From the Mind of a Liberal Against Global Warming

All in a Good Cause
By Orson Scott Card

Editor’s note: This article first appeared in The Rhinoceros Times of Greensboro, North Carolina

Here's a story you haven't heard, and you should have.

An intelligence source, working for a government agency. He's not a spy, he's an analyst. He uses computers to crunch numbers and at the end of his work, out pops the truth that was hiding in the original data. Let's call him "Mann."

The trouble with Mann is, he has an ideology. He knows what he wants his results to be. And the original numbers aren't giving him that data. So the agency he works for won't be able to persuade people to fight the war he wants to fight.

Well, that's not acceptable.

Cooking the Figures

He starts with his software. There are certain procedures that are normal and accepted in his line of work. But if he makes just one little mistake, his program does a weird little recursion and if there's any data at all that shows the pattern he wants it to show, it will be magnified 139 times, so it far overshadows all the other data.

He can run it on random numbers and it gives him the shape he wants. Unfortunately, the real-world numbers aren't random — they have a very different shape. All the numbers. Even his jimmied program won't give the results he wants.

All he needs is any data shaped the right way. And so he looks a little farther, and ... here it is. It looks, on the surface, like all the other data that he's been working with. Other researchers working in his field, just glancing at it, will assume it is, too.

But it isn't. Because the source that gathered this batch of data had some other key information that takes it all away. The numbers don't mean what they normally mean. In fact, this number set is absolutely false.

If you use these numbers along with all the other data, however, the clever little program will pick them up, magnify them radically, and voilá! The final report shows exactly the shape he needs the numbers to have.

The trouble is, these numbers are supposed to be double-checked. Anybody who looks closely at his numbers and at his program will see what he's done. It's not hard to find, if you have the original data sets and can examine the program. He will be exposed as a fraud. It will do his cause more harm than good, if it's made public.

But he's not afraid. He knows how this works.

He doesn't show the program or the lists of his data sources to anybody.

Second, he is given a big boost by the fact that another researcher — we'll call him "Santer" — had his own axe to grind. He was also the author of a questionable report and got himself appointed to a position that allowed him to get to the final report before it's published, delete all statements about how "there is no way to reach a definitive conclusion," and replace them with his own conclusion, which is absolute.

And it works. Santer's report is accepted, even though it has since been proven false. Mann's report continues to be relied on, and no one questions it. The government agency issues the report which they know has been altered to fit preconceived conclusions.

Vast sums of money are expended on the basis of what he claims to have found. People's live are put at risk.

Mann and Santer didn't do it for the money, though grants do flow in their direction.

They did it for the cause. It's a noble cause. And even though the data don't actually say what they wanted them to say — in fact, they say the opposite — they are untroubled by that. Because the government actions that are being taken are the Right Thing.

Santer and Mann are true believers. They don't need evidence. Evidence is just something you create to persuade other people.

Here's the amazing thing about Mann's original report: He's not the only researcher working in this field. In fact, it's the job of many hundreds of researchers to refuse to accept his data at face value. After all, his findings disagree with everyone else's. Before they accept his results, they have a duty to look at his software, look at his data, and try to duplicate his results.

But nobody does it. Not a soul.

Nor, when it goes public, does anyone in the press check the results — because they want him to be right, too.

Steve the Canadian Businessman

Not until a Canadian businessman — let's call him "Steve" — took a look at the stats and got curious. Now, it happens that Steve is in the mining business; he also happened to be a prize-winning math student in college. He knows how to read number sets. He knows what good analysis looks like.

He also knows what cooked figures look like. He has seen the phony projections that companies use when they're trying to swindle people. Their results are too perfect. Mann's report looks too perfect, too.

So Steve starts digging. First, he read's Mann's original report. He finds it an exercise in obscurity. From what he published, it's very, very hard to tell just what statistical methods Mann used, or even what data he operated on.

This is wrong — it's not supposed to be that way. Scientists are supposed to leave a clear path so other people can follow them up and replicate their research.

The fact that it's so obscure suggests that Mann does not want anyone checking his work.

But Mann used government grants in his research. Which means he has an obligation to disclose. Steve contacts him, asks for the information. He gets a runaround. He gets pointed to a website that does not have the information. He tries again, and again gets a runaround — in fact, Mann sends him a very rude letter saying that he will no longer communicate with him.

Why should he? Steve isn't a legitimate researcher in that field. He's just a businessman.

But Steve is now sure there's something fishy going on, and he doesn't give up. He gets other people to help him. Finally they are pointed to a different website, where, to their surprise, they find that someone has accidentally left a copy of the FORTRAN program that was used to crunch the numbers. It wasn't supposed to be where Steve found it — which is why it hadn't been deleted.

Also, there was a little more carelessness — there is a set of data labeled "censored." Steve can't see, right away, what's significant about it, except that a score or so of data sets are left out of the censored data.

Steve looks at the program. He finds the glitch rather easily. He tries the program on random numbers and realizes that it always yields the distinctive shape that has caused all the stir.

Sorting out the data sets is much harder. He contacts a lot of people. He does what anyone checking these figures would have to do, and he realizes: If anyone had tried to check, a lot of this information would already have been put together.

He realizes: I am the first person ever to attempt to verify these astonishing, anomalous, politically hot results. Out of all the researchers in this field who had a responsibility to do "due diligence" before accepting the data, none of them has done it.

Finally he has all the original data put together. It includes more than just real numbers — it includes "extrapolated" data, which means that sometimes, where there were holes, Mann just made the numbers up and plugged them in. This is sloppy and lazy — but it's just the beginning.

What's crucial is that Steve now understands why the "censored" data sets are smaller than the ones Mann used. The full source data includes those misleading results that shouldn't have been used. But the "censored" data sets leave it out.

This means that Mann knew exactly what he was doing. This was not an accident. Mann ran the program on the data without the misleading numbers, and then he ran it with the misleading numbers. What he published was the results that made his ideological case.

Where's the Press?

This story is true.

Anybody who cares to can verify the story. In fact, one of the leading science journals was prepared to publish Steve's results. But then, before publication, they kept cutting back and cutting back on the amount of space they would let Steve's report take up in the journal.

Finally the space they were going to allot was so small that they concluded Steve could not tell his story in that number of words, and therefore they decided not to publish it at all.

