlton’s more hyperbolic rating is:

 … Yes, Hamas is also trying to kill Israeli civilians, with a barrage of rockets and guerilla border attacks. It, too, is guilty of terror and grave war crimes. But Israeli citizens and their homes and towns have been effectively shielded by the nation's Iron Dome defence system, and so far only three of its civilians have died in this latest conflict. The Israeli response has been out of all proportion, a monstrous distortion of the much-vaunted right of self defence. 

It is a breathtaking irony that these atrocities can be committed by a people with a proud liberal tradition of scholarship and culture, who hold the Warsaw Ghetto and the six million dead of the Holocaust at the centre of their race memory. …

Carlton neglects to mention the tunnels through which Hamas launched attacks into Israel, which along with rocket attacks were the primary source of the necessity to invade.

His defense of Hamas appears to be based on the argument that their barrage was largely ineffective, owing to Iron Dome, which intercepted many of their rockets, more than 300 of which were reportedly defective to the point where they fell on their own population.  Incompetence in offensive actions does not make those actions excusable, nor insulate them from consequences.

There will probably still be a position available for him at the public broadcaster, The ABC, which has no worries about offending subscribers as the taxpayer picks up the tab.

ABC; keeping it classy

Several months ago, the public broadcaster and left wing shill, the ABC demonstrated both its class and its idea of how to deal with critics with the photo shopped image of News Ltd commentator, Chris Kenny (Right)

Kenny’s complaint was handled by the ABC’s Audience & Consumer Affairs division, which unsurprisingly came up with the following dismissal:

“A&CA’s assessment is that the skit was likely to offend but the segment was justified by the editorial context.  While strong in nature it was consistent with the Chaser style — one very familiar to its target audience.”

The ABC managing director Mark Scott has been dragged kicking and screaming into an apology after Kenny was granted the right to sue for defamation.

For the benefit of overseas readers, the ABC’s Q&A program is our equivalent of ‘The View’ except it has a varying panel consisting of one rightie up against four lefties and the leftist moderator. When they wish to be really cynical, they have Malcolm Turnbull as the rightie.

Tim Blair informs us that tonight we are in for a real treat with obscure, but foul mouthed playwright Van Badham on the panel:

THE ABC has defended the decision by its Q & A chat program to invite little-known playwright and anarchist Van Badham on to Monday night’s show. 

The ABC will also pay for her flights and accommodation. 

Badham’s Twitter account features obscene attacks on various politicians, including Prime Minister Tony Abbott (‘‘a lying sexist c ...”), former PM Kevin Rudd (“the c ... that caused all these f ... ing problems”), Environment Minister Greg Hunt (“an insult to the word c ...”) and the entire 2013 Labor caucus (“let me into that caucus room to kick the mother...ing sh.. out of the dumb c ... rags in there”). 

Q & A producer Peter McEvoy said his show “aims to provide a platform for as wide a variety of views as possible’’. 

“The point ... is to generate an informed, civil discussion ... By necessity this means some guests will have views others might object to,” he said.

In Douglas Adams book, Life, the Universe and Everything, there is mention of The Rory Award, which is given for category: "The Most Gratuitous Use Of The Word 'Fuck' in A Serious Screenplay".

He possibly came up with the idea for this while watching the ABC.

How the left ‘keep the skeer’

We have alluded to the Nathan Bedford Forrest style tactics of the left here before.  Some time ago, Andrew Sullivan made the rather curious claim that if Virginia and Florida were to go to the Republicans, the Confederacy would be reborn and the South would rise again. 

Over here we have similar tactics from the left with Labor’s demented assertions of a Liberal war on women and the recent Greens claim that Abbott was homophobic, racist, and every other buzz-word that will scare low information voters.

Here is Chris ‘Leg Thrill’ Mathews giving a bit of helpful advice on how to keep the public scared:

Many of us have known for a long time how statists spin the relatively innocuous positions of opponents into a worst-case scenario. Mathews is letting the cat out of the bag with his advice to exaggerate the positions of opponents and state the result as a fact.  A sensible person engaging in such underhand activities, or advising on the tactic would normally keep it ‘in house’.  Mathews though is no Einstein.