Meanwhile, serious publications did publish Mann's savage response to what Steve was saying on the website where he was putting up his results for everyone to read.

Notice: Steve is making all his work transparent to the world — anyone is free to check his data.

Mann is still hiding, denying, attacking — but not providing the full information. You still have to do detective work to ferret it out.

Now, if you were a reporter — you know, those brave guys and gals who are committed, body and soul, to "the public's right to know" — wouldn't you smell a rat? Wouldn't you jump on the chance to expose such an obvious fraud?

After all, there are now governments all over the world basing their decisions on Mann's false report. Crucial decisions are being made. Schoolchildren are being terrorized with dire projections of what will happen if Mann's report is not believed and acted upon. Vast sums of money are being spent. People are treating Mann's cause as a crusade — and his fake results are the chief weapon they use to prove their case.

Where's the press? Why am I able to tell you this story in full confidence that very few who are reading it will have ever heard it before?

Because Mann doesn't report to the Bush administration. The government agency for which the result was filed was a UN agency — specifically, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

And Mann's report is the famous "hockey stick" that "proves" that global warming not only is happening, but right now we're in the warmest climate period in the past thousand years.

Ah! You've heard of that report, haven't you! The press has been all over that one! Your kids are being taught about it in school!

You have friends who look at you like an idiot or the scum of the earth if you don't get energized by it, frightened by it, determined to act on that information. Don't you care about the future of the environment?

Why haven't you joined the cause? Why doesn't the Bush administration act to save the world from the most terrible threat imaginable?

It's like the opening of the "Talk of the Town" section of the February 12th New Yorker: "Except in certain benighted precincts — oil-industry-funded Web sites, the Bush White House, Michael Crichton's den — no one wastes much energy these days trying to deny global warming."

This statement is not just false, it's stupidly false. It speaks of such deep ignorance at The New Yorker — ignorance that they're actually proud of — that it makes one despair, for this is a magazine that once prided itself on knowing what it was talking about.

"By the time the IPCC publishes an assessment, it has been vetted by thousands of scientists," says The New Yorker — but we know that in fact nobody vetted the Mann paper, and nobody checked Santer except, of course, Santer — while he went ahead and removed statements of some of those "thousands of scientists" (p. 27).

In other words, whoever wrote this New Yorker piece did not check. He or she just spouted.

What is really being said here is, "We believe in the IPCC and anybody else who supports Global Warming. We believe it so much that we refuse to listen to anybody who says otherwise."

The only difference between this and Jim and Tammy Baker on the old PTL Club is that nobody says "Jesus." It's all faith, no science.

They're like four-year-olds putting their fingers in their ears and chanting "La la la la" until the person talking to them goes away.

The Hockey Stick Hoax should be a scandal as big as the discovery of the Piltdown Man Hoax. Bigger, really, since so much more is at stake.

But because the media are dominated by True Believers, they are doing everything they can to maintain the hoax, to keep the public from learning the truth.

What were those bad numbers Mann plugged in to get his fake results? Modern bristlecone pine tree-ring data in which recent tree rings showed the widths that would normally mean unusually warm weather.

However, these trees were located near temperature recording stations that showed lower than usual temperatures. So instead of being a sign of warmer temperatures, the tree rings are actually responding to the increased CO2 levels.

Even the heading on this bristlecone pine study clearly stated that the wider tree rings did not indicate higher temperatures. But Mann plugged them in as if they did, producing the one dataset that showed "warmer weather" (i.e., wider tree rings) in recent years, allowing the defective software to produce its hockey-stick result.

The bristlecone pine study was real science. Mann's use of it was deliberately fraudulent.

How Can We Know What's True?

All this can be checked. I didn't even change the names. "Mann" is Michael Mann; his co-writers on that hockey stick report are Raymond Bradley and Malcolm Hughes. "Steve" is Stephen McIntyre, and the writer of the report I'm working from is Ross McKitrick, who is a climate scientist. Their report is a chapter in Shattered Consensus: The True State of Global Warming, edited by Patrick J. Michaels.

Do you know how True Believer scientists respond to this? Just like the ignorant New Yorker writer. There's no attempt to answer any specific charge. They simply dismiss any disagreement by saying, "All the smart scientists agree that global warming is happening; anybody who denies it is just a crank, and you should ignore them."

This is exactly the kind of bias that President Bush's enemies accuse him of having during the run-up to the Iraq War. They claim that Bush and his people only believed the intelligence reports that told them what they wanted to hear, and ignored the rest, claiming that "everybody knew" things that were false.

That's not what happened with Bush (but you don't actually have to prove accusations against President Bush these days). But with the Hockey Stick Hoax it can be proved — yet the very same reporters pay no attention at all. It's "not a story."

In other words, the very people who attack Bush as a liar are actually behaving exactly as they accuse Bush of behaving.

Global Warming vs. Climate Change

If you pay close attention, you'll find that Global Warming alarmists are not actually saying "Global Warming" lately. No, nowadays it's "Climate Change." Do you know why?

Because for the past three years, global temperatures have been falling.

Oops.

The thing is, we've had twenty years since the Alarmists first raised the banner of Global Warming. They told us that "If This Goes On" by 2010 or 2020, sea levels will be rising so high that coastal cities will be flooded, famines will cover the earth, and ...

Oh, you know the list. They're still making the same predictions — they just move the dates farther back.

It's like those millennarian religious cults in the 1800s. Religious leaders would arise who would predict the Second Coming of Christ in 1838. When Christ didn't oblige them by showing up, they went back to their visions or scripture calculations or whatever they claimed and report that they miscalculated, now it was going to be 1843. Or whatever.

Here's the raw truth:

All the computer models are wrong. They have not only failed to predict the future, they can't even predict that past.

That is, when you run their software with the data from, say, the 1970s or 1980s, and project what should happen in the 1990s or 2000s, they project results that have absolutely nothing to do with the known climate data for those decades.

In other words, the models don't work. The only way to make them "work" is to take the known results and then fiddle with the software until it finally produces them. That's not how honest science is done.

Why are so many scientists so wrong?

First of all, there aren't all that many scientists. You hear about how "everybody" agrees about global warming. But who is "everybody"?

I had somebody at a conference get very angry with me for even raising a question. "I have a friend who's a climate scientist and he says that the Everglades are definitely drying up!"

But that's not the question, I said. Global warming isn't even the question. The question is, what is causing global warming or cooling or climate change? Is it human carbon dioxide emissions or something else? Your friend is studying aquifers in one specific area. In what way is he qualified to speak about global climate?

The only answer I got was the answer you always get when you challenge the roots of someone's religion — fury, dismay, and a refusal to talk about it any more.

That's what happens over and over. Who are the scientists who are qualified to speak? There aren't that many. It's the relatively few scientists who are studying paleoclimate and those who are working on contemporary data collection and collation and analysis.

And here's where it almost gets funny. Even the IPCC, which was so heavily biased in favor of Global Warming alarmism, could not get its pet scientists to agree that Global Warming in recent decades is even probably caused by human activity.

What Is Driving Global Climate?

Science isn't done by consensus. It's done by rigorous testing. When a hypothesis — or a computer model — fails to correspond to the actual real-world data, you throw them out

That's what the real climate scientists are doing. They have found, in recent years, a very close correspondence between global climate and variations in the amount of radiation the Earth receives from the Sun.

The light and heat we get varies depending on the distance and position of the Earth and the amount of radiation the Sun puts out. The Earth's distance and position seem to determine the big cycles — the Ice Ages — and the Sun's variations seem to determine the smaller climate cycles.

We have historical data indicating several global warm periods. There was one during the heyday of the Roman Empire; then there was a global cooling during the Dark Ages (beginning about 600 A.D.) The Medieval Warming kicked in about 950, followed by the Little Ice Age beginning about 1300.

The Little Ice Age ended in about 1860. You'll notice that most reports on our modern Global Warming set that as their base point, and leave out all prior warmings.

But those warm periods are real, as are the cool periods. Ice core samples from various places around the world back it up, as do ocean floor samples. In fact, the predictions based on the 1500-year (approximately) solar cycle are borne out everywhere.

There's now at least as much real-world evidence supporting the solar cycle as the cause of climate variation -- including all of today's climate variation — than there was for, say, tectonic plates or the asteroid-caused extinctions at the time when they were first plastered all over the media as the hottest science news of their day.

It's not that it's really a secret. The book Unstoppable Global Warming by Singer and Avery tells us what the media could easily have reported to us:

"On 16 November 2001, the journal Science published a report on elegant research, done by unimpeachable scientists, giving us the Earth's climate history for the past 32,000 years — along with our climate's linkage to the sun" (p. 8).

They quote Richard Kerr of Science:

... the climate of the northern North Atlantic has warmed and cooled nine times in the past 12,000 years in step with the waxing and waning of the sun.

And Kerr quotes glaciologist Richard Alley of Penn State:

The ... data are sufficiently convincing that [solar variability] is now the leading hypothesis to explain the roughly 1,500-year oscillation of the climate seen since the last ice age, including the Little Ice Age of the 17th century (p.8).

We're not talking about fly-by-night wackos. We're talking about leading scientists doing solid research.

And other scientists have found data that correlates closely with their findings all over the world. In other words, these solar oscillations account, completely, for the global variations.

The opposite is the case with the Global Warming alarmists. Their human-emitted carbon dioxide hypothesis is made ludicrous by the fact that most of the warming since the 1860s occurred before 1940, an era when human CO2 emissions were not significant. And we had significant global cooling between then and 1970, precisely the period when CO2 emissions were steeply rising.

CO2 really is rising, though. Any greenhouse heat effect seems to be dissipated by a newly discovered "Pacific Heat Vent." Moreover, CO2 emissions are provably involved in fertilizing vegetation wherever CO2 levels have risen.

Global Warming "Solutions"

We can't stop global warming or cooling. We simply don't have the power to do it. We can't heat up or cool down the sun; we can't jiggle the Earth in its orbit or change its position. We'd be idiots to try, even if such unimaginable powers came within our reach.

So we'll continue, as long as the human race persists, to have ice ages and warm periods, with relatively minor oscillations (like the Little Ice Age and our current warm period) in between.

In fact, what we have right now, while we are not yet as warm as the peak of the Medieval Warming (a fact that Mann and others have tried to deny or obscure), is a superb climate that is making life better for people all over the world. It's the cold periods that cause famines and population drops, and promote plagues and floods.

We should be grateful.

Instead we are being hit with dire warnings, every one of which is either false or a normal part of the Earth's history; our business should be to adapt to the unavoidable solar-caused warming, not to destroy the worldwide economy in order to prevent something that human activity is not causing.

Because the "solutions" proposed by the alarmists do not solve anything — and they admit it! The drastic proscriptions of the Kyoto Protocols, even if anybody were actually following them, would not have had any effect on Global Warming, even if it had been caused by human CO2 emissions.

Do you understand that? When Al Gore goes on and on about what we must do to save the Earth, he knows — and everybody involved with the Global Warming alarmist movement knows — that none of their drastic proposals would have the slightest effect on Global Warming even if it worked they way their fantasies say it does.

So why do they propose it? There are many personal motives, of course, but when you look at the non-solution "solutions" they propose, the pattern is clear: They are not trying to stop global warming. They are trying to punish the Western democracies for being richer than the rest of the world.

There are solutions to that problem (and I believe it is a problem), but they involve stabilizing bad governments, increasing international trade, and making unsafe parts of the world safer so they can take part in the global boom.

Not only that, but many of the programs the alarmists advocate are actually needed for completely unrelated reasons. It is a mark of our folly and blindness that we continue to be so ridiculously oil-dependent all these years after the oil embargo of 1973.

For national security, environmental, futuristic, and personal-happiness reasons we should be working hard to change our automobile centered culture into more civilized patterns that invariably make people happier wherever they are tried.

It can't be done by cutting back on automobile emissions or even by raising taxes on gasoline — especially because these changes are hardest on the poor and the marginal middle class.

But I'll write about how and why we need to cut back on our destructive love affair with that faithless mistress, the car, in another column.

What matters right here and now is that it is time for the world's scientists to apostatize from the Church of Global Warming. It is a false religion. It is based on lies, and its leading prophets know that it is because they're the ones faking the data or stretching it to ridiculous lengths to pretend that the real world hasn't already ruled against their claims.