Given the failure of the Obama Presidency and the absurd disaster of Obama care, the left has little to hang its hat on as far as its record is concerned.  As result, its shills and apologists have resorted once again to the aphorism of the old general, "Git 'em skeered and keep the skeer in 'em.”

Expect more of the same here.

NYT calls for enlightened despot to solve congressional gridlock

Cartoon: By R May 

Collectivists love the idea of strong leaders if they have the same collectivist ideas as themselves and pursue the same aims as the beholder.  Its not so much fun for them if the other side gets control of the reigns of power though, and you end up with a Margaret Thatcher, or worse still, (for both sides) a Campbell Newman.

For this reason, lefties around the world crave a philosophy that accommodates both the quick and easy idea of a central authority that is instantaneously able to grant their wishes, but not those of the other side.  The solution to the second part of this conundrum is the requirement that the person at the centre of things be able to understand the difference.

Clearly, as the proponent is presenting a vision for the future, the central authority has to be enlightened, just like the person advocating it considers himself to be.

David Brooks of the New York Times has resurrected the age-old concept of enlightened absolutism in his OP-Ed calling for increased powers for the executive branch to solve the problem of congressional gridlock in the US: 

... But there is a way out: Make the executive branch more powerful.This is a good moment to advocate greater executive branch power because we’ve just seen a monumental example of executive branch incompetence: the botched Obamacare rollout. It’s important to advocate greater executive branch power in a chastened mood. It’s not that the executive branch is trustworthy; it’s just that we’re better off when the presidency is strong than we are when the rentier groups are strong, or when Congress, which is now completely captured by the rentier groups, is strong. 

Here are the advantages. First, it is possible to mobilize the executive branch to come to policy conclusion on something like immigration reform. It’s nearly impossible for Congress to lead us to a conclusion about anything. 

Second, executive branch officials are more sheltered from the interest groups than Congressional officials. 

Third, executive branch officials usually have more specialized knowledge than staffers on Capitol Hill and longer historical memories. 

Fourth, Congressional deliberations, to the extent they exist at all, are rooted in rigid political frameworks. Some agencies, especially places like the Office of Management and Budget, are reasonably removed from excessive partisanship. 

Fifth, executive branch officials, if they were liberated from rigid Congressional strictures, would have more discretion to respond to their screw-ups, like the Obamacare implementation. Finally, the nation can take it out on a president’s party when a president’s laws don’t work. That doesn’t happen in Congressional elections, where most have safe seats. …

It seems odd that at a time where the President is increasingly making use of executive orders and is being seen as moving progressively towards a monarchial or imperial form of rule, that the Times would be seeking more of it.

The US Constitution was designed to prevent the accumulation of power in any branch of government, something that has been eroded over the years.  Calling for a more despotic form of government is totally irresponsible.

While the NYT is essentially a liberal advocate and apologist rag which would tend to see more Obama as a good thing, it tends to forget that the Democrats do not have a permanent hold on the top job.  A good rough rule of thumb is; do not give your current Obama more power than you would like to see your next Bush wielding.

Sean Penn’s new utopia

Image: The Peoples Cube

Most of us have some ideas on how the world could be made a better place and believe that were those ideas implemented it would be so. Libertarians for example, believe that removing about 50 – 75% of the size, scope, cost, and powers of the state would set people free to advance by their own efforts, without the dead hand of government weighing them down.

The left on the other hand, tend to believe in a centrally controlled state or even world, under the unlimited authority of a strong leader free to pursue his agenda without interference from opposition.

This brings us to Sean Penn and his fellow celebrities whose illusions of infallibility are only matched by their delusions of relevance. Sean has come up with a new idea to bring about Utopia in our own time; have the president issue executive orders to commit Ted Cruz and his fellow Tea Partiers to mental institutions:

Penn fails to mention whether he wants this power extended to all future presidents but possibly hasn’t thought this all the way through. His condescension towards ‘uneducated people is interesting in the light of:

… But the thing you're talking about and, and the way people's perception of political positions are, is a direct reaction to their lack of, of their education which is a huge problem that we're dealing with in the country. And between an uneducated people and the solipsism of the people like Ted Cruz and their party, it's a poisonous thing. …  

… Cruz graduated cum laude from Princeton. He later attended Harvard Law School where he was a John M. Olin Fellow in Law and Economics, a primary editor of the Harvard Law Review, an executive editor of the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, and a founding editor of the Harvard Latino Law Review. 