It is time for our school systems to stop accepting the gospel of that false religion and start doing their due diligence. Our children should be taught about the demonstrable solar cycles and the whole human-caused Global Warming theory, along with the Hockey Stick Hoax, should be taught only as another example, after Piltdown Man and pre-Copernican theories of planetary movement, of how science can be corrupted when ideology gets ahead of the data.

It is time for us to laugh at the ideologues who try to pretend that any criticism of Global Warming alarmism is idiotic and unscientific. They are the ones who ignore the data; they are the ones who believe on faith alone, without evidence; and, most important, they are the ones who are trying to stifle the opposition without answering it.

The Global Warming alarmists are the anti-science religion that is trying to forcibly indoctrinate and convert everyone while suppressing dissent. And the news media are their patsies, their stooges, their puppets.

Right now, let's start demanding that whenever the local newspaper or TV stations say anything about Global Warming, they back it up with actual data that takes into account the solar oscillations, the real climate history of the earth, and the facts about what CO2 actually does in the atmosphere.

It's time to stop letting them lie pass along other people's lies. It's time for the news media to stop doing cocktail party "research" and dig down into the science and get it right.

Read It for Yourselves

I could not possibly array all the evidence here; you must read the books for yourself. Unstoppable Global Warming is a highly accessible book written for ordinary educated readers. It's the book I recommend most highly.

Shattered Consensus, on the other hand, uses the language of various disciplines of science to a degree that makes some chapters fairly difficult for untrained readers, though the key chapter I cited here, on the Hockey Stick Hoax, is quite readable and worth looking at by everybody.

S. Fred Singer and Dennis T. Avery, Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years.

Patrick J. Michaels, ed. Shattered Consensus: The True State of Global Warming.. (See especially: Ross McKitrick, "The Mann et al. Northern Hemisphere 'Hockey Stick' Climate Index: A Tale of Due Diligence," pp. 20-49.)


© 2007 Meridian Magazine. All Rights Reserved.

Just A Reminder To Wake Up

Mike'a America posted this last year. But along with this documentary and all the information on the insanity they wish to perpatrate, people are still living with blinders on.

Let's Get Serious

If one really wants to compare President Bush with a real dictator, one only has to have a smidgen of a sense of history and library card. In case you're someone who gets their news from Google (ala Rosie O'Donnel) and MTV, here's a little reminder of what real tyrants look like.




Hmm. A little reminiscent, don't you think?

And perhaps a little reminder of what the far-left's heroes do inside their own borders while their apologist American followers ignore and/or forgive their indiscretions.

If Bush is Hitler, What is Venezuela's Hugo Chavez?

What would Cindy Sheehan, Jesse Jackson and the Hollywood left do if President Bush changed the constitution to allow him to stay in office for an indefinite term without facing re-election?

What would they say if he passed a law that made it a crime to insult him?

How would they react if he summarily fired workers who opposed his policies, wiretapped, then broadcast their phone calls on television, ordered troops to shoot protestors, closed down radio and television stations?

What would their reaction be if President Bush refused to provide funds to state governments controlled by Democrats?

They would go absolutely bonking crazier than they are already! Yet, these same lovers of freedom embrace Hugo Chavez, the dictator of Venezuela, who has done all that and more:
RealClearPolitics The Man Who Controls Venezuela By Peter Mork

Jesse, Cindy, Ed Asner and the rest of the hate America left have all made pilgrimages to Venezuela to heap praise on Chavez for all he is doing for (or TO) the Venezuelan people.

It's called democracy leftist style. Change election laws to create a one party Marxist state and jail, torture (the real kind, not Guantanamo) and kill anyone who dares to object.

Do that and the America hating left will shower you with praise.


How about an introduction to their southern hero?
This is the man that demagogues, Michael Moore, Oliver Stone, Cindy Sheehan, Jesse Jackson, Danny Glover, Harry Belafonte, et al love and make sure you know it. And of course, there's also all their minions that blindly follow them due to their hatred of everything American (with the help of the American media, of course) I'm reminded of a line from "Star Wars", spoken by Sir Alec Guiness as Obi-Wan Kenobi that states,
"Who's the bigger fool? The fool or the fool that follows him?"

Like I said, get serious.

Bush Finally Starts His Move Toward True Dictatorship

Gotcha!
I was taken in for a second as well when I read this via Flopping Aces. I was left shaking my head when I realized I had been fooled by the "news". I should have known better since it wasn't pasted all over the MSM since the crack of dawn. Interesting attention-getter, none-the-less. Be sure to scroll down for more compelling info, especially on the undeniaable surge progress and the unification of Sunnis and Shiites (what happened to the "civil war"?) and the defections of al Queda fighters.

On another page, while surfing the site, I found a little more on the hypocrisy, lies and re-writing of history from ex-president Clinton.

I..Don't..Believe..It

Who is this man and what has he done with Olbermann?


Of course, he still hasn't apologized for why he's on the air in the first place.
You'll notice he distanced himself of any wrongdoing by immediately saying "...when I was off last week." Liberals and accountability= oil and water.

In Their Own Words (Again)

Here's even more proof on Democrat double-talk concerning WMDs, Haditha and other pandering to the far left (i.e. Daily Kos, Huffington Post) It's more or less a compendium of a prior post on the matter. I never tire of this. I know my liberal friends do, but I don't.

General Patton Returns

This is a thing of beauty and so, so true. IT IS A MUST SEE! We all know that we need another Ronald Reagan, but how often do people say we need another General George S. Patton? Well, there are a few, I suppose. Good voice re-creation by Mike Kaminski

The best line: "The complacency of fools will destroy them."

Haditha Marine's Father's Conversation with Murtha

From Flopping Aces comes this interesting little tidbit.
Interesting point therein. Liberals like Murtha are always going on about how President Bush is "trampling" on the Constitution. Isn't Murtha doing exactly that when he denies these soldiers rights to due process? It's becoming painfully obvious that to become a liberal democrat, one must receive a master's degree in hypocrisy.

War For Oil

The war on truth, that is. It's not as if we didn't already know that liberals lie to further their propaganda against the war so they can earn points amongst their ignorant constituents to garner votes and stay in power, but now we learn that they're in bed with the enemy as well.

From Bottom Line Up Front

Bush's Legacy?

I don't know if I agree with everything in this, Washington Post column by Bill Kristol, but he hit on some very good and important points. You have to look at it through the looking-glass of history. Today, Truman is seen as a great war president, yet his approval numbers were also below the 30 per cent mark. Lincoln was also not very popular during the Civil War. Both of these men stod firm and ended up as visionaries. Of course, back then the press wasn't as vicious or biased.

This About Sums Up the 9/11 Kooks

Forget Screw Loose Change (great site) forget Mark Roberts (one smart guy) this is all you need to know about the 9/11 "Truthers".

Judge Tells Plame to Take a Hike

I'll take this as a victory for the Bush administration. Since Valerie Plame will never be called on her perjury, her civil suit against Vice President Cheney is dead in the water. How will it go down in the MSM? Either way, leave it up to the Traitor Times to not even mention her name.

I was going to mention Kieth Ellison comparing President Bush to Hitler, but when it comes to the hate-filled left, what else is new?

Is My Face Red

Man, oh man, am I embarrassed. I can't believe I actually said that Mika Brzezinski of a Mess NBC had integrity. Although I do think she did the right thing by refusing to lead the news off with any Paris Hilton garbage, she had to go and ruin it by not only swooning over Dan "Fake But Accurate" Rather ala Ann Curry, but then she, along with flipper, Joe Scarborough, doesn't even call Rather on his "I'm big on personal integrity" crap. That's what I get for trying to be impartial and defend ANYONE associated with the network that would hire Kieth Oberloon.


That'll teach me.

Love the Earth, Eat the Endangered Inhabitants

Al Gore may (and I do mean may) sincerely care about the earth and that of it's future, unless he's using 20 per cent more energy than everybody else, or eating endangered species as further proof of his hypocrisy. Folks, do you need any more proof that this guy just doesn't get it? Or maybe it's his mindless drones that don't have a clue. Either way, with the lack of interest in "Live Earth" and his reluctance to take an oath to "change the way he lives" while all the rest of us are expected to do just that, added with this juicy little tidbit, his little crusade may be losing steam and allies.

But, somehow, someway, he'll get his revenge:


But more and more people are making it harder for him.

Check out this interesting little bit of info by a commenter named "Kenner" Emphasis mine.

In John Crichton’s book State of Fear the plot revolves around an extremist environmental group trying to cause extreme weather anomolies in order to support an upcoming conference on global warming. They try to create a major tsunami and also a major hurricane to demonstrate how out of control the weather is. The interesting thing is that the book was written before either the Indian Ocean tsunami or Katrina happened. Both events were, in fact, subsequently used by environmentalists to attack Bush and his not signing the Kyoto treaty and to gin up support for their overall agenda on global warming. Truth in fiction, indeed.

Matt Groening (The Simpsons creator) is apparently on board with the Goracle. Yes, it is from "A Covienient Lie" No wonder the Simpsons sucks now.


I can totally see Gore snapping like that, seeing that how he's starting to fall behind in the race for our collective "global awareness".
Then again, people are starting to snooze about it anyway.

And I think somebody has finally has the answer on the REAL cause of global warming. Why didn't we see this sooner?


Dig it.

UPDATE: Goracle isn't guilty (sort of) because he has a real good (hypocritical) excuse.




I guess it's okay then. And as a quote from Townhall.com says: "Now, as long as he can get that power bill under 10 times the average American consumption, he might just be a believable spokesperson for environmental issues."

What Are They Afraid Of?

Hillary Clinton and John Edwards must be running scared. Last night in Detroit, after they both attended a NAACP forum, they got together to quickly discuss how they can limit the other "lesser" Democrat presidential hopefuls from future gatherings of candidates. They didn't seem to realize that they were caught on a live microphone (presumably from one of the podiums they were standing by) discussing their little conspiracy. Remember, Clinton is one of the ladies along with Barbara Boxer that Senator James Inhofe claims he overheard discussing re-implementing the fascist doctrine. I really never do tire of liberal hypocrisy.

Hillary may have a legitimate reason to be worried, as Illinois senator, Barack Obama is hot on her heels in the poles. But if "Silky Pony" Edwards thinks he really has a shot at the nomination, he may want to have his head examined, much like Republican, Ron Paul.

Here's the video. You may have to watch a advertisement or other news items before you see it. You can hardly hear them, but it was said.

The Obvious Left-Wing Media Agenda...Again

O.k, first off, here's the White House press conference transscript from yesterday that had the jurassic, ignoramous, Helen"I Love Jihadists" Thomas and her unbeleivable rhetoric, David Gregory and his usual hatred of everything republican, the whining, speculative, Martha Raddatz and the wishful thinking Jim Axelrod.

Video:

Does Thomas ever give it up? Did she even ask a question there? Does she realize she's a broken record with her accusations, such as her question a few months back, "Why did you really want to go to war?" She's another bias media member that has no knowledge of history and facts, despite her 1,000 year reign as a senior White House reporter.
Here, Tony Snow tries to school her on the facts concerning last summer's Israel-Lebanon conflict:


Can you blame his frustration?


Then there's Harry "The war is lost" Reid and his cowardly dodging of a simple question.



Here's Pat Dollard's great take on the press conference, as well as Jules Crittenden's blog Foward Movement.


John Stossel takes on RFK, Jr. over global warming:



He never does answer Stossel's questions, does he? Or explain his "corporate toadie and traitor" comments. If the issue of global warming has nothing to do with politics or ideology, why is a politician getting involved, much less with personal attacks?

And just for fun (and believe me, it is a pure joy to expose this fraud as much as humanly possibly) here is (I'm sure) just the beginnings of the exposing of Michael Moore's "SiCKO"

But for the more serious stuff, here's an item on the apparent revitalization of al Queda.
If this is true, and by all accounts so far, it is, then the President does have some explaining to do. Such as after four years of war, and with all the confirmed reports of the crippling of al Queda, how could this be allowed to happen? I can only think of one thing in his defence-Pakistani President, Pervez Musharraf is too scared to really go against bin Laden and his crew and didn't allow U.S. forces to enter his country in the first place. I truly believe if he had (and if the U.S. left-wing media and their defeatist agenda hadn't had a erection of hatred of Bush) we might just be a whole lot further along on the WOT. Or is that just a bumper sticker?