Penn on the other hand, dropped out of a motor mechanics course at Santa Monica College. It is understood though; that he has played some highly educated people.

Yes prime minister in Oz

Labor has once again dipped into the shallow end of the talent pool (or perhaps the wading one) and come up with a new leader in Bill Shorten. During the leadership campaign, Bill is the guy who came up with the idea of quotas for various groups in parliament including ethnic, gay, lesbians, transgender, and so on.

His defining moment though, came in an interview as a senior government minister during the Gillard prime ministership. (Note; this is not satire):

 

DNC broke, perhaps this explains the state of the USA

It should really be no surprise given the state of the nation but it is reported that the DNC is in deep financial trouble.  Fortune reports that it is juggling accounts to try to keep it running and pay angry suppliers: 

FORTUNE -- There's another budget crisis in Washington, and it's unfolding inside the Democratic party. The Democratic National Committee remains so deeply in the hole from spending in the last election that it is struggling to pay its own vendors. 

It is a highly unusual state of affairs for a national party -- especially one that can deploy the President as its fundraiser-in-chief -- and it speaks to the quiet but serious organizational problems the party has yet to address since the last election, obscured in part by the much messier spectacle of GOP infighting.  

The Democrats' numbers speak for themselves: Through August, 10 months after helping President Obama secure a second term, the DNC owed its various creditors a total of $18.1 million, compared to the $12.5 million cash cushion the Republican National Committee is holding. 

Several executives at firms that contract to provide services to the party -- speaking anonymously to avoid antagonizing what remains an important if troubled client -- describe an organization playing for time as they raise alarms about past-due bills falling further behind. And senior strategists close to the DNC say they worry the organization appears to have no road map back to solvency. "They really thought they could get this money raised by the summer," one said, "but the fact is, from talking to people over there, they have no real plan for how to solve this."

Most of recognize a pattern here as far as the left in government is concerned.  They tend to be hopeless at staying within a budget or see a pot of gold they cant spend three times over, the US being worse off than us as they can’t actually produce one.  We are not sure of what the Yanks are like, but ours tend to downright self-righteous about their spending.

Back in April, Julia Gillard developed a simple analogy to teach us ‘economic simpletons and sloganeers’ the basics of how to budget like the government.  It involved ‘John’ whose boss cut his large bonuses out, promising a regular 5% pay rise which never eventuated. 

She went on to explain how a rational person would reorganize finances on being told that the rises would not be coming for a few years, but then his pay would go up to what it would have been.  ‘John’ being an analogy for government fails to notice that there is a pattern emerging in his bosses promises, so rather than cut expenses like the rest of us, he does the following: 

“A rational response would be to make some responsible savings, to engage in some moderate borrowing, to get through to the time of higher income with his family and lifestyle intact and then to use the higher income to pay off the extra borrowing undertaken in the lean years,”

At least his bank manager would get a good laugh.

Caution with satire, they might take you seriously; Shorten did

In my previous post, I quoted an article in the Business Spectator in which Labor leadership contender (for want of a better word), Bill Shorten was calling for ethnic quotas to ensure that Aboriginals and Torres Straight Islanders were represented in parliament. 

Indigenous Australians already have a number of passionate and articulate advocates, such as Warren Mundine and Noel Pearson who would make great MPs in their own right and could get there on their own ability should they wish to go there.  But then, Labor prefers a sense of entitlement to ability every time.

Just for a bit of fun, and to take the piss out of Bill, I decided to play around with other minorities that could also have quotas attached to them for representation.  Among them were gay, lesbian, transgender, and a number of immigrant and religious groups. 

Now, today I find that Shorten is advocating quotas for gay, lesbian, and transgender people. 

Labor leadership candidate Bill Shorten wants to introduce quotas to boost the number of gay and lesbian politicians in Parliament.

Mr Shorten is continuing his pitch to the party membership, sending out a manifesto that calls for the introduction of quotas for politicians representing minority groups.  He says the party should consider quotas for Indigenous Australians and the lesbian, gay, bixsexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) community. 