As for the Iraqi government not living up to their end and only reaching less than half of the benchmarks set, not only is the course of the war in doubt (although I still believe given enough time, they can be-see, without bias the actual progress made overall) but it may be time for Nouri al-Maliki to step aside. Now before you say I'm just covering for "yet another Bush administration failure", may I just say that you're half right. Should there be no further progress on these benchmarks, it can do nothing but indeed reflect badly on Bush and his plans. But let there be no mistake about it, militarily speaking, we are winning this war. As for the political side of things, sure Bush has to take some responsibility, but the real onus is on Maliki and his cabinet to find a way to get things done. He's the man in power in Iraq, at least officially.

On a another note, I can't believe (actually I can) the nerve and ignorance of this punk, Avi Lewis, who I believe does his smirky, socialist propaganda hatred for the CBC (gee, there's a surprise) it really irks me that we share a flag. He conducted an interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the former Islamic whipping girl, who refused to take it and the fundamentalist Islamo-Nazis that wish her dead. She decided to expose the radicals for what they truly are and this terrorist apologist, Lewis, condemns her for it. Check out his idiotic statement, "Is there a school where they teach you these American cliches?" Talk to the descendants of (legal) immigrants or to immigrants themselves that DID come to America, worked hard, sacrificed and DID make something of themselves, because you CAN become successful in America (and Canada for that matter) despite his communist angle of "only if you're rich." And he obviously thinks that her statement that "there is no Islamophobia" is pure hyperbole. Of course, as with all the rest of the idiots who can't tell the difference between Islamic fundamentalist radicals and true Muslims, she has to carefully explain it to him. But she didn't back down.

What's even worse, this is the same type of anti-American ignorance that permeates in the mindset of the producers of the TOTAL crap that is "The Lies That Lead to War". The Michael Moore-type "documentary" that uses the same old lefty lies and lack of the knowledge of history. Yet the Canadian government still expects us to pay for this channel that excels at blind hatred of everything American and conservative. Except of course unless they're portraying any American left-wing ideology or socialist propaganda, then it's a full-on butt-kissing fiesta.

By the way, check out some of the viewer comments left on the site. One in particular claims that she (being a black Muslim) and anyone that defends her is a racist because of her (their) views. I mean, does that make sense or what? No surprise here, it's typical non-sensical lefty talking points.

Oh Boy, Is This Great!

Most of you probably already know this by now, by either seeing it on CNN or HotAir.com and Breitbart.tv.

Michael Moore has finally snapped (or snapped again) He is shown a critique of his new "documentary" "Sicko" before being interviewed by Wolf Blitzer. The report says (surprise, surprise) that Moore once again tries to mislead the American public. Points like: Americans are more satisfied with their health care system than Cubans or Canadians are, Canadians and European countries that have so-called "free" health care actually have longer waiting times for non-emergency cases (even to get an appointment-to which I can validate) and that Cuba, contrary to Moore's lies, is lower down on the WHO's list of satisfactory health care systems than the U.S.

He also tries to sell the crap that he war right about the war and that "everything [he] said has cone true." Except that, once again, he's lying through his teeth.

Then of course there's the matter of his racism. He sarcastically and intentionally mispronounces the name of Indian doctor, Sanjay Gupta. the man who Moore says is a liar and a government shill because he was embedded with the troops. The problem with that is Dr. Gupta is democrat supporter and has contributed a large amount of cash to their cause.

I've never seen him so irate and I love it. Did you catch the beginning of his diatribe? He accused the piece of being bias? Moore, of all people accused someone else of being bias? Hello, Kettle? Yeah, it's Pot, how ya doin? Yeah, not bad. Listen, um, you're black.
He whines, "I wonder which pharmaceutical company's ad is coming up after our break, here."
He then immediately goes into his B.S.-laden tirade after saying he would like a 10-minute rebuttal to the piece. Again, this coming from the opportunist who likes to cut off the microphone of anybody that disputes his propaganda, or threatens to sue them if they try and "slander" his mocumentaries. He has the gall to tell ANYBODY to tell the truth?
Typical paranoid lefty. You can't debate the facts, so attack the messenger, then deflect the discussion and/or blame onto someone or something else. Textbook.

Once again, it goes to show that Moore and those of his ilk simlpy cannot handle dissent or fair questions regarding their "work" and that they totally rely on softball questions and pandering to them on network news and talk shows to further their causes. Sad.

If you haven't had the pleasure, please read this.



Brent Bozell hits it right on the head.
By the way, Moore is now making it a personal vendetta against his former (and future) coddlers at CNN. Look out, he's maaaaaad.

Once Again, Where's the Outrage?

This stuff is simply going to keep on happening until Christians stop "turning the other cheek".

I think it's time for another Crusade. Any takers?

Luke 22:36: "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one." -Jesus the Christ

Iraq the Model

My favourite Iraqi blogger, Iraq The Model (you know someone that IS there) has posted his opinion on how people should decipher and understand the upcoming progress report in September. Of course, as we all know by now, the Dems don't even want to wait that long.


Wednesday, June 27, 2007

There's more than numbers for those who want to understand
It's almost July now, and General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker will present their report about the situation in Iraq, military and political, at some point in September.
I don't know what parameters the two men are going to list statistics for in their report but I expect it to show the results of fighting al-Qaeda and other armed groups in numbers, the progress in building the ISF in numbers, also in numbers and of course the report would include the progress, if any, that our political leaders will have made by the time.

I think what matters more than the way of presentation would be how the data in the report is going to be read and afterwards interpreted into attitudes and actions.
One thing I hope the decision-makers and the media do when they read the report is to not isolate the war in Iraq from the war on terror and al-Qaeda as a whole, and at the same time put in mind the difference between war and nation-building. The latter takes much more time than winning a military conflict but requires different tools.

The results so far have been astounding, and please allow me to say that I'm proud of the change in attitude many of my fellow Iraqis are showing. Even if numbers don't suggest so because the change is happening but it will take time-perhaps beyond September-before this change will show in numbers.
A nation is not a corporation and when we deal with a nation we are dealing with a society; a mass of people with ever changing hearts and minds and that's why numbers alone can't be enough to assess the situation—thoughtful insight and looking at the bigger image are also required.

For over a year the media and many officials were spooking us with the exaggerated ghost of civil war. I wonder what they have to say now! I think their silence is more telling than anything they would've said.

Iraqis are awakening, one very telling example can be seen in the ongoing operation in Diyala; members of the 1920 revolution brigades, once bitter enemies of the US military and Iraqi government are now assisting US and Iraqi military in fighting al-Qaeda even though the majority of the Iraqi soldiers and officers are Shia.
If the change in exclusively Sunni Anbar is good then the change in Diyala is good beyond words.

Another great example that I have personally been in touch with is taking place in a place outside Baghdad. Maybe you remember the story I told you about the area where members of our tribe live. For months unfortunate bloodletting was going on between the tribes, militias and al-Qaeda terrorists in which most of the victims were no more than innocent farmers.

Last week I learned from relatives that two groups of tribes have separately formed two "battalions" of several hundred young tribesmen each; not to fight the other sect or the US or Iraqi forces but to fight al-Qaeda. Even better this step has been taken in cooperation with the authorities in the region and the arrangement will ultimately lead to turning many of those tribal fighters into legitimate law enforcement personnel.


Despite such examples of many promising changes, we have to remain realistic and not overlook the rest of challenges. Uniting against al-Qaeda and even defeating it is not enough to solve all of Iraq's problems and the greater challenge of nation-building still lies ahead.
However, I expect and hope the world to show some gratitude to the Iraqis and Americans who fought, suffered, bled and died ridding the world of thousands of al-Qaeda terrorists, each one of whom could have been capable of murdering as many innocent people as their fellow terrorists did in New York, London or the many cities across the world that paid a high price simply because they don't approve of the ways of those extremists.

The internal struggle for power in Iraq will not end by pacifying al-Qaeda or the militias. It will continue in different forms until we have the correct legislations and institutions that can prevent bloodshed by facilitating peaceful sharing of power and treasure in a way that every individual or group get what they deserve, no more and no less. It goes without saying that these legislations and institutions will need an impartial, competent force to be able to function efficiently.

The impact of successful military operations, aside from people's direct safety, will not be visible immediately when it comes to the aspects of daily life in areas like economy, social life, education, etc. and here comes the role of true political reforms at all levels, from holding local elections to choose new and representative district and city councils to amending the general elections law to allow voters to choose their representatives directly instead of the current slate system. It might be also a good idea to adjust the federalism law to allow turning each province into an individual region within the federal state to avoid the sensitivities that could arise from forming regions on sectarian and/or ethnic basis.

Right there is where we will still need help from the world; not with more soldiers and tanks but with good will, compassion and thoughtful advice and guidance.

Winning the Hearts and Minds?

So you think my post about regular Iraqi citizens shooting insurgents in their respective neighborhoods is bogus? Then check this.

Whaddya Mean Greenland Used to be Green?

I just had to add this. Anytime I can reduce the omnipotent Goracle to a stuttering pile of hypocrisy, I HAVE to post it. Of course Gore won't mind, or even know, he's back in Tennesee offering moral support to his son who was arrested for drug possession. So, he's just being a good fath...wait a minute, no he isn't, he's too busy hanging out with his new celebrity friends and "playing on our fears" about global whining.

I think John Ridley had it right when he said Gore should maybe hug his children instead of the trees. And this from an admitted Gore fan.



Ok, so the MSM actually (and slightly) reported the arrest of Al Gore's son, Al Gore III. But why haven't they gone nuts about it like the way they did with the Bush girls? Or mention Chelsea Clinton at all?

Liberal Arabs Denounce Terrorism

From the MEMRI website, I bring you this. And no, I'm not surprised by it, but denouncements like this are still too few and far between, but they're building, finally.

Also you might want to check out what Iranian dissedents, and anti-Amadinejads, especially its youth, think of their glorious leader and what he thinks of them and their actions of attempted free speech(via Spanish Pundit) something else the anti-American MSM won't tell you.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And what's up with perennial America-hater, Oliver Stone? He's at it again. Will somebody please beat this man. Even the whackjobs don't trust him.

These big, brave terrorists...they're real men's men aren't they?

Still Haven't Heard Anything

It's been about two weeks and I still haven't heard the MSM say boo about this
Hmm. Anybody dare to take a guess why?

Louis Black on Conspiracies

By now, all of you know how I feel about conspiracies, all of them. You really can't believe in one without believing them all. Sort of like polls, I guess.
Louis Black, you may all know him from The Daily Show, has penned a column that just about says it right, you know, apart from my own posts on the matter.
If you're a lefty, you will obviously enjoy his take on the "corrupt" Bush government, but those who know better (seeing that he does mention a press gone bad) won't mind that little rant, since it's been come to be expected from anyone who has a stint on the Comedy Central show. Still, even a marginally intellectual lefty has a point or two.

By the way, you may want to disregard the typical lefty crap about how Bush "misled" the country into war. Really, is the whole left-wing existence solely based on regurgitating lies that were debunked years prior? Well, when the myth becomes legend, print the legend, I guess. Anyways, he says the part about the shamnesty bill (that he likes to call-like all leftys, and worse righties that for some reason agree with that term- the immigration reform bill) was defeated, not because it was essentially amnesty, but because it was "racial prejudice". Leave it to the left to blame race on everything. Or was it Bush's fault?

White House Officials Go Native...I Mean Muslim

It was bad enough when Nancy Pelosi did it when she visited (decked in submissive Syrian women's wear) now even Bush's own people dedcided to appease the people at CAIR via the Islamic Center in Washington. There's nothing wrong with respecting one's cultures and traditions, but I'd expect that when dignitaries go to foreign nations on the president's behest. Do these officials realize that they are in the United States with Judeo-Christian laws and traditions? They don't have to bow to political correctness here.



Senior White House staff members attend the rededication ceremony of The Islamic Center in Washington June 27, 2007. From L-R are: Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism Frances Townsend, White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten, and Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Karen Hughes. REUTERS/Larry Downing (UNITED STATES)

From HotAir.com

On cue, CAIR is playing up spokesman Ibrahim Hooper’s attendance at the speech and taking full advantage of its presence to insinuate itself into the President’s agenda.

Why Bush is alowing this to happen is beyond me. This really gives the left some ammo now, if they know how to use it. I'm telling you, if Bush doesn't do a few things in the last six months to blow us away and try to repair at least some of the damage to the Republican party, in terms of bringing his base back into a uniform group, he may very well end up being a lame duck; which I don't think he is...just yet.