Neil Fharaoh, the national convenor of Rainbow Labor, which represents the party's LGBTI members, says it is a step forward.  "The LGBTI community has been underrepresented, particularly in political seats, both at a state and federal level in Australia," he said. 

"There's probably only 12 gay and lesbian identifying politicians across the country and probably not too much more in the history and its definitely underrepresentative.  "So we'd welcome any moves to increase the representation in politics.”

Labor is proving once again it is beyond satire.  I now have to hope that he didn't read my post, and get the idea from me.

Bill Bjelke Shorten and the national interest

Cartoon: By Nicholson 

I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good. – Adam Smith

Labor has a rather confused idea of what constitutes the national interest.  One consistent principle in the Labor version though, is that it has to coincide with Labor’s interest or that of one or more of the membership elite.

Leadership candidate, Bill Shorten is no exception.  With questions over his loyalty, having voted to overthrow Rudd#1 in favor of Gillard, then to toss her out in favor of Rudd#2, Bill claims the national interest was at stake: 

"I wanted to just let myself be swept up in it," Ms Gillard said.  "Losing power is felt physically, emotionally, in waves of sensation, in moments of acute distress". 

But leadership contender Bill Shorten yesterday defended the decision to return to Mr Rudd, saying it was in the national interest for Labor to be competitive. "I believe that Kevin Rudd did make Labor competitive," Mr Shorten said. 

Outgoing agriculture minister Joel Fitzgibbon argued that Labor under Mr Rudd had added about 10 seats to its tally compared with the likely result under Ms Gillard.

Apparently the interests of the nation can come down to something as simple as the electoral fortunes of a political party, especially if it is Shorten’s.

This statement is somewhat reminiscent of one by Joh Bjelke Petersen in defending his gerrymander back in the 70s, when he claimed that the National Party had a responsibility to do everything in its power to prevent Labor getting into office.

Kevin Rudd the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever

Cartoon: Paul Zanetti 

One disturbing aspect of Labor party politics at present is that it seem to be engaged in presidential style politics, where the party tend to speak with one voice, Kevin Rudd’s.  The Liberals tend to over-rely on Tony Abbott but at least they sometimes bring Joe Hockey, or Julie Bishop out for a run.

Labor though, seems to grant Rudd a Messianic form of leadership role in which he seems to run the party as a one man band in much the same way as was done during his previous incarnation as Opposition Leader/Prime Minister.  This remained the case until he became too big a poll liability and was replaced by Gillard who did the same until she became too big a poll liability and was replaced by Rudd #2.

This seems to indicate that either the party has no talent other than the leaders, or that the entire party-room is prepared to accept an authoritarian style leadership. The need to reinstate Rudd seems to back up the lack of talent argument although it is possible that anyone with any ability was unwilling to take on a leadership role with Rudd still in the party, white-anting them from under the floorboards.

Equally disturbing are the reports form last night’s state of origin match that indicate that the old Rudd overblown sense of entitlement is still there: 

Mr Rudd and Ms Rein arrived at ANZ Stadium minutes before kick-off, forcing the NRL to scramble to find several tickets for his entourage at the sold-out match. … 

… An NRL spokesman confirmed the Prime Minister's office had called on Tuesday asking for three extra tickets to the game but was unaware of any further requests. He said the tickets were for the PM's Australian Federal Police protection detail and another member of his staff. "We didn't think it was an extraordinary request," the spokesman said. 

But The Daily Telegraph was told other corporate sponsors were asked to offer up any spare tickets they had to transfer to the PM's staff. A source who confirmed they had been asked for extra tickets said they had been told that the Prime Minister's office had also asked if the pre-game formalities could be delayed because Mr Rudd was running late to the game.

It is now understood that the later request was for an extra ten tickets to allow for Rudd’s entourage to attend the sold out match at the last minute.  Ray Hadley at 2GB reports that other than a late request for extra tickets, and a delay in pre-game formalities, he also requested that lifts be held for him, both to arrive and depart.  

It seems that the man who verbally abused an air force stewardess to the point of leaving her in tears over his lunch not being up to his exacting standards has not changed at all, despite all those stories of the new and improved Kevin Rudd.  

$7,500 fine for helping bogged motorists

It's somewhat ironical that tonight’s episode of Australian Story was about the way people pitched in to help others during the Tasmanian bush fires.  It was a great show featuring the effort by a woman who created a Face Book page that put people in need of help in touch with those willing to give assistance and help coordinate the whole show.

In times of trouble, the best seems to come out in people.  It was not that long ago that we saw victims of a North Queensland cyclone donating their emergency assistance checks to the Victorian bushfire appeal, and before that, Southern farmers donating semi loads of hay to droughted farmers in Queensland.

On the other hand, it is a bad idea to be a Good Samaritan if it is likely to incur the wrath of the Greens or attract the baleful gaze of their captive envirofascists in the Queensland Department of the Environment.  A retired businessman in Harvey Bay has just been fined $7,500 for towing bogged motorists in a national park and could be hit for $15,000 more: 

A GOOD Samaritan who says he has towed more than 200 bogged cars from roads in the Burrum Coast National Park in the past 20 years has been fined $7500 for damaging the park during the rescues. 

Douglas George Waters, 71, appeared in the Hervey Bay Magistrates Court on Monday charged with six counts of breaching a restriction on cultural and natural resources protected areas and one count of driving an unregistered tractor. 

Magistrate Graeme Tatnell convicted Mr Waters on two counts of damaging the national park but dropped the five other charges.  He was fined $7500 - and he may be up for a further $15,000 payment because of a hole he dug while fixing a road. 

Mr Waters has lived on a property in the heart of the Burrum Coast National Park for 25 years and, under the Queensland National Government in 1988, was given permission to maintain the isolated roads leading to his home.  The previous state Labor government cancelled that permission. 

Mr Waters said outside court that the roads had since deteriorated and people could easily become stuck.  He told the Chronicle outside court he was dumbfounded by the lack of common sense.  "At the moment I can't tow anyone out," he said. 

"If you are unlucky enough to be bogged and it's a Friday afternoon or out of normal hours DERM (now Environment and Heritage Protection) has no after-hours number to help which could result in your situation becoming life-threatening."

It is a bit surprising that Mr Waters is “dumbfounded by the lack of common sense” given that he has been dealing with bureaucracy for some time now and should be getting used to it.

It appears that the department was really going after him given the charge of driving an unregistered tractor.  Given that most farm tractors are unregistered unless the farmer has reason to take it on public roads often, and that the road was unmaintained, it has to be assumed that the enviros were trying to get him for everything they could pin on him.  The withdrawal of permission to maintain the road leading to his home may be taken as an attempt to make his continued occupation of his property untenable.

About the only decent thing coming out of this other than the actions of Mr Waters is that the Member for Hinkler, Paul Neville is taking his case up with the Qld government.    

Gillard calls leadership spill on State of Origin night

Cartoon: By Bill Leak

In her typical ham fisted and inconsiderate manner the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard has called for a ballot on the Labor leadership on State of Origin night when everyone but deadshit politicians have better things to do than watch the death those of the government.

Essentially she is hoping to short circuit the Rudd challenge before he is ready, or at least try to deny further waverers the time to abandon ship: 

The Prime Minister has called a leadership spill for 7pm in an attempt to finish off Kevin Rudd's political career once and for all. 

Mr Rudd said he had been convinced to stand by colleagues and at the urging of tens of thousands of Australians who were afraid of what an Abbott government would do, including reviving Work Choices under another name. … 

… The Prime Minister has demanded the loser of the ballot must resign from parliament to resolve Labor's leadership crisis once and for all. ''I believe anybody who enters the ballot tonight should do it on the following condition,'' she told Sky News. 

''If you win you are Labor leader. If you lose, you retire from politics.”

The writing has been on the wall for Gillard for a long time, becoming bold with the failure of her last attempt at recreating her gender war.  It adopted a larger font on Monday with a disastrous showing in opinion polls, then went all caps after the ludicrous kangaroo knitting farce yesterday.

This ‘photo op’ has been such an embarrassment that both the woman’s Weekly and the Gillard camp are blaming each other for coming up with the idea. 