Can You Believe This?

I won't say a word.
Except for...*COUGH* Mark Rich *COUGH*

Greatest Movie Line Ever

I found it. I finally found it. I first heard this in a bumper used by Larry Elder on his show. I've been trying to find it for a few months, but with no avail, even after a link was sent to me via email. Unfortunately it didn't work. Then I just thought, why don't I just look on YouTube, I mean, what are the odds. Duh. I should have looked there right fom the start.
You know, YouTube may favor terrorist-supporting videos and ban any attempts by people such as Michelle Malkin and the like; but man, you can find pretty much anything on there. I fear QubeTV has a long way to go before they can rival these guys. Of course, there is one major difference in their approach; QubeTV doesn't ban dissenting views.

Anyways, the clip is from a 1940 film starring Bob Hope entitled, "The Ghost Breakers". Enjoy.



You gotta love Bob Hope. Nobody, and I mean nobody supported the troops like this man did. By the way, did you know he performed in every entertainment medium? From vaudville and radio to stage and screen-both television and movies. I think he may have even wrote a book or two.

Man, I Wish This Guy Could Be Leader For Life

I'm telling ya, we're going to miss this guy, his complete awareness of what's really going on and his unique way of getting across the bloody obvious. Thank you Mr. Blair and may your new assignment of Middle East Peace envoy be as successful.



He may not have been as popular or as elequent as Ronald Reagan, but like the Gipper, they'll never be another like him.

It Was the Right Thing to Do

He shouldn't have had to do jail time anyway. Not with Clinton being impeached, but yet allowed to finish out his term, Sandy Berger not being indicted at all, and the Wilson's lying to the House Select Committee.

Not too long after this President Bush decided (and rightfully so) to commute Scooter Libby's sentence. Now before you get all up in arms over this, first off, remember about the above mentioned lawlessness of the left that never has seen the light of day and he's NOT being pardoned. He was convicted by a jury and he DID "lie" to federal investagators, so I'm not saying he should get off scott-free. He is still on probation, he still has to pay an substantial fine (approximately $250, 000) But I believe after his sentencing and after Bush's decision, justice has been served.

Here is the President's speech on the matter.

Thoughts of an Ex-Terrorist

I don't know if this guy really is a reformed terrorist (if that's even possible) or if he's a fundamentalist just feeding us misinformation and propaganda. However, if it is propaganda, it's not going to do their side any good, seeing that is pretty much an admission of Islamo-fascist guilt and mindset.

Finally, A Reporter with Some Integrity

And from MSNBC no less. Check out the video of what happened when MSNBC anchor, Mika Brzezinski refused to go the route of "Paris TV" you know, "All Paris, all the time".



Of course, that flip, Joe Scarborough and his gang try to ridicule her for not giving in to demands of sensationalism and for trying to be a journalist. In fact, he even says to her,
"Why are you being such a journalist?"
On national television, he asks a news reporter why she wants to be a professional and to read the fluff. And he has the audacity to tell her SHE's the cop out? "Take control of your life?"
That's Joe Scarborough for you. He apparently graduated at the top of his class at the Keith Olbermann School of Journalism.

Read the story here.
She's not the first

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


HAPPY CANADA DAY

Ok, ok. I cheated. I forgot to post about my country's 140th birthday, so I'm "editing in" this little postscript. Unfortunately, I thought this year's celebrations were a little low-key and a couple of articles concur with that. Here's one.
As for our boys and girls in Afghanistan, they did their own celebrating.

I don't get it. You hear all the time about how Canada is this great nation, which I agree; at least it used to be before it became a socialist's haven. I love the U.S. I respect it's Rule of Law and the giving of its people, but I wouldn't want to live anywhere else. Mind you, I wouldn't mind the commute to work in the States to make that American dollar (or I could wait until the North American Union kicks in with all its benefits-HA) but while the United States marks it's birthday every July 4th with massive parties, fireworks and national mainstream news coverage, in Canada, not so much. I mean there is the same parties and fireworks, but the I don't think the meaning really rings true with a lot of Canadians. It seems we are more cognizant about the meaning of freedom on November 11th. It seems Canada Day is just an excuse to stay home from work and prove to the world once again our love of beer. I just don't get it.

Aaaaaaaaand just for fun...

It's Been One Year...and My Watch Broke

I just realized I missed my own anniversary. It's been one year since June 6, 2006 that I've been blogging (semi) regularly. I wish I could do it every day, but there are more pressing matters. I suppose if I was getting paid for it and was able to pay the rent and bills, I guess I would do several posts a day. Actually, I guess I would have to if I wanted to keep the job, not to mention a roof over my head.

I hope I've mildly entertained you while informing you. I hope I've done the latter more, and more convincingly. Who knows how long this will last? I'll quote John Lennon when he said,
"You can be pig-headed and say, 'Oh yeah, we're gonna last 10 years" but as soon as you say that you think, you're lucky to last six months."
Now, I'm not saying I'm as relevant or as culturally popular as the Beatles (not that I would want to-paparazzi need not apply) and I don't really know what that quote has to do with anything (I guess it's mildly relevant) but I bet in one year of blogging, anything I've said is at least (if not more so) pertinent than what Lennon got across to his minions. Yeah, I said it. Heck, in my earlier days, I was one of those minions.

Yay. Happy Anniversary to me.

Just More Proof That Fire Can't Melt Steel

You know since Sept. 11, 2001, all the kooks keep saying that "it was the first time in history that fire has caused the collapse of of steel buildings."
Well, not only was that a lie, but it keeps happening to this day. Where and when you say? How about on April 29 of this year, as well as this past Wednesday, the 20.

Some of my favourite passages from Wednesday's article are:

"Capt. Ralph Linderman of the St. Andrews Fire Department said the blaze was the hottest he could recall in three decades of firefighting. "That fire bent steel like a wet noodle," he said.

"Charleston Fire Capt. Jake Jenkins said the firefighters were spread out in teams when the roof - a steel truss system - collapsed. Other crews fought to get inside the building and rescue the fallen, but the conditions were too bad, he said."

"The tragedy drew people from throughout the region. Some came to offer condolences. Others took photographs or stared at the store's smoking remains, a twisted tangle of concrete and steel."

Coincidence? I think the firefighters were paid off.
Again...idiots.