Both Rudd and Gillard are currently on television claiming that each has to do this because of Tony Abbott.

It will be a great disappointment if Gillard loses as we have all been waiting to toss her out ourselves in September.  Tossing Rudd out will be something of a consolation but not as satisfying as ridding ourselves of our tormentor.

Gillard plays gender card again

Image: By Zanetti (Commenting on the blue tie thing) 

Sometimes you just can’t make this stuff up.  In this case, there would be no point because Gillard or her spin-doctors have already made it up.

Labor has adopted a siege mentality with polls consistently showing a wipeout in the coming election. Labor is trailing by 10 – 16% on a two party preferred basis for as long as most can remember and the PMs tenure is under increasing speculation.  Most pundits doubt that she can survive for the remainder of the fortnight left in the current parliamentary session.  The tail fin of former PM, Kevin Rudd is circling the raft, and police are investigating her over her alleged part in the AWU fraud.

In such times, the ‘real Julia’ comes to the fore as it has this time with blatant attempts to smear her opponents with the race card, class warfare rhetoric, or in this case, the gender card: 

A crowd of about 100 people turned out to see the PM rally her female support base and launch a stinging attack on the Coalition's leadership team, without mentioning Mr Abbott's deputy leader Julie Bishop. 

“I invite you to imagine it, a prime minister, a man with a blue tie, who goes on holiday to be replaced by a man in a blue tie, a treasurer who delivers a budget wearing a blue tie,” said Ms Gillard. 

She introduced abortion as an election issue. 

“We don't want to live in an Australia where abortion again becomes the political plaything of men who think they know better,” Ms Gillard said.  “That's not the future we should choose for our nation.”

This is deliberate deceit, something we are becoming increasingly accustomed to from this government.  Just for starters, while Abbott may be conflicted on the abortion issue owing to his Catholic faith, he has made no effort to prevent it.

Were Abbott (in a blue tie or otherwise) to go on holiday, his place would be taken by his deputy, Julie Bishop who, unless we are badly misinformed is not a man nor has she shown any propensity for wearing blue ties.

Only the few remaining Labor supporters left could believe this and even then it is straining their credulousness.

ABC spins lower sea level rise

ABC news reported a story that has been doing the rounds of the news networks today about the lower expectations of sea level rises due to the melting of glaciers in Greenland.  The conclusion of the report gave the good news that the expected rise was now less than a metre (39.3 inches) by the end of the century.

While this is much less than the figures stated by such gurus as Tim Flannery and Al Gore who tend to think six metres is a bit optimistic, it will still make the climate frantics feel deliciously vindicated.

The only trouble is that that the actual expected rise has been revised down to between 40mm (just under two inches) and 85mm (around 3.3 inches.) 

European and US researchers predict the impact on sea levels from the island's melting glaciers could be as little as 7 per cent of previous projections of more than half a metre. 

The "state-of-the-art ice-flow model" calculates that melting ice from Greenland's 50-odd glaciers will raise sea levels by between 40mm and 85mm by the end of the century. 

The estimates, reported today in the journal Nature, are extrapolated from modelling of four "single-outlet" glaciers in southern and northwestern Greenland. 

The paper says glacier modelling is extremely difficult because of the complex forces at work.  "The complicated behaviour of narrow-outlet glaciers has not yet been fully captured by the ice-sheet models used to predict Greenland's contribution to future sea level," it says. 

"Complex pattern(s) with rapid changes may be transient and not necessarily indicative of long-term trends." 

Lead author Faezeh Nick, a glaciologist based on the Arctic island of Svalbard, said previous estimates had been based on "simple extrapolation".  "This is the first time we have managed to calculate the contribution of ice dynamic in sea-level rise in a realistic way based on physics," Dr Nick said. 

"Now we are more confident about our projections."

Well, it’s nice to see that they are more confident about their projections, but a downward revision of more than 90% in figures that were written on stone tablets of settled science is something of a setback, given that in the past anyone who dared to criticize or doubt this figure was branded a climate denier, web footed inbred yobbo, ignorant red neck, and so on by the very people who are doing the revision.

But still, the ABC is quite correct.  40mm is less than a metre.